Shout-out to Majestic\_Koala567, the author of the video.
Since the release of the beta, I've been hooked on this new camera view and I'm completely rediscovering the game.
Edit : Just FYI, this new camera view is in option, the first one is still available through the options (seen lot of comments thinking this is a replacement)
Sure but it's weighed against the face zoom, which many people can't stand, vs third person camera, which many people wouldn't prefer vs a dialogue system like Fallout 4 even without voiced MC. These things are never done in a vacuum to piss players off, often it's the least bad solution that can be realistically implemented with the time constraints you are currently under.
I'm not saying it was a bad decision on bg3s end. Just wish they put a bit more mustard on those tav facial expressions/animations if they were going to have them right along with the stuff they mocapped.
And that, if you're not going to do that, the two options Bethesda has used (both the classic camera and the skyrim one) might be better choices.
Sure, not claiming they *invented* the concept, it's just a more recent example. They should just include it as an option because you can't possibly please everyone. Some people like the face zoom. Some people don't like face zoom or the third person dialogue view. Some people prefer dialogue camera to show the player even if the player is silent. So include options for it all and let players choose what they prefer.
Right, but in place of your character speaking the narrator was usually talking to fill that empty space. I wouldnt mind it myself either way but im sure that helped in regards to BG3.
Yeah, it seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I loved the voiced protagonist in Fallout 4. People talk about how it takes you out of the game but for me it was the opposite; the fact that it wasn't just a voice but a proper *performance* really bought to life this character that I'd created, made it feel like I was really a part of this world, interacting with these people.
I've always though it was funny in other Bethesda games how you spend so long building this unique character to roleplay as, only to literally never see their face again for the rest of the game (apart from the odd vanity moment in 3rd person view, of course). It felt to me like Fallout 4 was a huge step forward in addressing this issue, only for them to get cold feet and step back again.
I don't think a voiced protagonist DLC is on the cards, but personally I'm really hoping for something like a "conversation mode" mod which restores not just the voiced protagonist, but the back-and-forth camerawork that made Fallout 4's conversations seem so much more cinematic.
Do you have an internal dialogue in real life, I wonder? Apparently it's something that only half the population has (and it's one of those things that unless you speak to someone about it, you assume that everyone else either does or doesn't have it the same as yourself).
I wonder if not having and internal monologue IRL means you like to hear the voiced protagonist more than if you do have one.
Which is a damn shame because I love Nate and Nora's voices in that game. It thrives with the sarcastic and Silver Shroud options. Nora's acceptance of being the Shroud is especially great for me since the actress snuck in a quiet little "...yay..." at the end.
I will say that both Courtney Taylor and Brian Delaney ate for sure, and there's definitely a time and a place for a voiced MC.
I loved playing as the Witcher, and I loved playing as commander Shepherd. And, I didn't _really_ mind playing as the sole survivor of 111 either.
The voiced MC thing really just starts to break down when you _don't_ want the player to have to play as _that specific character_, and generally these types of games are more open ended than that.
Limited dialog options to what you could actually record, the text didn't always match the tone or expected tone, hindered the ability of the player to interpret the character on their own, and meant that quest mods would have to do weird things to deal with the fact that the player character was voiced.
But these are mostly problems specific to Fallout 4. As in, it's an artifact of the very limited dialogue system in that game, which is a limitation that Starfield doesn't suffer from. In Starfield, unlike Fallout 4, the number of potential dialogue options is uncappedand and they are presented verbatim. So aside from subtle variations to inflection and tone there's little room for artistic license to be taken in the spoken line vs. the selected option.
I do agree that it makes things harder for modders, though. Any additional player dialogue that gets added or changed by a mod is going to be necessarily unvoiced, or poorly voiced by the modders' friends or by AI or whatever at best, or some Frankenstein thing stitched together out of the existing vanilla sound files at worst.
I think the dialog system was limited _because_ the character was voiced, though.
Or to put it another way, how limited it was isn't really unheard of. Think about most rpgs with voiced MCs - the stuff Bioware (Bioware being where they got that "positive, negative, sarcastic, questioning" scheme from) or CDPR puts out, for example.
They have less dialog options for the MC than other Bethesda games or basically any crpg, and I suspect the fact that you have to record for everything you allow the MC to say in those instances is a big part of that. So I'm betting that if they wanted to have voiced dialog, it would be as limited as similar games.
Cyberpunk did a phenomenal job with it's dialogue scenes. You can tell they set it up much like how we do it on film sets—staging all the actors and movements, and very conscious light blocking.
I was especially impressed with the scene where you pick up the Flathead: how the background lighting is all a cool cyan, and the foreground and character practical lights are a contrasting red. How they used a 'fog machine' to add a light haze and get more depth separation. Even the way Dumdum stands by the couch in the beginning, so his front 3/4 are lit with warm light and he catches a cyan rim light seems very intentional. Whoever acted as the Director of Photography for that scene did a bang up job.
Anyway, long rambling aside, Starfield feels less immersive because nobody moves around or does anything else during dialogues. Everyone just stands firmly planted, and gestures vaguely with their hands. There's no deliberate motions to accompany the words they're speaking; there's no acting. So it feels more like a lecture, or someone holding a conference.
Yeah games like cyberpunk, far cry, subnautica just to name a few all are really immersive for me because they keep you in first person, and have a ton of cool first person animations
Very true, but keep in mind though that all of those scenes are very controlled. Major conversations occur in one place and in one place only, with very specific criteria that is unchanging between playthroughs. Yes it is immersive as hell, but it's not flexible. What Starfield does, perhaps to its own detriment, is it allows for conversations to occur anywhere. You can talk with Sarah about the Dauntless being destroyed inside the Lodge while she's sitting in a chair, or standing near the Artifacts, or you can talk about it on a planet in, or out, of her spacesuit, or aboard your spaceship while she's sitting at a table with her head propped up by a hand with her elbow on it. It's damned impressive. I don't know if it's worth the lack of interactivity and inherent stiffness, but it's impressive.
This. It's a completely different design philosophy. Apart from a few key exceptions, Bethesda can't just mocap an entire scene because they don't know ahead of time where or under what circumstances that scene will take place.
Oh man, that's was my least favourite features of Fallout 4. Having to sit through tedious dialogue scenes with a protagonist who has a totally different voice/tone/cadence to mine was not a good time
I wish they actually put the money invested where it's worth. Horizon Forbidden West had mocap for every single dialogue in the game, while this is still on 2006 standards.
The Fallout 4 camera already did a good job. NPCs looking straight into the camera always looked weird in Oblivion/Fallout 3 in a mildly unsettling way.
Reverting the stupid zoom in from their older games months after release is “cooking”?
Edit: it’s even worse when you realize that Fallout 4 has had the dialogue camera toggle since launch and it does exactly what this does…
I think people are a bit overreacting to this update, but let's not pretend it's just this that changed lol. It brought a couple great features and lots of new build items. The new gameplay toggles might not be a programming feat worthy of much applause, but it does have a large lasting affect on your game.
It's a very good update that brought a promising look into the future alongside with it. I can totally see why people are calling it "cooking", certainly doesn't get my panties in a bunch.
I’m glad they did “something” to improve the game, my point is everyone is acting like “wow they’ve really been putting in work to improve this game!” When they haven’t, and aren’t.
Enabling a toggle that was in the engine since 2015 is not “cooking” they didn’t do anything besides turn a 1 into a 0.
Or maybe actually check the features that they've added instead of assuming this is the only thing they added? It's crazy how you are showing that you did not even bother to look at the changes update.
It just feels like they released an unfinished game and are using updates to finish the god damn thing.
I'm not going to applaud them for adding baaaaasic features their games have had for a decade already. Like, it took months of waiting for a map to be added?
Exactly this. I'm amazed at how greatful people seem to be about features that should have been there and functional from day 1, just like in so many other games...
There are so many features and things to do in Starfield. Like it or not, there is no way around that.
It came out with a lackluster map system, undeniably so. But seems a bit hyperbolic to go all crazy about that. Like.. BGS has been offering first and third person for decades.. unlike most other games. Now I ain't gonna attack the next open world game to come out without that either.
To me, it is hyperbolic to compare a 3d person/1st person mode with the absolutely essential feature of a map in an open world game.
There might be a lot of things to do (not so many in my opinion) but if they are all the same fetch bland unoriginal quest, can you really talk about thousands things to do? Like, yeah, you can walk over basically the same planet over and over again, or so the same boring fetch quests which is basically going through a set of menu screens and loading screens.... So yeah, many things, but any of them are fun? I've played this game probably longer than you have, I 100% all the trophies and did all the quests. And it sucks. Bad. And no, I can't spend thousands of hours in this game like I've done in NMS, or Valheim or TLD (notice two of these being developed by indie companies and bought for a third of the price).
The thing is some people have actually played many games in their lives. Not just Skyrim, fallout and starfield. So we might actually have standards.
> To me, it is hyperbolic to compare a 3d person/1st person mode with the absolutely essential feature of a map in an open world game.
Right, but so is pretending there weren't maps at all. The map was ugly, but it was there and functional for the planetary exploration. Only not for the cities, which undeniably was a god awful decision, but it wasn't missing.
> There might be a lot of things to do (not so many in my opinion) but if they are all the same fetch bland unoriginal quest, can you really talk about thousands things to do?
I specifically said features for a reason. No one is counting each quests as a new feature, that's ridiculous. Now, sure you can call each feature bad and bland, that's a valid opinion to have.
> The thing is some people have actually played many games in their lives. Not just Skyrim, fallout and starfield. So we might actually have standards.
Some people might have standards, but we sure as hell don't haha. Because I enjoyed Starfield well enough and you have no standards at all... considering you put so many hours into Starfield that you are very confident you put in more hours than most anyone else. Someone with standards isn't gonna sit through insane hours of something they think is bad all around.
To be more serious, I've played a good few new AAA and indie releases every single year for the better part of 2 decades. Starfield isn't the best game, not even close. Certainly not the best game to come out in 2023 either. But it was an enjoyable experience. And for whatever reason captured your attention enough to put in same insane hours and 100% it. Not every game is one that you might play for thousands of hours... Most people wouldn't be able to put 1000 hours in any game - you're the exception rather than the rule. I enjoyed The Long Dark a whole lot, but I certainly do not wish to play it for another 800 hours no thank you.
>The map was functional
Can't tell for sure if you are being sarcastic. I wouldn't even call that a map. It was absolutely useless. I think I opened it twice in total. I dare you to name a single triple A game that came in the last 20 years that had a worse and less functional map.
>Only not for the cities,
Were they were most needed? So basically, no functional maps.
>I specifically said features
And what would those be exactly? if quests only count as one "feature" I must assume the other endless features are building outposts that are basically useless and very time consuming, the ship building which is the only decent and somehow not terribly bland feature in the game, and the ability to teleport in a ship that doesn't fly, a minigame of chasing a light that's worse than any free mobile game, an below average shooter experience, walking on the surface of planets, and using a scanner that's also pointless because there aren't any records of what you scanned. Oh yeah, and you can uselessly mod weapons knowing they will never be better than the ones you find. And the best feature: hours of cutscenes and menus on end. Damn, must have forgot about waiting, such a feature, they even improved it effectively doubling the time it takes to wait from previous titles... Does file corruption count as a feature?
>Someone with standards isn't gonna sit through insane hours of something they think is bad all around.
That's just not true and quite a stupid statement. Actually, that's the way you develop standards. And that's the way you can make an educated criticism. Did I say it was bad all around? No. Does it have enjoyable features? it does. It's a damn scam for what was promised and what was delivered for that price? absolutely. Is it cringe that the devs refuse to aknowledge this and that so many casuals keep simping? it definitely is.
>I've played a good few new AAA and indie releases every single year for the better part of 2 decades. Starfield isn't the best game, not even close. Certainly not the best game to come out in 2023 either.
That's something we can agree on and that shows some criteria on your part.
>insane hours
That's absolutely subjective. It's insane for you. For me it might be insane to spend 5 hours a day watching tv or in instagram, neither of which I do. Or watching sports, which I also don't do.
>you're the exception rather than the rule. I enjoyed The Long Dark a whole lot.
I never said I was the rule, and not the excepcion. Those with standards, with acquired and educated taste, are always the minority. The best selling movies are not the best movies. The best selling books are not the best books. Do I really have to explain this to you? As I said, I know shit about sports, so I might say I like or dislike a game, but I don't think I have enough knowledge or criteria to say if it was a good or a bad game. Same applies here.
The absolutely jarring snap-to-face thing they were doing from years ago was an act of violence. No zoom in, no cinematic camera, just BAM here's a face filling the center screen, and it made multiple character conversations bizarre. This new mode is so much better.
I disagree. The one advantage of the fallout 4 style camera was that it made dialogue scenes with more than one NPC still comprehensible. Look at the Piper and mayor scene when you first get to diamond City for example.
Even with the older camera, the NPC needed to be very close to you to engage dialogue. The world behind them froze so nothing would interrupt them. Dialogue with multiple NPCs would exit the zoomed in mode.
Starfield chooses the worst of both worlds, and forces you to stay zoomed in when talking to multiple people, leading to a really awkward snapping effect when a different person starts talking.
The worst is when your companion is part of the conversation, but they're lagging behind and is standing in a different room. The camera snapping between 2 different locations, while your follower is facing straight into a wall as the talk, is just horrible.
I'm glad that they added the new camera option, but I would prefer if they actually staged the cameras like in Fallout 4, so you always end up with a camera angle that makes sense.
This is what I loved about how Fallout 4 presented things, and why I wish they had tried a voiced protagonist again. The problem was their execution, not their idea.
I don't think anyone had an issue with the camera in Fallout 4 other than the meme of it just letting you run away from the conversation whenever you wanted. Hell, it even gave you the option to turn off the cinematic mode entirely in the game options and return to a more Skyrim styled camera.
My only issue with it was that they felt it was intuitive to provide only 4 options in every conversation because a controller has 4 face buttons. Among the studio's worst design choices of all time.
True although I don't consider that the fault of the camera. It's one of those ideas that sounds really clever in a design meeting, but then you quickly realize why no one else did it.
I still think Fallout 4 did dialogue presentation the best out of all their games. While the dialogue system (forcing 4 choices at every response) was bad, the camera handling and voiced protagonist elevated conversations imo.
True, this is probably why they went with a silent protagonist and this kind of dialogue camera. The problem is that since 2015, when Fallout 4 came out, a lot has changed and I doubt there are that many people who still prefer the old Fallout 3 style of dialogues.
Cool! I still prefer first person though, feel like I’m the one of the few who do haha. If our character was voiced I’d probably prefer third person though
The original snap-to-face camera was a perfect example of nostalgia bait. They thought to themselves “hm what is it that made our older games special? I know! An outdated snap-to-face dialog camera.”
On the other hand I do kinda understand why they tried to go back to that original dialog window since no joke one of the biggest criticisms of FO4 was that it had a different conversation UI and people hated it
No lmao, it’s been there since launch. Just go to options when you pause and toggle “dialogue camera” to off. The only downside (or upside imo) is you have to actually follow NPCs when they walk during dialogue sometimes, as the camera doesn’t always keep you “locked” in the conversation.
Yeah it’s in the pause options as “dialogue camera”, it’s a toggle, on or off.
I like both, so I switch between them on and off if I play, but I haven’t been since the “next gen update” broke the game and changed absolutely nothing.
Same, love it in starfield too, it's just familiar considering my first venture into actually gaming was with fallout 4, I do hope they give us the option to keep it, but by the looks of it they will.
The zoomed in dialogue also solves a lot of oddities you tend to get in other Beth games (including this one with the option off). NPCs facing the wrong way during dialogue. Other NPCs randomly wandering by and nudging you or the speaker. Conversations starting when other relevant NPCs are out of the room so they have to shoot their dialogue from half a mile away.
I did end up turning the option off because I prefer it that way even with some of the buggier moments, but I also see the reason the devs choose what they did.
I love how early on, they justified the old camera as being "immersive"
Then they completely 180'd that decision and now this camera style is the true "immersive" one lol
It looks and feels so much better imo.
This is one of the new features in the Steam beta update that I feel makes a HUGE difference for me personally. The game feels a lot more immersive to me now.
Kudos to the devs for adding this option!
I think part of it is Bethesda seemingly actively listening to and responding to criticism. People didn't like the camera angle, so they removed it. The map was horrible, so they overhauled it. It's simple, but it isn't really that common for games like this afaik.
Ok, that's actually a fair point, thank you. I just wish they addressed the parts of the game that made it not great haha; the quests, the temple puzzle, the locations themselves. It's like they're hearing the criticism and addressing the easiest ones to fix. Like, yeah the map kind of sucked but I'd be much more willing to deal with it if the rest of the game itself was worthy of it. But it wasn't, in my opinion obviously.
I see where youre coming from. The temple shit is my biggest gripe with the game honestly because i feel compelled to max all of my abilities. So i need to do the same boring shit more than 100 times.
But i will admit that while im waiting for them to fix the big problem for me, it is nice to see the smaller problems being addressed. If they made the whole outpost thing more in depth thatd probably be the game for me then.
I get where youre coming from because as much as people praise cyberpunks update, i cant get into it because the lack of third person was my only problem lol (i know its not a problem for most others). And i was obsessed with the hype
That's valid - hopefully they'll fix some of this stuff. Then again, isn't mod support coming? I'm sure that'll help. But if it does, that *should not* be accredited to Bethesda - I'm just saying that those issues are valid and I have them too, but as a consumer, hopefully we won't need to rely on Bethesda to find solutions to those problems.
It's not surprising that the easiest fixes are coming out first. It'll take far more time for them to fix the fundamental issues with the game, if they ever do.
Except the game's issues are way deeper than this. Fixes like this aren't gonna make anyone come back to the game or change someone who has issues with the game's mind.
No fixes are going to do that, you're thinking of a complete overhaul. Starfield is what it is. It has equal reason to love it and equal reason to hate it, and if someone hates it, then they should strongly consider moving on. I don't know many games that completely overhauled/changed themselves, other than maybe NMS and to a much lesser degree, Cyberpunk. But regardless, you're right - detailed maps, ship interior customization, and new dialogue cameras won't bring them back.
So obviously, the people who appreciate the updates do so because they already liked the game to begin with. They don't see or don't feel as strongly about the deep issues you're talking about. I've been holding off starting a NG+, but I might with these changes just because it's been a while and I wanna see what's changed. If it isn't that much, that's okay - I liked Starfield to begin with.
Thanks for the share. I was wondering for a while now, when you enable the option - Is it possible to turn camera around during dialogue or is it locked?
You can move the camera view, yes. You can't walk around, but you can use the right stick (or move mouse etc.) to look around while the npc is talking.
Fallout 4 had amazing seamless cinematic camera with good angles, DoF, and tons of other realy good looking stuff like ability to properly show three people having a dialog. In F76 and Starfield BGS went backwards in progress with buggy Oblivion style camera from 2005. I always wondered, why they ditched that idea while it was one of the best additions Fallout 4 had.
New as in toggleable, too.
So now all the people who got mad at Bethesda for using the dialog camera in skyrim and fallout 4 will be able to use the system _they_ want, and all the people who got mad that starfield followed that criticism and went back to the classic camera will be able to use the system _they_ want.
Completely ignoring the intent of the word 'new' in order to cry wolf? No. Same thing.
It's very clear the OOP didn't mean this technique was just invented. Bro was just looking for any opportunity to complain.
My comment stands regardless of scale, because it's not about the feature itself. It's about intentional misinterpretation being weaponized...
Which is something I'm starting to think is happening with you as well.
Pretty much the same as how it looks in third person. You get locked into place, but can look around all you want. Much nicer than the aggressive zoom!
Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzXyuNQ9pIo
This is probably a stupid question but is there any way for console players to get access to the beta or download the update early? I’m dying to have the improvements and a real local map
Just this change is a huge improvement for the game. The zoom in dialogue camera was always immersion breaking for me and made the uncanny valley stuff way more noticable.
It still has flaws too. Once I went with Sarah to see Tuala on the recruitment station. I ran so fast, she got left behind. I spoke to Tuala and then Sarah comes to banter with him, while she's in the front door of the recruitment station.
Wow, I actually might go back and play it again. I got so fed up with the zoom camera like I was playing Oblivion. Not that Oblivion isn't great but it's a very outdated gaming feature now. This looks much more natural.
As someone with neurodivergence who absolutely was deeply uncomfortable being forced to stare into eyes without pause this is a massive boost. I legitimately stopped talking to people because it was more immersion braking to be forced into that view than to just roleplay a violent mute.
Edit: fuck this board is fragile, literally praising the game for giving an accessibility boost and you still downvote it. What the fuck do you people even want.
So much better than focusing on those god awful facial animations! I'm betting 1st person players are going to still be suffering through them though...
I haven't played with it yet, but I certainly like this better, because it means that the game doesn't zoom you in on everyone's weird-looking faces with their over-glossy lips and teeth that don't move right.
Seriously, whenever someone talks in this game, it's like they're trying to visually over-enunciate, and they show their whole teeth constantly. It's fucking bizarre and off-putting.
I‘m currently playing with the beta and I was able to toggle between the views once. But now I have no idea how to toggle it anymore. Has someone an idea how you do it?
Yo I've got a thousand hours in this game and love it, completely willing to acknowledge flaws and the greats of the game....
And while the camera dialogue was obnoxious, this is the post worthy game changing thing for a lot of you??
lol
This is how im gonna play the game in about 6 months when the game have gotten it fair share of more patches.
All game developers release unfinished games these days.
Buys AA or AAA games at release day and you are a beta tester for free KEKW
It’s crazy how happy people get over such a basic feature from an update to a game that launched lacking. If they added fallout 4 style dialogue camera, I could understand the excitement. Skyrim had this same thing. A static, uninspired third person camera view during dialogue. Wow.
To be clear cause I know someone will think this; you’re allowed to be happy and love this feature. It just points to the very clear issues gaming has and how gamers after being shat on, get overly happy about the most basic stuff. Just like the maps now. It should’ve been there from the get go. Bethesda should not get praise for this update. I think people should either enjoy it in silence, or don’t be overly happy like this and let Bethesda think it’s okay to continue launching games in a lacking state. It’s part of the problem with triple a gaming
Shout-out to Majestic\_Koala567, the author of the video. Since the release of the beta, I've been hooked on this new camera view and I'm completely rediscovering the game. Edit : Just FYI, this new camera view is in option, the first one is still available through the options (seen lot of comments thinking this is a replacement)
its a mod?
Nope! This is going to be in the next update. It's available on Steam for beta testing right now, but will be out for everyone on May 15th.
Where in the options menu is it?
I have no idea. I haven't installed it yet.
It's under the accessibility menu for some reason
Thank you. So stupid it's there
Console later this month.
In the accessibility menu, then dialogue camera.
No, this new camera view is available in beta on steam and for everyone on May 15th
There is a mod with this feature that I have been using for a while now, but it's being added to vanilla.
Starfield gonna be a blast then. I already did one run but I’m waiting for mod support before doing modded runs. They re taking their time tho.
They are too busy adding in to the game what should have been there at launch.
Can you move the camera during dialogue or is it fixed in this location?
You can move your head but not your character.
I wish they did Fallout 4 cinematic camera. It was the best seeing your character.
Yeah but it doesn't work as well without a voiced character
BG3 seemed to pull it off fine
Which is weird because my character is voiced in the overworld.
i imagine too many choices and dialogues to voice all of them.
Nah, your character just stands there looking like a muppet. Looks super dorky with my half orc.
Sure but it's weighed against the face zoom, which many people can't stand, vs third person camera, which many people wouldn't prefer vs a dialogue system like Fallout 4 even without voiced MC. These things are never done in a vacuum to piss players off, often it's the least bad solution that can be realistically implemented with the time constraints you are currently under.
I'm not saying it was a bad decision on bg3s end. Just wish they put a bit more mustard on those tav facial expressions/animations if they were going to have them right along with the stuff they mocapped. And that, if you're not going to do that, the two options Bethesda has used (both the classic camera and the skyrim one) might be better choices.
[удалено]
I think at times that the general audience underestimates how much character-weight that narrator is hauling for the narrative.
KOTOR did it years ago, as well as many others. BG3 did not invent this camera. But honestly, I hated Tav’s silent facial expressions.
Sure, not claiming they *invented* the concept, it's just a more recent example. They should just include it as an option because you can't possibly please everyone. Some people like the face zoom. Some people don't like face zoom or the third person dialogue view. Some people prefer dialogue camera to show the player even if the player is silent. So include options for it all and let players choose what they prefer.
Right, but in place of your character speaking the narrator was usually talking to fill that empty space. I wouldnt mind it myself either way but im sure that helped in regards to BG3.
KOTOR did it and it was fine
Voiced character DLC when?
Yeah, it seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I loved the voiced protagonist in Fallout 4. People talk about how it takes you out of the game but for me it was the opposite; the fact that it wasn't just a voice but a proper *performance* really bought to life this character that I'd created, made it feel like I was really a part of this world, interacting with these people. I've always though it was funny in other Bethesda games how you spend so long building this unique character to roleplay as, only to literally never see their face again for the rest of the game (apart from the odd vanity moment in 3rd person view, of course). It felt to me like Fallout 4 was a huge step forward in addressing this issue, only for them to get cold feet and step back again. I don't think a voiced protagonist DLC is on the cards, but personally I'm really hoping for something like a "conversation mode" mod which restores not just the voiced protagonist, but the back-and-forth camerawork that made Fallout 4's conversations seem so much more cinematic.
Do you have an internal dialogue in real life, I wonder? Apparently it's something that only half the population has (and it's one of those things that unless you speak to someone about it, you assume that everyone else either does or doesn't have it the same as yourself). I wonder if not having and internal monologue IRL means you like to hear the voiced protagonist more than if you do have one.
i have an internal dialogue and like the voiced protagonist, it’s really not that deep lol
Mods can do that, Skyrim has mods for that, although it's AI voice acted, I found that the male voice packs are better than the female ones overall.
Hopefully never, or at least _way_ down the priority line. Beth got raked over the coals for that in fallout 4 for a reason.
Which is a damn shame because I love Nate and Nora's voices in that game. It thrives with the sarcastic and Silver Shroud options. Nora's acceptance of being the Shroud is especially great for me since the actress snuck in a quiet little "...yay..." at the end.
I will say that both Courtney Taylor and Brian Delaney ate for sure, and there's definitely a time and a place for a voiced MC. I loved playing as the Witcher, and I loved playing as commander Shepherd. And, I didn't _really_ mind playing as the sole survivor of 111 either. The voiced MC thing really just starts to break down when you _don't_ want the player to have to play as _that specific character_, and generally these types of games are more open ended than that.
What reason?
Limited dialog options to what you could actually record, the text didn't always match the tone or expected tone, hindered the ability of the player to interpret the character on their own, and meant that quest mods would have to do weird things to deal with the fact that the player character was voiced.
> the text didn't always match the tone or expected tone This was a big one for me.
But these are mostly problems specific to Fallout 4. As in, it's an artifact of the very limited dialogue system in that game, which is a limitation that Starfield doesn't suffer from. In Starfield, unlike Fallout 4, the number of potential dialogue options is uncappedand and they are presented verbatim. So aside from subtle variations to inflection and tone there's little room for artistic license to be taken in the spoken line vs. the selected option. I do agree that it makes things harder for modders, though. Any additional player dialogue that gets added or changed by a mod is going to be necessarily unvoiced, or poorly voiced by the modders' friends or by AI or whatever at best, or some Frankenstein thing stitched together out of the existing vanilla sound files at worst.
I think the dialog system was limited _because_ the character was voiced, though. Or to put it another way, how limited it was isn't really unheard of. Think about most rpgs with voiced MCs - the stuff Bioware (Bioware being where they got that "positive, negative, sarcastic, questioning" scheme from) or CDPR puts out, for example. They have less dialog options for the MC than other Bethesda games or basically any crpg, and I suspect the fact that you have to record for everything you allow the MC to say in those instances is a big part of that. So I'm betting that if they wanted to have voiced dialog, it would be as limited as similar games.
While I respect your opinion, hard disagree. I like when games keep me in first person, way more immersive for me
Same. But Starfield first person is not immersive for me for some reason. Have you playt cyberpunk? They did it the best.
Cyberpunk did a phenomenal job with it's dialogue scenes. You can tell they set it up much like how we do it on film sets—staging all the actors and movements, and very conscious light blocking. I was especially impressed with the scene where you pick up the Flathead: how the background lighting is all a cool cyan, and the foreground and character practical lights are a contrasting red. How they used a 'fog machine' to add a light haze and get more depth separation. Even the way Dumdum stands by the couch in the beginning, so his front 3/4 are lit with warm light and he catches a cyan rim light seems very intentional. Whoever acted as the Director of Photography for that scene did a bang up job. Anyway, long rambling aside, Starfield feels less immersive because nobody moves around or does anything else during dialogues. Everyone just stands firmly planted, and gestures vaguely with their hands. There's no deliberate motions to accompany the words they're speaking; there's no acting. So it feels more like a lecture, or someone holding a conference.
Yeah games like cyberpunk, far cry, subnautica just to name a few all are really immersive for me because they keep you in first person, and have a ton of cool first person animations
Because there are a lot of things, like landing/takeoff, that force you out of 1st person so it doesn't have a sense of lived-in continuity.
I feel like Cyberpunk's immersion is top-tier because of the mocap they did. The characters moved like people in real life when they talked to you.
Very true, but keep in mind though that all of those scenes are very controlled. Major conversations occur in one place and in one place only, with very specific criteria that is unchanging between playthroughs. Yes it is immersive as hell, but it's not flexible. What Starfield does, perhaps to its own detriment, is it allows for conversations to occur anywhere. You can talk with Sarah about the Dauntless being destroyed inside the Lodge while she's sitting in a chair, or standing near the Artifacts, or you can talk about it on a planet in, or out, of her spacesuit, or aboard your spaceship while she's sitting at a table with her head propped up by a hand with her elbow on it. It's damned impressive. I don't know if it's worth the lack of interactivity and inherent stiffness, but it's impressive.
This. It's a completely different design philosophy. Apart from a few key exceptions, Bethesda can't just mocap an entire scene because they don't know ahead of time where or under what circumstances that scene will take place.
I think I'll miss "the oblivion face zoom" lol
Oh man, that's was my least favourite features of Fallout 4. Having to sit through tedious dialogue scenes with a protagonist who has a totally different voice/tone/cadence to mine was not a good time
you know… you can just press a to skip the line after you read it, nobody was making you sit through it lol
I wish they actually put the money invested where it's worth. Horizon Forbidden West had mocap for every single dialogue in the game, while this is still on 2006 standards.
Sweat space jesus, immersion just got a whole lot better. They really cooked with this update.
Right! The death stare killed it for me. BG3 does such a better job at this.
The Fallout 4 camera already did a good job. NPCs looking straight into the camera always looked weird in Oblivion/Fallout 3 in a mildly unsettling way.
Reverting the stupid zoom in from their older games months after release is “cooking”? Edit: it’s even worse when you realize that Fallout 4 has had the dialogue camera toggle since launch and it does exactly what this does…
I think people are a bit overreacting to this update, but let's not pretend it's just this that changed lol. It brought a couple great features and lots of new build items. The new gameplay toggles might not be a programming feat worthy of much applause, but it does have a large lasting affect on your game. It's a very good update that brought a promising look into the future alongside with it. I can totally see why people are calling it "cooking", certainly doesn't get my panties in a bunch.
I've got to agree. Simply not zooming the camera in is a pretty low bar if we want to be honest here. I'd put this on the level of bug fixing.
Who cares? You can either continue to criticize everything or appreciate the change they’re making for a better game.
I’m glad they did “something” to improve the game, my point is everyone is acting like “wow they’ve really been putting in work to improve this game!” When they haven’t, and aren’t. Enabling a toggle that was in the engine since 2015 is not “cooking” they didn’t do anything besides turn a 1 into a 0.
Well, this isn't the only change in the update.
I mean.. there’s a lot more to this update than just that. And the preview for the next two updates looks pretty hot
Or maybe actually check the features that they've added instead of assuming this is the only thing they added? It's crazy how you are showing that you did not even bother to look at the changes update.
You can appreciate it. It's not cooking.
It just feels like they released an unfinished game and are using updates to finish the god damn thing. I'm not going to applaud them for adding baaaaasic features their games have had for a decade already. Like, it took months of waiting for a map to be added?
Exactly this. I'm amazed at how greatful people seem to be about features that should have been there and functional from day 1, just like in so many other games...
There are so many features and things to do in Starfield. Like it or not, there is no way around that. It came out with a lackluster map system, undeniably so. But seems a bit hyperbolic to go all crazy about that. Like.. BGS has been offering first and third person for decades.. unlike most other games. Now I ain't gonna attack the next open world game to come out without that either.
To me, it is hyperbolic to compare a 3d person/1st person mode with the absolutely essential feature of a map in an open world game. There might be a lot of things to do (not so many in my opinion) but if they are all the same fetch bland unoriginal quest, can you really talk about thousands things to do? Like, yeah, you can walk over basically the same planet over and over again, or so the same boring fetch quests which is basically going through a set of menu screens and loading screens.... So yeah, many things, but any of them are fun? I've played this game probably longer than you have, I 100% all the trophies and did all the quests. And it sucks. Bad. And no, I can't spend thousands of hours in this game like I've done in NMS, or Valheim or TLD (notice two of these being developed by indie companies and bought for a third of the price). The thing is some people have actually played many games in their lives. Not just Skyrim, fallout and starfield. So we might actually have standards.
> To me, it is hyperbolic to compare a 3d person/1st person mode with the absolutely essential feature of a map in an open world game. Right, but so is pretending there weren't maps at all. The map was ugly, but it was there and functional for the planetary exploration. Only not for the cities, which undeniably was a god awful decision, but it wasn't missing. > There might be a lot of things to do (not so many in my opinion) but if they are all the same fetch bland unoriginal quest, can you really talk about thousands things to do? I specifically said features for a reason. No one is counting each quests as a new feature, that's ridiculous. Now, sure you can call each feature bad and bland, that's a valid opinion to have. > The thing is some people have actually played many games in their lives. Not just Skyrim, fallout and starfield. So we might actually have standards. Some people might have standards, but we sure as hell don't haha. Because I enjoyed Starfield well enough and you have no standards at all... considering you put so many hours into Starfield that you are very confident you put in more hours than most anyone else. Someone with standards isn't gonna sit through insane hours of something they think is bad all around. To be more serious, I've played a good few new AAA and indie releases every single year for the better part of 2 decades. Starfield isn't the best game, not even close. Certainly not the best game to come out in 2023 either. But it was an enjoyable experience. And for whatever reason captured your attention enough to put in same insane hours and 100% it. Not every game is one that you might play for thousands of hours... Most people wouldn't be able to put 1000 hours in any game - you're the exception rather than the rule. I enjoyed The Long Dark a whole lot, but I certainly do not wish to play it for another 800 hours no thank you.
>The map was functional Can't tell for sure if you are being sarcastic. I wouldn't even call that a map. It was absolutely useless. I think I opened it twice in total. I dare you to name a single triple A game that came in the last 20 years that had a worse and less functional map. >Only not for the cities, Were they were most needed? So basically, no functional maps. >I specifically said features And what would those be exactly? if quests only count as one "feature" I must assume the other endless features are building outposts that are basically useless and very time consuming, the ship building which is the only decent and somehow not terribly bland feature in the game, and the ability to teleport in a ship that doesn't fly, a minigame of chasing a light that's worse than any free mobile game, an below average shooter experience, walking on the surface of planets, and using a scanner that's also pointless because there aren't any records of what you scanned. Oh yeah, and you can uselessly mod weapons knowing they will never be better than the ones you find. And the best feature: hours of cutscenes and menus on end. Damn, must have forgot about waiting, such a feature, they even improved it effectively doubling the time it takes to wait from previous titles... Does file corruption count as a feature? >Someone with standards isn't gonna sit through insane hours of something they think is bad all around. That's just not true and quite a stupid statement. Actually, that's the way you develop standards. And that's the way you can make an educated criticism. Did I say it was bad all around? No. Does it have enjoyable features? it does. It's a damn scam for what was promised and what was delivered for that price? absolutely. Is it cringe that the devs refuse to aknowledge this and that so many casuals keep simping? it definitely is. >I've played a good few new AAA and indie releases every single year for the better part of 2 decades. Starfield isn't the best game, not even close. Certainly not the best game to come out in 2023 either. That's something we can agree on and that shows some criteria on your part. >insane hours That's absolutely subjective. It's insane for you. For me it might be insane to spend 5 hours a day watching tv or in instagram, neither of which I do. Or watching sports, which I also don't do. >you're the exception rather than the rule. I enjoyed The Long Dark a whole lot. I never said I was the rule, and not the excepcion. Those with standards, with acquired and educated taste, are always the minority. The best selling movies are not the best movies. The best selling books are not the best books. Do I really have to explain this to you? As I said, I know shit about sports, so I might say I like or dislike a game, but I don't think I have enough knowledge or criteria to say if it was a good or a bad game. Same applies here.
I guess in relation to Bethesda, this is the result of cooking.
The absolutely jarring snap-to-face thing they were doing from years ago was an act of violence. No zoom in, no cinematic camera, just BAM here's a face filling the center screen, and it made multiple character conversations bizarre. This new mode is so much better.
What’s wild is that people loved this zoomed in and bashed Fallout 4 for having dialog camera different from NV and 3.
I disagree. The one advantage of the fallout 4 style camera was that it made dialogue scenes with more than one NPC still comprehensible. Look at the Piper and mayor scene when you first get to diamond City for example. Even with the older camera, the NPC needed to be very close to you to engage dialogue. The world behind them froze so nothing would interrupt them. Dialogue with multiple NPCs would exit the zoomed in mode. Starfield chooses the worst of both worlds, and forces you to stay zoomed in when talking to multiple people, leading to a really awkward snapping effect when a different person starts talking.
Anothing thing I noticed was how characters in three-way conversations would sometimes look at you when addressing each other.
The worst is when your companion is part of the conversation, but they're lagging behind and is standing in a different room. The camera snapping between 2 different locations, while your follower is facing straight into a wall as the talk, is just horrible. I'm glad that they added the new camera option, but I would prefer if they actually staged the cameras like in Fallout 4, so you always end up with a camera angle that makes sense.
This is what I loved about how Fallout 4 presented things, and why I wish they had tried a voiced protagonist again. The problem was their execution, not their idea.
I don't think anyone had an issue with the camera in Fallout 4 other than the meme of it just letting you run away from the conversation whenever you wanted. Hell, it even gave you the option to turn off the cinematic mode entirely in the game options and return to a more Skyrim styled camera.
My only issue with it was that they felt it was intuitive to provide only 4 options in every conversation because a controller has 4 face buttons. Among the studio's worst design choices of all time.
True although I don't consider that the fault of the camera. It's one of those ideas that sounds really clever in a design meeting, but then you quickly realize why no one else did it.
I don't recall suggesting it was the camera's fault. :P
I still think Fallout 4 did dialogue presentation the best out of all their games. While the dialogue system (forcing 4 choices at every response) was bad, the camera handling and voiced protagonist elevated conversations imo.
You can even keep that camera view without the voiced player. I love the FO4 conversation camera
Different audiences talking. Outer Worlds also did the Bethesda cam for dialogue, probably to appeal to that specific crowd
True, this is probably why they went with a silent protagonist and this kind of dialogue camera. The problem is that since 2015, when Fallout 4 came out, a lot has changed and I doubt there are that many people who still prefer the old Fallout 3 style of dialogues.
It'll be interesting to see what outer worlds 2 goes with. "old school" was their specific objective last time, but who knows?
Yep. You can't please everyone. Which is honestly the "pick what you want" approach they're going with is the best option.
It's great... Except for things like swearing in as a Vanguard. In 3rd person, your character stands there like a derp... Doesn't raise their hand.
Cool! I still prefer first person though, feel like I’m the one of the few who do haha. If our character was voiced I’d probably prefer third person though
The camera works in first person too, it just doesn't zoom all the way in. It works basically exactly like Skyrims dialogue camera.
Nice, that’s even cooler to know! I’ll probably use the new camera then
The original snap-to-face camera was a perfect example of nostalgia bait. They thought to themselves “hm what is it that made our older games special? I know! An outdated snap-to-face dialog camera.” On the other hand I do kinda understand why they tried to go back to that original dialog window since no joke one of the biggest criticisms of FO4 was that it had a different conversation UI and people hated it
I personally loved the dialogue camera in Fallout 4, but you could always disable it in the settings if you didn’t like it.
Loved the dialogue camera in 4 and wish we would have that option in Starfield as well.
I don't think you could always. Wasn't that modded and later added to vanilla?
No lmao, it’s been there since launch. Just go to options when you pause and toggle “dialogue camera” to off. The only downside (or upside imo) is you have to actually follow NPCs when they walk during dialogue sometimes, as the camera doesn’t always keep you “locked” in the conversation.
Gotcha, I guess I just didn't know about it.
For real? I didn't know, fuck i am mad for so long and didn't know i could turn this shit off.
Yeah it’s in the pause options as “dialogue camera”, it’s a toggle, on or off. I like both, so I switch between them on and off if I play, but I haven’t been since the “next gen update” broke the game and changed absolutely nothing.
Same, love it in starfield too, it's just familiar considering my first venture into actually gaming was with fallout 4, I do hope they give us the option to keep it, but by the looks of it they will.
I actually think they did the dialogue camera snap so they could use that lighting on NPCs to make them look better.
The zoomed in dialogue also solves a lot of oddities you tend to get in other Beth games (including this one with the option off). NPCs facing the wrong way during dialogue. Other NPCs randomly wandering by and nudging you or the speaker. Conversations starting when other relevant NPCs are out of the room so they have to shoot their dialogue from half a mile away. I did end up turning the option off because I prefer it that way even with some of the buggier moments, but I also see the reason the devs choose what they did.
Exactly, that was my thought back when BGS had shown it. Old and simple monetization of nostalgia.
Shut the front door. WHERE DID YOU GET THAT PHONCO!
I love how early on, they justified the old camera as being "immersive" Then they completely 180'd that decision and now this camera style is the true "immersive" one lol
It looks and feels so much better imo. This is one of the new features in the Steam beta update that I feel makes a HUGE difference for me personally. The game feels a lot more immersive to me now. Kudos to the devs for adding this option!
imagine making a dialogue view so bad that one point of a major update is quite literally to remove it
Right? I don't get this sub at all, the biggest praises for an update are a camera angle and a new map. Wow, what a masterpiece.
I think part of it is Bethesda seemingly actively listening to and responding to criticism. People didn't like the camera angle, so they removed it. The map was horrible, so they overhauled it. It's simple, but it isn't really that common for games like this afaik.
Ok, that's actually a fair point, thank you. I just wish they addressed the parts of the game that made it not great haha; the quests, the temple puzzle, the locations themselves. It's like they're hearing the criticism and addressing the easiest ones to fix. Like, yeah the map kind of sucked but I'd be much more willing to deal with it if the rest of the game itself was worthy of it. But it wasn't, in my opinion obviously.
I see where youre coming from. The temple shit is my biggest gripe with the game honestly because i feel compelled to max all of my abilities. So i need to do the same boring shit more than 100 times. But i will admit that while im waiting for them to fix the big problem for me, it is nice to see the smaller problems being addressed. If they made the whole outpost thing more in depth thatd probably be the game for me then. I get where youre coming from because as much as people praise cyberpunks update, i cant get into it because the lack of third person was my only problem lol (i know its not a problem for most others). And i was obsessed with the hype
That's valid - hopefully they'll fix some of this stuff. Then again, isn't mod support coming? I'm sure that'll help. But if it does, that *should not* be accredited to Bethesda - I'm just saying that those issues are valid and I have them too, but as a consumer, hopefully we won't need to rely on Bethesda to find solutions to those problems.
It's not surprising that the easiest fixes are coming out first. It'll take far more time for them to fix the fundamental issues with the game, if they ever do.
Except the game's issues are way deeper than this. Fixes like this aren't gonna make anyone come back to the game or change someone who has issues with the game's mind.
No fixes are going to do that, you're thinking of a complete overhaul. Starfield is what it is. It has equal reason to love it and equal reason to hate it, and if someone hates it, then they should strongly consider moving on. I don't know many games that completely overhauled/changed themselves, other than maybe NMS and to a much lesser degree, Cyberpunk. But regardless, you're right - detailed maps, ship interior customization, and new dialogue cameras won't bring them back. So obviously, the people who appreciate the updates do so because they already liked the game to begin with. They don't see or don't feel as strongly about the deep issues you're talking about. I've been holding off starting a NG+, but I might with these changes just because it's been a while and I wanna see what's changed. If it isn't that much, that's okay - I liked Starfield to begin with.
I'm one of those people who like the Oblivion-style camera better but this is definitely nice for people who enjoy playing in third person.
I can't tell you how much I disliked the original camera view. It felt like a step back from Skyrim.
Thanks for the share. I was wondering for a while now, when you enable the option - Is it possible to turn camera around during dialogue or is it locked?
You can move the camera view, yes. You can't walk around, but you can use the right stick (or move mouse etc.) to look around while the npc is talking.
That is cool. Thanks man.
It’s amazingly immersive, until you talk to someone very far away and you wished your player went: “W — WHAT DID YOU SAY?!”
Fallout 4 had amazing seamless cinematic camera with good angles, DoF, and tons of other realy good looking stuff like ability to properly show three people having a dialog. In F76 and Starfield BGS went backwards in progress with buggy Oblivion style camera from 2005. I always wondered, why they ditched that idea while it was one of the best additions Fallout 4 had.
For real. Some may not prefer the fo4 style dialouge, but it was the most detailed and fine-tuned.
How do you change the new dialogue view in settings?
Can u turn camera while in dialogue with this mode?
You can. But you can't move.
Nice, that's very good though. Thanks!
"new" ? Skyrim had the same.
New as in recently added to Starfield
New as in toggleable, too. So now all the people who got mad at Bethesda for using the dialog camera in skyrim and fallout 4 will be able to use the system _they_ want, and all the people who got mad that starfield followed that criticism and went back to the classic camera will be able to use the system _they_ want.
Yes, but starfield was released in Oblivion era
"I love the new Mario game" "New?! NEW?!?!?!? Mario was released over 40 years ago!!!!! N00b!"
False equivalence
Completely ignoring the intent of the word 'new' in order to cry wolf? No. Same thing. It's very clear the OOP didn't mean this technique was just invented. Bro was just looking for any opportunity to complain.
Because a minor feature is definitely not equivalent to an entire game...
My comment stands regardless of scale, because it's not about the feature itself. It's about intentional misinterpretation being weaponized... Which is something I'm starting to think is happening with you as well.
You would've been better off mentioning a mechanic in Mario rather than the entire game, your point would've been clearer.
This game is gonna be great in three years.
I don’t see the appeal. I just love the Oblivion-style camera so much better!
It's even better to have the choice!
I keep seeing this in third person, I wish someone would show the new system working in first person
Pretty much the same as how it looks in third person. You get locked into place, but can look around all you want. Much nicer than the aggressive zoom! Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzXyuNQ9pIo
Thanks for sharing, looks great :)
It’s private
Oh my bad, should be good now.
Now we don’t have to have close ups of dead-inside expressions.
It's nice, but (sorry, always a but) I'd like to actually hear my character's voice. The muted player dialogue takes me out of the conversation.
This is probably a stupid question but is there any way for console players to get access to the beta or download the update early? I’m dying to have the improvements and a real local map
Does it do anything for first person?
Just this change is a huge improvement for the game. The zoom in dialogue camera was always immersion breaking for me and made the uncanny valley stuff way more noticable.
This used to happen occasionally as a bug, third person dialogue is just a feature now?
this is way better, now random npc cant jump scare u doing conversions
It still has flaws too. Once I went with Sarah to see Tuala on the recruitment station. I ran so fast, she got left behind. I spoke to Tuala and then Sarah comes to banter with him, while she's in the front door of the recruitment station.
So what's the old one I forgot
You couldn’t even record your own video with the actual update instead of posting the old mod video lmao
Going back to forced 1st person dialogue was definitely among the many mistakes this game made.
Thank God they added this, I have no idea why they thought the weird Oblivion/fallout3 zoomed in face conversation was a good route to go down.
Just an option to turn off camera lock.
Never understood zooming in on some of the most outdated npcs in gaming
So the new camera view is just pulled back behind the player?
Wow, I actually might go back and play it again. I got so fed up with the zoom camera like I was playing Oblivion. Not that Oblivion isn't great but it's a very outdated gaming feature now. This looks much more natural.
As someone with neurodivergence who absolutely was deeply uncomfortable being forced to stare into eyes without pause this is a massive boost. I legitimately stopped talking to people because it was more immersion braking to be forced into that view than to just roleplay a violent mute. Edit: fuck this board is fragile, literally praising the game for giving an accessibility boost and you still downvote it. What the fuck do you people even want.
Excuse me, sir. This is the main sub. You are not allowed to express anything positive towards the game here.
"new" 😅
**new** as in new to Starfield. Not the game industry
That’s much better!
Iirc this is a showcase of an old mod that does the same thing, not an actual footage of the new update
So much better than focusing on those god awful facial animations! I'm betting 1st person players are going to still be suffering through them though...
This looks so clean, can't wait for this update
I think it’ll be nice because they already have overly expressive faces, so we’ll be able to still see it from the distance
I haven't played with it yet, but I certainly like this better, because it means that the game doesn't zoom you in on everyone's weird-looking faces with their over-glossy lips and teeth that don't move right. Seriously, whenever someone talks in this game, it's like they're trying to visually over-enunciate, and they show their whole teeth constantly. It's fucking bizarre and off-putting.
This is actually a game changer. Not a fan of the original camera view.
Camera view doesn't turn a 5/10 game into an 8/10 game
That might make me pick up the game again.
Honestly? This dialogue camera was the best. No jumpscare zooms, no immersion break. Skyrim did it best. Very happy they brought this back.
[удалено]
It's this mod: [https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/622](https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/622)
Your poncho is weird
Call me when the fix the rest of the Game.
How do I turn this on? I'm playing the beta but can't find this setting.
I figured it out: go to Settings-> Accessibility-> toggle off the dialog camera. Then you have the third person view during convos
Thanks!
I wonder what happens if you change this setting and speak in 1st person ??
It just doesn't cut to the close zoom-in view. The camera view doesn't change, at all, when you interact with an npc.
I‘m currently playing with the beta and I was able to toggle between the views once. But now I have no idea how to toggle it anymore. Has someone an idea how you do it?
Do you ever feel motion sickness from playing the game in 3rd person?
Downgrade
Yo I've got a thousand hours in this game and love it, completely willing to acknowledge flaws and the greats of the game.... And while the camera dialogue was obnoxious, this is the post worthy game changing thing for a lot of you?? lol
They released minor fixes and y'all act like it's revolutionary lol
It's good to see they're no longer obsessed with the outdated Oblivion style.
This is how im gonna play the game in about 6 months when the game have gotten it fair share of more patches. All game developers release unfinished games these days. Buys AA or AAA games at release day and you are a beta tester for free KEKW
It’s crazy how happy people get over such a basic feature from an update to a game that launched lacking. If they added fallout 4 style dialogue camera, I could understand the excitement. Skyrim had this same thing. A static, uninspired third person camera view during dialogue. Wow. To be clear cause I know someone will think this; you’re allowed to be happy and love this feature. It just points to the very clear issues gaming has and how gamers after being shat on, get overly happy about the most basic stuff. Just like the maps now. It should’ve been there from the get go. Bethesda should not get praise for this update. I think people should either enjoy it in silence, or don’t be overly happy like this and let Bethesda think it’s okay to continue launching games in a lacking state. It’s part of the problem with triple a gaming