Wasteland 2 Kickstarted

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

The point the katana example was that making that choice gave your PC a longshot ability to use a rare weapon ~one that's out there, but that you might never find, and at significant cost too... one that pays off only if you do find the weapon. Why should this not be the same for Energy weapons... or even TRAPS in Fallout.

 

Well, if the game clearly communicates that this is a gamble, I see nothing wrong with that. But it didn't.

 

 

... But how could it not be a gamble?

Energy weapons would be the most expensive guns in the game ~excepting miniguns, and that makes them rare by default, no?

 

 

True enough, but based on the info the game hands out to you ("It is a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Anything might be out there"), basically every skill except melee weapons (you get one at the start, doesn't require ammo which might or might not be rare outside the vault), outdoorsman (it's a post-apocalyptic wasteland, knowing how to survive there will surely come in handy) and perhaps stealth (wide utility, universally usable on all enemy types) is a gamble.

 

(Worst of all, even these skills are somewhat underpowered.)

[AwesomeOcelot]

My perspective is your not creating a character to be good at the world that you're about to enter that you know nothing about, you're creating a character from the limited back story of being raised in a vault, hopefully one that makes sense. The game doesn't punish you for tagging skills that are better in the late game, you can drop points in other skills. Outdoorsman could have been more important e.g. Fallout 2, they probably didn't want to punish exploration too much, but this wouldn't change the fact that some skills are going to be far more useful than others, and I'm fine with that.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

The point the katana example was that making that choice gave your PC a longshot ability to use a rare weapon ~one that's out there, but that you might never find, and at significant cost too... one that pays off only if you do find the weapon. Why should this not be the same for Energy weapons... or even TRAPS in Fallout.

 

Well, if the game clearly communicates that this is a gamble, I see nothing wrong with that. But it didn't.

 

 

... But how could it not be a gamble?

Energy weapons would be the most expensive guns in the game ~excepting miniguns, and that makes them rare by default, no?

 

 

True enough, but based on the info the game hands out to you ("It is a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Anything might be out there"), basically every skill except melee weapons (you get one at the start, doesn't require ammo which might or might not be rare outside the vault), outdoorsman (it's a post-apocalyptic wasteland, knowing how to survive there will surely come in handy) and perhaps stealth (wide utility, universally usable on all enemy types) is a gamble.

 

(Worst of all, even these skills are somewhat underpowered.)

 

...

 

"how could it not be a gamble?" 

 

response is simple and obvious. only a jackass o' a developer would offer a player skills that were not viable. if a player starts with the assumption that because the skill is available at start of game, then obviously such skill will be useful and beneficial, we would no doubt agree that such an assumption were perfectly reasonable if not ideal logical.  

 

who the hell would suspect that character development choices is a monty haul scenario?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKR6dNDvHYQ

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[Oner]

I found outdoorsman fairly useful when I first played FO2.
Me and Sulik vs 5 highwaymen with guns on level 2-3. And I was supposed to survive that?
Running is an option, sure, but you'll be low on hp even if you survive the escape. Cue next fight..

[Gromnir]

I found outdoorsman fairly useful when I first played FO2.

Me and Sulik vs 5 highwaymen with guns on level 2-3. And I was supposed to survive that?

Running is an option, sure, but you'll be low on hp even if you survive the escape. Cue next fight..

am not a fan o' outdoorsman for fo2 neither, but please note we said fallout.  there is fo fans who even today dont know what outdoorsman did in that game as it didn't seem to work as described anyway. less damage from dehydration and rockfall encounters... maybe?

 

and That is the beauty of fallout.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[aluminiumtrioxid]

My perspective is your not creating a character to be good at the world that you're about to enter that you know nothing about, you're creating a character from the limited back story of being raised in a vault, hopefully one that makes sense. The game doesn't punish you for tagging skills that are better in the late game, you can drop points in other skills. 

 

But it does punish you for tagging the skills that are equally useless in early and late game (gamble immediately jumps to mind).

 

Also, since your character was chosen to enter the outside world, it's kinda reasonable to create a character from the standpoint of "what would be useful in the outside world" - he was chosen for a reason, after all

 

 only a jackass o' a developer would offer a player skills that were not viable. if a player starts with the assumption that because the skill is available at start of game, then obviously such skill will be useful and beneficial, we would no doubt agree that such an assumption were perfectly reasonable if not ideal logical.  

 

Also this*.

 

*only in a less confrontational tone, 'cause I'm a laid-back guy like that

[AwesomeOcelot]

But it does punish you for tagging the skills that are equally useless in early and late game (gamble immediately jumps to mind).

Yes, yes it does.

 

Also, since your character was chosen to enter the outside world, it's kinda reasonable to create a character from the standpoint of "what would be useful in the outside world" - he was chosen for a reason, after all

Only if you lack imagination. They send a moron out to get killed if you create a character with low INT, the overseer has specific dialogue for this occasion. There are many reasons for being chosen, they're not all about being the most capable.

[Gizmo]

But it does punish you for tagging the skills that are equally useless in early and late game (gamble immediately jumps to mind).

Gambling is not one I'd consider useless.  Technically it should have been a skill to notice cheating; but in Fallout it just seems to increase one's odds at winning.

I know that I tagged and boosted Gambling and arrived at the Junktown casino with 5 caps, and left with over 1500 in short order.

 

...

only a jackass o' a developer would offer a player skills that were not viable.

... 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Is it your true opinion that for example Fallout, should have changed the starter 10mm pistol on the corpse at the vault door ~into a laser pistol with ammo if the PC tagged energy weapons? Or that in every RPG the PC should start with their best weapon ~by contrived chance? Or conveniently find one in the first 20 minutes ~whatever it is? If the PC tagged Big Guns, they should find a flamer instead of a pistol? 

 

For including [detect/disarm] 'Traps', they should saturate the gameworld with hundreds of traps to make the skill a downright necessity to survive? (lest it be seen as 'useless'.)  I don't see any problem with having a skill, and being able to use it where another PC could not ~for having not selected it.  I think it's a real problem that people assume that a game should (for some reason) play on their terms; that they are entitled to win, or even somehow entitled never to make a mistake (whether it actually is, or they just think it is). *Or that they are somehow entitled to every scrap of content the game holds for it's player base. A good RPG should have more content than should be allowed to display for any one PC/play through; and that can necessitate areas where certain skills simply have no outlet. It shouldn't matter that the PC is an energy weapons specialist if they are in a location with no energy weapons... and it should not demand that ALL places have energy weapons ~or at least have them until the PC gets one.

 

 

it is a bad example for multiple reasons.

 

as said, we is warned in bg2 that katanas is rare (which is actual not exactly true btw.) for a new player o' fallout, you get no such warning about energy weapons. you can very easily get ten or more hours into the game Before you realize that you took a gamble.

It's a perfect example, but tell me.... what do you think it is an example of ~that it's so bad?

(And by that I mean of course ~what you believe that it is trying to impart or illustrate? I can tell you it's not trying to con.)

I don't believe they should have to tell the player... I don't especially believe they should keep it from them either... but if they did tell them that it was of marginal use.. then no one would take it and the purpose for it would not be seen. 

 

there is a katana available in irenicus's dungeon, in spite of the warning, so at least at start of game, even our dual wield ranger and grandmaster fighter has a weapon.

Of course there is ~it's their stuff. That stuff is their equipment.

 

there ain't no ammo for melee weapons in bg2, so once you find or buy a magic katana, it will suffice for the entirety o' the game.

Not true. There are monsters in the game that are immune to enchanted blades. It's actually a rather nasty trick in the game, because by the time you encounter them, most players will have discarded all conventional low tier equipment... making the brutes immune to attack ~until you find something to bludgeon them with.

(And a grand master dual wielding Katanas, is probably not a master with clubs either, so even when you find a club, you are at greatly reduced advantage using it.)

 

and again you is using fallout to prove itself. stop it. serious. 

No ~of course not. I can use Fallout to prove itself ~it IS itself. I'm truly boggled that this is really an issue for you. What have you against self-evidence?

 

actually, we kinda do. otherwise you got no valid reason to oppose respec. am thinking we can all agree that creating balance requires extra effort on the part o' the developers...

...

if you is against respec 'cause of exploit, then am gonna need call the hypocrisy hammer down upon you as balancing is the most common developer tool for combating exploit.

...

 HA! Good Fun!

It's not just the exploit, it's the logical fallacy of it... It's that they've already begun the adventure, encountered NPCs; possibly saved people or looted attackers... and suddenly they become someone else entirely; someone with different skills and might even be different races...

 

It's like another "Darrin Stephens" all over again. No... It's like someone who picks a hobbit and then finds out that they cannot fight like Dwarves, and cannot cast spells like Gandalf, they aren't thieves... they are just small and hide well. RESPEC! And yet their particular talents can shine later in the adventure. The better RPGs should offer this; some do. 

 

*Now I get to say HA! Good Fun!

Were you a fellow Ceribus fan eh per chance?

 

 

Edited June 27, 2014 by Gizmo

[Gromnir]

reply/quote is not good for you. we say, "it's not a good example" and then explain why is a bad example in next two or three paragraphs, but you has already replied asking us why is a bad example. is ... annoying. at very least read entire post before reply.

 

*shrug*

 

"No ~of course not. I can use Fallout to prove itself ~it IS itself. I'm truly boggled that this is really an issue for you. What have you against self-evidence?"

 

and this is so completely false. the fact that there is text describing what power armour should do or be like in fallout is neither evidence that pa should be implemented thus, or that developers o' other games should implement as power armour were described.

 

the rest is so utterly repetitive that we will concede that even our preternatural patience has been burned into nothingness. in the battle o' attrition, you is the weiner. we predicted this eventuality back in post 13 of this thread.  this will be 59. am thinking we deserve a cookie for sticking with it this long.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps you want back to channeling bester? "Or that in every RPG the PC should start with their best weapon ~by contrived chance?" be better than that.

Edited June 27, 2014 by Gromnir

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

But it does punish you for tagging the skills that are equally useless in early and late game (gamble immediately jumps to mind).

Yes, yes it does.

 

...And that's a feature because...?

 

 

 

Also, since your character was chosen to enter the outside world, it's kinda reasonable to create a character from the standpoint of "what would be useful in the outside world" - he was chosen for a reason, after all

Only if you lack imagination. They send a moron out to get killed if you create a character with low INT, the overseer has specific dialogue for this occasion. There are many reasons for being chosen, they're not all about being the most capable.

 

 

Well, the validity of other character concepts doesn't make the lacking-in-imagination character concepts invalid, does it?

[AwesomeOcelot]

You can create a lucky gambler character, or an unlucky gambler character, that's a feature, also it's not entirely useless. You can create a character from the standpoint of "what would be useful in the outside world", it's completely valid.

[Gromnir]

 

 

But it does punish you for tagging the skills that are equally useless in early and late game (gamble immediately jumps to mind).

Yes, yes it does.

 

...And that's a feature because...?

 

 

 

Also, since your character was chosen to enter the outside world, it's kinda reasonable to create a character from the standpoint of "what would be useful in the outside world" - he was chosen for a reason, after all

Only if you lack imagination. They send a moron out to get killed if you create a character with low INT, the overseer has specific dialogue for this occasion. There are many reasons for being chosen, they're not all about being the most capable.

 

 

Well, the validity of other character concepts doesn't make the lacking-in-imagination character concepts invalid, does it?

 

is just not worth the effort. you is fighting against +10 years o' inertia. we fall into same trap every year or so and try to make headway, but is futile. heck, we got folks trying to compare fallout and special to bg/bg2 and d&d... which wholly ignores what we thought were the oh so obvious fact that the developers o' a d&d game is stuck with d&d license. fallout is not a game- is a religious icon. fallout's existence and features is used as proof o' the right way to do things in a crpg... in all crpgs. is kinda mind-blowing. fallout is not a game. your mistake is you is arguing as if it is. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[aluminiumtrioxid]

is just not worth the effort. you is fighting against +10 years o' inertia. we fall into same trap every year or so and try to make headway, but is futile. heck, we got folks trying to compare fallout and special to bg/bg2 and d&d... which wholly ignores what we thought were the oh so obvious fact that the developers o' a d&d game is stuck with d&d license. fallout is not a game- is a religious icon. fallout's existence and features is used as proof o' the right way to do things in a crpg... in all crpgs. is kinda mind-blowing. fallout is not a game. your mistake is you is arguing as if it is. 

 

*sigh* Well, when there's a considerable amount of resistance against concepts like "let's try making sure that all skills are equally worth the investment a player might make in them", I'm liable to agree with you.

[Gizmo]

...fallout's existence and features is used as proof o' the right way to do things in a crpg... in all crpgs. is kinda mind-blowing. fallout is not a game. your mistake is you is arguing as if it is. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

I wouldn't claim that. Planescape is the better RPG in my opinion, however... I do consider Fallout to be the better example of ~Fallout; not the best example for all RPGs. Quite the contrary. It is the bane of modern gaming that so many studios think there IS a right way for all cRPGs... That's why the Fallout series has become mess that it is.  Too many people [with a say in it] make the assumption that RPG franken-shooters are the grand panacea for all things in gamedom... Everything is devolving towards that homogenous McRolpaying ~soup like it's an improvement of anything and everything that's not that way already.  Fallout isn't the blueprint for all RPGs ~it's the blueprint for Fallout RPGs.... Yes... it 's the same way with ~even Halo. You don't make and Brand "Halo Wars" as Halo:3; you don't make and brand SpaceMarine as "Dawn of War 3".  

 

There is nothing wrong with Halo Wars and SpaceMarine ~but they are decidedly [way the hell] too different  to be numbered sequels of Halo & Dawn of War.

 

*And yes I do lump FO3 in that bunch.  Do not casually assume that I merely mean the FPS aspect of the game (though I do include it), but there is the core treatment of it that's flat out wrong as a sequel. Where Fallout presented a post apocalypse in recovery, FO3 presented a stagnant time capsule in permanent limbo. Where the inhabitants of Fallout were all trying to recover; the inhabitants of FO3 were living in filth ~even in the BOS Citadel, where anyone should expect the initiates to have been given tooth brushes to scrub the place spotless the first week of the BOS occupation.  Where Fallout had risk, FO3 had forgiveness ~like shooting BOS paladins in the face and joining the group later ~level of forgiveness. 

 

These were entirely different games and FO3 was quite the odd man out ~and still is.  You mistake an adherence to the past as anti-progress, when it is more commonly anti-defacement.

No one (okay very few ) make the claim that Fallout's style is the only way to make all RPGs. The only one I've seen claiming others do ~is Gromnir [you].

So what do you have against game series retaining their identity, rep, and user experience? (IE. Those qualities that garnered them a fanbase).

 

I get the serious impression that a sizable chunk of modern humanity is totally accepting of the notion that a brand name is arbitrary and can be applied to anything in the name of sales. Like ~say... making a film called "Weekend at Bernie's 3" but it's a documentary about an arsonist and his victim's... and that's totally justified because ~it's change , and it's new... the new thing is reality TV... "what lame studio would ever make anything else now that we have tv that's REAL and [seemingly] unscripted!?" :meh: 

 

No... I certainly don't think Fallout is the end-all-be-all design for consummate roleplaying... but I do think it's the best example of Fallout; it's baffling why anyone wouldn't.  It's not that they cannot make a better style of game than Fallout, it is that when they do, it's not Fallout style anymore; so why call it that? It's disingenuous. There is not a single FO3 fan that wouldn't have bought it and loved it had it been named something more descriptive of what it was ~than "Fallout 3".

 

In a way it's sad that Wasteland's Kickstarter had to push itself as a Fallout/Tactics clone instead of something more like Devil Whiskey.

 

 

BTW, this is beyond discombobulating; I'm downright gobsmacked by it.

the fact that there is text describing what power armour should do or be like in fallout is neither evidence that pa should be implemented thus, or that developers o' other games should implement as power armour were described.

This was established tech in the IP setting. They did the same thing with the Mr. Handy robots. The new robot they made looks great ~until you see that they also used it as the old ones too; logically the same antiques (still active) established in the rest of the games; and it looks nothing like it.

 

____________________________

 

** On a side note:

Could I ask what this topic is about?

(Tracing it back... all it says is "This needs its own thread". The conversation meanders back and forth, was it supposed to just be general news?

Edited June 27, 2014 by Gizmo

[IndiraLightfoot]

OMG! I have deliberately stayed away from this game until gets finished, and now, having only seen this trailer:

 

I'm chomping at my bit, just to get my hands on it. Thanks to Obsidian's KS, I got my hands of a copy, and I am really glad I have it. It almost looks like the return of Fallout 1 and 2. I actually own Wasteland 1, but I haven't ever played it. I have played the Fallouts, though, and this looks like a fantastic party-based, turn-based version, with a really diverse character creation on top. Also, the art direction is stellar, it seems. All good things come to those who wait.

 

EDIT: Well, combat certainly is reminiscent of XCOM as well, but seemingly having a lot more options.

Edited September 9, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to this too. Have played the Beta and really love it. It has a Fallout style to it which I like and also like the 3D direction they took with it.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Hiro: Glad to hear that you've tried it and love it (and by playing the beta, even helped making it better)! It's really nice that someone you know from these boards, whose opinions on games I value, are looking forward to it, since then I can be even more certain that I am in for a treat.

 

EDIT: More of my musings. I really dig the intensity of combat and the UIs. The sounds and animations (although simple), still convey a sense of power and urgency fit for the setting. Imagine if PoE had a little more of this oomph. I'm not saying, turn PoE's combat into D3's, but the displays of force, power, swiftness and trickery are so far pretty lacklustre and paperdoll-y.

Edited September 9, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Undecaf]

I actually own Wasteland 1, but I haven't ever played it.

You should give it a try. Once you get the hang if how the interfaces work, it's actually quite fun (for a game if its age).

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Hiro: Glad to hear that you've tried it and love it (and by playing the beta, even helped making it better)! It's really nice that someone you know from these boards, whose opinions on games I value, are looking forward to it, since then I can be even more certain that I am in for a treat.

 

EDIT: More of my musings. I really dig the intensity of combat and the UIs. The sounds and animations (although simple), still convey a sense of power and urgency fit for the setting. Imagine if PoE had a little more of this oomph. I'm not saying, turn PoE's combat into D3's, but the displays of force, power, swiftness and trickery are so far pretty lacklustre and paperdoll-y.

 

I've played it but haven't really contributed anything to the WL2 forums. But I've found the game is fun.

 

It's a shame that too much emphasis on balance and trying to remove degenerate gameplay was a focus (maybe not the main focus) with PoE imo. But I feel it could have been much better. Also, WL2 was put back a year to continue development which shows InXile really have gone above and beyond imo.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[IndiraLightfoot]

Yeah, as for InXile, good on them, for doing so. Such dedication also makes me more confident in my high hopes for T:ToN. It will be very interesting to see what OE think of PoE at this stage. Will they say: "This will do for a X-mas release. We'll fix the rest for the expansion." Or perhaps they take the bold decision to push it forward quite a bit, to make it considerably better and more polished and "full-featured".

Edited September 9, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[kgambit]

Release:     Friday Sept 19 at 8am GMT/ 12am PST

[sorophx]

It almost looks like the return of Fallout 1 and 2. I actually own Wasteland 1, but I haven't ever played it. I have played the Fallouts, though, and this looks like a fantastic party-based, turn-based version, with a really diverse character creation on top.

that's an illusion. from what the beta had to offer I'd say Wasteland 2 is what Fallout Tactics should've been. in other words, it's a mix of Fallout and Fallout Tactics. it's nowhere near as complex a game as Fallout was, though

[Marceror]

I have played the WL2 beta for many hours, and completed it a couple of times. Even in beta, it has the makings of a truly excellent game. I'm enjoying exploring the world and looking at the visuals. I'm enjoying combat, and the party mechanics are first rate. I'm enjoying the story and the amazing level of immersion. With every new release the game has taken huge leaps forward in in quality and content. I can't wait for the final release, which is this Friday if I'm not mistaken. I may need to arrange a long weekend for myself.

 

I'm sure I'm going to be playing/replaying this one for many, many years to come.

[Bryy]

OMG! I have deliberately stayed away from this game until gets finished, and now, having only seen this trailer:

 

I'm chomping at my bit, just to get my hands on it. Thanks to Obsidian's KS, I got my hands of a copy, and I am really glad I have it. It almost looks like the return of Fallout 1 and 2. I actually own Wasteland 1, but I haven't ever played it. I have played the Fallouts, though, and this looks like a fantastic party-based, turn-based version, with a really diverse character creation on top. Also, the art direction is stellar, it seems. All good things come to those who wait.

 

EDIT: Well, combat certainly is reminiscent of XCOM as well, but seemingly having a lot more options.

I backed WL2 purely out of inertia and Kickstarter Game Dev Hype. It was right off DFA (which, by the way, what a let down in every sense).

 

I'm so glad I did. InExile's work ethic, attitude (even if Fargo is needlessly vengeful sometimes), and the game made me a fan for life.

[IndiraLightfoot]

sorophx: Thanks for the heads up!

 

Bryy & Marceror: I'm salivating as I type this because of your posts.

 

As soon as the manual was pre-released, I downloaded it, and I have worn it down to the point of digital corrupt file. If you have the time, read the manual. It's actually great reading in itself - a manual! Its graphics and font are spot on too.

Fargo seems to be a perfectionist. It's a bit nostalgic for me, as I recently saw Brian Fargo's name and Interplay text in the original BG manual.

Character creation itself is very cool, so many non-combat skills to pick, and apparently the manual warns you of not including all sorts of skills in your party. You need to cover all of your bases when rolling up a party.