What PoE can learn from Wasteland 2 release? (faults and lessons to learn)

[drfruitloop]

One thing that can be learned from Wasteland 2 is not to assume the players already care about the story. I was never given any reason to care about the world or the Desert Rangers or whatever the **** that 'Cochise' thing everyone kept talking about was. The game ran entirely on assumed empathy and it killed any investment in the story for me which combined with the mind-numbing gameplay almost made me regret my purchase.

[Volourn]

They don't expect you to care. Consdieirng you can choose to betray the rangers your argument is lame. Not to mention illogical. It's story isn't deep but it's better than most of the game you think have good stories. Trust me on that.

 

 

"Speaking about perks and traits, WL2 as it is ended up being compared to Fallout much more than it's needed, if you ask me. And conclusion more often is "This is lousy Fallout!". I think the first reason devs came up with brand new role system is to avoid using SPECIAL (does it fall under Fallout license, by the way? Just curious.)"

 

You do realzie that the characetr system used in WL2 is based on WL1 which came out before FO right? The FOs are the 'spiritual successor' of WL not the other way around.

 

 

"I just hope people playing PoE will never conclude "This is lousy Baldur's Gate!"."\

 

\I'm more worried that PE will turn out to be plain old lousy or merely 'average'.

 

WL2 doesn't ahve that problem. It's awesomesauce.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Volourn

[Lephys]

Okay okay, it was my mistake to simply say "Demolitions" and not "certain applications of demolitions." However, I find it a bit strange that I cited a specific example (blowing a door open using explosives, rather than kicking/bodying the door open), and received two responses back telling me how using Brute Force on a land mine wouldn't work, as if my example in no way conveyed the idea I was getting at (that force is force).

 

In other words, what's the difference between intelligently using the force of a battering ram, or explosives, or a robot suit, or mentally controlling someone else's body, or telekinesis, etc.... and using the force of one's own body. Other than that one's own strength factor's in in the latter, and doesn't in all the formers?

 

That's my point. And yeah, I don't think it's stupid, because it makes sense in the context of a game. And it does make sense that more knowledge and experience with Brute Forcing things would increase your effectiveness at it, without any raw increase in or abundance of Strength. But, that doesn't really change the fact that you wouldn't become the world's Brute Force master with the least amount of Strength, even amid a tier of badass folk. So, no, it's not entirely ridiculous. It's just not much of a simulation, is all, while other things in the same game are a bit more accurate.

 

Nothing more, nothing less.

[Cantousent]

So, you hated the story and the gameplay and for that reason you *almost* regret the purchase?  What saved the day for you?  Don't hold back, now?

 

The story in WL2 is the story.  It makes absolutely no sense that their great mistake is that they 'assume' you already care about the story.  They crafted a story and you didn't like it.  Works well enough for me, but maybe I'm just too pedestrian in my tastes.  Now, I do understand the longstanding and boring argument about assuming the player should have empathy, and sometimes it can be refreshing to see a game that either allows for multiple motivations or assumes you're the bad guy.  Fair enough.  Every game doesn't have to leave the question open and not all games would be better if the designers did.

 

...But, hey, this is the internet where it's your God given right to say that you *almost* regret purchasing a game where you apparently hate the story and detest the gameplay.

 

EDIT:  Sorry, posted in reference to drfruitloop.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Cantousent

[archangel979]

I think he just means the game does not have cinematic storytelling like Mass Effect or Skyrim (at least the start of Skyrim). The story and way it is presented is not much different than Fallout 1 and 2 and I don't care about it not being cinematic.

 

I prefer it done this way. Old school style.

[Quetzalcoatl]

I think he just means the game does not have cinematic storytelling like Mass Effect or Skyrim (at least the start of Skyrim). The story and way it is presented is not much different than Fallout 1 and 2 and I don't care about it not being cinematic.

 

I prefer it done this way. Old school style.

That's...not even remotely what he said. Not sure where this strawman comes from.

[Ink Blot]

One thing that can be learned from Wasteland 2 is not to assume the players already care about the story. I was never given any reason to care about the world or the Desert Rangers or whatever the **** that 'Cochise' thing everyone kept talking about was. The game ran entirely on assumed empathy and it killed any investment in the story for me which combined with the mind-numbing gameplay almost made me regret my purchase.

There was no 'assumed empathy' other than the fact that the characters you create are... Desert Rangers. I don't even get your complaint. As for the 'Cochise' thing, that's part of the history. Did you read the responses when you asked about it? Or did you even ask about it? There's quite a bit of lore and history to find out if you delve into it, which explains a lot about the Desert Rangers and why things are as they are in the game's setting. If you still don't give a crap about the Rangers after that, then you can, as noted, just betray them and call it a day.

 

Full disclosure: I never played Wasteland 1 and knew nothing about it going into Wasteland 2. I never felt there was any assumption of empathy.

[archangel979]

 

I think he just means the game does not have cinematic storytelling like Mass Effect or Skyrim (at least the start of Skyrim). The story and way it is presented is not much different than Fallout 1 and 2 and I don't care about it not being cinematic.

 

I prefer it done this way. Old school style.

That's...not even remotely what he said. Not sure where this strawman comes from.

 

That is how I understood as because he wasn't clear enough.

 

And what are you, his lawyer?

Edited October 23, 2014 by archangel979

[drfruitloop]

They don't expect you to care. Considering you can choose to betray the rangers your argument is lame. Not to mention illogical. It's story isn't deep but it's better than most of the game you think have good stories. Trust me on that.

 

If they don't expect me to care what reason do I have to spend 40 hours playing it? I could finish Planescape: Torment twice in that time. Even with the ability to turn on the rangers I never cared about the world and its people enough to want to see would happen. Also the only games I think have genuinely good stories are Torment, Spec-Ops: The Line, Shadow of the Colossus and maybe Metal Gear Solid 2.

 

 

So, you hated the story and the gameplay and for that reason you *almost* regret the purchase?  What saved the day for you?  Don't hold back, now?

 

I don't regret it because I got to see what the people making Tides of Numenera (which I backed) are doing. I'm still optimistic though, my narrative problems will likely go away with a stand-alone story.

 

I think he just means the game does not have cinematic storytelling like Mass Effect or Skyrim (at least the start of Skyrim). The story and way it is presented is not much different than Fallout 1 and 2 and I don't care about it not being cinematic.

 

I personally loathe cinematic storytelling in games, as it runs contrary to the idea of an interactive medium (The Last of Us is the worst example of this). What made Planescape work for me was that it got me personally invested in the characters and world, and particularly in my own story (who I was, why I couldn't die, why the shadows were chasing me etc).

[Lephys]

That's...not even remotely what he said. Not sure where this strawman comes from.

It burns my soul every time someone whips that term out of their arse for no reason. All he said was what he thought he meant. If that's incorrect, it's called being mistaken, not constructing a strawman.

 

"I think it's supposed to rain today, but I'm not sure."

 

"No the weather report says it's clear, actually. NICE STRAWMAN!"

 

Gyah... I'm sorry. I just feel a "strawman" intervention is in order, the number of times I see that term tossed around like pizza dough.

 

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

[Cantousent]

 

So, you hated the story and the gameplay and for that reason you *almost* regret the purchase?  What saved the day for you?  Don't hold back, now?

 

I don't regret it because I got to see what the people making Tides of Numenera (which I backed) are doing. I'm still optimistic though, my narrative problems will likely go away with a stand-alone story.

 

Damn it, way to give a reasonable answer when I expected an angry retort! lol Okay, I get what you're saying, although I disagree about WL2. :Cant's slap on the back icon:

[Volourn]

"I could finish Planescape: Torment twice in that time. Even with the ability to turn on the rangers I never cared about the world and its people enough to want to see would happen. Also the only games I think have genuinely good stories are Torment, Spec-Ops: The Line, Shadow of the Colossus and maybe Metal Gear Solid 2."

 

Most of those games are pure crap. PST's story is good but overrated. What is so 'special' about their stories that make you 'care' so much'?

[phalzyr]

Gyah... I'm sorry. I just feel a "strawman" intervention is in order, the number of times I see that term tossed around like pizza dough.

 

LOL, was just going to ask if it was just me, but seeing this term thrown around so often lately. Most of the time incorrectly. "Hey i don't like what you said, strawman..." "I disagree... your opinion suck you strawman"

 

Maybe it just these forums...

[archangel979]

 

I think he just means the game does not have cinematic storytelling like Mass Effect or Skyrim (at least the start of Skyrim). The story and way it is presented is not much different than Fallout 1 and 2 and I don't care about it not being cinematic.

 

I personally loathe cinematic storytelling in games, as it runs contrary to the idea of an interactive medium (The Last of Us is the worst example of this). What made Planescape work for me was that it got me personally invested in the characters and world, and particularly in my own story (who I was, why I couldn't die, why the shadows were chasing me etc).

 

Ok fair enough, I got you wrong first time.

 

But by reading this post of yours, I would say you are a victim of your expectations. WL2 was never advertised as anything similar to PST. You can compare it with Wasteland 1 and even with Fallout and none of those games had what you want here. In Fallout you had one character but I didn't care much about his main quests. It was just a backstory to give you a reason to go out and explore the world. WL2 works similarly.

[Ohioastro]

Not every story works well for everyone.  I really liked the storyline in Wasteland 2 - there were decisions with real consequences, and you started out as a crew of lawmen struggling in a corner of Arizona, not a set of demi-gods to be.  But others might not.  However, this isn't a reason to change things up.

[prodigydancer]

But others might not.

The funny part is that "others" cannot come up with an example of a good story unless it's from a 15+ years old game. I like old games too but when someone totally discounts all modern games are trash we have to attribute it to burnout effect.

 

So now when I stumble upon yet another post that starts with something like "I loved FO/FO2 but Wasteland 2 is crap because..." I don't even bother to read any further. It's burnout, baby.

Edited October 27, 2014 by prodigydancer

[Cantousent]

Yeah, my prodigious friend, the 'next generation' has been spelling the downfall of humanity since Plato's time.  If every generation were a mere shadow of the previous one, we wouldn't even exist as a species today.  Don't get me wrong, some generations are better than others, but I'll play my Wasteland 2 in the shadow of the Fallout franchise and be glad for the shade!

[cabal23]

I'm pretty sure you belong into an exceedingly marginal group of nostalgia-fetish people, so your opinion is really quite irrelevant.

 

That would mean every pc gamer who grew up in the 80's and 90's. Me think you overstate your position a touch. There are more 30 and 40 something gamers out there than you think. We all grew up with these games. Call it nostalgia-fetish all you like. What it boils down to is a cross-section of the gaming population that can afford to make the games that they grew up with thanks to crowdfunding. We all have incomes, so anything you make like this is going to get made and become a beloved title as long as it is done to standards that the originals were made. Some people pledged thousands of dollars of their own money to get a toon in the game. Where else does that type of thing happen?