Wasteland Should I Keep Playing Wasteland 2?

As others said, California is way better than Arizona, in Arizona i felt like if i was playing a re-tell of W1 beats and California really feels like its own thing.

I dont even know why i finished W2 in the first place either now that i think about it, i played and finished the OG W2 and never tried the DC edition because the OG left a bad taste in my mouth that i could never shake off, i have vague memories of the game, i remember terrible performance, bland graphics, not so interesting dialogue (at least in Arizona), California was green fucking everywhere, a terrible difficulty spike with robots pushing my shit in either before or after Arizona and something to do with metal armors and begin low in ammo all the time.

This is the reason i have 0 interest in Wasteland 3 even if i love post-apoc shit.

 

Best game inxile ever made. Had a lot of fun with it. But if you find it a slog, it wont get much better.

P.S. there is a lot of mines and explosives in the game, so not speccing one char in disarm is defo a mistake

 

people who disagree with my post, all righty then:

1) does the character system (attributes, skills, level progression) show it's a new system with design input by Stackpole and St Andre (who have both designed good P&P systems before)?

2) does game content (areas and quests) make good use of that system?

i think both of these have been often mentioned in game threads, and can be roughly summarized as: a meh letdown


3) i know rpg itemization is often funky, and when it deals with swords and bows it sort of doesn't matter as we can treat them as unknowable antiques in an unknowable foreign world of magic so anything goes - but treating roughly contemporary firearms in the same manner?

seriously, how to justify this shit:



every single thing in this table (with the possible exception of price) indicates it was designed by a Prussian teenager unfamiliar with the world who ran away with a time-travelling circus and joined InXile shortly after

 

All I remember from this game was some super shitty weapon mechanic near the end, where my dudes would be better off naked than wearing power armor. Which didn't even show on the models because of the fucktarded vanity items design they went with.

So don't force yourself, it's not horrible, but still pretty forgetable.

 

Pity, because imho it's worth it. Arizona has some decent atmosphere, particularly as you get into the mad monks area, and then California is great. Mr Manners absolutely cracked me up, and there are some little moments/scenes that are just greatly pulled. Completely inconsequential, but wow.

"Samson Samson protect me. Raise your hammer for all to see. Blazing bright throughout the night. Keep me safe till morning light."

Hard disagree. Ag Centre is definitely rough for a new party and a slog at times, but Doc Rose is worth her weight in lore.

 

The game is OK but it's a huge mess technically, aesthetically, mechanics wise, everything wise. If it feels really rough now that feeling's just going to continue to build.

 

I couldn't care less about WL2 lore ... The writer was probably on meth or just getting out of a loony bin.

And battle encounters are way better in the village/refinery where you fight a gang with a fair amount of cover for everyone and have to fight your way to the top.

 

California is different to Arizona, and it is better in some sense with some sophisticated role playing and quest design, but I would not necessarily say that it is more enjoyable. YMMV. The big antagonist is laughably uninspired, and inXile's SJW issues also become apparent in California (but maybe that's fitting, it is California after all).

I do not remember having any major technical issues with the DC version.

 

Wasteland 2 was quite fun for a while, but there is a limit to how many "there are two equally retarded sides In conflict, pick who wins" quest chains I can force myself through. I was on 5th one before dropping it.