Wasteland The Wasteland 2 Beta Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Yeah I don't know what's happened to Lhynn over the last few months, he's suddenly gotten very aggressive. Onset of Rabies?

 

hiver-itis.

 

How is that relevant? Shit, I'd say his 64% of posts in general RPG discussion are far more damning nowadays. You've got 100+ page threads on Obshitian, Bioware, and Bethesda games, then considerably smaller threads on the games that actually deliver on the promises...

Anyway, I like Torment. It's an okay game, but MCA getting god status because of one good game and numerous bad ones always confused me.

 

Well faggots keep deluding themselves.. "WL2 Beta means nothing. Everything will get aweshum !!!1"

 

Dark Souls is better than WL2 can ever be

(But yeah all other akshun rpgs are shit...)

and Avadon 2 is TB too.. I would rather play Dark Souls over jeff vogels latest crap. What I really want is a Wizardry sucessor GODDDAMNIT

 

Lots of stress at both works i guess, plus i find those statements pure stupidity, cant help but shit on them.
Also, you can say that AP is a bad game, not too sure its true, i have way too much fun playing it for it to be shit, the writing i find really really good, not deep shit, but good spy stuff, especially for the characters. Kotor 2 writing was very good as well, and some bits on new vegas were either very good or masterfully crafted... this is why i trust avellone, and obsidian as a whole really, to deliver good, engaging writing, they can fuck up, sure, DS3 is proof of that, but guess what, anyone can fuck it up.

Back on topic (havent played the game since the first beta release without patches), wl2 feels lacking, true, its a beta, but the purpose of this thread as BN stated was to make it better.
To me combat needs to feel more visceral, the pace at which you level up is too fast, the pace at which you gain and are able to successfully use skills is too slow. The setup is dumb, part of it anyway, the rangers should allow you to get provisions and everything you need to survive, or you should get a chance to travel to a nearby trading post of some sort to get whatever you need to successfully do the thing that got a experienced ranger killed.
Encounter maps are shit, they need to be completely redesigned, be a lot bigger, leaving the option of escaping said encounters, also i would love the option to set up ambushes, maybe even with traps like tripwires and mines, it would give an awesome use to survival skills. Combat, especially at the begining, should be less frequent, more rewarding and a lot more dangerous, i dont mind having to restart the encounter over and over if it means actually devising a good strategy to be able to clear it.

Chance to hit needs to be lower from both sides, weapons need to do (a lot) more damage, and chance to hit should be a lot harder to raise. Cover needs to be more important, making some shots impossible, this will make moving around terrain more important.
Finally, all weapons feel almost the same, a way to make this better would be to enable unique especial attacks for each weapon. called shots should be possible, but

Dunno, maybe these things have been added already, maybe these are not good ideas, but i honestly believe they could improve how combat plays out a lot.

 

Story/plot, dialogue and setting can be seen as important parts in an RPG (not just in adventure games which for the record PST isn't, I hope I don't have to spell out the differences for you) but that's not the only area in which PST excels, I have never seen another RPG where roleplaying through attributes and dialogue options is so prevalent and well done. While Nameless One is not exactly a blank slate you can mold him in a variety of different ways and feel like your choices in that regard matter, roleplaying an evil bastard is especially well done compare to other RPGs where such options are usually presented in a manner that would only fit a cartoonish mustache twirling psychopath.

Sure the game lack skills (outside thief ones), class system is very simple (only 3 classes), combat is mostly filler, world interaction is somewhat limited (as it is in all IE games) etc. but then again you can pick apart any game (Tim Cain's Fallout included) if you want to concentrate on its flaws.

-PST is not a JRPG.

-Tim Cain spent the majority of his post Troika years working on on some shitty MMO (if Alpha Protocol was 10 times worse I'd still prefer it to that crap), so what? Doesn't erase all the great stuff he did before.

 

PS:T is small change.

Alpha Protocol is the one and only game that elevated MCA to god status

 

Yeah, current Jeff Vogel games are quite "meh". On the other hand, I've replaying Geneforge 1 and I find it more interesting and downright FUN than W2's beta. And that's a RPG made by a single man, 13 years ago, that puked on the screen while dong the UI.

 

Well WL2 Beta isn't as bad as Avadon 2...but it simply fails to recreate the sense of wonder i get from playing the Geneforge Series (1 and 5 are my favorites).

 

Frian Bargo's mistake may be in shooting for demographic of children who like turn-based combat, which is neither here nor there.

 

Lot of kids like Pokemon.

Pokemon is a deeper game than Wasteland 2.

 

Too edgy, bro.

 

I'm not going to read through a 100 pages.

Can someone tell me what's upsetting people about Wasteland 2?

 

A summary of the thread:
1)Some people are butthurt because the beta isn't nearby the saviour of cRPG status that was dreamed of (Not enough reactivity, simplistic combat, linearity,excessive amount of resources, okay quests but nothing mind blowing) and they are skeptical of the ability of inXile doing anything about it.

2)Other people are butthurt because some people are butthurt about the state of the beta.

 

I haven't been following that closely. Have they shown such to be true? Are there any examples where something was wrong and based on legitimate feedback, they changed direction, attended to the issue, or reasoned back to everyone why they think it is justified to have that issue as it is?

That is the sad thing though. The bar is set really low and I think that because people are so desperate for a game that isn't designed for mindless automatons that they will excuse far more than they should. Like you said, we will see.

 

Healing while resting, some issues with cursors, some ideas with attack bonuses/penalties when melee attack the ranged. Also Brother None coys that many pieces of feedback from codex will be used when balancing skills and attributes.

If we are talking about the skills: Has anybody found any traces of skills that can be acquired only during gameplay? I remember that in one older update it was stated that some skills can be learn only in game not in the party making screen.

 

You should rethink that DSIII mention and change to to NWN2. Even if you think DSIII has worse writing than NWN2, NWN2 may be more fitting to a discussion that relates to MCA cause that's a game MCA actually worked on and not *just* playtested. (And has fucked up on with its companions)

 

Is it not clear from the numerous updates inXile posted, that they actually want to hear most peoples opinion about the beta content so far? Why would they release a really early beta build, if not to get a lot of useable feedback etc. to use in he game? ... Also, the beta update that we already got... ALREADY attended to several issues.. (auto regen being one) and some others... And that most stuff is still pretty much subject to change.. (still need confirmation on what specificially, from Brother None).. No proof as of yet, that inXile WON'T and are NOT capable of changing direction on some stuff, and altering some fundamental stuff.. in the process we are in right now.. and the small beta material we have on hand.

 

That would be what not reading the 100 pages gets you. Oh yeah, nothing to talk about.


Well, in short:
What i found in beta is that you will be always playing with a team of rangers that has all the skills. So every team every player makes will be completely the same - except different portraits.

The fake split of single skills into two doesnt really produce anything meaningful, except practically forcing players to make dedicated builds that have both of those - which are really just one skill. Only separated into whats actually a starting level of knowledge in that skill or science, and an advanced level. In w2 those are two separate skills...
computer tech - synth tech, field medic - surgeon, weapon stripping - weaponsmithing, lockpicking - safe cracking. etc.

If you spread any of these skills between two characters - you only create tedium for yourself and you cannot gain any advantage because of it at all. Since a character with just one of those is useless without the other.
Not to mention how contrary to any common sense it all is.


The game gives so much XP and skill points (especially for high Int) that you can max out the primary skill or skills very quickly and after two areas have a team with extra SP you dont have anywhere to spend. Except putting those points into weapon skill... which isnt really necessary in combat as it is.
And even if you do - you would max out the weapon skill very quickly. As the game plays now you will have the team with 10 (or 8 or 9 which are very high on that scale) points in every primary skill and several other skills on very high, while every team member will have two or three weapon skills high or very high - before you leave Arizona.
- i dont really see how they can change this in some good way. They can slow down the amounts of XP but there is a limit to that and at best a player would reach the same point after a location or two more (provided that random encounter XP is minimized by diminishing returns)
- while any such change demands rebalancing of enemies, combat encounters, weapons, armors,... etc.


As for the quests and reactivity - there is nothing of that you can influence by your skills. You go through a quest or a mission popping moles (combat certainly can be improved itself) and then you get an ending "choice" which comes down to Yes or No.
Where a "No" doesnt really make any sense or has any special consequences - except some narrative ones. All of the smaller additional sub quests that dont really affect much are either just ok or ... not that good at all. While many are missing further gameplay in a case of a few - "hey, you want more content or no?" examples, like the girl with her dowry and finding her dad or a husband for her...

The opening act and few first missions are also forced choice between the two locations (done in a really cheap way since you just cannot see those two locations by traveling there yourself until the game decides they should suddenly appear on the world map)... which can be accepted once in the game, in an opening act and as a way to create tension (problems start at both locations at the same time, which can happen), but it looks like there will be more of that later on.


It seems (if things remain this way in general), that reactivity will be achieved through the differences of what you chose to do at the very end of each location or choosing between some binary outcome - which would then create some sort of ending slides for the Arizona and later on the whole game.
The smaller things you can do inside a mission, are just flavor options and dont affect the mission at all, in any way. And you dont have to use skills for those anyway. You still get that final "Yes - No" choice. While choosing No is pointless in the current version.

Rail Nomads location seems like it has a little bit more to it, but it doesnt. Its a basic setup of two fighting sides and you can go for one, the other or peace between them solution. First two are just straight up fights against one group. (with an unfinished option for stealth characters - presumably, where you just steal one mcguffin item from one group and give it to the other) And it could really use an overhaul itself too in several ways, not the least in the characters and internal logic department, how environment sections are connected to each other and ..more.


- oh yeah, the Ui is bad. It mixes character screen with the inventory screen which makes it all worse - just so you can see the 3d models of a ranger - that dont look too good at all.
The silly small inventory section that is squashed into what little space is left, uses lists that actually show less info per item then one would expect - which you actually get represented by a "polaroid picture" - an illustrated icon or picture of the item - that pops up when you click on every fucking list item bellow.
(sometimes it doesnt)

 

NWN 2? OC was worse than oblivion and dat camera, gods.
But, to make up for it they gave us MotB, talk about overcompensating for a fuck up. So that game gets a free pass on my book.

 

Really? Let's look at the skills:

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

Alarm Disarming
Animal Whisperer
Anti-Tank Weapons
Assault Rifles
Barter
Bladed Weapons
Blunt Weapons
Brawling
Brute Force
Computer Tech
Demolitions
Energy Weapons
Evasion
Field Medic
Field Strippin
Handguns
Hard Ass
Kiss Ass
Leadership
Lockpicking
Move Silently
Outdoorsman
Perception
Safecracking
Salvaging
Shotguns
Smart Ass
Sniper Rifles
Southwestern Folklore
Submachine Guns
Surgeon
Synth Tech
Toaster Repair
Weaponsmithing

Realistically, most characters are going to have about 3-4 skills they specialize in. With a party of 4, that translates into 16 skills on average, while this list features 34. That means most players won't get more than half to a high level.

You could, with followers, in theory get a few points in everything, but then if the game starts throwing skill checks of 9 and 10 your points would probably be spread too thin to deal with them.

Unless you are just editing out skills you arbitrarily deem unnecessary, i.e. alarm disarming, barter, anti-tank (which I don't think is fair to judge right now, considering how rough balance is, and there is no way to get a sense for how useful those skills will be throughout the entire game), you won't get anywhere near close to maxing everything out.

Just like Fallout 1 - yeah, you can beat the game and experience all the content if you max out small guns, speech, lockpicking and science, but you didn't get "all the skills", you just picked the best (arguably most imbalanced) ones either through past experience, reading guides or just luck. Going into Fallout blind without that meta-gamey perspective is a very different experience, but unfortunately you can't really go back and play the game the same way now. I remember my first couple play-throughs of Fallout 1 being very interesting compared to my "perfect" ones later on.

Subject to change. But reasonably I can, during the beta and without grinding random encounters, get a primary weapon skill to maybe level 7, but at the expense of some support skills.