Review RPG Codex Review: Wasteland 2

[Vault Dweller]

You can do a single shot, a burst if your weapon supports it, and an aimed shot for more damage. What else can you do with firearms? Sure, you can do a small burst or empty the magazine. Would it add much? No. Some SMGs do have two burst modes if I recall correctly. Aimed: body parts? Legs/torso would be pointless. Maybe arms to disarm but I don't see it adding much.

C'mon VD, there's a lot you can do: arm shots to disarm...

Alright. What happens when you disarm? The enemies can't shoot? Drop weapons? THC goes down?

If can't shoot/drop weapons, it's the new easy mode since you have 7 people in your party. THC goes down? Would it really be a useful option considering the overall design? Again, you have 7 people going against relatively small groups of enemies out in the open. Concentrating fire is better than wasting shots to lower THC.

Silent Storm and XCOM tactics came from having to split your party to cover large grounds or enter several buildings. That's where WL2 falls short, but to be fair, it's a tactical game thing and RPGs don't really do that.

If I had to make 3 key changes to WL2, I would go with a smaller party (although that goes against the old school thing) - 4 people max, smaller but more focused world, focus on communities and dialogue not combat.

Silent Storm is considered a good tactical game. Did you have more combat options? It didn't but the overall design was better. Of course it was a combat game, so...

SS had a lot more options. You have 4 different walking speeds, shots aimed at body parts (Head, Body, Left arm, Right arm, Left leg, Right leg) plus 6 different types of shot, from hip shot to sniping.

These extra options were either options for the sake of options (arms, legs), stealth related options (no stealth or infiltration in WL2), or options brought forth by the overall design (namely low THC over distance).

Again, SS offers you one thing - tactical combat in a tactical environment. Realistically, you can't expect/demand an RPG to do it plus do all the non-tactical things (large world, dialogues, choices & consequences, multiple solutions, etc). Remove the tactical environment and you'll remove all those extra options.

 

[Grunker]

Silent Storm is considered a good tactical game. Did you have more combat options? It didn't but the overall design was better. Of course it was a combat game, so...

SS had a lot more options. You have 4 different walking speeds, shots aimed at body parts (Head, Body, Left arm, Right arm, Left leg, Right leg) plus 6 different types of shot, from hip shot to sniping.

But did it add much?

Yes. Even the bare minimum that SRR added made the combat better. Considering how bare-bones SRR combat is, it's really weird to think that WL2 is even more.

You can do a single shot, a burst if your weapon supports it, and an aimed shot for more damage. What else can you do with firearms? Sure, you can do a small burst or empty the magazine. Would it add much? No. Some SMGs do have two burst modes if I recall correctly. Aimed: body parts? Legs/torso would be pointless. Maybe arms to disarm but I don't see it adding much.

C'mon VD, there's a lot you can do: arm shots to disarm...

Alright. What happens when you disarm? The enemies can't shoot? Drop weapons? THC goes down?

If can't shoot/drop weapons, it's the new easy mode since you have 7 people in your party. THC goes down? Would it really be a useful option considering the overall design? Again, you have 7 people going against relatively small groups of enemies out in the open. Concentrating fire is better than wasting shots to lower THC.

Strawman. You asked if there were ways to add options to combat. Specific design should of course be done within the confines of WL2's system. It's preporsterous to claim that just because you add party + combat it's suddenly impossible to have involved combat.

Even if this absurd scenario was the case, it'd be an argument against having parties and guns in the same game. Not an argument against the criticism of WL2 combat.

 

[Kem0sabe]

I'm hard pressed to name one single gameplay feature in WL2 that i consider a good addition to the RPG genre. It tries to do a lot of things that are staples of what you would call a good crpg, but it's mediocre in it's efforts.

 

[felipepepe]

Didn't VD already cover all of this in this one sentence:

Does it mean that you’re going to like it? It depends entirely on your expectations. If you expected a long overdue sequel or a game that allows you to chart your own course, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised. If you expected a game like [Fallout / Jagged Alliance / ‘best game evar’], you might be disappointed.

I think it's a lame statement, that reminds me of PC Gamer's review of Broke Age:

Broken Age might not be close to the length and complexity of previous Tim Schafer games such as Grim Fandango and Full Throttle, or an instant classic like just about every Lucasarts adventure not a bad anagram of "Escape From Island Monkey," but it's still a fine reminder of them. And really, that's what should have been expected. Those games were very much products of their time, and in specifically promising to be one rather than update the idea like Ron Gilbert attempted with The Cave, this was always going to be a celebration rather than a modern successor.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Didn't VD already cover all of this in this one sentence:

Does it mean that you’re going to like it? It depends entirely on your expectations. If you expected a long overdue sequel or a game that allows you to chart your own course, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised. If you expected a game like [Fallout / Jagged Alliance / ‘best game evar’], you might be disappointed.

I think it's a lame statement...

It's not though. It's a warning to people who want a game like Fallout or Jagged Alliance or some truly next-gen RPG. PC Gamer's review tries to dodge the fact that BA doesn't come close to Schafer's previous work which isn't the case here.

Fargo didn't try to make Fallout (and for the record, he didn't). He wanted to make an old-school (and not in a mythical "everything was better in the olden days" but in a very specific "combat-centric" way) sequel to Wasteland. I'd say that he delivered exactly what he promised.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Going back to guns, since it's a subject I'm interested in.

The way I see it with guns you have 2 attack types: single shot and burst. Single shot can be split in 3 attacks: fast shot if you have high THC (he pistolero option), normal shot, and aimed shot to increase THC. Burst can be split in 2: short and long. Plus aimed shots (depending on the overall design). That's about it. Maybe run and gun (not in a retarded XCOM way), although I can't say that I see a point. Am I missing something?

I'm not talking about what's possible to cram into it but what works.

 

[Shadenuat]

Realistically, you can't expect/demand an RPG to do it plus do all the non-tactical things (large world, dialogues, choices & consequences, multiple solutions, etc).

You can't if these RPG things are also done well, but in case of W2 you exaggerate their quality. Large world is full of special plot barriers and you don't even see half of it or what happens in it after you get in the choppa, in dialogue you rarely need to think - just click until no keywords left, and only C&C people really praise is Titan Canyon since other interesting location (Hollywood) was bugged on release so much you had to guess and savescum to understand what was even intended there. Multiple solutions, maybe, sometimes, but very often you are dragged into direction of "perfect" solution by the game and solve everything perfectly even without knowing it. For example, you don't need to be particularly smart to get the best ending for Rail Nomads, the whole location almost serves it for you. Everything else is generally a filler that doesn't lead to anything new or interesting to do. You join Mannerites you get to visit aqueduct and kill their enemy leader, bring her head. You join their enemy, you get to visit aqueduct and kill Mannerites leader, bring his head. Same location, same extra fight. That small farm town with bandits - no matter what you do, good guy or evil dude, every plot leads to same fight. Hollywood too - you think you join fanatics you'll get into something cool, at least another fight against locals maybe? No, just one random cutscene you might never see because it's in location you don't really have to visit. Where is fun in all that?

 

[Grunker]

Going back to guns, since it's a subject I'm interested in.

The way I see it with guns you have 2 attack types: single shot and burst. Single shot can be split in 3 attacks: fast shot if you have high THC (he pistolero option), normal shot, and aimed shot to increase THC. Burst can be split in 2: short and long. Plus aimed shots (depending on the overall design). That's about it. Maybe run and gun (not in a retarded XCOM way), although I can't say that I see a point.

You're right. That's everything. Just as with sword you've got Light Strike and Powerful Strik, and that's it.

Am I missing something?

Nope. All games and systems who include more options are figments of our collective imagination.

Are we really having this conversation, or am I in some sort of nightmarish limbo?

I'm not talking about what's possible to cram into it but what works.

OK. Why wouldn't expanded options work, exactly? Guns are just ranged weapons with a high rate of fire. This is turning into one of the most absurd discussions I've ever had on the Codex.

Even just special ammo types, stances, aimed shots or other down-to-earth basic shit like that are more than what you reduce to two different ways of firing a gun.

 

[MF]

Good review. I mostly agree. Unfortunately, I finished the game before they fixed Hollywood. The bugs there made me nearly quit the game after putting in 80 hours. That was my biggest gripe and apart from that I loved the game.

In terms of atmosphere and art direction it doesn't hold a candle to the original Fallout and like VD, I wish it would have been a different game, but it's not and I love it for what it is. In my opinion, Leonard Boyarsky made Fallout 1 much more than a game and I doubt anything outside of the art-oriented adventure games like Machinarium is ever going to match that.

The art direction in the original Wasteland was haphazard but that approach doesn't translate well to 'modern' graphics. The game really does look like shit. Unity may have kept the developers from covering up bland art with fancy effects, but the root of the problem is bland art. It's worse than boring, it's atrocious and illogical. A 'top hat' will ook like a Stetson in your inventory and something out of Alice in Wonderland on your character. I'd have much preferred if they kept it simple and let my imagination fill in the blanks. As it is, the blanks are filled with utter shit. Even Jeff Vogel's games have a more consistent and dare I say better look and that's saying something.

Sound wise, it's a different story. I like the radio chatter, the songs -especially in California- and Morgan's score. It's not as iconic as Fallout's score but it does the trick. The sound effects are stock schlock but good enough. The voice over was cast well, written well and for the most part enjoyable. Probably because they kept it to a minimum.

Which brings me to another point: The writing. It's not great, which is a problem for a game with this word count. There are some great parts, sure, but like many people here have said it also descends into amateurish drivel too often. It's funny how I can recognize MCA's writing from the style alone because of my work on the Fallout Bible. Some of the better parts are obviously his but even there it's hit or miss. There is a lot of dialogue and filler text so it's almost impossible to get everything right but the worst could have been avoided by an editing pass from a small team of solid writers. Apparently they're short on those.

 

[Infinitron]

I have my own comments for Vault Dweller:

1) So-called "corridor maps" were a cause of huge concern among some people during the run-up to this game's release. Did you find this to be an issue at all?

2) You say that the game shines in California, but you don't really explain why and how. Care to say more about that? Use spoiler tags for spoilery stuff, if you don't mind.

 

[Pope Amole II]

What's so annoying is that it manages to look even worse than russian shovelware from 2006, like Planet Alcatraz:

Planet Alcatraz is not shovelware. It's an incredibly solid Fallout clone (with shitty RTwP combat, unfortunately). And the rather specific writing (which is untranslatable into english, pretty much). But in terms of quests & stats implementation and whatever it's very good & well-done. In terms of atmosphere also - it has this Age of Decadence atmosphere of "don't trust anyone, everyone tries to fuck you" in spades. Well, the other way around, of course, as Alcatraz was long before that. It's a strange game, but definitely not shovelware.

 

[FeelTheRads]

just click until no keywords left,

I really can't figure out the point behind keywords. If they're simply dialogue options that's pretty much the Mass Effect dialogue wheel where you have some random shit to click on and then your character says some this about that then what is the point?
It if was actually a dialogue system based on keywords and actions then they would make sense, but they're just used for scripted dialogues so it's just full derp.

I'm not talking about what's possible to cram into it but what works.

And how do you define what works? Do you judge it on how the game ended up or how it could have been?

 

[Darth Roxor]

Also, this thread: agenda-based brofisting in action

 

[Vault Dweller]

Going back to guns, since it's a subject I'm interested in.

The way I see it with guns you have 2 attack types: single shot and burst. Single shot can be split in 3 attacks: fast shot if you have high THC (he pistolero option), normal shot, and aimed shot to increase THC. Burst can be split in 2: short and long. Plus aimed shots (depending on the overall design). That's about it. Maybe run and gun (not in a retarded XCOM way), although I can't say that I see a point.

You're right. That's everything. Just as with sword you've got Light Strike and Powerful Strik, and that's it.

I'm not an expert with swords (although I'm relatively good with rifles), but I imagine that becoming a good swordsman is much harder and requires learning different attacks and styles than becoming a skilled shooter.

The very nature of melee combat requires different attacks against different opponents plus some crowd control. You can't do crowd control with a pistol and if you manage to hit something, it's gonna hurt regardless of armor due to the bullet's velocity.

Even just special ammo types, stances, aimed shots or other down-to-earth basic shit like that are more than what you reduce to two different ways of firing a gun.

I mentioned ammo and aimed shots. Stances? Not sure. Basically, crouch or low down to increase your THC and decrease theirs. No trade off there. AP cost hardly counts.

 

[Stompa]

Planet Alcatraz is not shovelware. It's an incredibly solid Fallout clone (with shitty RTwP combat, unfortunately). And the rather specific writing (which is untranslatable into english, pretty much). But in terms of quests & stats implementation and whatever it's very good & well-done. In terms of atmosphere also - it has this Age of Decadence atmosphere of "don't trust anyone, everyone tries to fuck you" in spades. Well, the other way around, of course, as Alcatraz was long before that. It's a strange game, but definitely not shovelware.

I wouldn't say that quests were very good, it drops off in quality fast after you escape the newbie prison. I have troubles remembering any of them, except for that gay parody of Romeo and Juliet. It's also very combat-focused and as such you can't really forgive shitty RTwP (didn't help that balance is gets fucked by endgame).

 

[Grunker]

The very nature of melee combat requires different attacks against different opponents plus some crowd control. You can't do crowd control with a pistol and if you manage to hit something, it's gonna hurt regardless of armor due to the bullet's velocity.

The day has come. VD is countering my arguments with the PoE-threads worst simulationist offenders. Tell me, VD, if the problem with guns isn't what you've said so far (i.e. it's impossibruh to add tactical variety to gunplay) but rather that "guns just don't work that way", how come you're not mad that a single shot doesn't eliminate opponents? Even if you get shot in the arm, or hell just a graze, IRL, you're probably down for the count.

That's right, because games turn reality into systems so we can have fun. There are a ton of ways to systemize gun combat options and lots of games have done it.

 

[tuluse]

I think the argument about what actions you can take with guns is kind of a red herring. In a game that features discoball robots that make your characters dance, area of effect laser weapons, mushroom cloud explosions, frogs that grab and eat your weapons--where are all the gadgets for the rangers?

How about some remote controlled robots? Or energy weapons that work like the ones slicerdicers have? Where are the knockdown effects (with AP cost for standing up) and knockback effects like Fallout had with melee weapons?

 

[Grunker]

I think the argument about what actions you can take with guns is kind of a red herring. In a game that features discoball robots that make you characters dance, area of effect laser weapons, mushroom cloud explosions, frogs that grab and eat your weapons--where are all the gadgets for the rangers?

Yeah, already made this point. I agree.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'm not talking about what's possible to cram into it but what works.

And how do you define what works? Do you judge it on how the game ended up or how it could have been?

On whether or not something is useful (i.e. works within the overall design). For example, even though Fallout had many aimed attacks, there was no good reason to use anything but aimed: eyes. In WL2 THC is fairly high, thus there is no reason to use snap shots and such (had such option been included).

 

[Vault Dweller]

I have my own comments for Vault Dweller:

1) So-called "corridor maps" were a cause of huge concern among some people during the run-up to this game's release. Did you find this to be an issue at all?

No. It's not the best design but it didn't detract from the overall experience.

2) You say that the game shines in California, but you don't really explain why and how. Care to say more about that? Use spoiler tags for spoilery stuff, if you don't mind.

Better overall design, locations and factions formed a coherent whole.

 

[Tigranes]

Isn't the logical conclusion to this way of thinking that we should not have low/no-magic guns combat for party RPGs because they cannot be made more than decently fun?

 

[FeelTheRads]

I'm not talking about what's possible to cram into it but what works.

And how do you define what works? Do you judge it on how the game ended up or how it could have been?

On whether or not something is useful (i.e. works within the overall design). For example, even though Fallout had many aimed attacks, there was no good reason to use anything but aimed: eyes. In WL2 THC is fairly high, thus there is no reason to use snap shots and such (had such option been included).

So then we go into a loop? Game didn't make the options matter so they don't matter?
How about making the game work with those options then?

 

[Blaine]

I wouldn't call WL2 "good," even taking fixes and changes since release into account, but I'd call it a "good try."

Seems pretty fair, actually, though for the monocled it's already 9/10. A few patches, tweaks, and perhaps a mod or two down the road? A solid 9/10 for anyone.

Good job, buddy. You've dishonestly cherry-picked something I wrote while I was still enjoying the honeymoon phase of playing WL2. We're all human.

Now quote the rest of what I posted in that thread while I was playing through for the first time, if you don't mind.

Yeah, that's what I thought. If you really want to provoke me into slamming the game right here in its review thread, I can certainly oblige.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Good review. I bought the game but haven't had time to play it as of late.

 

[Grunker]

Isn't the logical conclusion to this way of thinking that we should not have low/no-magic guns combat for party RPGs because they cannot be made more than decently fun?

See:

Even if this absurd scenario was the case, it'd be an argument against having parties and guns in the same game.