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

[Azrael the cat]

Early access is one of the worst 'innovations' in modern gaming. Not only does it offload work onto amateurs willing to be exploited, that should go towards hiring people with families to feed, but the very notion of replacing paid beta testers with amateurs almost guarantees that there'll be a noticeable increase in major and minor bugs. What's more, as one developer has noted, amateur beta testers cause games to be drastically dumbed down; just like focus groups they have a tendency to whine as soon as they encounter anything that requires more thought than 'press awesome button to win' (unfortunately such developers are extremely rare - so rare that the developer in question didn't put his name to it, in fear of losing his job; nonetheless Gabe has made similar public statements about the shittiness of focus groups and amateur testers).

But even putting all that aside, I can't comprehend why anyone would pay money for open access. I'd pay money NOT to be exposed to open access. It's like flicking to the last page of a novel - worse, it's like flicking to the last page of a DRAFT novel. You can only play a game for the first time once, and Open Access means that you are PAYING to have a worse gaming experience. Games vary in what they consider beta, and no doubt there are many games where one would come away from open access so jaded that it would be nigh-impossible to enjoy the finished product.

I'm not saying that Wasteland, or any other game, will or won't be good. That's because I'm avoiding Open Access like the plague. What I do believe I can say with confidence is that whatever the game's quality, I'll enjoy it FAR less if I play the open access version first.

 

[buzz]

A-fucking-men, completely agree with you. I'm more than afraid of what will come out of gaming when sales pitches/kickstarter/early access crap will turn into the next big evil thing, like DLCs and F2P before.

 

[shihonage]

Open access is a good feature for procedural-driven games, for these reasons:

1) The game is NEVER finished, it always evolves, and it can be fun from an early alpha stage as developer explores innovative and unfamiliar concepts together with his player base.

2) The game's quantity of content remains largely the same from the start. Its quality increases as it evolves.

3) Every time you play it, the experience is different.

I.E. games like Dwarf Fortress and Minecraft and Terraria and anything else where the level designer is the code itself.

But with games like Wasteland 2 and Underrail, which are dependent on hand-crafted content, it is different. The game's quantity of content starts small and then grows, and there's a beginning and an end to the journey. Everytime you play, it's a very similar experience to the last time, at least on macro level (same environments, same enemies, same quests to choose from). There's a definite state of being finished that is anticipated. It makes sense to wait until release.

 

[hiver]

The problem with w2 reactivity is not that its not a C&C monster (infinitron and his strawmans and ad hominems - you are godamn laughable sometimes) - the problem is that what they think reactivity is - is laughably, horribly superficial and internally incoherent.
Its literally on the level of bethesda. The games quest and mission actually look like they were designed by Pete and Tod.

Review of the current state of things is on page 154.

Together with emphasis on "player choices" and intentionally almost completely removing any sort of influence from character skills and stats.
As BN nicely explained a page or two ago.

- Ive played through the Prison area and i dont have anything else to report - either.

That's what the last 160 pages have been about... do you join InXile's apologist club and trust their ability to fix everything and deliver glorious incline, or are you butthurt, think they will never make it a great game and all hope has died? Join? Die?

...or do you ignore the thread because you haven't even played the game and don't plan to until it's actually released, and thus can't trust what anybody here is saying

OR - you see whats there, take it and proceed to beat them over the heads with that dead chicken in futile attempt to make them realize it should be better and then actually do it.

 

[Grotesque]

[...] keep bringing up all kinds of minor shit instead.
"Oh, I don't like this quest, the reactivity feels forced! Oh, why is there cover here there shouldn't be cover here it's too obvious! Oh, why isn't this map a big grid with houses? Oh, the humor here is so juvenile!" Give me a break.

Someone please tell him that forced reactivity, obvious cover, insipid map design, lame ass juvenile humor are not some "minor shit" and they're the ingredients for a shitty game.

It's funny how Wasteland 2 makes some big shots around here feel so small all of a sudden because they manage to discredit themselves.

 

[Infinitron]

Wanna know why I don't like the Wasteland 2? Because it is a mediocre and boring game, made by playing safe and copying others, while never understanding what made those games great in the first place. Everything in W2 is there because it was promised or because "it's what RPGs do"; there's no vision or soul behind it, just a bunch of has-been and want-to-be working their asses off to do everything in a feature checklist that Fargo came up with a year ago, as if a game was just the sum of the parts.

The use of terms like "soulless" is a leading indicator that the person using the term is unable to put his finger on why he doesn't like a game.

Look at it this way - if somebody told you he doesn't like Blackguards because of the bloom, the voice acting and the cheesy story and that these things collectively make the game "generic and soulless" and therefore not worth playing, would you take that person seriously? I'm sure there are plenty of people saying things like this, btw. People do this to games that they fundamentally don't like all the time - nitpicking them to death with bullshit because they were just never hooked in to the core experience.

So W2 does C&C right, it's me that can't appreciate it. But if I disagree with that, W2 was never about C&C anyway...

I never said that. Obviously, WL2 has evolved and become very much about C&C. It did not, however, take money from people with the promise of C&C, and that's pretty important.

 

[hiver]

 

[FeelTheRads]

he'd just realize that Wasteland 2's core gameplay loop - which seems to be "isometric dungeon crawling and keyword clicking conversations" - just isn't his cup of tea. It's like some people can't put their finger on WHY they don't like a game, and thus they keep bringing up all kinds of minor shit instead.

So.. do you think W2 can suck (did you even play it?) or games in general can be shit or is it just people that don't like them, also known as evil haters?

 

[NotAGolfer]

Having pledged for the game I was worried about felipepepe's posts too.
But only til I read one where he kept insisting that a huge part of his disappointment with the C&C in this game stems from the game being party based and allowing him to cover all skills needed for each skill check. And since that's just a matter of taste (I knew it would be party-based and therefore I never ever expected Fallout-level character build dependant C&C), I started hoping for the best again and will wait til it's finished.
You can't trust anyone's opinion on anything. That's always true with everything.

 

[Cazzeris]

Having pledged for the game I was worried about felipepepe's posts too.
But only til I read one where he kept insisting that a huge part of his disappointment with the C&C in this game stems from the game being party based and allowing him to cover all skills needed for each skill check. And since that's just a matter of taste (I knew it would be party-based and therefore I never ever expected Fallout-level character build dependant C&C), I started hoping for the best again and will wait til it's finished.
You can't trust anyone's opinion on anything. That's always true with everything.

The problem is that he's saying that it has bad C&C.
And I'm a C&Cfag.

 

[hiver]

That was my post, not felipepepes, as far as i know. (notagofler has me on ignore for a while now - im afraid i didnt masage his ego at some point or another)

The thing about party having all possible skills - and very early at that - is not that its "not like Fallout" imbecile - thats a strawman BN threw in, despite what i wrote in my review.
The problem with that is that it automatically radically lowers possibilities for any actual RPG-reactivity.

Turns the game into another "player skill" LARP game.

You can't trust anyone's opinion on anything. That's always true with everything.

= sticking your head up into your ass is teh answer. nah,nah,naaah i cant hear youuuu

opinions... mhmm, sure thing. If only those were just my opinions...

 

[NotAGolfer]

Having pledged for the game I was worried about felipepepe's posts too.
But only til I read one where he kept insisting that a huge part of his disappointment with the C&C in this game stems from the game being party based and allowing him to cover all skills needed for each skill check. And since that's just a matter of taste (I knew it would be party-based and therefore I never ever expected Fallout-level character build dependant C&C), I started hoping for the best again and will wait til it's finished.
You can't trust anyone's opinion on anything. That's always true with everything.

The problem is that he's saying that it has bad C&C.
And I'm a C&Cfag.

It's not like we are spoiled by lots of CRPGs with real, consequential C&C that are not just window dressing.
Nitpicking on games with those only because all of the sudden they are not the right kind of C&C anymore ("swiss army knife parties don't make for real C&C", "the game doesn't inform you about your choices beforehand" ... wouldn't it feel like a CYOA if it made them too obvious?, and so on) might be typical for Codex discussions (there's always something to bitch about) but it indeed looks like bitching for the sake of bitching.

I'm still more worried about the complaints about fights feeling staged and tactics being obsolete or too obvious but I guess I'll have to play it for myself to see if that's true. Sadly the discussion you had about that stuff is buried below a mountain of graphic-whore faggotry and isn't in-depth enough for my taste anyway.

 

[hiver]

isn't in-depth enough for my taste anyway.

:rasping mad laughter:

Here is something deep:
I asked for anyone to figure out what is the worst thing in the new small location, called Level Lupe Mine, or something.

Especially the game design expert BN is, unlike the rest of us. No answers were given.
well, im not surprised some bros here didnt see it or felt like discussing it, After all, these W2 missions are so full of derp that a reasonable mind recoils in horror from them. I myself havent considered several angles that Felipepepe mentioned in other... "quests".


So, here is the pic of that small mission to make it clearer.
(a part of me would like nothing better then to leave it alone and have it appear in the final game for more lulz... but im going to do the team and other players another favor, because thats how nice i am )

The setup is this: Miners are trapped in that last "room", cant get out. They have dynamite placed to blow the (grey) part that blocks the exit... but they dont have dynamite caps - which is where you come in.
You go through the corridors and kill the bad badgers and bring the caps to miners so "you" can blow up the stones. (miners dont do it - its you who does it - without any requirement for demolition skill, of course)

- additionally, there is nothing between miners and badgers, miners dont have weapons - and you blow those stones while everyone stands right next to them. Well, you disintegrate them really. (dont ask me how or why)

So... what is the biggest problem with this setup?
(hint - it makes the whole setup completely nonsensical)

 

[felipepepe]

The use of terms like "soulless" is a leading indicator that the person using the term is unable to put his finger on why he doesn't like a game.

Look at it this way - if somebody told you he doesn't like Blackguards because of the bloom, the voice acting and the cheesy story and that these things collectively make the game "generic and soulless" and therefore not worth playing, would you take that person seriously? I'm sure there are plenty of people saying things like this, btw. People do this to games that they fundamentally don't like all the time - nitpicking them to death with bullshit because they were just never hooked in to the core experience.

I made pretty clear what I meant by soulless, but lets play your game. You read the preview/review that Roxor and I did, and those were exactly the points we said were bad about the game. Therefore, I accept and share this complains, but I would argue that combat is the focus here, and the combination of great encounter design + freedom of character creation + solid combat makes the game a pleasure for any combat fag out there, it's Blackguard's "soul". But if you are a storyfag, then yes, this game is not for you.

Back to Wasteland 2, I've presented various tangible issues: shitty corridor level-design, superficial C&C (now called "reactivity"), cookie-cutter quests I've done a million times before, dumb Mass Effect-like click-everything dialog, absence of any coherence in the setting, lack of open world exploration, forced combat encounters, redundant skills, looting is boring, etc... and all I got from the defenders was either "it will/might be changed!" or "this game is not trying to be X!". Ok, so what the fuck this game is? Why is it good, why you defend it? What are the fucking qualities of this game that makes it worth playing? On another change of goalposts, you said it is a "isometric dungeon crawling and keyword clicking conversations", and I just told you that it sucks even next to Fallout: Tactics. Now what?

 

[Roguey]

So... what is the biggest problem with this setup?
(hint - it makes the whole setup completely nonsensical)

I'm guessing that a) since you already cleared out all the badgers and can escort them back, there's no need to blow up another exit (except to save you the trouble of backtracking) and b) there's nothing at all stopping the badgers in the last room from slaughtering the miners, so they're just standing there waiting for you to kill them just because..?

 

[Infinitron]

Ok, so what the fuck this game is? Why is it good, why you defend it? What are the fucking qualities of this game that makes it worth playing?

Why don't you ask Micoselva, who LP'd the game's very first beta version and more-or-less enjoyed it?

Obviously, there is something there that you personally just can't see.

 

[felipepepe]

Why don't you ask Micoselva, who LP'd the game's very first beta version and more-or-less enjoyed it?

I don't see Micoselva here defending the game every day and accusing me of "not getting it", only you.

Obviously, there is something there that you personally just can't see.

Obviously then, I'm not the only one "not seeing it"...

 

[Infinitron]

No, not the only one, but let's not turn this into a popularity contest. We both know the game is doing quite well at the moment.

We just need to wait for the final product and see what other Codexers think. The sample size is currently too small because lots of people don't want to play.

 

[felipepepe]

Stop evading the question, Infinitron. You clearly have a very defined stance on this, so why the hell you defend Wasteland 2 so much? You never say anything good about it, and your Steam says you only played 3.5 hours of it... why waste so much time and effort on this? What you "see" that is worth so much?

 

[Thane Solus]

they should ignore everybody (users/players) and make the best and polished game they can with their current budget and funds, and call it a day. Then later check out the feedback and those that make some sense in the game context should taken seriously and act accordingly. While usually players give good feedback( about 10-20% of each base) the rest simply lack the experience, so while its nice to read them, they are not helping unless they give you (the developer) some other ideas based on this.

so lets wait for release and then troll, praise, whatever after. The developers have enough experience to deliver a decent, maybe good product. It cant be as bad as the triple A shovel ware some of you guys playing these days.

/goes outside to hug a tree

 

[Daedalos]

MEh..

I wish I could fast forward 6 months and skip all this bullshit.. back and forth between haters and optimists like myself.

Skip forward and evaluate WL2 as a finished product.

Do you think Brian Fargo will be able to find some soul to put into his game by then? :D

Who knows bro. In 6 months time. We probably will.

 

[Daedalos]

Even Blizzard finally turned Diablo 3 into something worth playing with their new expansion, Reaper of Souls

 

[WhiteGuts]

It's okay then. We only have to wait a year after the final release to have a playable game.

 

[Daedalos]

Don't care really at this point... They can take all the time they want, as long as it ultimately ends up being great.

I'll go do other stuff with my life, instead of spending it waiting patiently. When it does finally arrive, it will be all the more awesome (hopefully)

 

[hiver]

No, not the only one, but let's not turn this into a popularity contest.

Really? But you will claim that the game is good and Felipepepe simply doesnt "see" that - because Micro Selva made an LP of it?
Which was a pretty superficial run-through the previous beta content. Micro Selva obviously did not aim to actually turn the beta upside down and explore every thing and angle in it (which all fall apart the second you prod any of them) - but just played on to provide a general overview.

And you of course keep me on ignore - so you can pretend none of the facts i described in two reviews are there at all. So you wouldnt need to answer any questions. Just like BN.

We both know the game is doing quite well at the moment.

By some popularity contest ?

We just need to wait for the final product and see what other Codexers think. The sample size is currently too small because lots of people don't want to play.

What others think? Lots of people... who you know personally?

How is it even possible you dont understand or see your own retarded self defeating fallacies?

oh, right... extreme emotional engagement... ffs...