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

[Infinitron]

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?

Probably the same reason I defended PE for months back when it was the game the Codex loves to hate. I'm sure the same will happen with Torment when the inevitable rage begins for that one. Such is the life of a Kickstarter optimist.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Such is the life of a Kickstarter optimist.

Any reason you're still one? About how many Kickstarters turned out to your expectations?

 

[Daedalos]

Such is the life of a Kickstarter optimist.

Any reason you're still one? About how many Kickstarters turned out to your expectations?

Nothing ever much turns out exactly how you planned, envisioned and expected it to be. Such is life bro. Atleast being somewhat optimistic about it all... helps to deal with it.

I'm still not really convinced how Fargo has "betrayed" the expectations of his kickstarter pledgers... I've seen the vision docs.. and the stuff... so far it seems to be they are delivering what they promised.. albeit at a larger scale (and a longer timeframe of course)


I'm having trouble understanding how some people can get so butthurt about their own misguided expectations and then turning it around and blaming it on Fargo. It should be a healthy exercise for some and a lesson learned.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Nothing ever much turns out exactly how you planned, envisioned and expected it to be. Such is life bro. Atleast being somewhat optimistic about it all... helps to deal with it.

Doesn't make sense to me. Being pessimistic is what helps dealing with it.
Or is optimism about lying to yourself and lowering expectations with each new detail revealed? Then I can see how it helps and all Kickstarters will be great successes!

 

[SuicideBunny]

stuff @Infinitron

you do realize that infinitron is ignoring you?

 

[Daedalos]

Nothing ever much turns out exactly how you planned, envisioned and expected it to be. Such is life bro. Atleast being somewhat optimistic about it all... helps to deal with it.

Doesn't make sense to me. Being pessimistic is what helps dealing with it.
Or is optimism about lying to yourself and lowering expectations with each new detail revealed? Then I can see how it helps and all Kickstarters will be great successes!

Pessimism is expecting everything to be shitty, because of some unfounded assumptions or exaggerated expectation that's not in touch with reality. Never much room for benefit of doubt there.

Overreacting negatively to something that doesn't sit well with you is also a characteristic of being very negative.



While optimism can be equally as bad, it's good blended with a mixture of realism is what drives game development.

 

[hiver]

Nothing ever much turns out exactly how you planned, envisioned and expected it to be. Such is life bro. Atleast being somewhat optimistic about it all... helps to deal with it.

Doesn't make sense to me. Being pessimistic is what helps dealing with it.
Or is optimism about lying to yourself and lowering expectations with each new detail revealed? Then I can see how it helps and all Kickstarters will be great successes!

"Being optimistic’s worthless if it means ignoring the suffering of this world. Worse than worthless. It’s bloody evil. And being pessimistic, well, that’s just the first step on the path, and it’s a path that might take you down Hood’s road, or it takes you to a place where you can settle into doing what you can, hold fast in your fight against that suffering." Steven Erikson.

stuff @Infinitron

you do realize that infinitron is ignoring you?

Yeah. From long ago. Ive said so in the post itself too.
He takes a peek though.


-

SuicideBunny oh right, ,

 

[Owlish]

I'm having trouble understanding how some people can get so butthurt about their own misguided expectations and then turning it around and blaming it on Fargo. It should be a healthy exercise for some and a lesson learned.

Butthurt is such a stupid, overused word nowadays.

I've personally have had low expectations for WL2 ever since I learned it's more about party tactics, and saw the stupid keyword dialogue system. I had much more hope for Numenera but the stuff I'm hearing about WL2 is sending up huge red flags about that too.

 

[Drakron]

"swiss army knife parties don't make for real C&C"

That always been absurd that in a party based game if I dont have the skill but one of my party members have then I cannot use it, this isnt about "real C&C" as it is about party members actually being party members and not a collection of stats used in combat.

The only lack of real C&C been that most of the time they are a collection of stats used in combat that never leave, if party members have a personality and can leave then its only expected this should go further and non-combat skills can be used.

The entire system was meant to replicate party systems of tabletop RPGs were specialization exists to over individual weakness, that is intended otherwise we would have overspecialized parties that would be unable to complete various challenges, that would in fact "dumb down" the game to the simplest ... this isnt a competition to screw the players over and I wish people understood game design is not something so you can frustrate and punish the players so you "win", adventure scenarios were meant to be winnable and party system were designed for the classes to cover weakness of other classes and support each other, its meant as cooperative play and that goes beyond combat situations.

"the game doesn't inform you about your choices beforehand"

Actually its funny seeing that right after the "swiss army knife parties" complain because that is exactly why they exist, so people dont metagame to be winnable.
Also there is responsibility, its only a question of the consequences of those choices being logical or not ... the responsibility is that people appear to not wanting to accept a choice they made lead to a consequence they did not wanted and so blame not "informing" them ... rather this is not about the choice, this is about wanting to know what the consequences of every choice are before they happen, this is the same as having a NPC tricking the player into doing something and wanting the game spell it out that NPC is tricking the player when in fact the game should not at all give any hint the player is being tricked as long its not logical for such hints.

 

[hiver]

There is one example of W2 reactivitaeh that i find especially elucidating when it comes to presentation to the player. Among other things.

In Rail Nomads, you can get a very valuable party member, Scotchmo - old hobo with insane stats. If you lead him to a local graveyard - he will start sobbing a bit, in the overhead text form.
You can of course use the shovel and dig out nonsensical loot from each grave - and each grave marking or a cross has some kind of inscription that you can "take a look at".

There is one - which has no marking at all. You try to dig that and Scotchmo attacks you.

It is supposedly a freshly or recently dug out grave of his bellowed wife.


And , you see... according to w2 internal logic (and whoever came up with that fabulous idea) - when someone buries their bellowed spouse - they dont write anything on their cross. Nothing.
- So the player can be tricked into trying to dig it. - So you have that amazing example of reactivity - of loosing one of the best NPC allies in the game.

Which of course you will not do. You will reload and never do it again.

The end.

 

[Excidium]

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 this game like most CRPGs has an awful skill check design, the solution to problems is just having the skill so being able to cover all choices simply removes any sort of consideration, any approach succeeds. I'm glad it's finally showing how bad it is in W2.

 

[Drakron]

And , you see... according to w2 internal logic (and whoever came up with that fabulous idea) - when someone buries their bellowed spouse - they dont write anything on their cross. Nothing.
- So the player can be tricked into trying to dig it. - So you have that amazing example of reactivity - of loosing one of the best NPC allies in the game.

No, this a example of you acting like a asshole and then complain about it.

Digging up graves is a very asshole thing to do, the game lets you do it and even to get away with it to some extend, the fact it lets you inspect the headstone is a hint and also there is a unmarked grave, the moment you started to act like a dick and dig up graves was the moment the game would react or not, the fact it doesnt until you go do it on the one that stands up is simply because at that point you assumed the game would not react and let you do it, now you complain about logic?

I am pretty sure if the game allows you do it you would complain about lacking reactivity, if the game had the name of the headstone you would complain about being obvious ... serious, this isnt hard to figure out, if you have a sobbing man on a graveyard you dont go around grave digging, since none of the marked ones had him react then either the unmarked one would make him react or not.

Your argument about logic is simply you grasping because whatever they did, you can complain about it.

Also I am going to say this, I rather there is a response and I am penalized for doing something assholish that not, your "best NPC in the game is gone" is not the same as Icewind Dale were the best game in the game could only be used by a Paladin and it was a late game weapon (very late in fact) so the only way to know this was playing it at least once or know about by someone telling you ... anyone complained them about it? According to your internal logic it should been printed in the manual.

2014 RPGCodex ... objective arrows are necessity.

 

[Excidium]

Should get dark side points for digging graves

 

[Owlish]

And , you see... according to w2 internal logic (and whoever came up with that fabulous idea) - when someone buries their bellowed spouse - they dont write anything on their cross. Nothing.
- So the player can be tricked into trying to dig it. - So you have that amazing example of reactivity - of loosing one of the best NPC allies in the game.

No, this a example of you acting like a asshole and then complain about it.

Digging up graves is a very asshole thing to do, the game lets you do it and even to get away with it to some extend, the fact it lets you inspect the headstone is a hint and also there is a unmarked grave, the moment you started to act like a dick and dig up graves was the moment the game would react or not, the fact it doesnt until you go do it on the one that stands up is simply because at that point you assumed the game would not react and let you do it, now you complain about logic?

I am pretty sure if the game allows you do it you would complain about lacking reactivity, if the game had the name of the headstone you would complain about being obvious ... serious, this isnt hard to figure out, if you have a sobbing man on a graveyard you dont go around grave digging, since none of the marked ones had him react then either the unmarked one would make him react or not.

Your argument about logic is simply you grasping because whatever they did, you can complain about it.

Also I am going to say this, I rather there is a response and I am penalized for doing something assholish that not, your "best NPC in the game is gone" is not the same as Icewind Dale were the best game in the game could only be used by a Paladin and it was a late game weapon (very late in fact) so the only way to know this was playing it at least once or know about by someone telling you ... anyone complained them about it? According to your internal logic it should been printed in the manual.

2014 RPGCodex ... objective arrows are necessity.

No, that doesn't make sense.

He's just going to watch you dig up the grave and then attack you after you are finished? Why doesn't he interrupt you with a speech prompt saying, "Hey man, that's my wife's grave!" Or if he's sobbing why doesn't he go over to the grave, and it could bring up a dialogue option. How about he wants to protect the sanctity of the whole graveyard since his wife is buried here, and will fight you if you try to dig up graves, after a warning.

Just being able to dig up graves until you get to the special unmarked one with no indication that it's particularly special to the party member and then digging it up and having him fight you with no outward rhyme or reason is retarded.

If it's such an asshole thing why doesn't your party react? It's supposed to be after an apocalypse and people do all kinds of fucked up things.

 

[tuluse]

No, that doesn't make sense.

He's just going to watch you dig up the grave and then attack you after you are finished? Why doesn't he interrupt you with a speech prompt saying, "Hey man, that's my wife's grave!" Or if he's sobbing why doesn't he go over to the grave, and it could bring up a dialogue option. How about he wants to protect the sanctity of the whole graveyard since his wife is buried here, and will fight you if you try to dig up graves, after a warning.

This is a good point. At the begining, if you try to dig Ace's grave the rangers do tell you to stop.

Just being able to dig up graves until you get to the special unmarked one with no indication that it's particularly special to the party member and then digging it up and having him fight you with no outward rhyme or reason is retarded.

If it's such an asshole thing why doesn't your party react? It's supposed to be after an apocalypse and people do all kinds of fucked up things.

Soulless automatons.

 

[Behelit]

No, that doesn't make sense.

He's just going to watch you dig up the grave and then attack you after you are finished? Why doesn't he interrupt you with a speech prompt saying, "Hey man, that's my wife's grave!" Or if he's sobbing why doesn't he go over to the grave, and it could bring up a dialogue option. How about he wants to protect the sanctity of the whole graveyard since his wife is buried here, and will fight you if you try to dig up graves, after a warning.

This is a good point. At the begining, if you try to dig Ace's grave the rangers do tell you to stop.

An interruption at Ace's grave and none at the wife's tombstone makes me think its a mere oversight instead of "LEL CONSEQUENCES!!!"

Just being able to dig up graves until you get to the special unmarked one with no indication that it's particularly special to the party member and then digging it up and having him fight you with no outward rhyme or reason is retarded.

If it's such an asshole thing why doesn't your party react? It's supposed to be after an apocalypse and people do all kinds of fucked up things.

Soulless automatons.

"I was just following orders!"

 

[buzz]

I think the concept is called "choices and consequences", not "guesswork and consequences". This could have been so easily avoided if they just put his wife's name on the headstone, and let the other ones be unnamed. Or have an NPC reaction when you inspect the wife's grave.
On paper, the idea of chaotic, hint-less choices seems really great, closer to reality in a way. Most of the choices in our lives are not telegraphed, we don't get to see first-hand what will be the reactions to the choices we make. But this is a game with limited mechanics, where we can't do the research that normally eases the chaotic nature of our choices, and most importantly we don't expect a fully-reactive environment because that's impossible to design and program.

 

[hiver]

And , you see... according to w2 internal logic (and whoever came up with that fabulous idea) - when someone buries their bellowed spouse - they dont write anything on their cross. Nothing.
- So the player can be tricked into trying to dig it. - So you have that amazing example of reactivity - of loosing one of the best NPC allies in the game.

.

Well no, this is an example of you being an extremely emotionally engaged moron who cannot even understand what the fuck i find idiotic about that scenario despite me clearly describing it.
Also, you could have said that without those cheap insults that are supposed to felate your ego, but now you can go and cry to your mommy because i insulted you back.

Of course someone is going to react to someone else digging a grave of his wife.
I never criticized that particular thing, you brainless shit.

if the game had the name of the headstone you would complain about being obvious ...

oh nice... a strawman argument you came by because you are telepathic little imbecile.

serious, this isnt hard to figure out, if you have a sobbing man on a graveyard you dont go around grave digging, since none of the marked ones had him react then either the unmarked one would make him react or not.

look, you despicable retard... when someones loved one dies - they mark the grave, write their loved one name on and maybe something nice.

The fact that particular grave is unmarked is a stupid, idiotic, retarded cheap cheat .- that prevents the player from making any kind of informed decision. Designed for fucking morons like yourself.

Scotchmo "sobs" only in a few short overhead blurbs that are not specific about anything at all - it could have been a friend, someone he knew, his pet or maybe he is just an emotional guy who starts crying because of flowers - whatever - YOU DONT KNOW -and there is no way to talk to him about it or ask anything.

Anyone reasonable, with normally functioning mind, supposing he might be crying about someone at the graveyard - which is not clear at all since he starts with those few short unspecified blurbs before you go into the graveyard itself - would expect that whoever he is crying about is in one of the marked graves - you stupid whiny cunt.

Also I am going to say this, I rather there is a response and I am penalized for doing something assholish that not, your "best NPC in the game is gone" is not the same as Icewind....

What the fuck the Icewind dale has to do with this?

This is not a penalty you retarded, devolved turd... becuase nobody will just go along with it - especially because the game cheats you into it, so blatantly and stupidly - by falsely representing the situation.

Your argument about logic is simply you grasping

It is only you who is grasping for anything.

No, this a example of you acting like a asshole and then complain about it.

projections, projections... how do you fucking work?

2014 RPGCodex ... objective arrows are necessity.

thats could be an almost funny strawman, if it werent so fucking moronic and a huge neon sign of emotionally engaged imbecile - for whom such idiotic, cheap non-reactivity was designed.

 

[felipepepe]

I think the concept is called "choices and consequences", not "guesswork and consequences".

Now you know why in W2 it's called "reactivity", not C&C.

 

[undecaf]

I understood reactivity, the way they've described it, to mean just these small scale cause and effect things aside from the actual C&C (which, admittedly, hasn't been shown much at all - but then, the narrative hasn't really kicked off yet either). Stuff like how in Fallout 2 - iirc - Sulik would leave the party if you dug up too many graves. Little things like that are great to have, and they're not really something the player needs to actively seek out to prove their existense; they just happen if you act a certain way and you'll notice the difference if you're perceptive enough. I'm not defending haphazard implementation, though; the Scotchmo thing sounds more like entrapment than proper reactivity (I haven't seen it yet, but just reading the way it's being described here as), but these things should be easy enough to fix to make them seem less... "random" - unless randomness is called for by the event.

There should be clearer distinction, as to what sort of C&C they've meant and are planning (eg. with made up examples, to get a wiff of what to expect); I mean, surely, hopefully, the extent of it is not these micro level interactions the player may never even see, or some binary choices between X and Y (AC vs HP). How do these bigger (and smaller) choices affect the gameplay and narration down the line? That's something I'd like to see an indepth update about.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I understood reactivity, the way they've described it, to mean just these small scale cause and effect things aside from the actual C&C (which, admittedly, hasn't been shown much at all - but then, the narrative hasn't really kicked off yet either). Stuff like how in Fallout 2 - iirc - Sulik would leave the party if you dug up too many graves. Little things like that are great to have, and they're not really something the player needs to actively seek out to prove their existense; they just happen if you act a certain way and you'll notice the difference if you're perceptive enough.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too. I don't know why some people have problems with this. Is it just because inXile called it C&C?

And if were are to be so precise about terms aren't these actually C&C and different ways to accomplish missions is actually reactivity?

 

[Infinitron]

They've always used the term "reactivity", not C&C. Some people may have interpreted them as the same thing, though.

 

[Gord]

Again, how much "C&C" or reactivity can you anyway reasonably expect from the first few hours of a game?

 

[Copper]

Man, I'd love it if they had a 'B' team of Rangers who're on roughly the same mission as you, but get messed up depending on your choices - ie if you go to Highpool, they go to Ag Centre, potentially fucking up in the process. Through the game, they morph into extreme vigilantes/etc based in part on their interactions with the party, and in part on how well their performance in missions goes. (Affected by the player donating /stealing loot from them). It could be even better if they actually auto-played the game, Iron-man style, with casualties being replaced by fresh Rangers from the citadel / recruiting pre-gens the party passes up on.
"Angela Deth sacrificed her life helping us save Highpool."

Pretty pie-in-the-sky, and far too late to implement, but it would be a great way of adding the illusion of agency to the world - the Ranger's aren't just trusting you, they're sending out other teams, and those teams have a fair shot at completing their objectives - just without the luxury of save/load to rewind time. Obviously, the player is the main agent - they choose their objective, B team gets the other. Having a couple of teams on rotation would increase the sense of being part of a bigger unit.

 

[garren]

Nice ideas. There definitely should be at least some sorta system where you can meet other ranger parties occasionally and ask how their doing on their missions, so you don't feel like the only ranger party out in the universe.