Game News Wasteland 2 Kickstarter Update #34: Gamescom Demo Video, First Dev Diary Released

[felipepepe]

Even so, he's still the lead designer of a gridless, FPS real-time Fallout game...

 

[FeelTheRads]

Personally, I loved that KOTC2 shot and thought that it was an improvement over the original, but that's not what most people want.

Fargo: We don't care about what most people want etc.

 

[Infinitron]

Personally, I loved that KOTC2 shot and thought that it was an improvement over the original, but that's not what most people want.

Fargo: We don't care about what most people want etc.

I think what VD meant is that most RPG fans don't want that either. It reminds me of this post about the differing receptions of Underrail and AoD: [URL]http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,2916.msg93949.html#msg93949[/URL]

I'm sure you saw the Codex reaction to Underrail. Its design appeals to a lot more hardcore RPG fans than what we did. That's what I meant.

Underrail is a separate topic. I also liked Underrail. The thing with Underrail is that you just don't want to replay it, it had nothing memorable.

Sure it has a ton of cool features, lighs, sneak, crafting system, but it also has worse writing, worst possible combat system, not so interesting characters and a weird setting. Most of it's popularity comes from easy combat. I pretty much slaughtered everyone with melee weapons, even the strongest characters that kill you in one turn and give you 4k exp were obliterated. EDIT. The quest system is nothing but fetch quests!

Again, did you see the reaction? It speaks for itself, doesn't it?

This isn't a veiled stab at the game, mind you. It's pretty good, but it's very different from AoD and, as it happens, it's a lot closer to what people want to play than AoD is.

The real issue with AoD isn't the difficulty or anything you listed, but the overall design and the focus on the story-telling and text-adventure elements. What did some people on the Codex call it? City intrigue simulator? Not everyone wants to play those.

 

[suejak]

Looks basically perfect. I'm not crazy about the cover-based combat system, but I've yet to see a combat system in a computer game that I enjoy, so that's ok. Pretty good shit.

 

[tuluse]

Not drawing hexes under the corridor walls is what would make it even more confusing as to why you can't walk through the space. This would be result of just taking an existing map and laying a hex grid under everything without extensive and meticulous tweaking.

I feel like I haven't explained my self very well.

Take the characters, and only have them fill 80% of a hex. Now props can overlap hexes by 10% on any side, and the character will still fit.

Then make some extra animations for characters to interact with props that don't quite fill the hex they're in. Actually, I just though of an ever cheaper solution. You can use the same cover animation, and just move the character around a little bit. As long as the character is mostly in the hex they're occupying there is no reason they can't slide over a little bit to interact with props.

I'm pretty sure between these two changes, you can easily put a hex grid over any map, and it will be clear what is happening and look fine for a 3 million dollar game.

 

[hiver]

*shrug shrug* Irrelevant.

Au contraire, Ms. Bee. It's very relevant (special thanks to Infinitron who mentioned Fallout 2 here). See, Fallout 2 had wacky shit - the rat king, talking deathclaws, yakuza, giant robots and such, but they were treated seriously, as if they made perfect sense and fit right in. Even some explanations were provided. Fallout 3 was retarded because they treated everything like lulz.

Okay, so I'm just gonna disregard what you said about Fallout 2 because it doesn't make much sense to me, and say that I don't mind straightforwardly lulzy games; in fact, I love them. Saints Row IV is my game of the year, and you can't get more lulzy than that. Fallout 3 sucked not because it treated everything like lulz, but simply because it failed at being entertaining. There just wasn't a single memorable lulzy moment or joke in it. Also it wasn't a Wasteland game, it was a Fallout game, so different standards applied.

If Wasteland 2 treats everything like lulz and does it well, I'm all for it. I don't want it to treat its subject matter seriously, because then it wouldn't be a Wasteland game.

There is smart intelligently written humor, there is ...decent enough but generally mediocre humor - and there is stupid as brahmin shit humor.

Whether its there for teh lulz or actually has any relevance with the story or the setting is a secondary feature and should be a secondary consideration - arising and expanding from and on the base of the first, primary feature of quality and intelligence.

kids.

now be off withcha.


- hex grid removed?

- (thats an insulting, despise ridden lol, fyi)

 

[Cosmic Misogynerd]

...stupid as brahmin shit humor.

Your specialty, I guess.

 

[HiddenX]

If you have natural terrain (fields, caves, etc), you don't really run into the downsides of hex grids. They often look better there, since right angles are not common in nature. they look worse in most man-made areas, though.

The hex grid distance metric is much closer to euclidian distance than any of the reasonable metrics for square grids. This make them superior in tactics games. With a square grid, you have to do strange math things if you want the space to feel like euclidean space (you have to make diagonals work, and it's hard to do so with integer-logic). On the other hand with hex grids the player's intuition about distance is pretty close to the in-game distance.

In a square grid there are only 4 directions you can move that go through an edge. The other 4 go through corners. This can cause issues in games when diagonal movement or range counting is allowed as technically 15 squares diagonally is longer than 15 squares horizontally or vertically (-> see Pythagoras).

Hexagons on the other hand have 6 degrees of freedom and all movement is through an edge, never a corner. This makes range counting easier and more consistent as well.

However it's hard to draw right angles in a hex grid (i.e. if you take the 3 axis approach, there's others, then no axis is at 90° to another). That's why square grids are more common for dungeon style maps with straight corridors and right angle turns while hex grids show up more for over world maps where sharp corners are less likely.

But there's a solution for everything:

Just use Kisrhombille tiling and you can use hexes and draw straight lines!

Tiling Dual Semiregular V4-6-12 Bisected Hexagonal works best.

 

[shihonage]

HiddenX I thought the solution posted by someone above (2 AP for non-diagonals, 3 AP for diagonals) was pretty fair. Not ideal (1.5 isn't exactly 1.41) but much more fair than... otherwise.

As for the concept of "tiling" in general, 3D engines like Unity don't operate like that, and neither do the associated environmental editing tools.

You can implement "tiling" when you are meddling with a 3D renderer at early stages of development, which isn't the case here. I don't think W2 was built around any sort of tile concepts, and they're just using whatever grid works best with the environment creation process.

 

[HiddenX]

Some game coders say:
Vectrosity can do a lot of things ... fast.

So at least the overlay grid should be no problem at all. But I'm only a database developer...

 

[imweasel]

HiddenX I thought the solution posted by someone above (2 AP for non-diagonals, 3 AP for diagonals) was pretty fair. Not ideal (1.5 isn't exactly 1.41) but much more fair than... otherwise.

Hex grids are not very fair in this respect either. Open a grid. If you move north or south through an edge (or one of the other four directions) everything is fine. But open a grid and try moving directly east or west. You won't move as far because you are not moving in a straight line. You are instead doing the "ziggedy ziggedy zag" that we all know and "love" from Fallout.

Hex grids aren't perfect either and are not the PnP-tile of choice "as intented by god" (no matter what Sawyer says).

(BTW, I am not saying that you don't know this, I am just using your quote for discussion)

 

[Excidium]

Hex grids are not very fair in this respect either. Open a grid. If you move north or south through an edge (or one of the other four directions) everything is fine. But open a grid and try moving directly east or west. You won't move as far because you are not moving in a straight line. You are instead doing the "ziggedy ziggedy zag" that we all know and "love" from Fallout.

Hex grids aren't perfect either and are not the PnP-tile of choice "as intented by god"

Who said that? I know about as many games that use or recommend hexes for grid maps as I do games that go for squares.

Square grids are only for games where precise dungeon mapping plays a huge part, otherwise you are much better off with hexes

 

[imweasel]

Hex grids are not very fair in this respect either. Open a grid. If you move north or south through an edge (or one of the other four directions) everything is fine. But open a grid and try moving directly east or west. You won't move as far because you are not moving in a straight line. You are instead doing the "ziggedy ziggedy zag" that we all know and "love" from Fallout.

Hex grids aren't perfect either and are not the PnP-tile of choice "as intented by god"

Who said that?

"Do not disturb my circles" - Archimedes

I know about as many games that use or recommend hexes for grid maps as I do games that go for squares.

Square grids are only for games where precise dungeon mapping plays a huge part, otherwise you are much better off with hexes

Hexes are slightly more accurate, so it is usually a good to try and use them instead. But they aren't perfect either. As shihonage already said, interpreting diagonal movement on a square grid as 1.5 moves is probaly just as good (if not better) than a hex grid.

 

[Excidium]

It's a decent workaround if you really have to go with squares. Still I like hexes more.

 

[hiver]

The problem is what the new consoles are capable of. Dont you see it smartarses?

list inventories, square grids, simplified corridor terrain and areas ...

then:
reactivity is: if you pay a weapon tax then you dont fight and GEEE if you dont then there will be a fight!
Amazing, isnt it.
(it would be nice to see one fucking example of reactivity and C&C that doesnt seem like it was made by underage simpleton - for underage simpletons. So far - i have seen none)

Goats just standing there is utterly stupid idea. Its not funny either.

The subquest with a sick woman is cheap.


And thaT FUCKING YELLOW BLOOM is horrible. THE SAND DOES NOT fucking glow!!

 

[Kem0sabe]

As AoD has proven, you can have an interesting 3D game world and locations, with tons of reactivity and depth without compromising too much. The major problem i am seeing with this latest demo is down to pacing and writing, both of which are way off.

 

[Excidium]

The major problem i am seeing with this latest demo is down to pacing and writing, both of which are way off.

Reminder:

The level was the winner of an internal competition process (as mentioned last update).

Once we learned the show date, we figured we’d get a little friendly competition going. 2 levels were chosen to have a level-off. The teams would work for 2 weeks straight, making it as great as possible during that time. We’d then select the level that showed the best and spend the next few weeks polishing it up.

 

[Infinitron]

The major problem i am seeing with this latest demo is down to pacing and writing, both of which are way off.

Reminder:

The level was the winner of an internal competition process (as mentioned last update).

Once we learned the show date, we figured we’d get a little friendly competition going. 2 levels were chosen to have a level-off. The teams would work for 2 weeks straight, making it as great as possible during that time. We’d then select the level that showed the best and spend the next few weeks polishing it up.

Consider how long it takes to develop the game. Two weeks, even a month, is a rush job, especially since they probably had other stuff to do as well.

Anyway, the pacing issues probably have more to do with the way Chris Keenan played the game than the levels themselves. Making an entertaining, well-paced LP of a non-linear game isn't a trivial task.

 

[Excidium]

The major problem i am seeing with this latest demo is down to pacing and writing, both of which are way off.

Reminder:

The level was the winner of an internal competition process (as mentioned last update).

Once we learned the show date, we figured we’d get a little friendly competition going. 2 levels were chosen to have a level-off. The teams would work for 2 weeks straight, making it as great as possible during that time. We’d then select the level that showed the best and spend the next few weeks polishing it up.

Consider how long it takes to develop the game. Two weeks is a rush job.

Not for designing a map. Besides the map was already existing, they just had two weeks to polish and maybe make some demo-friendly content.

 

[HiddenX]

Hex grids are not very fair in this respect either. Open a grid. If you move north or south through an edge (or one of the other four directions) everything is fine. But open a grid and try moving directly east or west. You won't move as far because you are not moving in a straight line. You are instead doing the "ziggedy ziggedy zag" that we all know and "love" from Fallout.

Hex grids aren't perfect either and are not the PnP-tile of choice "as intented by god"

Who said that?

"Do not disturb my circles" - Archimedes

I know about as many games that use or recommend hexes for grid maps as I do games that go for squares.

Square grids are only for games where precise dungeon mapping plays a huge part, otherwise you are much better off with hexes

Hexes are slightly more accurate, so it is usually a good to try and use them instead. But they aren't perfect either. As shihonage already said, interpreting diagonal movement on a square grid as 1.5 moves is probaly just as good (if not better) than a hex grid.

To avoid zig-zag-wandering from west to east, you can use in-between hexes (orange):

 

[General Maxson]

I don't have a problem with square grid (sure, I'd like hexes too, but it's not crucial for a good crpg IMO), but other things disappointed me, like writing, dialogue, stupid C&C, railroading, exploration what others here said. Have they delved too deep in popamole as to forget what an open world crpg should be like?

 

[shihonage]

I don't have a problem with square grid (sure, I'd like hexes too, but it's not crucial for a good crpg IMO), but other things disappointed me, like writing, dialogue, stupid C&C, railroading, exploration what others here said. Have they delved too deep in popamole as to forget what an open world crpg should be like?

The question is, did Fargo ever understand, on the ground, pedal-to-the-metal level, how to design an open CRPG, or was he too high-up on the development ladder to see the fine details. He always struck me as more of a publisher-level guy who understood the basics of programming and design effectively enough to communicate with the actual "doers" in the team.

Unfortunately an open-world CRPG is one of the hardest gameplay types to design. I have a sense that he still sees such a game as a large collection of IF-THEN statements that in sufficient quantity will create game magic.

Unlike more researched genres like side-scrollers, RTS games, or story-driven FPS, there aren't that many useful development tools and design conventions when it comes to core mechanics of an open-world CRPG. Due to deeper properties of world actors and multitude of states, the game data accumulates at catastrophic rate, much of it is interlinked, and the whole mess needs to be managed and altered effectively, without having to retrace every changed dependency by hand.

Fargo does, however, show a lot of enthusiasm and he's actively listening to feedback. Maybe he'll figure it out, or someone on his team will after he gives them enough lashes.

 

[Infinitron]

I don't have a problem with square grid (sure, I'd like hexes too, but it's not crucial for a good crpg IMO), but other things disappointed me, like writing, dialogue, stupid C&C, railroading, exploration what others here said. Have they delved too deep in popamole as to forget what an open world crpg should be like?

The question is, did Fargo ever understand, on the ground, pedal-to-the-metal level, how to design an open CRPG, or was he too high-up on the development ladder to see the fine details. He always struck me as more of a publisher-level guy who understood the basics of programming and design effectively enough to communicate with the actual "doers" in the team.

Unfortunately an open-world CRPG is one of the hardest gameplay types to design. I have a sense that he still sees such a game as a large collection of IF-THEN statements that in sufficient quantity will create game magic.

Unlike more researched genres like side-scrollers, RTS games, or story-driven FPS, there aren't that many useful development tools and design conventions when it comes to core mechanics of an open-world CRPG. Due to deeper properties of world actors and multitude of states, the game data accumulates at catastrophic rate, much of it is interlinked, and the whole mess needs to be managed and altered effectively, without having to retrace every changed dependency by hand.

Fargo does, however, show a lot of enthusiasm and he's actively listening to feedback. Maybe he'll figure it out, or someone on his team will after he gives them enough lashes.

It's not like the game is Fargo's work alone. I believe this photo from May 2012 is a more-or-less accurate representation of the main figures behind Wasteland 2's overall design:

On the other hand, the lower level things that they're doing now, the so-called "reactivity passes", might be the work of people who are lower on the chain.

 

[Lady_Error]

Is that Cleve Blakemore with a stick?

 

[Micmu]

WTF is with the chainsaw hanging from the celiling?