Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Wasteland Wasteland 2, what gone wrong? [SPOILERS]

hiver

Guest
Close enough, I started in 1998 with Fallout
It didnt help, obviously.

Those are facts. The fact you don't like them is because of personal preferences. I do like the naked thing against energy weapons. So what?
No... these things are idiotic despite you liking them. The fact that you force yourself to like them just speaks badly of you.

That armor-energy weapons is not even a feature, its a mistake that appears because of how they designed that whole system.

fair enough, but saying "meh I don't like it, then it must be a bad mechanic" it's not good either
Thats a very obvious strawman argument, be careful not to do it again. Non-intentionally or otherwise.

I never said that. I in fact explain why and how all the things i mention are incredibly idiotic. The fact that you somehow "like them" just makes you someone who will sell logic and common sense for cheap superficial personal enjoyment based on literal nonsense. Therefore you are the lowest common denominator.


Why not? Who set this rule that these things can't happen at the very start?
Because its all cheap contrived nonsensical crap. That aims at lowest common denominators - just like you.
 

miles teg

Scholar
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
130
It didnt help, obviously.
No... these things are idiotic despite you liking them. The fact that you force yourself to like them just speaks badly of you.

One good thing about Fallout is that it was designed when there was no "community" to help them. No people like you, for example.

That armor-energy weapons is not even a feature, its a mistake that appears because of how they designed that whole system.
YOU think it's a mistake.

Thats a very obvious strawman argument, be careful not to do it again. Non-intentionally or otherwise.
I do whatever I want, within the forum rules.

I never said that. I in fact explain why and how all the things i mention are incredibly idiotic.
I never quoted you. Don't flatter yourself.

The fact that you somehow "like them" just makes you someone who will sell logic and common sense for cheap superficial personal enjoyment based on literal nonsense. Therefore you are the lowest common denominator.
I don't sell anything. The "common denominator" was the backers community, which I'm happy NOT being a part of, at this point.


Because its all cheap contrived nonsensical crap.
Still personal preferences here.

You offer no argument in this post. you only showed you are very proficient in offending people while still moving withing the forum rule boundaries. It's a skill that can make someone proud, I guess. People like you, for example.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
YOU think it's a mistake.

So what would be the reasoning behind it?

which I'm happy NOT being a part of, at this point.

oooh....

iceburn.gif
 

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,398
fair enough, but saying "meh I don't like it, then it must be a bad mechanic" it's not good either
Do you realize that on many encounters enemies use both energy and normal attacks? If you remove the armor, the physical attack enemies fuck you, if you place the armor, the energy weapons enemies fuck you even more without mentioning that even high tier armor don't protect you all that much against physical attacks anyway. The best strategy is to just walk without armor and ignore it completely. You have only two ways to respond to this, repeat this argument "It's all about feelings man." and I will place you on my ignore list with the other ignorant retards in there or give me a convincing defense of this ridiculous mechanic.
 

hiver

Guest
I do whatever I want, within the forum rules.
Its not the forum "rules" that you have to worry about. Its me. I intensely do not like strawman arguments and i will push your head into your proverbial asshole and pull you through to the other side for it.

+ there is no forum rule that says: "strawman arguments are the way to go bro"

YOU think it's a mistake.
Noooo, its only you who just thinks stuff - because you have nothing else to offer as argument.
Of course it is a mistake. Wearing an armor of any kind makes energy weapons deal over 100 pts of damage to your characters. Taking it off makes energy weapons deal about 10-15 pts of damage.

What fucking possible sense can it make that energy weapons such as lasers or plasma weapons would deal LESS DAMAGE versus unprotected flesh?

And additionally, that effect only exists for the player. Since all enemies later on have "some kind of armor" and they cannot take it off.

If you try to come back with idiotic "well how do you know they didnt do that intentionaly" retort - if they did then the situation is even worse. Its utter mindboggling nonsense, and you are just trying to excuse it with more incoherent nonsense because you want to feel pleased about the game, despite any reason, common sense or logic.


fair enough, but saying "meh I don't like it, then it must be a bad mechanic" it's not good either
hiver says - hey i never said that...
I never quoted you. Don't flatter yourself.

Are you insane?
:lol:


I don't sell anything. The "common denominator" was the backers community, which I'm happy NOT being a part of, at this point.
There was no such backer community, there were just laughable stupid cretins like you - the LOWEST common denominators who for their personal feeling of emotional engagement sell out any logic, reason or common sense and scream how everything is awesomeeeee!

And some people who hoped too much.


-

For the record, i dont mind the "dead guy" so much. Its more of a sser personal thing.

But i do fucking mind the nonsense of the whole prologue causing me to start shutting down any higher brain functions in order to not vomit out of shear stupidity and nonsense of it all, to be able to continue playing. which then turns out to be the whole fucking game.
The dead guy about whom most of players know nothing about or can care about is just a part of it. (also easily corrected and made much better with one or two very simple changes)

The nonsense of closed citadel until you deal with both the first mission that should never be given to a group who are not even fucking rangers yet - and forcing you to deal with Ag center or Highpool, before you can enter the Citadel - for no sane reason at all. And the horrendous disgraceful labeling of general Patton as a "strategist" - in order to describe how Vargas is "cool" .... should be too much stupid for anyone sane.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hiver

Guest
Infinitron is another lowest common denominator, as you can see, so you better follow ... his example? :lol:
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Though again, for some weird reason, most people just somehow skip over the examples i wrote above and think that some icons and loading skill use strips are the biggest problem in the game... (VD never mentioned a single of those examples in his awesome review).

Well, at least it’s one of the most glaring and obvious failures that you notice right at the beginning, in the first hours playing the game. The things you said are a compilation of problems, which you realize afterwards. About VD, this was surprising since one of the many merits of AoD is the consistent and systematic elimination of filler content.

Funny thing is I found W2 a very good game. My main issues are with quests being a bit short and some weapons to be too powerful (AR mainly).
[...]
I think some of the complains here are genuine (no matter if I agree with them or not) but overall my impression is that while most people agree this game is bad, they always have different reason. This leads be to believe that people are just sad they didn't get the game THEY wanted (which is a different game for each person, I hope this makes sense :D)

Look, the problem is not that W2 it is horrible, since the game is better than some old-school cRPGs. In a certain sense, a lot of the nitpicking destruction that Hiver is doing also holds for many games. So, no. This is not the problem. The real problems is whether Hiver, or any other disappointed player, are justified in having these bash-attitudes toward the game. And if they are justified, why. I think that after the immense-bubble-hype intentionally created by Fargo with his false promises and grandiose schemes burst with his amateurish results everyone that played the game is justified in being disappointed. They are justified in being angry at all the wasted opportunities in bad design decisions that any sane person with a modicum of sense in its day and age would recognize as bad. They are entitled to being angry since every single time that someone would point the design problems in Inxile forums they would ignore criticisms with the fallacy that this game is not a successor of Fallout. And no, design decisions are not just a matter of preference. It’s not good design to force every player to disarm explosives and open safes to receive trinkets. This is shovelware design and life is too short to waste on filler content.

Funny, people drool when they have 4 different skills for clicking hypertext links in dialogue trees (yay, I cannot "indimidate" here but i can "seduce" there, very replayability!11), but having 4 different skills for looting is somehow bad. Storyfags, storyfags never change.

Is not a question of whether you are a storyfag or not, but how this things impact in the gameplay. You have a dialogue -> choose smartass -> pass the skillcheck -> go on and continue playing the game. You find a mined camp in the prison -> use your demolitions skill in every single mine, each one with a time limit (maybe 15 or more!) -> go on and continue playing the game. You get the picture? There is a big difference. And I didn't even touch the subject of the rewards that both type of skills can provide. With lockpicking you will have a lot of stupid trinkets, wigs and some occasional piece of lore. With kissass you can convince a lot of people and have a turn of events.

90% of the game is nitpicking now? Those are "minor details" now?

Look, when you wanna talk about a game you have at least two choices. You can either analyse the game in its minute details in the most unforgiving and uncharitable manner, or you can praise the game giving more emphasis to the good points, whilst also point out some of its flaws. This initial choice depends on many factors such as what are you expectations of the developer, how serious are the perceived flaws, how great are the good points, etc. If the sum of these factors is not positive, the player will trash the game, otherwise he will praise the game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hiver

Guest
90% of the game is nitpicking now? Those are "minor details" now?

I was waiting for that non-argument to pop up.


The things you said are a compilation of problems, which you realize afterwards.
Not really, you notice them right at the start and then they just continue on without anything sensible as any kind of counter balance, save those few lone accidental examples such as Darwin or Titan Canyon and even that just partially.
 

hiver

Guest
:what:

Say wut?

You can either analyse the game in its minute details in the most unforgiving and uncharitable manner

OR

or you can praise the game giving more emphasis to the good points, whilst also point out some of its flaws.

So, if i get this declaration correctly... if the game is utter shite with no redeeming qualities then criticizing that is intentionally unforgiving and uncharitable? So none of those critiques based on actual facts of the game are real but a product of personal dislike?
And im supposed to invent and give more emphasis to the good points and address only some, a few flaws...?

This initial choice depends on many factors such as
So... someone first makes this "initial choice" and then goes on to criticize the game?
... and you just claim that because you know upfront what someone was thinking? I guess you never saw my review of the beta which has exactly the same critiques that i wrote previously here?

If the sum of these factors is not positive, the player will trash the game, otherwise he will praise the game.
Yes?

Which has what to do with expressions such as "nitpicking" which means falsely focusing on small irrelevant details and intentionally not talking about any good ones?
Have i even mentioned a single small detail of the game? Did i not mention a few locations that were ok?

Arent those two posts of mine filled with only the most important parts of the game, the reactivity it brags about, how major quests are handled and how the game plays overall?

Care to give me some examples of that great content in the game i was supposed to also include into my criticism to make you satisfied with it?
 

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,398
Look, when you wanna talk about a game you have at least two choices. You can either analyse the game in its minute details in the most unforgiving and uncharitable manner, or you can praise the game giving more emphasis to the good points, whilst also point out some of its flaws. This initial choice depends on many factors such as what are you expectations of the developer, how serious are the perceived flaws, how great are the good points, etc. If the sum of these factors is not positive, the player will trash the game, otherwise he will praise the game.
All games have flaws Lurker King but all games have merits too and Wasteland 2 ones are very, very few what makes the problems even more intolerable. If you fought amazing after amazing combat encounters, did awesome after awesome quests and suddenly found that thing of the boy drowning and only concentrated on that, that would be nitpicking but when you are bored out of your mind and convoluted situations like that are the rule instead of the exception... that feels even worse.
 

undecaf

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
3,517
Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2
Though again, for some weird reason, most people just somehow skip over the examples i wrote above and think that some icons and loading skill use strips are the biggest problem in the game...

Could be that they are such obvious examples. What's to add? And there's noone around to argue for the 'brilliance' of the drowning boy situation et al.

The skill timers are an easy and - for the most part, the way I see it - insignificant pick.

----------------------------------------------------------
The game is troubled and underwhelming by comparison to what it was adverstised to become, and it has the pacing and flow of a sumowrestler belted with satchel charges on a marathon, but I don't think it's as full of shit as it is made out to be. Flawed in several ways, all of which have been pointed out, but not irredeemably so; just underwhelming.
 

4too

Arcane
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
288
Doing That Crazy Hand Jive




(Under) Dressing for success might raise inventory wardrobe management to the heights of fascist fashion!

Have yet to cross over to California, have no evidence if armor rating lower then energy weapon armor threshold rating does not have that 2.2 or more damage multiplier. If this is a false fix, I am disappoint’. :(

Armor level above the energy weapon armor threshold gets the big zap. Panz-ah Arm-ah Ma-an Gets Microwaved In Teh Can-an! :lol:


Allow me to offer out raged logic a possible misdiection. Sci Fi may be more fantastic than fantasy, but can never resist the inconvenient … what if.

Arizona’s Cinderella weapon blossoms into a contender in California. Another possible ‘gotch-ya’ in the skill point resource management mini game.

Much used Sci Fi scissors/paper/rock condition when one tech (armor) is out paced by an innovation OR HAPPY (unhappy) ACCIDENT in another (energy weapons).

If WL2 energy weapons have electrical mechanical waveforms, and photon energy duality, … imagine my hand gesticulations desperately imitating the compound interest of resonance frequencies!

Go ahead wave your hands too!

Quickly consider (still hand waving?)

Energy penetration of armor surface not diminished by difraction, but builds wave form amplitude to a resonance climax.

Microwave boils that egg on the inside and …

(Now clap your hands!)

POP!





Not aware of any in game lore to support resonance peaks.

Might have helped suspension of disbelief , if one didn’t have to ‘brown bag’ all their own intoxicating associations … ponder the morning after, the horror, the horror, of self delusional hangovers! :o






4too
 

hiver

Guest
Could be that they are such obvious examples. What's to add? And there's noone around to argue for the 'brilliance' of the drowning boy situation et al.
The skill timers are an easy and - for the most part, the way I see it - insignificant pick.
Its not that anyone has to add something to it, but atleast acknowledging those examples exist would be nice. Its not like you have much else of good quality to comment on and it is rather obvious, as you say.

Looks as if everyone are somehow afraid to point out any specifics and rather talk in oblique. In generalizations, metaphors and allusions dancing around the bush.
I mean, ive seen several posters expressing their dislike in general terms, or aimed at other things, but most of the stuff i wrote is either never or rarely mentioned. And a lot of times it is mentioned as "the game has a lot of reactivity and a lot of C&C! .... :crickets chirping: "


Ralphie quest was criticized by many, and the idea of it was criticized since the first time Fargo mentioned it, i think way back during kickstarter. That quest is not what i was referring to really. If that was the only such example it woudlnt matter that much. It certainly deserves to be mentioned in any list of faults the game has but its not some kind of primary example. Just one of many. (and i did have several geniuses arguing for it, but only by saying that they dont mind it or that they like it)

But all that other stuff... god... all that other stuff.

I think actually a lot of people do not want to think about it too much, in too many details, because then most of what fun they had would be ruined too badly.


Have yet to cross over to California, have no evidence if armor rating lower then energy weapon armor threshold rating does not have that 2.2 or more damage multiplier. If this is a false fix, I am disappoint’. :(
Armor level above the energy weapon armor threshold gets the big zap. Panz-ah Arm-ah Ma-an Gets Microwaved In Teh Can-an! :lol:

Allow me to offer out raged logic a possible misdiection. Sci Fi may be more fantastic than fantasy, but can never resist the inconvenient … what if.

Arizona’s Cinderella weapon blossoms into a contender in California. Another possible ‘gotch-ya’ in the skill point resource management mini game.
Much used Sci Fi scissors/paper/rock condition when one tech (armor) is out paced by an innovation OR HAPPY (unhappy) ACCIDENT in another (energy weapons).

If WL2 energy weapons have electrical mechanical waveforms, and photon energy duality, … imagine my hand gesticulations desperately imitating the compound interest of resonance frequencies!
Microwave boils that egg on the inside and …
POP!

Not aware of any in game lore to support resonance peaks.
Might have helped suspension of disbelief , if one didn’t have to ‘brown bag’ all their own intoxicating associations … ponder the morning after, the horror, the horror, of self delusional hangovers! :o

4too
:lol:

- snipped a bit -

I know. I considered the same. But it doesnt pan out. I only wish.... i had a brown bag :lol:

Those are energy beam weapons, not microwave weapons. So they should do less damage to the character body because a part of their energy would be spent on piercing the armor, however you cut it or go about it.
And even if they were... microwaves do wonders to stuff filled with water and flesh.

It may make some kind of non-sense that these weapons would somehow make greater damage to enemies with metal armor... for some fantastic reason, but it just doesnt make any sense that they do almost no damage to unprotected flesh.
Besides, there is no different kinds of armor, its all a simple numerical progression, from armor 1, to 2, to 3, to 4 and so on until "power armor" which is just 10. The only other difference is the weight of armors. Nothing else is there.
(and you will just positively love finding power armor in some ditch, under a rock or a random locker)

Arizona energy weapons deal modest to good amounts of damage to any enemy there and in Cali you just get stronger versions that also work great against any enemy. The only lousy ones are the very first laser pistols you get but just because they are the weakest of all.
This unfortunate bad and very extreme effect is reserved only for the player. Enemies cannot use it or abuse it.

There is a difference between normal weapons and energy weapons visible in Arizona. When you fight different robots energy weapons do better damage to them while normal weapons do less, in general.
So... instead of properly designing enemies and armors separately... they just made energy weapons do more damage to any enemy with "armor"?
But even if so... how come the strongest energy weapons you can find in the later game do almost no damage to player characters without any? Why is the difference so big, so extreme? In California it means getting hit once or twice at the most - and being hit dozens of times and surviving.

My energy weapons do work very well against everything. Just even better against robots and cyborgs and ... wolves and honey badgers ? (you can go through LevelUp mines on lvl 1 with energy weapons, melee and enough healing items)


Did they intentionally reduce the damage to non-armor wearing characters just because they didnt want energy weapons to be useful against everything? But everything has some kind of "armor"! What is then this "armor" thing in this game?
Its just doesnt make any sense at all, even a weird wrong one.
The more you think about it the worse it gets.




Anyway... its not really the thing i would concentrate on as definitive problem, i mention it only because it adds to ridiculousness of the whole thing. As with Ralphie quest - its just one of many. (no pun intended)
I haven't even mentioned other problems with combat. Or with skills, or attributes that are often mentioned and how they dont interact with skills at all... or how the trailers for the game blatantly lie about several important features. Or several others that are mentioned by other players.



As far as im concerned the worst parts of the game are those "reactive" moments that companions do and very, very lousy design of locations, their own gameplay and their own inner stories, plots, quests and "C&C". While the overall main plot basically doesnt exist at all.
Evil robots want to kill everyone... ffs...

Basically, if the whole game was on the level of atleast Darwin and Titans Canyon i could call it moderately good despite all those other flaws. Maybe.... looking from this standpoint.
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,290
Location
Ingrija
You find a mined camp in the prison -> use your demolitions skill in every single mine, each one with a time limit (maybe 15 or more!) -> go on and continue playing the game. You get the picture?

Or just throw a grenade. And if you crave every single xp point like I do, well, blame yourself.

There is a big difference. And I didn't even touch the subject of the rewards that both type of skills can provide. With lockpicking you will have a lot of stupid trinkets, wigs and some occasional piece of lore. With kissass you can convince a lot of people and have a turn of events.

If lockpicking rewards aren't good enough for you, ignore those boring chests then :smug:
 

Disgruntled

Savant
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
400
I cant go back on my word and say I didnt enjoy the game, but looking back I do see the faults more clearly.

For me, the acceptable sense of wonder, purpose and achievement fell apart as I hit California. This was the halfway mark but due to the various issues already mentioned itt, I felt like I was slogging through a protracted end game. There needed to be a sense of purpose and weariness traveling through a wastelend. Instead it was not unlike a new zone in an mmo, keep killing the bad guys, keep leveling up skills, do all the quests, open all the loot etc.
The battles never improved enough to hold up the bargain while the impressive amount of C&C ultimately fell flat on characters and situations I did not care much about.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Which has what to do with expressions such as "nitpicking" which means falsely focusing on small irrelevant details and intentionally not talking about any good ones?

But it is nitpicking since a lot of cRPGs (maybe most?) have the same stupid writing or design flaws and receive praise instead of being trashing down. Fallout have mongoloid stuff right at the beginning of the game, but it is a classic. I’m mean, for fuck’s sake, you talk as if W2 was the worst cRPG of all time. This is just as implausible as praising the game as a new classic. At the very least you must recognize that the game have some nice porno-weaponry, right? That the game provides some reactivity, even if is not that great. Divnity earn the fucking RPGOTY and have mongoloid writing all over, but you choose to praise the developers because Larian heard you on the forums. All those criticisms are a smoke screen for our disappointment with the arrogance of Fargo, his false-grandiose promises and the waste of opportunity and money. I’m sympathetic to your rage and I think it is justified, but at least I don’t pretend that is much more than that.

All games have flaws Lurker King but all games have merits too and Wasteland 2 ones are very, very few what makes the problems even more intolerable. If you fought amazing after amazing combat encounters, did awesome after awesome quests and suddenly found that thing of the boy drowning and only concentrated on that, that would be nitpicking but when you are bored out of your mind and convoluted situations like that are the rule instead of the exception... that feels even worse.

Of course, the game have these flaws. What I’m trying to say is that the angry attitude towards the game is not motivated just by the flaws, but also, specially, by Brian Fargo’s car salesman pitch.

The skill timers are an easy and - for the most part, the way I see it - insignificant pick.

They are too slow and omnipresent to be just a small detail.

If lockpicking rewards aren't good enough for you, ignore those boring chests then :smug:

I can’t. I’m a completionist. I had to open every single stupid chest and safe just to read some pieces of lore.

:negative:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hiver

Guest
What can one possibly say to such splurge of blatant idiotic strawman arguments?
How can you be so fucking stupid to think you will just go in and tell me what i am thinking? Why does every idiot do that very same thing? - obvious rhetorical question is obvious.

Fallout... mongoloid? That only makes you a mongoloid of the internet kind. W2 is one of the worst RPGs ever made and i dont talk like that because of some imbecilic motives you invented, but because it is full of stupid shit which i only partially numbered and explained.
I really dont give a flying fuck how that makes you feel or your idiotic notion that you are telepathic.

OS is a far better game, even if its based on epic high fantasy setting, in all features a cRPG has, across the board, including writing. Larian devs do deserve any praise for their approach to backers feedback (out of which i was just a small part) and insane amounts of efforts they put into the game throughout alpha and especially beta stages. But we are not talking about it or Fallouts here.

I wouldnt give a fuck about Fargo or his PR and other shit - if the game was good.

porno weaponry? wtf?

just ...gtfo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,398
But it is nitpicking since a lot of cRPGs (maybe most?) have the same stupid writing or design flaws.
No, unless you consider Bethesda as a RPG developer.

Fallout have mongoloid stuff right at the beginning of the game, but it is a classic. I’m mean, for fuck’s sake, you talk as if W2 was the worst cRPG of all time.
Worst RPG of all time? No... there is Lionheart, Fallout Brotherhood of Steel and other gems that are tough to beat but this argument is kinda strange "Well, Wasteland 2 isn't as terrible as the worst crap out there so it is good, right?" Well it isn't the worst piece of crap out there but if someone said to me "DeepOcen you aren't the ugliest man on face of Earth. " I would hardly think that as a compliment.

Of course, the game have these flaws. What I’m trying to say is that the angry attitude towards the game is not motivated just by the flaws, but also, specially, by Brian Fargo’s car salesman pitch.
Man, a few days ago when I gave up, I remember very well of having played a really shitty game. If it was made by some ruskie shovelware factory I wouldn't feel much happy playing it either. Fargo's car salesman pitch just made things worse but if the game had some big and consistent redeemable quality, my will to play would have survived. Man, I didn't manage to finish Wasteland 2 and on a really small genre, only a few RPGs managed that feat.

Anyway, you were answering Hiver but I got interested because many times people have the custom of psychologizing things and divining other people toughts, "You don't hate Wasteland 2, you hate Fargo!". If Wasteland 2 was made by some unknown ruskie shovelware factory (and some parts of it sure looks like it was.) I would be impressed by its size and how much they managed to accomplish but I would still think the game stinked and I would have abandoned half way through.
 

hiver

Guest
That aint nothing but just more of strawmans and usual ad hominem fallacies. Nothing but ignore worthy crap.

Thats how it starts. The same people like him are a big part of the reason why w2 turned out as it did, though im not sure if there would be any big difference if all of us were shouting at inXile same or similar stuff i or some others were saying.

You get proclaimed to be teh enemy of progress and modern times and enemy of the developers and a hater - and the company just finds a different audience. Weve been there already, many times.
I bet at least half of the posters who ended up praising the game and saying how awesome it was didnt even get to California at the time, not to mention trying to explore what are those "other paths" through the game and its false "C&C".
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,601
Location
The Desert Wasteland
Perhaps a more constructive way to evaluate Wasteland 2 is to compare and contrast:

D:OS
Dragonfall
WL 2

Larian vs. Harebrained Schemes vs. inExile.

They're all kickstarter games, so what worked and what didn't?

What were the best things about those games, and what were the worst? Why did you like one more than another? What essential features were missing or screwed up? What were the greatest strengths and weaknesses of these games as far as immersion? Where did you see innovation? Where did you see a good feature-set being intelligently carried over from other games?

Then ultimately, who deserves praise and who deserves criticism, and why?

Was it the management, writers, programmers, designers, artists, community, fans, etc?
 
Last edited:

hiver

Guest
Man... i already wrote a few pages concentrating on specific features, quests, sub quests, reactivity and other things in the game - and i get "oh you are emotional and a hater" vomit.
What more constructive way do you want then what i already provided - which goes far beyond anything anyone else has written about it?

Why dont you do it?
Its not like i care and really have to convince every single poster out there.

And you think im going to write a dissertation about three whole games? For what?
More retards screaming "nah! nah! naaah! I liked it!!!" and "i hated that other stuff you say it was gooood!!!" as if its a vote for emotional engagement?

I didnt play Shadowrun, btw. Will try it out sometime in the future.


Just as an example DOS undeniably has better art design then W2. You may not like High fantasy but only a blind cretin cannot see the difference between the beauty of DOS and unity derivative W2. What we have seen from PoE and future Torment is comparable in that regard.
Compare the glory of OS evolved TB combat with simplistic fake shit W2 has. Its no contest. The smaller side quests are all done way better and have more emotional effect on players then the cheap soap opera schlock of w2 and its general nonsense.
Even the main plot of OS epic high fantasy, being cliche that it is and being practically bare bones stuff in both games, is better then retarded cliche of evil robots want to kill everyone of W2.

Why even argue about it?

There is no arguing about it possible based on objective merits. It can only be a screaming match where who shouts more and who posts the last post wins - and i have more then enough of that around here and other forums thank you.

The topic of this thread is simple enough and should be adhered to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,038
Well, at least it’s one of the most glaring and obvious failures that you notice right at the beginning, in the first hours playing the game. The things you said are a compilation of problems, which you realize afterwards. About VD, this was surprising since one of the many merits of AoD is the consistent and systematic elimination of filler content.
I dislike filler but am I supposed to criticize games that have design elements I dislike? I criticize elements that are poorly done (and I did). I can't stand RTwP and consider it an abomination but I didn't complain about it when I reviewed MotB either.
 

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,398
Didn't play D:OS, unfortunately, but DragonFall and Wasteland 2?

Dragonfall:

Pros:
How they made great combat encounters out of its simplistic combat mechanics (wasteland 2 team would learn alot from those guys).
Decent writing,I had some problems with the plot, especially as it is a bit on the cliche side but it was nowhere as bad as Wasteland 2 on this department.
Nice 2d graphics with some good art design.
Nice setting.

Cons:
C&C is pretty Biowarean.
Needs some more character building options.
Guns needed to be a bit more unique.
Lacks some more expansive level design.

Conclusion: You spend most of your time killing people and killing people is surprisingly fun on this game, it doesn't waste your time with bullshit and there is some effort on making some coherent plot. Classic material? No (maybe with Hong Kong). Good enough RPG even if a bit on the RPG lite category? Yes. Nothing revolutionary but I had great fun with it (what automaticaly makes it better than Wasteland 2).

Wasteland 2:

Pros:
Size?
C&C, well Wasteland 2 has alot of C&C if you compares it to Dragonfall but its "C&C" is quite convoluted, random and many times forced you on purpose on this "no one win scenarios". The npo win scenarios would be okay if they weren't so many times contrived (the prison), there is a ton of random, convoluted or quite pointless "reactivity" like the Ralphy rescue quest. There are a few moments like the Canyon of Titan and the nuke situation where the game grows but they are rare and not enough to kill the boredom.
Skill usage (plenty of opportunities here but I was swimming so much on skill points that skill usage just became a no brainer without mentioning that many are just pointless waste of time like those safes everywhere)

Cons:
Main plot is garbage. ( I don't give a fuck for the rangers or who the fuck Ace was and those radio towers even less. There is no threat and you don't feel any pressure to move foward, besides killing one ranger and some acts of sabotage, you don't feel invested on what you are doing at all. The game assumes you gonna emphatize with the rangers automaticaly and fon't give you any real reason for you to do so. )

Combat is boring. (I can't wait to fight the same fights over and over and over and over until falling sleeping. The combat encounters on this game... )

Loot is boring. ( Armor is useless and if you choose any other gun that isn't assault rifles, you are really gimping yourself and adding frustration for having a highly useless character, especially if you commit the mistake of selecting Supreme Jerk!. Anyway, the guns progress on damage and armor on protection but enemies progress on life and armor penetration making "finding" new guns and armor just a requirement to defeat the enemy HP bloat and far from something exciting.) You can buy M16s for cheap on Ranger citadel and there you are... kill all the Arizona with it as a better rifle will only appear on California ( some rifles are just reskins of others like the AK - 47 that is mostly a reskin of the M 16 and many are highly useless.)

Guns are way too similar... SMGs are just crappy assault rifles, machineguns are crappy assault rifles, sniper rifles are crappy assault rifles, shotguns are finaly different but they unfortunately suffer alot from highly armored enemies, melee... well it is a joke.

You choose Supreme Jerk! and hey! HP bloat for you... hope you enjoy almost empting an assault rifle clip to kill a late game enemy and anything less is easy mode.

Random loot = random boring loot.

Areas are highly disconnected from each other and all your decisions have "consequences" confined on that area and many times like on the Canyon of the Titan, you can decide how the area ends but many choices involve: saving it/choosing what faction rules with only consequences on the end slides or the destruction of the whole place turning it on a combat zone. It is a step up from biowarean choices but it is a really timid one and not enough to compensate for the other weak parts of the game. Ag center was destroyed, right? You have to deal with alot of people hungry? Nope! Highpool destroyed? Do the rangers have to deal with refugees? Nope!

Conclusion:This game plays like a turn based NWN 2 OC with an even crappier story and just a bit more "reactivity" and alot of "reactivity" is pointless, contrived stuff (like people dying on the prison for... reasons.). I hope InXile releases a MotB to save their asses because they are sure needing.
 

Volrath

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 21, 2007
Messages
4,299
I dislike filler but am I supposed to criticize games that have design elements I dislike? I criticize elements that are poorly done (and I did). I can't stand RTwP and consider it an abomination but I didn't complain about it when I reviewed MotB either.
Then why the fuck is PoE your most anticipated Kickstarter game?
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom