Wasteland Early Personal Reviews/Impressions

[Phage]

Since WL2 has its own forum, we may as well play along with the experiment and get out of the megathread.

What are your personal reviews and impressions so far? I've got 14 hours in on Steam and am feeling pretty mixed. I obviously find the game compelling enough to have played it this long. I understand that I'm only about 25% through the game, but I feel that 14 hours of my life is enough time spent to make an initial assessment of it.

Sure, the writing is alright. The atmosphere is fine. There's a surprising amount of reactivity all things considered. Combat is passable, and seems to be getting more involved as time goes on. Areas are large with lots and nooks and crannies.... But, still, something just feels kind of off.

Here's a list of whining:

- Pointless systems in place that only serve to waste time (Water being the most obvious offender)
- In fact, the game really likes to waste time, period. Skills take what i'm guessing is 6 seconds to go off, and combined with the sheer ass-rapingly high number of booby traps, you will spend a lot of time watching icons fill up.
- Tying into time being wasted, too much combat per area. Seriously, you can't go more than 1-2 screens without another lengthy battle. Almost no way to peacefully avoid combat beyond the gimmicky animal whisper skill - which often doesn't really work since other animals will aggro you will you try to whisper one. I can't even imagine how many (extremely similar) encounters I would have had to slough through without Deth's outdoorsman skill.
- Weak dialogue system. Your selections rarely have variance beyond spamming the keywords to get new keywords, and when there are actual choices it's often difficult to even realize you're making one.
- NPCs randomly flip the fuck out. Even with 6 leadership it happens a lot. Really silly mechanic.
- Weapons jam frequently despite having a 3-5% chance to do so. Some people on other forums claim this is caused by low luck attribute. Unfortunately this isn't explained anywhere in the game.
- Enemies seem untuned balance wise. RSM Heavy units and the infamous rabbits in particular randomly have obscene amounts of AP, while other enemies won't have nearly enough to be a threat.
- Same battle song over and over. I actually like the song, but when you hear it for more than half of your playtime it gets on your nerves.

Characterization LOOKS decent at first until you realize what you're actually dealing with.

- Huge skill bloat. So many skills that should have been condensed. Why are Safe Cracking, Lock Picking, Explosives Disarming and Alarm Disabling all separate skills (should have been 2 or 3 imo)? Hell, throw Computer Science in there since all it really does is unlocks electronic safes, aside from a few very rare computer interactions. Why are surgeon/field medic separate? Is the game serious implying that someone who can perform surgery can't apply a first aid kit? Why bother with 3 different speech skills? Why not just have Persuasion / Intimidation? The only explanation I can come up with for the skill bloat was to counteract the fact you'd have 4 Custom Rangers + 3 companions. This could have been easily curbed by cutting down on the number of skill points handed out.

- Attributes are pretty janky. You can increase pips in intelligence with literally zero benefit. Charisma does actual nothing other than giving it to your leader skill user to increase the radius. (Before you cite experience gain, considering the game has a level cap and attribute points come incredibly slowly, it seems much better to have a stronger character base than to get a few more skill points)

- No traits/perks/etc.

- I have yet to have anything in game change due to gender/race/creed/size/smoking preference. Not a huge offense, but it's always a nice touch to have a small consequence, or even for an NPC to react differently based on that sort of thing.


Anyways, my final verdict is that the game is alright but has a lot of fundamental core problems. I find it strange these flaws are present considering the combined experience of the team here. Many of WL2's flaws weren't present in past games like Fallout. On the flip side, there should have been hindsight in regard to prior faults like Fallout 1's overabundance of useless skills and stats like Charisma.

If you take a look at the AMA inXile did on Reddit, and read staff comments on forums, you'll notice that they're very clearly communicating a desire to patch the game further. I wouldn't be surprised if in 6 months the game addresses some of these flaws. They've also not ruled out the possibility of DLC/expansions despite the red boots gag.

So.. having said that,

My personal conclusion is that it's worth it to just wait and see. Unless you're desperately stark raving mad for some cRPG action, the game will probably be a lot better later. I know that personally I have a massive backlog of stuff to play though until things are tightened up a bit.

 

[Infinitron]

It has lots of skills because Wasteland 1 had lots of skills (even more, in fact). I'm utterly puzzled by the fact that people keep bringing this up.

 

[StaticSpine]

My early impression is - I dislike AG center. I tried to there first with my previous shitty party, didn't like it much. Re-rolled the party, completed Highpool, which was rather good and now came to AG center once again. Now it seems even less sympathetic.

 

[Kem0sabe]

It has lots of skills because Wasteland 1 had lots of skills (even more, in fact). I'm utterly puzzled by the fact that people keep bringing this up.

Because Wasteland 2 is so much like Wasteland 1, right?

Seriously, using "Wasteland 1 had lots of skills" as justification for Wasteland 2 having ridiculous and useless skill bloat is a poor argument.

 

[Zetor]

I'll repeat my early impressions from the ex-megathread with a few updates. At this point I'm halfway through Rail Nomad Camp; I finished AGCenter and Highpool (what was left of it) as well as a few minor random encounters.

So far the game is ok... not really blown away, but it's not terrible either. Impressions:

• The overall atmosphere and the text is pretty close to the original WL; I also like all the nostalgic references to it. Graphics/sounds/UI/etc are fine, if a bit janky. Overall plot is about as subtle as a sledgehammer, but it's still better than e.g. DivOS.
• Combat is booooring and formulaic (moreso than vanilla SRR, which isn't a high bar to clear). Maybe this'll change with humanoid enemies and cover? To be fair, it's much less boring than WL1's combat (har)
• Does dialogue design progress beyond 'exhaust all options (maybe hitting the hard/smart/kiss ass options when they come up) and occasionally choose the I ACCEPT THIS QUEST option'? Right now "underwhelming" would be an euphemism.
• All the safe / crate / buried loot feels random, and not particularly fitting (why am I finding sniper rifles and hand mirrors buried in one of the ag center fields?). Kinda like a less interesting DivOS. I would've preferred much fewer lootboxes with more significant / thematic loot. Looting random vendor crap from enemies is OK, though it's a bit MMOy. Toasters are fine (they're more of a scavenger hunt side activity).

 

[Infinitron]

It has lots of skills because Wasteland 1 had lots of skills (even more, in fact). I'm utterly puzzled by the fact that people keep bringing this up.

Because Wasteland 2 is so much like Wasteland 1, right?

Seriously, using "Wasteland 1 had lots of skills" as justification for Wasteland 2 having ridiculous and useless skill bloat is a poor argument.

I don't think it's a poor argument at all. And I also think there are lots of people who think having all those skills is kind of cool and makes characters feel more personalized.

(btw, 5 skills - too few, 30 skills - too many, I guess that means there's a canonical number of skills every RPG should have?)

 

[Kem0sabe]

It has lots of skills because Wasteland 1 had lots of skills (even more, in fact). I'm utterly puzzled by the fact that people keep bringing this up.

Because Wasteland 2 is so much like Wasteland 1, right?

Seriously, using "Wasteland 1 had lots of skills" as justification for Wasteland 2 having ridiculous and useless skill bloat is a poor argument.

I don't think it's a poor argument at all. And I also think there are lots of people who think having all those skills is kind of cool and makes characters feel more personalized.

(btw, 5 skills - too few, 30 skills - too many, I guess that means there's a canonical number of skills every RPG should have?)

Why have 3 different lock picking skills and not just have one? I have to have 3 different characters leveling up 3 different skills just to open a safe or lockbox.

Having complexity for sake of complexity with no added gameplay benefits just feels like wrong decision. Because with the amount of skill checks in game (massive), its becoming very tedious to spend half of my gameplay time clicking hotbar.


Edit:

Repost my impressions from main thread:

Some thoughts going from the beta to release arizona.

Technical:

1. Game was running fine in beta, then performance wasnt so great in release, especially in more crowed areas like Ranger HQ. Solution was to force directx9 on the game shortcut, now it runs smoothly;
2. Motion blur on an isometric 3D rpg... why? i truly want to know why the hell is that even an option?;
3. No crashes, its remarkably stable for an unpatched release version, great job;
4. Still cant use custom portraits because the game seems to have a problem recognizing custom characters in the windows user path name, like for example C:\Users\João\Documents\My Games\Wasteland 2 only gives me question marks instead of portraits, while C:\Users\Joao\Documents\My Games\Wasteland 2 works fine. This is a serious issue thats been around a while since beta and still hasn't been fixed for international users.

Gameplay:

1. There is still a stupid amount of skill bloat, having 3 skills to unlock stuff alone is ridiculous, also the amount of skill checks during gameplay gets to a point where your clicking the hotbar and between characters every few feet. This either should have been contextual or have more condensed number of skills;
2. Speaking of skill bloat, there are still too many skill points awarded during gameplay, your characters level way too damn fast making most encounters trivial;
3. Difficulty, HP bloat is not the way to balance difficulty settings;
4. Combat, i find myself not using the headshot feature, as often it doesnt give me any damage bonus for the added AP cost. Ranged weapons still reign supreme over melee, and not having skill checks for grenades and rocket launchers makes things even easier;
5. I'm enjoying the writing more this time around, as well as some of the characters i didnt took during the beta, like ralphy and schlomo;
6. Map design was terrible at the start but started improving as zones progress, hitting a nice balance between corridors and less linear level design at Titan canyon, but still too many choke points and "gates";
7. Ammunition is too readily available, the only draw back to having infinite ammo is weight, even so its never a problem, this should have been balanced better, allowing for alternate strategies like melee;
8. Too easy to make money, just the crap alone by selling to ranger HQ will make you fortune, unbalancing the game economy;

 

[Phage]

It has lots of skills because Wasteland 1 had lots of skills (even more, in fact). I'm utterly puzzled by the fact that people keep bringing this up.

Because Wasteland 2 is so much like Wasteland 1, right?

Seriously, using "Wasteland 1 had lots of skills" as justification for Wasteland 2 having ridiculous and useless skill bloat is a poor argument.

I don't think it's a poor argument at all. And I also think there are lots of people who think having all those skills is kind of cool and makes characters feel more personalized.

(btw, 5 skills - too few, 30 skills - too many, I guess that means there's a canonical number of skills every RPG should have?)

I don't think you're quite understanding the core of the complaint - the skills don't do nearly enough differently to feel unique. Just because three of my rangers have different negotiation skills doesn't make them feel any more personalized - it just changes which one I have highlighted when I need to click on the appropriate shape every 10th dialogue conversation.

The skill system actually homogenizes parties if you want to play efficiently. I guarantee you that the vast majority of players who want to succeed simply spread out the skills so each character does 2-4 really well (depending on INT) and the companions become masters of the remainder. Funnily enough, your squad, if built even remotely well (which is pretty simple to pull off) ends up becoming capable of solving nearly every skill check the game throws at it unless you're under leveled. I've had very few checks that I couldn't solve (I could go back and solve them if I really wanted to actually) and I've cleared a significant portion of Arizona

After dwelling on it, since the skills don't directly improve your player or effect combat (barring the weapon skills obviously), it actually doesn't matter at all who is given what skill with only two known caveats (high Cha gets Leader and high Int gets surgeon). Aside from those two (and perhaps field medic), you could literally just swap the skills between party members with no impact on your experience.

 

[Weirdstuffinspace]

Really enjoying the game. Glad I backed this.



That said:

when dragging ammo to your gun in inventory: load the gun

all hud elements rotatable and usable on all 4 sides of the screen.

optional doubling of the conversation window. It is far too small now.

Also please give the option for text to appear instantly and/or smoothly scroll up so it shows the whole text like a block, and not on a row by row basis. Right now because of the cramped window and letters appearing, while it's also scrolling down one row at a time, it feels like a jumbled mess. This game has a lot of text and I'd like to read it calmly and right now every conversation is like a slotmachine flipping out. Smooth transitions please.

toggle outline around characters or a baldurs gate style circle as an option. Could be colorcoded corresponding to character portrait outline. Make it easier to see who's who, because i feel the rangers sometimes really blend into the background when zoomed out high.

speaking of which:

Make zoom optional to keep the same angle on the party. I understand top down view gives a better tactical view but I'd really like to keep the same angle just higher up.

might be I overlooked this but i'd like the option to remove dialogue boxes showing it's there because of your speech skill.

Using spare action points for aimed shots.

Ability to grab/strangle/slit throat/slit throat silently/use as human shield/knock weapon from hands/etc...

would love a stealth mechanic.



Now for your next game and kickstarter:

the third wasteland a non derp space opera game in cooperation with peter f hamilton/stephen donaldson/asimov's corpse/some other good sf writer. Use their legions of fans to fund the game. profit!!! Then make a hardcore isometric tactical storyfag space rpg. keywords: jagged alliance 2/stasis/hexes

 

[Toll]

How do you patch out fundamental design flaws?

Bottom line is, this game is Alright, but far from a pillar of gaming excellence. It has too many design flaws holding it back.
For example: Why, given the pedigree of developers and supposed community interaction are there even 'Dump Stats' in the game.
They should have been identified in the design phase. They should have printed out the character build screens, accompanied it with a modified design document that details the stats/skills and given them to experienced Min/Max roleplayers (and real roleplayers).

The Min/Maxers would have quickly identified dump stats. Whilst the real roleplayers would have built interesting characters. Take those interesting characters and find ways to use their skills out of combat that isn't an 'open a container for loot' application. This is well before any programming is even done (except engine stuff).

Repeat that a few times to the point where you don't have any real 'dump stats', each stat -from a min/max perspective should be a must have, or a must-not for dumping.

Seriously a heavy combat character that dumps a stat called 'Coordination'? Have they not watched an army rifelman go through training, kinda need coordination.

edit: Oh, the min/maxers would have also showed that pretty much every skill in the game can be built to a very useable value with 4 characters.

For example: My current team has 2 combat specialists (they have higher skills in weapons then the other 2). A medic and a Skilled up super-tinker.
Between the Killed up dude and the Medic, most of the 'non combat' skills are covered. The remainder go into the spare points for my 2 combat people.
The medic is an excellent pistol user and the skilled up dude excellent with Shotgun.
1 Combat dude is superb with rifles an the other is good at rifles and good at subbies. Considering the range of subbies, the chance to hit is often high even with a low amount of skill points. Same with the Shotgun and Pistol.
I don't even have an optimal attrib spread.

So really, there is no real choice in character creation. Or as it should be viewed:
Your team as a whole should be considered 1 character.
As it turns out that 'character' has a very limited range of choice. It kind of boils down to having Kiss Ass or Hardass or the other one.
Also as people pointed out, the remainder can be picked up generally by NPC's.

So I think they stuffed up and didn't view the Player 4 man Team as a single 'character' and the build choices of that 'character'. Instead they focused on the individual rangers and thought, 'Hay Ranger 1 is different to Ranger 2, so that sorts out build choices, hooray'.

 

[Phage]

It's true that some of the deepest faults likely won't get patched out. Still, there are a lot of little things that could be worked on to make the overall package more appealing. If we do get an expansion or major DLC, perhaps a complete overhaul of core mechanics could come about.

 

[Toll]

Wasteland 2: To Die For.
- Combat made interesting DLC.

 

[Volourn]

"Why, given the pedigree of developers and supposed community interaction are there even 'Dump Stats' in the game."

FUCK OFF, SAWYER.


P.S. There's lots of choice in building characters. I just look at other people's builds to know this.

R00fles!

 

[Toll]

But how do those individual character choices change the overall Team and what it can do?

 

[Phage]

Don't even bother arguing with Volourn. It's a well known troll that has acted this way for over a decade.

But yeah, every remotely effective team is essentially composed of the same basic things. Reminds me of a lategame Bethesda game (New Vegas as well) character - good at everything in the game. Difference is that at least in the bethesda games your character has some variation from others early game. In Wasteland 2, your squad is good at everything at all points in time of the game unless you handicap yourself.

 

[Volourn]

Eh. This is pretty much true in every game ever played with multiple characters. This isn't new and original. Still, people can make their characters didfferent.

While 'dump' stats aren't greatest ever and should try to make them all useful, the existence of them doesn't make the game horrible. Also, one's person's 'dump stat' is another one's 'dream stat'. *shrug*

Don't mind Phaque, I don't even know about him but he seems to know a lot about me. That's rather creepy.

 

[Toll]

This game is certainly no horrible. It just falls short of being exceptional. The flaws I point out are, imo, part of what makes it fall short and with a bit more foresight in conception may have brought the game into that exceptional standing. I admit, hindsight is very easy, however I thought that was the point of their open community development, to point out dump stats, etc and fix them.

 

[DosBuster]

For those wondering, dialogue does change, the ass dialogues might not always go well, and may end up.. causing unexpected things to happen. Also, saying the wrong thing caused the wrong thing to happen at times for me.

With this game, the more you play, the more complex it becomes. Arizona is very straightforward and normal compared to California.

Combat gets better in California, mainly in the way that you need to think more tactically.

 

[RK47]

 

[Volourn]

I'm usually one of the last people to make fun of someone's spelling/grammar but HOLY SHIT was that hard to digest into meaningfulness.

 

[Cyberarmy]

I'm usually one of the last people to make fun of someone's spelling/grammar but HOLY SHIT was that hard to digest into meaningfulness.

I hope assume he did it on purpose.

 

[Volrath]

I think Wasteland 2 is the very definition of good for what it is.

 

[Darth Roxor]

I think Wasteland 2 is the very definition of good for what it is.

Having played it for a longer while now, yeah, definitely this.

I find it hard to explain - some parts of the game are so crap/badly designed they make me rage out loud, so far only a very small handful of things I would call great, and in general the game is just "eh, kinda cool I guess"... but for some reason I can't stop playing.

 

[Volourn]

WL2 is awesome. Not perfect. there are things that can be improved. But, awesome. And, a TRUE hardcore oldskool RPG. Unlike the FAKE ones that peopel pretend are but really aren't. Of course if you hate the WL and FOs it ain't for you.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Updated my impressions:

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,4787.0.html

 

[fizzelopeguss]

I feel it's an uglier fallout tactics, which is fine as I enjoyed that game a lot.

A Solid base for a spectacular third game. Hopefully they'll get the opportunity.