Game News inXile reveal Wasteland 3's party system

[Mustawd]

Hmm, who are you quoting? I never said that.

 

[Fairfax]

It's why Obsidian gave up on Figstarting Tyranny.

Tyranny is a Paradox title you fool. Obsidian is merely the developer.

Paradox only signed with Obsidian in mid-2015. Back in 2014, Feargus was talking about crowdfunding it, but eventually decided not to.

 

[Mustawd]

Why am I quoting something that Mustawd never said?

It is a mystery.

 

[l3loodAngel]

There are still plenty of games where you can make a party. You could "create" your companions in POE. Also Serpent in the Stagland, Legend of Grimrock and Lord of Xulima. Its just most people prefer well written companions to silent dummies just accept that.

Have you noticed that, besides Grimrock, all these games were Kickstarter projects?

The whole point of kickstarting old-school RPGs was to get things that are not being done anymore, that wouldn't get funding from publishers. "I'll revive a old-school RPG from 1988, with isometric graphics, full party creation, exclusive for PC." - That's something no publisher would back in 2012, and was aimed at a niche.

A valid concern, but you are missing the point. The question should be: "Does it make the game better?". I would take Gannayev-of-Dreams above all cartboard cut outs in the blink of an eye. So if the full party creation makes the game better than they should go with it, otherwise just scrap it. Being just different doesnt make stuff better...

About KS I had different expectations from it. Isometric games, with chalenging combat, good stories, interesting and fun systems. No emphasis on romances and etc. I never thought that full party creation increases my pleasure. I also believe that it was one of the main reasons why IWD series sucked ass.

 

[GloomFrost]

Its just most people prefer well written companions to silent dummies just accept that.

Because most people are stupid emotional wankers that need their ego validated in everything they do, even by such meaningless concept as npc in a computer game. If people want well written characters they should read some fucking books.

When I play a game and create my party, I can give them all of the character and personality I want. I usually don't go beyond the basic roles they will play. There will be somebody who leads the party, various forms of soldiers, a wise mage to cast some spells and somebody who can heal my party. Its a game, if the mechanics are interesting then they don't need stupid backstories. Do you give names to your pawns in chess?

But from all of the games that had a strong focus on companions, their characters, backstories and romances, I learned that it is used to hide the fact that the game is shallow and boring when it comes to mechanics so the developers drown you in the incessant character drama.

Fuck, I get more attached to my dudes in turn based strategy games than in modern cRPGs.

Let me tell you a secret but promise not to tell anyone. A good game can have memorable, well written characters as well as good mechanics and challenging combat. As for "read some fucking books" well that is one of the reasons why Skyrim or F3 sell so well while the genre of point n click adventures hardly exists anymore. Clearly if its a video game no good writing allowed.

 

[felipepepe]

A valid concern, but you are missing the point. The question should be: "Does it make the game better?". I would take first-person graphics above all isometric games in the blink of an eye. So if the FPS combat makes the game better than they should go with it, otherwise just scrap it. Being just different doesnt make stuff better...

^That's how it was back in the Fallout 3 days. And you can apply it to anything, because "better" is subjective.

Point is, people have different tastes, and a game can't possibly please everyone - especially not with a crowd-funding budget. Most RPGs nowadays have companions, a rare few have full party creation. I don't think EVERY GAME needs full party creation, so why the fuck people want to shove BioWare companions over every goddamn game? It's just egoism, "every game should pander to my tastes".

And you know, most players really think quest compasses make games better. That real-time is better than turn-based. And so on... this is a road to ruin and boredom, that we already walked in the 00's.

 

[AArmanFV]

I think that the problem here to some guys should be the fact that Wasteland is a frachise that in it's 2 released games has full-party creation, maybe having companions in "another" game without the Wasteland tredemark in it's title... maybe... you took the Fallout 3 example, the franchise historically was isometric and turn-based, I think you can bitch arround about some changes when you are talking about changes on a specific game of a franchise, just because it could be some kind of "treason" for the fans who are fans since the beginning.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Let me tell you a secret but promise not to tell anyone. A good game can have memorable, well written characters as well as good mechanics and challenging combat.

Perhaps you'd like to list those games, just so we see how many we have.

Also, that was not the point. The point is that a game with party creation will play differently than a game with depressed orphan homosexuals from dreams following you around. It's just how it is, the focus of each is different. And some people prefer the style of the former and don't really give a shit that most people don't.

And most people think Bioware and Bethesda games are "well written". So I hope you don't mind if I don't really give any importance to what "most people think".

 

[DeepOcean]

Companions are okay but Wasteland 1 and 2 were games with full party creation, we aren't talking BGs or Ultimas here, the feeling I have is that the true motive behind this decision is that they are trying to do the same BS Obsidian did with Tyranny, reduce the party size to four people because casual shit players supposedly feel oppressed with so much people in the party. At this rate, all RPGs will soon have only two party members controlled by the AI because for party members is still too opressive for casual shit players, why don't remove this boring combat and do twin stick shooters with stats instead with cover mechanics and romanceable homosexual repressed teenagers, "Hey, it is isometric right guys? This is all traditional RPGs are about right?"

When videogame developers will accept that dumbing their games down won't make them sell popamole numbers? You don't have a 100 million dollars marketing budget and don't have money for popamol production values, dumb down won't work for you.

 

[l3loodAngel]

A valid concern, but you are missing the point. The question should be: "Does it make the game better?". I would take first-person graphics above all isometric games in the blink of an eye. So if the FPS combat makes the game better than they should go with it, otherwise just scrap it. Being just different doesnt make stuff better...

^That's how it was back in the Fallout 3 days. And you can apply it to anything, because "better" is subjective.

Point is, people have different tastes, and a game can't possibly please everyone - especially not with a crowd-funding budget. Most RPGs nowadays have companions, a rare few have full party creation. I don't think EVERY GAME needs full party creation, so why the fuck people want to shove BioWare companions over every goddamn game? It's just egoism, "every game should pander to my tastes".

Better is not subjective. It may depend on your target audience, but that's about it. It's a complete strawman, because FO3 case it was dumbing every aspect of the game down, while here adding companions does not dumb down any aspects. It's a basic preference. Not creating a full party does not mean you will turn game into popamole. I am not even sure what you are trying to say.

Again I doubt that they are trying to shove Bioware companions. It's another strawman. Most of games in codex top RPG's had talking companions. Surprise, surpise... My point was if the overal game get's improved without losing anything of value then they should proceed. It's the case here.

In POE people had party a creation and most of it ended up with 4 cypher bullshit. Another thing is that in order to have a meaningful full party creation you have to have top notch combat and character systems along with encounters and hard difficulty. This was not the case in WL2, thus it is meaningless to keep it. Full party creation optimum is only meaningful if the game supports it difficulty and content wise, otherwise its just another gimmick.

 

[felipepepe]

Better is not subjective. It may depend on your target audience, but that's about it.

subjective

[suh b-jek-tiv]
adjective
1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).
2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.

Seriously bro, try reading what you're typing. This is embarrassing.

All the rest you're saying is equally bullshit. YOU think Fallout 3 was dumbing down, the vast majority of gamers think it was AWESHUM. If you think those people are idiots, congratulaions - that's exactly how you look right now. Also, everything costs resources & development time. People writing companions could be writing quests. Money spent voicing companions could be spent hiring combat designers or enhancing the AI, and so on.

 

[Grunker]

quality is subjective

et tu, felipe?

edit: for the record I pretty much agree with the rest of what you're saying, but this "everything is relative" stupidity is best saved for SJW islam-apologists and people who don't like getting their nostalgia for shitty 90s cartoons challenged

 

[l3loodAngel]

Better is not subjective. It may depend on your target audience, but that's about it.

subjective

[suh b-jek-tiv]
adjective
1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).
2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.

Seriously bro, try reading what you're typing. This is embarrassing.

All the rest you're saying is equally bullshit. YOU think Fallout 3 was dumbing down, the vast majority of gamers think it was AWESHUM. If you think those people are idiots, congratulaions - that's exactly how you look right now. Also, everything costs resources & development time. People writing companions could be writing quests. Money spent voicing companions could be spent hiring combat designers or enhancing the AI, and so on.

OK. Quality is subjective... So you would take a new Kia instead of new Audi or Mercedess? Because quality is subjective? Maybe you should think before typing. I don't care about majority here, since they do like FO3. However, I do believe that at least some thinking old school individuals will see no diffrence.

Quests for companions and interactions with them can only happen if they are written and not cardboard cut outs. Period. That adds some flavour. Maybe a double agent or someone with interesting back story. Do they need to be voiced? Fuck no. Will the resources taken from writting few companions put into combat design will yield better results? Fuck No. Writting and combat design is mostly about talent.

Another thing here that you don't need many combat designers. You need few good one who understand how stuff works. Few rules for starters:
1. Don't have convoluted, meaningles or singnificantly overlaping (in the sence of derived statistics) attribute system.
2. Have some real C&C with skill utilization and optimization. Meaning that if you didn't put points in traps you can't fucking disarm them.
3. Use 1-100 or more system instead of 1-10. Because it alows player customization and flexibility that otherwise would be lost. In FO example you could increase small guns in the beginning and it would make your character better in the beginning better, without making it too powerfull in the end. But in the end game you could increase to 150 or more, or you could leave it there and focus on ther skills, but it would still be useful. That way if you know what you are doing can have a good time from beginning to the end. You can min-max and make optimal builds for exploring more of the game, or being combat beast and etc.

 

[felipepepe]

Quality =/= Better.

These are two very different concepts. A Ferrari is a high QUALITY car, but even a goddamn Beetle or Lada are BETTER if you need to drive through a bumpy dirt road.

Planescape: Torment companions are of the highest QUALITY, but I don't think Wizardry, Diablo or System Shock 2 would be BETTER games by simply adding Morte. That's bullshit.

 

[Darkzone]

Quality =/= Better.
These are two very different concepts. A Ferrari is a high QUALITY car, but even a goddamn Beetle or Lada are BETTER if you need to drive through a bumpy dirt road.
Planescape: Torment companions are of the highest QUALITY, but I don't think Wizardry, Diablo or System Shock 2 would be BETTER games by simply adding Morte. That's bullshit.

This statement is in my opinion correct, but..
In my opinion there are attributes that are objective and there are also subjective (here about quallity and perception of what is better) attributes. And even under the subjective attributes there are different distributions (and not only gauss) of opinions about them ( i think that is also your department ).

 

[naossano]

Mandatory occasionnal reminder that party creation won"t be removed in WL3...

 

[l3loodAngel]

Quality =/= Better.

These are two very different concepts. A Ferrari is a high QUALITY car, but even a goddamn Beetle or Lada are BETTER if you need to drive through a bumpy dirt road.

Planescape: Torment companions are of the highest QUALITY, but I don't think Wizardry, Diablo or System Shock 2 would be BETTER games by simply adding Morte. That's bullshit.

Quality =/= utility. For offroad compare lada with Subaru or hummer H1.

Diablo is a twitch (reflex based game) popamole, therefore adding stuff is pointless. You would gain by removing stuff until the only thing left would be Yes button. Now the right question could be: "If IWD would be better with a plot involving companions, dialogues with them and their quests." I believe that Yes.

 

[Zed]

Update 2: inXile developer Thomas Beekers has also made a statement in response to a fan question:

And if that single character dies but one or more of the party created later do not, does the game end?​

You can still continue playing if that character dies.​

that's dumb, but this game will be dumb and also suck so eh~

 

[Fenix]

You can solo Wasteland 2.

That sounds like it'd be an incredible slog given that enemies are balanced for parties, and there's no way to stealth critical path encounters.

The final battle would be a massive chore even with the benefit of combat shooting.

In my two man party only Older Brother fights. Junior is waiting around the corner.
Actually it is only thing that keep me interested in W2.

 

[felipepepe]

For offroad compare lada with Subaru or hummer H1.

For RPGs with emotionally-engaging companions bundled with "loyalty quests", play BioWare games.

Diablo is a twitch (reflex based game) popamole, therefore adding stuff is pointless. You would gain by removing stuff until the only thing left would be Yes button. Now the right question could be: "If IWD would be better with a plot involving companions, dialogues with them and their quests." I believe that Yes.

Might be surprising to you, but adding all that to Icewind Dale would make it just like Baldur's Gate. And a lot of people like that there's a range of IE games - story focused (PST), combat-focused (IWD) and balanced (BG). I like party creation, but it would make no sense to add it to PS:T.

Problem is, your head is so up your ass you simply cannot see the world beyond your own taste.

Mandatory occasionnal reminder that party creation won"t be removed in WL3...

Yes, and you can still disable quest markers in Skyrim - then questing and exploration are just like Morrowind, right?

 

[l3loodAngel]

For offroad compare lada with Subaru or hummer H1.

1. For RPGs with emotionally-engaging companions bundled with "loyalty quests", play BioWare games.

Diablo is a twitch (reflex based game) popamole, therefore adding stuff is pointless. You would gain by removing stuff until the only thing left would be Yes button. Now the right question could be: "If IWD would be better with a plot involving companions, dialogues with them and their quests." I believe that Yes.

2. Might be surprising to you, but adding all that to Icewind Dale would make it just like Baldur's Gate. And a lot of people like that there's a range of IE games - story focused (PST), combat-focused (IWD) and balanced (BG). I like party creation, but it would make no sense to add it to PS:T.

Problem is, your head is so up your ass you simply cannot see the world beyond your own taste.

1. Wow 2 strawmen in a single 13 word sentence. Keep up the good work. I am not searching for emotionaly engaging companions, neither for Bioware games with retarded loyalty quests. If anything I have not played anything bioware since DAO. I have not even instaled Mass effect or other dragon age games. I am willing to bet that you did.

2. BG series has a wide recognition of being better. Thanks for proving my point. Everybody jumped old school funding ship with: "creators of BG" and only slightly mentioning IWD. Odds are if you're not roguey, you don't think IWD was that great.

I don't see the problem, because it's not my taste. It's just about being a better game overall. In almost all instances well written party > cartboard cutouts. Nobody differentiates IE games like that and IWD is always the least interesting and almost always forgotten bastard...

 

[Lurker King]

I think that you should JUST ACCEPT THAT YOU WERE BETRAYED BY InXile AND ARE POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. Stop using this design change as a DISHONEST EXCUSE TO BASH InXile. This is not a discussion about game design. It as bunch of butthurt idiots in a small-minded circle trying to make a vain consensus based on irrational knee-jerk reactions. Do you guys have any idea how ridiculous your rationalizations you call arguments look? This is all massively out of proportion. The reality is that you won’t influence anyone by this BUTTHURT HYSTERIA. Nothing good can come out of this. Move on with your lives.

The fact of the matter is that this change makes perfect sense because Wasteland 2 was already a game more focused on story, C&C and roleplaying and you can’t role-play as six characters at once. Commanding six lifeless tailor-made zombies allows for more strategic and tactical choices, but that doesn’t encapsulate what role-playing is in a PnP campaign. At the very least, your companions (being Bioware emmos or not) should have their own personalities, because you can only role-play in a team with companions. It doesn’t get more complicated than that. Now you go on and try to dismiss everything I said trowing tags, negative ratings and whatever is the dogmatic instrument you use to discourage different opinions and reinforce the illusion that this butthurt hysteria matters. I don’t give a fuck.

 

[Kev Inkline]

Your avatar pictures go through a cycle, is this now the meltdown phase?

 

[CryptRat]

1. Wow 2 strawmen in a single 13 word sentence. Keep up the good work. I am not searching for emotionaly engaging companions, neither for Bioware games with retarded loyalty quests. If anything I have not played anything bioware since DAO. I have not even instaled Mass effect or other dragon age games. I am willing to bet that you did.

2. BG series has a wide recognition of being better. Thanks for proving my point. Everybody jumped old school funding ship with: "creators of BG" and only slightly mentioning IWD. Odds are if you're not roguey, you don't think IWD was that great.

I don't see the problem, because it's not my taste. It's just about being a better game overall. In almost all instances well written party > cartboard cutouts. Nobody differentiates IE games like that and IWD is always the least interesting and almost always forgotten bastard...

I liked Icewind Dale more than Baldur's Gate (but the Gold box games are a lot better).
Also you're talking about combat-only games but in Darklands or Blade of Destiny (and to a lesser extend Wasteland) the player's characters have the personnality the player wants to give them (it's a mix of numbers and what they do). The party in Blade of Destiny of any player out there is more interesting than any party made of pregenerated character made by a developper. The story and what the characters are is what they do, an heavy over the top chosen-one emotional imposed story is totally useless (and it's just annoying) if the problems to solve and allowed solutions are well crafted.

 

[l3loodAngel]

I liked Icewind Dale more than Baldur's Gate (but the Gold box games are a lot better).
Also you're talking about combat-only games but in Darklands or Blade of Destiny (and to a lesser extend Wasteland) the player's characters have the personnality the player wants to give them (it's a mix of numbers and what they do). The party in Blade of Destiny of any player out there is more interesting than any party made of pregenerated character made by a developper. The story and what the characters are is what they do, an heavy over the top chosen-one emotional imposed story is totally useless (and it's just annoying) if the problems to solve and allowed solutions are well crafted.

Dude I have nothing against autism or lack of social interactions. I am not really a sociable person myself, but numbers are not personality.