Review RPG Codex Review: Wasteland 2

[the_dagon]

The game list was given as an example of true RPG games, not to be talked about which was better... Funny some of you think those games are "the reasons the RPG is said to be dead". Maybe those are in fact the reason why the RPG genre is still alive !

About the phrase : "not bad but it aint wizardry". I had a good laugh.
Did you launch Wizardry lately ? Do anyone think that today Wizardry's gameplay is superior to Legend of Grimrock ?
Wizardry was great beacause it was the first game to create this kind of gameplay, but other games (from the original Bard's Tale through Dungeon Master and now Legend of Grimrock) went far beyond that and were really better.

Where I completely agree is that the whole gaming production trying to go mainstream with cross-genre games (action-adventure-RPG) almost killed the RPG genre.

Also quite disturbing to notice some of them came from once (or future) great RPG makers (remember D.W. Bradley's Dungeon Lords, Swen Vincke's Divine Divinity, Bioware's Dragon Age 2, Arcane's Dark Messiah of M&M (where's Arx 2 ?), Brian Fargo's Hunted the Demon's Forge, ...)

 

[Infinitron]

Joined:
Feb 20, 2004

 

[Vault Dweller]

Did you launch Wizardry lately ? Do anyone think that today Wizardry's gameplay is superior to Legend of Grimrock ?

You've gotta be kidding me. There is absolutely no comparison. None whatso-fucking-ever.

Wizardry was great beacause it was the first game to create this kind of gameplay, but other games (from the original Bard's Tale through Dungeon Master and now Legend of Grimrock) went far beyond that and were really better.

You're talking about Wz 1, right? Because Wiz 8 is better than BT, DM, and LoG combined.

 

[Irenaeus]

This is guy is someone's ancient alt trolling. I blame Nikaido

 

[the_dagon]

You've gotta be kidding me. There is absolutely no comparison. None whatso-fucking-ever.

Wizardry was great beacause it was the first game to create this kind of gameplay, but other games (from the original Bard's Tale through Dungeon Master and now Legend of Grimrock) went far beyond that and were really better.

You're talking about Wz 1, right? Because Wiz 8 is better than BT, DM, and LoG combined.

Yes, Wizardry isn't limited to Wiz8. I was talking about Wizardry 1-5. Wiz6-8 is quite different...

 

[FeelTheRads]

I don't see how LoG is better than 1-5 either.
What is it? Character system is very basic and the combat is laughable, even more so compared to Wizardry. So what then?

 

[the_dagon]

- Wiz : character management+basic turn-based fights
- LoG : basic combat system but puzzles, traps, ...
Player has to think a bit more ...

 

[Irenaeus]

I don't see how LoG is better than 1-5 either.
What is it? Character system is very basic and the combat is laughable, even more so compared to Wizardry. So what then?

Also LoG has worse graphics:

 

[Zorba the Hutt]

About the phrase : "not bad but it aint wizardry". I had a good laugh.
Did you launch Wizardry lately ? Do anyone think that today Wizardry's gameplay is superior to Legend of Grimrock ?

- Wiz : character management+basic turn-based fights
- LoG : basic combat system but puzzles, traps, ...
Player has to think a bit more ...

 

[Grunker]

It is never pretty when the ancients arise.

 

[FeelTheRads]

- Wiz : character management+basic turn-based fights
- LoG : basic combat system but puzzles, traps, ...
Player has to think a bit more ...

Wizardry didn't have puzzles or traps.

 

[Azrael the cat]

The game list was given as an example of true RPG games, not to be talked about which was better... Funny some of you think those games are "the reasons the RPG is said to be dead". Maybe those are in fact the reason why the RPG genre is still alive !

About the phrase : "not bad but it aint wizardry". I had a good laugh.
Did you launch Wizardry lately ? Do anyone think that today Wizardry's gameplay is superior to Legend of Grimrock ?
Wizardry was great beacause it was the first game to create this kind of gameplay, but other games (from the original Bard's Tale through Dungeon Master and now Legend of Grimrock) went far beyond that and were really better.

Where I completely agree is that the whole gaming production trying to go mainstream with cross-genre games (action-adventure-RPG) almost killed the RPG genre.

Also quite disturbing to notice some of them came from once (or future) great RPG makers (remember D.W. Bradley's Dungeon Lords, Swen Vincke's Divine Divinity, Bioware's Dragon Age 2, Arcane's Dark Messiah of M&M (where's Arx 2 ?), Brian Fargo's Hunted the Demon's Forge, ...)

Bad examples. Bard's tale had some good class design going for it, but had so many monstrous flaws that it was mostly seen as the 'potential competitor to wizardry that never quite made it' - Better presented, and by bt3 it had enough of its own ideas (the illusionist subclass in particular, where you can summon permanent and massively over-levelled additions to the party, but the longer an intelligent enemy encounters them, the greater the risk they'll see through the illusion and dispell it) that it's arguably better than wiz 1,albeit far rougher in terms of balance, level design,and encounter design. But by then, wizardry was up to wiz4,and a whole gen ahead of BT in terms of mechanics - they'd broken out of the design conservatism that made 2 and 3 little more than expansion packs for 1, and from 4 onwards the bt series is no longer in the same school of crpg.

And Grimrock, m&m, etc were always a different type of crpg that just happened to come from the same era with a fp viewpoint. Comparing them to wiz is like comparing Diablo to jagged Alliance.

 

[Neckbeard Shitlord]

http://www.dagonslair.com

Looks like he is a full time troll.

 

[the_dagon]

And Grimrock, m&m, etc were always a different type of crpg that just happened to come from the same era with a fp viewpoint. Comparing them to wiz is like comparing Diablo to jagged Alliance.

Good point. You're true. Except for the first perso view, step based movements, the two games are quite different and focus to different gameplay strengh. Wizardry is more on character management/combat and LoG is more on puzzles.

http://www.dagonslair.com

Looks like he is a full time troll.

Wow. Very interesting comment. Very constructive. Very smart.

Wizardry didn't have puzzles or traps.

It HAD traps. But if I remember well, you had nothing to do but to step on them or use a spell to go through them. No way to be able to avoid them, or use walls/buttons/pression plates/items to avoid them.
But Azrael the cat hit a good point : those games are quite different in their focus.

 

[jiujitsu]

I completely agree with the closing statements. I had the same feeling while playing. I had to keep going because it was awesome. Not quite as awesome as some of the classics, but for a mostly crowdfunded game with limited budget, it nailed it. Hard.

I loved the game and my biggest complaint is that there wasn't more. MORE MORE MORE. DLC pls?

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Guess I am getting old or too demanding, I can't understand the praise this game gets on here...

It needed another 8 months of development.

 

[Akratus]

What Roxor said on page 1. The part about "too many important decisions" and "great writing" stretch things too far in particular. It's turn based game, in what other game is it possible to add precise control over actions and a lot of actions to think about and execute?

Which actions though?

You can do a single shot, a burst if your weapon supports it, and an aimed shot for more damage. What else can you do with firearms? Sure, you can do a small burst or empty the magazine. Would it add much? No. Some SMGs do have two burst modes if I recall correctly. Aimed: body parts? Legs/torso would be pointless. Maybe arms to disarm but I don't see it adding much.

It works in AoD because you're alone, outnumbered, and combat is mostly melee. Party-based, mostly ranged (guns) combat is something completely different. The missed opportunity is ammo, which I did note. It was the only way to make combat and weapons' choice more interesting.

Pardon me for digging this old stuff up, but there's still a lot of actions possible to take in a modern ranged combat situation.

When you're in cover, one can fire blindly, or pop up and shoot, or lay their weapon down on cover and actually aim. A kind of risk vs reward type choice. Obviously in turn based games you can't be attacked while you take aim, but perhaps a debuff to hit chance on the character for the next round, or maybe just the first attack on them, is a complementary design choice.

And then of course there's covering fire, which I feel every tactical top down game with automatic firearms should have.

Of course I have no idea how much any of this is or isn't implemented in Wasteland 2, or how it would fit into the design, as I've yet to play it, but intend to.

 

[Blaine]

Obviously in turn based games you can't be attacked while you take aim....

Certainly you can. X-COM has just such a mechanic, known as reaction fire: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Reaction_Fire

Of course I have no idea how much any of this is or isn't implemented in Wasteland 2, or how it would fit into the design, as I've yet to play it, but intend to.

You can kneel and/or try for a headshot (hastily implemented and never worth it last I played), and higher ground increases accuracy. Cover is implemented in fairly standard fashion.

 

[Athelas]

Obviously in turn based games you can't be attacked while you take aim

Yes, it's not as if attacks of opportunity haven't been a staple of the genre since forever...

 

[Akratus]

I don't know how I could have forgotten that.

 

[roshan]

I don't know if anyone has noticed but Vault Dweller has a tendency to generally overlook most flaws of games he likes, and even goes out of his way to give a positive spin to even the worst gameplay elements. Over here he is actually arguing that Wasteland 2's barebones combat system could not possibly be better than it is, which is absurd. He also gave MOTB a much better review than it deserved. Even MOTB's "constantly suck up to me" companion system according to Vault Dweller's review is perfect, just happens to be wrongly called "influence".

 

[Vault Dweller]

In other words, all games have flaws but sometimes these flaws don't bother us that much, creating a wide-spread phenomenon called "I like this game!". For example, my top 3 RPGs are Fallout, PST, and Arcanum.

Fallout featured tons of useless skills, easy combat (just aim for the eyes), and lack of anything resembling balance, BUT it had a great atmosphere, excellent writing & dialogue trees, non-linearity and multiple solutions. PST was linear as fuck and had an atrocious combat system. Arcanum? Where to begin? One can write a very lengthy article documenting design flaws, but the good was so fucking good that it easily outweighed the bad.

Now, WL2 won't make my top 10 list, but I really enjoyed it, which means that the flaws didn't bother me and didn't detract from the overall enjoyment. When I review games I don't give you the ultimate verdict. I give you my opinion, being fully aware that not everyone will agree with it.

Edit:

As for the combat system, in case I didn't make myself clear:

JA2 system was clearly superior and had more depth but JA2 was a tactical (i.e. mostly combat) game and nobody should have expected a JA2-type system in Wasteland 2. Thus comparing it to JA2 or SS or even ToEE is pointless. I'd say it's better than Fallout's system (even though Fallout had all kinds of aimed attacks), better than Arcanum and PST combined, better than in most games I've played recently or not so recently.

Clearly, I'm aware of the flaws and my review didn't present it as the best system ever. Yet it works and works well and I'm not convinced that adding aimed attacks would have magically added layers of depth and made it 10 times better.

 

[Grunker]

I agree with everything you say there. I have only ever challenged the fact that WL2's combat didn't have problems or the absurd statement of "well, you can't do anything else with gun combat..."

I like your review and I my expectation is that I will feel similarly about the game (though, who knows).

 

[Vault Dweller]

I agree with everything you say there. I have only ever challenged the fact that WL2's combat didn't have problems or the absurd statement of "well, you can't do anything else with gun combat..."

I meant in general not in regard to the WL2 system and I've never claimed that the system didn't have problems. In fact, I highlighted quite a few.

 

[Akratus]

Just put my first 3 hours into Wasteland 2. All I can say is: Fuck the haters.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Give it another 3 hours, you'll see.