Wasteland Wasteland 2 reception discussion

[Infinitron]

Nice portrait, Roguey. Er I mean sea

 

[Kem0sabe]

Shotgun? really? Maybe you are playing some magic inxile build that makes shotguns not to be crap.

I can do upwards of 150 dmg with a 6 AP 3xshot attack with an assault rifle on a single mob with arizona assault rifles, i can get 2 of those off on an assault rifle build character, 300 damage or more depending on mobs. then comes along my shotgun character, that needs to be up close to mobs, have them wonderfully lined up in such a way as to do damage to more than one to be worth the AP cost, that has limited ammo capacity, that forces me to maneuvers my squad around as to not be hit by friendly fire, and maybe does a magical number of 50 damage per hit.

Yeah, shotguns are awesome.

Again, I submit to you that you are pulling this information out of your ass. A quick look at weapon tables proves that the same tier weapons do similar base damage, and then you have shotguns like SPAZ 12 or Jackhammer that do well over 50 base damage with a single shot, while also having the ability to burst fire x3.
AK-47:
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/AK-47

vs Tactical shotgun:
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Tactical_shotgun

Proof that shotgun can do well above 50 damage:
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Jackhammer
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Spaz_12

Assault rifles generally have an advantage of doing more critical damage and having more ammo with the ability to burst fire, BUT they can only shoot at one target, and if the enemy is too close you have to move away to be effective. They also cost more AP to use, so you will get less shots per turn. I cannot repeat this enough, but doing 150+ damage to an enemy that has 20-30 HP points left is a waste of AP. When you are surrounded with 3-4 enemies that are already wounded, not having a shotgun specialist or a handgun specialist is going to make you take needless damage, because you can only deal with one enemy/turn most of the times. That is why my shotgun specialist has the most kills. He is usually the last to take the turn, so I position my party of long ranged damage dealers away (which I have to do anyway, due to assault rifles being useless if the enemy is standing right next to you). My shotgun specialist can then attack multiple targets and positioning is not that big of a problem that you make it be. Does it take some extra planning ahead? Yes. But you have to know how to use shotguns effectively. It is certainly a viable weapon, but it requires tactics and planning ahead. Imagine that!

I'm pulling this information out of my playing sessions where shotguns are all but useless until you get to the high tier ones in California.

Look at the enemies you have in Arizona. RSM and raiders in general usually stays at range and behind cover if they can, AG centre mobs you dont want to be anyone near them when they die, robots are mixed affair but the ones that get up close you can easily dispatch before they get near enough to involve your shotgun specialist, except for the giant ones, but those have such massive HP pools that your shotgun all but tickles them, while 2 assault rifle specialists can take them down in one round if you get off crits.

Shotguns came i handy killing zombies in Darwin, and doing multiple damage on wildlife when they rush you, like badgers or wolves and you can line up your shotgun guy.

For mopping up, a melee character is much more efficient or someone with one of the high damage handguns, but those have a high HP cost.

As i said, i couldnt care less about doing 150 dmg on a 20 HP mob if it ends up dead, because ammo and resources in this game are too easy to come buy.

If you guys had done a better job at balancing the ingame economy, maybe making better use of ammo would have been a consideration.

 

[Mareus]

I'm pulling this information out of my playing sessions where shotguns are all but useless until you get to the high tier ones in California.

Again, look at the links I posted. AK-47:
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/AK-47

vs Tactical shotgun:
http://wasteland.gamepedia.com/Tactical_shotgun

Same tier weapons which you get around the same time. Both weapons are from Arizona and they do very similar damage while each having their own advantages. If you don't know how to use shotguns don't blame the game.

Look at the enemies you have in Arizona. RSM and raiders in general usually stays at range and behind cover if they can,

So why is that a problem for a shotgun user, exactly? You wound them with long range weapons, then you run closer to them with your shotgun specialist and finish them off without having to worry about friendly fire you complained about.

AG centre mobs you dont want to be anyone near them when they die

Exactly, but again why is this a problem for a shotgun specialist? He does have some range with his shotgun you know? More than enough to avoid being caught in a blast, while those zombies are really slow and its not hard to run away if you get swarmed, especially while having long range support.

...robots are mixed affair but the ones that get up close you can easily dispatch before they get near enough to involve your shotgun specialist.

Not from my experience. 2 or more robots with 500+ HP makes it difficult to dispatch before they get too close, and then you also have those jumping spiders that are hard to kill as hell while they can jump to you in 1 turn, combined with smaller robots with blades that have high speed and will surround you within a turn. My shotgun specialist is extremely useful to have around robots.

except for the giant ones, but those have such massive HP pools that your shotgun all but tickles them, while 2 assault rifle specialists can take them down in one round if you get off crits.

Your whole starting premise here is completely wrong. You assume that shotgun usefulness is determined by its dps, which is the same as trying to determine the usefulness of a tank by how much dps they do. As I already explained. I don't use my shotgun specialist as my main damage dealer. I use him as support to finish off multiple enemies with one shot. It has nothing to do with ammo, but with efficiency! This makes my other characters much more efficient, because they don't need to waste a whole turn for doing 150+ damage to an enemy that has 40 HP left.

Look, at best you can argue that YOU personally found shotgun users to be shit, but don't tell me that they do around 50 damage because that is just not true as demonstrated by looking at the links I sent. Also don't tell me how useless your shotgun user was in Arizona in certain situations, when I played those same levels and found my shotgun user very useful. The bottom line of this little debate is that YOU found shotguns to be useless, but that does not mean shotguns are objectively a useless weapon. All I have to do to show your conclusion is incorrect is show one person who finds shotguns extremely useful, and I can testify that they can be very useful given that you apply some tactics and thinking ahead.

PS. Also, since you seem to think that having a melee character is quote: "much more efficient" for mopping up, go to AG center and tell me how that works out

 

[Kem0sabe]

To each his own then.

 

[Burning Bridges]

My viewpoint: Graphics are huge improvement over original Fallout games

Artistically? You gotta be kiddin me.

 

[Burning Bridges]

I am really not impressed what I see. The game showed a lot of promise until the shift in the release date.
Am I the only one who suspects that the good people were moved to Torment, and the rest of the work on WL2 was given to 2nd rate people?

 

[Jaesun]

I am really not impressed what I see. The game showed a lot of promise until the shift in the release date.
Am I the only one who suspects that the good people were moved to Torment, and the rest of the work on WL2 was given to 2nd rate people?

What specifically is the problem with WL2 for you?

 

[joelofdeath]

I'm more interested in the reaction to W2 from those that have played W1. Having played through it recently (for the first time) I have a much better understanding of a bunch of their design decisions, and actually appreciate the consistency. And so I can view W2 as a continuation of W1, instead of as an alternative Fallout 3, which is a more fun comparison IMO. Thoughts from those who understand the pedigree are great, like from Zetor previously:

Spoiler

The comparison is silly for obvious reasons. Wasteland 1 was one of my favorite games ever, and I consider the sequel OK. Not particularly good, and definitely not bad... OK.

Compared to the original Wasteland, it has

• better combat (considering that combat is a weak point in this game, you can guess how it was in WL1)
• a better character system with more options, but still not too much variation
• much better balance
• a bit less of the 'wacky wasteland' feeling and weird charm (most of the 80s stuff is just shoehorned in), but world-building is still OK overall
• less interesting approaches to problems, more linearity (most areas are either super-linear or consist of a single smallish map with a single objective, especially in LA)
• less internal consistency (the areas were made by different people probably months/years apart, and it shows)
• a bit better writing and dialogue (this was almost nonexistent in WL1)
• better use of video/audio features instead of pure text
• much more content, though much of it is samey

Also, play W1 if you haven't already. It's great. If you are time challenged (like me) follow the journal that comes with the GoG release, it basically steps you through the game, so no time wastage spent just wondering what the hell to do.

 

[Norfleet]

Look at the enemies you have in Arizona. RSM and raiders in general usually stays at range and behind cover if they can,

So why is that a problem for a shotgun user, exactly? You wound them with long range weapons, then you run closer to them with your shotgun specialist and finish them off without having to worry about friendly fire you complained about.

Shotgunman very good. The enemy AI exhibits the tendency to immediately plant itself into your face. If you form yourself into a battle line shaped like a short L, with your shotgunman leading the arm and the rest of your force on the base, enemies will basically line themselves up for an excellent enfilade shot before you've even taken your first turn. KA-BLAM! If you have a second shotgunman, you can even adopt a U formation which will allow you to enfilade the enemy line as it plants itself against you from both sides, often wiping out 3 or 4 enemies in a single barrage before they've even taken a swing at you. I haven't tried it sense the patch, though, so perhaps now that enemies don't have randomly unlimited movement capability, they might plant into your face a lot less.

Not from my experience. 2 or more robots with 500+ HP makes it difficult to dispatch before they get too close, and then you also have those jumping spiders that are hard to kill as hell while they can jump to you in 1 turn, combined with smaller robots with blades that have high speed and will surround you within a turn. My shotgun specialist is extremely useful to have around robots.

What you need for dealing with those spiders isn't SPECIFICALLY a shotgunman, but a pointman. Those things will leap and hurl themselves at the first thing they see. This means if you have one partymember standing way ahead of the rest, they'll all hurl themselves upon your pointman, and the rest of the party hanging back will be safe, protecting your pets and other NPCs. This job is, of course, quite well suited for a shotgunman, since he will find himself buried in enemies.

I will say, however, that I found the shotgunman somewhat LESS effective vs. robots. Robots, for some reason, do not seem to do the faceplant rush as often as earlier enemies did. This may be factor of the level design or it may be something intrinsic to robots, but either way, robots will often not reach your lines for several turns, and I generally found that they would be picked off by long-range fire well before they'd reach my lines.

PS. Also, since you seem to think that having a melee character is quote: "much more efficient" for mopping up, go to AG center and tell me how that works out

Maybe he went to Highpool instead.

 

[maverick]

With the haaaammerrrr aaaand the booooo'k!
with the haaammerrr aaaand the booo'k!
this great woooorld of siiiin he shooo'k!
with the haaaamer aaaand the booo'k"

This game is great

Playing it slowly and having a blast!

With the haaaammerrrr aaaand the booooo'k!
with the haaammerrr aaaand the booo'k!


With the haaaammmer aaaaaaand the boook!
with the haaammer aaaand the book!

I could sing this all day long

 

[Carrion]

Finally managed to beat the game.

The game definitely got better towards the end. Arizona never particularly grabbed me whereas California was much more interesting. "A bunch of rookies on a mission" is a refreshing alternative for being the chosen one, but at the start of the game it felt like the game was missing some kind of a driving force. The locations were isolated from each other and not really that interesting on their own: Highpool was kind of bland, the destroyed AG center was slightly annoying, the Rail Nomads Camp was big and empty, the canyon was mostly just boring... I never felt that interested in the game world or the story (if there even was one at the early parts of the game), the writing was all over the place, there was hardly any atmosphere to speak of and the combat wasn't good enough to carry the game. Damonta was where the game started to get good in my opinion, a much more atmospheric location than the previous ones that also offered some more motivation than just "do your job" along with a bunch of very good and challenging encounters.

California was just much better. Exploring an uncharted territory made things much more interesting, and the story got going too with all the factions filling the radio waves with their propaganda. It managed to give you a much better motivation to go on than the first half of the game. I think Rodia, Angel Oracle and Hollywood (although bugged) were much better than any of the locations in Arizona, save for maybe the aforementioned Damonta, with a lot more interesting quests and characters and at least seemingly more meaningful choices. The second half elevated the game from "meh" to at least "hey, this is actually pretty good!".

I really liked the endgame as well. Even if it was probably a bit rushed, I liked that they didn't have a HUGE endgame dungeon but instead just a handful of fights. The ending itself was really satisfying as well.

As far as game mechanics go, the combat was serviceable (although a bit too basic), but I was pretty disappointed with the skill use. Half of the skills are primarily used for opening containers or doors. Lockpicking and safecracking are the obvious ones, but by no means the only ones. Computer Science? Open electronic locks. Toaster Repair? Basically for opening a very specific type of container. Mechanical Repair? Unjam badly picked locks. Demolitions? Disarm traps on containers. Brute Force? Open doors, containers and gates. Alarm Disarming? Disarm alarms on containers and doors. Perception? Spot traps on containers. Of course the skills have lots of other uses as well, but these are by far the most common ones, which just seems a bit lame. Every area seems to have like a billion containers, almost all of which are locked and trapped. It's good that skills get lots of use, but that's a really lazy way of doing it. Failing a check usually just means that you miss out on some random loot, or that you lock yourself out from some linear side quest. Maybe a second playthrough would change my opinion, but it seemed pretty rare that skill use would allow you to open up completely new paths for completing quests. I was especially hoping that Alarm Disarming would've allowed some cool stuff, like being able to complete some quest in a stealthy manner, but usually it just allowed you to avoid encounters that you'd fight anyway. Maybe I'm a bit unfair here, because compared to most other RPGs out there the game is superb on this department, but I didn't feel like there was nearly as much freedom in completing quests like there was in Fallout.

All in all, the second half really redeemed the game for me. I feel they should've cut at least half of Arizona, taken the best parts and made it a more compact introduction to the game before setting the player loose in California.

tl;dr: Good for what it is, definitely worth playing, the KickStarter backgound shows as a certain disjointedness in places.

 

[SniperHF]

Highpool was kind of bland, the destroyed AG center was slightly annoying

If you found the destroyed version annoying try loading a save and playing the Save AG Center path. Then you will know what's really annoying.

 

[MicoSelva]

Not sure if this was posted already, but I only stumbled upon it yesterday.
Apparently, TotalBiscuit backed this game for $1000.

 

[Rpgsaurus Rex]

W2 started off fine, went to shit by canyon area and never really recovered (so I didn't really enjoy about 70% of the game... to put it mildly).

It's just so half-baked, everything about it. Every idea that could have been good is left unfinished.

It's unfair to compare it to any of the Fallout because those were actual good games and unique RPGs with skill system implementation almost unparalleled to this day. Things made sense and the world reacted to you, one way or another.

On to WL2... Combat system with the least amount of options I've seen in a strategy RPG, in a game that's almost ALL combat. Horrible skill system (remember, no one FORCED you into ANY skill paths in the Fallouts, no one made you pick 'lockpicking' if you didn't want to and the game was perfectly beatable in so many ways - even maxing a freaking outdoorsman was viable because of the alien blaster). Insanely repetitive skill usage (alarm disable/disarm trap/unlock). Random ass treasure. Unfunny (mannerites, no, no thanks). Did I say repetitive? There's no strategy other than sit/cover + shoot + reload and nothing makes sense, like actually the biggest amount of strategy here is taking off your armor vs. energy weapon users (apparently, being naked makes laser rays do less damage).

The quests... oh god, the quests. The C&C makes me weep. Hollywood was the straw that broke my fucking radscorpion's back. You free the slaves, nothing happens. You blow the glowing things, nothing happens. You discover that pimp woman had a whole slave complex behind her room, there is nothing you can do or say about it.

The bugs. TB combat that doesn't end when enemies near you die and that forces you to crawl across the square panels in turn-based mode across half the map because some thing or other ah fuck this shit.

There's nothing good about it other than the post-apoc vibe. To me this game is shovelware to be forgotten and never replayed.

 

[StaticSpine]

W2 started off fine, went to shit by canyon area and never really recovered (so I didn't really enjoy about 70% of the game... to put it mildly).

Man, L.A. is much better than Arizona.

 

[Cadmus]

Didn't read the whole thread but here goes:

I just started playing and my complaints after Highpool and now in AG center:

1) This is one of the ugliest fucking games I've ever played. Whoever said that it's a huge improvement over Fallout 1 is a retard. Fallouts and all the IE games look 300 times better. It's actually my biggest complaint with the game. It pisses me off and makes it hard for me to enjoy. It should have been 2D or on some better engine. There's no art direction whatsoever, it's just a bunch of a really shitty 3D models in horrible landscapes that look so bad as if they had been randomly generated. Even the overland map is fucking ugly.
2) The inventory gives some lag before loading and I suspect it has to do with those ugly-ass character models being rendered, why the fuck is that in there?
3) I've had 2 random encounters so far, both on the same map.
4) No formations is annoying for a tactical squad combat.
5) Headshots seem useless so far but maybe they'll be worth it if my chars get better levels.
6) The camera is a little annoying but I can handle it.
8) After a whole day of playing the game became sluggish so I had to restart it, no big deal. The cursor seems fucked and sometimes changes to normal cursor, no idea how to fix it but whatever.
7) The OP is an asshole for not saying he's not Sea right away.

Overall, I'm playing on the hardest difficulty and I'm enjoying myself so far. I'm all out of ammo and stuff and I think I'll have to give up in AG and go back and restock and the game succeeded in maintaining that the time actually flows in the quests so I'm afraid to leave the area


Fuck off with the complaints about the skill use. I'd decided not to minmax anything, not to research anything and just play the game as it comes. Haven't read any post release discussions cuz of spoilers. I like having tons of skills to use and learn. If only the combat was more tactical with more options.

 

[Rpgsaurus Rex]

W2 started off fine, went to shit by canyon area and never really recovered (so I didn't really enjoy about 70% of the game... to put it mildly).

Man, L.A. is much better than Arizona.

How so? It's just more of the same. It sort of gets by the first 1/4 due to the novelty factor. I'm playing a post-apoc RPG, woo! Running around the desert shooting things is fun until you realize that every battle is almost exactly the same. Like I said, it's got probably the least tactical depth out of any strategy RPG I've played. Quests are fine until you realize how shallow and non-reactive the world and the NPCs are. Skill system looks OK until you've gone through your 1000th 'disable alarm - disarm trap - open lock - find trash' routine. It's a shame that games that came out 10-15 years earlier did so many things better than WL2.

 

[StaticSpine]

How so? It's just more of the same.

Better cities, lots of sidequests, coolfactions, less filler comat. Arizona felt like small peaceful bits, connected by huge combat corridors. Cali is different.

Quests are fine until you realize how shallow and non-reactive the world and the NPCs are.

It's the most reactive world I've seen in years!

 

[StaticSpine]

Wow, I've made a W2 review on my lj page and I'm impressed by how many people in Russia hate the game and believe that it's a scam and inXile didn't deliver what they promised.

 

[Psquit]

Well, Wasteland 2 is pretty mediocre. It's not Inxile fault whatsoever, cause its the first time Inxile actually tries to make a good game.

Torment: Tides of Numenera is where the money is at YO!




















Clearly inxile is putting more effort in torment.

 

[Morality Games]

My viewpoint: Graphics are huge improvement over original Fallout games

Artistically? You gotta be kiddin me.

Indeed. Its not obvious to me that *any* game will ever triumph over Fallout 1-2 atmospherically.

I mean, maybe when we start plugging our minds directly into a simulation of reality, but nothing in the past and nothing since.

 

[Commissar Draco]

The quests... oh god, the quests. The C&C makes me weep. Hollywood was the straw that broke my fucking radscorpion's back. You free the slaves, nothing happens. You blow the glowing things, nothing happens. You discover that pimp woman had a whole slave complex behind her room, there is nothing you can do or say about it.

The bugs. TB combat that doesn't end when enemies near you die and that forces you to crawl across the square panels in turn-based mode across half the map because some thing or other ah fuck this shit.

There's nothing good about it other than the post-apoc vibe. To me this game is shovelware to be forgotten and never replayed.

They are atleast 2 ways to make her pay sans pouting a bullet in her head which you could cause no NPC in Wasteland is essential and how Manerites were not funny? They were great polite but not too nice faction with a dark twist which made them real life like unlike Rangers and listening to Mr Manners talkshow and dispatches was fun.

Also fights were quick and never had to comb entire map to find one enemy unit... You sure you played Wasteland 2 not Xenonauts?

Wasteland 2 really should be done in 2D as cheap Unity assets looked crappy and lacked art direction and style games like Baldurgates and real Fallouts had... but its at least not Gamebroyo and was serviceable in max zoom out Iso view; for a game made for spare change money it looked good.

 

[hiver]

To each his own then.

Yes, generally speaking, but in this case you were actually correct Kemosabe.

Shotguns are shite for one thing - they do not create sufficient amounts of damage in combat because any sort of "armor" enemies have almost completely neutralizes them.

 

[toro]

The game is good however it doesn't deliver an experience as tight as Fallout(s).

However I'm glad that the game was made and I look forward to Wasteland 3. It would be a shame not to be done.

 

[l3loodAngel]

The game is good however it doesn't deliver an experience as tight as Fallout(s).

However I'm glad that the game was made and I look forward to Wasteland 3. It would be a shame not to be done.

And it never will. Fallout was exploration based while wasteland 2 is quest based. I felt like playing a MMO, where you go to an area and collect 10 wolf pelts or whatever. While in FO it all felt natural and I was interested in what I will find and to see what characters I will meet.

A free roaming exploration game with FO2 type city quests would be awesome. but I don't see it happening any time soon as Inxile is busy with a blobber and Obsi would not do it in a hundred years... Going to city and wasting 20-50 guys is not really that fun and entertaining as is skill based exploration.