Main plot: MUST there be one?

[CaptainPatch]

So I am in favor of a main storyline, if any, that doesn't kick your ass too hard to get it done ASAP. In fact it would be great if you completely lose the thread from time to time, with no clear road forward, to encourage you to follow other storylines for a while.

Hmm. Where to go next is derived from clues acquired while executing certain side quests? That sounds more entertaining to me than big signposts that read, "This way to next main quest checkpoint."

The thing about the side quests in ME, they take the player literally light-years off the main path. You can't tell me that such a side trip takes "hardly any time lost at all." Meanwhile, supposedly there is a clock ticking, foreshadowing the approach of Doomsday. Naturally, taking a jaunt of 10, 20 light-years to fetch someone's lost whatever is in order!

[Gizmo]

Most people expect a goal to work towards, that creates an arc of suspense during play. Otherwise, all you have is an unfocused sandbox, that you wander through until all of a sudden you reach its limits and then the game is over with no satisfying conclusion.

Or worse ~it doesn't end.

[snakeoil]

of course there dont has to be a main plot in the sense of stopping or advancing some development of any kind. but the main plot of a wasteland game will always be the setting of a post apocalyptic world.
what you would need instead of a main plot would be some kind of interactive environment that you could constantly shape and modify. and several factors that would influence you on how and why you do so.
i would love to see a post apocalyptic game where you travel the world just to discover and collect precious items and developing your home base from a simple cave to a well equiped fortress of some kind. interactions with npcs would be rare and difficult since there would be just very few and they wouldnt be too trustworthy. dont necessarily need a main plot, the character would just age and die.

[Gizmo]

dont necessarily need a main plot, the character would just age and die.

That... does not look very promising, or interesting to play IMO.

[tuluse]

Personally I'm hoping for a main plot in the same vein as Wasteland 1 and Fallout 1/2.

There is definitely something that you have to do to win the game, but to a certain degree it's up to you to go find out what it is.

[Gizmo]

Personally I'm hoping for a main plot in the same vein as Wasteland 1 and Fallout 1/2.

There is definitely something that you have to do to win the game, but to a certain degree it's up to you to go find out what it is.

This is what I would like also.

[Enduin]

In theory I would agree that a no main quest game would be rather interesting. I too tire of games with a "save the world" plotline. I don't know if I would go so far as to say there should be no main plot at all, but I think that a more realistic and less over the top main plot would be greatly welcomed. I always prefer believable goals vs superhuman feats.

One idea would technically be a "no main quest game" by replacing it with a vague end goal. Instead of having to defeat big baddy X from doing something awful Y, we simply have a vague directive that can completed in a variety of ways. Already we know that we are assigned with investigating Southern California and creating a Rangers outpost there, so an extension of that could simply be to consolidate Ranger authority in the area and setup a fully functioning base. Sure an initial quest line could be dealing with the Guardians that have been mentioned, but that would just be the opening act, say to acquire the initial outpost. After that there would be no main quest line but a number of quest lines in varying importance and intricacy that would benefit this overall goal of expanding Ranger authority and developing their headquaters. Some missions would involve more lengthy storylines and discoveries with more serious foes but they wouldn't necessarily be the final mission of any kind. Technically there would be no final mission, you would simply successfully establish the Rangers and achieve your goal, but the story could continue on indefinitely if the content was introduced. New threats and new goals, expanding the territory, etc.

Most players need some kind of overarching goal. There's a reason like only 1/4 people actually complete a game, they get overwhelming, disinterested and lost. A main quest helps keep them on track. Games like TES have a a main quest but theyre so laughable and ineffective theyre kind of pointless, but then their sidequests are also often meaingless so lots of players end up feeling unfulfilled and lost, which is why I think a vague goal and not a specific plot line would be more productive for Wasteland in order to create a more open world. Especially one where you are actively developing a headquarters, its a visible and constantly changing thing that the player can see and explore. Its tangible and they'll have a much greater incentive to complete it.

[CaptainPatch]

Hmm. I was just reflecting on the axiom, "The reward of a job well done is more work." The Rangers at the start are after all, relatively minor minions of a much larger organization. Privates and Corporals would NOT be assigned to projects that inevitably lead to "Save the world!" conclusions. No, HQ would send them out on the equivalent of a scouting patrol or running supplies to an outpost or anything that pretty much anyone could accomplish. Finish that task and there's another, slightly more difficult task that would get assigned to the team. Along the way of executing a mission, other quests that do NOT originate from HQ could crop up. (= side quests) Collectively, the results of mission assignments and side quests give the Powers That Be at HQ a better grasp of just what the team could realistically handle, and assign subsequent missions that challenge the team to accomplish more difficult tasks. Other than, "These are the only personnel in the right position to tackle the task at the moment", there would be no need to throw the team at an obviously vastly superior problem. HQ is looking at the Big Picture and throws resources at problems aiming to have an overall satisfactory conclusion. That is, sometimes it is necessary to execute "soak off attacks" (diversionary attacks) there so bigger goals can be realized here. [Definitely not a fun time for those units assigned to the soak off attack, but, hey, "It's for the Greater Good", right?]

Anyway, not a direct path to "Save the world!", but the party can still end up there. But by following a more expansive, broader -- and hopefully more entertaining path.

[Enduin]

That's probably what the introductory segment will be about. In AZ we'll start out as low level Rangers completing menial introductory tasks, but some event will occur that will allow us to distinguish ourselves and after that we'll probably be promoted and assigned, do to our proven capabilities, the task of going into Cali and investigating things there. After that I would assume much of the main story will rely on the "you're the only ones close enough" trope to explain why we have to take on whatever big problem arises.

Though again I think I would prefer a more non-linear and world building type end goal versus a main enemy/threat. It was great in FO how after you stopped the Master that you could still play on, but the very fact that you knew all the big stuff was behind you kind of took the punch out of being able to play for another decade of ingame time. There really wasn't much left to do.

I would be more than willing to pay 5-10 bucks every few months for a couple years to get expansions to the game that continue the story of the whole world, and not your typical DLC we get these days like FO3 and NV where they create isolated pocket stories that have no influence on the main game, but instead real new content within the current world. New conflicts and task with communities and groups we have met, new areas and locals when necessary and worthwhile, but all with the main goal of continuing on as Desert Ranger doing what they do.

[CaptainPatch]

I would be more than willing to pay 5-10 bucks every few months for a couple years to get expansions to the game that continue the story of the whole world, and not your typical DLC we get these days like FO3 and NV where they create isolated pocket stories that have no influence on the main game, but instead real new content within the current world. New conflicts and task with communities and groups we have met, new areas and locals when necessary and worthwhile, but all with the main goal of continuing on as Desert Ranger doing what they do.

I am entirely in agreement on this approach. Spinning off to some pocket universe where there is zero connectivity to the main area of operations feels artificial, unreal, immersion-breaking, etc., and does nothing to make me feel more invested in what is supposed to be "the game world in question".

[tuluse]

I'd rather have no DLC, with full game releases that have self contained stories.

Maybe it's just me though.

[Enduin]

I'd rather have no DLC, with full game releases that have self contained stories.

Maybe it's just me though.

Well I don't envision this as a long term solution just something for the short term in between major releases. If a Wasteland 3 does get made after this it will probably take a few years from the time of Wasteland 2's release before it comes out, and that's if inXile doesn't have another project or contract come in before hand. So in the meantime it would be nice to get a couple post release expansions that further develop the world we'll undoubtedly spend a great deal of time in and show its progression with new stories and foes. After that when the real sequel comes out they can jump ahead another 15 years if they like and go to a new location or whatever.

Expansions like these don't require the entire company to produce, but a smaller team of people can take it on, especially if they truly are expansions that simply add to the current world, which would require minimal asset creation or other kinds of time consuming work. Its simply content creation and insertion, everything else is already finished and implemented in the main game. The majority of the dev team can still easily focus on developing Wasteland 3 or whatever other project they may have in line.

[Iknownothing06]

I'm not too sure about the idea of DLC. At this point in time asking for DLC is jumping the gun. It would probably be best to wait to see how the actual game turns out before requesting we get DLC to expand the wasteland universe. To me, DLC is something that is done only in consideration to add something to a game in order to further enrich it, not complete it. Until we see the final product, requesting DLC is not exactly something that should matter.

Unless they decide to do what ME 3 did, which was to introduce day one DLC. That is just a cheap way to withhold extra content unless you fork over the extra cash on top of $60 for the actual game.

As for having a main plot, for an rpg game I say you must have it. The difference being is how you introduce it. I'm gonna go with the way they handled Fallout 1 and 2. You're given a basic plot point, of which you as the character was supposed to solve within a certain amount of time, then once that is completed you discover that something terrible has happened, changing your initial goal into the main goal.

In Fallout, initial goal : Get the water chip before the vault people die of thirst.
Main goal: Vault leader finds out about imminent super mutant threat. Hence, deal with the super mutants, multiple endings of course.

Fallout 2, initial goal: Get the GECK before the people in the Arroyo Village starve.
Main goal: Villagers are captured by an evil organization called the Enclave. Hence, deal with the Enclave, again multiple endings.

Now I'm not looking for the exact mirroring of the Fallout plot structure, line for line (or in this case, macguffin for macguffin). I'm more focused on having the players start out with initial goals (Ranger's initial goal: go into California, investigate possible allies/enemies) and then have it evolve into a main goal (Ranger's 'possible' final goal: Prevent <insert name>, a terrorist organization, from taking over the world.... or something like that). The reason being is that as the protagonist, you're given incomplete information that requires you to explore the world to fill out those missing pieces of information. As you go along, you start to realize that your objectives change as you acquire new pieces of information. As a result, it makes the game both interesting and believable.

[CaptainPatch]

I'm not too sure about the idea of DLC. At this point in time asking for DLC is jumping the gun. It would probably be best to wait to see how the actual game turns out before requesting we get DLC to expand the wasteland universe. To me, DLC is something that is done only in consideration to add something to a game in order to further enrich it, not complete it. Until we see the final product, requesting DLC is not exactly something that should matter.

IF there is to be the possibility of some DLC between Roman numerals (WL2, WL3, WL4, etc.) there needs to be some "reserved rooms" in the game world where that DLC can be integrated into the existing world. This is probably the main reason that the FO3 and FNV DLCs existed in "pocket universes", outside of the main main map. The designers had NOT saved any space where those things could be comfortably plugged in. Therefore it was necessary to insert just a portal to an exterior location. This, to me, is a Bad Idea because the player isn't any further invested in the main context of the main game. If anything, it's like taking a vacation abroad = not a real part of your regular existence.

At least Bethesda seems to have figured that much out. The two DLCs released for Skyrim thus far actually mesh into the overall Skyrim map, so that world feels more fleshed out by their inclusion.

[McDougle]

The mainplot just happens in real time? Oh please, no!
That "feature" kept from playing through Fallout 1&2 as a kid... those timers always got me nervous(I always try to see *everything* in a game before I go up against the endgame).

[Gizmo]

The mainplot just happens in real time? Oh please, no!
That "feature" kept from playing through Fallout 1&2 as a kid... those timers always got me nervous(I always try to see *everything* in a game before I go up against the endgame).

That was something that I liked, and that impressed me about Fallout 1 & 2; and I'd really hope for it to be included.

*It's interesting that Tim Cain apparently did not like them. It shows me that I really like his work ~when it's tempered by others... Kind of like Sting's music*.

[CaptainPatch]

The mainplot just happens in real time? Oh please, no!
That "feature" kept from playing through Fallout 1&2 as a kid... those timers always got me nervous(I always try to see *everything* in a game before I go up against the endgame).

Actually, it's worse if the timers are set to _game_ time. Several days in the game world can expire just during one hour of Real World time passes by.

IF there is a timer attached to a quest, then it should be connected to the passage of game world time. Such as, "In 30 days, Something Bad WILL happen!" Furthermore, the amount of time allocated to the timer should be enough that the characters have an adequate opportunity to perform all of the tasks required before the timer expires. Perhaps, just barely enough time, but if the characters DO accept the task, it should never be a matter of "The clock WILL run out before you reach the Finish Line, regardless."

Personally, I have always seriously disliked quests that clamor, "Come quick! You need to go somewhere as fast you can and then ____________!" Only to discover that you can wander off to roam the entire map, sometimes multiple times, only to discover that the quest in question is still sitting there, waiting for you to complete it.

[Drool]

Personally, I have always seriously disliked quests that clamor, "Come quick! You need to go somewhere as fast you can and then ____________!" Only to discover that you can wander off to roam the entire map, sometimes multiple times, only to discover that the quest in question is still sitting there, waiting for you to complete it.

See, that just amuses me. I got several hearty chuckles out of Martin's breathless urgings to hurry in Oblivion while I traipsed about the countryside doing whatever I wanted. I pictured him complaining to the blades when I was gone:

"That blasted Nord! We need a Daedric artifact to save the world, but he keeps telling me, 'I'm on it.' On it? I can see that he's wearing four right now! And I saw him use Azura's star to recharge his sword! While he was telling me he hadn't found any! Honestly, I think we picked the wrong guy to help us. If it wasn't for the fact that he's personally shut down over two dozen gates by himself, I'd take out an ad or something."

Then again, I've expressed how I vastly prefer exploring to being on a timer. Seems the easiest fix is to just not have quest givers prattle on about urgency. Or have them use phrases like, "the sooner the better" or "as quickly as you can". Then the Rangers have an excuse!

"I said as quickly as you can!"
"Yup. And six months was as quickly as we could!"

[CaptainPatch]

All that sounds like the thing for them to do is NOT have _any_ urgency on _any_ of the tasks. "Need to Save The World? I'll get around to it when I get around to it."

I think the more appropriate NPC process should be to make ALL tasks open contracts. First one to bring home the prize gets the reward. Those that dragged their feet, tough luck. Makes the player more circumspect as to "Do I do Task A or Task B? If Task C pops up along the way and it has a bigger reward, drop whichever task I had been doing and go for the bigger prize."

Many people have been calling for their actions to carry consequences. _Choosing_ to drag one's feet would yield that kind of consequence. If you try to juggle too many things at one time, it's not surprising at all when some of them get dropped. In fact, it's only to be expected.

[snakeoil]

i would love to see the game starting with no mission at all. then after a long while the terror kicks in...
so you have some time to get prepared for any challange that may come.