Kickstarter Drive Update #6

[krellen]

The plan was to present their ideas to people and then gather feedback. I don't know if that'll be done before Kickstarter is over.

I just got a response today that made it seem unlikely that we'd see a vision document before the Kickstarter ended. I was told they were going to hash out details over the next couple months.

[Brother None]

I just got a response today that made it seem unlikely that we'd see a vision document before the Kickstarter ended. I was told they were going to hash out details over the next couple months.

Ok, but we weren't talking about the vision document.

But sure, that makes sense. It's an actual vision document, not a piece of PR. inXile has sadly been a little overwhelmed during the whole Kickstarter phase, which means the rate of information and updates has been less quick than preferable. Can't be helped.

[flang]

If he is going to devote significant staff and funds towards this part of the project as he indicated he would,

Where did he indicate that? The plan was always for this to be a minor addition, some notes, sharing info and maybe items. Not co-op, not full multiplayer, nothing like that.

The plan was to present their ideas to people and then gather feedback. I don't know if that'll be done before Kickstarter is over. inXile does not consider it important enough that it "cannot be removed".

It's this quote from the original update: "At 2 million we will increase the staff to make the game more social so that it can become a more shared experience."

Maybe he overstated how much work will go into these features, but if that's the case then why doesn't he come out and say it? Why doesn't he issue an update that puts it just as you did - "I misspoke in implying there would be staff dedicated to the online experience. This will be a minor addition, nothing more."

We don't need a vision document or anything detailed like that. None of the questions I listed requires any significant amount of time or effort to address. I'm just frustrated that despite stating he would be seeking further feedback on how this portion of the game will work, it now looks like it's a done deal and they're just going to ignore whatever further questions anyone has until well past the funding deadline.

The plan was to present their ideas to people and then gather feedback. I don't know if that'll be done before Kickstarter is over.

I just got a response today that made it seem unlikely that we'd see a vision document before the Kickstarter ended. I was told they were going to hash out details over the next couple months.

And if this is the case, then we're almost certainly not talking about minor features any more. Anything that takes a couple of months to plan out is very likely to be an integral part of the game that can't be easily ignored or dismissed by those who choose not to use it.

Don't double post, use the edit button - BN

[Brother None]

It's this quote from the original update: "At 2 million we will increase the staff to make the game more social so that it can become a more shared experience."

Maybe he overstated how much work will go into these features, but if that's the case then why doesn't he come out and say it? Why doesn't he issue an update that puts it just as you did - "I misspoke in implying there would be staff dedicated to the online experience. This will be a minor addition, nothing more."

I dunno if it's that wide spread an issue that this was read as "all the $500K extra will go to social feature". The vast majority of money always goes to making the game bigger and deeper. Brian has talked about how he should've formulated this better, yes. I was hoping the whole "update on social things" post would happen earlier, but it might've been moved aside as Obsidian kind of made everyone forget about it.

To be honest, it's not that easy for Brian to be fully aware of all the concerns and reply to them in a timely fashion. He's pretty busy, as is everyone at inXile. The staff could probably do with a PR/community manager type guy, only obviously that's not where we want the money to go. Right now I'm kind of fulfilling this role on a voluntary basis, but I'm not in the studio so there's only so much I can do.

[Vryheid]

Maybe he overstated how much work will go into these features, but if that's the case then why doesn't he come out and say it? Why doesn't he issue an update that puts it just as you did - "I misspoke in implying there would be staff dedicated to the online experience. This will be a minor addition, nothing more."

Because video game devs are masters at being deliberately vague so they can keep all design options out on the table? Even the highly unlikely ones?

I mean that isn't the most romantic explanation, but this is just standard practice in the industry. You think this is frustrating, just try getting a straight answer out of a Blizzard or Infinity Ward dev. We should be thankful we're getting any feedback at all at this point.

[flang]

To be honest, it's not that easy for Brian to be fully aware of all the concerns and reply to them in a timely fashion. He's pretty busy, as is everyone at inXile.

I really want to believe that, but in the time he took to write up a lengthy blog post regarding the controversy, he did not actually put to rest most of the concerns anyone had brought up. It effectively amounted to: "Don't worry about it," and now nothing.

I guess it's too late to hope that the funding never actually reached $2 million, which is a pretty lousy thing to wish for in the first place. It's just incredibly disheartening that they've seemingly decided to just ignore the issue to avoid any further controversy until the funding is in hand. In this one area of "Ignore the problem until it goes away" they are more like the big publishers than they'd probably admit.

Because video game devs are masters at being deliberately vague so they can keep all design options out on the table? Even the highly unlikely ones?

I mean that isn't the most romantic explanation, but this is just standard practice in the industry. You think this is frustrating, just try getting a straight answer out of a Blizzard or Infinity Ward dev. We should be thankful we're getting any feedback at all at this point.

That may be the best-case scenario in this situation. But wouldn't it be pretty awful that devs are turning to Kickstarter to get out from under the heel of opressive publishers... only to end up adopting some of their worst habits in the process?

[Brother None]

I guess it's too late to hope that the funding never actually reached $2 million, which is a pretty lousy thing to wish for in the first place. It's just incredibly disheartening that they've seemingly decided to just ignore the issue to avoid any further controversy until the funding is in hand. In this one area of "Ignore the problem until it goes away" they are more like the big publishers than they'd probably admit.

That's ascribing some dastardly motivations to what probably comes down to poor communication skills/time free to invest in communicating.

[krellen]

And if this is the case, then we're almost certainly not talking about minor features any more.

Let me be clear: I got this in response to asking about combat and the vision document specifically, not social features.

[flang]

I guess it's too late to hope that the funding never actually reached $2 million, which is a pretty lousy thing to wish for in the first place. It's just incredibly disheartening that they've seemingly decided to just ignore the issue to avoid any further controversy until the funding is in hand. In this one area of "Ignore the problem until it goes away" they are more like the big publishers than they'd probably admit.

That's ascribing some dastardly motivations to what probably comes down to poor communication skills/time free to invest in communicating.

Despite my obvious cynicism around this topic, I honestly, deeply want for you to be right and me to be all wrong.

[ButchinMelancholy]

And you really seems to be on the wrong track indeed.

I understand that you would expect an answer at this matter now that it has been put on the table, but as Brother None said, they are a relatively small team and can't do everything at the same time, so you should at least have the decency to understand it before assuming some dishonest or hypocrite motive from them. If he doesn't give news about that, perhaps is it just because there are some more important things to think about for now, and he may get back to that idea timely. And it doesn't mean either that he would like to "free" himself to not pay as much attention to our feedback after the Kickstarter campaign than now.
Do you really believe that they will basically wait to cash the money and say "Thanks, f*ck you and good bye!" then? If you don't trust them, you shouldn't be here I think.
Now Brian didn't, ever, implied that this will need "a significant staff and funds" just because he referred to the fact that this will imply to hire a few people more. Especially as, from the very beginning, he has made clear that this would be a minor and "TOTALLY OPTIONAL" (as it was written) feature, and absolutely never "end up being a significant part of the finished product". Neither is it possible that "Brian considers the social features to be an important part of the game that cannot be removed" as he directly stated that "if YOU the fans still don't want it then we will not fight the majority".

So your only relevant questions are:
"- Approximately how much of the final funding amount will be dedicated to developing the online portion of the game?"
Certainly very little, provided that this will be done.

"- Will the structure be server-based or peer-to-peer?"
I don't know (of course). Does this represents any problem?

None of the rest is even appropriate to consider. So yes, there wasn't anything else to address than what was already said apparently.


That said, after reading again and other things about it, I think I get the idea and finally, it seems pretty nice. I wasn't sure how they could conceive something that would really fit or have any true interest regarding that game, but it looks like it would just be a "Turn on" option that would permit you to have contact with your friends while you are both playing the game (and then the ability to leave notes perhaps, I don't know).

[flang]

And you really seems to be on the wrong track indeed.

I understand that you would expect an answer at this matter now that it has been put on the table, but as Brother None said, they are a relatively small team and can't do everything at the same time, so you should at least have the decency to understand it before assuming some dishonest or hypocrite motive from them. If he doesn't give news about that, perhaps is it just because there are some more important things to think about for now, and he may get back to that idea timely. And it doesn't mean either that he would like to "free" himself to not pay as much attention to our feedback after the Kickstarter campaign than now.
Do you really believe that they will basically wait to cash the money and say "Thanks, f*ck you and good bye!" then? If you don't trust them, you shouldn't be here.
Now Brian didn't, ever, implied that this will need "a significant staff and funds" just because he referred to the fact that this will imply to hire a few people more. Especially as, from the very beginning, he has made clear that this would be a minor and "TOTALLY OPTIONAL" (as it was written) feature, and absolutely never "end up being a significant part of the finished product". Neither is it possible that "Brian considers the social features to be an important part of the game that cannot be removed" as he directly stated that "if YOU the fans still don't want it then we will not fight the majority".

So your only relevant questions are:
"- Approximately how much of the final funding amount will be dedicated to developing the online portion of the game?"
Certainly very little, provided that this will be done.

"- Will the structure be server-based or peer-to-peer?"
I don't know (of course). Does this represents any problem?

None of the rest is even appropriate to consider. So yes, there wasn't anything else to address than what he already said apparently.

There's so many problems I have with your post, most prominently with your attitude and implying that I'm somehow indecent for requesting more information on a widely-controversial aspect of the game, that I'd rather just ignore you. But on the other hand I'm tired of trying raise questions in as calm and civilized way as possible only to end up being shouted down by you and a couple of others on this board.

You do not work at InXile, you presumably have no contact whatsoever with any member of the team, so you have absolutely no knowledge of how any part of the game is being developed or conceived beyond what anyone else knows. And the only information any of us know is what Brian wrote in one Kickstarter update, a couple of tweets, and one follow-up blog post. In none of those places were any of the questions or concerns that I and others have addressed.

Yes, I understand that the online features are optional. Seriously, you can stop bringing that point up. That has absolutely nothing to do with any of the potential problems I raised about their inclusion. The mouse I have with my computer is also optional, but the experience wouldn't really be ideal if I tried to go without it. Get the idea? If Wasteland 2 is a game that is 80% offline and 20% online, those that play offline are going to get a significantly lesser experience.

Regarding how the structure of the online features are built (server or P2P), it makes a big difference in how we will play Wasteland 2 several years in the future as well as privacy for those who care about it. Having the game based off of a server means we may end up being required to open an account with InXile in order to access any of it. More importantly though, if InXile eventually ends up being acquired by a larger publisher like EA or Activision, we will then have to sign up for their respective online platforms in order to play the game, which would be an absolute kick to the face to those of us who detest those companies for their abusive practices and attitudes towards consumers.

And yes, Brian did say they would hire additional staff specifically to implement online features into the game! It's right there in the update. He has not edited or rescinded it in any way. That means that at this point, it's pretty reasonable to assume that online is going to be integral in some way to Wasteland 2. I understand that I may be wrong. I am only basing my prediction on the very little information that has been given to us thus far. That is why I am pleading that someone from the team post new information that provides some clarity.

He also followed that update by stating that InXile will post their thoughts in the forums to gauge our response, but 2 weeks later that has not happened and it looks like it probably won't happen until well after the deadline. That means that those of us who care deeply about the effect online integration could have on the final product, as well as its long-term value, are left mostly clueless as to whether the project we're backing is going to end up is dramatically different than what it started as.

I understand you don't really care about any of this. That is totally fine with me. But please don't act like a jerk and throw childish remarks around just because I'm discussing a topic you care nothing about. If you do happen to get solid answers from Brian or InXile to the questions I raised, I would very much like to see them. As of right now though, you're no more up to speed than I am.

[krellen]

flang, if you are a backer, go to the Kickstarter, click the "Ask a Question" button, and ask your questions.

If you are not, post them simply and concisely here and I shall do so for you.

[flang]

flang, if you are a backer, go to the Kickstarter, click the "Ask a Question" button, and ask your questions.

If you are not, post them simply and concisely here and I shall do so for you.

I am a backer. I initially sent a question through Kickstarter back when the update was first brought up but got no response. I also posted in the comments but the only post made was to wait for further info.

If you could have better luck than I, then here are the questions I feel are the most critical to address as soon as possible, in order of importance:


- Will we be required to go online to experience certain parts of the story, dialogue, or gameplay?

- Assuming some of the online implementation will affect the game's difficulty (e.g. item sharing and note dropping), will the game's "normal" level be balanced towards those who do play online, or those who do not?

- Will the structure be server-based or peer-to-peer? Will we be required to register an account with InXile in order to play?


Thank you for offering to help. If you ask them I really hope someone gives you a solid answer.

[Brother None]

- Will we be required to go online to experience certain parts of the story, dialogue, or gameplay?

- Assuming some of the online implementation will affect the game's difficulty (e.g. item sharing and note dropping), will the game's "normal" level be balanced towards those who do play online, or those who do not?

- Will the structure be server-based or peer-to-peer? Will we be required to register an account with InXile in order to play?

I think some of these questions may not have been answered because they're too obvious. The answer to the first two is no and "those who do not". Register in order to play? Hell no.

[krellen]

I paraphrased into simpler line items for them to address, but I just got back a simple blanket response:

We've backed off on the social features until we have more time to detail out what we're thinking and discuss this with the community. Nothing is set in stone yet and we will be discussing our thoughts as we get further into preproduction. You have to keep in mind that we only knew Wasteland was a go a few weeks ago. We plan to keep designing the product for the next 6 months or so.

[flang]

- Will we be required to go online to experience certain parts of the story, dialogue, or gameplay?

- Assuming some of the online implementation will affect the game's difficulty (e.g. item sharing and note dropping), will the game's "normal" level be balanced towards those who do play online, or those who do not?

- Will the structure be server-based or peer-to-peer? Will we be required to register an account with InXile in order to play?

I think some of these questions may not have been answered because they're too obvious. The answer to the first two is no and "those who do not". Register in order to play? Hell no.

I would think that most of those have obvious answers as well, but because they haven't yet elaborated on it I wanted to at least bring those points to their attention so they know the concerns are there. Even an obvious answer would be satisfying over no answer at all, and putting the info out there would add some much-needed closure to the matter. Weeks-long radio silence can breed confusion (or perhaps even unwarranted distrust, in my case).

I think that since virtually all PC games are digital distro now, most PC devs assume that if you buy your game online than you must have no problems whatsoever playing online either. But for those who care about the long-term value of their games, having a complete offline experience is critical, especially since so few games today offer it. That shift towards "games as a service" and away from games as a singular, self-contained experience which can be enjoyed for generations into the future is why I am harping so hard on this point.

I paraphrased into simpler line items for them to address, but I just got back a simple blanket response:

inXile wrote:We've backed off on the social features until we have more time to detail out what we're thinking and discuss this with the community. Nothing is set in stone yet and we will be discussing our thoughts as we get further into preproduction. You have to keep in mind that we only knew Wasteland was a go a few weeks ago. We plan to keep designing the product for the next 6 months or so.

Thank you. I guess I should've just tried again at a less busier time instead of spending all this time complaining. I'd rather they try to sort it out ahead of time instead of during pre-production, but I understand their situation and at least it means they still intend to get feedback before going ahead with it. So I suppose I can now give it a rest for a while.

[ButchinMelancholy]

There's so many problems I have with your post, most prominently with your attitude and implying that I'm somehow indecent for requesting more information on a widely-controversial aspect of the game, that I'd rather just ignore you. But on the other hand I'm tired of trying raise questions in as calm and civilized way as possible only to end up being shouted down by you and a couple of others on this board.

I don't think your problem comes from my words. I have been as civilized as you deem to be, and my purpose was only to be clear, not to "shout you down". That said, again, if you don't mind joining almost offensive inuendos against some honest people willing to do their best to deliver a game you should be enthusiastic about (because you are here I guess) to your claims, don't wonder why some other people involved with passion behind this project act a bit sharply towards this attitude.

You do not work at InXile, you presumably have no contact whatsoever with any member of the team, so you have absolutely no knowledge of how any part of the game is being developed or conceived beyond what anyone else knows. And the only information any of us know is what Brian wrote in one Kickstarter update, a couple of tweets, and one follow-up blog post. In none of those places were any of the questions or concerns that I and others have addressed.

The difference being that I am gathering all those elements together and only assume the likely assumptions, and not pretending anything else, whereas you are blatantly extrapolating to the benefit of some unfounded -in regard to this case- hypothesis partly based on a questionable -to say the least- depreciation of inXile's intentions, which I just find improper. What you can assume in some cases does not apply everywhere else, especially when it was reproved in those other places.

Yes, I understand that the online features are optional. Seriously, you can stop bringing that point up. That has absolutely nothing to do with any of the potential problems I raised about their inclusion. The mouse I have with my computer is also optional, but the experience wouldn't really be ideal if I tried to go without it. Get the idea? If Wasteland 2 is a game that is 80% offline and 20% online, those that play offline are going to get a significantly lesser experience.

Do you really think so? Again, from everything that was evoked about it, I can in all likelihood interpret the expression "totally optional" as "this will not affect in any way the core experience of the game" which is basically what they said, because it will not be a part of it (according to their statements). So this would likely just be a bonus, you know, like a 3D mode, "get the idea?"...

Regarding how the structure of the online features are built (server or P2P), it makes a big difference in how we will play Wasteland 2 several years in the future as well as privacy for those who care about it. Having the game based off of a server means we may end up being required to open an account with InXile in order to access any of it. More importantly though, if InXile eventually ends up being acquired by a larger publisher like EA or Activision, we will then have to sign up for their respective online platforms in order to play the game, which would be an absolute kick to the face to those of us who detest those companies for their abusive practices and attitudes towards consumers.

How can you tell me that you understand what "totally optional" means when you still think that we will have to use these online features to play the game?
As I already said, this will not be a part of the core gameplay (not just my words, I insist), so we could still play the full game anyway...
However yes, as a matter of handling the details we could try to figure out how will this be supported, but this is not important nor urgent and they will most certainly offer the most convenient solution, and tell us in time (because I repeat, snapping your fingers will not help them to do all the work, that's just irreverent).
Again, where are you getting all these fetched problems... It's not that I am careless, just rational.

And yes, Brian did say they would hire additional staff specifically to implement online features into the game! It's right there in the update. He has not edited or rescinded it in any way. That means that at this point, it's pretty reasonable to assume that online is going to be integral in some way to Wasteland 2. I understand that I may be wrong. I am only basing my prediction on the very little information that has been given to us thus far. That is why I am pleading that someone from the team post new information that provides some clarity.

I think I get one of your problems, you can't read properly, isn't it? I am sorry to be harsh, but that's annoying. Where did I deny the fact that Brian Fargo said he was considering to hire some more people to do the thing (certainly not when I said "he referred to the fact that this will imply to hire a few people more")? My point was just that adding some people for this task doesn't mean that this will be an important part of the game, but only that it requires those people to be included in (that's why I've used bold letters to highlight the important words to take into account, but that wasn't enough apparently...). And I won't repeat how he designated it as accessory, which clearly doesn't let any chance to interpret this as being a possible full new team to work on it full-time, and so the costs should not be important on the other hand (here's the why and how...).


So the only "dramatic" or "childish" thing here is how you're mishandling those insignificant things and react to some only rational criticism (which was just a minor part of the other purely "pragmatic" answers).
And that's not because I am not waving my arms in all directions that I don't care about this question, you should have read all this topic before. You are overreacting, yes.

So try to get your answers from the concerned before throwing that nonsense around. Thanks.


EDIT: I am becoming bitter I must admit, and apologize...