Who actually really played Wasteland?

[Lanatir]

Ok, since i cant do a poll here ill just ask in a normal thread. I get the feeling that the majority here never really played Wasteland (and with played i mean dont start it up once in Dosbox or Emulator and go like 'cant get over crappy gfx and cumbersome menu, what a sucky game!').

I'd really like to know...who played it? Did You finish it? Did you like it? And if you didnt play it, why exactly are you backing it? What is your expectation?

As for me, i played it back then in 1988 on the C64, my first playthrough took around 2-3 months. The game was on par with jewels like Ultima 4 and Bards Tale 3 back then, and i couldnt stop playing it. I finished the game with very very pimped characters (cloned my best char and then grinded some ranks just using close combat).

[Drool]

Played it and beat it dozens of times both back in the day and since the announcement of the kickstarter.

[Skirge]

My cousin and I played it once back in '88 and beat it. We would actually each play it ourselves and then compare how far each had gotten when we got back together a few weeks later. We'd continue playing for the weekend using the saved game of whoever had done better. Had an awesome time trying to figure it all out. I tried to play it in the past year or so and just can't bring myself to do it.

[Sxerks]

There is a list in this thread.

[krellen]

There is a list in this thread.

Well, that's not a complete list. I haven't posted in that thread, because I honestly don't remember what computer it was. I've had a lot.

[Lanatir]

There is a list in this thread.

Well, that's not a complete list. I haven't posted in that thread, because I honestly don't remember what computer it was. I've had a lot.

Thank you.

Yes, i want some more information then mere 'apple or c64 or ibm'. And i also wanna hear from those who DIDNT play it. I wanna understand their reasoning behind backing this game.

[krellen]

Their reasoning is probably "more Fallout". Look over the Kickstarter. There's more mention of Fallout than Wasteland.

[Lanatir]

While i am quite worried you might be right on this, i still assume that people that fund a game called Wasteland 2 still have the dignity and class to accept the fact that it will indeed by Wasteland 2. But i dont want to jump to conclusions. I really wanna get input on this.

[Mishrak]

I'm backing it because of Brian Fargo and Fallout 1. I realize though, that it will not be a "true fallout 3". However, a cRPG made in the same spirit that Fallout 1 was made is something I want to play. I'm extremely uninterested in the modern rpgs because of how bland and dumbed down they are.

I've played enough of Wasteland to understand the point. I love the feel and approach for it. I have too much going on right now to just sit down and figure everything out, and I really would rather not just follow a player's guide on a first playthrough, so some technical limitations have left me not desiring to really push past that.

I love what I've seen of it recently and what I had seen years ago when I first took a shot at Wasteland. I had my pledge up literally within less than an hour of the Kickstarter going live and I can't wait to take a look at the Beta and see what a modern day Wasteland will be like.

[ButchinMelancholy]

Their reasoning is probably "more Fallout". Look over the Kickstarter. There's more mention of Fallout than Wasteland.

It is legitimate to have other references when you didn't play the original, this doesn't mean that they are necessarily expecting a new "true" Fallout game (although this is the case for some indeed... but everyone's not as wise as Lanatir supposes ).

This is my case. I've only started Wasteland recently (because I want to know more and that is certainly a game I will enjoy), but my mind is pretty clear, I don't confuse Fallout with Wasteland. I wasn't especially appealed the first time I heard about this project, because this name didn't recall me much (although it sounded familiar), but I was intrigued though. Then I knew more and it became very interesting, because of the people involved and the nature of their claims. I am fond of those "old school" deep and tactical RPGs, and Fallout certainly is my fetish one. I am not ignoring that there is a certain gap between Fallout and Wasteland, but it seems that they are intrinsically linked together though, and as inXile are willing to do I think this game should now benefit from those 20 years of evolution (and I don't mean to be "modern" or join any fashion, but to be "up to date") and deliver its potential with nowadays possibilities. I don't want to have a copy of the first one because I can fortunately play it today too, and I think those good old RPGs that made me passionate can be improved (and revisited) also. Of course, as many of you I guess, I've got some difficulties to imagine how they could do it right and worry a bit as all this "magic" seems to be lost nowadays, but I'm feeling pretty confident however.
As I said arriving here, "if that game could just be spiritually truthful to the Fallout experience, and somehow feel like a brother to it, with its own settings and personality but leaving us that same flavor, it would be a bliss." And I didn't mention the first Wasteland because I don't know it enough, again, but that's what I meant by having its own identity.

In sum, I am excited about the prospect of finding those kind of experiences again, everything I have learned about this project make me enthusiastic and I trust the guys behind it.

[Lanatir]

Yes, i see where you are coming from. While i did play Fallout, you could probably count me deep into the hardcore WL crowd. But while i was very much upfront against the including of too many fallout features and also went against the 'falloutians' as i have called them, i came to realize that the only way we all will get what we want is when we accept the wishes of 'the other crowd'.

All im really asking is: make me a game that i can recognize. A game that when i would see it on some computer screen i would say: oh, look, this looks someone made a Wasteland sequel!

[ButchinMelancholy]

I don't think you could necessarily recognize it at first glance, but I hope this will feel really familiar with both of these games yes, and that's what Brian seems to wish too.

[wormspeaker]

I first played Wasteland on my C64. I still have the "album" style box and one of the 5.25" floppies. (I seem to have lost the others somewhere.) More recently I used to play it through to completion about once every year or two in the IBM version up until about 2005 or so when my old Windows 98 machine finally died and it was too hard to get it to work on my new machine.

That being said, there aren't too many differences between Wasteland updated to newer graphics and interface and Fallout 1 and 2. The main differences are in the aesthetics (Wasteland was very much a product of the 80s and Fallout had it's retro 50s vibe) and the lack of true party based combat in Fallout. (The underlying game mechanics are different, but Wasteland 2 will certainly not have the same game mechanics as Wasteland 1, because those were more or less the result of limitations in technology of the time more than anything else.*)

No doubt somewhere there is someone who has compiled a list of differences between the two properties, but I think the two that I listed are the only major ones. The rest of the differences are ones of extent rather than kind.

So, frankly if two different people backed this project: One wanting a sequel to Wasteland, and the other wanting a sequel to Fallout 1/2, I think both parties will ultimately be satisfied with what Wasteland 2 will most likely be.

* One of the most unique things about Wasteland is the way that the combat is dealt with. I don't think the original Wasteland team chose to use a non-map based combat as a intentional stylistic choice, and instead that choice was dictated by limitations of the hardware and development tools of the time. They couldn't stick in map-based combat like the "Gold Box Series" and the open world in the same game with the limitations of time, money, and technology that they had at the time.

[krellen]

Satisfied, perhaps. But it's largely a question of how deeply invested I'm willing to be. I'd pay more for something closer to Wasteland than to Fallout.

[Gizmo]

I played it; I didn't finish it ~but I plan to before Oct 2013

I did play and finish "Destiny Knight", but I didn't get the other two from that series until about 6 years ago, and I haven't played them seriously yet.
Great game.


I backed WL2 because he's been trying to get it backed for decades and I know that it will be a good game; and
(of course) because of it's relation to Fallout.

[Lanatir]

I played it; I didn't finish it ~but I plan to before Oct 2013

I did play and finish "Destiny Knight", but I didn't get the other two from that series until about 6 years ago, and I haven't played them seriously yet.
Great game.


I backed WL2 because he's been trying to get it backed for decades and I know that it will be a good game; and
(of course) because of it's relation to Fallout.

If you did like destiny knight i suggest you really give Bards Tale 3 Thief of Fate a try. It is an improvement in every aspect. And the storyline is absolutely epic.

[CaptainPatch]

I played WL originally on someone else's PC back in 1988. Loved the game so much, I acquired my own copy when I got my very own first PC. I didn't stop playing until the newer OSes stopped supporting 5-1/4" floppies. I've been waiting ever since for the game to be re-released for Win XP/Vista/7. (In vain, it seems.) I'm hoping that prior to the WL2 release, inXile will do just that, just to warm up the audience.

Along these same lines, I recently acquired a re-release of the Baldur's Gate series, which also includes the Icewind Dale series, Planescape: Torment, and Temple of Elemental Evil, all for $20. And I've been loving it. Plot-wise, those games are still every bit as fascinating as any other current games. Even the graphics, crude as they are, are still decent to look at. Really wish inXile would do the same for Wasteland, _NOW_.

[Gizmo]

If you did like destiny knight i suggest you really give Bards Tale 3 Thief of Fate a try. It is an improvement in every aspect. And the storyline is absolutely epic.

That's a good endorsement.

...and Temple of Elemental Evil, all for $20. And I've been loving it.

http://www.moddb.com/mods/circle-of-eight-modpack/downloads

[Rzarkrusz Rowa]

Played it for the first time in 2008. I started playing it tens of times, never finished it. The furthest I got was to New Vegas and Darwin.

* One of the most unique things about Wasteland is the way that the combat is dealt with. I don't think the original Wasteland team chose to use a non-map based combat as a intentional stylistic choice, and instead that choice was dictated by limitations of the hardware and development tools of the time. They couldn't stick in map-based combat like the "Gold Box Series" and the open world in the same game with the limitations of time, money, and technology that they had at the time.

Wasteland combat is map-based. You can press space to see where everyone in sight is on map.
What is different is the scale of the map. Wasteland has a tactical-scale map while Gold Box Series have a skirmish scale map.

[krellen]

http://www.moddb.com/mods/circle-of-eight-modpack/downloads

Anywhere I can find out what changes that mod actually makes?