Don't "niche" yourself out of business

[rakenan]

I'm really excited about seeing a sequel to Wasteland, but I'm also seeing a disturbing trend in the forums where die-hard fans want to dismiss 25 years of gaming development progress as rubbish and see a game released that would have been merely a re-hash of Wasteland had it been released 20 years ago, and would be downright antiquated today.

Please, you don't need to discard everything game developers have figured out over the past 25 years - including how to take advantage of modern hardware - to create a true spiritual successor as well as sequel to the original Wasteland. Wasteland wasn't awesome because it had no automap function, because your party was composed largely of anonymous stat-sheets produced by a random number generator, or because much of the game's storage was off-loaded into a paragraph booklet to provide a semblance of DRM. It was awesome because it had atmosphere, a story, a sense of whimsical humor, and at least in part because it was competing with the games that were available in 1988. It would be, and deserve to be, a dismal flop if released today, and if you make a game that only appeals to the die-hard fans who still go back and play Wasteland today, you'll have wasted a lot of kickstarter donor dollars.

I neither want nor expect a big budget graphical powerhouse of a game that follows every trend of modern gaming. I also don't want a slavish copy of Wasteland, warts and all, with every advancement in game design since Wasteland's initial release dismissed as being casual, or for spoiled kids in the console generation, or making the game "too easy."

[Brother None]

Well, what are you thinking of specifically? I mean, if it's about auto-mapping and having all the text in the game itself, then yeah, I wouldn't worry, they're not going to design this as a deliberate throwback.

But there's some "conventions" that have come in that I think would be detrimental to adapt to. Lack of puzzles, use of quest compasses, voice acting, stuff like that. So where would you draw the line?

[Ausir]

Well, what are you thinking of specifically? I mean, if it's about auto-mapping and having all the text in the game itself, then yeah, I wouldn't worry, they're not going to design this as a deliberate throwback.

Wait, no paragraph book? Blasphemy!

[Flamekebab]

I must agree with rakenan - we've come a long way, baby.

Where the line is drawn is up to the designers. With any luck I hope we can find a nice compromise.
I found Wasteland was just too old school for me (I'm 25 at the time of writing). If the atmosphere of the original can survive but be adapted for modern times, I'd be grateful.

[Abe Sargent]

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

[Tanglebones]

I'm really excited about seeing a sequel to Wasteland, but I'm also seeing a disturbing trend in the forums where die-hard fans want to dismiss 25 years of gaming development progress as rubbish and see a game released that would have been merely a re-hash of Wasteland had it been released 20 years ago, and would be downright antiquated today.

I neither want nor expect a big budget graphical powerhouse of a game that follows every trend of modern gaming. I also don't want a slavish copy of Wasteland, warts and all, with every advancement in game design since Wasteland's initial release dismissed as being casual, or for spoiled kids in the console generation, or making the game "too easy."

Part of the problem I'm having in nailing down your intent in your post though, is that it's very general. If you think there's a specific advancement in gaming technology/theory that you think is important, I think it's important to hear from you (as important as hearing from anyone else, anyway).

I've probably said something like "in the original Wasteland..." in about half my posts so far, but that I'm trying to point to things that (I think) the original did well in no way indicates that I want a 16 colour game, or combat that's primarily reading text while looking at an animated picture. Of course, WL2 needs to embrace new developments. One of the new developments that personally, I enjoy is the fact that many modern games are "easier" than oldschool games, but that's mainly because newer games don't equate tedious, repetitive failure to perform simple tasks in a game with a challenge. (Instead of repetitive failure, now we have repetitive fetch quests /whine). So, you know, I think we're more or less on the same page there, despite the fact that I've also been pushing, where appropriate, for the actual environment of Wasteland to be dangerous... I want the environment to be dangerous/challenging in the sense that "you have to take care or you can wind up dead", not "even if you take care, you may wind up dead." The first (I think) is fun, the second, tedious.

But, conversely, the kind of game that I think most people refer to when they say "old school RPG" kind of fell out of favour about 10-12 years ago, so, in a sense, I think, making an old school RPG is going to be a step back in time, and making a topdown/isometric game featuring turn based tactical combat is going to be, to a certain extent, a "niche" product. That's why InXile is taking it to kickstarter, because most publishers seem to think that it's too "niche" and too antiquated to fly nowadays.

[rakenan]

Well, what are you thinking of specifically? I mean, if it's about auto-mapping and having all the text in the game itself, then yeah, I wouldn't worry, they're not going to design this as a deliberate throwback.

But there's some "conventions" that have come in that I think would be detrimental to adapt to. Lack of puzzles, use of quest compasses, voice acting, stuff like that. So where would you draw the line?

Look at some of the other posts in the "What to avoid" forum. People don't want a quest log, for pete's sake. Another thread said we should just be mashing the space bar repeatedly to heal from our wounds. I haven't seen the thread insisting that rolling electronic dice for character creation was a good idea, but I'm sure it's coming. Even voice acting, I'm not sure why people dislike it. It's not for Wasteland 2, I suspect, but that seems like more of a budget issue. Fear of the written word *IS* a terrible trend in modern games, but I don't see any particular virtue in fear of voice acting either.

Then there's the stuff that I'm not really sure about. Modern RPG convention is to have one "protagonist" character, who the player may or may not create, and a bunch of recruited assistants. I honestly prefer this to creating a bunch of characters myself - it helps me feel invested in "my" character, and lets the others feel like more than anonymous stat sheets. Still, I know that some people want more of the Icewind Dale experience than the Baldur's Gate experience. That's a debate that probably belongs in another thread, though.

[Tanglebones]

Look at some of the other posts in the "What to avoid" forum. People don't want a quest log, for pete's sake. Another thread said we should just be mashing the space bar repeatedly to heal from our wounds. I haven't seen the thread insisting that rolling electronic dice for character creation was a good idea, but I'm sure it's coming. Even voice acting, I'm not sure why people dislike it. It's not for Wasteland 2, I suspect, but that seems like more of a budget issue. Fear of the written word *IS* a terrible trend in modern games, but I don't see any particular virtue in fear of voice acting either.

Then there's the stuff that I'm not really sure about. Modern RPG convention is to have one "protagonist" character, who the player may or may not create, and a bunch of recruited assistants. I honestly prefer this to creating a bunch of characters myself - it helps me feel invested in "my" character, and lets the others feel like more than anonymous stat sheets. Still, I know that some people want more of the Icewind Dale experience than the Baldur's Gate experience. That's a debate that probably belongs in another thread, though.

If you've got concerns about what some posters are suggesting in other threads, you should consider making your arguments in those threads. You seem to be here suggesting that you just can't believe what all these crazy other people think might be a good idea, but making a new thread and then talking in very general terms about what other people are saying elsewhere doesn't do much to contribute to the discussion about the issues that you're having concerns about.

[ankou]

Still, I know that some people want more of the Icewind Dale experience than the Baldur's Gate experience.

I'm only going to say that your analogy here is incorrect. Well, maybe not incorrect so much as misleading. What we want is a Wasteland experience rather than a Fallout one. Wasteland had you create your four-man firesquad of rangers, and i feel quite invested in them all because, after creation, they are all my characters but I still feel more invested in my "main".

[tyroie]

I think that a lot of the people discussing about their old favorite elements don't want an "antiquated" Wasteland 2 either. But rather, are probably trying to imagine the best way to mix the old with the new - things that most gaming companies wouldn't consider.

I don't think there's anything wrong with talking about things that you loved that you never see anymore. If a lot of people, and the devs, feel the same as you, it would be so awesome to see those things thrown into a modern game. That's part of what makes this project exciting, at least to me.

And maybe some people will get to experience something they never have, and find out that it's better than they thought it'd be.

[Infinitron]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

[hiptanaka]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This. People who want a "modern" take on RPGs could play Fallout 3, Skyrim, or Mass Effect.

Making it turn-based, party-based and top-down is already a dismissal of modern conventions, and that's what at least I am backing.

That being said, of course they shouldn't use 8-bit sound/graphics and a clumsy interface, but I think few people would prefer that. And InXile won't do it for sure.

[Workbench]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

QFT

[Jasede]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This. People who want a "modern" take on RPGs could play Fallout 3, Skyrim, or Mass Effect.

Making it turn-based, party-based and top-down is already a dismissal of modern conventions, and that's what at least I am backing.

That being said, of course they shouldn't use 8-bit sound/graphics and a clumsy interface, but I think few people would prefer that. And InXile won't do it for sure.

That.

[CappenVarra]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This. People who want a "modern" take on RPGs could play Fallout 3, Skyrim, or Mass Effect.

Making it turn-based, party-based and top-down is already a dismissal of modern conventions, and that's what at least I am backing.

That being said, of course they shouldn't use 8-bit sound/graphics and a clumsy interface, but I think few people would prefer that. And InXile won't do it for sure.

That.

+1

[CanadianWolvie]

I think this is an important thread, I probably would have written something very similar to the OP

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This. People who want a "modern" take on RPGs could play Fallout 3, Skyrim, or Mass Effect.

Making it turn-based, party-based and top-down is already a dismissal of modern conventions, and that's what at least I am backing.

That being said, of course they shouldn't use 8-bit sound/graphics and a clumsy interface, but I think few people would prefer that. And InXile won't do it for sure.

I bolded the part I agree with whole heartedly. I was going to add I don't want the old Wasteland User Interface, I don't want to do key words to have conversations with NPCs ... but this isn't saying I don't want the core game mechanics and the design philosphy that says "here, try the approach you think it appropriate, multiple possibly solutions for one problem" or a setting that is in its own way very mature with its subject matter around moral decisions.

There is a lot about this project that seems steeped in the rose coloured glasses of nostalgia or that seems like trying to play Dwarf Fortress, I hope you know what I mean by that. Maybe I made a mistake Backing this when I haven't had any experience with Wasteland itself but this spawned Fallout, full stop.

Fallout let me use my mouse, I got to point buy the character, and without a doubt I want that in Wasteland but on Wasteland's terms, I want to point buy a whole team and try to survive as a group of Rangers. So I find it insulting that me wanting a "modern" experience that isn't another god damn FPS that only controls a single character. To me this is no different than hoping both Xenonauts and the Firaxis XCOM game succeeds but I couldn't care less about Syndicate FPS or Xcom FPS. To me this is playing Brogue instead of Rogue because Brogue is so damn nice to me in letting me use my mouse and makes ASCII look so damn pretty with all the colours.

I hope you understand and consider this +2.

[krellen]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This is exactly the point. The beautiful thing about the Kickstarter is that InXile does not have to make a game that will "sell". We have all already bought it, and funded it. It's already hit the "profitable" mark. So long as the financial support remains satisfied, the game is already golden. We don't have to worry about a game Johnny Gamer, who loved Fallout 3 but finds Fallout 1 impossible to play, will buy.

[Lucius]

I think the game/genre definitely needs a bit of modernization in graphics and interface. I wouldn't want dialogue with typing keywords either, but I hope the character stats during creation are still rolled like dice rolls.

[Workbench]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This is exactly the point. The beautiful thing about the Kickstarter is that InXile does not have to make a game that will "sell". We have all already bought it, and funded it. It's already hit the "profitable" mark. So long as the financial support remains satisfied, the game is already golden. We don't have to worry about a game Johnny Gamer, who loved Fallout 3 but finds Fallout 1 impossible to play, will buy.

It really is a dream come true. I have faith that fargo will see through the bullshit and deliver a quality product.

[Balthazor]

Wasteland 2 has already been niched out of the "business". That's why it needed a Kickstarter.

This is exactly the point. The beautiful thing about the Kickstarter is that InXile does not have to make a game that will "sell". We have all already bought it, and funded it. It's already hit the "profitable" mark. So long as the financial support remains satisfied, the game is already golden. We don't have to worry about a game Johnny Gamer, who loved Fallout 3 but finds Fallout 1 impossible to play, will buy.

Funding for production /= profitable.

The OP has a good point. Inxile will do well to make a great game in the spirit of Wasteland, but taking advantage of all appropriate gaming developments made since 1988 in order to keep the game attractive and accessible to as many people as possible.

This doesn't mean making Fallout 4. But it also doesn't mean they should have a paragraph manual and no game saves, either. There is a happy balance that can be achieved here.

Making the game too 'niche' just doesn't make sense; I want the game to be as successful as possible, so inXile has the clout to keep making more great games on their terms and has more leverage to raise funds from either fans or publishers. And successful, at least to me, means a great game that also sells well; simply handing out kickstarter supporters the game and calling it a day is not really a good business model.