Kickstarter Drive Update #6

[God is Dog backwards]

Brian Fargo's most recent Tweet said the following:

"Read the whole update. Social as in share information with fellow player IF you want to. Demon Souls best analogy."

Except in Demon's Souls, the multiplayer part was INTEGRAL TO THE GAME! If you played offline you didn't get the 'proper' game experience - it was meant to be played socially - viewing player's ghosts, seeing the messages etc. It's not what I want in an old-school RPG! The whole game was balanced around the multiplayer - you were warned of insta-death traps etc. You were at a disadvantage if you played offline.

If this is seriously how Brian Fargo wants Wasteland to emulate and take inspiration from... well, like some others, I'll be dropping down to the minimum tier at least, or possibly dropping out altogether. It's not what I want in an old school RPG.

[flang]

Add one more who will withdraw his pledge completely if social features stay in the game. Who in the world asked for this? It's not among any of the polling options for requested features at all. If Brian Fargo and InXile want to take the profits from Wasteland 2 and make a social-gaming RPG I think that's swell, but that should not be a part of this game.

I thought the whole reason this Kickstarter happened in the first place is because single-player, tactical CRPGs can't get funding anymore, because publishers don't want to invest in any game that isn't "connected" in some way. Based on where all the ridiculous hype is around Facebook and iPhone gaming, Fargo would have no trouble at all getting a couple of million to make a social game of any kind if that's really what he wants to do.

If you're really set on doing this, at least put it in the poll as a possible feature, so that the backers can vote on it. If it turns out that most people actually do want a social game, so be it; I will take the $100 I would've spent on Wasteland 2 and put it towards whatever Avellone comes up with down the road.

__________
Edit: This post now comes across as harsher than I intended. Sorry.

[ewHurtado]

I never had the pleasure of playing wasteland, probably never will, so the closest I'm going to get is wasteland 2... So no Social... and no Multiplayer, Please... I want to be able to experience the game how it was meant to be.

[JanetRGilbert]

I wouldn't retract my pledge, that'd be silly. After all you can always ignore the social features. But feature creep on a tight budget seems risky.

[lexicon]

Well yeah one can always ignore the social features but the question is why spend money on this at all?

I wouldn't retract my pledge, that'd be silly. After all you can always ignore the social features. But feature creep on a tight budget seems risky.

[SXX]

I'm totally against social features in the game, its okay if you include achievements as long as they optional and disabled in DRM-free version.
But any socialization its against spirit of old-school RPG. I make my pledge for old-school RPG, not for social experience.
I never seen any game when social things and achievement wasn't stupid.

They always limit player in role-playing and force him to be like he can be in real life.

Sandbox RPG should be interesting by itself without artificial goals.
If game boring you can't make it fun with this stuff, but all that always damage atmosphere and gameplay.

[Brother None]

An update from Brian Fargo:

Everyone remain calm....

There has been a lot of panic that any kind of element of sharing will ruin the classic old school RPG. I think some people are overreacting to the word "social" which I can kind of understand. But here is the bottom line. We will post a description of our thoughts in the forums and if YOU the fans still don't want it then we will not fight the majority. We can now get back to our normal shouting.

[Infinitron]

To be honest, to me, this social feature just smells like something InExile wants for the tablet-market to increase sales after launch... Not to make a better old-school single player RPG-game.

That would make sense if they'd first committed to making a tablet version, which they haven't.

[SXX]

That would make sense if they'd first committed to making a tablet version, which they haven't.

I don't care about any tablet/console versions as long as they go with independent development cycle.
But saying about social features or multilayer its really bad idea.

I'm already seen what happens with RPG when its goes to have multilayer.
Check FOnline: 2238

[undecaf]

I agree with people that this (the social stuff) is a bad idea and I will definitely vote NO without second thoughts when a poll appears, but to back out completely and harm the chances of finally getting an old school RPG over this kind of issue seems overreacting to me. For me at least, it takes a lot more to withdraw my support than an admittedly bad, but negligable issue like this.

The good thing about this backlash is that there will likely be a survey very soon so we get this thing out of the way.

[The_A_Drain]

Everyone remain calm....

There has been a lot of panic that any kind of element of sharing will ruin the classic old school RPG. I think some people are overreacting to the word "social" which I can kind of understand. But here is the bottom line. We will post a description of our thoughts in the forums and if YOU the fans still don't want it then we will not fight the majority. We can now get back to our normal shouting.

I take issue with assuming 100ish hardcore elitists represent the other 19,900 people who donated. Would seem the 'majority' are actually silent.

I also think people are underestimating just how social old school hardcore RPGs really were. I spent a lot of time discussing tactics, dungeons, items, puzzles etc with classmates as we played through various games. The word 'social' might raise an allergic reaction in some people (myself included) but I think reacting to the point where some people are threatening to withdraw pledges is completely insane, and promotes precisely the kind of behavior these kickstarter projects sought to be free of, pressure from a third party. In my mind it makes no difference if that third party is a small vocal group of elitists who want a game only a handful of people can enjoy, or a publisher wanting a game millions will buy.

Let the developers do their thing.

[Ekaros]

I think question is mainly will it truly fit in and is it worth it, or could the money be spend elsewhere for better return on experience...

[Infinitron]

That would make sense if they'd first committed to making a tablet version, which they haven't.

I don't care about any tablet/console versions as long as they go with independent development cycle.
But saying about social features or multilayer its really bad idea.

I'm already seen what happens with RPG when its goes to have multilayer.
Check FOnline: 2238

Well, there's multiplayer and then there's multiplayer...

[Quarex]

I am not going to say I am 100% against this idea, since I do not understand it at all (I only have a vague idea what Dark/Demon Souls even is), but I certainly am not excited about it like I have been about basically every other thing ever announced for the game.

I suppose there were times that my roommate and I were both playing Morrowind (or more recently my Steammate and I were both playing Skyrim?) and we thought it would be hilarious if we could walk into each other's games and say "hi," but we would never want a game to actually support that to the detriment of the single-player experience.

Good to see, though, that he has taken notice of the panic over this entire issue!

[Brother None]

I take issue with assuming 100ish hardcore elitists represent the other 19,900 people who donated. Would seem the 'majority' are actually silent.

Anyone can provide feedback. You're perfectly free to register and post. If you don't want to, that's fine, but there's no point to being offended your voice isn't being heard if you're not going to talk.

In other words, this is the feedback available to InXile. They can't ask the silent majority because they're silent. That's just what it is.

[krellen]

I take issue with assuming 100ish hardcore elitists represent the other 19,900 people who donated. Would seem the 'majority' are actually silent.

If they don't care to voice their preferences, they'll probably be happy with whatever they get, and therefore making the people that do care happy would be more important.

[oldmanpaco]

I take issue with assuming 100ish hardcore elitists represent the other 19,900 people who donated. Would seem the 'majority' are actually silent.

If they don't care to voice their preferences, they'll probably be happy with whatever they get, and therefore making the people that do care happy would be more important.

Sheeple are going to Sheeple.

I can't be bothered to read this entire thread but I would like to say that spending any resources programing any social elements is a goddamn tragedy.

[ButchinMelancholy]

The "leaving notes" thing immediately reminded me of HoMM 6 which had the same kind of online feature in the single player campaign. Interactable spheres of sorts (don't remember what they were called) placed around the maps where people posted their thoughts. It looked like a bathroom wall with all the geekspeech obscenity and served no purpose at all.

How was it done in Demons Souls? I haven't played it, so I do not know how it worked there.

The Souls system is quite well thought, because you just have the choice between some preconceived sentences (subject-verb-complement style), so you can't abuse it this way. But sometimes it leads to some pointless indications...
However it truly makes sense in this game, because it presents itself as a great puzzle, where each thing is a challenge you need to find the clue, and you're a lost soul among others all suffering together...

Just considering this game is now being influenced by a console game makes me really nervous!! I have to admit I'm reconsidering my high level pledge now that this is being considered. It's not what i signed up for .

I have played Dark Souls, and I can say this is not a console-game, this is just a (great) game on console if you see what I mean...


But apart from those particular concepts, this (ultra)social trend is quite insane to be honest. I think some people realize how this globalization alienates us in many ways including in our human relationships.
Keep it real please...

[The_A_Drain]

I take issue with assuming 100ish hardcore elitists represent the other 19,900 people who donated. Would seem the 'majority' are actually silent.

If they don't care to voice their preferences, they'll probably be happy with whatever they get, and therefore making the people that do care happy would be more important.

While that's a perfectly valid statement although I only agree to a point, I feel that the developers making the game they want to make should come first without a shadow of a doubt. And if people don't want to support that, then they should never have pledged in the first place.

Fan feedback is one thing, fan pandering is another and can ruin a game and break a developers spirit as quickly as any large publisher suit.

[KuroShiro]

Hoh boy, this is a can of worms you guys have opened. My final reaction to this will probably depend on the scale of what is planned, but my initial reaction is a big, red, bold faced NO.

It's not so much that I hate the idea itself -- implemented properly it could be interesting, if somewhat immersion breaking -- but I don't like the idea of part of an already small budget being channeled to a vestigial feature. Regardless of whether or not it is optional, it takes resources to develop. I would much rather extra funding be put directly back into the main game than used to tack on needless extra fluff. Maybe if the funding reaches a point where there's simply no more that can be done within the planned development window, but until then I would trash this.