Skip to content
alexlovesinxile wrote:1) The game will be on steam.
alexlovesinxile wrote:2) You probably have a phone, and/ or meet these friends in person.
3) The Dark Souls system doesn't provide any greater opportunity for in depth discussions of tactics, etc.
spindown wrote:It's quite ironic that the pitch video contained scenes of Brian Fargo getting annoyed with Farmville and Bejeweled requests. And now, just a few days later, he's facing massive nerd rage for suggesting the inclusion of social features in Wasteland 2.
I don't get what the problem is with people who withdraw their pledges for a game that they're not interested in..
SXX wrote:spindown wrote:It's quite ironic that the pitch video contained scenes of Brian Fargo getting annoyed with Farmville and Bejeweled requests. And now, just a few days later, he's facing massive nerd rage for suggesting the inclusion of social features in Wasteland 2.
Yep, its make me cry.
Seems like Fargo want to be nice with all backers and its why he can't just say "NO"... He say that:
"We have received many questions about multi-player, and my feeling is that we do not think it would be the right decision for such a heavy narrative RPG. "
But I sure he should have strong opinion about some things and he should strongly say "NO".
Infinitron wrote:Refusing multiplayer isn't really very controversial, though. I'm sure the folks at Bethesda have been ignoring requests for multiplayer TES games for at least a decade. And you don't get more mainstream RPG than that.
The_A_Drain wrote:You are right, there is no reason.
But if the inclusion of a potential feature, not even just this one but any feature you could think of is distasteful on such a level that you would be completely disinterested in the project then I would advise you follow the traditional process of waiting until the game is out, evaluating it, and then making your purchasing decision then.
Holding your investment to ransom when an idea does not fit with your personal view for the project does nobody any good in the long run. Voice your concerns and opinions, but down the line somewhere you are going to have to accept that what the developer wants to should come first, otherwise the entire premise of removing third party influence falls down. I don't want social mechanics in the game, but more than that I do want the team to make the product they want and if that includes social aspects then so be it.
aggaire wrote:Ok guys, I think everyone has interpreted "social" to mean "like Facebook", and I really don't think it needs to be. Social is something that could be done nicely just to make it a little more communicative with you and 5 or 6 friends, without actually making it multiplayer, and it wouldn't take a lot of time and code to do it.
When I first heard about this, I was thinking more along the lines of "hey, that would be cool, much more like REAL old school RPGs, when you had to get a bunch of friends around a table to play." Not like the first cRPGs, but definitely like the first RPGs.
I don't want Facebook integration, I don't want "social media". I'm totally in agreement with everyone saying that. I don't want random unknown people posting ridiculous stuff that has nothing to do with the game and is obnoxious.
However, if I could pick just a few people who were my friends, and the game could be a little bit personalized, that could be fun.
The game will be a single-player experience. It's not multiplayer. So you shouldn't be radioing to each other giving hints about how to get through this area, because I just did "x" and it worked.
However, it could be cool if, for example, a friend could record his/her voice saying something, and say it's a radio transmission from 5 years ago that kept bouncing around and finally was received (all static-y and distorted).
Or say there's an old newspaper fluttering in the street that shows a snapshot of your friend's characters and has a headline with their character's name, and a brief story about something they did.
Or an old notebook written by your friend's character.
There are ways of making it a little bit "social" that I don't think would ruin the game, especially if you just keep it to a few friends.
PiPboy wrote:If they don't want to use the Social compontent they don't have to. its so extremely simple as that.
PiPboy wrote:Honestly people are over reacting. If they don't want to use the Social compontent they don't have to. its so extremely simple as that.
Odd144 wrote:Kickstarter has slowed down because of all the negative comments.....this is why I will never liked self proclaimed "FanBoys" as they instinctively jump quickly into the haters queue if they don't like a simple OPTIONAL dynamic as would be the case for the Social aspect that Fargo/InXile are talking about, it is going to be a tough week to try and get this campaign back on track, $ 2 Mil is looking far away now
PS - EA Games, Activision and ZeniMax are laughing their heads off right now at InXile, thinking "There take your medicine you NERD developers MWAHAHA!"
Users browsing this forum: Sxerks and 1 guest