Wasteland 2 External News Thread

[Brother None]

You need names in place to convince people to donate this much. Double Fine is a brand name, as is Schafer's name, as is Fargo's, as is Avellone's, as is Wasteland. It's hard to imagine getting this much money with such name value.

That said, as MCA points out, DoubleFine Adventure *is* a new IP, as would be Obsidian's. But if you want to create a new IP and have little to show engine/concept/art wise, you're going to have a hard time of it.

[Vryheid]

You need names in place to convince people to donate this much. Double Fine is a brand name, as is Schafer's name, as is Fargo's, as is Avellone's, as is Wasteland. It's hard to imagine getting this much money with such name value.

That said, as MCA points out, DoubleFine Adventure *is* a new IP, as would be Obsidian's. But if you want to create a new IP and have little to show engine/concept/art wise, you're going to have a hard time of it.

This is why I feel like The Banner Saga is a great example of how to offer up a new IP. Right from the get-go they had a proof of concept and some gorgeous animation to display, and the devs made it clear that they had the experience and organization to make the project happen. No, they're not going to get Double Fine levels of donations from this, but if enough people are willing to try something new then they can still get a significant amount (right now hovering around $470k).

[ButchinMelancholy]

I'm a bit worried for the possible french voice acting as the level of quality is usually between average and mediocre (often not credible and ridiculous)...

You're assuming this game's voice-over will be localized? That is extremely unlikely. Text will be localized where possible. Voices? I doubt it.

I'm not assuming since I said "possible", because I know that this is quite unlikely... But if we have the VO at least, I'm fine with it.
But I hope text will have great translation too...

[Brother None]

Brian Fargo interview over on VG247

[Vryheid]

lol surely I can't be the only one who read the URL as "no more Brian Fargo on Wasteland 2". about to do some angerposting there

Interesting blips:

People seem to be quite concerned that fan input will get out of control but to me that is like being concerned about open beta testing. Plus with fan funding we owe them a voice to be heard and we agree with most of what the consensus likes anyway. It is important to keep in mind that it is broad strokes that we incorporate and that would range from weighing the importance of features like audio vs. game depth, Linux vs. iPad or turn- based vs. real-time combat

Gamers are not trying to risk money for a profit like a publisher is. They just want a certain game and they are willing to pay for it ahead of time.

There is just a certain charm that comes from a game where the developers get to tinker and riff with new ideas during the process. The games just felt so connected in their humanity. Slick and polish only goes so far… it is always the human moments we remember.

[MDF_MadDogFargo]

However, combat isn’t going to consist of scrolling text so clearly we need to up the tactics part of the game. And we don’t want the tactics SO deep that you feel disconnected from the world by being in long battles all the time. The last thing we want is someone groaning every time combat pops up.

Hmmm, I hope this doesn't mean there won't be any scrolling text at all! Naturally I am hoping for pictures of combat. But I don't think it would be popular to do away with the text altogether. I'm hoping for text + pictures (animated or otherwise) together. The text scroll makes Wasteland unique and it puts your characters' custom text like their names into the story. That principle can be expanded to include dialogue and other details generated by encounters. It doesn't replace the graphics, but it can cohabitate with the graphics.

But his comment is ambiguous; "combat insn't going to consist of" could mean that there will be more to it than that or that it will be excluded. Someone please tell Brian that the text scroll is one of the most attractive features of Wasteland!

[Brother None]

Hmmm, I hope this doesn't mean there won't be any scrolling text at all!

Of course it doesn't. It means combat will play out visually, with a top-down (likely isometric) camera and individual characters, like Fallout or Jagged alliance. But Fallout still had scrolling text too, and I certainly think Wasteland 2 will as well. "Doesn't consist of" only means that's not the only thing in combat anymore, you're reading too much into it.

[MDF_MadDogFargo]

Hmmm, I hope this doesn't mean there won't be any scrolling text at all!

Of course it doesn't. It means combat will play out visually, with a top-down (likely isometric) camera and individual characters, like Fallout or Jagged alliance. But Fallout still had scrolling text too, and I certainly think Wasteland 2 will as well. "Doesn't consist of" only means that's not the only thing in combat anymore, you're reading too much into it.

Yeah, that's what I figure, but his comment is ambiguous, like most of his interview comments. (He must have a high Political skill.) But, the Fallout scrolling text is kind of weak IMO. You can ignore it. It's not critical to the game. Your names don't show up in it. (Your name in Fallout barely matters anywhere in the game.)

If I was going to upgrade the scrolling text, I would make it read out like a more involved story, but not too involved mind you, just enough to get your characters' personalities involved a bit more. There can be different types of encounters besides fights, where different character skills or attributes are involved and instead of telling you how brutally you murdered the Wasteland Warrior, it could give you character dialogue or other prose elements relating to their history or their nationality, for example.

[Brother None]

Michael Stackpole guestwrites on RPS on Wasteland 2

[Vryheid]

Brother None on the ball yet again

do they just feed you a top secret stream of these news articles or are you always searching on Google for them

[Brother None]

Blame the twitter addiction

NMA interviews MCA and Fargo.

The only real new tidbit is inXile has narrowed down the engine search to two, and is working to see which one fits their needs best.

[Nohar]

Thank you very much Brother None for the infos ! Bixby's Big Thumbs Up !

I admit that I wonder which engine they will pick for the game... Hmmm... Well, at least, I guess we know that they won't build an engine from scratch (something which takes a lot of time and money I believe).

[ButchinMelancholy]

Last interview: http://www.neogamr.net/news/interview-inxiles-brian-fargo-on-wasteland-2

[Zeronet]

It seems some of the bigger sites like Joystiq and Kotaku aren't biting yet. Though that Kickstarter for Call of Duty Police Warfare won't go away from their banner.

[Brother None]

Older interviews:

MCA with Critical Bit, most of it's not on Wasteland 2

Brian with CGMonthly

[Zeronet]

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind- ... deo-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

[ijusten]

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind-kickstarter-ruin-video-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

Huh. Obviously I'm kicking open doors here, but this Matt doesn't seem to realize the concept of looking forward more than few months. A developer that wastes the money on poor-quality game isn't going to get the funding for their next one - not from a publisher, and not from kickstarter.

[Prometheus]

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind-kickstarter-ruin-video-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

I skimmed through the article -- it's right and wrong. Presumably (based on what's been said, past history, etc..) Brian Fargo and InXile are looking at Kickstarter as a way of acquiring the initial funding (like a VC -- without the % ownership) to make Wasteland 2 -- rather than as a way to make money off of a promise to make Wasteland 2.

I supported Wasteland 2 because Brian Fargo and his team have a reasonably solid history of a) making games, and b) making games I like. It's believable to me that Brian Fargo would like to continue to make more games into the future, and that a Kickstarter is really just a way to show the publishers that they are wrong about what kinds of games are profitable. In other words, the Kickstarter is the beginning: the goal is to make a good game (Wasteland 2) which will then sell and make a profit (aka, > 3,040,000 USD). And I suspect the goal is ultimately to continue to make more of these "unconventional" games that publishers are afraid to touch.

But yes, there definitely are some sketchy Kickstarter projects (amazing what people will donate their money to), and the Kickstarter medium is certainly ripe for exploitation. I would never want to donate to a Kickstarter "game project" if the sole purpose of the kickstarter was to create a game for the people donating to it. As the author of the article seems to suggest: once they have the money there is no further incentive to develop a good product.

EDIT: missed a post:

Huh. Obviously I'm kicking open doors here, but this Matt doesn't seem to realize the concept of looking forward more than few months. A developer that wastes the money on poor-quality game isn't going to get the funding for their next one - not from a publisher, and not from kickstarter.

I think the problem with a Kickstarter is that there could easily be very little accountability / transparency. What prevents a gang of people from running pump-and-dump schemes and just changing the names of the companies or picking a different spokesperson? Sure, they might be unable to rack up $3,000,000 -- but $100,000 isn't bad either. Hell, $1,000 for nothing isn't something to complain about.

Kickstarter doesn't promise to do policing either -- so ultimately the risks are passed completely to people donating.

[ijusten]

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind-kickstarter-ruin-video-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

Huh. Obviously I'm kicking open doors here, but this Matt doesn't seem to realize the concept of looking forward more than few months. A developer that wastes the money on poor-quality game isn't going to get the funding for their next one - not from a publisher, and not from kickstarter.

I think the problem with a Kickstarter is that there could easily be very little accountability / transparency. What prevents a gang of people from running pump-and-dump schemes and just changing the names of the companies or picking a different spokesperson? Sure, they might be unable to rack up $3,000,000 -- but $100,000 isn't bad either. Hell, $1,000 for nothing isn't something to complain about.

Kickstarter doesn't promise to do policing either -- so ultimately the risks are passed completely to people donating.

Well, obviously :) I just took this as implied :) I always forget that not everybody is as careful with their money. Obviously you need merits or something to showcase from before. Even the latter isn't perfect, as it's easy to steal art from DeviantArt - for example, I was under the impression that the Leisure Suit Larry's new design pictures have been making rounds in DA for a year or two. If Rebound Games wouldn't have so many videos up with Al Lowe starring, I would have taken it as a scam.

But if you aren't one of those people donating thousands of dollars, then giving few dozen dollars for Kickstarter isn't much more dangerous than preordering game (remember that picture of the Duke Nukem Forever pre-order receipt from 1998?).

[ButchinMelancholy]

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind-kickstarter-ruin-video-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

Usual and boring antagonism to something that don't please their silly mind or wicked interests...
That guy talk like if his words were authoritative but his "argument" is nowhere near consistent. For example, can he give us any statitics or observation for what he assume? Obviously not because everything remains to be seen in those cases. Or perhaps develop the logic behind it? I don't feel like he has anything but foolish reluctance about the concept or something more dishonest from what I can note...

Sure, Kickstarter could change a part (only, yes, because this doesn't affect its other forms, what the author forgot to consider for the sake of that asinine dramatization) of the gaming industry "as we know it", and I think most people are damn enthusiastic about that obviously. And perhaps there's a reason for that...
Does he feel like he knows better the ins and outs of this principle than all of his "peers" (apparently), or than everyone else around it? Where did he find that quite everyone who's interested in the project, or will be, can only be the backers? Does he really has any experience in that field? Because it is obvious that many people would not buy a promise, or buy for a name but would be interested in the finished product, and there are many different levels and kind of interests other than "fanboyism" vs indifference... There's indeed a difference between fans and customers that he doesn't seems to consider, and a Kickstarter campaign lasts a month, while a PC game can be "forever" (and dematerialized plateform like Steam helps long-term sales for example)...
And he dared to call that empty assumption knowledge...

Then, I think when a developer turns to some independent means, this is certainly not because he don't care about what he makes, and when he directly hands his community's money you can be sure he'll be more invested for those who supported him and permitted him to do what he loves. And he will have much more pressure to deliver a really good game, and not some oppressive and sterile one like publishers do, but some of a community of people that love his work and wait for it.

His following paragraph is just plain hollowness and has absolutely nothing relevant to consider. If a project receives more money than intended, the developer will make the game even better, make his company run and be able to deliver other games in the future, like any other developer is supposed to do, isn't it?

He'll have to explain me too how an anonymous can create huge hype behind a project and then vanish with all the money, because otherwise I don't see anyone settled in any field able to quit everything to keep the money and disappear like that...


And you know what? F*ck the industry, you greedy b*stards.


That said, my first thought was that Kickstarter is not perfect, and perhaps there should be a plateform dedicated to the independent gaming for that, to offer more security and visibility to the scene.
I wrote something about that besides but I feel like it has to be revised...


EDIT:

http://manatank.com/2012/04/matts-mind-kickstarter-ruin-video-games/

Basically, take half of the hard drive video and put it into a blog..it's a terrible article but it's pretty amusing.

Huh. Obviously I'm kicking open doors here, but this Matt doesn't seem to realize the concept of looking forward more than few months. A developer that wastes the money on poor-quality game isn't going to get the funding for their next one - not from a publisher, and not from kickstarter.

Another valid point here...