"Old School RPG" thanks, but no thanks.

[Woolfe]

I'm curious: what do you feel is anachronistic that people want to retain?

No saves/limited saves is one.

People seem to think that made it Hardcore?!??!? Whereas I think it was just annoying.

[Drool]

I can see how limited saves make things more tense. You have to be sure you're following the path you want and commit, as opposed to branching your saves at critical decision points. On the other hand, it's simple enough to just not use multiple saves. Hell, the only reason I have a couple dozen Skyrim save files is because I accidentally pick "Create New Save" when I'm rushing. Otherwise, I'd just have the one.

Well, one plus the three(?!?!) autosave slots.

[paultakeda]

I tend to save more often in Chose One RPGs simply because the plot and main character have definite main branching points of different types. The BioWare romance branches alone create several save points (hey, it's in there, I paid for the game, I'm playing ALL options, and LIKING it, too), not to mention all those saves I made throughout Mass Effect because I thought saving/killing the Rachni queen had an actual consequence (yeah, this is what really ticked me off about ME3, even more than the ending).

For Skyrim I have about five save points. There's less branching plot-wise there, so not so many. For WL2, even though I advocate unlimited saves I don't think I'll have more than two or three, again because it won't be as linear. Maybe five or so if the stuff about making WL2 have more narrative means more branches.

I do know one thing, I plan on playing with "permadeath"; if a ranger dies, that ranger is dead and I'm walking back to Ranger Center to get a replacement. I'll have multiple saves like I always do for other games: for story branching.

[Roger Wilco]

If you really aren't interested in an old school RPG, then you really shouldn't be here.

I realize that the OP went into more detail than that, but really I don't get the point of people that see Fargo come out and start a kickstarter saying "We are going to make an Old-School RPG, and not worry about trying to reach the audience that isn't interested in that kind of game" and then think that they shouldn't make an old school RPG.

[MDF_MadDogFargo]

I guess what I am asking for is a comment from fellow gamers-do you want some fairy-make-belief-RPG or a hardcore-kick you-in-the-nuts man's game?

Neither. I want a fairy-make-belief-hardcore-kick-you-in-the-nuts man's/woman's/child's game. Seriously, why would you want a game that women or children wouldn't want to play? I was 14 when I played Wasteland, best time of my life for it. (Though maybe I would be in better shape today if I'd played more sports ....)

I'm curious: what do you feel is anachronistic that people want to retain?

The limited save system. That really is a a true technical limitation.

Huh? Oh! The saves are only as limited as your ingenuity. Swap disks = extra saves. Backup folders = extra saves. (Oh and unlimited dupes too.)

[Thrin]

This is meant for Inca and about the title specifically in which he says he doesn't want an Old School RPG.

I'm ignoring the rest of the post because it's the title that makes me wonder one thing.

If this is the case (and not a bit of sensationalism to gather up attention) then why support the kickstarter project?

In the project description it says:

This is probably the last chance for a Wasteland sequel. We have tried to pitch this game multiple times to game publishers, but they’ve balked. They don’t think there’s any interest in a solid, old school type of game. This is our shot at proving them wrong. And more importantly this could help bring back an entire genre of RPGs.

So, the entire point is to create an old school type of game but you're clearly against that as per your title.

I'm just a little confused.

[Mandemon]

I think confusion rises from the fact that when people support "Old School RPG" they often demand that anything that happened between Kickstart and Wasteland needs to be ignored because it's too "mainstream", "dumbed down", "fanservice", etc.

Sometimes I wonder if people want sequal or remake...

[ffordesoon]

I realize that the OP went into more detail than that, but really I don't get the point of people that see Fargo come out and start a kickstarter saying "We are going to make an Old-School RPG, and not worry about trying to reach the audience that isn't interested in that kind of game" and then think that they shouldn't make an old school RPG.

This. I think a fair number of people here know by now that I'm not a grognard by any stretch of the imagination, but it is rather bizarre to me that so many of these sorts of threads have cropped up. I understand that "old-school RPG" means a lot of things to a lot of people (much like RPG), and I do like stuff from other genres (survival mechanics, as I mentioned) and some modern conveniences (autosaving, multiple save slots, the ability to "save-scum", etc.) in my RPGs, but there are so many threads here asking for stuff that is by definition not going to be in the game.

It's akin to getting all four original Beatles back together somehow - like, to the point of resurrecting John and George, right? And they throw a concert at Carnegie Hall, and they say they're going to play all their songs just the way they were before, along with some new songs from their new album that are right in line with the old stuff. Like, it'll be as if they never stopped recording. Granted, there may be some new techniques they try to make it sound even better, but the general plan is to keep everything sounding classic. Flash forward a few days, and Carnegie Hall is, like, packed. The Beatles come out on stage, and Paul McCartney leans into the mic and says that since they've been out of people's lives for so long, they thought it would be special to play a request first.

And someone goes "Play 'Daydream Believer'!" And a second person goes, "Naw, man, they gotta play some Sabbath! Yo, Paul, hit us with 'Crazy Train'!" And the suggestions get progressively weirder from there, with some people asking for Springsteen, some people asking for U2, and one lunatic even asking for "Tom Sawyer" by Rush.

I mean, it's not an exact metaphor - how they would be able to hear all these simultaneous requests is something I'm still trying to figure out. But you get my meaning, right? And, if I may pummel this poor metaphor into the ground, I'm sitting in the nosebleed seats (and also improbably possessed of the same magical hearing powers the Beatles have), and I'm going, "Yes, those bands are good at what they do, but I didn't come here to see a Monkees show!"

You know?

(God, I'm gonna feel so sad if nobody understands this...)

@paultakeda:

Will check those threads out, thanks!

[Inca]

Thank you everyone for the feedback. I admit, I wanted the title of the topic to be a bit polarizing, so that opinions about what people would like to see in the game would become more crystallized.

My vision of the game is in no conflict with what Fargo has advertised in Kickstarter:
I want turn-based tactical party RPG in Post-Apocalyptic setting-on that point I am in complete agreement with majority of the people here. This is the reason I pledged money, I also believe in the talents of the people involved in the development.

Now, without any violation of the stated goals of the developers, I want to implement several "game mechanics" that I think will make for an excellent addition to original title, such as:
-Sophisticated tactical options (cover, elevation, maneuver)
-True Survival Challenges (perishables, climate, weight/bulk, diseases)
-Vehicles and Mounts
-A character creation system that bases attribute and skill point distribution on a questioner system with some limited "bonus" points for further refinement.
Again I do not believe I violate the parameters that Fargo outlined for the game. That is why I feel well justified voicing my opinion to the developers, and I do not feel the long drawn out "beetles" analogy is really applicable here.

What I call an "Old school game" is a game that desperately tries to avoid any touch of reality. I perfectly understand why, because their roots are in pen and paper table games and it is hard to implement any kind of modeling of real situations, when your tools are pen and paper. Hence the use of primitive algebraic expressions and a dice roll to model any outcome. But since those old days, what was just a coping mechanism, to make board game playable all of a sudden became some sort of a sacred art form, that horrible neophytes like myself are trying to subvert. People forget that now we got computers, and all the little processes that were "modeled" with a roll of a dice, could actually be calculated through, with acceptable degree of precision. All the data that no one wanted to bother keeping track of in the board game can be easily tracked with a computer.

So when I "oppose" the "Old school games", what I am saying to the people that are clinging to the pen, dice and paper religion - we all can have a richer experience if we just stop being afraid of a little innovation and introduce a couple of new features to the old title.

One pet peeve of mine is that "the purist crowd" constantly says that they are using their imagination (as opposed to us dumb newbies, though technically they have no way of knowing how old anyone is or what gaming experience they had) they are playing a character. So it is always puzzling to me, why their imagination would fail to serve them when it comes the time to imagine walking with 100 lb backpack in Arizona sun with an ounce of water left in their canteen? Or trying to imagine pressing their bodies into the ground and trying to shrink as much as possible when bullets start wheezing all around them?

Wouldn't it be great if the game provided visual and sound cues and actual mechanics to play off that imagination? Wouldn't it be great if a blistering sun drenched landscape started to shimmer and distort in mirage, and sound of heavy breathing of your crew and squeaking of backpack straps would accompany their walk and a raspy voice of your companion asking you for a bit of water broke the silence of the wasteland? Wouldn't it be great if one of them stated to wobble and fell on his her fours unable to take another step, because you bought a fancy samurai sword instead of extra 10 liters of water?

Just a couple of thoughts.

[krellen]

Wouldn't it be great if the game provided visual and sound cues and actual mechanics to play off that imagination? Wouldn't it be great if a blistering sun drenched landscape started to shimmer and distort in mirage, and sound of heavy breathing of your crew and squeaking of backpack straps would accompany their walk and a raspy voice of your companion asking you for a bit of water broke the silence of the wasteland? Wouldn't it be great if one of them stated to wobble and fell on his her fours unable to take another step, because you bought a fancy samurai sword instead of extra 10 liters of water?

No, not really.

[Inca]

No, not really.

May I ask why?

[krellen]

No, not really.

May I ask why?

Mostly because I don't see "tromping through the desert, parched, searching for water" to be a valid image for Wasteland in the slightest. For reasons I stated above, this is just not a central theme that has a place in Wasteland.

[Inca]

Let's say in "original" setting, thirst was not a major concern (though according to Fargo's update, location will be changed in the game), this does not invalidate my overall point. You just focused on one very particular example, and missed the thrust of the argument.
I was talking about the fact that modern computer system can enable implementation of many atmospheric game mechanics, that would have been burdensome in cRPGs that direct descendants of Pen and Paper games. The problem, in my view, that some gamers are so enamoured with old way of doing things, that they are in the risk of screwing themsleves and other gamers out of what potentiall could be an amazingly rich experience.

[krellen]

The industry isn't hurting for the experience you're advocating, Inca. There are plenty of games out there doing those little touches - they may not necessarily have all the parts you want, but they have most of them. Those of us seeking something "purer", something "old school", are completely out in the cold - the market isn't even pretending to try to serve us. You could probably convince a modern publisher to make your game. It's taking Brian Fargo and my (and many others who feel likewise) own money to make this one. Your "rich experience" is not the only way, nor should it be - but this is the only way to get anything else.

[Woolfe]

What I call an "Old school game" is a game that desperately tries to avoid any touch of reality. I perfectly understand why, because their roots are in pen and paper table games and it is hard to implement any kind of modeling of real situations, when your tools are pen and paper. Hence the use of primitive algebraic expressions and a dice roll to model any outcome. But since those old days, what was just a coping mechanism, to make board game playable all of a sudden became some sort of a sacred art form, that horrible neophytes like myself are trying to subvert. People forget that now we got computers, and all the little processes that were "modeled" with a roll of a dice, could actually be calculated through, with acceptable degree of precision. All the data that no one wanted to bother keeping track of in the board game can be easily tracked with a computer.

Ok I think your definition of "Old School Game" is well, wrong.

The Pen and paper games were about trying to emulate reality using well pen and paper, and dice. And lets face it Dice are really just random number generators.
And it wasn't any outcome that was randomised, in most pen and paper systems, you had a GM who managed a lot of that stuff, sure he'd use something like that if it required it, but in most cases it was either not important, or key to the story, so they would manage that themselves, maybe rolling to give the illusion of randomness, but usually not.

So essentially you had Random Number Generators, and a GM controlling the flow.

Now in a pc game, you don't have a gm. So suddenly your random number generators are actually much much more important. But that is ok, because you have a whole lot more power to crunch those random numbers, and form huge complex algebraic expressions.

None of that is in question here. We are not advocated making it like a pen and paper game. Quite the opposite really, we want the powerful number crunching to allow more complex patterns and affects.

In the days of Wasteland 1, not only were the machines technically limited, but the CRPG was in its infancy, so a lot of the stuff brought over was done so without fully understanding the implications. Now some of that makes sense to get rid of, but other parts of it don't. Turn based combat is a perfect example. It fell by the wayside not because it was bad. Many of us loved it and still do. No it fell by the wayside becuase the publishers could only accept the "realtime" catchism. Literally I watched as games went from turn based to realtime, for no reason other than that was what was selling at the time. And it even made sense in those days, as the market was still relatively small. But the Market today is huge. The Gaming industry earns more than the movie industry. The point is that today, there is space in the market for niche games, like turn based. Thus the reintroduction of turn based in Wasteland.

So when I "oppose" the "Old school games", what I am saying to the people that are clinging to the pen, dice and paper religion - we all can have a richer experience if we just stop being afraid of a little innovation and introduce a couple of new features to the old title.

The only people I see clinging to this, are one or two holdouts, and the people in opposition who seem to want to lump us all together. I'm just saying before you start accusing everyone, look at what they are saying. In 9 out of 10 cases, it is not because they are against innovation, but rather because they want to go back to certain elements that have been lost because they weren't "popular" but were still perfectly good ways of doing things.

One pet peeve of mine is that "the purist crowd" constantly says that they are using their imagination (as opposed to us dumb newbies, though technically they have no way of knowing how old anyone is or what gaming experience they had) they are playing a character.

Yeah, but read it in context. Most of the "purist" crowd are not actually that "purist" but some of the arguments have been incredibly circular and frustrating, and sometimes people revert to poor defences as part of that.

So it is always puzzling to me, why their imagination would fail to serve them when it comes the time to imagine walking with 100 lb backpack in Arizona sun with an ounce of water left in their canteen? Or trying to imagine pressing their bodies into the ground and trying to shrink as much as possible when bullets start wheezing all around them?

Yeah, I do understand what you mean here. This sort of thing was really due to technological and development issues in the days of "Wasteland" That said from what I have seen regarding the arguments about water, is simply that it is a monotonous gameplay aspect, that isn't necessary outside of the desert. So bearing in mind that most of the game is set outside of the desert, why bother with it. And the Cover and tactical elements, are again a few holdouts who don't want it to turn into a tactical game with RPG elements like Fallout tactics, as opposed to an RPG with Tactical combat. They are essentially saying if there is a choice between RPG and Tactical, they want RPG. I am on the Tactical side personally. I want an RPG with indepth tactical elements.

Wouldn't it be great if the game provided visual and sound cues and actual mechanics to play off that imagination? Wouldn't it be great if a blistering sun drenched landscape started to shimmer and distort in mirage, and sound of heavy breathing of your crew and squeaking of backpack straps would accompany their walk and a raspy voice of your companion asking you for a bit of water broke the silence of the wasteland? Wouldn't it be great if one of them stated to wobble and fell on his her fours unable to take another step, because you bought a fancy samurai sword instead of extra 10 liters of water?

Visual and Sound cues, sure but remember that part of this game is related to using skills and attributes as number generators. So those cues should only really occur if you have the skills/attributes to notice them.

"Sun drenched landscape, and heavy breathing". Meh. Doesn't do it for me sorry.

I am all for a weight and bulk type inventory system personally. Most rpgs had that. Wasteland again was simply restricted by the tech and dev of its time.

[Inca]

The industry isn't hurting for the experience you're advocating, Inca

I respectfully disagree. There is nothing out there like what I want. Though elements exist in different games, they were never brought together. If its tactical squad game-it's a poor RPG, or not in Post Apocaliptic Setting, or not turn based, or lacking good survival elements. So I find myself in presicely same predicament "It's taking Brian Fargo and my (and many others who feel likewise) own money to make this one" and this is why I do not feel that the "old school people" should be the sole beneficiaries of this development effort.
Further, I still do not understand in what way, the innovations that I am trying to advocate, hurt your cause? I am trying to put myself in your shoes and I simply fail to see a burden that would be placed on your gaming experience. In any RPG there are certain things that have to be performed-healing, trading, fighting, negotiating, managing inventory. What is it that I suggest that would be a deal breaker for you?

[Inca]

OK. I know it maybe somewhat pointless but let's try and forge a consensus here--

Non negotiable things:
Post Apocaliptic
Party based (player generated party of say 4 plus 3 potential NPC recruits)
Turn Based Combat

Team "Neophytes" puts on the table:
-Tactical Combat (approximatly JA2 style)
-Survival Elements
-Weight/Bulk
-Controlled Character Creation (I don't know exactly the form it would take, but I don't want to roll atributes)

Team "Old Guard" what say you, what do you want (and please don't say: "first we want to get rid of everything you suggested", let's start with constractive suggestions first)?

[CookieEatingHuskarl]

In an interview with Stackpole.

I think the first time I really understood that we had something special with Wasteland was when, courtesy of Interplay, I got to attend a game developers meeting at EA. In various conversations with other game developers I learned what cool things they had going on in their games. I realized that everything each one of them was doing—their one special thing—was something we had going on in Wasteland. All of them.

Partially I like what the older CRPG brought to the table, but I don't think conservatism is the way to go at all. If the system is not broken per say, do not even try to fix it like what modern games did, but if a more polished, engaging model can be thought up, go ahead. It'll be like replacing an older car made in the 60s with a newer one. Car's not exactly broken yet, but the new car just feels better to drive in. The modern gaming equivalent is the car salesman telling you everyone absolutely like driving a 3 wheeled car that needs to be pedaled continuously.

[krellen]

What is it that I suggest that would be a deal breaker for you?

I already went over every single one of your points. The big deal breaker, though? Your insistence on a Jagged Alliance level of tactical combat (which, BTW, was totally an RPG; your problem is that you didn't like its story or the elements of choice therein, but god fucking dammit all, these are not things unique to RPGs and do not make things RPGs (and I'm really upset with Extra Credits for trying to argue that they do)) and your insistence on intricately detailed inventory and resource management.

I'm not interested in juggling every last pound of weight, I'm not interested in coming down to even Fallout Tactics level combat every time I walk past an angry rodent, and I'm not interested in making the game you dream of seeing - because what you're asking for is a dream combination of elements that exist currently, but simply haven't put together in the manner you want. What I'm asking for is something that simply does not exist any other way - you're just absolutely wrong that this is the only way to get your game made, but it is the only way to get mine.

And I don't want to "forge a consensus" with you. Every time I have to have this conversation, I want to cry, I want to scream, I want to pull my money out of the project for fear Brian Fargo will listen to you and make your fucking modern fucking post-Apocalyptic game and leave me in the fucking cold. AGAIN. This wasn't supposed to be the project to make the new awesome post-Apocalyptic game everyone's been dreaming of in their spare time. It's the project to make a sequel to Wasteland, drawing from the basis of the original - and that is a goddamn direct quote from the pitch page.

[Inca]

I don't want to "forge a consensus" with you. Every time I have to have this conversation, I want to cry, I want to scream, I want to pull my money out of the project for fear Brian Fargo will listen to you and make your fucking modern fucking post-Apocalyptic game and leave me in the fucking cold.

Well that got real ugly, really quck. Man, let's not loose our cool. All I have is a wish list. I don't have any magic powers over Brian. He will make the game he wants to make.
I hope everyone realizes, even if not a single thing on my list is implemented, the game simply is not going to be the same game as 24 years ago.