The case for a sequel

[Lucius]

So you don't want to eliminate random encounters - you just want to make them not random.

As i stated it, appropriate. Like being ambushed by highwaymen near trade routes, found by enemy (guardians maybe) patrols in their territory, attacked by desert lizards near their hatching grounds.

Having means to avoid those or going in prepared and with beneficial position would be much appreciated.

So pretty much scripted encounters is what you are asking for?

Random encounters shouldn't occur every two steps. As long as it's every 3 or more steps I'll be happy with the random encounter system.

[Emmy Lou]

I get what Van Der Muchbetter is saying. I dunno, maybe WL1 had a feature like this, but I know for a fact FO1 & 2 was like this.

Take FO2 for example:
The north where you start out has mostly beasties, tribals, the occasional slaver party as you head out more East near the Den. More East and you start to see raiders more often. If you head directly down the coast when you begin, you'll start to get into Enclave Patrol region. If you're lucky and get past them, you may encounter Hubologists and NCR. Back north and you may see Reno gangsters and more raiders again.

So, the encounters are neither random ~nor~ scripted. Simply... regional. These regions overlap (think a Venn diagrams), so it's not like you always know what to expect. In WL1 terms, of what I know about it, it would be like running into more robots as you get closer to Vegas, more Guardians as you near their temple, more Rangers as you get near HQ; that sort of thing.

My apologies if this is how WL1 worked as well and y'all are like "...duh", but I can't tell by the way you guys are jumping on this guy for suggesting semi-intelligent placement of encounters, saying they're "no longer random" and "scripted".

[krellen]

Wasteland's encounters were quasi-regional - Quartz has a separate encounter list from Needles, which was separate from Las Vegas, which was separate from Darwin. The overworld, best I can tell, only had one encounter table and wasn't regional at all.

I didn't get a request for "regional encounters" from what Van Der Muchbetter posted, though. If that was what he was asking for, that's cool.

[Lucius]

I agree with what Krellen is saying here. I didn't get that from what he was saying. I think all of us assume regional influence should certainly play a role. That makes sense. Also this kind of influences what we think he's trying to say...

By the way, i consider reliance on random encounters as a evil of RPG design.

[Hiver]

P.S. Great points, Hiver. Good system won't make battles tedious and sluggish.

Oh... i have more arguments if anyone doesnt believe me...

:starts pointing all three mini-guns and heavy rail/pulse/artillery/flak gun at everyone while scanning the crowd:

[Emmy Lou]

I think what he meant by that is when designers use Random Encounters merely as "Speed bumps" when moving on the overworld map. A boring mixture of timesink and character exp injection. If you read his posts, each one says something to the effect of "Now, I'm not calling for the removal of RE's". In fact...

My wording might have been unclear. What i want to see is not a total extermination of random encounters, but making them appropriate to situation, varied and fun.

Taking out 3 hordes of rats is way worse than 1 tactically sound road ambush.

And somehow you guys took "Appropriate, varied and fun" as:

So you don't want to eliminate random encounters - you just want to make them not random.

To which he reasonably replied:

As i stated it, appropriate. Like being ambushed by highwaymen near trade routes, found by enemy (guardians maybe) patrols in their territory, attacked by desert lizards near their hatching grounds.

Having means to avoid those or going in prepared and with beneficial position would be much appreciated.

You guys all seem to have read him call it "an evil" and then completely glazed over every other opinion he's had since. I think what he wants is the Wastes to have more than just JRPG style "you have encountered a slime!!" encounters every time, which is something I think we're all on the same page about but for some reason we're arguing about it.

Since I think I get what Mr. Muchbetter is gettin' at, here are a few examples:

Appropriate combat: As he said, bandits on trade routes, patrols near bases, increased wildlife away from settlements.

Varied: Not just combat encounters every time you're stopped on the world map that make you roll your eyes for the hundredth time. Caravan merchants with interesting merchandise, civilians with a request for aid somehow, a crashed transport that could contain boons or could be a boobytrap or ambush, a nasty thunder or sandstorm that has a chance of putting your expedition off course. A "variety of encounters".

Fun: Unique encounters like the Easter eggs ones you would find in FO .They don't even necessarily have to be pop culture references, they could just be something to make you go "Haha, I can't believe that just happened to me!" or "Wow, look at this interesting place I found!"

And by "means to avoid", I think he means like the Outdoorsman skill in Fallout, where a higher skill would decrease your negative RE chances while increasing your positive chances. Or give you the choice to engage the encounter or not as you become better at scouting. Or even something like, if you take out a nearby Raider or Slaver den, then their activities in that area will be significantly reduced, maybe even squelched. Having some control over the environment instead of feeling like a constant victim of an endless procession of ambushes.

How close am I to articulating what you were saying, O' Van Der?

[krellen]

Dammit Emmy, I wanna fight slimes! You never let me have any fun!

[Emmy Lou]

Since you're such a prominent poster and Fargo & company are watching, watch what you say, krell!
You don't want to get the only unique copy of the game where your "Quirky Backer skill" is "Slime Magnet"

[krellen]

Since you're such a prominent poster and Fargo & company are watching, watch what you say, krell!
You don't want to get the only unique copy of the game where your "Quirky Backer skill" is "Slime Magnet"

... Yeah I do. I'm getting a signed collectors edition. Do you know how much I could eBay that for?

[Garfunkel]

I don't want to have to walk four people around a map, put them in position, have to worry about posture and THEN attack.
Then sit through 10 minutes+ of the computer doing the same for all the NPCs.

Good thing it isn't going to be like that, then. Since none of the games mentioned as possible sources of ideas/mechanics had TB combat like that. Heck, even Pool of Radiance 2, which probably has the worst TB combat in a RPG ever, wasn't as bad as you describe.

[Felix]

I want a sequel to Wasteland. Not a spinoff. Not a reimagining. Not a relaunch. A sequel. A real sequel, like sequels used to be.

I may have read that in a GLaDOS voice.

Joking aside, I totally agree. All publishers want is more sales and a broader audience. Apparently the only way to do this is make a first person shooter and you shoot anything that moves.

[MDF_MadDogFargo]

I want a sequel to Wasteland. Not a spinoff. Not a reimagining. Not a relaunch. A sequel. A real sequel, like sequels used to be. I want Wasteland 2 to be as close to Wasteland as Fallout 2 was to Fallout. As close as Starflight 2 was to Starflight. As close as Empire Strikes Back was to Star Wars, and as close as Back to the Future 2 was to Back to the Future, as close as Karate Kid 2 was to Karate Kid. Before Fallout 3, before Mass Effect 2, before Dragon Age 2, there was a time when you could actually see the connection between a sequel and its predecessor. It was still your old friend from before - he just got a hair cut and some new clothes. Maybe he got some glasses and could see better. But underneath, he was still the same.

That's what I want in Wasteland 2 - my old buddy Wasteland, in a new suit. I miss that guy.

I'm with you, krellen.

Unfortunately it's pretty clear that's not exactly what we are going to see.

I am sure Wasteland 2 will be a worthy sequel to Wasteland. But it seems like it will be more like Fallout than Wasteland.

It seems like Wasteland 2 may not keep some of the more bookish aspects of Wasteland that make it endearing to me.

Things like phase-based simultaneous turns with a keyboard-commands screen, and text-based encounters are things that I have come to equate with Wasteland. What will they be replaced with - one command, one turn sequential turns with mouse-heavy input? BORRRING!

I believe that turning Wasteland into a Fallout type of game may be neglecting some of its more strategic aspects. I could be wrong, but we shall see.

I want to see an implementation of the Wasteland universe that preserves its unique and quirky (and supposed outdated) qualities.

But ultimately, my dream for the Wasteland/MSPE universe stretches beyond the scope of Wasteland 2. I would be happy with a Wasteland operating system! Some of my personal thoughts of what might make a better RPG probably do not belong in Wasteland 2 and that's fine.

So, I will be happy with the new reimagining that will take place, whatever is lost in the process, because I am confident the creators of the original will give us a new original work of art that is equally worthy of praise, however different it is from the original.

But if some of the things I love about Wasteland are abandoned in Wasteland 2, that does not necessarily mean they are dead forever. There isn't a copyright on any of the features I listed above. If we (the fans) feel Wasteland 2 does not do Wasteland justice (though it be a perfectly good, even a great game in its own right), we are free to resurrect our own version of the Wasteland universe with those qualities of the original that we love. If we can't use the word 'Wasteland' to describe it, then we will use some other word.

My own personal dream is to create a new computer/pen and paper hybrid, a cPnP RPG that plants its roots more firmly in tabletop PnP games, with modern technology. If there are enough of us who care, we could use a forum like this one to build it and polish it before we open a Kickstarter to finance it.

Are there enough of us here to make doing something like that worthwhile?

[paultakeda]

:) I'm with you, krellen.

Unfortunately it's pretty clear that's not exactly what we are going to see.

I am sure Wasteland 2 will be a worthy sequel to Wasteland. But it seems like it will be more like Fallout than Wasteland.

What gives you that idea?

Things like phase-based simultaneous turns with a keyboard-commands screen, and text-based encounters are things that I have come to equate with Wasteland. What will they be replaced with - one command, one turn sequential turns with mouse-heavy input? BORRRING!

Or this idea?

I wonder about the phase-based combat mechanic but if movement gets fixed it would be a fair trade. Text-based encounters are guaranteed; we voted for it in the polls by asking for more content and less voice acting.

Have more faith, MDF!

[Drool]

I think it won't be everything any one of us expects, but that we'll be satisfied with the results. Hell, even if I was making it, I'm sure there'd be things I wasn't pleased with by the time we got to the launch. Everyone has a slightly different vision and different desires and viewpoints. And it's been 24 years. We've had a lot of time to let that anticipation simmer and stew. Even just going from the time of the Kickstarter to release, that's a lot of time to anticipate. Hard to meet those lofty standards. However, this pleases me:

How far along is Wasteland 2 in development at the moment? Has work started on the design and has any preliminary code or artwork been made?

Jason Anderson worked on the story elements for nearly a year and we did some audio experimentation for ways to enhance the depth of the world. We have an overall story arc and some specific locales called out but now is the time we put the meat on the bones. The game itself has been knocking around my head for two decades so there is no lack of vision for where we are going. I had waited to nail down the look of the game until recently and now you can see the first two pieces that Andree Wallin did. We are clearly on a path that is unique from the Fallout universe yet is still distinctly post apocalyptic.

Emphasis added
I've had 24 years to build expectations, but Brian's had 24 years to brainstorm and plot.

[Emmy Lou]

That's the kind of optimism I like to hear, Drool!


While some of the Fargquotes may make you guys leery of the change in tone and overarching play mechanics, the fact of the matter is he's still making a Wasteland game set in the Wasteland Universe. As much as people decry its mood shift towards Fallout's flavour, it isn't going to be Fallout. No, not everything you loved about the original is going to be in it, but it's probably going to have an inordinate amount of new things you'll grow to love just as much. I don't think he's forgotten how to make densely detailed, narrative heavy roleplaying rollercoasters.

In fact, all the time being told by big publishers that the genre is dead and then being so strongly vindicated by us true fans who have been waiting since the original or fallout or VTMB or whatever classic cRPG introduced us to the genre has probably only steeled his resolve to deliver the most incredible game he's made yet.

Also, thanks for pointing out that Neogamr interview, Drool! That one had slipped under my radar and I've been absolutely devouring all things related to the this project over the last few days

[Interloper]

I think it's fine to change up a lot of the old systems that were limited by technology to make for a more fun and/or immersive experience. Menu based combat for example would be dreadfully dull and make the entire system unengaging. However a tactical system that retained things like combat messages and the depth of the original is merely an expression of the original system in a more engaging manner and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that in a sequel.

Ideally for a sequel you look at what was fun and memorable and what made up the game's identity (mood, writing style, gameplay mechanics) and try to keep them recognizable while making improvements where you can. Mindless adherence to past convention prevents progress, and although you may remember them fondly, they may not be the best choice with regards to other mechanics, or the story, or even modern technology.

For example, Wasteland's map was heavily grid based and the art was comprised of neon pixellated 2d sprites, but you can still have a sequel if there's no grid or if the art style is a higher resolution and in 3D, you're merely expressing elements of the original with more fidelity. If the original was cartoony then you change the sequel to realistic or vice versa then you're changing the entire mood of the game and introducing a break in thematic continuity, so there are of course limits (Team Fortress 2 is completely unrelated to the universe of Team Fortress for example), but I don't see the problem in updating the systems and gameplay to portray the world with more detail, or to make the gameplay more engaging as long as there's an obvious continuity between the first and second.

Even Fallout 3 managed this in a lot of ways with things like VATS alluding to the called shots of the original, and the pip-boy being similar to the original menus. I mean, it wasn't a spot on 3D transition, but the inspiration was obvious and I think it worked better for the game they were making than simply retaining those elements (imagine having to use VATS for all the combat. Ugh). Now, I'm not suggesting go that far every time, but nor do I think every sequel should be 100% faithful to the original - otherwise why not just do a remake or an expansion pack?

[Van Der Muchbetter]

How close am I to articulating what you were saying, O' Van Der?

That was...

PERFECT. Thank you, that was exactly what i tried to say.

[Infinitron]

Ideally for a sequel you look at what was fun and memorable and what made up the game's identity (mood, writing style, gameplay mechanics) and try to keep them recognizable while making improvements where you can. Mindless adherence to past convention prevents progress, and although you may remember them fondly, they may not be the best choice with regards to other mechanics, or the story, or even modern technology.

Every time somebody makes this argument, krellen sheds a single glimmering tear.
A tear of hatred.

[Emmy Lou]

How close am I to articulating what you were saying, O' Van Der?

That was...

PERFECT. Thank you, that was exactly what i tried to say.

Ah do wud ah can, pardner

[Interloper]

Ideally for a sequel you look at what was fun and memorable and what made up the game's identity (mood, writing style, gameplay mechanics) and try to keep them recognizable while making improvements where you can. Mindless adherence to past convention prevents progress, and although you may remember them fondly, they may not be the best choice with regards to other mechanics, or the story, or even modern technology.

Every time somebody makes this argument, krellen sheds a single glimmering tear.
A tear of hatred.

I'm sorry, they're just so delicious. I can't help myself.