Being able to be your own faction

[ToasterRepairman]

I didnt say go rogue

I said I dont want some omnipotent ever present "Faction Leader" directing our every move and in the end reap all of the reward for our work as the main game player.

Yes Man was close, but it was still not good enough. I crave independence, I crave non linear game play, I crave recognition for my characters achievements.

How many times has your character been sacrificed, exiled, set off alone again, imprisoned, indoctrinated, shown pretty colored explosions.

Its an easy fix

Dont drag the player around by the nose using a NPC commander say go to point A and do mission 1

Dont take all the credit from the player for the faction

In the game world Commander shepard will always be a commander and never a general or admiral or emperor no matter how many times they save the entire universe.

What was the end frame for every single Fallout New Vegas ending for the courier regardless of who you picked?

Spoil

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... ending.jpg

[Gillsing]

Ranger Center doesn't know what is going on in Vegas and beyond. Ergo, RC doesn't _know_ what the party needs to be doing next. When Command is that blind, it usually just goes with whatever "boots on the ground" recommends.

At the end the Ranger command did reveal that they received reports after the player-rangers had left, so for some time they knew what was going on. But the in-game excuse for not saying anything was that they didn't dare mention it over the radio:

"Congratulations Rangers on a mission well done. Since you embarked on your mission we had reports from other rangers about the horrible strength contained in Base Cochise. Had it been possible, we would have warned you. However, we were afraid any such communication would have drawn Cochise's forces to you and would have destroyed your mission before you had a fair chance of succeeding. Even now, news of your victory is spreading through the Wasteland and your heroic efforts will be rewarded."

I hope that Wasteland 2 will stick firmly to the way the Rangers were handled in the original game: Total freedom, but under the Desert Ranger banner. I like independent rogues as much as the next guy, but I don't mind having my party clearly identified as Rangers wherever they go. (Except when they're temporarily disguising themselves as robed cultists.)

Creating an entirely custom faction with its own goals seems to be more suitable for a different type of game, such as a 4X game or an RPG where most of the content is procedurally generated. In such a game it would be easy to let the players customise their own factions by specifying which keywords the NPCs will use in communication with or about those factions. I think that it works very well in Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, and I'm quite curious how that would work as an RPG with more than six NPCs plus the player.

But I imagine that Wasteland 2 will stick to the tried and tested method of writers creating very specific content which would require a lot of extra work if they'd have to account for the party perhaps not being Desert Rangers after all. And I'd rather see that time and effort going into more content for Desert Rangers, since that's what I plan to play.

[DrunkVision]

Playing a role is ancient, but Roleplaying (AFAIK) came from psychotherapy, it was (is) a technique used to teach empathy. A person would be asked to try to see a situation from another person's (or creature's) perspective; how they would view an event... how that would make them feel... perhaps so that the patient could then see why the other person was upset, or why their dog didn't like being yanked around (off the ground) by their neck... with the leash.

One of the best roleplayer's I've seen in a while was Tord (aka MyNameIsNotLilly, on Youtube). He always played the same PC in every RPG; picked and shaped the class to match her [evil] personality. Every opportunity, every conversation; every interaction is done with his character in mind.

He has Lets plays for Fallout 1 & 2; Baldur's Gate; Neverwinter Nights... and an [IMO] unmatched (modified) Let's Play of Wasteland. I can't recommend the WL "lets play" highly enough, I've not seen anything like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvYcu5qa ... plpp_video

that's some messed up logic like sayng that cars came from bycicles and definatly not from the wheel itself. There is no essentual differences between theatre and psychological experiments that you descibed. So I don't see any point for you to argue with me. Regarding walkthoughs of some dudes playing evil girls I would say nothing cause I don't know what to say.

If this game's scope goes beyond California and Nevada, I'll be shocked.

sci-fi technologies my friend, sci-fi technologies.

Perhaps you have the wrong game. In this game, you are a member of a paramilitary organization, and likely will continue to be a member for the entire game.

Duh, do you understand what military line of command is? Even lietenants has their degree of freedom to do their orders as they see fit, while each general who does not follow what government officials and fatty burocrates says can do almost anything while speaking to fellow generals which are higher in rank not like merely subordinate, but as a comrade. That's the reason that Brotherhood of steel could become divided. The only option for that freedom to be gone is computer-rulling like in enclave or just harsh dictatorship regime.

[Gizmo]

There is no essentual differences between theatre and psychological experiments that you descibed. So I don't see any point for you to argue with me. Regarding walkthoughs of some dudes playing evil girls I would say nothing cause I don't know what to say.

Who was arguing?
But I would have to say that of course there is a difference... Theater is mass entertainment; roleplaying in psychotherapy was not for entertainment sake. A second difference is that in theater the actor is given scripted material; it's rote parroting if the text (mixed with craft), and it has to sync with the scripted material given to the other actors. The role in theater [play] is predetermined.

Roleplaying as mentioned above, had it's origin in the understanding of life from a perspective other than one's own. Case in point (for example): A real life body builder & self defense instructor is role playing a 72 year old man with a leg brace and a war injured shoulder. The scene is him walking home from the corner bar late at night, and the possibility of getting mugged. It is irrelevant that the player can defend himself (or even tell the older man how to); it's just him walking home. The player is restricted to what the character can plausibly accomplish ~and that doesn't include direct conflict with multiple attackers. The point of the Roleplaying would be for the player to think about it and decide what this character would be thinking, what his plan would be if accosted; what other options he'd have if it came down to it, and how best to avoid that if possible. You might say, 'where's the fun in that!?' or 'why would anyone play that kind of character?' ~But that is unrelated to roleplaying; Roleplaying is simply the player's best guess (or even educated guess) at a specific character's reaction, motivation, and course of action. (I would bet several roleplayers could have had fun with that PC and scenario).

In Wasteland 2 we'll be playing inexperienced Desert Ranger characters; and thankfully more than just one. Which should give us plenty of varied roleplaying opportunities.

[DrunkVision]

Who was arguing?
But I would have to say that of course there is a difference... Theater is mass entertainment; roleplaying in psychotherapy was not for entertainment sake. A second difference is that in theater the actor is given scripted material; it's rote parroting if the text (mixed with craft), and it has to sync with the scripted material given to the other actors. The role in theater [play] is predetermined.

Roleplaying as mentioned above, had it's origin in the understanding of life from a perspective other than one's own. Case in point (for example): A real life body builder & self defense instructor is role playing a 72 year old man with a leg brace and a war injured shoulder. The scene is him walking home from the corner bar late at night, and the possibility of getting mugged. It is irrelevant that the player can defend himself (or even tell the older man how to); it's just him walking home. The player is restricted to what the character can plausibly accomplish ~and that doesn't include direct conflict with multiple attackers. The point of the Roleplaying would be for the player to think about it and decide what this character would be thinking, what his plan would be if accosted; what other options he'd have if it came down to it, and how best to avoid that if possible. You might say, 'where's the fun in that!?' or 'why would anyone play that kind of character?' ~But that is unrelated to roleplaying; Roleplaying is simply the player's best guess (or even educated guess) at a specific character's reaction, motivation, and course of action. (I would bet several roleplayers could have had fun with that PC and scenario).

In Wasteland 2 we'll be playing inexperienced Desert Ranger characters; and thankfully more than just one. Which should give us plenty of varied roleplaying opportunities.

"Entertainment is an action, event or activity that aims to entertain, amuse and interest a public ("public" can consist of one person)." Psych o the rape-y mostly consists of getting money out of fools who think that such activities as imagining himself as a friends dog will help him/her to get rid of trauma getted by that moment with nasty uncle in the childhood.. or something like that and entertainment is very important at least to get fools attracted to new "doctor" methodics.
So you imply that role-playing was made to enrich our characters, make us emphatic to other people needs and worries? That would be useful mostly to americans who usually do not want to know about life of their neightbour, or socially restricted to do so and able to do such thing only in games which is kinda pathetic. Well, maybe it's like that right now for all of us cause modern society creates visible and invisible borders between humans. Still, I would rather talk to real person instead of that and role-play only in game universes where there are resources or abilityis to do what I am lacking or can't do in real life due to moral code that I am followng, level of globalisation of economy, etc. cause it helps my imagination.

[Gizmo]

Psych o the rape-y mostly consists of getting money out of fools who think that such activities as imagining himself as a friends dog will help him/her to get rid of trauma getted by that moment with nasty uncle in the childhood.. or something like that and entertainment is very important at least to get fools attracted to new "doctor" methodics.

Missed point.
Roleplaying the dog is for sake of not injuring the dog by drawing attention to the owner that yanking on their neck hurts... IE, "how would you feel if you were pulled into the air by the neck".

So you imply that role-playing was made to ...

I implied no such thing; I merely made the mistake of citing the origin of roleplaying.

[DrunkVision]

Psych o the rape-y mostly consists of getting money out of fools who think that such activities as imagining himself as a friends dog will help him/her to get rid of trauma getted by that moment with nasty uncle in the childhood.. or something like that and entertainment is very important at least to get fools attracted to new "doctor" methodics.

Missed point.
Roleplaying the dog is for sake of not injuring the dog by drawing attention to the owner that yanking on their neck hurts... IE, "how would you feel if you were pulled into the air by the neck".

So you imply that role-playing was made to ...

I implied no such thing; I merely made the mistake of citing the origin of roleplaying.

I'm puzzled. How would you feel=enriching personality with new understanding of different positions in life. Isn't it? (Though I consider that psychologists are all perverse that concept and in games it's not perverted)

[Gizmo]

I'm puzzled. How would you feel=enriching personality with new understanding of different positions in life. Isn't it?

No. In this context roleplaying is actually trying to teach empathy (in this case for the dog). It's not about enriching one's own life, it would be about enriching the dogs; but this is strayed away from cRPGs.

[CaptainPatch]

If this game's scope goes beyond California and Nevada, I'll be shocked.

sci-fi technologies my friend, sci-fi technologies.

It's absolutely amazing, incredible even, how 80 years after the near-total collapse of Civilization, Society, and Science, someone has apparently managed to cobble together bits and pieces from the rubble devices that can accomplish something that was light-years ahead of Science at its peak just before the bombs almost made Mankind extinct.

Wonder where the scientist(s) responsible for these scientific miracles got his (their) education(s)?

[DrunkVision]

sci-fi technologies my friend, sci-fi technologies.

It's absolutely amazing, incredible even, how 80 years after the near-total collapse of Civilization, Society, and Science, someone has apparently managed to cobble together bits and pieces from the rubble devices that can accomplish something that was light-years ahead of Science at its peak just before the bombs almost made Mankind extinct.

Wonder where the scientist(s) responsible for these scientific miracles got his (their) education(s)?

What's so unbelievable in that? In Russia we have tanks that were made in 1945 and they still can be used. Many are storaged at uknown to public warehouses. There are a lot of protected computer networks that could work even after EMI. I don't know how it's in america but average sitizen of Russia has at least 20 books at home, including published in 1916 or earlier. Futhermore there are several underwater powerstations on the north shore that produce electricity from the power od sea waves and can work for dozens of years without proper maintainance.
Every really new advance in science were made not by collective of scientists, but by one person who suddenly got masterpiece idea, yeah, he would need at least some knowledge in the area of research, still, he could be very badly educated, like Einstein who got mostly "F"s at school.

[Zombra]

I hope that Wasteland 2 will stick firmly to the way the Rangers were handled in the original game: Total freedom, but under the Desert Ranger banner.

Same here. There are a million RPGs out there in which your party has no particular loyalties; you're just following the storyline because it's the obvious thing to do. I think it's a nice feature of Wasteland that there is actually a faction that the party all belongs to and is assumed to be at least moderately loyal to. It adds a very interesting flavor.

A story about four people stranded together on a desert island is interesting. A story about four cops stranded together on a desert island is also interesting, and a very different kind of story. That's the kind of thing I hope to see with the Desert Rangers.

[CaptainPatch]

It strikes me that in any social structure where it IS possible for _anyone_ (of exceptional abilities of course) can rise to the very pinnacle of power, it would also be an environment where the motto would be "Every man for himself!" or "You need to look out for #1!"

To have supremacy over others, _they_ have to allow you to have that supremacy. It may be through power, through wealth, or persuasion, but ultimately it's because _they_ let you be The Person In Charge. Power is straightforward: "Do what I tell you, or I will kill you and destroy EVERYTHING and EVERYONE you care about. (Not necessarily in that order.)" Warlords, dictators, crime kingpins all work along this model. But even they require the willing services of their henchmen. (Or in the case of a Mad Scientist, perhaps it would be hench_robots_.) Wealth is the most common process these days where $$$ can buy the firm support of legions of supporters. (Provided they are paid enough.) Persuasion is the hardest to sell because you have to convince people that it is in their own best interests to put you in charge -- and then keep you there. Quite often, this is how dictators came to be dictators: Elect me to Ultimate Authority as your best hope for Life, Health, and Happiness -- but once in power, "the gloves come off". This could be used to describe how Hitler got to the pinnacle of his power.

Whatever path is used to get to be THE person in charge, the trick will be to stay in charge. After all, if _you_ could start as the bottom rung of the ladder and rose to the top, then others could follow your path to replace you sometime in the future. That is, unless you deliberately take steps to block that path behind you. (Which says a lot about what kind of Leader you would be.)

So: Power, Wealth, or Persuasion -- which path will _you_ choose?

[Drool]

If this game's scope goes beyond California and Nevada, I'll be shocked.

sci-fi technologies my friend, sci-fi technologies.

I fail to see how that is in any way relevant. The game's scope is California and Nevada. Last I checked, all of America, Canada, and Europe were not inside California and Nevada. Global conquest isn't within the game's idiom. Just like I don't expect my Rangers to be exploring Dwemer ruins or fighting off the Combine.

[CaptainPatch]

Penguins. The game MUST have penguins. And a talking lion and a talking zebra and...

What? Doesn't everybody want what I want? Shows you how short-sighted they are!

[deus]

sci-fi technologies my friend, sci-fi technologies.

It's absolutely amazing, incredible even, how 80 years after the near-total collapse of Civilization, Society, and Science, someone has apparently managed to cobble together bits and pieces from the rubble devices that can accomplish something that was light-years ahead of Science at its peak just before the bombs almost made Mankind extinct.

Wonder where the scientist(s) responsible for these scientific miracles got his (their) education(s)?

Every really new advance in science were made not by collective of scientists, but by one person who suddenly got masterpiece idea, yeah, he would need at least some knowledge in the area of research, still, he could be very badly educated, like Einstein who got mostly "F"s at school.

Where do people get that from?

Einstein did very well in both early education and academia.


Offcourse education can be done outside school, but that's generally where the knowledge is. Its the societal cliques and organisations that attains and study knowledge and keeps track on what is on the forefront of scientific enquirers.

You loose that nexus of repositories...then there aint going to be much new discoveries.
Every new discoveries is made by standing on the shoulders on the one who came before.



*I see these kind of conversation about the plausibility of the setting as mostly trite and pointless but i just had to respond to this.