Do not listen to fans too much

[browncoat]

I registered on the forums to post my full agreement to this "anti-suggestion". As far as I'm concerned I paid for a game by inXile, not for participating in creating a game and certainly not for a committee-designed game.

Dear developers, stick to your vision. I have full confidence that you will make an awesome game.

EDIT: An interesting, somewhat related read: http://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/3/1 ... ds-testing

[Vryheid]

One interesting piece of advice I've heard is that developers shouldn't place too much value in what consumers say they want, because they'll never be satisfied. instead devs supposedly should be making something new and convincing consumers after the fact that they need it without even having realized earlier.

I'd say that's a bunch of nonsense. If a CEO decided to make a bunch of crazy business decisions against the will of the company's shareholders, he'd be fired immediately. If a politician decided to routinely ignore the overwhelming demands of his constituents, he'd be recalled and replaced at the first opportunity. Now you're telling me that a developer who's funding depends on consumer demand, who's promised to us that in exchange for donations that consumer input would be taken seriously into consideration, should just ignore all that and blow off their entire fanbase? If Inxile did something crazy like remove the entire skill system or add extremely restrictive DMC despite overwhelming opposition from fans, I seriously doubt they would ever be able to make another successful Kickstarter campaign, let alone get people to buy their games.

From what we've heard from Brian Fargo, these devs sound a lot more intelligent and open to the community than that. Obviously they should work around their original design vision, but they read and seriously consider every thread that gets posted on these boards. If it means adjusting priorities to add features that are in high demand, I'd say that's time well spent.

[northrop]

I really hope our input will go towards beta testing and bug reports, rather than telling inXile what to do. Between Fargo and his team, and us... who's better qualified at making games? Sure, we can make suggestions and stuff, and that's fine, and I'm sure inXile has (and will continue to) skim through the suggestions. Maybe they'll find something they like, maybe not. I'm sure they had a plan for this game laid out on the table way before the Kickstarter happened, so it's not like the name of the game is all they got, and now they need us to tell them what to do.

The localization thread is the most depressing, IMO. If the game is going to get translated, I hope the resources will go where they should, not the three people with one post in the thread, desperately trying to get their hands on the game's manuscript.

[cbk]

[...]

The localization thread is the most depressing, IMO. If the game is going to get translated, I hope the resources will go where they should, not the three people with one post in the thread, desperately trying to get their hands on the game's manuscript.

I'm a professional freelance translator and imho Wasteland2 would be a very-very difficult game to translate -what with the humor, the quirky references, slang etc. I've seen some fan-made localizations for Monkey Island outside the (E)FIGS set of languages and the result is...well, somewhat problematic. Not for lack of respect of the source material or effort, it's just a very difficult game to translate and keep in the target language the same tone.

Anyway, I'm sure inXile have both the experience and skill to deliver a superb game, looking forward to the next steps.

[Lucius]

I'm more worried about the beta phase then pre development.

[Archcraft]

"We’re going back to the original and building from there. No first person shooter, we’re going top down so you get a tactical feel for the situation. And we’re not ditching the party play to turn it into some hack-and-slash bloodfest. It’s turn based, tactical, with a storyline that will be deeper and broader."

This is a quote from Wasteland 2's Kickstarter page.

Does that sound like old ideas to you? Does that sound obsolete?

It sounds like a game that could (and should) be released today. A game which I would gladly purchase right here, right now and nostalgia has nothing to do with it. Hell, I started playing those kind of games maybe a year before going to college and that's about a decade ago. I first played X-com last year and my first thought wasn't that it was "old", I thought: "what an awesome concept".

Of course I only played a few hours at most because the dated graphics and interface got the best of me (also it's not an easy game, I must admit). With a fresh new coat of paint, improved interface and twenty years of game design experience to learn from, you've got a "modern" game.

The reason why 23 thousand indivuals pledged to fund a sequel to Wasteland is because publishers won't for many reasons, most of them being complete bullshit. It's not because turn-based, tactical, top-down (or isometric or cavalier oblique or whatever) games ceased to be relevant or fun, it's because they thought they could make more money with other genres.

What convinced me to pay a hundred bucks in advance for this game is the paragraph I quoted above. I believe there should be more games like this. I believe games like this should never have stopped being produced. But I don't see this as a crusade against "modern" games. I don't want an anti Mass Effect (a series I like) or an anti Elder's Scrolls (a series I don't like), I don't want it to be a moronic statement against full voiced dialogues, first person perspective and action gameplay.

I want more type of games, not less.

Asking fans for input is not a good idea, in my opinion. They proposed to make a turn-based, top down, tactical game and we agreed to fund their project. Our job is done, theirs is to make what they promised to. I don't believe we have any business dictating every little detail, so I don't feel like suggesting anything. In short: let's trust the professionnals.

But I do hope for one thing:

That it be marketed as a modern game.

[Tanglebones]

...just because of what people on the forum said.

I say this because I've been looking at this thread for a little while now, and I've seen some strongly-worded (read: profane) 'arguments' against various game elements. Some I agreed with, some I didn't.

But I have no sense of entitlement about the design of the game. My pledge gets me a voice, not a decision. It's because I believe that the designers know this that allows me to put my trust in their decisions.

I'd hope that the majority of pledgers feel likewise, even if they choose to stay quiet about it.

Fargo's already laid out what he perceives the relationship between us fans giving suggestions and his team making the game is. He's said, basically, that we can propose big-picture ideas, and if they fit with what InXile's got going on, then they'll include them. You can kinda guess what the folks at InXile are thinking about/looking for feedback about because they put up polls to get specific feedback on stuff that becomes a general concern in the community. So I don't know that there needs to be any concern that forum members voicing their opinion is going to break the game. The folks making these games have been around a while, and I'm pretty sure that game developers can get just as passionate about their ideas behind the scenes as we are in the forums, and part of consistently making good games is learning to know when an idea is a good fit with a game.

That said, I don't really care for the implication that people who disagree with you are "profane" and "entitled" if you have problems with specific suggestions, or specific community members, it'd probably be more helpful to hash that out on the thread that concerned you, rather than making a new thread to talk about those other idiots.

[geezer]

The graphics should be as modern (meaning good or realistic) as InXile can afford, but not the gameplay. Action games actually have mostly improved over the years, copying from the RPG and Adventure genres, but cRPGs, whose ideas were poached here and there by action games, have steadily become worse and worse so that they are now not even recognizable as part of the genre from which they were derived. But those of us who loved those original cRPGs are mostly still alive and still like the same sort of game mechanics. We haven't disappeared. And that's where Brian Fargo comes in. And hopefully later, maybe MCA and his gang of heavies. So yes, make the graphics modern, but not the game play. Not to say that I want identical game mechanics to Wasteland 2, but I certainly don't want what passes for a modern game now. Hell, even action games are being destroyed by the console kiddies. Not that there were many good action games to start with.

[KrystianGalaj]

I understand it is important for inXile to make the backers/fans feel included in this project, but personally, I pledged for the team of inXile to deliver a worthy sequel of Wasteland, not a "consensus" on what it would be cool or not. I want the vision of Fargo & Co., not some compromise between what fans and backers want.

They have a vision, and won't compromise:

http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/1 ... age-2.html :

Part of the reason we have the excitement we do is there is this general feeling that the games have been dumbed down for the masses. Politically correct situations, linear events, being careful no one gets lost etc...it can be kind of lame. We will put the game into beta test and if a huge majority about the lack of a feature we need to consider it but in general let's recreate the wonder with modern graphics and sound.

GB: Unfortunately, role-playing games have lost much of their original identity in recent years, thanks in part to the popularity of first-person action RPGs. How do you convince a newer or younger RPG fan who has grown accustomed to the action-focused titles to give Wasteland 2 a shot?

Brian: Well here is the beauty of fan funding... we don't have to convince some younger RPG player of anything. I am making this game for the wonderful fans who put their money behind us and not some nebulous group of new people. Let's make the game they all expect and let the chips fall where they may. There is just no way I'm going to consider anything that could let down the core.

http://www.gamezone.com/editorials/excl ... asteland-2 :

If you go back to Wizardry, Bard's Tale days and other classic role playing games, you control a party of characters. The part of the fun is the mix right? If it was a medieval setting, it was the Thief, the Warrior, a Spellcaster and you find your right combination, mixing and matching combinations, that's a lot of fun, and there is a lot of tactics you can do with that, and bringing that kind of game, is fun. On top of that, some of the role playing games today have become fairly pretentious, and ours is not, ours is 'you play it the way you want' and so we don't set any kind of morality on anything you do and there is no clear cut way to handle things. And often when you try to do things right, you end up getting yourself in a situation going from bad to worse, and we just put you in these uncomfortable situations where you just couldn't help it. NPC's that join your group have a mind of their own, so you have some control over them, but if they want to steal from you, or empty a clip, or maybe they have a vendetta against bikers and open fire when you didn't want them to, then you have to deal with the consequences. All these kinds of dynamics are interesting, and what made Wasteland fun was the system, making the story and experience work, but it's what happens within the rules that makes it interesting. If NPC's go through all the clips which are really hard to find, you find yourself screaming at them, and you can't get that kind of emotional reaction from the writing, you get it from the system.

[Vryheid]

With your collective vision, the game that was the godfather to the popular Fallout series will become a reality. Not only will you fund the development, but you’ll have a voice in how the game goes together. We will have forums up for design discussion and soliciting your ideas for what will make Wasteland 2 rock.

This is your chance to influence the kind of game you want to see. With fan funding, you drive the direction of game design and development. If it is important to you, it is important to us.

I don't know how they could have been more clear about it. We did not just fund them for "a turn-based, top down, tactical game". We donated to them so that we could indirectly participate in the design process and give suggestions. I don't recall them ever saying that "our job is done" as soon as we pay their bills. They made it extremely clear that our input would help drive their game design. To me, this thread looks like you're just as interested in giving input as we are.

[Gizmo]

I'll say this straight up front; I would not at all want anything like this...

[falloutgod13]

Me either, lol if you want it that retro there's always the original. Which actually looks better than the mock version in my opinion.

[Oesophagus]

The thread title made me mad at first, but after reading it, the OP actually makes a valid point.

But it's really hard to express it in simple words, so I'll use an analogy

[Jeremy Clarkson]



This is the Jaguar e type. It's a brilliant car made in the 60's. Many people today think it is one of the greatest cars ever made, and with good reason. It is also one of the most beautiful cars ever made.
But it does seem a bit... 'dated'



This is the Eagle Speedster, and immediately it gives the impression of being a much more modern car. And it's weird because it's based on the e type, it looks very similar, it's basic design is very similar. Yet it seems better in every way. That's because the designers who built this car did not try to be revolutionary, and stuck to improving an already great design. So its looks were slightly changed, all of it's components, while still working the same way, have been replaced with modern ones, and it's engine was tweaked to be more efficient and powerful.
But it still seems fair to call it a Jaguar e type

[/Jeremy Clarkson]

Somewhere in there is what I'm trying to say about Wasteland 2

[Gizmo]

Which actually looks better than the mock version in my opinion.

Mine too, but the idea was the old game with 16 bit facelift; not good IMO.

Wasteland was made for the constraints of a computer that had [total] 640kb or less system memory and around a 4.77 MHz processor. (for comparison, 1 megabyte RAM is 1024 kb) There is no reason to restrict a modern desktop to the limits of the old 8088 systems (or even 486's).

Wasteland 2 should not even look like Narc IMO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0UzWNydt04

[Archcraft]

@ geezer

I think I wasn't clear enough.

My point is that we'll never be satisfied with so called modern games by substracting ourselves from the so-called modern world. By labelling ourselves and our games as "old-school" we're admitting we're somehow living in the past and proving the kiddies that plays dumbed down shit we don't like are the present and future.

I don't believe we should have this attitude.

And I'm not talking about making ANY concessions. I'm not talking about AAA graphics or health regen. Games like Wasteland, Fallout or Torment have ceased to be produced for a period of time, but now they're making a return, well and alive, not as animated corpses.

Are shooters necessary old school? Is shooting a gun from a first person perspective a dated mechanic? No? Then why isometric perspective should be strictly seen as something that occured only because of technical limitations instead of a legitimate, enjoyable and efficient way of interacting with a game? Same with 2D graphics.

In fact, I don't really mean Wasteland 2 should use the label "modern", but refrain from going the "old-school" way and simply stand as a proud representative of a genre that has been neglected for too long.


@ Vryheid

I didn't misunderstood them, I just don't really agree. That is all.

[Namfoodle]

Concept or gameplay doesn't make anything old-school, Civilization V was pretty much the same as the first one, yet it's still a modern game.

[PiPboy]

There is a 80% chance that majority of the "details" we are arguing about they would have already decided. We are simply just bickering away "hoping" to be useful. If anything is if the creators have an argument of what to put, they can simply look at their fan forums and see where the majority is at, an simply slinck away back to their Programming studio an back to work.

He spent nearly 20 years trying to get a sequal out. More then likely all the characters \ story design \ etc. are already planned out in some secret book hidden under his pillow.

[Archcraft]

@ Oesophagus

I admit it looks provocative at first glance. My bad.

I thought about making a car analogy too. While we're not exactly speaking about the same thing, I still agree with your point. Craftsmen becomes better at their craft so we should expect their oeuvre to evolve. Of course, we hope it evolves for the better.

An analogy that would better illustrate what I'm trying to say would be like this:

Once people travelled by train and thought it was great and modern and blablabla. Then cars came up, become very popular, very practical, very modern. So yeah, trains are less used, less popular, some think it's archaic. But it's not. Trains are still useful, liked by many. Train enthusiasts shouldn't just like them because it's an older mean of transportation, but because it's still a great mean of transportation.

Trains can improve and evolve as much as cars. But making trains shaped like cars to convince car people to switch would be pretty dumb. We must convince them trains are worth a try.

Am I making sense?

@ Namfoodle

If Van Buren would have become Fallout 3 and spawned a sequel or sequels championning the same gameplay, I suppose we would regard them as "modern" games as much as Mass Effect or Skyrim.

[Lucius]

I agree with almost everything in this post. The original post is awesome and he makes a very true point. Later, the car analogy is perfect. And I think nobody wants antiquated graphics. I bet many of us are hoping Wasteland 2 is a huge success and brings back this entire genre. Imagine Wasteland 3 with a $20 million budget.

[falloutgod13]

He spent nearly 20 years trying to get a sequal out. More then likely all the characters \ story design \ etc. are already planned out in some secret book hidden under his pillow.

Actually... yes.. but someone else wrote all that and it's not under B.F.s pillow. Watch the video on kickstarter page. Part of the reason why we might see this game next October is because a lot of the framework is laid out for the story and concepts. Now it's just a matter of getting the money(more of it) and starting on the project. Only reason we're here is because they stated they wanted to make a game we'd all enjoy and wanted our input. ... Some of it probably isn't a good thing and the community has shown unprecedented ability to bicker and rage over some really silly aspects of the game.