Wasteland 2 - Director's Cut Trailer - Story And Scale Trailer
- Thread starter Silver
- Start date
Added perks and traits. Improved graphics and added more voice acting.
Can't wait to play this again. I thought it was a great sequel to Wasteland and more customization is always a good thing.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
As I mentioned to the developers when they visited, I thought the release version was lacking some vital features, including perks and aimed shots, and I'm glad they've added them now.
Not entirely convinced they couldn't have implemented them from the beginning by being more in touch with the best in the genre, but that's neither here nor there now.
I don't know if they've changed the skill-bloat, but I found I could live with it - even if I think roughly a third of them are completely redundant from a gameplay perspective. Too much pointless busywork, essentially. I had to make at least one character that was more or less worthless beyond the technical skills - just to have a chance of covering them all.
I did enjoy the parts of the story I came across during my initial ~10-15 hours with the game as well as the excellent combat - and I'm looking forward to a proper post-apoc RPG this time around.
Not entirely convinced they couldn't have implemented them from the beginning by being more in touch with the best in the genre, but that's neither here nor there now.
I don't know if they've changed the skill-bloat, but I found I could live with it - even if I think roughly a third of them are completely redundant from a gameplay perspective. Too much pointless busywork, essentially. I had to make at least one character that was more or less worthless beyond the technical skills - just to have a chance of covering them all.
I did enjoy the parts of the story I came across during my initial ~10-15 hours with the game as well as the excellent combat - and I'm looking forward to a proper post-apoc RPG this time around.
Melvil
Super Duper Super Sweet
I agree with DArtagnan on this count, I could never get past the area north of the initial impassable radiation line. I just got sick of all the loot skills and the combat was typically the same fight over and over. I actually feel guilty because I have yet to finish any of these kickstarted RPGs and I backed 90% of them.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
I never replayed the game, but the skills didn't seem redundant to me. If you choose to have a skill monkey in your party, that's your decision. You can do without one. I'm all for player choice.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Without one, you will have to do without a hell of a lot of goodies. If you want skills to be important and to demand sacrifices, the smart design is to have fewer and let the best loot demand that you invest a lot instead. Same result, but without bogging the game down with pointless busywork, forcing the player to stare at progress bars for 2-3 skills instead of just one appropriate skill. It has the added bonus of not having to place endless obstacles to justify the existence of so many skills, and it lets the player feel rewarded for investing in a genuinely useful set of skills sensibly divided between party members.
Nice, this game now looks a lot better than other videos I watched from the past. I can tell it has been highly polished up in the graphics department. I especially was liking those small but important little details in the environments. I have been recently playing what I now consider to be a modern masterpiece, Sleeping Dogs, definitive edition, and the way all the tiny details scattered throughout the different environments in the city setting (Hong Kong) make for a real, livable world is truly amazing in the game. And it looks like Wasteland 2 also understands this concept. While I doubt Wasteland 2 will be as sublime as Sleeping Dogs is, I do think it looks like an excellent rpg.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Try playing with minimum charisma (no NPC's). You can't afford a skill monkey in your party then - choice enforced.
I don't really see an advantage in cutting the misc skills down so you can have one on every party member - no choice there. Putting a few points into a few skills isn't busywork for me though, so I can't relate to that. I just like having to balance my combat skills with a good number of non-combat skills, knowing I will definitely miss out on a few of them unless I want to sacrifice my combat skills.
Skills were also not redundant IMO because they played out quite differently - the things computers and toaster repair did were differing enough to warrant two skills.
I don't really see an advantage in cutting the misc skills down so you can have one on every party member - no choice there. Putting a few points into a few skills isn't busywork for me though, so I can't relate to that. I just like having to balance my combat skills with a good number of non-combat skills, knowing I will definitely miss out on a few of them unless I want to sacrifice my combat skills.
Skills were also not redundant IMO because they played out quite differently - the things computers and toaster repair did were differing enough to warrant two skills.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying having the skill would get you access to anything. I'm saying you'd still have to invest a lot to get the best loot, which means you'd have to choose between being efficient at combat or the skill - so you'd just get rid of the redundancy.
Simply giving one to each member would do nothing unless you invested - and that'd get you 5 members who suck at combat.
As for busywork, I'm not talking about putting points into skills, I'm talking about having 3 different icons on my hotbar that I have to click in the correct order - waiting for a progress bar for each one - before I get access to one crate of loot.
To you, that's great gameplay - and that's cool.
For me, it's busywork that adds nothing positive whatsoever.
I love having to choose and I love having to sacrifice for appropriate rewards. I absolutely despise staring at progress bars for no reason at all.
We all enjoy different things for different reasons.
I'd simply have designed the game around giving a similar variety of outcomes based on level of investment instead. Another alternative is to motivate a smart combination of skills and/or stats. As in, being quick and having a decent level in, say, "mechanical" would make you great at picking locks and disarming traps - while being strong with the same skill would enable you to break locks instead or whatever.
I prefer a smart and economical design to lazy and bloated design.
But simply having a lot of skills adds nothing positive that I can detect.
I'm sure we can agree that there's a limit to how many skills are appropriate, regardless. I think Fallout is an appropriate example of the sweet spot, even if I think there might be one or two skills that aren't used enough.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Which would be cool and all if that really was the case but it isn't. There are enough instances in the game where skills are used seperately. You are suggesting that every skill, on its own, should always yield reward - which would be pretty silly a nd weak, design wise ("here, have your locked container, or your hackable container, or your smashable container. Take your pick").
I can't follow your reasoning here, as I would say again that the skills in W2 are differing enough to be counted as separate skills. You can lump them together, it may even make sense to a limited degree, but the question would be why. Because not only are you giving the player the chance to invest heavily or lightly into skills, you're even giving them the choice as into what aspect of the skill (the theoretical "phat l00t skill") they want to invest.
I think we will again agree to disagree.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Ehm, no, you still don't understand.
I'd design the game to have a locked gate in one instance, a hackable device in another instance - and something to disarm in yet another instance. I wouldn't put them together in the same instance as is the norm in WL2 (which they obviously did to justify that amount of skills) - except on rare occasions - as that triples the workload and changes nothing about the player having to invest in each skill to expect to gain access to stuff.
In my design, he'd still have to choose between non-combat and combat skills, he just wouldn't have to fiddle around with countless icons and progress bars.
Obviously, if the player invested a lot and sacrificed combat efficiency - he should be expect to be rewarded for that choice. Only a bad designer would punish the player by putting a useless non-combat skill in the game and laugh at the player who sacrificed combat prowess on some of his characters.
I already explained why they're absolutely not different enough - except if you enjoy different icons and progress bars just for kicks, which apparently you do.
Sure
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
I haven't found a single skill to be completely useless, so I'd call this theoretical. Basically, by splitting up skills and increasing skill points, you're just playing with granularity - as you'd never get the same amount of skill points if there only were 4 non-combat skills in the game.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
AFAIK, there are 9 "knowledge skills" in the game - and I'm suggesting there should be around 6.
I'm not saying the skills in the game are literally completely useless, because they've designed the levels with the skills in mind.
What I'm saying is that it COULD have been designed with fewer skills and given the player the EXACT same choice between "tech-guys" and "combat-guys" - with the added advantage of not bogging the game down with redundant skills.
Also, I'd have had meaningful perks in the game from the beginning - because I think those are a vital part of the genre that only a bad designer would "forget" about. In that way, you'd have even more ways to diversify your party members without the need for redundant skills.
With fewer skills, you'd also make the level-designer job easier. Well, you'd make most of the jobs easier.
But that's my opinion, nothing more.
Ok, so I'm absolutely 100% confident I'm right - but that goes without saying
