Wasteland 3 - Officially Announced

[JDR13]

I like the sound of the ice-waste setting; bit more lukewarm though on the multiplayer aspect.

I'm not sure how I feel about the icy setting. I hope it's not all snow and ice for the entire game as I tend to find such environments bland after awhile.

I'm indifferent to the multiplayer as long as it doesn't have any kind of significant impact on the single-player.

 

[mercy]

Depends on the GUI. If it will be as horrible as WL2 dircut, count me OUT.

 

[Arkadia7]

Yea, this was unexpected! I'm stoked. Sounds like they are going to improve and add new features to the game, while keeping the core good stuff intact. I will make a new account on this funding site and put in my "two cents" so the game will be made… I agree, too many gamers seem angry and in a rage at some of these rpg developers, I don't get it. I have only backed a few games, made by the big names like Larian, and Inexile, and these are the "good guys", in my humble opinion. Very happy with the final products and the deals I got by kickstarting them!

These are the core rpg gamer's studios/developers, along with Obsidian, and if Obsidian would put out a game on kickstarter (or this new platform) - one that, at last, I was truly interested in, then I would back them too. Maybe one day… (grin)

Anyway, whatever…if people want to be angry and boycott kickstarter funding, that is their choice. For me, it has been very good experiences, and I will continue to back games this way.
Last comment. I agree with the notion in the comment above that snowy landscapes can get boring, and so do hope there are a good variety of dungeons and landscapes to explore in the gameworld. Not just snow...

 

[azarhal]

I can sort of see the case for indie studios using crowd funding every time. All game projects are pretty risky, and even one significant failure can undermine a company. The crowd campaign gives them a cash injection, shows them whether there is strong interest in the game, and helps with publicity.

The thing with InXile is that they currently have 2 games, both crowdfunded, in the making, neither of them close to be released. This Wasteland 3 announcement raise that to 3 games at the same time. You don't find it fishy that a company who ask for crowdfunding help to make a single game is working on more than one at the same time?

 

[Deleted member 18181]

after the bullshit they pulled with torment, no money from me

 

[joxer]

BTW, they are BASICALLY doing Divinity: Original Sin and BALDUR'S GATE style multiplayer, so I fail to see how it's "Wasteland Online" or that they sold out. Hypocrites and bullshitters are so transparent.

I'm not sure why are people using fantasy RPGs as some example, especially superold game that wasn't originally crowdfunded but recently got it's milk-em phone version.

Inxile are basically doing a crowdfunding campaign. Nothing more, nothing less.
They've numbered planned product details and these details to some might sound as improvement, to some others as decadence.

Some of us don't want to "invest" a dime into such product. I'm in exactly that minority. Why would I back a product just because someone else is eager to MMO it? Sorry but no. If I want a product without MMO, I'll toss some cash if I'm sure there is no MMO.

Instead of calling me bullshitter, don't say it's not me as only I dared to write "wasteland online", how about you support that MMO with more $ so they can safely develop the MMO instead of dropping the project just because some people wanted singleplayer only Wasteland sequel. I'm sure Inxile would appreciate that more from you than fighting a futile flamewar.

 

[mbpopolano24]

I am not touching 'fig'. I am sure they will make it. When the game will be heavily patched and discounted, then they'll have my money.

 

[Archangel]

Frack this shit. Support this instead: https://www.kickstarter.com/project...me-themed-turn-based-tactical-rpg/description
This is a true love project of a guy that loves Xcom and Fallout

 

[TomRon]

after the bullshit they pulled with torment, no money from me

Ok, I'll bite. What bullshit? I've backed InXile so far and they haven't let me down yet. I'll probably back this too, if nothing else than to continue supporting crowdfunding. It has brought me loads of great games so far that wouldn't have been made otherwise.

I'm not interested in the MP aspect, but it's hardly a problem either. Just like it isn't a problem with D:OS. This still sounds like a proper sequel to me.

 

[Grifman]

Negative: I refuse to KS funds again to an established company to make a sequel to a game that would sell itself without guaranteed money.

You need the money upfront to make the game. Profits from prior games is hardly likely enough to fund a new game entirely.

 

[Grifman]

Instead of calling me bullshitter, don't say it's not me as only I dared to write "wasteland online", how about you support that MMO with more $ so they can safely develop the MMO instead of dropping the project just because some people wanted singleplayer only Wasteland sequel. I'm sure Inxile would appreciate that more from you than fighting a futile flamewar.

Because calling it "Wasteland Online" has a different connotation (and negative one at that to many people) than saying it simply has MP, and I think you're smart enough to know that. So you're just adding more BS to your original BS

 

[Ripper]

The thing with InXile is that they currently have 2 games, both crowdfunded, in the making, neither of them close to be released. This Wasteland 3 announcement raise that to 3 games at the same time. You don't find it fishy that a company who ask for crowdfunding help to make a single game is working on more than one at the same time?

I don't find it fishy, no. It doesn't seem particularly odd that a games company is making more than one game at a time, and it seems fine to me if they want to use crowd-funding in each case.

As I said, I think there's more than one way that crowd-funding can be used. When it's a small two-person indie like Whalenought, looking for 50 grand, then it makes sense for enthusiasts to give them some extra money; with 100k they could make a significantly different game.

These larger studios are using it in a different way, which I see more as a preorder scheme, getting people involved and generating buzz, and so on. I actually think that's OK, even if they could fund development in the traditional way. In a Larian interview, they said they were divided on whether they should use Kickstarter again for D:OS 2. If they were divided on the question, then clearly they had the option of funding the project themselves. If a studio in that position takes the KS route, fine, but I have no interest in handing over more than the asking price in that scenario. In that case, I certainly don't believe that throwing money at them is going to result in a better game.

 

[joxer]

Because calling it "Wasteland Online" has a different connotation (and negative one at that to many people) than saying it simply has MP, and I think you're smart enough to know that. So you're just adding more BS to your original BS

You got that right.
I'm on a crusade and have no problem with getting dirty. The outcome probability is not on my side, but I'm not an usual quitter and sometimes something happens against all odds. In this case, while not very likely, Inxile might still drop the MMO act and transfer funds planned for that rubbush into richer singleplayer experience.

 

[GabrielMP_19]

The thing with InXile is that they currently have 2 games, both crowdfunded, in the making, neither of them close to be released. This Wasteland 3 announcement raise that to 3 games at the same time. You don't find it fishy that a company who ask for crowdfunding help to make a single game is working on more than one at the same time?

Tides of Numenera is almost coming out. They're releasing one game, working in the next and making projects for a third. They delivered with Wasteland 2, so I don't see why not trust them.

 

[you]

I will expand on this; I believe torment is pretty much done. Some fixes and details to added but the bulk of the development team is likely moving to Bard vi which is likely near the end of pre-production and the pre-production team is likely moving to wasteland 2. Remember this is transition will likely take place no earlier than Nov as the kickstarter won't complete till Nov. In my eyes this all makes sense esp with regards to timing and what they stated was their plan a year or two earlier.

Also I would like to know what 'shit' they pulled with torment. If porting it to console is the 'shit' then Larian also performed the same 'shit' by porting ds 1 (and 2) to consoles. I have no problem with the games being on console as long as the pc interface is solid.

Perhaps you are referring to some other shit and can fill us in on the details.

Tides of Numenera is almost coming out. They're releasing one game, working in the next and making projects for a third. They delivered with Wasteland 2, so I don't see why not trust them.

 

[ElderGnome]

On the topic of why some might not be into funding games or pre-ordering:

http://www.slashgear.com/no-mans-sk...y-we-should-stop-pre-ordering-games-15451789/

WL2 was really only properly "done" for the PC months after they released it. I bought it full price upon release and figure that's enough "support" from this gamer. I'll buy WL 3 when its done; probably 6 months after release judging by previous kick starters. Being first just isn't important to me. I don't pirate software and own hundreds of games I bought full price; I think I support my hobby industry quite enough in that way.

For people who like buying stuff sight unseen and supporting the development process, cool. KS gives you a way to do that.

 

[ChaosTheory]

Just because I won't front a company money anymore to make a game I could enjoy doesn't mean I'm "not a fan" or "hate" this or that about them and it's not a matter of trust. I just don't believe, as a matter of principle, that I should take the risk for them. Or if it's not about risk-aversion, then at best it's being used as an advertising gimmick which… I guess is innovative if you have patience for that sort of thing.

I am constantly reminded that there are bad bets in this industry, even from established, well-intended producers. I will give them my money when the product is finished if it's a game that delivers everything it promised (No Man's Sky, anyone?). I will even buy add-ons, expansions, DLC and horse armor without complaint-- if I like it.

I'm even more steadfast on this position when a company tries it again, knowing full well they will be able to deliver without it.

 

[Deleted User]

Just because I won't front a company money anymore to make a game I could enjoy doesn't mean I'm "not a fan" or "hate" this or that about them and it's not a matter of trust. I just don't believe, as a matter of principle, that I should take the risk for them.

I'm not sure why you're calling it "taking a risk" when really it's just showing support to a small company that for the most part is actually struggling to release these sorts of games. Before Kickstarter it's not like there were all these Baldur's Gate spiritual successor games being made. The reason these companies use Kickstarter to begin with is to make these types of games that otherwise wouldn't be able to be made due to publishers calling the shots, etc. etc. Some people seem to have a short memory about this.

 

[ElderGnome]

It's the definition of "taking a risk" because you are literally paying for a product before you have any idea what the end result will be; topping that off with a large number of Kickstarter projects that burned their supporters badly. I think you'd be foolish to not be skeptical.

Why take the risk when you can wait for others to take the risk and then buy a complete, finished product at a later time? I give my charity to homeless LGBT youth organizations, personally. Not software developers.

 

[Ripper]

I don't think we can deny that there's an element of risk in being a backer - that just goes with the territory. But, I do agree that one big reason for even successful studios to use KS is that it doesn't attach all the strings that finance from a publisher would entail.

I expect that even successful studios can't usually fully finance a new game themselves, and would traditionally have to submit to a publisher's conditions - which would often interfere with creative control. KS financing can free them from that.