• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Wasteland 2 Kickstarter project by inXile entertainment [Ended, $3 Million Funded]

messed up my numbers but since edited to make more sense. The money won't go far. They need about $2 million upwards to do it justice imo.

posted over for the new page:

re: money stretching from my last post:

say staff:

edited:
50k/staff/year
x18 months

75k over the project/staff = 20max (for 1.5 million)

Kickstarter + amazon takes 8% . 1.5 million = 1.38
Then you have expenses...etc - rent/power/sundries/tea coffee

The money isn't going to stretch far.
 
I'm not going to. He could make it within budget. Plus the team can grow and contract depending on what phase the project is at. That post was just tabled for how "expectations" should be tempered by the reality with regards to money.

some "fans" seem to think this is a multi million dollar project; that things don't cost money.
 
You have to consider that Brian Fargo isn't taking any of that money for himself. In fact, since he was planning on putting in $100k from himself to begin with, I'm sure he'll be willing to still put that money in if it's needed.

Fargo has a lot of experience, and he's not going to fuck up anything financially.
 

Varna

Member
I kind of remember Fallout 2 having voice acting for at least some characters. There was an aborigin guy with a bone through his nose which I seem to remember talking.

This always struck me as such an odd choice. Why did this character have so many voiced lines but other more story important characters didn't?
 

dLMN8R

Member
Anticitizen One's posts in this thread are tremendously confusing.

1) Dude created an awesome, very specific type of game in the past

2) Dude wanted to create a new game in the same style

3) Dude approaches every single publisher, not a single one has any interest in the game unless it undergoes specific changes <X> <Y> and <Z>

4) Dude has Kickstarter instead, raises money independently from literally tens of thousands of fans who know exactly what's being proposed, and who know exactly what kind of game they want.


...


5) Anticitizen One claims that everyone will be disappointed because the game won't undergo specific changes <X> <Y> and <Z>
 
Anticitizen One's posts in this thread are tremendously confusing.

1) Dude created an awesome, very specific type of game in the past

2) Dude wanted to create a new game in the same style

3) Dude approaches every single publisher, not a single one has any interest in the game unless it undergoes specific changes <X> <Y> and <Z>

4) Dude has Kickstarter instead, raises money independently from literally tens of thousands of fans who know exactly what's being proposed, and who know exactly what kind of game they want.


...


5) Anticitizen One claims that everyone will be disappointed because the game won't undergo specific changes <X> <Y> and <Z>

I think there's some confusion. The publishers wanted it to be a modern game probably a shooter with cover mechanics, regenerative health and perk based multiplayer. That's different than what I was expecting. I was expecting wasteland 2 to be a faithful but more modern. If you haven't played waste 1 it's extremely primitive by today's standards. What I am hoping/expecting is a wasteland sequel that plays like the 90s fallout games and games like planescape. I would have liked real time combat but I know I'm in an extreme minority with that one.
 
I think there's some confusion. The publishers wanted it to be a modern game probably a shooter with cover mechanics, regenerative health and perk based multiplayer. That's different than what I was expecting. I was expecting wasteland 2 to be a faithful but more modern. If you haven't played waste 1 it's extremely primitive by today's standards. What I am hoping/expecting is a wasteland sequel that plays like the 90s fallout games and games like planescape. I would have liked real time combat but I know I'm in an extreme minority with that one.
You equated realtime combat with "modern" and said that turn based is not acceptable and strictly a product of limited technology.

You will find few allies.
 
I think there's some confusion. The publishers wanted it to be a modern game probably a shooter with cover mechanics, regenerative health and perk based multiplayer. That's different than what I was expecting. I was expecting wasteland 2 to be a faithful but more modern. If you haven't played waste 1 it's extremely primitive by today's standards. What I am hoping/expecting is a wasteland sequel that plays like the 90s fallout games and games like planescape. I would have liked real time combat but I know I'm in an extreme minority with that one.

i was almost with you up until real time combat.

i havent played wasteland 1, but like the idea and wanted to support it. i have been asking for someone to start making infinity engine so i guess i cant argue i would be happy if it were similar to torment. that does mean very limited voices, walls of text, and turn based combat though.

all that said, more than anything i feel fargo should make exactly what he wants, since freedom from publishers and their bullshit restrictions are the reason i have been pro-kickstarter projects.
 
Real time combat in isometric perspective? Like an RTS? I'm not sure I'd like that for Wasteland 2. It worked in Baldur's Gate because it was a seamless turn based game that allowed users to pause, but I prefer the way F1 and F2 handled it.
 

Aaron

Member
Screw modern game conventions. If a game is fun and accessible that's all it needs to be. Wasteland is still playable right now. The only real thing holding it back is the graphics, and that it runs at the speed of light on modern machines. The thing I hated about Fallout 1 and 2 is how overly complicated they made things. There was too much to manage that got in the way of the fun of it.
 

Varna

Member
Screw modern game conventions. If a game is fun and accessible that's all it needs to be. Wasteland is still playable right now. The only real thing holding it back is the graphics, and that it runs at the speed of light on modern machines. The thing I hated about Fallout 1 and 2 is how overly complicated they made things. There was too much to manage that got in the way of the fun of it.

Explain... Wastelands seems to have far more skills (and less useful skills as a result) and it gives you four characters right from the start. You also have to keep track of key words, manually pool money together, and yeah... I'm sure it's a far less intuitive game overall.
 
Real time combat in isometric perspective? Like an RTS? I'm not sure I'd like that for Wasteland 2. It worked in Baldur's Gate because it was a seamless turn based game that allowed users to pause, but I prefer the way F1 and F2 handled it.

yes like Bastion, Diablo series, Baldur's gate, etc etc. if its like the early fallout games are then fine but I would appreciate it being less confusing. It took me several hours to figure out how to shoot something in fallout 1
 

Sentenza

Gold Member
yes like Bastion, Diablo series, Baldur's gate, etc etc. if its like the early fallout games are then fine but I would appreciate it being less confusing. It took me several hours to figure out how to shoot something in fallout 1

Why? The only party based game you listed was Baldur's gate, and it was decent but it pales compared to ToEE's combat system.
Beside, there was nothing "complicated" about Fallout 1 or 2 beside the clumsy interface.
Ironically, it was even more clumsy in Fallout 3.
 

Wiktor

Member
messed up my numbers but since edited to make more sense. The money won't go far. They need about $2 million upwards to do it justice imo.

posted over for the new page:

re: money stretching from my last post:

say staff:

edited:
50k/staff/year
x18 months

75k over the project/staff = 20max (for 1.5 million)

Kickstarter + amazon takes 8% . 1.5 million = 1.38
Then you have expenses...etc - rent/power/sundries/tea coffee

The money isn't going to stretch far.
Pre-production won't be made by full team, because why would it? It will just be designer and artists. So those numbers are off.
Also..expenses...I doubt inXile is going to be making solely this one game in the next 18 months. THey propably have other projects lined up, so the costs will be split.

Overall, I think you're overreacting. Plenty of modern games got made with this kind of budgets and they survived.
 

Kyouji

Haman Discharged... she smells nice
If you haven't played waste 1 it's extremely primitive by today's standards.

I first played Wasteland last summer, and I would like to qualify this statement by saying that it's definitely a game RPG fans should attempt to play through, even if you decide part way through (or 5 minutes in) that it's not for you. The game allows you to build a personalised group of PCs and the party mechanic combined with the skill system gives the player an opportunity to weave their own narrative around the actions of these characters (my AT and demolitions specialist blew himself up trying to load a howitzer shell, then on another occasion, couldn't hit the broad side of the Scorpitron despite my moving him up closer than the rest of the team). This kind of storytelling succeeds more than any amount of expensive CG or well-known voice actors could hope to accomplish.

The combat system was just tactical enough with a dash of decision making (go in for melee and double XP or stand back and plink away from a safer range; do a burst shot to conserve some ammo or full auto so you can get to Doctoring your comatose teammate ASAP) during key moments. The combat text was amusingly written and sometimes hilariously violent, but because it was all scrolling text, you could speed it up when you were tired of reading or just going through easy punks. As much as I enjoy the combat in Fallout with its targeted groin shots, the bigger battles could bog down a bit; I would prefer Wasteland's when given a choice, and certainly more so for what is being sold to us as Wasteland 2.

Lastly, the usage of the various skills throughout the game was something I have rarely seen contemporary RPGs attempt, to the extent that Wasteland did. The system certainly isn't perfect, with some skills that have lesser applications, but just giving players the option to teach their character skills like Metallurgy or Helicopter Pilot was awesome. I completely messed up my attempt to use the Helicopter Pilot skill, but even my screw up ended up being an amusing memory from the game. Giving my four Desert Rangers different skills was my way of personifying them (forget hair colour, I'm taking Cryptology and Toaster Repair); sure, it stung a bit when I found out Metallurgy was useful in all of 1 location (if it's useful elsewhere, someone tell me), but while the "gaming" part suffered, the roleplaying opportunity all those skills gave me will always stick with me. I hope this aspect of the game is not forgotten as they work on updating everything else for 2.

What I am hoping/expecting is a wasteland sequel that plays like the 90s fallout games and games like planescape.

I am hoping for a Wasteland sequel that plays like Wasteland, but with necessary and carefully-tested UI and gameplay tweaks so that new players aren't put off; I don't want them to sacrifice aspects of Wasteland that were integral to its experience in order to please all these people who are hopping on board expecting a "Fallout 2.5" experience. It will probably be a bit of a meld of both, and I'll accept that as long as the Wasteland mechanics aren't completely buried or reduced to aesthetics.
 
What I am hoping/expecting is a wasteland sequel that plays like the 90s fallout games and games like planescape. I would have liked real time combat but I know I'm in an extreme minority with that one.

Fallout 1 and 2 are turn based. Am I missunderstanding what you mean hoping to play like 90's fallout games.
 

Wiktor

Member
yes like Bastion, Diablo series, Baldur's gate, etc etc.

You would like a Wasteland sequel, a project fully funded by fans, to not resemble Wasteland?
So bassicaly what you would want is Brian Fargo to gather all that money and then do completely different game that he promised, essentially making the whole kickstarter just a one big con?
 

duckroll

Member
yes like Bastion, Diablo series, Baldur's gate, etc etc. if its like the early fallout games are then fine but I would appreciate it being less confusing. It took me several hours to figure out how to shoot something in fallout 1

Please. Just. Stop. It's like you're just spewing rubbish out of your mouth without using your eyes or your brain.

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 on the Kickstarter page itself. It's the game they want funding for. Not interested in that? DON'T FUND IT. Trying to complain about it or imply that people who are funding it don't know what they're in for just because you yourself didn't bother to read about what this is about is annoying as hell.
 
Fallout 1 and 2 are turn based. Am I missunderstanding what you mean hoping to play like 90's fallout games.

Yes. I'm saying at a minimum it should play similar to the 90s fallout games and not use something similar to the clunky interface from 80s games like the original wasteland

I'm going to stop debating because it seems people are getting confused and possibly misreading me.
 

duckroll

Member
Yes. I'm saying at a minimum it should play similar to the 90s fallout games and not use something similar to the clunky interface from 80s games like the original wasteland

No you're not. You're just changing your argument to whatever suits your purpose in the reply to keep playing devil's advocate against NO ONE. That's all you've been doing in this thread. Trying to rile people up, be offensive, or just act dumb. Stop it.

Edit: No, no one is misreading you. You're just being a douche. You don't even have to admit it, we don't care. Just leave the thread if you think that's for the best.
 

Sinatar

Official GAF Bottom Feeder
Yes. I'm saying at a minimum it should play similar to the 90s fallout games and not use something similar to the clunky interface from 80s games like the original wasteland

Do you honestly think he isn't going to update the interface at all? What the hell are you talking about?
 

Wiktor

Member
You know what I would like to see? Destruction and use of cover like in new XCOM.

Yep. That's the way to "modernize" older games. Not throw away old mechanics and replace them with something completely different, but keep the functions, polish interface and then build upon it with new features like destruction and cover. I don't mean it just for Wasteland 2, but for all the classics that are returning.
 

Sentenza

Gold Member
I'm not really in favor of environmental destruction because it's not really what these games are about. Cover use could be interesting though.

Well, it wouldn't make the game one single bit worse, for sure, but it would probably take time and resources for a feature they wouldn't even exploit that much.

Yep. That's the way to "modernize" older games. Not throw away old mechanics and replace them with something completely different, but keep the functions, polish interface and then build upon it with new features like destruction and cover. I don't mean it just for Wasteland 2, but for all the classics that are returning.
Exactly.
Classic mechanics with modern production value.
 

Wiktor

Member
Exactly.
Classic mechanics with modern production value.

2008 was an interesting year in this regard, because it saw the releases of King's Bounty: The Legend and Fallout 3. Both were ressurections of old classic IPs, but one remained faithful to the original and just brought it to modern standards, while the other one threw out a large part of what the originals were about.
 
Anticitizen One said:
yes like Bastion, Diablo series, Baldur's gate, etc etc. if its like the early fallout games are then fine but I would appreciate it being less confusing. It took me several hours to figure out how to shoot something in fallout 1

There's NOTHING confusing about shooting in Fallout 1. There's manual, there's tutorial with rats... shooting is as simple as clicking on weapon in your hand and then on the target.

Please stop spewing misinformation about Fallout series in this thread.
 
@stoppedintracks. if you read his prior thread (mentioned somewhere) in here; he didn't even know how to attack a rat in fallout. game seriously wasn't that hard to learn.
 

duckroll

Member
Well, it wouldn't make the game one single bit worse, for sure, but it would probably take time and resources for a feature they wouldn't even exploit that much.

Right. I don't think it would make the game worse, and I think given the right attention to detail and implementation it could even be interesting. But I don't think it's right for a project like this, and experimentation is the last thing I want out of a game which is fan-funded to basically bring back a oldschool sort of game.

I'll also rather the team get to design and create as many interesting and cool looking environments as possible in the world without having to worry about how they could be destroyed and how that would impact the flow of the game.
 

Wiktor

Member
Except when it is a zelda game and everyone bitch about it ;)
Well..reaction to ressurecting a style of play from over a decade ago will bring different reaction then churning one sequel after another eveyr few years without changing much. I'm sure people would bitch about classic-styled Wasteland 5 in 2018
 
It also would be cool to go prone. Adds another layer of complexity though...

falllout tactics

6307699603_ce110d5288.jpg


FOT_Different_Stances.png


http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Tactics_combat
you can go low to up your accuracy/increase defence but it really is a different game.
 
Fallout: Tactics is SERIOUSLY underrated. Game is very good (think X-COM, Final Fantasy Tactics), very long and only goes down the shithole near the end with near invincible army of robots.
 
I hope they move to a 3D engine, at this point it takes more effort to draw a million HD sprites than it does to just model in 3D. It also allows people to use many different resolutions and aspect ratios, which is necessary in this day and age where everybody is running at a different resolution and their screens are different widths.

Diablo 3 is a good model for them to follow in terms of modernizing a game while preserving all the classic mechanics which make the game distinctively what it is.
 

duckroll

Member
I hope they move to a 3D engine, at this point it takes more effort to draw a million HD sprites than it does to just model in 3D. It also allows people to use many different resolutions and aspect ratios, which is necessary in this day and age where everybody is running at a different resolution and their screens are different widths.

It would be modeled in 3D anyway, regardless of whether they use a 2D or 3D engine. So yeah, I'll say the odds are good that the game engine will be 3D.
 
Fallout: Tactics is SERIOUSLY underrated. Game is very good (think X-COM, Final Fantasy Tactics), very long and only goes down the shithole near the end with near invincible army of robots.

That's my only concern for this game. Sometimes they see putting near invincible enemies as "fun"

But I simply don't find such things fun...difficulty must make a balance between tedium and rewarding-ness (lol).
 

zkylon

zkylewd
i don't think blackisle worked on fallout tactics. I played all the fallout games (except PS2 - eeeurrgh) and like SIT said; it was good til the final acts. Just got impossibly hard. I did enjoy it but I never finished it.

If its 3D. Van Buren.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuDKrY7eW0

modern tech should be able to pull that off better.
Yeah, Westwood developed Tactics. Every single time it breaks my heart seeing what it could've been.
 

Haunted

Member
This is pretty incredible. I loved that pitch video, and a good one like this goes a long way to convince those on the fence.


A larger gaming audience becoming aware of crowdfunding possibilities (pioneered by Notch and now continuing with Kickstarter) is potentially the best thing happening to the industry in quite a while. Paradigm shifts happening right before our eyes.
 

duckroll

Member
"At $1.25 million, the money will go primarily into making the world bigger, adding more maps, more divergent stories and even more music."

Looks like we've made it there! Now onwards to $1.5 million! :D
 
Z

ZombieFred

Unconfirmed Member
"At $1.25 million, the money will go primarily into making the world bigger, adding more maps, more divergent stories and even more music."

Looks like we've made it there! Now onwards to $1.5 million! :D

250k can easily be made with the amount of free time they have left. I have a good feeling this game will turn into something incredible.
 
Top Bottom