Support NeoGAF

[EVOL 100%]

Just popped into this thread before I sleep to echo the 'fuck honey badgers' sentiment. What a pain in the ass that was

I don't know if it has already been discussed, but a French journalist said that in conversations, picking keywords in a certain order actually matters (a lot, apparently); did anyone notice this?

Saying the wrong things at the wrong time can bring trouble, yes

 

[Enduin]

But this sort of complaint applies to the combat system, too. Why should I ever accept a combat that goes poorly? There's no reason to sit and take the lost HP when I could reload and do it over. Why should I waste the health packs?

By having a percent chance to hit, they encourage me to reload and try the fight again if I've missed a lot. Or caused friendly fire, etc.

That's an entirely different situation altogether. There is nothing wrong with reloading before a combat encounter that didn't go well if you think you can do better, which can sometimes be a big if, that's just part of learning the system, but even that's different from reloading to prevent any kind of damage or because you didn't have a good % chance to hit. That's one reason why you can't save in combat, only outside of it.

Not only that but combat takes far longer than skill checks and you are dealing with a great many dice rolls, so to speak compared, to just one with skill checks. You might be doing really well in an encounter compared to the first time you tried it so you won't have to waste health kits but then a bad shot or lucky crit by the enemy might seriously hurt one character, is it really worth reloading and wasting another possible 10 minutes just to avoid that damage? It's a very different situation and barrier of entry compared to save scumming skill checks.

 

[Shake Appeal]

I don't know if it has already been discussed, but a French journalist said that in conversations, picking keywords in a certain order actually matters (a lot, apparently); did anyone notice this?

Saying the wrong thing can start combat sometimes, or shut down avenues of conversation you can't get back. The former is usually pretty damn obvious, though.

 

[Noaloha]

It's a role playing game, not a reward promising game. Nothing wrong with some dice-rolls in an adventure.

 

[Fallout-NL]

He's got a point there Sporky.

 

[UncleSporky]

I don't know if it has already been discussed, but a French journalist said that in conversations, picking keywords in a certain order actually matters (a lot, apparently); did anyone notice this?

Sometimes saying a certain keyword will end the conversation and give you no chance to learn other valuable information.

Also if a chance to use a speech skill comes up and you don't take it (or can't), you never have the opportunity to do so again. If you just change the subject and start talking about something else, the opportunity is gone.

I don't know if there's any sort of situation where you're talking to a dude and asking about his pants first and his shirt second instead of vice versa totally changes the direction of the rest of the conversation. It's usually about the things that will end conversation or force you into a certain quest path.

 

[Sotha Sil]

I don't know if there's any sort of situation where you're talking to a dude and asking about his pants first and his shirt second instead of vice versa totally changes the direction of the rest of the conversation. It's usually about the things that will end conversation or force you into a certain quest path.

That's what I was wondering. Would be cool, but unlikely.

 

[greenfish]

Let's do this!

lmao

 

[Fallout-NL]

To be honest, personally, I've gotten too used to modern quick save systems and check points (which Wasteland 2 doesn't have) that I can barely save-scum properly even if I wanted to. I simply forget to save often enough.

 

[UncleSporky]

He's got a point there Sporky.

Not for me. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't actually play it that way.

I save scum all skill checks (because why would I just accept a broken lock) and I save scum all combats (because why would I just accept a combat that goes poorly).

I save scum walking back to the Ranger Citadel, because why would I want to waste ammo and potentially get hurt when I just want to sell junk and stash loot? Should avoiding encounters also be pass/fail?

I save scum breaking down weapons to get the best mods. Should you just be able to choose what item you get from breaking down the weapon? Why would anyone ever choose broken weapon parts?

Early in the game I didn't accept any combat where I took damage, or else only took the damage when I was close to leveling up and getting healed. I'm at the point now where it's getting a lot tougher to avoid being hurt, but if I don't manage to kill an enemy with my surprise shot at the start, I reload.

Anything with a percent chance of success or failure, the game encourages save scumming for. If I wanted to play legit then I would go all the way, I wouldn't just feel a pull to scum the safes but not the combat.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

Not for me. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't actually play it that way.

I save scum all skill checks (because why would I just accept a broken lock) and I save scum all combats (because why would I just accept a combat that goes poorly).

I save scum walking back to the Ranger Citadel, because why would I want to waste ammo and potentially get hurt when I just want to sell junk and stash loot? Should avoiding encounters also be pass/fail?

I save scum breaking down weapons to get the best mods. Should you just be able to choose what item you get from breaking down the weapon? Why would anyone ever choose broken weapon parts?

Early in the game I didn't accept any combat where I took damage, or else only took the damage when I was close to leveling up and getting healed. I'm at the point now where it's getting a lot tougher to avoid being hurt, but if I don't manage to kill an enemy with my surprise shot at the start, I reload.

sounds fun

 

[greenfish]

Not for me. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't actually play it that way.

I save scum all skill checks (because why would I just accept a broken lock) and I save scum all combats (because why would I just accept a combat that goes poorly).

I save scum walking back to the Ranger Citadel because why would I want to waste ammo and potentially get hurt when I just want to sell junk and stash loot. Should avoiding encounters also be pass/fail?

I save scum breaking down weapons to get the best mods. Should you just be able to choose what item you get from breaking down the weapon? Why would anyone ever choose broken weapon parts?

Early in the game I didn't accept any combat where I took damage, or else only took the damage when I was close to leveling up and getting healed. I'm at the point now where it's getting a lot tougher to avoid being hurt, but if I don't manage to kill an enemy with my surprise shot at the start, I reload.

Why not use godmode instead?

Seriously?

Inquery: You loved fallout 3?

 

[UncleSporky]

sounds fun

It is, it's awesome. I'm being really completionist, I'm seeing how all the quests play out from all the angles in one playthrough as much as possible.

Being rude to people just to see how they react and then reloading, that sort of thing. A lot of people already say they do this, I just do it all the time.

Why not use godmode instead?

Seriously?

Inquery: You loved fallout 3?

Yeah actually, I replayed it a few months back and did the same thing with it and that was fun too.

Actual god mode, like save file hacking and such, is just boring because you didn't actually earn it within the confines of the game.

 

[itsjustsurvival]

Not for me. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't actually play it that way.

I save scum all skill checks (because why would I just accept a broken lock) and I save scum all combats (because why would I just accept a combat that goes poorly).

I save scum walking back to the Ranger Citadel, because why would I want to waste ammo and potentially get hurt when I just want to sell junk and stash loot? Should avoiding encounters also be pass/fail?

I save scum breaking down weapons to get the best mods. Should you just be able to choose what item you get from breaking down the weapon? Why would anyone ever choose broken weapon parts?

Early in the game I didn't accept any combat where I took damage, or else only took the damage when I was close to leveling up and getting healed. I'm at the point now where it's getting a lot tougher to avoid being hurt, but if I don't manage to kill an enemy with my surprise shot at the start, I reload.

Anything with a percent chance of success or failure, the game encourages save scumming for. If I wanted to play legit then I would go all the way, I wouldn't just feel a pull to scum the safes but not the combat.

Sounds exhausting.

 

[-tetsuo-]

A big problem I have with the game is that Skill use is kind of pointless in its current form. I just save before every one and reload till I succeed.

Not for me. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't actually play it that way.

I save scum all skill checks (because why would I just accept a broken lock) and I save scum all combats (because why would I just accept a combat that goes poorly).

I save scum walking back to the Ranger Citadel, because why would I want to waste ammo and potentially get hurt when I just want to sell junk and stash loot? Should avoiding encounters also be pass/fail?

I save scum breaking down weapons to get the best mods. Should you just be able to choose what item you get from breaking down the weapon? Why would anyone ever choose broken weapon parts?

Early in the game I didn't accept any combat where I took damage, or else only took the damage when I was close to leveling up and getting healed. I'm at the point now where it's getting a lot tougher to avoid being hurt, but if I don't manage to kill an enemy with my surprise shot at the start, I reload.

Anything with a percent chance of success or failure, the game encourages save scumming for. If I wanted to play legit then I would go all the way, I wouldn't just feel a pull to scum the safes but not the combat.

 

[Noaloha]

Sporky play how you want (obviously!), just don't assume after your playthrough that you have any reasonable foundation to comment on the game's balance.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

I do admit that I also save scum from time to time but not to that extend. Damn.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Clearly, there is a divide in those who want to roleplay and those who wish to powergame. Some of the gameplay issues in WL2 are something of a vestigial artifact of its roots in a tabletop RPG design (the core systems of WL1 and WL2 are based on one) and its reliance upon die rolls which, along with its percentage listed, can cause a lot of worrying and doubt in those of us used to more confidently graded levels of challenge and success. To alleviate that, inXile really ought to get on with implementing a stricter, much more difficult method of enforcing results, not much different to the Ironman-like default setup of WL1. To entice those normally unwilling to take any unfortunate results into thinking about taking part in such a mode should be a bonus layer of reactivity and even playable content. A game as large as this one should do all it can to make it clear to the player that they should be willing to live with the consequences and move on and not to try to ace a first run.

 

[UncleSporky]

Sporky play how you want (obviously!), just don't assume after your playthrough that you have any reasonable foundation to comment on the game's balance.

Nah, I have as much foundation to comment on it as anyone else. I've seen all of the most common complaints in action and most of them are valid. For example, assault rifles being awesome and overpowered, enemies who throw explosives at you being really annoying etc.

It's not like I would ever call the game too easy on the basis that you don't take enough damage, because I decided to avoid damage! If anything I would recognize the difficulty all the more because of how often I replay combats.

I've started just taking those hits and going through combat normally unless it really goes south, because it's started to take too long. I've also stopped reloading the contents of safes and crates unless I'm really short on sniper ammo or something.

But no, really, I am not one to say "WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, AMMO IS PLENTIFUL, I NEVER RUN OUT" or anything like that. I know what I'm doing.

And this is one of the most fun games I've played in a long time, I love it.

 

[Dresden]

Had to use up my rocket launcher against a pack of six honey badgers. These animals, man.

 

[phantomspiker]

And this is one of the most fun games I've played in a long time, I love it.

And that's all that really matters in the end.

I don't really have the patience to save scum. I find the game more exciting when I have to deal with the outcome of my decision.

 

[GungHo]

I've never encountered this even once. Perception check tells you what you need to use on a safe. It's always been either "electronic lock" (computers) or "working tumbler" (safecracking). Sometimes there's a trap to be removed first (demolitions).

Maybe I'm mis-remembering then, because I'm pretty sure I've run across a keyed safe. That'd be pretty sad, though, given the remembering I'm having was from playing yesterday. Thanks for confirming my senility.

I think that's kind of the point, it's a gun for melee use. You want to try to hit multiple enemies with it, that's the main benefit, and it's great when it works.

I hear what you're saying, and I realize they're trying to get you to use the cones by running up on people, it just seems like it's a lot more trouble than its worth given that the rest of the team is hiding behind cover while this guy's running up and spazzing out like he's Eugene Tackleberry from Police Academy.

 

[zonezeus]

People actually DON'T do that? I don't care about safes or combat or weapon mods because they're mostly not worth the effort of reloading the game several times (I ran across maybe one or two safes with actually good content, not just random ammo and junk), but every single doors MUST be absolutely, positively unlocked, I have to see EVERYTHING or at least as much as possible.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Clearly, there is a divide in those who want to roleplay and those who wish to powergame. Some of the gameplay issues in WL2 are something of a vestigial artifact of its roots in a tabletop RPG design (the core systems of WL1 and WL2 are based on one) and its reliance upon die rolls which, along with its percentage listed, can cause a lot of worrying and doubt in those of us used to more confidently graded levels of challenge and success. To alleviate that, inXile really ought to get on with implementing a stricter, much more difficult method of enforcing results, not much different to the Ironman-like default setup of WL1. To entice those normally unwilling to take any unfortunate results into thinking about taking part in such a mode should be a bonus layer of reactivity and even playable content. A game as large as this one should do all it can to make it clear to the player that they should be willing to live with the consequences and move on and not to try to ace a first run.

I disagree with that. I feel like if Sporky has fun playing how he plays he has every right to do so. Why force people into a certain way of playing the game, it doesn't add anything to the experience of the people who wouldn't do it anyway it just takes away something from the people who do it.
It's cheating in a Singleplayer game, nobody should give a damn. If you want to sit there reloading a safe 50 times and you have the time and patience to do it be my guest. Cause that's the trade-off. Real time.

I remember Fallout NV having something like that in the casino though, where you had to wait 60 seconds after each spin before you could reload again.

 

[UncleSporky]

I do admit that I also save scum from time to time but not to that extend. Damn.

Part of it for me is that this game is an unknown factor, I don't know how difficult it's going to be later. Maybe I'll come across a combat that is just so tough that I'll need to pull out all the stops, and I won't have the equipment to do it. It's the classic Final Fantasy save-all-your-elixirs-for-the-final-boss thing. Because someday you might need them.

I don't know, sometimes I try setting off to play these games legitimately, but quickly I get frustrated at all the stuff I'm missing. With just one little 5 second reload, I could have opened that safe instead of having to leave it behind. Why in the world wouldn't I reload?

The only reason I wouldn't is because the last time I saved was an hour ago. But the last time I saved was 10 seconds ago, so what do I care?

I totally understand why people think playing this way is crazy, and I totally understand the enjoyment of playing legitimately instead. I just didn't decide to play it that way this time.

What I don't understand is feeling like it's ok to save scum one aspect of the game but not another. If you're going to reload for an optimal result, might as well go all out, you've already lost your "honor" or whatever.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

What I don't understand is feeling like it's ok to save scum one aspect of the game but not another. If you're going to reload for an optimal result, might as well go all out, you've already lost your "honor" or whatever.

Cause it's a waste of my time. I don't want to sit there for five minutes trying to crack a safe. I' fine. I have 50 healthkits without reloading fights. Cause I did conserve them a lot in the beginning. I waited on Leveling Up till my team was low on HP. So now I have a lot of them. I have a bunch of money and ammo. There is literally nothing in this safe that is worth that much time.

I do sometimes save scum on story stuff because I know I only have the time to play this game once, so I'd like to see as much as possible so if I some check fails and a fight breaks out I might reload. I don't give a shit about "honor" btw. Everybody should just have fun the way he plays. If you want to edit the savefiles to give your characters 5000 skill points, I don't care. If it's fun to you, why not?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I disagree with that. I feel like if Sporky has fun playing how he plays he has every right to do so. Why force people into a certain way of playing the game, it doesn't add anything to the experience of the people who wouldn't do it anyway it just takes away something from the people who do it.
It's cheating in a Singleplayer game, nobody should give a damn. If you want to sit there reloading a safe 50 times and you have the time and patience to do it be my guest. Cause that's the trade-off. Real time.

I remember Fallout NV having something like that in the casino though, where you had to wait 60 seconds after each spin before you could reload again.

I'm not at all saying people shouldn't play the way they wish, I'm saying that there should be greater encouragement to play the game as it was intended with its focus on consequences and roleplay. People will do what it takes to get the experience they're after, so I don't see any reason to get in the way of that by way of a stick, but it would be a better overall package if it had a carrot there.

 

[UncleSporky]

I disagree with that. I feel like if Sporky has fun playing how he plays he has every right to do so. Why force people into a certain way of playing the game, it doesn't add anything to the experience of the people who wouldn't do it anyway it just takes away something from the people who do it.
It's cheating in a Singleplayer game, nobody should give a damn. If you want to sit there reloading a safe 50 times and you have the time and patience to do it be my guest. Cause that's the trade-off. Real time.

I remember Fallout NV having something like that in the casino though, where you had to wait 60 seconds after each spin before you could reload again.

Well here's the other thing though, if the game had some way to enforce keeping the consequences of your actions, I would still play it, and would operate within those confines.

Like if you could only save at Ranger Citadel, and all other saves were temporary and deleted themselves after loading, I wouldn't save scum, because it would just take way too long.

If skill checks were pass/fail, I would definitely have spent the 30+ unspent points I have on every character, because I would've needed to bump them up to open safes and unlock doors, that sort of thing. But as it is, I save them in case a skill check comes up "impossible!"

 

[Fantastapotamus]

I'm not at all saying people shouldn't play the way they wish, I'm saying that there should be greater encouragement to play the game as it was intended with its focus on consequences and roleplay. People will do what it takes to get the experience they're after, so I don't see any reason to get in the way of that by way of a stick, but it would be a better overall package if it had a carrot there.

Yeah, I kinda flew over your text and wrote my comment to fast. You are right, I agree with that.

 

[UncleSporky]

I do sometimes save scum on story stuff because I know I only have the time to play this game once, so I'd like to see as much as possible so if I some check fails and a fight breaks out I might reload.

Yeah, this is my main reasoning really, I'm probably not going to want to replay this game for a long time, so I want to see as much of it as possible. I want a complete save file, wherein I opened every safe and dug up every buried item, as much as the game will let me. I'd rather take three times as long to play the game once than have to play it three times to see everything.

I did the same thing in New Vegas, I waited as long as possible to pick NCR or Cesar or House or independent, and I went through and got all the endings in rapid succession. It's just what I do.

Like I said I've started just going with what I get at this point because it is taking quite a while, but I still need to open all those safes.

Anyway I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make the page about me. I'm sorry if I offended anyone because I play my WRPGs like a jackass. Carry on enjoying Wasteland 2!

 

[hunchback]

These type of games I always play like I would if playing D&D with friends. Which means I accept the failed critical hit or the failed safe opening. It's OK to lose or die? You can't win every time you play and if you did would that be fun? The game designers want you to fail sometimes.

 

[Deleted member 245925]

Do you guys think a charisma/leadership party member is required at all or can you do fine without one? Has anyone played without any NPCs and just the four party members? From what I read about the NPCs, I don't really want to bother with them running away and charisma is just such a waste of attribue points.

Basically, is playing only with the four main characters and without leadership viable?

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Do you guys think a charisma/leadership party member is required at all or can you do fine without one? Has anyone played without any NPCs and just the four party members? From what I read about the NPCs, I don't really want to bother with them running away and charisma is just such a waste of attribue points.

Basically, is playing only with the four main characters and without leadership viable?

It's definitely harder that way cause you don't level up as fast and especially in the beginning a the fifth member of your team is really helpfull. But I'm sure you can do it.

 

[Enduin]

And? What incentive do I have to just accept a crit failure when I had a 71% chance to succeed? A straight up Pass/Fail system would make a lot more sense and still have clear incentives and disincentives to it. The current system is asking the player to accept failure when they have the power to reverse it right there with the push of a button.

Clearly, there is a divide in those who want to roleplay and those who wish to powergame. Some of the gameplay issues in WL2 are something of a vestigial artifact of its roots in a tabletop RPG design (the core systems of WL1 and WL2 are based on one) and its reliance upon die rolls which, along with its percentage listed, can cause a lot of worrying and doubt in those of us used to more confidently graded levels of challenge and success. To alleviate that, inXile really ought to get on with implementing a stricter, much more difficult method of enforcing results, not much different to the Ironman-like default setup of WL1. To entice those normally unwilling to take any unfortunate results into thinking about taking part in such a mode should be a bonus layer of reactivity and even playable content. A game as large as this one should do all it can to make it clear to the player that they should be willing to live with the consequences and move on and not to try to ace a first run.

I enjoy roleplaying in W2, I'm not really fond of power gaming at all. It's tiresome and can suck all the fun out of a game because it just becomes a chore and constant fight with the mechanics. I spent a good 2 hours setting up my party, writing long Bios for each of them and thinking hard about the role I want them to play in the party. I read everything I find, as well as all the flavor text in the text box, and I take my own notes about info and quests. The game is one of few that I actually enjoying RPing seriously, but that only goes so far. It's still a game where I want to enjoy my time and get the most out of it and accepting failure when the means and barrier to reverse that is not even remotely difficult is one I can't pass up.

I'd be more than fine with a single constant autosave feature that you can't control if that's the game they want us to play. Have it save in each new area or after each major action or at certain time intervals. I don't really care. I'm more than capable of playing an Ironman like setup. But right now to just expect players to accept failure on their own is just not realistic nor good game design, so they should have come up with some better systems if they don't expect or want players to reload saves often.

 

[Arkaerial]

Had to use up my rocket launcher against a pack of six honey badgers. These animals, man.

I'm not sure why I actually laughed at this...Maybe the visual.

 

[UncleSporky]

Do you guys think a charisma/leadership party member is required at all or can you do fine without one? Has anyone played without any NPCs and just the four party members? From what I read about the NPCs, I don't really want to bother with them running away and charisma is just such a waste of attribue points.

Basically, is playing only with the four main characters and without leadership viable?

EDIT: I think I misunderstood the question to begin with but I'll leave the first paragraph anyway.

From what I've read, some characters may require a certain amount of total party charisma to get them to join at all. One early one is said to require 10 or 15, others are supposed to require 25 or even more. I don't think anyone has all the details on this or whether it's even true, though.

Leadership is bugged. The skill says it grants a certain amount but the tooltip on the buff is half that. If you are supposed to be getting a bonus 6%, you'll actually get 3%. This is kind of disappointingly low. Nobody knows which amount is actually intended, but either way it's not a huge benefit right now.

On the subject of whether you want to deal with NPCs who sometimes do their own thing...well they don't run away, if anything they will charge into the middle of a fight and get themselves killed. In that respect, it can't hurt to try them out, they'll just die anyway. You might love having them.

 

[-tetsuo-]

And? What incentive do I have to just accept a crit failure when I had a 71% chance to succeed? A straight up Pass/Fail system would make a lot more sense and still have clear incentives and disincentives to it. The current system is asking the player to accept failure when they have the power to reverse it right there with the push of a button.

....Right. That is exactly what is asking to do. Just because you want to save scum it doesn't mean that it is a problem with the game. It is a problem with you.

 

[Deleted member 245925]

It's definitely harder that way cause you don't level up as fast and especially in the beginning a the fifth member of your team is really helpfull. But I'm sure you can do it.

Well, I've really enjoyed my XCOM Impossible Army of Four run, so I think I'll try without any NPCs and without leadership. I like a challenge in turn based games.

From what I've read, some characters may require a certain amount of total party charisma to get them to join at all. One early one is said to require 10 or 15, others are supposed to require 25 or even more. I don't think anyone has all the details on this or whether it's even true, though.

Leadership is bugged. The skill says it grants a certain amount but the tooltip on the buff is half that. If you are supposed to be getting a bonus 6%, you'll actually get 3%. This is kind of disappointingly low. Nobody knows which amount is actually intended, but either way it's not a huge benefit right now.

On the subject of whether you want to deal with NPCs who sometimes do their own thing...well they don't run away, if anything they will charge into the middle of a fight and get themselves killed. In that respect, it can't hurt to try them out, they'll just die anyway. You might love having them.

That's the thing, I don't care about NPCs at all, therefore charisma for me seems to be even more of a waste because I would only benefit from the +% hit bonus. And as you say, it's either bugged or the description is wrong and it's working as intended (which would make leadership even more useless for me). Do the NPCs have interesting conversations that might be worth taking them with you?

 

[MickeyKnox]

Anybody get GeDoStaTo working with this? It's in the whitelist but it doesn't actually recognize the game.

*edit* Forced DX9 in the launch options and the game now sees the custom resolutions but it doesn't actually change them, seems locked to the desktop rez

 

[UncleSporky]

Do the NPCs have interesting conversations that might be worth taking them with you?

Yeah, they offer commentary all throughout the game at various locations and situations. Sometimes characters you meet will recognize them and have a brief discussion with them during dialogue.

Two examples from my own game, spoilered for people who hate all spoilers but these are really minor:

Spoiler

- I walked by some really obvious junkies who threatened me for more drugs, and this dumb kid just had to comment, it made me laugh out loud because it's such a Homer Simpson thing to say.

http://i.imgur.com/c79cry4.jpg

- I went back to the Ag Center after recruiting the two characters talking here. You really have no reason to go back to this specific place later except to mop up some loose ends, depending on the order you things in. And they still bothered to write unique dialogue for the characters when you walk through these giant fans.

http://i.imgur.com/3oLvZmU.jpg

 

[BeesEight]

I save scum to keep my main four rangers alive. I did a few at the start because I thought some things had to be passed in order to proceed but I've mostly abandoned that.

 

[FlyinJ]

So, I used animal talk to get the goat to follow be around from the ranger citadel. It gave me a +1 precision, which was awesome.

About 5 hours later the goat got blown up by a stick of dynamite. I lost the +1. However, when I left the area, the goat appeared again and is following me around, but I get no stat bonus.

I can talk to the goat and tell it to stop following me still, however. Does this work the same way as companions? If I tell the goat to split, will it be back at the ranger citadel allowing me to recruit it again?

 

[UncleSporky]

So, I used animal talk to get the goat to follow be around from the ranger citadel. It gave me a +1 precision, which was awesome.

About 5 hours later the goat got blown up by a stick of dynamite. I lost the +1. However, when I left the area, the goat appeared again and is following me around, but I get no stat bonus.

I can talk to the goat and tell it to stop following me still, however. Does this work the same way as companions? If I tell the goat to split, will it be back at the ranger citadel allowing me to recruit it again?

The animal reappearing is probably a bug, I've read about that elsewhere.

Someone else said that they lost an animal and it respawned where they got it, so it might be worth a try.

I love that freakin' goat.

 

[Enduin]

....Right. That is exactly what is asking to do. Just because you want to save scum it doesn't mean that it is a problem with the game. It is a problem with you.

To an extent, it's partly my own fault. I can't deny that. It's not something I ever really do in other games though, but this game doesn't provide any compelling reason to not act in this way so I do it. Thus it is promoting such behavior to one degree or another. You might not do it, which is fine and your choice, but it doesn't change the fact that the way in which the mechanics work at this time doesn't offer a compelling or worthwhile reason to play the game straight.

To expect players to just accept failure when they can easily and effortlessly reverse it is simply unrealistic, and I am far from alone here. There are other ways to craft these systems that don't require the player to handicap themselves. I'm not looking to remove challenge from the game, but have it actually make sense and be meaningful. I like challenging systems and hard choices, but they don't mean much when the game allows for meta-gaming that completely undermines itself.

 

[FlyinJ]

I personally don't save scum any failures. I'm more than happy being given the choice than limiting saves to checkpoints.

 

[Violet_0]

stupid question but how do I open a safe with a tumbler

 

[Metroidvania]

stupid question but how do I open a safe with a tumbler

Click edit: safecracking on your skill bar, click the safe.

If you can't, it's because it has an electronic lock, which requires computer skill instead.

 

[Violet_0]

Click edit: safecracking on your skill bar, click the safe.

If you can't, it's because it has an electronic lock, which requires computer skill instead.

oh I just noticed that safecracking is a separate skill from lockpicking

 

[UncleSporky]

....Right. That is exactly what is asking to do. Just because you want to save scum it doesn't mean that it is a problem with the game. It is a problem with you.

Well...Fallout 3 has a percentage-based speech check that you can save scum if you like, and New Vegas has a hard number-based speech check that requires an exact skill level to succeed at which prevents save scumming.

Is one of these games worse than the other due to the way they implemented this feature?

If not, then why not do it the New Vegas way?

It's not about whether there's a problem with the game or the person. If doing things one way can help some people and not hurt all the rest, then why not do it that way?

 

[NotoriousPUG]

Sometimes alarm disarm works on safes.