Preview Wasteland 2 Gamescom Preview at Wasteland 2 Guru

[MicoSelva]

I like what I've read in the previews so far (but I am waiting for The Codex one the most, when? when?). In theory it all sounds pretty damn good. Hopefully, it plays just as well (or better).

The discobot idea is pure nonsense, but I don't like my postapocalyptia too serious, because it tends to be depressing (The Road, Hell). I'm all for some 80s style nuclear wasteland sillyness, and the nostalgia factor won't hurt either.

Sniper rifle not usable at all at short range is just stupid, though. Let's spam Wasteland 2 forums until they decide to change it.

 

[Infinitron]

You don't need to spam anything, Brother None can read this thread just fine.

 

[MicoSelva]

That he can does not mean he will, or that he gets the message well enough.

On topic:

in the first 30 minutes of the game you will have to make a decision and save either Highpool or the Agricultural Center, leading to tangible consequences both in the long and short term.

This one, I don't like. This is the same thing as in new XCOM. An artificial choice, that could easily be avoided. In new XCOM I should be able to have two Skyrangers and try to save both cities terrorized by aliens. In Wasteland 2 I should be able to split my Ranger party and get a (smaller) chance of saving both Highpool and Agricultural Center.

 

[MicoSelva]

BTW, I've checked the Polish-language previews linked to at Wasteland2 tumblr site and they offer gry-online.pl one offers no new information, with the journalist being pretty butthurt over Shadowrun Returns and therefore very skeptical towards Wasteland 2.

EDIT: Actually there is some cool new (at least to me) info in the gram.pl preview. I'll try to post the bulletpoints a bit later.

 

[Jack Dandy]

What's the problem with sniper rifles being useless in short range? These things are pretty bulky you know. It's not like these people are just standing in place.

 

[Infinitron]

Some players would prefer to be able to use sniper rifles at short ranges, even if they are useless and have single digit hit chance percentages. To not allow them to do so would break their immersion.

Other players, however, might find it immersion breaking to have ridiculously low hit chance percentages to hit an enemy that's one meter away from them. For them, the "gamey" restriction of not being to able to use the sniper rifle at all would actually be less immersion breaking.

 

[MicoSelva]

I should still be able to fire it and waste ammo if I want to roleplay a retard with a sniper rifle (who was actually a character in my never-finished novel), even if I have 2% to-hit chance, or am mor elikely to shoot myself in the foot than hit the enemy.

 

[Jack Dandy]

Didn't they say it was still useable, but just with a very low chance of actually hitting?

 

[Infinitron]

Didn't they say it was still useable, but just with a very low chance of actually hitting?

A sniper rifle is a dedicated long range weapon that can't even be used if the enemy's too close.

Seems pretty unambiguous to me.

Although, now that I think of it, if this also prevents you from firing at other enemies who AREN'T close, then this is actually a pretty cool/interesting mechanic. "Sniper engagement".

 

[Wizfall]

Don't care about the inability of the sniper rifle to shoot at close range, really unimportant.
I like a lot the disco bot, it's the right kind of goofy (and W1 has plenty more goofy that only the bunny master) and add a tactical layer so it's all good.

 

[MicoSelva]

now that I think of it, if this also prevents you from firing at other enemies who AREN'T close, then this is actually a pretty cool/interesting mechanic. "Sniper engagement".

It could block sniping, but then the rifle should have another firing mode (from the hip, or something) that still can be used, even if it is ineffective.

 

[Jack Dandy]

Oh, whoops. Heheh.
Well, I don't mind either way.

And as for the discobot, it's good to see the game doesn't forget it's supposed to be off-beat at times.

 

[Maiandros]

So let me get this straight..

No one complains about a mob getting shot 2, 3 and 5 times from a fucking .350 high powered rifle and still living..that's F.I.N.E.

But if Fargo comes along and says oi, can't shoot the bloke at point-blank range, that's immersion breaking amiright..
mk

 

[undecaf]

In Wasteland 2 I should be able to split my Ranger party and get a (smaller) chance of saving both Highpool and Agricultural Center.

I think a more elegant, though less involving way would be if, instead of letting the player tackle the consequences away, the narration would account your choice by sending another team where you are not going. Then giving Ranger von Fakapp and his team of cretins a low percentage chance of saving the place, but doing a lousy job and creating circumstances for additional reactivity not achievable by other means. This would potentially further mitigate playercentricism and give the world a more "living" feel. Imo.

 

[Maiandros]

or in other worlds, people are already complaining about them choices mommy, oh please, make it back as it was!
I want to do everything and have nawthing destroyed mommy! It's so sad, them people dying..why do they make me choose one mom? I want Bioware everything!

Course being the Codex, they even rationalise their thinking..as if it that changes the negativity of the outcome they prefer to see realised. See Bioware

 

[Infinitron]

In Wasteland 2 I should be able to split my Ranger party and get a (smaller) chance of saving both Highpool and Agricultural Center.

I think a more elegant, though less involving way would be if, instead of letting the player tackle the consequences away, the narration would account your choice by sending another team where you are not going. Then giving Ranger von Fakapp and his team of cretins a low percentage chance of saving the place, but doing a lousy job and creating circumstances for additional reactivity not achievable by other means. This would potentially further mitigate playercentricism and give the world a more "living" feel. Imo.

"Your team is the only one that's in the area. By the time we manage to send in another one from HQ, it'll be too late."

 

[MicoSelva]

No one complains about a mob getting shot 2, 3 and 5 times from a fucking .350 high powered rifle and still living..that's F.I.N.E.

That is not fine (at least for me), but this issue was not mentioned in any of the previews, so it is not being discussed.

or in other worlds, people are already complaining about them choices mommy, oh please, make it back as it was!
I want to do everything and have nawthing destroyed mommy! It's so sad, them people dying..why do they make me choose one mom? I want Bioware everything!

An artificial and contrived choice is no better than no choice at all. If the game explains WHY I can't try to split my Ranger squad and try to save both places, I will be fine with that, but if the only explanation is 'because narrative' then you have Bioware right there ('You can't save both Ashley and Kaidan because someone has to die, and no you cannot send your squad to save one of them while trying to rescue another yourself, silly!').

 

[undecaf]

In Wasteland 2 I should be able to split my Ranger party and get a (smaller) chance of saving both Highpool and Agricultural Center.

I think a more elegant, though less involving way would be if, instead of letting the player tackle the consequences away, the narration would account your choice by sending another team where you are not going. Then giving Ranger von Fakapp and his team of cretins a low percentage chance of saving the place, but doing a lousy job and creating circumstances for additional reactivity not achievable by other means. This would potentially further mitigate playercentricism and give the world a more "living" feel. Imo.

"Your team is the only one that's in the area. By the time we manage to send in another one from HQ, it'll be too late."

Yeah I know. Just throwing some shit in the wind here since it popped in my hand after reading what I quoted.

And to not leave it unclear if it was, I'm perfectly fine with the way they are offering these choises.

 

[dunno lah]

Will WL2 have facing direction as a feature? I just started Tactics Ogre yesterday and thought it was a neat thing.

 

[Lancehead]

On topic:

in the first 30 minutes of the game you will have to make a decision and save either Highpool or the Agricultural Center, leading to tangible consequences both in the long and short term.

This one, I don't like. This is the same thing as in new XCOM. An artificial choice, that could easily be avoided. In new XCOM I should be able to have two Skyrangers and try to save both cities terrorized by aliens. In Wasteland 2 I should be able to split my Ranger party and get a (smaller) chance of saving both Highpool and Agricultural Center.

My problem with it is that it seems that you never get to visit and know those places before making the decision, which means there would be no meaningful considerations in picking one place to save over the other. That can make the choice weightless and the consequence devoid of any impact, emotional or otherwise.

 

[Maelflux]

I like that sniper's can't fire up close. It makes for more interesting tactics in rushing enemy snipers to shut them down. (Instead of rushing them, knowing they have 5% chance to hit you - yet the enemy AI will hit you each and every time with those 5% at higher dificulties, which would piss me of)

 

[undecaf]

My problem with it is that it seems that you never get to visit and know those places before making the decision, which means there would be no meaningful considerations in picking one place to save over the other. That can make the choice weightless and the consequence devoid of any impact, emotional or otherwise.

I can relate to that, and it's true most of the time. One could think, though, that picking blind would make the choice here even harder and with more impact since you know the concept of consequences in this case and you don't know what to expect or what you will miss (but that you will miss something). I don't know if there's even supposed to be an emotional connection or deep considerations since it's just rangers doing their job.

 

[himmy]

My problem with it is that it seems that you never get to visit and know those places before making the decision, which means there would be no meaningful considerations in picking one place to save over the other. That can make the choice weightless and the consequence devoid of any impact, emotional or otherwise.

http://pbfcomics.com/162/

 

[CappenVarra]

Didn't the sniper rifle have the same weapon perk?

I might be remembering this wrong, but while both the Scoped Hunting Rifle and the Sniper Rifle had a to hit bonus more than 16 tiles away (or sth along those lines), I think only the Scoped Hunting Rifle had a large to hit penalty for shorter ranges... Then again, JA2 did all shooting simulation much better, so it doesn't really matter what FO2 did.

 

[Monty]

My problem with it is that it seems that you never get to visit and know those places before making the decision, which means there would be no meaningful considerations in picking one place to save over the other. That can make the choice weightless and the consequence devoid of any impact, emotional or otherwise.

Why do you necessarily have to visit? A bit of information, even over the radio, could provide 'meaningful considerations' to the choice. Perhaps one town has a number of children and the other has a medical centre. Or one has a useful stash of weapons but the other has vital food and medical supplies. And then the choice would influence the future direction of the game. But even if we knew absolutely nothing about the towns (unlikely I guess) I still prefer options to a railroad.

Must say I don't really get all the butthurt over this choice. Instead of being railroaded into the first few scenes you get alternate paths through the game, adding interest and replayability. But so many comments are along the lines of "why can't I save both" or "I want to visit them both before deciding". It's a desperate struggle for survival, one of these towns will get raped and minced, and no you can't have all the prizes.