Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MrWiggles]

I can't recall, did they say skills get better with use? That would probably be a reason informing the design. But I do agree, if you have everyone selected, it should probably just use the character with the highest skill.

When he made mention of it, I took it to mean that any/every skill functions like that. Which implies there no 'levels'.

[Jopax]

Because that mode is an abominaton that kills any and all immersion and is incredibly annoying to use

Immersion & convenience were the exact reasons why I was wondering.

- Good flow. When you encounter an enemy, the game doesn't suddenly change into a chess game. Instead it flows smoothly as everyone takes action at a same time.
- Action point management. "Dang! I need 57 action points to reload and I have only 56! I shall stand still for half a minute, THEN reload!" or the unnecessary calculation of action points just to make sure you'll have enough to turn around and crouch behind cover. Kills immersion and is far from convenient.
- Flexibility. As situation changes, you can make instant decisions and plan changes. Immersive and convenient!

As Ivefan said, Fallout Tactics nailed it. Too bad rest of the game was shit. Edit: Except now that I think about it, I don't think it had a pause.

Except it's completely opposite for me, I oftenly get into a game completely when in combat and forget about most other things existing beyond me and the enemy when a game is real time, acting on instinct by what I learned works or trying out something new. Having to pause to make sure the rest of the people don't die or tht I don't die is annoying and completely takes me out of the expirience.
Going turn based to the fullest on the other hand allows me to take time and plan everything out many times over and act as the situation develops slowly and gradually, which is also engrossing but in a wholly different way.

Meshing the two together is wierd and I could never get used to something so wierd, it's like combining RTS and FPS, it might work for some people, but combining those two to any extent cripples one or both of the things that makes each of the genres so compelling and fun.

[Lorgath]

Good video, I had completely forgotten about Wasteland 2 until the email popped up this morning. The game appears to show some promise, but I reckon the keyword dialogue could be really awkward to use. I'm very glad they aren't going to try and make EVERYTHING voice acted though. Also turns out I backed it at the $50 tier. When the hell did I have that kind of money?

Was I the only person who actually enjoyed Fallout: Tactics? Sure, it was rather flawed, but I recall enjoying blasting my way through it without using the turnbased mode. Mind you, this memory comes from the time when all I played were the various Infinity Engine games and the Fallout series because my computer was a pile of crap and I had no access to the internet... and I had to walk fifteen miles uphill to school (without shoes!) carrying my grandfather on my back, etc etc etc.

[loose nut]

Ooh that video makes me very happy.

When he made mention of it, I took it to mean that any/every skill functions like that. Which implies there no 'levels'.

Maybe? The original had both levels (mostly used for raising attributes) and skills that raised from use.

[mainiac]

Was I the only person who actually enjoyed Fallout: Tactics? Sure, it was rather flawed, but I recall enjoying blasting my way through it without using the turnbased mode.

I loved it myself but I played it all the way with turnbased except when shopping and whatnot.

[Zangi]

Shaping up to be a pretty good investment from the looks.

[casserol]

So I understood the beta started a couple days ago. Do we have anyone in who'd care to share his/her impressions ? 

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I've been too caught up to play it. Apparently there's updates for it already, too, which I need to download.

[nenjin]

Sorely tempted to do EA, but since I didn't back and it's not going to be any cheaper at release, I think I'll wait. Would like to hear some impressions however.

[BigD145]

$60 early access after already being kickstarted. Hmmm.... For something that looks Baldur's Gate-esque I think I'd pass even at $40.

[Drakale]

Yeah, I wish them the best, but I don't really agree to this kind of business model.

[BigD145]

They might actually sell copies and expand the user base if they lowered the price. Anyone that does not know Wasteland is absolutely not going to plonk down $60 for something that looks like it might be published by 1C. Anyone that does want to pay $60 either already kickstarted it or missed out on the kickstarter. Either way they already made the money to pay salaries to project completion and they're just trying to ream people. I'm not saying it should be free. Set a reasonable price and make some money.

[Knave]

Often companies will charge a higher price for early access to go along with what they were charging for a similar tier during KS. I'm quite certain the price will drop once it actually releases. But if they charge less now for early access, they'll make their fan base who helped get the game funded feel worthless for paying so much when new adopters can get it for cheap.

[nenjin]

Yeah, these Kickstarters that go on to Steam EA are between a rock and a hard place. They can't offer a price lower than what was offered during the KS for alpha-beta access. Otherwise their KS backers think they're getting shit on.

On the other hand, all non-backers think its a shameless, overpriced cash grab. Like PA doing EA for $89 or something insane like that.

And still on the other-other hand......people will pay for it if it's on Steam, regardless of the state of its completion. As much as I'd like Kickstarter devs to not milk the Early Access Cash Cow (it's like, how many revenue streams and PR campaigns and "THIS WOULDN"T HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT YOU!" things can they do before it all just starts to sound hollow?), realistically I don't know if I'd do anything different. But this is the new reality for games run by large dev houses who don't want to do the traditional publishing route; they have to squeeze every available dime out of every step of the process they can. If you don't mind your devs basically throwing their game all over the internet at various stages of completion, it's not a bad thing. Personally, it makes me a little sad as it seems like the Quest For More Money is really more important at times than whatever product they happen to be working on. (See: Obsidian, Double Fine and inXile all pimping 2 to 4 projects at time now.)

[Biowraith]

Personally I consider the price to be too high for what they're offering.  But I don't hold it against the devs (or publishers in other cases) in the slightest so long as they're up front about what I'm getting if I buy.  I can just look at the price, look at what they're offering, and decide whether I think it's worth it.  If they price it too high that just makes it an easier decision to make.

And while the cynic in me does wonder to what extent the official line about not pissing off the beta-tier backers plays in the pricing decision, it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable to think the fallout from doing that would be worse than the fallout for charging too much on Steam.


But I have no real interest in the beta at any price (that sort of game I'd rather wait for the 'real' release) and already have it effectively pre-ordered for $20 via the Tides of Numenera kickstarter, so it's an easy decision for me even before considering the $60.