Wasteland 2 interview, HD video, F3/NV OSTs on iTunes

[Brother None]

NowGamer offers a new interview with Brian Fargo, though it covers very familiar grounds.<blockquote>What stage is your game at?

At this point we are at approximately the halfway point in the development cycle for Wasteland 2. I have us on a 6/6/6 plan, which had us finish all the pre-production including all the heavy lifting on design for the first 6 months.

The second 6 months is all about integration of the assets such that we can fully play through and get a total sense of the experience. And the last 6 months is one in which we focus on iteration of the ideas, build in more nuance and get the feedback from beta testers in.

It is critical to have plenty of time for iteration on an RPG as we need to accommodate for many different play styles. We will have a video demo in the next few weeks which shows off first pass at the HUD, combat, skill usage and conversation.</blockquote>inXile has also posted a status update now offering the gameplay video in 1080 HD and promises a follow-up soon.<blockquote> The response to the video has been amazing so far, and we have been busy taking in all the feedback. Our goal with the video was to show some game-play and some of the systems that we have working already. It was in no way meant to be a comprehensive explanation of all the elements of the game, the video would have to be 4 hours long to do all that. But judging by your feedback many of you want to see more and to know more about how things work.

To that goal, we promise to continue to show our progress in both more videos and more blogs giving details about some of the game systems. Look for our next update with more information about the HUD, the camera system, and the dialog system next week. Thank you all for your continued support and enjoy the video in HD!</blockquote>And a tidbit we forgot: the soundtrack of Fallout 3 and soundtrack of Fallout: New Vegas are now both available on iTunes.

 

[Bewitched]

It's interesting that they've added this concept to the general collection to illustrate the interview. It's not labeled "Wasteland 2" on Wallins' official website. I've asked Fargo about this via Twitter but there was no response so far. Any idea on this?

 

[Brother None]

It's interesting that they've added this concept to the general collection to illustrate the interview. It's not labeled "Wasteland 2" on Wallins' official website. I've asked Fargo about this via Twitter but there was no response so far. Any idea on this?

That's not a Wasteland 2 piece, just an unrelated piece by Wallin. Don't know why NowGamer put it up with the interview, they may have misidentified it as a WL2 piece.

 

[SimpleMinded]

I like their development process. None, you have more experience with the gaming industry - how does that compare to standard companies?

I would imagine most places, that middle step is a much greater portion of the process than here.

Interesting to see InXile making that last step so long. I wonder if that's a product of Kickstarter and wanting to make sure the fans are happy.

 

[tekhedd]

Everyone wants to see more gameplay. I, on the other hand, am afraid to see too much!

I'm still half-worried that they'll listen to the backers and ruin the game. We all know how that goes. It's called "market research" and it's a great way to hit mediocrity dead on target. We'll see.

 

[Alvarez]

Everyone wants to see more gameplay. I, on the other hand, am afraid to see too much!

I'm still half-worried that they'll listen to the backers and ruin the game. We all know how that goes. It's called "market research" and it's a great way to hit mediocrity dead on target. We'll see.

That irks me a bit, why should fan feedback ruin the game? And why the hell is this market research?

 

[SimpleMinded]

I think the problem is that even within their backers, there's such a wide range of opinions that you ultimately CANT satisfy everyone. I'm sure there are a few things that people could spot that would ultimately improve the gameplay, but there is that concern of trying to appease too many backers with different views.

 

[Crni Vuk]

developers play that card often today, you cant please everyone!

I know you don't mean it that way but lets say we are talking about the games quality, like bugs. What has this to do with opinions? Just as small example.

As far as the content goes, I think it is possible to deliver a quality product even if not everyone likes it. That should not stop you from making a great game for your target audience. It is possible to go for a common denominator and then design the game around that. If people play a certain RPG then they expect a certain experience, thats why it is clear to make sure WHAT your game is in the first place. Today sadly to many games get butchered, because someone somewhere said "THIS here doesn't sell anymore!" what they really mean is "THAT game over there sells a lot more!".

When I played Jagged Alliance 2 for example there was pretty much nothing I didn't liked. Some things could be improved, for sure. No game is perfect, but the basics have to be right. If you manage to do that right then everything else will follow.

After all, why would someone play an turn based RPG for example if he didn't even liked turn based combat in the first place.

Just saying. Its true that you cant please everyone, but that should not stop you from making a a quality product.

Everyone wants to see more gameplay. I, on the other hand, am afraid to see too much!

I'm still half-worried that they'll listen to the backers and ruin the game. We all know how that goes. It's called "market research" and it's a great way to hit mediocrity dead on target. We'll see.

That irks me a bit, why should fan feedback ruin the game? And why the hell is this market research?

I believe that all they have to do is to make this game first an inprovement to Wasteland 1 and after that they should look what the community wants or to say it that way what their wishes are.

 

[Werozzi]

Community is, for gaming, that thin line that can make a game better... or screw it.
So, fan feedback is something that can be a little dangerous, specially if some of the backers are FPS fans or something like that.

 

[Brother None]

It is pretty important to know how to deal with fan feedback. You can't make everyone happy and shouldn't try, but at the same time you should take them seriously, and not just as "people who can give me money" (PR-style) either. I think finding that right balance depends a lot on your experience and confidence as a dev, and am not personally too worried about inXile there. They're a veteran team, many of whom have been together since the Interplay days.

I like their development process. None, you have more experience with the gaming industry - how does that compare to standard companies?

Hmmm. Honestly my impression is there isn't much of a "standard" way of doing things, it depends a lot on the type of game you're making, the scope and the studio size. inXile's 6/6/6 split works well because their team size isn't hugely flexible and because the scope of beta is bigger, meaning being open to big iteration in the end is very important. But I've followed projects with almost no pre-production time or very little polish/iteration. It really depends.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Community is, for gaming, that thin line that can make a game better... or screw it.
So, fan feedback is something that can be a little dangerous, specially if some of the backers are FPS fans or something like that.

Without reading their "forum" I cant be sure but I guess that is not really something to worry about. I mean how many of those people could be around anyway? Remember, Wasteland is a rather specific kind of game and experience. And it is unlikely that they will make it all of sudden a "cod" like experience. Just like BN said, those people are not rookies. They know what they do and I guess they understand what made Wasteland well Wasteland. I would not even expect that everyone will be pleased by ALL the things in the game, hell probably no one of us will find everything entertaining. But those are just details, and just like Fallout 1 was not a "perfect" game it still was an awesome experience. I expect the same from Wasteland 2.

 

[Placid]

Hmmm. Honestly my impression is there isn't much of a "standard" way of doing things, it depends a lot on the type of game you're making, the scope and the studio size. inXile's 6/6/6 split works well because their team size isn't hugely flexible and because the scope of beta is bigger, meaning being open to big iteration in the end is very important. But I've followed projects with almost no pre-production time or very little polish/iteration. It really depends.

I'd say that the biggest difference is that there is no publisher breathing down their necks demanding to see "milestone builds" at regular intervals, etc.

This frees the developer up to do things in the order they want, with minimal interference and frantic "scrambling" as a deadline gets ever closer.

If it makes any difference on the end result on the other hand, i dont know

 

[dONALD42]

About listening to poeple...

The main problem with most RPGs (and frankly every other game-genre) these days is that the publisher wants to sell it to the most people possible, no matter what the genre of the actual game is.
It's pretty obvious for most hardcore [insert genre] gamers (I hope), that certain kind of games are for certain people. For example I don't think most tactical FPS-fans want dialogues or numbered abilities in their games.
So in a totally hypothetical (yeah, right!) case, when one tries to sell an RPG for the most people one can, one throws out some RPG-elements and insert other, more casual ones, ones from other genres, or gaming styles. For example throws out abilities of the character non-relevant for combat, or insert mini-games, quick-time-events, perhaps a bullet time-like effect (remember, it's a totally hypothetical situation here!).
It's even more dangerous for the final product if the game or game-series in question is an old and famous franchise. Usually this is a way to destroy and scatter a fan-base of a game-franchise. And the saddest part is, that it's not necessarily a bad thing for a publisher. They don't want to admit that, but if destroying a fan-base, or making a part of the fans leave a franchise brings more casual gamers in, it's a good thing for the publisher.
Not to mention that these days, everyone can comment on everything without very much control.
So especially these days, when most games are getting dumbed down to sell for the most people possible, designers must be careful how much they listen to fans, even with Kickstarter games.
In this case, they want to make an isometric turn-based CRPG, so this is their main goal, no matter how some of the supporters might want the game to turn out to be.