Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Discussion about the upcoming Wasteland 3!

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3715
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Gizmo » July 23rd, 2017, 2:05 pm

Agreed (also).

I've played party based RPGs where the stats used for the challenge, were those of the selected character; (best kind).

*I can think of one RPG, where it offers to select the best PC for the task—but it's optional.
**With Fallout 2, one might recall that the NPCs will readily step up and use their skill, when they are better at it than the PC.

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Remo » July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am

Stuurminator wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 10:20 am
I still don't understand why this sort of thing is appropriate to a chosen one game but not a party-based game.
That is the wrong question. I doubt anyone here would say no to more branching dialogue (which is already on their agenda) and flavor options, the question is whether focusing on something like this would befit us the most.

And while I would love to see both more party (core and companions) interactivity like we talked about, I am not certain that your suggestion as presented above would be the best option.
Stuurminator wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 10:20 am
I want to be able to think "Boy, it's a good thing I have a Russian on the team!" or "It sure came in handy to have a Sikh in the group!" I don't see why it's appropriate to say "Ah, my Watcher has a unique perspective on this due to mercantile background," but this isn't.
Because one fit its setting and the other isn't. See previous post about the silliness of old world nationalities still being a thing among post-apoc Americans few generations removed born and raised in America.

Also it's one thing to utilize tropes to make more memorable/quirky characters or even throw in some stereotypical foreigner jokes, its another to fashion everything around a holdover from previous games that doesn't make sense. Would it be less appropriate for Vulture's Cry to respond to party member who was also raised in tribe or with scout background?
Gizmo wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 2:05 pm
**With Fallout 2, one might recall that the NPCs will readily step up and use their skill, when they are better at it than the PC.
As it was in the case in certain PoE scripted interaction (which was mentioned above), however, conversation wise (which is what we are talking about) it was the Protagonist who mattered.

I would add that I love FO2 and PoE approach to both, these offered me much more replay value with several unique RP path I could take even when min-maxing, wheres in WL2 I felt too much like I am stat padding my party.
Last edited by Remo on July 24th, 2017, 10:27 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3715
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Gizmo » July 24th, 2017, 7:08 am

Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am
As it was in the case in certain PoE scripted interaction (which was mentioned above), however, conversation wise (which is what we are talking about) it was the Protagonist who mattered.
That's because in Fallout 2, there were no recruit-able PCs that specialized in speech; had there been, then they could (theoretically) have stepped in; except that the devs probably never wanted anyone but the main PC doing the talking. Among other RGS that came to mind were the Goldbox titles, and the Realms of Arkania series. In both series, the game evaluates the selected PC for the current task. In the GB series specifically, there are events that directly ask the player to choose what PC makes the attempt.

What I like about any RPG that adheres to this concept, is that the player's options shift with those PCs that are currently conscious; so the party fleeing with their gravely injured lock-picker in tow, cannot simply have them pick open the locks that bar their path. The task must fall to a less than ideal character; or be impossible. It's always been this way with combat PCs... but not so with non-combat skilled characters. (IE. the fighters are down, and the techs & medics are hauling them away from the battle... then they have a combat encounter; only now it can be the reverse as well... The fighters hauling "those useless geeks", only to need them to open the security doors.)

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Remo » July 24th, 2017, 7:50 am

Gizmo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 7:08 am
That's because in Fallout 2, there were no recruit-able PCs that specialized in speech; had there been, then they could (theoretically) have stepped in; except that the devs probably never wanted anyone but the main PC doing the talking.
Which is exactly my point. That even though it seems common sense that all party member should be influence conversation options, with exception of rare interjections that virtually never the case in RPGs.

So unless you think that everyone else are stupid, it would be nice to figure out why is that and see if that reason applies here.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3715
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Gizmo » July 24th, 2017, 8:55 am

The reason is simple. Branching dialog is a minigame; skill & stat checks are a challenge. The NPC's in Fallout can aid in the challenges, but shouldn't play the minigame for the player. The NPCs in DragonAge (for instance) (may) offer various additional input for having them present during the conversation. This happens at least once in Fallout 2 as well.

In a traditional party based game (where the player plays all of the PCs), the characters act as different implements to affect interactions.

At it's core, it is always the lock pick game from Hillsfar; re-skinned with to the context of the whatever the situation is. The characters are the lock picks, one of them does the job with the optimal outcome, where the others don't. Not all of the character/tools are available all of the time. In the case of actually picking locks, failure is absolute, but in other situations, a failure can mean simply a lesser outcome.

Image

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9757
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Drool » July 24th, 2017, 9:01 pm

Gizmo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 8:55 am
At it's core, it is always the lock pick game from Hillsfar
Well played, Captain Obscure! :geek:
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3715
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Gizmo » July 24th, 2017, 9:24 pm

It's not seen in the screenshot, but the picks break; you can have the correct picks, and be unable to use them. This is analogous to having disabled or dead PCs in the party; where their talents were needed, but not available.
Drool wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 9:01 pm
Well played, Captain Obscure! :geek:
It's possible that it originates even further back than Hillsfar, but this example is what easily came first to mind.

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5855
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Woolfe » July 24th, 2017, 10:05 pm

Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am
Stuurminator wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 10:20 am
I still don't understand why this sort of thing is appropriate to a chosen one game but not a party-based game.
That is the wrong question. I doubt anyone here would say no to more branching dialogue (which is already on their agenda) and flavor options, the question is whether focusing on something like this would befit us the most.

And while I would love to see both more party (core and companions) interactivity like we talked about, I am not certain that your suggestion as presented above would be the best option.
Stuurminator wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 10:20 am
I want to be able to think "Boy, it's a good thing I have a Russian on the team!" or "It sure came in handy to have a Sikh in the group!" I don't see why it's appropriate to say "Ah, my Watcher has a unique perspective on this due to mercantile background," but this isn't.
Because one fit its setting and the other isn't. See previous post about the silliness of old world nationalities still being a thing among post-apoc Americans few generations removed born and raised in America.

Also it's one thing to utilize tropes to make more memorable/quirky characters or even throw in some stereotypical foreigner jokes, its another to fashion everything around a holdover from previous games that doesn't make sense. Would it be less appropriate for Vulture's Cry to respond to party member who was also raised in tribe or with scout background?
We actually had a big discussion about this previously during WL2.

I personally advocate for a party conversation including elements directly calling stats/traits/characters elements.

So if you have a high skill in a certain weapon skill, you might get an additional "keyword" highlighted as such, and the game then has the individual with the skill say something appropriate about the Weapon.
Or for a trait, if identifying as "Russian" heritage, it might mean that the character understands some basic russian.
Or you might have the option of offering a smoke to someone you are chatting to, the character may comment on the brand as you offer it.

But all this obviously requires someone to spend the time finding elements to be included in conversations and things that will impact in game, both useful and just for flavour, and then you have the concerns around whether they are actually worth having resource wise etc.

Oh and on the whole Russian, Sikh etc thing. That was something that got passed along from WL1 in which we had different nationalities. I believe the idea was meant to be ethnicities moreso that nationalities, but anyway. An excuse for some of them still identifying as a previous nationality/ethnicity would have been possible, the Game lore allows for a lot of quirky stuff.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

User avatar
Stuurminator
Scholar
Posts: 167
Joined: March 23rd, 2014, 12:43 pm

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Stuurminator » July 25th, 2017, 6:58 pm

Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am
Because one fit its setting and the other isn't. See previous post about the silliness of old world nationalities still being a thing among post-apoc Americans few generations removed born and raised in America.
If we were talking about Fallout or another setting you'd be right, but these old world nationalities are alive and well as of Wasteland 2. You've got Vulture's Cry, of course, but also that Russian bartender in the Rail Nomads and that strange Russian text you can wander across on the radio, as well as Rambeau's inexplicable French accent in Hollywood. Religion doesn't get as much love (possibly because it's a much touchier subject for many people), but you still have God's Militia and the reactions to it from more legitimate Christians.

Wasteland, as a setting, tends to explore how cultural artifacts may be misinterpreted by societies several generations removed, and adding a little more reactivity for a ranger's nationality and religion is another vehicle to such things, even if in a small way.
Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am
Would it be less appropriate for Vulture's Cry to respond to party member who was also raised in tribe or with scout background?
I'm sorry, but I've read this over and over and I still can't understand what you mean. Less appropriate than what?
Woolfe wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 10:05 pm
But all this obviously requires someone to spend the time finding elements to be included in conversations and things that will impact in game, both useful and just for flavour, and then you have the concerns around whether they are actually worth having resource wise etc.
I agree, and to that end, I think they should aim for only two or three unique interactions per nationality or religion, even purely flavour ones (after all, how many Arabic- or Hindu-identifying people would be around in Colorado a century after the apocalypse?). I don't think it would take much effort to shoehorn that many in for each, but if you build your party for maximum diversity (and you would, if you were gunning for this sort of thing), that would still be a couple dozen references to your rangers' background history throughout the game. I'd be satisfied with that.

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Remo » July 26th, 2017, 4:50 am

Stuurminator wrote:
July 25th, 2017, 6:58 pm
If we were talking about Fallout or another setting you'd be right, but these old world nationalities are alive and well as of Wasteland 2.
Absolutely not. Like I said before, in JA2 and Xcom, where where you recruited a multinational team to fight threats abroad it fit the setting, added flavor and was part of team compatibility mechanic. In PoE ethnics fit the setting and were integral part of the plot, those who read the entries and paid attention to flavor conversation could see how the various people ancestry, language, social, cultural and recent national experiences played into shaping their ethnic identity.

In Wasteland2, old world nationalities in post-apoc USA several generations removed make no sense at all. They have never been defined within the setting and are overall nothing but holdover that was sometimes used for comic relief. Its like me going ha ha Prussia in 21 century middle east, bask at my glorious walrus mustache :shock: :oops:
Gizmo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 8:55 am
The reason is simple. Branching dialog is a minigame; skill & stat checks are a challenge. The NPC's in Fallout can aid in the challenges, but shouldn't play the minigame for the player. The NPCs in DragonAge (for instance) (may) offer various additional input for having them present during the conversation. This happens at least once in Fallout 2 as well.

In a traditional party based game (where the player plays all of the PCs), the characters act as different implements to affect interactions.
I don't think of Branching dialog and stat checks in that way. I already mentioned NPC interjection, as for the rest we are not talking about skill use or non dialogue-heavy RPGs.
Woolfe wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 10:05 pm
I personally advocate for a party conversation including elements directly calling stats/traits/characters elements.
That is exactly what I asked in this thread, however, I became cautious when we started to look at the specifics and I realized that you'd be able to create a team padded with all nationalities.. If go back to FO2, IMO the reason its skill system works so well is exactly because you can't pick all the skills otherwise it would have been meangless.

So right now I am waiting for some to suggest that this must come with some sort of party comparability mechanic (along the lines of like in JA2 or new XCOM expansion). Which could work very well given that few players expressed desire for more quirky NPC and might offer some more options with whole NPC leadership charge thing people were annoyed at.

User avatar
undecaf
Explorer
Posts: 405
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 5:48 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by undecaf » July 26th, 2017, 8:33 am

There is of course that if people were fresh or even semi-fresh immigrants when the nukes hit and the world "ended", where would've they gotten the sort of proper education to integrate so well that their ethnic or national past was completely forgotten behind "being American"? (That's not a question to answer by the way, but just something thrown there.) It makes sense enough that there are some people here and there who have not been completely Americanized. What wouldn't make sense is if the place was littered with people like that.

There's always a possible explanation.

Anyways...

Mechanically... the dialog interface could have an always present [keyword] buttons for when ever the player might want to express these kinds of personifications (religion, nationality, smokes... what ever they are). So you might need to kinda search for the reactivity it might offer, read the situation and decide for yourself if the time is good to push/ask about... what ever you chose. You might get an agreeing oneliner response or even start a little exchange on the subject, or just "I don't know about that", or "Piss off". And people might get irritated and call you out for it if you spam; "Please cut it out...", "Shut the fuck up already"... and a believer might even get angry and attack you if you spam your atheism enough times (or vice versa).

I don't think that'll happen, but the way I imagined it to work could be fun on some level.
Last edited by undecaf on July 26th, 2017, 10:41 am, edited 2 times in total.
"A human being in his last extremity IS a bag of shit."

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3715
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Gizmo » July 26th, 2017, 10:20 am

Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 3:36 am
Gizmo wrote:
July 23rd, 2017, 2:05 pm
**With Fallout 2, one might recall that the NPCs will readily step up and use their skill, when they are better at it than the PC.
As it was in the case in certain PoE scripted interaction (which was mentioned above), however, conversation wise (which is what we are talking about) it was the Protagonist who mattered.
This is common sense, and what I stated... yet your posts deliberately try to be dismissive. :?
Remo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 7:50 am
Gizmo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 7:08 am
That's because in Fallout 2, there were no recruit-able PCs that specialized in speech; had there been, then they could (theoretically) have stepped in; except that the devs probably never wanted anyone but the main PC doing the talking.
Which is exactly my point. That even though it seems common sense that all party member should be influence conversation options, with exception of rare interjections that virtually never the case in RPGs.
It is that case in any party based game that uses the selected PC's own abilities for the interaction; (conversation or otherwise). I know of many games that do. But aside: This was not exactly your point; what you say here as "exactly my point" is said of an answer to your previous question. How can an answer to your own question be exactly your point? (Especially when it's plainly stated as theoretical.)
Remo wrote:
July 26th, 2017, 4:50 am
Gizmo wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 8:55 am
Branching dialog is a minigame; skill & stat checks are a challenge.
I don't think of Branching dialog and stat checks in that way.
That doesn't change the nature of it.
I already mentioned NPC interjection,
Welcome to the club. ;)
as for the rest we are not talking about skill use or non dialogue-heavy RPGs.
No one is... What's your point? (Besides apparently being dismissive of anyone else's... I say this because this must be the fourth time at least, where you've seen fit to add barbs to your posts, and have attempted to marginalize others, myself included.)

User avatar
Stuurminator
Scholar
Posts: 167
Joined: March 23rd, 2014, 12:43 pm

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Stuurminator » July 26th, 2017, 11:14 am

Remo wrote:
July 26th, 2017, 4:50 am
Stuurminator wrote:
July 25th, 2017, 6:58 pm
If we were talking about Fallout or another setting you'd be right, but these old world nationalities are alive and well as of Wasteland 2.
Absolutely not. (...) In Wasteland2, old world nationalities in post-apoc USA several generations removed make no sense at all. They have never been defined within the setting and are overall nothing but holdover that was sometimes used for comic relief.
I cited multiple examples of non-American holdovers in Wasteland 2. If you didn't like them, that's fine, but that doesn't mean they weren't there (or that they somehow didn't count).

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5855
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Woolfe » July 26th, 2017, 6:29 pm

Stuurminator wrote:
July 25th, 2017, 6:58 pm
Woolfe wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 10:05 pm
But all this obviously requires someone to spend the time finding elements to be included in conversations and things that will impact in game, both useful and just for flavour, and then you have the concerns around whether they are actually worth having resource wise etc.
I agree, and to that end, I think they should aim for only two or three unique interactions per nationality or religion, even purely flavour ones (after all, how many Arabic- or Hindu-identifying people would be around in Colorado a century after the apocalypse?). I don't think it would take much effort to shoehorn that many in for each, but if you build your party for maximum diversity (and you would, if you were gunning for this sort of thing), that would still be a couple dozen references to your rangers' background history throughout the game. I'd be satisfied with that.
Remo wrote:
July 26th, 2017, 4:50 am
Woolfe wrote:
July 24th, 2017, 10:05 pm
I personally advocate for a party conversation including elements directly calling stats/traits/characters elements.
That is exactly what I asked in this thread, however, I became cautious when we started to look at the specifics and I realized that you'd be able to create a team padded with all nationalities.. If go back to FO2, IMO the reason its skill system works so well is exactly because you can't pick all the skills otherwise it would have been meangless.
Actually I would suggest that you build interactions that also support non diversity.

So if you have a party with several pcs of the same nationalities or religion or something. You could build to support that also.

With either diverse or non diverse, things like "race" and "religion" identification should probably be flavour type interactions or maybe minor bonuses/penalties, rather than "important" game changing level stuff.

Whereas Skills and stats, should be open to both important stuff or flavour.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Remo » July 27th, 2017, 12:16 am

undecaf wrote:
July 26th, 2017, 8:33 am
There is of course that if people were fresh or even semi-fresh immigrants when the nukes hit and the world "ended", where would've they gotten the sort of proper education to integrate so well that their ethnic or national past was completely forgotten behind "being American"? (That's not a question to answer by the way, but just something thrown there.) It makes sense enough that there are some people here and there who have not been completely Americanized. What wouldn't make sense is if the place was littered with people like that.
No.. that mis-representation/understanding of what I said.

I have no idea what "being American" is, only that after several generations it will change. With large portion of society removed, its institutions destroyed, having to adapt to the new way of life, weathering the harsh condition of the waste, lack of proper education and loss of information,likelly shorter average lifespan, etc etc all these will exacerbate the natural culture shift with each generation from which new identities will form. So no, the current list of old world nationalities (and religions) after 200 years don't make sense.

And I didn't suggest that people will forget their past completely, which is silly. Some cultural signifiers always remain, and I already said that such (and other familiar stereotypes) can and should be used as themes to create interesting characters and places (e.g. I seen in the wiki that the Rail Nomads tribal community was fashion as melding of Native American tribal customs and depression era labor union culture )

Anyway, the fact remain that what it means to be 'American, Chinese, Mexican, Native american or Russian' is not well defined in the setting. And no, being told that Vulture's Cry is native american, doesn't tell us what being native american is.. And we shouldn't fashion a mechanic that will shoehorn us into one of these vague nationalities that feel out of place, arbitrary and meaningless. Using these will be essentially like using cigarettes for this, which were a nice tribute from WL, but building a mechanic around them is silly, because what does i am a 'Styx' smoking man even means?!

Since the whole point of this suggestion i to give us a way to personalize our characters I suggested that instead they should add/use a list of background that would fit the setting better and allow us to relate to characters we are RP. (p.s. on top of PoE example, here is another list from a roguelike.

User avatar
undecaf
Explorer
Posts: 405
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 5:48 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by undecaf » July 31st, 2017, 3:00 am

Remo wrote:
July 27th, 2017, 12:16 am

No.. that mis-representation/understanding of what I said.
It's a misunderstanding then. From the way you came out it seemed clear to me that you wouldn't accept any national heritage expressable in any way, other than the American post apocalypse (the current status quo in the game) because it wouldn't otherwise make sense to you.
"A human being in his last extremity IS a bag of shit."

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5855
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Woolfe » July 31st, 2017, 7:52 pm

undecaf wrote:
July 31st, 2017, 3:00 am
Remo wrote:
July 27th, 2017, 12:16 am

No.. that mis-representation/understanding of what I said.
It's a misunderstanding then. From the way you came out it seemed clear to me that you wouldn't accept any national heritage expressable in any way, other than the American post apocalypse (the current status quo in the game) because it wouldn't otherwise make sense to you.
The interesting thing about this, is I can see it going both ways. I could see people clinging to the "old world" holding their "identity" close, raising it up to "worshipped" status in some cases.

Then the flipside are groups who don't really remember. Life was so hard that any semblance of history has been wiped from them.

And then everything inbetween.

So many options for interesting stories...
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by Remo » August 1st, 2017, 3:25 am

undecaf wrote:
July 31st, 2017, 3:00 am
It's a misunderstanding then. From the way you came out it seemed clear to me that you wouldn't accept any national heritage expressable in any way, other than the American post apocalypse (the current status quo in the game) because it wouldn't otherwise make sense to you.
I might have phrased it badly before*. I hope the above explained that point.

*English is my third language, and unless I really pay attention between translations distractions and lizard brain grammar it can be hard to convey you idea well.
Woolfe wrote:
July 31st, 2017, 7:52 pm
The interesting thing about this, is I can see it going both ways. I could see people clinging to the "old world" holding their "identity" close, raising it up to "worshipped" status in some cases.
In general? yes. For example, in some isolated community of conservative religious fanatics you might find something resembling the old world. But in context of what we were discussing, no. Old world remaining the major and only "nationalities" after generations in the post-apoc wasteland is ludicrous ( even the term 'nationality' is no longer relevant ) and more importantly from RP aspect it is much less relevant and relate-able attribute than something like backgrounds.
Last edited by Remo on August 1st, 2017, 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
undecaf
Explorer
Posts: 405
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 5:48 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by undecaf » August 1st, 2017, 12:28 pm

Woolfe wrote:
July 31st, 2017, 7:52 pm

The interesting thing about this, is I can see it going both ways. I could see people clinging to the "old world" holding their "identity" close, raising it up to "worshipped" status in some cases.

Then the flipside are groups who don't really remember. Life was so hard that any semblance of history has been wiped from them.

And then everything inbetween.

So many options for interesting stories...
Yes indeed.

I immediately thought about a group speaking bad English and behaving like stereotypical Italians (or any other easily distinguishable nationality), but not having any recollection (or even knowledge; "Ita... What now?") of their past, this is just how they've lived and the language they've spoken after the bombs, this is their "normal" as skewed as it might look outside. A PC party wth someone Italian along might notice it and be able to comment on it.
Remo wrote:
August 1st, 2017, 3:25 am
*English is my third language, and unless I really pay attention between translations distractions and lizard brain grammar it can be hard to convey you idea well.
I'm not a native English speaker either. It is not hard to misunderstand - for example - long paragraphs with relatively complex structure. Anyway, I think the point is clear by now.

----------------

This has nothing really to do with pet peeves, but it's just a thing I wondered some day about savescumming.

Could the game keep track of multiple grouped reloads and once detected a certain threshold, give every character in the party a timed unremovable this:

Image

Coupled with a cowbell sound when the characters move, and maybe a ranked achievement (I've no idea why people are crazy about those, but a lot of them seem to be...) or even a perk (that might increase the time in the loading screen... "Expert quickloader allows you to spend more time in your favorite place." :lol: ). Pretty harmless, and more of an ingame joke really, but it could get annoying enough in the long run for the sought out effect with the constant cowbell and all.
"A human being in his last extremity IS a bag of shit."

User avatar
sear
Developer
Posts: 2681
Joined: March 21st, 2012, 8:30 am

Re: Your pet peeves & possible improvements for WL3

Post by sear » August 1st, 2017, 1:30 pm

undecaf wrote:
August 1st, 2017, 12:28 pm
This has nothing really to do with pet peeves, but it's just a thing I wondered some day about savescumming.

Could the game keep track of multiple grouped reloads and once detected a certain threshold, give every character in the party a timed unremovable this:

Image
:lol:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests