W3 Replayability

Discussion about the upcoming Wasteland 3!

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

W2_player
Initiate
Posts: 7
Joined: June 6th, 2018, 6:13 pm

W3 Replayability

Post by W2_player » June 6th, 2018, 6:18 pm

The Wasteland 2 and DC both have a feature to export players after happy ending last fight.
In addition to that a multiple replays are still taking its place due to several factors.
Yes it grants a saying that a particular game surely have its fun and experience that is done by only this way.
Exported squad gives an option to do things that were omitted due to lacking of skillpoints, and also the story line itself is not tied to side quests.
Thus, repeating replaying by exported squad cant change much due to the level cap.
Those several speech checks, lets say for DBM line, are ridiculously high in aspect of how much it cost to success vs its actual result.
The game itself say have a budget of actions, limited skill points, limited health, and also a real time budget, that player do actually spend.
A trending way of making player to wait for game interface, say loading progress bars, skill usage animations, slow movement on map and other
things are merely the ways to report that game have lengthy play time. Actually players are not to follow this, but how ?
Actual value of multiple replay is experience, both for winning over the RPG part, and the farming must-do.
It is clearly seen that there were a decision to lean the farming to main quest line, giving enough XP, and putting a money/bullets needs to farm at randoms.
Looks like the rangers actually patrolling the area and have some fun.
After all, a few play strategies actually arise aside of skill point farming.
These are the experince of how fast end effectively game is played, and finding benefits that were unknown before.
In the "not-so-fast" upcoming W3, all the same needs will take its place.
Short and simple main story line, farming options, weakly hidden secrets and better graphics.
Lets state that the higher difficulty player choose the more content the game should deliver.
A rookie squad may win at easy setting, but they will not see all the world and tasks that really exist in-game.
A second replay may have another storyline, inaccessible by first turn at highest difficulty.
My opinion is that RPG game, should have a lot of storylines, and developers are not say it cost a buck. It is a success feature.
It is not hard to write a scenario with all speech-nodes having several layers.
Many secret places and enemies are much appreciated.
A squad with all stats high should have an option for really brutal enemies, not the HP raised bots to kill.
A story ending is not enough.
Thanks.
P.S. I was surprised by statements people were saying of many things around W2/DC, i.e. dump stats and wasted skill points, alas i did the same resolution by the way, no way to change it, and uh it was said many times that such decisions put ingame are ridiculous at all. So someone get a buck for it, and the developer team as a whole has no way to change it. How this is going to be ?

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9578
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Drool » June 8th, 2018, 5:03 pm

W2_player wrote:
June 6th, 2018, 6:18 pm
A rookie squad may win at easy setting, but they will not see all the world and tasks that really exist in-game.
No. Difficulty-locking content is absolute bullshit.
A second replay may have another storyline, inaccessible by first turn at highest difficulty.
That works for Undertale or Nier:Automata, but I don't think most people will have the patience to play through an 80-100 hour game only to do it all over again because the story's now changed.
My opinion is that RPG game, should have a lot of storylines
Naturally, but that doesn't mean it should lock those storylines behind difficulty levels or multiple playthroughs. They should be concurrent. That's part of the point of sidequests.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 8th, 2018, 8:17 pm

I disagree with that, and would prefer it be impossible to be presented with all possible content in one play-through; certainly the case with opposing quests like kill the Sheriff/protect the Sheriff style quests. Difficulty locking is not a preference of mine, but it's not unwarranted for major events. A boss fight can have a few extra guys in the mob, for a more experienced party—a few less for a novice crew that triggered the encounter early... though it doesn't have to be guaranteed a win for the player. Even if they are going to lose, it can be five against ten in stead of five against twenty.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9578
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Drool » June 9th, 2018, 2:17 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 8th, 2018, 8:17 pm
I disagree with that, and would prefer it be impossible to be presented with all possible content in one play-through
Content locking because of your choices is a different beast than "you literally cannot see this content no matter what until you've beaten the game X times in Y ways". Again, see: Undertale and Nier: Automata.
Difficulty locking is not a preference of mine, but it's not unwarranted for major events. A boss fight can have a few extra guys in the mob, for a more experienced party—a few less for a novice crew that triggered the encounter early...
That's not what anybody means when they talk about difficulty locking content and you know it. Difficulty locking content would be like if WL2 didn't let you access the L'eve L'upe mine unless you were on Supreme Jerk difficulty. Or like NES-era beat-em-ups only giving you the first 3 levels if you played on the easiest difficulty. More patterns or more ads is just adding difficulty.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 9th, 2018, 2:34 pm

Drool wrote:
June 9th, 2018, 2:17 pm
That's not what anybody means when they talk about difficulty locking content and you know it.
I didn't know (/notice) that, perhaps I missed its mention somewhere.
Difficulty locking content would be like if WL2 didn't let you access the L'eve L'upe mine unless you were on Supreme Jerk difficulty. Or like NES-era beat-em-ups only giving you the first 3 levels if you played on the easiest difficulty. More patterns or more ads is just adding difficulty.
This I am not entirely against. Consider if the designer made the map with a certain implied level of challenge, and that anything less than supreme-jerk would mean crippling the presentation. Consider the Beholder Core encounter (in Curse-otAB) Imagine it with 1/3 the enemies, and all with half their normal hitpoints/ and no immunities... That's like ordering the extra hot & spicy kid's meal—that comes with bell & cherry peppers. What's the point?

W2_player
Initiate
Posts: 7
Joined: June 6th, 2018, 6:13 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by W2_player » June 9th, 2018, 5:18 pm

The points are the two :
1. Being actually played W2 multiple times, player comes to uber solutions, in most cases. Everything is optimal, all quests known, all fight won.
2. Uber squads have nothing to do in this particular game, nor it gives extended gameplay.
The initial position of disagreement for locking behind difficulty, high stat and replay is stated clearly, but for whom is it ?
All is gonna be optimised for rookies who just buy and play, no far.
Yep, no point in reducing the scenario for rookies, and of course no point not to have lots of extra for experinced players.
It is more a real-time lock, than just plain reducing the game.
Obviously the real situation is : players do play a lot, and get nothing for that.
Why ? Because the game testers which provide actual responce themselves just did not play for fun.
Much of difference between beta testing and actual long term playing to do-it-all.
I am not to offend, such is my feeling how things are done with W2.
Lots of games today are just plain empty, this affects even the PC market, because there are few games that need or drive consumer to buy high spec PC, and quite a few games that have great content, after all. Bethesda's multiple fails with Fallout series are undesirable.
Well, there are ways to play with csharp.dll, this itself is good game to play.

BIGMike614
Initiate
Posts: 1
Joined: June 9th, 2018, 7:23 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by BIGMike614 » June 9th, 2018, 7:32 pm

With all of the above I would like to see this open world

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9578
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Drool » June 10th, 2018, 2:04 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 9th, 2018, 2:34 pm
This I am not entirely against. Consider if the designer made the map with a certain implied level of challenge, and that anything less than supreme-jerk would mean crippling the presentation.
The difficulty slider isn't some ancient deity that wields absolute power, you know. The game designer is still the one designing the game.
Consider the Beholder Core encounter (in Curse-otAB) Imagine it with 1/3 the enemies, and all with half their normal hitpoints/ and no immunities...
Having recently replayed the Corps, it would still be tough with those stipulations. Not a great example though, because Curse had a single difficulty.

But you what did have a difficulty slider? Death Knights of Krynn. Know what else it had? Dave's Challenge. Dave's Challenge which ignored the difficulty settings because it was a super tough post-game challenge. If a developer wants to put in a super-tough location for the thrill of being super-tough, they can do it. They can ignore whatever they want while creating it.

And, again, you apparently completely miss the point I was trying to make in favor of coming up with some inane "well ACKSHUALLY" edge case that's only tangentially relevant at best.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 10th, 2018, 5:12 pm

Drool wrote:
June 10th, 2018, 2:04 pm
...
I am not sure why you are always so caustic [to me]—but you are, and have been since day one; though I didn't notice it in the early days. :?

I know the SSI games, Dave's Challenge, and the rest. I also just played them recently; (and am currently playing DQK—and I am the one who sent you the link to the GBC utility). I used those examples because I was replying specifically to you—and that you'd know them.
The Beholder Core is to be considered [almost] unwinnable, and the point of mentioning it was not that that it would still be tough with those stipulations, but that it would be hamstrung by them... and not be an encounter that lives up to the name.

**And of course it does not matter that Curse had no difficulty slider; that's not part of the example.
(Which was citing an encounter that would not make sense on a novice difficulty setting (in any game), and would not be a plausible depiction of the encounter if it were scaled or reduced. Think "Bruce Lee vs Superman in a cage match", and think "Bruce Lee vs Superman in a kryptonite cage —match". It's just not the same encounter.

I don't have issue with a game walling off certain locations, NPCs, or even major encounters by difficulty setting. I do have issue with telling the player 'No', you can't attempt this, and locking them out; but that's not the same as never presenting the the option.
___________

It is both amazing and a little bit sad to me, that I usually like, and agree with posts by you and by _noblesse_oblige_, but you both change your character when posting to or about myself... The latter derisive and aggressively so. So in that way, it's a little bit like watching the Sopranos or Breaking Bad... in that one can appreciate their personalities, insight, perspectives, and humor, but it's one sided, and you know that they would treat you like crap if they ever met you. :(

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 6190
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Zombra » June 10th, 2018, 8:48 pm

No content gated by "achievements". Nope. No thank you.
Image

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 10th, 2018, 9:26 pm

Zombra wrote:
June 10th, 2018, 8:48 pm
No content gated by "achievements". Nope. No thank you.
They do that?
(I wouldn't know; I almost never use Steam, and I usually look for an achievement crippler/remover mod, if possible.)

While it might keep me out of it, I don't see any problem with making content reserved for those few that are determined, and persistent enough to earn the access to it... so long as it is not locking out the main campaign.

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 6190
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Zombra » June 10th, 2018, 10:21 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 10th, 2018, 9:26 pm
Zombra wrote:
June 10th, 2018, 8:48 pm
No content gated by "achievements". Nope. No thank you.
They do that?
That's what we're talking about, isn't it? This content doesn't appear unless you've finished the game 3 times, kind of thing. Hell with that. Content should be available based on whether your choices take the story there. Save the princess and gain access to the frog quest. Not level up 50 times across multiple playthroughs and unlock the frog quest.
Image

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am

Zombra wrote:
June 10th, 2018, 10:21 pm
That's what we're talking about, isn't it? This content doesn't appear unless you've finished the game 3 times, kind of thing. Hell with that. Content should be available based on whether your choices take the story there.
I've seen this in fighting games; with unlockable characters who only appear after beating the game one or more times, and/or by certain behavior. IRRC, there was a character in Mortal Kombat 2 that you could only encounter by defeating a certain opponent with foot-sweeps.

I really don't have a problem with conditional content. My view of gaming is about what you can take from the games, not what they freely offer you, or what one thinks they are owed. Image (I don't enter a game assuming that I'm owed anything.)

There is something unappealing about having goofy meta-conditions like revealing hidden content only for performing certain actions in the game menu, or after asking the same NPC the same question thirty five times in a row, through the dialog loop... that can be objectionable—if it contradicts the general impression of the game, but it works well in some games; usually more arcade-like titles though... generally not RPGs**.

In Epic Pinball, for instance, you can press the f1 key in the menu to permanently gain an additional ball in the game. In Killer Instinct, there is a way to unlock the end boss (Eye-Dol) as a playable character to start the game with; but you have to know the joystyick/button code, and when to use it.

**But in Witcher 2, there is the Madman achievement, for those who beat the game on Insane difficulty mode, and you do get access to equipment not found in the regular game. I would have no qualms against some quests not being revealed unless the game decides the player is experienced (or dedicated) enough—even if I never see them myself.

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 6190
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Zombra » June 11th, 2018, 1:33 am

Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am
I've seen this in fighting games
It's perfectly appropriate for some kinds of games, but not for RPGs, which are about player agency. I should get the special quest if I save the princess; she shouldn't withhold it because I haven't caught 1000 fish, unless that is part of the story of the quest itself. There is no story element that only makes sense to introduce if the story has already been completed.
Image

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2018, 1:39 am

Zombra wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 1:33 am
Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am
I've seen this in fighting games
It's perfectly appropriate for some kinds of games, but not for RPGs, which are about player agency.
Name one. I don't know of any RPGs that are about player agency.
(It's interesting though, that the fighter games actually are about player agency, and by no means are they RPGs—essentially because of that.)
I should get the special quest if I save the princess; she shouldn't withhold it because I haven't caught 1000 fish, unless that is part of the story of the quest itself.
There is no 'I' in RPG; that's not what they are about.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9578
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Drool » June 11th, 2018, 1:49 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am
I've seen this in fighting games
This. This right here is why my replies are terse. Nobody is talking about fighting games. Fighting games are completely irrelevant to this conversation and yet, for some reason, you felt compelled to bring them up.

We're talking about difficulty locking content IN WASTELAND 3.
But in Witcher 2, there is the Madman achievement, for those who beat the game on Insane difficulty mode, and you do get access to equipment not found in the regular game.
That's also completely irrelevant to the conversation. Do you not understand what is being talked about, or are you just being deliberately obtuse? The OP wants locations and quests locked behind multiple playthroughs and difficulty selections. Not overpowered weapons, not fighting game characters, not single encounters.
Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 1:39 am
Name one. I don't know of any RPGs that are about player agency.
All of them.
There is no 'I' in RPG; that's not what they are about.
Only in the bizarre world you live in. Your view and definition of RPG doesn't match anyone else's that I've ever met in my life.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

Dork Mage
Scholar
Posts: 188
Joined: May 13th, 2013, 5:58 pm

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Dork Mage » June 11th, 2018, 4:35 pm

Drool wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am
There is no 'I' in RPG; that's not what they are about.
Only in the bizarre world you live in. Your view and definition of RPG doesn't match anyone else's that I've ever met in my life.
Fallout (1) is an excellent example of a character-RPG where there definitely isn't an "I". You choose a character with low intelligence and no matter how articulate 'you' are, the character won't be able to carry on dialog.

Frankly, Fallout is the kind of RPG that I prefer where the player has to role-play the limitations of the game world character - and there is no 'I'.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2018, 6:45 pm

Drool wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 1:49 pm
Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 12:36 am
I've seen this in fighting games
This. This right here is why my replies are terse. Nobody is talking about fighting games. Fighting games are completely irrelevant to this conversation and yet, for some reason, you felt compelled to bring them up.
I mentioned it because that's where I have seen it done, and it works well enough in them; it doesn't feel out of place like it would in an RPG.
We're talking about difficulty locking content IN WASTELAND 3.
That's nice, so am I. Zombra mentioned content gated by achievements.
But in Witcher 2, there is the Madman achievement, for those who beat the game on Insane difficulty mode, and you do get access to equipment not found in the regular game.
That's also completely irrelevant to the conversation.
Again (not in a post to you) Zombra mentioned that it doesn't suite an RPG to have achievement locks, and yet there it is, and there is nothing wrong with it being there.

(...And I wouldn't have issue with similar being in WL3. I would think that the only people who would care enough to disapprove are those that resent not experiencing it themselves... in the same way as one might resent the option of others to go para-sailing... because they don't get to do it—because the they choose not to.)

What this does is open additional content on a second play-through; and so long as it's not game-breaking, or radically alters the main quest, I don't see a down side to it. In the perspective of the PC, it could even be class-locked quests that suit them; as in someone has 95% in a robotics skill, they can find a robotics quest that wouldn't interest anyone else, nor would those others have a chance at success—outside of the ridiculously contrived. (I am not saying that I prefer this over Fallout's precept to have solutions for all PCs, but I have nothing against it.)

I would not at all mind if RPGs shaped the entire presented set of quests & content based on the initial design of the PC. Consider a game that has three (plus) solutions for every quest, verses the same game with three times the number of quests—but that the PC only gets presented those they have at least a slim chance of succeeding at; (or is at least in some way relative to their character choice).
Do you not understand what is being talked about, or are you just being deliberately obtuse? The OP wants locations and quests locked behind multiple playthroughs and difficulty selections. Not overpowered weapons, not fighting game characters, not single encounters.
I think it is you being obtuse;p as I never suggested over powered weapons, or fighting [game] characters. Those examples are not suggestions for inclusion, or recommended to be emulated in WL3.
Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 1:39 am
Name one. I don't know of any RPGs that are about player agency.
All of them.
None of them, or they are not RPGs. Player agency is seen in fighting games, where the expert martial artists act like a fools if the player doesn't know how to play. It's also seen in crap like FO3, where the player can deliberately offset their aim to hit targets the PC is not skilled enough to hit.

In an RPG, the player should NEVER succeed (by player agency) if the PC is incapable of succeeding; and this is due to the character design, and ability selection & development.
There is no 'I' in RPG; that's not what they are about.
Only in the bizarre world you live in. Your view and definition of RPG doesn't match anyone else's that I've ever met in my life.
That's nice. I take it that you and your friends use cRPGs for virtual LARPing then. This kind of play puts the player in the gameworld as the PC, instead having the player extrapolate the motives and personality of the character. This nullifies the purpose of having the character, and its limitations; this reduces it down to a digital costume for the player to wear in the game-world, with a set of interactive abilities to use. It fosters playing a Wizard, Fighter, Ranger, Thief version of one's self, instead of playing the Gandalf, Boromir, Aragorn, Gollum—or other developed personality. "No I in RPG", means choosing the PC's action based on the PC's personality, and not one's own. The PC isn't a costume; it's a persona. Gandalf wouldn't act like Gollum—even if the player playing Gandalf wanted to steal the ring, that's not what Gandalf would do.

If it must be re-phrased as Rangers to register as related to WL3... :( Then a character like Vasquez in Aliens would not act or be motivated the same as Newt or Carter Burke; these are very different personalities, with different skill, levels of confidence, and each with their own personal way of dealing. Very different from each other, and from the player.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9578
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Drool » June 12th, 2018, 4:02 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2018, 6:45 pm
I mentioned it because that's where I have seen it done, and it works well enough in them
Who cares?
I think it is you being obtuse;p as I never suggested over powered weapons, or fighting [game] characters. Those examples are not suggestions for inclusion, or recommended to be emulated in WL3.
So you admit that you're just bringing up irrelevancies for no real reason.

I quite like meatloaf. I'm not suggesting that the game disc should be made out of meatloaf, I just thought I'd bring it up.
None of them, or they are not RPGs. Player agency is seen in fighting games, where the expert martial artists act like a fools if the player doesn't know how to play.

In an RPG, the player should NEVER succeed (by player agency) if the PC is incapable of succeeding; and this is due to the character design, and ability selection & development.
You use strange definitions.
It's also seen in crap like FO3, where the player can deliberately offset their aim to hit targets the PC is not skilled enough to hit.
I call putting red pepper flakes on pizza "playing a first person game".
That's nice. I take it that you and your friends use cRPGs for virtual LARPing then.
Your use of "LARPing" as a pejorative is funny.
"No I in RPG", means choosing the PC's action based on the PC's personality, and not one's own.
Well, since I made the character, I'm the one who decides what is in character for them since I, you know, created their personality. I don't really care what Gandalf would or wouldn't do because I'm not Tolkien.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3627
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: W3 Replayability

Post by Gizmo » June 12th, 2018, 7:16 pm

With responses like that, one needs to triple the word count of their posts, just with exceptions and disclaimers for inexplicable edge case interpretations, and all manner of hostile attempts at derisive interpretations. Lets agree to (vehemently ;) ) disagree—on this subject. Though I mean you no malice, and will still tend to agree with you in other areas.

**Distilled: One group plays the games from the perspective of, "What would I do"—they wear the PC like a suit. Another group plays in character, and chooses the actions of that character, based on that character. This boils down to not choosing actions on whim, or against character. The PC is not a like a car you drive any way you wish; it's like a puppy, and in some situations the puppy chooses to pee on the floor—because that's what the puppy would do. (And it should follow that: Thieves steal; Assassins assassinate; The cleric PC returning to the party with their pay, probably stops in the church on the way, and tithes for them all—much to their unexpected enmity when they find out.)

**In a multi PC game, it certainly means the thief does not bring the Paladin along for protection on their burgling spree. ;)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest