too much party management

For all Wasteland 2 discussion that does not fit elsewhere, suggestions, feedback, etc. No spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

User avatar
Roger Wilco
Scholar
Posts: 231
Joined: March 12th, 2012, 4:04 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by Roger Wilco » March 15th, 2012, 2:52 pm

It sounds to me like we won't have (full) control over NPCs in our party, and I like that approach. Sure, you can't always rely on the AI to be smart, and they will be programming the personalities of the NPCs to play in role in doing what you may or may not want them to do. It adds to the game to me, doesn't detract.

I think (hope) this game will be difficult, perhaps even frustrating, at times. We are asking for a game, the likes of which hasn't been made in 20 years and to do so much of the hand-holding, and some of the accessibility built into modern games has got to go.

windrider
Initiate
Posts: 7
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 2:04 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by windrider » March 15th, 2012, 3:45 pm

One more vote for disagreement. I enjoy party management, and wasteland was always about making the best party, not making the best single unit. Party management means that we are able to specialize our team, either by making them all good at one thing and playing the game to their strengths, or by diversifying their talents so that there is someone on the team can handle each type of challenge. Wasteland is not Fallout.

User avatar
CanadianWolvie
Acolyte
Posts: 61
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 9:30 am

Re: too much party management

Post by CanadianWolvie » March 15th, 2012, 3:54 pm

I disagree as well. Party management is part of the whole appeal of this game being made, its counter-productive to suggest otherwise.

If it helps you any, think of a party as the player's character, they are mostly controlled by you anyways - you know, other than the npcs that tag along.

Guurt
Initiate
Posts: 10
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 8:42 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by Guurt » March 15th, 2012, 4:00 pm

Aleanthus wrote:Too much Party-Management was the thing that broke Baldurs Gate for me.
Let the player be the hero, not some combined will of several persons. The way it worked in Fallout was perfect.
Dont put the tactics and strategy aspect before the actual rolleplay aspect of the game.
I disagree.

I am tired of being the super hero in every game.

The nice thing about a party based game is that you are playing the whole party.

I want lots of party management. The micro-management is what was fun about RPGs in the golden years.

The "stream-lining" of games just dumbs them down.

Jagged Alliance 2 still remains one of my favorite games because of the great party management (and of course the fantastic turn based combat)

skuphundaku
Novice
Posts: 35
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 2:06 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by skuphundaku » March 15th, 2012, 4:08 pm

I disagree too! There should be a lot of party management. Think Jagged Alliance 2 levels of party management! To put this into perspective, robust party management is my greatest complaint with Fallout 1&2, which were, otherwise, the best RPGs to date.

User avatar
Wanderer
Scholar
Posts: 156
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:59 am

Re: too much party management

Post by Wanderer » March 15th, 2012, 4:16 pm

There should be a lot of party management, but if somebody plays with a single character, this character should earn proportionally more exp. This is a simple yet effective solution.

Siecje
Initiate
Posts: 3
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 4:17 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by Siecje » March 15th, 2012, 4:47 pm

I vote for Party Management, it allows you to roll play more than one player.

User avatar
Vryheid
Explorer
Posts: 336
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 1:39 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by Vryheid » March 15th, 2012, 5:05 pm

Aradael wrote:The problems mentioned in party combat in Fallout are entirely AI related. AI has come light-years since then, they just have to use a better AI script to avoid those derpy moments NPCs have. Personally I'd like to see something like Dragon Quest 9 used, a selection between Full Control or a list of AI behavioral settings to use during combat.
AI has improved? Games like Skyrim, Mass Effect and Dragon Age would like to have a word with you. AI programming and theory did not magically get easier along with the technology used to run the games. Companions are still as dumb as they've ever been- in fact, I'd challenge anyone to find a modern RPG where not micromanaging the AI is a superior alternative to doing so.

User avatar
Quarex
Scholar
Posts: 132
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 2:46 pm
Location: Massachusetts' Base Cochise neighborhood

Re: too much party management

Post by Quarex » March 15th, 2012, 5:38 pm

Party management is good. And I still think, in response to the concern that PCs should not have any personalities of their own, that giving you the option to give your PCs pre-set NPC personalities should still be there (as I mentioned elsewhere, the personalities would be either attached to a recruitable NPC or assigned to your PC and the related NPC would be removed from the game).

kad136
Novice
Posts: 46
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 7:11 am

Re: too much party management

Post by kad136 » March 15th, 2012, 7:52 pm

Combat party management is one of the best things about Baldur's Gate.

Pneumonica
Initiate
Posts: 10
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 7:40 pm

Re: too much party management

Post by Pneumonica » March 15th, 2012, 8:07 pm

I would like to say that while I love party management, I will give a partial agreement in that "too much" party management is a bad thing. While it might be fun to have procedurally generated interactions between party members (I remember in Sentinel Worlds certain party members would chime in with lines, even though they weren't game-created NPCs), I don't see a need for things like "relationship levels" (although it might be fun to level up at Intimacy 5... kudos if you catch that reference).

NPCs, IMO, should not be firmly controlled by the player. The original game did have them doing their own thing from time to time (occasionally shooting their own girlfriends, as I found out in one playthrough), but the NPCs are just that. Unless they actually *become* Desert Rangers, they shouldn't be under the players control except in general terms, and even then they might be unreliable about following orders.

Interesting side note: Keeping Jackie in your party is a form of unsympathetic fun (she gets killed a lot). I'd love to have the Desert Rangers have a policy that "anybody rescued by a Ranger is deemed deputized until the Ranger dismisses them". It'd give them something of a harder flair, and might make a few people who would otherwise be rescued by them less excited about being rescued.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests