Wait. Is this a single-character game??

[Zombra]

You start the game as the sole survivor of Team November, a Ranger squad dispatched to the icy Colorado wastes.

I could be overreacting, but this sounds like a setup for "Chosen One plus companions".

No. No. No. No. No. No thank you. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Wasteland was a true party-based game. So was Wasteland 2 and it was wonderful.
Wasteland 3 will also be a true party-based game. Say it with me, inXile. Please. Please say it.

[sear]

The game will still be party-based.

[Zombra]

The game will still be party-based.

Thank you, sea!

Urge to kill ... fading ... fading ...

[Infinitron]

Haha now wait just a minute. Does "party-based" mean "full party creation" or not?

[Zaphod]

It does sound like a sole ranger survives and then goes about trying to build a new team and ranger base in Colorado.

I'll go make some pop-corn...

[paultakeda]

The game will still be party-based.

Thank you, sea!

Urge to kill ... fading ... fading ...

Party-based is so broad. Dragon Age and Mass Effect are both "party-based". I now commence my sitting down and eating of the popcorn as I watch Zombra's head explodes.

[Zombra]

I felt like we established pretty clearly what "party-based" means during W2's development ... but some clarifying details on the plan for W3 would be nice in case sea forgot.

Note that if the game starts with a single PC, but lets us create* more later (maybe after the base is established), and none are "essential", I'm fine with that. *Important: "recruit" and "create" are not the same thing.

It'd be really amazing if the base was like Ranger Center in the original (or the Adventurers' Guild in Bard's Tale), where new PCs could be generated at any time ... but that may be too much to hope for.

My assumption is that we will see the "4+3" structure that worked great in Wasteland, and recently Wasteland 2.

I look forward to finding out more details on October 5th.
Keep that popcorn fresh, gentlemen ... if this goes wrong, old Zombra may be in trouble ...

[Drool]

Note that if the game starts with a single PC, but lets us create* more later (maybe after the base is established), and none are "essential", I'm fine with that. *Important: "recruit" and "create" are not the same thing.

Strongly agree.

If that "sole survivor" is essential (if his death ends the game), then it's not party based. And frankly, I'll be disappointed if we only recruit to fill up the party, even if the sole survivor isn't essential. I want to make my party.

[paultakeda]

This is why I say "party-based" remains a vague term. We hashed this out in the salad days of WL2 discussions but in the end however way we defined it in the forums has nothing to do with how it is being used to define WL3's system. Consider WL3 a blank slate and the term "party-based" equally so.

You start out with one dude/dudette. Already it sounds Chosen-y.

I pushed a lot of keys on my keyboard on this topic for WL2 and frankly, I'm not in the mood to fight this all over again for WL3. I'm just happy to see a WL3 because it continues the world building. I would rather that the core WL games stay party-based as we defined it and have spinoffs that do other things (I am not averse to FPS, RTS, adventure and whatever Wasteland games as long as it is Wasteland: XXXXX, but the core Wasteland N must be party RPG), but that's me. In the end, what's nice to see is inXile thriving and with it, Wasteland; and as an aside, this forum site.

So, whatever. Wasteland is dead. Long live Wasteland.

[ogi79]

Well, i like idea to start with one character and then as you progress in game you add more people in to a team ,everyone with his unique personality and background and speciallity. Something simillar to Fallout 2

[NovaRain]

Well, i like idea to start with one character and then as you progress in game you add more people in to a team ,everyone with his unique personality and background and speciallity. Something simillar to Fallout 2

What Wasteland needs is less like Fallout IMO.
The whole base building, resource management, and co-op multiplayer (and exclusive content?) already make me feel skeptical. Please don't tell me "all dialogues will be fully voiced".

BTW, I think it's better not to promise "modding support" this time if WL3 is still using Unity. Modding support for WL2DC is less than ideal to be honest.

[Bubbles]

Please don't tell me "all dialogues will be fully voiced".

If this answer to this is "no", here's a follow-up: will the player character be fully voice acted?

[Zombra]

I pushed a lot of keys on my keyboard on this topic for WL2 and frankly, I'm not in the mood to fight this all over again for WL3. I'm just happy to see a WL3 because it continues the world building. I would rather that the core WL games stay party-based as we defined it and have spinoffs that do other things (I am not averse to FPS, RTS, adventure and whatever Wasteland games as long as it is Wasteland: XXXXX, but the core Wasteland N must be party RPG), but that's me. In the end, what's nice to see is inXile thriving and with it, Wasteland; and as an aside, this forum site.

I pretty much agree here. "Wastecraft RTS" or "Wasteland: Shepard's Story" would be cool to see, but in a proper sequel I expect a certain adherence to fundamentals; and to me the question of party-based vs. Chosen One is as fundamental as it gets.

I am happy to fight this one all over again if necessary. Grassroots did make a difference to BT4, and over at Obsidian, POE added Adventurers' Hall style recruitment due to popular outcry. Hopefully all that noise won't be necessary this time around, though.

[IHaveHugeNick]

Well, i like idea to start with one character and then as you progress in game you add more people in to a team ,everyone with his unique personality and background and speciallity. Something simillar to Fallout 2

What Wasteland needs is less like Fallout IMO.
The whole base building, resource management, and co-op multiplayer (and exclusive content?) already make me feel skeptical.

Why? All of those are less like Fallout. They are also perfect fit for isometric, party-based, combat heavy RPG.

[Bubbles]

Well, i like idea to start with one character and then as you progress in game you add more people in to a team ,everyone with his unique personality and background and speciallity. Something simillar to Fallout 2

What Wasteland needs is less like Fallout IMO.
The whole base building, resource management, and co-op multiplayer (and exclusive content?) already make me feel skeptical.

Why? All of those are less like Fallout. They are also perfect fit for isometric, party-based, combat heavy RPG.

He's talking about Fallout 4.

[IHaveHugeNick]

What Wasteland needs is less like Fallout IMO.
The whole base building, resource management, and co-op multiplayer (and exclusive content?) already make me feel skeptical.

Why? All of those are less like Fallout. They are also perfect fit for isometric, party-based, combat heavy RPG.

He's talking about Fallout 4.

We don't talk about that one in here, you decline enabling casual.

[dorkboy]

Creating all the party members is a major part of the appeal for me with these types of games.

[NovaRain]

Well, i like idea to start with one character and then as you progress in game you add more people in to a team ,everyone with his unique personality and background and speciallity. Something simillar to Fallout 2

What Wasteland needs is less like Fallout IMO.
The whole base building, resource management, and co-op multiplayer (and exclusive content?) already make me feel skeptical.

Why? All of those are less like Fallout. They are also perfect fit for isometric, party-based, combat heavy RPG.

Let's just say I don't like the idea starting with only one character and recruiting the rest of members for the team, and "Something simillar to Fallout 2" line.

[-Archangel-]

I would prefer that the game will be balanced around letting us making our character and filling the rest of ranks with recruitable NPCs.

But also that you can create your own additional recruits similar to how Pillars of Eternity does it.

Technically you could do this in WL2 but it was tough surviving until you found enough NPCs to fill your ranks (and even tougher until you filled all your non combat skill needs with those NPCs).

[paultakeda]

The main problem is that when you start with but one character then you by default have a Chosen One. This is the lone survivor, right? So when the party is built as this player character goes through the story, you have the exact same recruitment dynamic in a game like Dragon Age: Origins. Sure, you could configure the crap out of these characters, including their armor and equipment (this is where DA went wrong in its sequels by going the Mass Effect route, which was fine for ME but a sad thing for DA), but in the end it is Chosen One gameplay.

Or is it going to be that somewhere along the line when you meet a new recruit you get to go through character generation, and then play a bit more, then go through another character generation? That does not sound fun.

I'm more or less convinced that if WL3's storyline starts with a lone survivor then it's a Chosen One + NPC party game.