I created this thread because I'm a little bit worried after reading some of user reviews.
There are some people mentioning grinding as a major game aspect. Some say that choosing non-combat character (alarm expert, etc.), will cause much trouble. Reviews also state that side-quests are mostly of fetch or kill nature. Is this true? For me this would be a deciding argument against purchasing the game. Some also say that the dialogue with NPCs is boring and the main storyline not very interesting.

From a game of such calibre I'd expect to have at least as much intelligent dialogue as Planescape: Torment has and AT LEAST as much different approaches to a problem as the original Fallout 'duology' had. With combat playing only a minor role in the gameplay and something to be avoided with a highly intelligent or sneaky 'survivalist' PCs - without any experience loss. I always found talking my way through a tight situation more satisfying that fighting the opponents. IMHO combat is way too much overused in most games. To a point that it's simply B-O-R-I-N-G.

Also, I heard some negative feedback about combat being too simplified. After playing JA2 1.13, Silent Storm series (both games have superb TB combat) and Brigade E5/7.62mm with its excellent RTwP combat with adrenaline affecting the aim, suppression, aiming down the sight causing stamina loss over time (depending on weapon weight), incredible weapon customisation options (ex. almost full control of bullet types inside a magazine of a given weapon, foldable stocks, attachable grenade launchers, narrowed vision when aiming down the scope, etc.) I have VERY high expectations.

Should I buy Wasteland 2?

Is there any difference in gameplay between the 'Digital Classic Edition' and the 'Digital Deluxe Edition'? €39.99 seems to be a very steep price already for just a computer game, but 'Deluxe Edition's' €54.99 is some kind of a joke. That's a ludicrous price!

PS. I'm not sure if it will help, but I played the original Wasteland in the past and I did not like it much. There was way too much combat in it and very little story and dialogue.

edit: nvm

That's a bit confusing.

If you both dislike combat: " I always found talking my way through a tight situation more satisfying that fighting the opponents. IMHO combat is way too much overused in most games. To a point that it's simply B-O-R-I-N-G."

And love combat: "After playing JA2 1.13, Silent Storm series (both games have superb TB combat) and Brigade E5/7.62mm with its excellent RTwP combat with adrenaline affecting the aim, suppression, aiming down the sight causing stamina loss over time (depending on weapon weight), incredible weapon customisation options (ex. almost full control of bullet types inside a magazine of a given weapon, foldable stocks, attachable grenade launchers, narrowed vision when aiming down the scope, etc.) I have VERY high expectations."

Then it is impossible for this game (or any other) to satisfy you.

This game is not built to have a no-combat solution. The turn-based combat seems fine to me. I think that the story is of paramount importance to the game and it delivers. The ambience and music are wonderful. The character-design and dialog are masterpieces.

Did you play Wasteland in the 80s/90s and dislike it, or did you play it recently? Can you point me to the negative reviews that you mention? I've only run into good ones, so far.

It sounds to me like NO GAME is right for you then. Arcanum is the only CRPG I can think of where dialogue provides more deep, intelligent or more satisfying solutions than combat/stealth/ignoring the problem. Most CRPGs does exactly what Wasteland 2 does, a lazy social skill requirement to open up the magic colour-coded dialogue option to avoid combat or have the bad guy commit suicide for no reason other than "play it your way" bullshit game design.

Planescape Torment is closer to an adventure game with light combat for narrative reasons rather than the other way around. Controversial opinion?

I doubt you'll get dialogue like the one in Planescape Torment in any other game. I haven't gone very far so I can't tell you just how good the story is. From what I've seen, it's at least on par with Fallout. I wouldn't call dialogue boring. There is lots of information about the world and events presented, lots of dark humor. NPCs react to what you've done or what you wear (Try wearing a dog collar).

Most quests have several solutions, depending on your skills and how thorough you are in exploring the environments. Some are better than others, like in most RPGs. True, there are fetch and kill quests, but even in those, you will find something interesting.

Combat is an integral part of the game and you will fight a lot. But it's good. Lot's of tactical consideration, positioning, cover mechanics, friendly fire, flanking. If you want something interesting and challenging, go with Ranger difficulty. Rookie and Seasoned became very boring, very fast, at least to me. Could the combat be better? Yes. Enemies sometimes seem to have abnormal amount of AP and will run up to your long range specialists in a turn, spraying you with lead at the end. Overall, if you like turn based combat, you'll like this. You can avoid lot of the combat, or get the drop on the enemy by finding alternate routes and using your skills.

Graphics are serviceable but it's Unity engine. So don't expect too much. Shadowrun, for instance, looks much better. But you shouldn't be buying this game for graphical bells and whistles anyway.

My main problem with the game so far is the lack of a bigger location, like Vault City, San Francisco, even something like Den or Hub. There is Rail Nomads Camp, but isn't really of that size and complexity. I hope some later locations provide this and that the place isn't full of hostiles.

If you like Fallout, JA, XCOM, Divinity: Original Sin, Temple of Elemental Evil, I see no reason not to get this game. Don't get discouraged by user reviews. Seems like a lot of people expected something different from this game. It's a little rough around the edges, but there is lot of fun to be had if you're into old school CRPG.

I completed half of the game, my experience so far:
Grinding isn't needed on second game difficulty - first available companion can clear it solo. You only need to upgrade her weapon. Best way to start - sell everything you started with and get Famas for her. Then upgrade to M16 when you get access to Citadel.
Non-combat character wouldn't hinder you that much - I have a medic with energy weapon, due to its mechanic (good damage only against highly armoured targets, at least 3+) it skipped turns until last quarter of first half of the game.
Personally, I got impression that side actions more of "heal/repair" skills than "kill", so don't worry about journal entries being "fetch and kill".
Don't know why you base your expectations so high for dialogues. You are member of militarized police force which solves problems in enclosed postapocalyptic uneducated area. I wouldn't expect from people speaking Monty Pyton dialogues there.
I don't understand why you compare this game to PT - story of an independent god and story of fresh recruits.World of magic lets you write way more unusual plot twists.

Combat is simple, all games of X-Com/UFO types have better tactic (grenade types, ammo types, skills...). Well, you can use heal/repair and hacking during combat, but there are no combat-related actions like different type kicks or disarming.
Definitely has some balancing issues. Assault rifles have comparable to sniper rifles stats with less drawbacks and let you do 4 shots/round (burst shot+single shot)

I wouldn't recommend this game to you because you expect Planescape in Fallout world with battles from best tactics games.

As much as I love Fallout I have to agree that suicide option was bullshit. 'My plan doesn't work because of a single flaw and I've done terrible things. Maybe I should call back my army and rethink everything?.. Nah, let's blow up everything, myself included' :)
But Arcanum also has 'final boss suicide option', only due to a bug he tells you he'll kill himself only to attack you anyway :) On my very first playthrough I played it this way, avoiding combat and making it more point and click adventure than RPG... and then Curst Prison handed by butt to me :)

Ha! You're my favourite person for today.

Most CRPGs? that is nearly ALL games period. If you find it a bullshit game design then I cant see how you can still play games

I would have to say this game is NOT for you. There is a significant amount of combat, it's not a long narrative effort like PS:T, and you said you don't like Wasteland 1. Why you would think the sequel would be radically different is... strange. So no, I think this is not going to be your cup of tea. However, you may want to check out Torment:Tides of Numenera. That one may be right u your alley.

The question for you first I think is this: do you like Fallout 1/2 and then do you like Fallout: Tactics? If so, then probably a good game for you to play. It's not as good as Fallout 1/2, but better than Tactics, IMO.

I haven't played all the way through Wasteland 2 yet, but I have a good feel for it now. The skill system is diverse and usable in its diversity (I see a lot of criticism about how builds and skills work etc., but I think those are incorrect.) I think it is highly nuanced and not getting enough credit for how varied those nuances are and the different feels/flavors it gives the playing depending on the skills you choose. And, if played right, you can use a lot/almost all of the skills throughout the game to a high degree and be greatly satisfied with their implementation. I find all the skills well thought out and and well usable (none of the skills are arbitrary, but it seems a lot of reviews are disservicing how good the skill system is; I'm thinking it is just more complex than people are used to.)

If you've played Fallout 1/2, think of its skill system, it's a bit more refined and straightforward than that, but basically the same. All good things. They learned from it and modernized it a little and I am loving it. I find it to be more rewarding than a lot of RPG games in it's character development, too. I have 4 characters that I created that I have a strong sense in their personalities because of the time I spent creating them at the beginning of the game. Even with its semi-limited models I had no problem finding a whole lot of appealing combinations that allowed me to make 4 very different characters.

Not everything is set up in the game to be as obvious as it seems, perception is key and then a right combination of skills and rangers is key to pull everything off as smoothly as you want. The difficulty settings might be what will make the game appeal to you the most. I'm not finding combat repetative or unrewarding at all. I'm finding it great. I'm finding there to be less combat than Fallout 1/2 (where I had a lot more random encounters and then not random encounters with so many radscorps, mantises, and other monters that I got tired of having to kill a bunch of.) Plus, you can speed up combat speed which is always a plus. I'm finding it a little easy on seasoned, but I've spent a LOT of time tweaking and starting over to feel out the tweaks to find a really good squad. It's really interesting how similar my characters are from when I first created them, yet how vastly more effective they are now vs. how they were before because of the tweaks.

You could either breeze through combat on an easy difficulty, choose from the bunch of pre-made characters they give (which have flavor and are give you a lot of variety to choose from, I liked them more than most pre-made characters games give you, but still wanted to make my own) and develop them to your liking and play through. Or you could make it a little harder and a little more combat focused and really have the need for good combat tactics (which I'm finding to be a blast, way more tactical than most RPGs, but not super-complex. It's not just harder on a harder difficulty because the mobs have more HP and do more dmg, but because you have to be more careful with how you go about trying to kill them, with positioning and smart AP usage.)

Either way you play the combat, easy or more in-depth, you'll experience a well-written, extremely rich atmosphere, EXCELLENT music, fun, smart, large, new RPG that gives something good to the RPG world.

A great aspect to the game is the combat. Because, if you don't want a lot of combat or combat you have to think a lot about, you can play on easy. If you do want challenging combat, it scales wonderfully in difficulty, making you really have to consider your moves and positioning and be just that much more precise and efficient the harder you make it.

I would say this game doesn't suffer from the problems other games with combat have. Yes, there's a lot of combat, but not repetitive or overdone. There's just a large world of a lot of adversity to face, and you face it and kick its ass and it is very rewarding. I would say DEFINITELY PLAY IT if most games bore you with repeat combat or where there's a lot of fighting but only to waste your time not because it's fun and an integral part of the game. Like TB tactical games like the ones you mentioned, I think it is intended to be a bit more tactical and combat-focused, but they didn't want it to be inaccessible for people who aren't big on combat tactics either. I think they did a great job with combat, weapons, skills, etc. Give the game some time to open and grow though, you won't have everything in your first 10-20hours of play (if you read everything.) Grinding it not necessary at all, or even part of the game at all as far as I'm concerned. I don't know what those people are talking about other than perhaps having made poor characters that they can't get to do the things they want, or they're trying to do areas that they aren't high enough for yet (which is doable, certainly.)

For the first several hours I played the game I found the camera and views and movement all quite a bit awkward and I was a little worried it would ruin the game for me, having to turn every which way and not being able to see everything and having to move the camera around in combat was especially annoying. Then at some point that all started to change and it really started to work for me. I started to get a "feel" for it. All I can say to that is, that is good video-game making to me. Something NEW!!!!!!! Something I had to learn! That is good!!! It's a little like the sword system in Die By The Sword (okay not that hard of a learning curve though), for the first good while you're like "WTF this is WHACK how can they think this is going to work and be enjoyable?" until you stick with it and actually start to get a feel for it and before you know it (usually after a rest and pause from the game and then come back to it refreshed) it comes naturally and you're just playing the game and going through not having to focus on the controls and it feels good. It works, just give it a chance.

I say remove your expectations, you shouldn't have expectations for it to be something, just hopes that whatever it is is good. Be open-minded. Allow it to be its own thing, not something you expect or want it to be. It's different, yet familiar. It has heart, atmosphere, uniqueness, and balls. I say buy it, support inXile and what they do. If you are open and patient and read the manual and don't over-dramatize your involvement in playing it (as in, some people just like to be like "OHHHMYYY it's so awful because it's not the most mind-blowing orgasmic easy-to-digest experience ever created so I'm going to hate on it), you should be able to enjoy it.

Holy cow! So many replies!
I'd like to thank all of you guys for taking your time to respond to my post. I really appreciate it.
There are many fantastic posts here that helped me a lot in deciding whether I should buy the game or not. And the game is not cheap, so your input means a lot to me.
I'm leaned towards purchasing this product. Hell, I'll make myself a Christmas present, though my girlfriend probably won't be too happy to see me sucked into some virtual world during weekends. :D

To answer some of your questions that surfaced here.


Dear Alcaray,
About combat. It's pretty simple actually. I like combat if it's a major aspect of a given title. Like it's in case of tactical games I mentioned. In RPG games, combat is of secondary importance to me. An RPG game from my point of view can, but doesn't have to contain it. And if it contains it, the question is how frequently will I have to battle various foes. If frequently, then either combat mechanics must be complex or quick and abstracted enough so I won't get tired of it after the first playthrough. I had no problems with combat in Fallout, Planescape: Torment, Arcanum and even The Witcher (apart of some areas where I had to hack through hordes of swamp creatures). It wasn't tiring nor distracting from the plot.

Why didn't I enjoy the original Wasteland, is a more complex matter, as I myself am not quite sure why. I first played it a couple of years ago. Initially I approached the game with great enthusiasm and a huge dose of nostalgia. It kind of resembled the "Freeway Warrior" gamebooks that I read (or played?) when I was a kid. It felt fresh, even though I have already played Fallout 1 and 2 to the death. But then there must have been something I didn't like. Maybe it was the frequent combat situations I constantly had to deal with, having to peek into the printed manual all the time to check dialogues, or maybe some game mechanics I have read about in some FAQ that I didn't like. I'm unsure. The thing is that I got bored with the game before I reached the end. :( Maybe I should give it another shot?

As to which reviews got me so concerned, all of them are here, on GoG's site:

There's one by Skywalkerpl titled "Decent but grindy" in the review section of the Digital Classic Edition. The reviewer points out that "the main storyline is the least interesting part of a game and side-quests... good 80% of the are just grinds, nothing more. Kill the guys there, bring the part here, fix that, fix this...". He also claims that "It's an excellent study on how you can make a game with long, dull combat (...)" and then he explains why he thinks so.

Then, there is a review by Gas.gas in which I can read that the game "suffers from an oversimplified implementation of the turn based combat system".

Addictedtosleep's review was disturbing: "There is a lot of great story, but any of the side information is just lacking and unnecessary. At first it was great, but then every character started re-hashing the same lines in different ways. The game tends to make you <<run errands>>".

Of course, there are many positive reviews, but some of those negative ones made me a little bit worried. Hence this thread.


Dear Gremlion,
Why do I compare Wasteland 2 to Planescape: Torment? Well, Brian Fargo, Chris Avellone, Colin McComb... Black Isle Studios? I think that's a pretty good reason to compare the two titles. :)

True, world of magic might give writers more freedom, but it also provides cheap "deus ex machina"-like solutions, and it doesn't have to mean that a Sci-Fi game set in a semi-realistic setting has to automatically have a worse plot with fewer twists. Don't you agree?


Dear Novotnus,
Yep, that's one of the weakest points of Fallout. Such things simply don't happen. Still, the game is great.


Dear Sufyan,
You said that "no game is right for me", but I have to protest! :) I'm very picky, but there are lots of games I do like very much, like the titles I already mentioned, Fallout 1 and 2, Dark Sun, Graviteam Tactics, and lots more from the Good Old Games' site (including both: oldies and new titles).
I probably would not be hesitating nor I wouldn't create this very thread if purchasing Wasteland 2 would cost me at least half as much as it does right now.

My special thanks go to Drealmer7, Gremlion and Revanbh for describing their experiences with the game.


---
One question remains unanswered though. What version do you guys recommend to buy? Would I miss a lot by not reading novellas that come with the Digital Deluxe Edition? Are they worth that extra price?

I can't answer this from the perspective of ownership, since I got the bare-bones just-the-game edition as a Pillars of Eternity backer bonus reward, but having said that: I don't at all have the feeling that I'm in the dark or missing out on big gaps of lore without having those extras.

On a side note, I've put a lot more time into the game than when I first replied and I have to say I love this game so far. There's a lot more depth to it than I first thought - and this applies to both the lore, story, game play situations, and combat. This easily sits in top spot for games I've played this year. Hell, I'm finding I'm staying up far too late at night and sitting down during the day to play this game when I should be doing something else. I'm even thinking about it throughout the day (whether it's thinking about new character builds, what I should do next in the game, or how to solve a particular quest). I haven't been this hooked on a game in years (for reference, I'm 50 years old - my wife thinks I'm either insane or suffering my mid-life crisis. Or both).

Why focus on reviewers who are obviously dismissive elitist PC gamers who hate on everything that is hyped up or popular? Why focus on reviewers who use generic negative and obviously superficial RPG terms like "grinding" and "fetch quests" to dismiss a HUGE game? They must have gone into the game expecting it to be a generic bore, and when they found a minimal amount of evidence towards this they jumped on it and declared the game a failure.

I'm ashamed to admit it but when the first Max Payne game was released I dismissed it as a dumb shooter with a gimmick slow motion mechanic that quickly grows old. Oh how foolish I was in my teenage years.

I have classic edition and don't feel like I'm missing on something. Haven't had the time to read any of the novellas (you get two in this edition) so I can't tell you about their quality. What I do know is that you can play this game without any prior knowledge of Wasteland universe and not feel in the dark. Game itself offers comprehensive overview of the past, with enough lore to satisfy the most interested background seekers, like me.

$20 difference between editions is not that small, so you'll have to weigh how important complementary copy of The Bard's Tale is to you.