First Wasteland 2 screenshot released, inXile hoping for feedback

Wasteland 2

By on July 22, 2012 at 1:58 pm

InXile Entertainment have released their first screenshot of the successfully-Kickstarter’d Wasteland 2, ever since raising $2.9 million of the $900,000 they asked for. “We are doing so to solicit feedback on the basic look,” writes Brian Fargo. “Please keep in mind that we have not put in the particle effects and post-processing which will have a dramatic effect on the scene, and this represents just one of the various environments for Wasteland 2 so expect to see other quite different locales.” Click on the picture below to go hi-res – what do you think?

15 comments (Leave your own)

Graphically, it’s a lot more than I expected. The real proof will be in the writing and gameplay though, the appeal was never about it being a great looking game.

 

yurtles: Graphically, it’s a lot more than I expected. The real proof will be in the writing and gameplay though, the appeal was never about it being a great looking game.

+1

 

Too bright and cheery.

 

Krater much? The only thing that could make this screenshot any more Krater-like would be if they were wearing quirky gas masks and toting pop culture references.

I guess we will see that with screenshot number two…

 
James Pinnell

We’re goin STRAIGHT, TO, THE WILD WILD WEST.

 

Looking good, particle effects will make it look nice and not so bright.

Hopefully gameplay is good!

 

Why does everyone insist on post apocalyptic worlds being boring and dull affairs? Chernobyl is hardly a grey wasteland, trees/animals don’t care about radiation and it doesnt just stop raining cause you let off some A-Bombs. Deserts are colourful too.

 
 

By the same token oldmate:

[img-large]http://www.mongolia-attractions.com/images/mongolgobi.jpg[/img-large]

I agree they’re not kaleidoscopes of variation, but the Aussie outback is a particularly bleak brand of desert :B

 

Big difference between a bomb going off and what happened at chernobyl though…

 

auld:
Why does everyone insist on post apocalyptic worlds being boring and dull affairs? Chernobyl is hardly a grey wasteland, trees/animals don’t care about radiation and it doesnt just stop raining cause you let off some A-Bombs. Deserts are colourful too.

technically Chernobyl is not even a nuclear explosion (nuclear reactor can’t actually suffer nuclear explosion realistically, their fuel is nowhere near enough in enrichment level to actually do so).

it’s at best approximately the effect of a dirty bomb, a rather stark contrast with ACTUAL nuclear detonation.

an actual A bomb… or worse H bomb, pretty much glass the ground zero and vaporize the surrounding area, or crush them with overpressure up to a distance depending on it’s payload.

and technically it doesn’t matter if the animals and plants (that didn’t get vaporized) don’t mind the radiation, there are only 3 outcomes: A. they die from the exposure, B. they survive and suffer radiation damage, C. they were either protected by something or otherwise too far from the blast.

 

Well isn’t everyone getting super duper technical (although BronzeD is 100% correct haha).

I still agree with auld on his point of “it’s not always barren as fcuk” though. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thriving parklands and memorial gardens only 67 years on. Immediately post an explosion it would be a disaster though!!!

 

True, though to be fair on the argument consider this as well:

A. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the effect of 2 of the earliest and smallest fission bomb in terms of payload for a strategic nuclear weapon.

B. under a nuclear war scenario you don’t get 2 small scale fission bomb tossed around, you get dozens or hundreds of warheads (if you consider MIRV warhead total payload) descending on the involved nations territory as the participant would be trying their best to overwhelm the opposing ABM capability.

so instead of thinking that Hiroshima and Nagasaki as an example of life after an A-bomb, think of them instead as a measurement stick of what would happen if the more up to date nuclear warfare equivalent happened instead with hundreds of H-bomb of yield multiple times the 2 original bomb are thrown around like confetti not just by one country, but by both sides or more.

In the event of a nuclear warfare, either nation would try to cripple the other as fast as possible to reduce their retaliatory capacity, the only sensible course of action then is to fire and saturate the first salvo as much as possible that will still leave enough warhead left to deal with what’s left.

a single thermonuclear warhead that comprises ONE of the 10 inside a Peacekeeper for example have yield roughly 20 times of the Hiroshima A-bomb… That one missile out of the several dozen originally active, carry anywhere from 0 (full decoy) to 10 such warhead, now put a couple of them or dozens airborne at once in a nuclear warfare and … well… you get the picture of what the outcome will be.

 

Emphasis on “Peacekeeper”… love that doublespeak USA

 

bronzed,

Yah, true. I should have thought about it a little more than I did. My bad :P

 
Leave a comment

You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href="http://www.google.com/"]Google[/url]

Leave a Reply

PC Gaming Calendar 2014

Follow Games.on.net

YouTube

Steam Group

Upcoming Games

Community Soapbox

Recent Features
Heroes of the Storm

Heroes of the Storm: We talk to Blizzard about new heroes, rage quitting, and why they want you to spend money on Stimpacks

What's up with Stimpacks? And how about those Goblin Techies spotted in the game files? We ask Blizzard for details.

the crew-580w-4

The Crew: A gorgeous open world, if you can handle the interruptions

Alex drives across the United States and back to bring you his thoughts.

Game of the Year 2014

Win a PS4 in our Game of the Year 2014 Competition!

Think you know who should take home the crown? Share your thoughts and win!

Streaming Radio
Radio Streams are restricted to iiNet group customers.

GreenManGaming MREC

Facebook Like Box