Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Classic Games (Games) Role Playing (Games) Games

Interplay Ex-CEO Brian Fargo Kickstarts Wasteland II 122

New submitter 0111 1110 writes "Attempting to emulate Double Fine's success to fund another currently dead genre of computer game, Brian Fargo of Interplay fame has started a kickstarter project for a sequel to Wasteland, his1988 post-apocalyptic RPG which inspired Fallout. It will be turn-based and party-based, with a top-down perspective and 2D graphics. Fargo has managed to attract many of the original developers, such as Alan Pavlish and Mike Stackpole, as well as Jason Anderson, who was a designer for Fallout, and Mark Morgan, who did the music for Planescape: Torment and both of the original Fallout games. Fargo's goal has been set at $900,000. Anything above that will be used for additional game content. At $1.5 million he will offer an OS X version. An interview with Fargo by Rock, Paper, Shotgun provides some additional insight into what he and his group are planning, as does a video interview with Matt Barton."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Interplay Ex-CEO Brian Fargo Kickstarts Wasteland II

Comments Filter:
  • A dead genre? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by scdeimos ( 632778 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:13PM (#39344999)

    Attempting to emulate Double Fine's success to fund another currently dead genre of computer game...

    Considering Double Fine were only after $400,000 and they've already passed the $3,200,000 mark, I'd say point and click adventure games aren't dead in the eyes of their customers.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:34PM (#39345281)

      The term currently dead is the's like mostly dead, if it were completely dead you could only go through it's pockets for change but if it is currently dead then it implies it could be raised with a little help from a miracle worker of course.

    • Re:A dead genre? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jerslan ( 1088525 ) * on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:46PM (#39345437)
      In terms of customer enjoyment and desire? Point & Click adventure games have never really been dead. In terms of Media Coverage and Industry Production? Yeah, it's been flopping on the ground gasping for air.

      With one exception. Tell Tale Games has made some amazing Point & Click Adventure Games, re-launching the much loved Sam & Max and Monkey Island series. I have played all of their Sam & Max games and they are pretty excellent, even if they did start to focus too much on making them console accessible :P

      Older games have been enjoying a comeback via Steam and mobile ports. I know the old Monkey Island games are available for iOS. Space Quest and King's Quest available on Steam, as well as the classic Indiana Jones: Fate of Atlantis. The classic Leisure Suit Larry games are out there on the nets somewhere (no clue if anyone is actually repackaging them for sale)... The new Leisure Suit Larry "reboot" games are just better off avoided at all costs. They're beyond awful and make the originals look incredibly classy, subtle, and tasteful (which says a lot IMHO).

      The genre is enjoying a lot of renewed interest, but not enough (apparently) to justify major developers doing anything other than yet another clone of DDR, Guitar Hero, or Call of Duty. Maybe the Double Fine Kickstarter will wake the Industry and Media up. I haven't seen one word about either of these efforts on and they tend to jump on these sorts of things in the way that a kitten jumps on a toy full of catnip.
      • by Ihmhi ( 1206036 )

        What baffles me on Point & Click games is this: why the hell aren't there more of them on phones?

        Any of the original turn-based games that don't require any realtime movement (Ogre Tactics, Fallout, Myst, SWAT 2, etc.) are PERFECT for the phone platform. Hell, add a zoom function and rebind the key controls and you're pretty damn set. I'd much rather play a Myst game than Bejeweled on a phone. Then, my only concern would be throwing my phone out the window instead of throwing my whole PC.

    • I think that they will be successful - 45% funded and 34 days to go. I put my $15 in!
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by devilspgd ( 652955 )

      Less than 1% of the desktop market can't justify development for an entire alternate platform?

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Go and see "total payments by platform", I see more than 1% for Linux.

        • Re:Linux... (Score:4, Informative)

          by GrumpySteen ( 1250194 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @07:18PM (#39345843)

          Going by the total payments chart, they should primarily develop for Windows first since it's nearly 3/4 of the payments. After Windows, they should develop for Mac since it's slightly more than half of the non-Windows payments. Linux, even though it's more than 1% of the total payments, should still be dead last in their list of priorities since the evidence given suggests that it will give the lowest return on an investment.

          And that's pretty much what they announced, isn't it? Windows first, Mac of funding reaches X amount, "other platforms" if funding allows.

          • Re:Linux... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by houstonbofh ( 602064 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @11:06PM (#39348059)
            God knows you would not want to develop a cross platform game from the get go and save on the porting fees to almost double you revenue over Windows... That's just crazy talk...

            Also, I (and I am really not that special in this) will no longer spend money on a promise. When it has Linux support, I will consider spending money. If they say it might if we reach some goal we will not tell you about, nope... Seen that lie a few too many times.
          • by rioki ( 1328185 )

            There are more benefits from porting games to MacOS and Linux aside from the Sales...

            In the words Jeff from Wolfire: Why you should support Mac OS X and Linux []

            • While the article you linked has some interesting points (and some ridiculous ones), it's irrelevant.

              Kickstarter is all or nothing. If the campaign doesn't meat the funding goal, no money is collected. It makes sense to try to appeal to the largest crowd.

              You seem to be making one of two arguments:

              1) They should have set the funding goal at $1.4 million (the level required for Windows and Mac versions) and not created any game at all if they didn't reach it.

              2) They should have promised the Mac version at $

              • No, he's saying that they should:

                3. Develop for Mac and Windows simultaneously. It's not even hard. Write OpenAL and OpenGL plugins to your game engine, a few cocoa-specific parts so the program behaves nice in an iOS environment, problem solved! And Linux port is then even easier (since OpenAL/OpenGL already exists, all you need are a few Linux-specific hooks). I bet both would take one Mac expert about 2 months of work to write new plugins to the engine, at the maximum.

                It's not an either-or proposition, a

                • And that Mac expert is going to spend two months working for free, right? And whoever does testing and QA for the Mac version will work for free too, right? No extra funding required!

                  That's not how the real world works, of course, and they need more funding (which it appears they will get) to be able to produce Mac and Linux versions.

                  • That mac expert will not work for free, no. Nor is he expected to. He will cost around USD 10 000 - which is peanuts compared to 50-100% increased revenue.

                    • You obviously don't understand the concept of a Kickstarter campaign and I'm not going to bother trying to explain it.

                    • Oh, I do understand the concept of a kickstarter campaign. But I was under the impression kickstarter was just for funding the game creation, not ongoing costs post-release?

                      It's still 10k of 900k for a cross-platform game (as opposed to DirectX) that can run on Wii, PS3, Android, iPhone, Mac and Linux as well as Windows and XBox 360, and it requires very little extra money. Sure, you need to invest in a couple of extra drivers and add an abstraction layer, but today you add that abstraction layer in either

        • I love the Humble Indie Bundles and buy all of them for Linux. But look at total Linux revenue, period from the humble bundles. A huge number of games wouldn't cover the expense of porting the game to Linux and supporting it for that kind of money - and of course the money listed there is gross revenue, not net.

          When the Humble Bundles are consistently bringing in $5 million in Linux purchases, things might change. Until then, we're just dreaming.
      • by eldorel ( 828471 )

        Less than 1% of the desktop market can't justify development for an entire alternate platform?

        Maybe not, but if you plan ahead and use platform agnostic development practices porting or running on other platforms is no where near as hard as it used to be.

        1% of the market might not be enough to develop a completely separate version if you're using directx, but opengl based games can be ported with very little headache with a little bit of advanced planning.

        Just look at the humble bundle packs success. Sure, access to 1% of the market is not worth it but virtually assured sales to 0.5% of the ma

        • Developing cross-platform is likely not as expensive/difficult as it once was in terms of gaming, this is true. However, there's more than development. The packaging (digital or the digital components of the physical, including the installer, patch management system, etc), QA and other resources don't scale and require significant investments for additional platforms.

          More important is the fact that although a larger than average percentage of Linux users might be gamers (and I've never seen any stats either

      • Less than 1% of the desktop market can't justify development for an entire alternate platform?


        • *cough*Desktop*cough*

          • *cough*UbuntuForAndroid*cough*

            We can go on all night. And the OS companies feel that the phone/tablet/desktop market is converging. Just look at Gnome 3 Unity, Win 8, and the direction OSX is going.
            • My point is that I was very specifically addressing only desktop installations. It's entirely possible that Android will have a presence in the desktop world in the future, but today, that's approximately 0% of existing desktop installs.

      • If you use a cross-platform framework/language/engine, porting to a second platform can be under 1% of the cost. Some just make sure they use wine-compatible stuff, and package their game with a certain version of wine. There's almost-zero cost there.

        • I touched on that in another reply. Development isn't as significant but performing QA, building installers, upgrade/patch management and similar doesn't scale at all and must be done from scratch on each platform so the ROI needs to be significant.

          Worse, how many Linux gamers don't have access to another supported platform already? What good is it if you pull off 1% of your sales on Linux if 90% of those were a lost sale on another platform?

          • My main desktop and my main laptop both run linux, and all the other systems I use, run BSD, so I don't have access to "other supported platforms".
            Most non-geek linux-users won't have more than a single PC either.

            As for installers, etc, desura might be an interesting choice for them, they've got their work cut out for them.

      • Less than 1% of the desktop market can't justify development for an entire alternate platform?

        Except that the development was already paid, in full, and Linux support was a requested by many backers. What the investors demand will be taken into lot more consideration then some comments on an Internet forum. That is why this kickstarter project is different.

        Also, Linux is more then 1% of the desktops but there is no point debating that with someone that still think this is 1995.

        • Well, this article indicated it's less than 2%: []

          Nothing against Linux, I use it and have installed it on other's computers, but it's extremely niche for the desktop.

          Also, listening to investor demand? There's no accountability to Kickstarter, you don't become a chairman of the board by donating $15.

          • Even if it's up to 2% desktop use, my argument still stands.

            At $DAYJOB we don't really look at OSX or Linux because, even combined, they're such a tiny portion of the SMB market that even if we did invest the time to develop cross-platform, it wouldn't pay for the ongoing QA and support. (Plus we're a .NET shop and our product works with, although doesn't require, Active Directory, so the effort would be non-trivial for a less than ideal result)

            I'm not a huge Linux fan myself, but I have a few Linux boxes t

            • Still, I can't see running it as a primary desktop for anyone but a fan of Linux or in an extremely locked down environment.

              My fiancée runs it, and she is finished her teaching degree, with a minor of social science. And she is no fan, or even techie... It just doesn't crash as much as windows did.

              Also, all of the percentage numbers are going to be off. For example, I have 3 systems here that are counted as Windows sales, but only run Linux. I also have a few systems that report as Windows in the browser refer tags for badly written websites. The only real information is the Humble Indie Bundle where Linux is 20% - 25

            • With the way the world is trending, you may want to review some of those decisions.

              Active Directory is where large organizations keep their user and site information, which is why Macs and Linux can talk to it too.
              Increasing sales of non-Windows devices (Mac, iOS, Android, etc.) at the same time as the Windows market is shrinking show that people are not nearly as locked into Windows as the industry once thought.

              The developers that put in place a strategy today that is platform-agnostic will be the winners

            • My lady uses Ubuntu now and I have to answer about 10% as many questions, and take over and fix something about 1/20 as often, as compared to when she was using the Windows XP that came with her Vostro 1500. The system runs quieter and cooler and seems faster.

              I still use Windows in a virtual machine, but only to run games. All the productivity-type software I use now has a plausible alternative.

              Linux is an ideal option for a primary desktop in any context because it is so much less likely to get owned, and

    • without a commitment to support Linux at release. I don't run Windows, and hoping to use wine as a kludge isn't something I'm willing to pay for.

    • by zrbyte ( 1666979 )
      With Double Fine Adventure [] you get

      The finished game in all of its awesome glory DRM free on PC, Mac, and Linux, or via Steam for PC and Mac, exclusive access to the Beta on Steam...

      if you donate 15 USD or more.

    • look on the bright side, if you buy in for $15 now you get a DRM-free copy (hopefully this means no steam, but I do have steam if needed to download it, and steam does run on Linux) which will probably work in wine and/or vmware player before long.

    • One of the considerations that you should have choosing Linux as a gamer, is that it's poorly supported as a gaming platform. That's the reality as it stands now, it may change eventually.
  • Matt Barton (Score:4, Informative)

    by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:18PM (#39345067) Journal

    Anyone who's not familiar with Matt should definitely check out his podcast. He has a lot of great interviews with real elders of gaming. The names range from Scott Adams to John Romero. And he just lets them reminisce. If you're interested in the development of your favorite classic games, or the personal histories of game design greats, or way the game industry has changed over the past 30 years, you'll get some great perspectives from watching Matt Chat.

  • by Ionized ( 170001 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:21PM (#39345099) Journal

    it seems that in american games anyways, the true RPG has gone the way of the dodo, and all we get now are FPS-RPG hybrids. while fallout 3 was fine, it was no fallout 1 or 2. i LIKE turn based top down gameplay. It's relaxing, and i can see everything thats going on easily.

    i am VERY interested in seeing where this goes.

    • by phoenix_rizzen ( 256998 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:38PM (#39345349)

      Hear hear!!

      I miss good ol' fashioned turn-based role-playing games, like the old SSI ADnD-based games (Pools of Twilight, Pools of Radiance, etc).

      "RPGs" nowadays are more hack'n slash, mouse-button mashfests than anything else (WoW, Diablo, Icewind Dale, etc).

      I don't want to play a twitch-reaction game. I want to control a party of characters and take my time thinking about how to use their various skills together against large groups of enemies. I want turn-based action.

      If I wanted a FPS (which I don't, can't stand them), I'd buy one. But I want an RPG. When was the last time you played a paper-n-pencil RPG where it was "whoever can roll the fastest gets to attach"? It's all turn-based.

      Bring back the turn-based RPGs!!

      • Not arguing with your point but you have a pretty liberal definition of 'nowadays'.
        Icewind Dale was released twelve years ago, as was the last iteration of Diablo (not that I'm claiming the new one would be much different).

        • I gave up on RPGs on the PC after Icewind Dale, and haven't seen/heard anything since to make it worthwhile trying anything.

    • by Zaelath ( 2588189 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:42PM (#39345409)
      I miss the writing from Fallout 2, the presentation was secondary for me, though I did like turn based combat over twitch/Diablo mashing. That said, when I hear "Interplay" I hear Python's "Run away! Run away!" line. They run projects like everyone at the top has the programming skill of Jobs, the design asthetic of Gates and the management style of a helicopter parent.
      • If you've never read the Fallout Bible (pdfs here []), I highly recommend it. It's pretty much a giant FAQ about the development of the game done by Chris Avellone, one of the designers of Fallout 3 and the defunct Van Buren (what was supposed to be Fallout 3). Lots of cool bits of trivia and ideas which didn't make it into the game.
    • by UpnAtom ( 551727 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:51PM (#39345507) Homepage

      Better than isometric is the upcoming XCOM from Firaxis. []

      You might also be interested in my short post on Temple of Elemental Evil the other day: []

      • by Ionized ( 170001 )

        I had no idea they were remaking xcom, holy crap. i am giddy with excitement. now i just need someone to make another game like planescape:torment and the triumvirate will be complete...

        • What's left of Team Torment is thinking about it []. Chris Avellone, the mastermind behind PS:T, would like to make it []. You might want to let him know yourself how you feel. I would guess that the success or failure of Brian Fargo's attempt will affect their decision on whether or not to do their own kickstart funded sequel-in-spirit to Planescape: Torment.

        • Don't get too giddy. They're limiting max deployment size to six members. No more mowing down a destructible level with fourteen squaddies armed with laser pistols and rocket launchers (nothing better than shooting blindly into the dark and hearing a Sectoid death groan). And one base. I'm okay with the time unit change, and the cinematics, but 4-6 squaddies and no robot tanks? If I down an alien craft in America, and my one base is in Turkey, I have to let the enemy craft go due to time constraints?
        • 2k Games (Borderlands, Bioshock) + Firaxis (Civ). I really, really cannot wait. I love the idea of the 'glam cam', I think it will blend the lines between action FPS and tactical turn based. The youtube vid looks so slick. If they keep a lot of the research, manufacture and soldier development in, and add in more tactical (like their example of different types of cover) options, I'll be buying this game on day 1, not waiting for sales, or second hand copy.

          This is one of those games that is so rare, in that

      • by stjobe ( 78285 )

        Better than isometric is the upcoming XCOM from Firaxis. []

        Oh wow. Oh yeah. Hell yeah!

      • It seems like they're keeping the gameplay and just adding some shiny graphical elements... ... which is totally fucking awesome!

        My laundry list for a remake would also include multiplayer (2 squads going after aliens or one player is the aliens one is the human, or x number of players where each player controls one soldier and one is the base commander) oh god I want this game now please.

    • I went in for $50 on this because I bet I'd enjoy the hell out of it.

      For those wondering how the funding works it is all through You authorize a payment in a given amount and Amazon will tell you the valid dates. If the funding goal is reached, Kickstarter tells Amazon to collect the payments, and they charge you account. If not, no charge is made. So no worries about CC fraud or any of that, Amazon is handling the payment auth.

      Only real risk would be that the developers would never deliver the

    • You said it. I miss the old styles of games in general - more complex, more challenging, and really imaginative. It's really interesting what's happening with indie games now, since the market is letting people do well by going back to these roots.
    • It seems strange to criticize FPS-RPGs, as being "not true RPGs" since from the ancient history of RPG lots of the successful ones have been FPS: Bard's Tale series, Dungeon Master and Chaos Strikes Back, Wizardry series, Might&Magic series, Black Crypt, Eye of the Beholder series, etc. True, they only had a pseudo 3D, reduced degrees of freedom, but those were the technical constraints of the time. I always liked the top down RPGs, like the Ultima series, but Fallout 1 and 2 do not fall under that cat
      • by Ionized ( 170001 )

        [turn-based out of combat? what a pain that would be!]

        with few exceptions, the old games you speak of were turn based, so while they are FP, it would be a far stretch to call them S - there are no shooter / fast paced / twitch elements to them.

        fallout 3, oblivion, skyrim - the combat in those is actually FPS in nature. yes, VATS was a nice option to get the tactical feel back, and i'm not saying fallout 3 was a bad game - i enjoyed it quite a lot - but the gameplay definitely had a very different feel, for

      • FPS means first person SHOOTER.

        Even though Bard's Tale & Wizardry (the only ones I'm very familiar with) have first person viewpoint (wireframe 3D in Wizardry in the dungeons), the gameplay is turn-based.

        BTW, I realize it wasn't done by Interplay, but by Brian Fargo, the PS2 Bard's Tale "reimagining" was very fun to play. (It doesn't fit with the turn based gameplay, however.)

  • by LordZardoz ( 155141 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @06:25PM (#39345155)

    There is a reason that Starcraft 2 took about 12 years to show up.

    Any given game (and this probably applies to movies and to TV to some extent) will have an initial title that proves the concept as being worth pursuing, followed by a title that effectively represents the pinnacle of the genre. For 3d Shooters you had Wolfenstien which led to Doom. For MMO's you initially had Ultima online, which gave way to Everquest, and in turn gave way to World of Warcraft. And for RTS games you had Dune which led to Warcraft 2 which led to Starcraft.

    Once you have that definitive product, competitors start to back off, realizing that they have no chance to dethrone the reigning king of the genre. The expectations of the fans keep escalating, and since you can never please everyone, you have fans of the genre start to splinter off, or perhaps just get bored. Since sales fall off, the resources for sequels fall off, and that basically buries the genre.

    The endgame is that the creators of the 'pinnacle' product eventually stop making new iterations, and that the competitors have usually abandoned that pursuit some time before that point. Eventually no one is making new games in that genre. Metaphorically, the challengers stopped playing the game when it was too difficult to win at it, and the champion stopped only because the rewards for victory were no longer enough to justify the effort.

    But the market for that genre still exists, and after about 10 years, a new generation is available to exploit. If the original concept was strong enough, the fans are probably hungry enough that a new iteration should be successful.


    • by Dan667 ( 564390 )
      If Fargo is successful in raising the money I think this really points to the fact the publishers may not know what they are doing as well as they think they do. A huge market they are not servicing and appear to have no visibility to? Not good business.
    • by Qzukk ( 229616 )

      But the market for that genre still exists, and after about 10 years, a new generation is available to exploit. If the original concept was strong enough, the fans are probably hungry enough that a new iteration should be successful

      I think this is what Kickstarter is showing it excels at. When the public is ready, the project will succeed, and that readiness will be demonstrated by the strength of cash on hand rather than the begging and ranting of some crazy fan.

    • I disagree with your overall assessment. In fact, I find most of these 'pinnacles' to be less interesting than the originals. Originality and a new take on things trumps everything in my book.

    • "There is a reason that Starcraft 2 took about 12 years to show up."

      The reason it took 12 years for SC2 to show up was world of warcraft was a success even blizzard didn't predict. They predicted they'd get something like 400,000 consistent subs, and it shot up into millions. Warcraft is what put Starcraft and diablo sequels on the backburner, it wasn't because other game companies couldn't compete in the space. We had Company of heroes, dawn of war and supreme commander. All valiant attempts in the RTS

    • by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @08:46PM (#39346651)

      For one, I'd say that this concept of the second game being the "pinnacle" is very flawed. The best example is MMOs. Ultima wasn't the first MMO, nor was EQ the pinnacle. If anything is to be called the pinnacle it would be WoW. Also it isn't like all genres die out either. Turn based strategy games are still going strong. Heard of Civilization 5? AAA title, released last year. How about Total War: Shogun 2. It is not nearly as large a genre as shooters, but it isn't dead by a long shot, and isn't even a "just indie" market.

      For that matter sometimes things will have a pinnacle, and then another later. Many TBS fans said Civ 2 was the pinnacle. They didn't care for Civ 3 as much, nor many other games that came after Civ 2. Then Civ 4 hit and man. Best. Civ. EVAR. Another pinnacle, better than the last. It isn't as though things peak and then are on a death spiral after that.

      Some genres die out, but often that is just due to the companies that are involved in them sucking. Many companies will have run off to some new things ignoring it. The companies that stay and try for the niche do a shit job, release games nobody likes, and that leads to a feedback cycle where nobody wants to back the projects because they perceive them as making no money.

      In terms of this game, I think it has quite a good chance at success. People have shown a love for old school type RPGs, and for TBT games (Frozen Synapse did quite well, indy TBT title all combat). The people behind it are people who know what they are doing, they are people with real successful games to their credit.

      Also Starcraft 2 took so long because:

      1) Blizzard is really slow at development, for a number of reasons.

      2) They got even slower because of WoW, which was all consuming with them for awhile.

      There have been a bunch of RTS games since Starcraft 2, many of which have done real well.

      • The 'pinnacle' game is not necessarily going to be the 2nd. It might come later, or perhaps the first game stands up as the pinnacle. With the Civ games, the later one replaces the older one in the series, and that is just iterating on their own success.

        Also, there are not many developers going head to head with the Civ series these days, is there?

        In any case, every successful genre seems to reach a point where a particular game is considered the standard to measure other games of that type against, and of

  • I've played Wasteland through probably half a dozen times, and I will continue to every few years when the urge strikes. It was one of the best RPG's of it's time, with a really great story. If this sequel happens, it's definitely worth playing if you like this sort of thing.
    • by llamalad ( 12917 )


      This is outstanding news.

      I'm so delighted with this, in fact that the first thing I did (after buying in at kickstarter) is dust off my slashdot login so I could post saying that. ^

    • Wasteland II has been an idea kicking around for 20 years in one form or another. For a long time, most people thought that Fallout was to be the successor.

      Guess that isn't the case now.

      Here's to carving up robots with your proton ax!

    • by Aladrin ( 926209 )

      I posted news of this kickstarter campaign to Facebook and my *sister* replied, "We played the **** out of Wasteland!"

      Wasteland has the distinction of being the one game from my childhood that was too hard to beat, AND that I came back years later to finally beat it when I had the skills. I can't think of another game that I came back to beat later. It's definitely in my top 5, if not top 2 games from childhood.

      I can't freaking wait. :D

  • No Linux support? (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by Omnifarious ( 11933 ) *

    Their willingness to support Linux (and Tim Shafer's offbeat and silly style) is one of the reasons I became a backer of the Double Fine Adventure. Linux support makes me about 10 times more likely to spend money on a game, and I haven't bought a PC-only game in about 6 years because I don't run Windows. Seriously. Now this guy comes in, wants more money, and only grudgingly offers the possibility of an OS X port if they get enough money.

    Nope, sorry.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by yodleboy ( 982200 )
      Run a VM or dual boot already. The cost of a copy of Windows is far less than any game console and you get to run the hundreds of Windows only games out there natively. Having Windows in a VM doesn't obligate you to use it for everything. Supporting linux is admirable, but who's the loser with this linux or nothing attitude? Not the game publishers. Sending a message only works when there are enough people to be heard.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by houstonbofh ( 602064 )
        I think you miss the point. I (and three others so far in this thread) will not do this. There is only so much I will pay for a game. Part of that is cash, and part of that is bullshit. Installing a VM or a dual boot of Windows just to play a game that will probably only hold my interest for a month, if that, is way to high on the bullshit scale. Admittedly, fighting PulseAudio problems is on the bullshit scale as well, but much lower than dealing with Windows. I will just stick to Linux games... Beli
        • It's way way easier to install Windows in a virtual machine (free vmware player) than it is to get a lot of Linux games to work. About a third of what I've got in humble bundles doesn't run on Ubuntu, which is the most popular distribution there is! I just get an error. Haven't gone back to check on updates, because I have so many games to play anyway... usually on Windows.

      • Where am I going to get a copy of Windows to run in the VM? Not to mention that's a pretty huge pain.

        • Windows 7 home premium on for $109. Have you installed Windows 7? I've installed on 5 PC's and you pretty much start it and walk away for an hour or so. When you come back you have an OS, can play any windows game and a lot of console games that get ported to windows for far less than the cost of a console. A couple of hours done once to install and set up and you're done. Compare that with what seems like the need to fart around with WINE and such for every game. Play enough games and you
          • If I buy it, I'm giving money to Microsoft. And that's not OK by me. Yes, they're nearly irrelevant nowadays. But they still haven't changed the behaviors that make them objectionable to give my business to.

  • It was called Fountain of Dreams. I remember playing it and found that the quality was much lower than Wasteland, but I was glad to have any sequel to begin with. My memory is not as clear as back then, but was that the one where you played a bunch of rangers and could mutate as you wandered the wasteland?

    (Wasteland was followed in 1990 by a less-successful intended sequel, Fountain of Dreams, set in post-war Florida. [] )

    Not saying that I wouldn't

  • by finlandia1869 ( 1001985 ) on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @08:05PM (#39346263)
    Look at Civ or Galactic Civilizations. Those non-FPS/RTS games were turn-based and required thought and planning. Old RPGs are the same way. People like me who grew up with Wasteland and its contemporaries miss the engagement and cleverness. I'm not interested in a fast twitch game and am willing to pay for a game that makes me think and spend time to beat. It's merely a bonus that it's a sequel to one of the all time greats that we're talking about. I'm contributing tonight and then I'm going to fire up my old copy of Wasteland and go see how little firepower I can beat Guardian Citadel with this time. Exploded blood sausage ftw!
  • Would much rather have seen a sequel to Starflight!

    And with none of this 2D grassroots bs, either. But I would settle for Oolite grade 3D space travel as long as it has decent storyline and atmospheric reentry sequences with super-fine planetary exploration missions.

    I lost way more than 40hrs to both Starflight and the sequel each.

  • I'm interested to see where this will all lead. The market just made a huge statement that we still want adventure games, and it's now showing that we want isometric, turn-based RPGs. Hopefully this will lead to widespread awesomeness.
  • Holy god damn Mike Morgan is going to be making the music for this! His soundtracks for Fallout I and II were the most atmospheric and appropriate soundtracks for any games ever.
  • I checked out good old games and they don't have the title. Is there a good/easy/legal way to play this on a modern system? I was a huge fan of bards tale 1 and 2 and fallout 1/2/3 but somehow I managed to miss wasteland back in the day. I'd love a crack at it before the new one comes out.

"This is lemma 1.1. We start a new chapter so the numbers all go back to one." -- Prof. Seager, C&O 351