Post by Dan @ 05:51pm 28/03/12 | 8 Comments
As the game has already been funded by fans of this very specific type of game (now currently over US$1.6million), the developer has the luxury of not needing to comprimise core-targetted features in order to cater accessibility to a broader market.
Latest Comments
8 Comments
Show
Follow Us
Advertisement
Log In
Posted 08:04pm 28/3/12
Posted 09:01pm 28/3/12
Time will tell.
(also, having missed 'Wasteland' is it worth revisiting? I don't mind dated games, but if it's Zork worthy I might give it a miss...)
Posted 09:19pm 28/3/12
Posted 10:49pm 28/3/12
Posted 11:23pm 28/3/12
It's worth a spin for nostalgia sake, as long as you don't expect too much.
Think Ultima IV & Bard's Tale III crossed with Fallout.
I usually find delving that far back into RPG history can be frustrating. Not because the games are necessarily bad, but because of all the conveniences and nuances added to later RPGs that have a tendency to spoil the player.
Posted 12:05am 29/3/12
Fallout 1&2 will give you a much better experience then Wasteland. Wasteland was great back in its day, but that day was long ago.
Posted 01:07am 29/3/12
No doubt, but the comparison is unfair as there was nearly 10 years between releases.
Wasteland is from the C64/386/DOS3.3 era and Fallout games were Windows 95/98 around when the Pentium II debuted.
Posted 09:41am 29/3/12