If I remember right, initially they were only asking for $1 million for WL2. So they got almost three times what they were asking for and still put out a buggy unbalanced game. That's why I won't give them any more of my money.

I guess so. But I really don't like it. Unless of course they didn't actually make enough on W2 to make the third game without the crowdfunding. Ah well, it's not my problem. I'm not giving them a dime untill the game is ready.

Which is fair. I'm more apprehensive about them using Fig, myself. >_>

Personally, I have a feeling that even though Wasteland 2 did relatively well, it wasn't enough to finance a full-fledged sequel. Add to that that InXile has two other projects still in development and all the cost related to that (among them Bard's Tale IV, whose campaign probably didn't meet the expectations of the studio at all). So I'm not surprised to see that Wasteland 3 is gonna be another crowdfunding campaign.

This is my concern with the timing on this. I'm already a backer on Torment and Bards Tale. How about we release one of those before we start a new crowdfunding campaign?

I believe Fargo already explained that in a few interviews. If I remember correctly, his goal is to avoid the growth/shrink cycle that most smaller developers have to stick to if they only work on one game at a time. In order to give his employees more stable work, the idea was to start games in sequence so that once certain work groups were done with one game, they could start working on another.

Most games are done but for polish months before release. If you don't start a new project, then you've either got to find a way to finance having those employees sit on their thumbs, or you need to find them new work. Starting a new game is probably the best way to keep things rolling; I have no worry that Torment will be delayed if Wasteland 3 ramps up, because the one is nearly done and the other just beginning; they don't overlap much at all in work requirements. And Bard's Tale is all written; no reason you couldn't let a few of the engine programmers start the litany of "if()" statements to get the new game rolling into alpha.

Blech. Wasteland 2 was a dull and lifeless experience for me.

hahaha ... shitty, greedy inxile won't see any money from me.

Why would they use Mr. Shitface's platform? They had huge success on kickstarter until now.

Fargo is one of fig's founders, that's why.

This still needs to be confirmed but one of articles explicitly mentions exclusive content such as quests and areas which will only be accessible if you have at least one other human player joining the game. Which I could imagine would be quite the deal breaker for a lot of people.

Will also be interesting to see if the campaign will be able to raise the amount of dosh they're asking for considering how inXile basically turned the PC version of WL2 into a shitty console port courtesy of the DC.

I liked Wasteland 2, but I'm really not interested in using Fig. I'm also a bit wary about the multiplayer thing, hopefully it'll be implemented well, but I remember many games where the single player part was sacrificed in favor of multiplayer.

I guess I'll wait until release to make a decision instead of backing the game this time.

"As with previous inXile games, Wasteland 3 will be crowdfunded. But it's ditching Kickstarter in favour of Fig, the program set up by video game developers including Double Fine's Tim Schafer that lets people not just back projects, but invest in them. (inXile's Brian Fargo is on the Fig advisory board.)"

Double Fine and their track record with money?. Come on!!......

"The Wasteland 3 Fig campaign launches next week, 5th October, with a funding target of $2.75m. Of that, $2.25m is the maximum inXile will take for equity. The minimum investment is $1000, but if you want to simply back the project you can do so at a much smaller amount."

Where does the rest go?. Sounds like certain game devs are getting a bit greedy.

" The party-based post-apocalyptic role-playing game sequel is set for launch on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One at the same time as PC, Mac and Linux."

On consoles at the same time --- compromised game for the sake of those piece of shite consoles?.

I think the multiplayer component is probably the result of Fargo looking at what Larian has been doing with Divinity. Provided it doesn't weaken the single player experience, I welcome it - it would be nice to have more than one contemporary choice when it comes to playing cRPGs with others.

I really don't want people I'm not currently playing with affecting my playthrough though. :l

deleted

Ah, you mean something ala Dark Souls? I don't think that's very likely to happen. Here's a fresh interview where Fargo confirms my guess and names Divinity: OS as the inspiration (with the mandatory tip of the hat to BG).

Full quote: