Review: Wasteland 3 (PS4)

NB I completed my playthrough of this on the PS5, as my first (PS4) attempt was somewhat set back by the console breaking. 

Wasteland 3 is a post-apocalyptic RPG set in the USA (Colorado, specifically). It’s got a grim sense of humour throughout, a six-man party, and a very interesting setup for combat and non-combat skills, plus plenty of decisions to make. But is it a good game?

Gameplay

The combat of Wasteland 3 will be easily recognisable to anyone who’s enjoyed XCOM or XCOM 2, but does handle things differently enough to set it apart. For those unaware, this style involves a turn-based approach on a grid, with the entirety of one side progressing at once, which means getting the jump on enemies is worth a lot. Movement and actions, such as firing weapons or throwing grenades, consume AP (action points).

However, whereas XCOM 2 has two AP and that’s it, Wasteland 3 has a more nuanced system with characters capable of having more or less AP depending on stats, and different weapons consuming different amounts. Heavy weapons and sniper rifles consume almost a whole AP bar, whereas shotguns and pistols can be fired multiple times in a single round without difficulty. This increases flexibility and makes the choice of weaponry (a mix through the squad is a good idea) crucial. In addition to the player and enemy sides, you may have a friendly turn, which will be your non-controlled allies such as animal followers and extra chaps (or robots) you pick up along the way.

On standard difficulty I found the combat to be sharp enough I needed to stay awake but, for the most part, usually not too challenging. That said, I had several hours in my initial borked playthrough as experience so I wasn’t diving in fresh and that may’ve smoothed my path a bit. Nevertheless, combat is fun and if you take it for granted you can easily end up in trouble. This is a big Wasteland 3 review highlight.

Out of combat players have multiple significant decisions to make regarding who lives and dies, and who you help, or not. You can also unlock multiple new dialogue options by proficiency in various skills, most commonly the hard ass/kiss ass skills. The game does a good job of ensuring you can be as nice or dickish as you like.

 

Story

Post-apocalypse is a genre I can really take or leave, but I still liked Wasteland 3 a lot, which is a testament to how well it’s written. There are plenty of grisly moments and daft comedy, which both work well.

You play as the leaders (even if playing solo you make two characters at the get go) of Team November. And by leaders, I mean survivors, because the other four dozen get killed in the intro. Hailing from Arizona, you’re in Colorado at the invitation of the state’s ruler, the Patriarch. He’s got supplies which the Rangers desperately need, all you need to do is capture his kids and stop them causing problems. But things may not be so simple… The Patriarch’s children are Valor, Victory, and Liberty, or Nerd, Psycho, and Tyrant if you want to know their respective personalities.

Beyond this core of the game there are a good number of side quests, exploring the map will throw up some fun gems you can easily miss (I especially liked paying Santa a visit), and each major quest can go down various ways. It’s pretty good, with some interesting twists that I won’t spoil.

Companions could be better, though. I liked Lucia quite a lot, but the other (non-player made) companions stayed pretty much undeveloped through the story. They will leave if you act contrary to their interests, apparently.

 

Sound

In most areas good, this is sometimes excellent. One stand-out example was when I loaded up a game in the world map and the radio played some random nonsense. This happened and it was a psycho with a chainsaw and screaming in the background, which was very well done (although not great for those who are squeamish). Flamethrowers, explosions, gunfire, ambient effects, and voice acting are all either good or very good.

The music deserves a special mention as there are a small number of fights (including one in the intro area) that have their own excellent tracks, as does one (optional) fight that can lead to a new companion. The latter was a rare occasion when I deliberately paused mid-fight just to listen to the music a bit more.

 

Graphics

As an isometric RPG this is not the biggest deal in the world, but the graphics get the job done without being spectacular. Occasionally you see major characters (the Patriarch, for example) up close and they’ll look ok, but not amazing.

 

Bugs and Other Problems

There were some bugs. I had a small number of crashes, perhaps three or so in an entire playthrough (I’d guess perhaps 30 hours total, can’t be sure). In addition, I once got stuck in combat and the enemy turn just wouldn’t start. That’s not ideal.

 

Replayability

There are two ways this game offers good replayability: difficulty and choices. The difficulty has several basic levels making combat easier or harder, but with some degree of customization covering things like permanent character death and friendly fire (NB even when this is off, you’ll be affected by AoE stuff so don’t throw a Molotov on your animal follower or you’ll end up with a hotdog).

Choices are plentiful and missions can often have multiple outcomes. Sometimes failure to attend to a matter can lead to it being resolved in your absence (I have one confirmed case of this, unsure if other things can happen this way). And certain missions can only be completed if you ignore an alternative, which will have consequences.

 

Conclusion

Wasteland 3 is not flawless. It has the odd bug and could perhaps be a little longer (playtime is perhaps around 25-30 hours, I think). But it has fantastic combat, engaging missions with multiple outcomes, and the approach to skills is excellent as all of them are useful and deciding where to spend points (and which perks to get) will alter your playthrough significantly. It’s a very good game indeed.

 

Thaddeus

Returning to Retribution Falls: Tales of the Ketty Jay (book one), by Chris Wooding

  

It’s been over a decade since I last read Retribution Falls, reviewed here. I always had fond memories of it, and decided to revisit the series. Would time have changed my mind? 

No. In fact, it was even better than I remembered. Already sinking my teeth heartily into the daring meal of adventure, engaging characters, and a very well put together plot (cunning twists that make sense in the world that’s established), this was perfect when the UK decided to cosplay as Jamaica on a hot day. Unable to work, I spent hours more reading than usual and read three-quarters of the book over a two day period.

It was great, just what I needed, and eminently enjoyable. The steampunk (if I’m referring to the right genre, with lever-action shotguns, airships, and a mix of gas, oil, and electrical lighting) genre is not one I read too much, Emperor’s Edge probably being the only other series that falls into the category but the world is very well realised and comes across effortlessly. Likewise, while Frey, the captain, is the main character every crewman is fleshed out and a couple (Jez and Crake) are especially well-developed.

There’s wry humour amid a serious story, dramatic twists and turns alongside character development. It’s a cracking book and a great start to a fantastic series. It’ll be interesting for me to re-read my own review from some time ago, but right now I’m very glad that, as I try and clear out old books, I hung onto the Tales of the Ketty Jay series. It’s top stuff.

 

Thaddeus

Half A War (Shattered Sea book 3), by Joe Abercrombie

Reading multiple books and waiting until I finish a historical trilogy to review that has led to quiet the hiatus in blogging, so I thought I’d post this before Britain melts on Monday and Tuesday. 

Half A War is the third and final part of Joe Abercrombie’s Shattered Sea trilogy, and I liked it a lot. Those who have bought the first two books need have no worries on the final part proving lacklustre. Recurring characters build on the previous two books, and we have a new POV character in the form of Princess/Queen Skara, whose kingdom gets ruined by the High King and forces her to flee to the nascent alliance between old enemies Vansterland and Gettland. 

The pace moves along at a good rate, neither flitting so rapidly there’s no space to breathe nor being slow and turgid (there is a prolonged period in one place but that fits in with the story and is contrasted by a journey elsewhere). 

Downsides are few. I didn’t especially like one small twist at the end (both obvious and slightly disappointing the way it happened but it doesn’t alter anything significantly). If you prefer more complex stories then the relative simplicity may put you off but personally I found this an enjoyable, engaging, and effortless read that I consumed pretty quickly (not something that’s always the case these days). 

I've kept this pretty brief as it's the third entry so spoilers are more annoying and it's pretty much a buy or avoid for those who've read earlier books in the series.

So, I recommend this but, obviously, after the first two books. Book 2 is reviewed here, and book 1 is reviewed here.

 

For those wondering, I’m currently re-reading The Inheritance of Rome by Chris Wickham, Retribution Falls by Chris Wooding (which I may review if I haven’t already as I read it a long time ago), and the final part in a Seleukid history trilogy by John D. Grainger, which I will review on a collective basis.

Thaddeus

Alternative Civ Leaders

Been playing a spot of Civilization VI lately. Its final expansion came out a while ago and work seems to be underway on Civ VII, which made me think of some potential leader changes.

I disliked a few for historical inaccuracy in VI. Victoria was not Queen of the English, but the British (especially daft as if they wanted a female English leader then Elizabeth I is an obvious candidate). Saladin wasn’t Arabic, he was Kurdish (although he did reign over Arabs so this is more accurate, although ironic).

On the flipside, I was surprised and pleased they went with Basil II for the Byzantine Empire (which should be the Eastern Roman Empire) and Trajan over Caesar for Rome.

My experience with the main Civ games is VI and II (which came out around 1999 or thereabouts). So it’s entirely possible that I’ll be mentioning people who had leader roles before.

 

France – Philip Augustus

I’ve never actually read books specifically on French history (excepting the Albigensian Crusade) but reading English medieval history does necessarily involve a lot of French stuff, mostly in warfare. I’ve always quite liked Philip Augustus, whose shrewd approach brilliantly exploited the admittedly open goal of Henry II’s familial infighting to great effect (and he came very close to actually conquering England). Less flashy or well-known than Napoleon but he was critical to the long term success of France as a nation.

 

England - Aethelstan

The grandson of Alfred the Great, Aethelstan was the first man who could claim to be king of all England. Building on the foundations of his father and grandfather, he won crucial victories, particularly Brunanburh against a coalition of enemies. This cemented a unified England, bringing together the Anglo-Saxon people.

 

Macedonia - Philip II 

Alexander the Great still looms large in the public consciousness, and it’s easy to see why. But his father has been somewhat neglected by comparison. When Philip II became king his land was poor, wracked with war, and weak. Through astonishing military innovations (he was inspired by spending time at Thebes and witnessing Epaminondas’ success against the Spartans) he transformed the Macedonian armed forces from pretty feeble to the most powerful army in the world. He was also well along planning the invasion of Asia until he suffered an unfortunate bout of assassination. I think this is the least likely change to occur, but Macedonian history does have great men beyond Alexander and the foremost of these is Philip II.

 

Rome - Aurelian

Aurelian is one of those chaps almost nobody’s ever heard of but when they learn of what he did it’s impossible not to be impressed. When he took the purple the Empire had split into three, with the Gallic Empire of Gaul, Iberia, and Britannia in the west and the Palmyrene Empire breaking away in the east. He stitched the empire back together when it could have collapsed two centuries earlier than the western portion did, and along the way won victories over numerous barbarian tribes. (I’d change the name to the Western Roman Empire as well, and have the Byzantine Empire as the Eastern Roman Empire).

 

 

Carthage - Hannibal

Carthage is a free city in Civ VI (Dido is leader of Phoenicia). This is something of a travesty given how powerful Carthage was and how Hannibal is the greatest antagonist Rome ever faced. Who first crossed the Alps, in winter, in the face of hostile tribes? Who annihilated the Romans at Trasimene and Cannae? Who survived a decade in hostile territory, without defeat? Who would have won if it weren’t for that political lickspittle Hanno? Bring back Hannibal!

 

Thaddeus