Savage Worlds was on my list of games to sniff out back when I got this idea of looking for a good universal system that was not GURPS. I wanted something lighter than GURPS (so - no, I'm not a GURPS hater.)
I finally got around to actually playing in Deadlands. I was shocked at how much fun it was. But the game petered out quickly because the GM sucked, but the game left a mechanical impression on me (enough of an impression that I bought a bunch of the books plus all the Deadlands Reloaded material). I think it has a lot of potential.
Flashforward to all the recent cyberpunk discussions... I decided to pick up the Interface Zero 2.0 book for Savage Worlds. Without hyperbole, I can say - this book is stunning. The production on this book is almost on par with FFG's Edge of the Empire (regardless of what you think of the rules) - the art, the layout, is just bonkers.
The setting itself I found to be extremely well thought out and covers more "cyberpunk" than anything I've read in the last few years. In fact I'd say it's really cyberpunk+. I don't have enough experience with Shadowrun to make a good comparison in terms of setting conceits. But Interface Zero obviously has no magic or anything, but the technological development is pretty advanced, going from gutterpunk street-tech salvaged from production parts, to spaceships just shy of FTL. Plus mechs!
So who here has used it and run it? How does it stack up against Cyberpunk 2020/Shadowrun? I'm open to anyone that has opinions pro/con on Savage Worlds in general about what you like or dislike, as I'm still learning my way around the mechanics.
Thoughts?
GURPS is a fine system, I just didn't like rolling low (I know it makes no actual difference but I prefer my high results = good and low results = bad) and the plodding advancement. I like Savage Worlds as its a roll high system with no cap due to acing and bonus dice. Similar to Earthdawn but runs a lot smoother. Specifically I like that Savage Worlds has a way to resolve just about everything in the core book. One thing that I don't like is that the chase rules are awful compared to normal combat and don't work well as a chase. I'm at the point that I almost feel like throwing them out and adapting the Earthdawn chase rules that I made. The abstract chase rules just don't work because distance is constantly determined by card draw and attacks are determined by who has advantage, the highest card draw with lower cards unable to attack the high card in the round. So the chase is a chase combat and ignores the distance between foes and movement rates that are part of the combat system. When your spaceship that has 20/60 movement is chasing guys with a pace of 6 and 18 and you are at long range from a card, it just feels broken because it doesn't make sense.
Deadlands Reloaded: The Flood was a lot of fun, we got through the whole campaign. The Player's Guide is really good for Deadlands as it has a lot of mechanics that are useful in not just Deadlands but other games.
My co-GM Ted is working on running exactly this type of game. He is making an Interface Zero Shadowrun kind of game. I've heard the book is stunning as well as the rules but as Ted isn't ready to run yet, I haven't got to see it in action.
The Science Fiction Companion does a great job of savaging scifi too. I've read that one and used it for pieces of Necessary Evil. What I really like about it is its a toolkit that allows you to also create new races (I find the SciFi Companion rules to do a better job of this than core), vehicles, spaceships, and mechs by using the system in the book.
I found this on the Savage Worlds GM G+ Community. This might be very helpful if you decide to run a Shadowrun kind of game. It takes Second Edition Shadowrun and Savages it.
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B9ilRupFha7zaWhyWVRTSmVJeDA&usp=drive_web
What I like about it:
- the rules are simple
- it's easy to read
- the layout of most books is very clear
- a lot of cool settings (which are just a little different)
- the settings usually have the right amount of detail for me
- random quest generators, savage tales and plot point campaigns
What I don't like about it:
- the system can be a little gimmicky
I really like it, although I can understand some people don't like the gimmicks of the card drawing for initiative, bennies, dice for skills/attributes etc. It's also a bit lite on the social and mental skills.
Savage Worlds also has a ton of settings in all kinds of genres.
Quote from: tenbones;885592Savage Worlds was on my list of games to sniff out back when I got this idea of looking for a good universal system that was not GURPS. I wanted something lighter than GURPS (so - no, I'm not a GURPS hater.)
...
Thoughts?
I realize you aren't all that into or familiar with it but I ran my last Shadowrun game using Savage Worlds and my go to system prior to Savage Worlds was Gurps (which I ran from 1st to 4th edition).
I do own Interface Zero, but it's still in my vast "to read" pile. It was recommended to me by one of my players. As well, Interface Zero is recommended in the Sci-Fi Companion for those wanting more detailed hacking rules.
What I like about Savage Worlds is that it plays fast, but it's very tactically oriented. So, without being much at all like Gurps, the end result gives that tactical feel of Gurps where combat is dangerous (especially with the right setting rules) and what you do is often as important as how well you can do it. At least it does to me.
I had no major problems converting SR to Savage Worlds, though I did have some interpersonal issues with the group dynamics, those had nothing to do with the system. In actual play I felt it ran well and gave the desired feel.
I wanted to pick up Interface Zero. Was never able to.
It's as awesome a Cyberpunk setting as Totems of the Dead is a S&S setting. Which is to say, hella awesome.
For me, Savage Worlds was always "Deadland's Braindead Little Brother" until Solomon Kane and Interface Zero proved you can make a setting with it that isn't just a different coat of paint splashed over the same exact rules.
Interface Zero is just one of many Savage Worlds games I really want to play but just haven't had a chance to try out yet. Reading the book was a breath of fresh air after I looked at the new edition of Shadowrun and decided it definitely wasn't for me.
For anyone interested, the official IZ character sheet is pretty bad. Or, at least it was the last time I looked in on it. Thankfully, that's where the fandom can step in. There are some great sheets on the PEG forums for those interested: http://www.pegforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=47715 (http://www.pegforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=47715). These are the ones I'll be using if I ever get an opportunity to do something with the game.
Quote from: CRKrueger;885648It's as awesome a Cyberpunk setting as Totems of the Dead is a S&S setting. Which is to say, hella awesome.
For me, Savage Worlds was always "Deadland's Braindead Little Brother" until Solomon Kane and Interface Zero proved you can make a setting with it that isn't just a different coat of paint splashed over the same exact rules.
For SW there are other options to consider as well. For S&S there is Beasts & Barbarians.
For cyberpunk there is Nova Praxis. I have only skimmed Nova Praxis, but to me it is more believable than Interface Zero. I dont't like the genetic mutations - it's too much fantasy for me. I've never got into Shadowrun too. NP is darker and is also focusing on space exploration, which I like.
But unfortunately I am totally tired of SW system. I may return to it one day but I need a long rest.
You know, Cyberpunk would be the only thing I'd consider 'hard' science fiction. Which puts Nova Praxis out because of space travel. It's highly unrealistic.
There's a reason we don't have any men on Mars. And why the moon landings were done at night. Our sun. A single solar flare would kill every astronaut in seconds. Cook 'em like bacon.
Why? Humanity right now, doesn't have the knowledge to make any radiation shielding as strong as to block enough to survive the 150 days to almost year it would take to get there.
So no, Nova Praxis is about as realistic as Interface Zero. Pick your fantasy, mutations or survivable space travel.
Own just about all of it at this point. It's all worth it. The one sheets make for a good series of intro adventures and let you seed all kinds of hooks of your own. The locations books generally have good information and a relevant sub system if you wish to use it. And the best part, you can ignore any bit of it if you wish and you aren't missing much. While the rules are largely consistent in resolution, they're packaged in easily contained subsets that you can toss or add to.
As for how cyberpunk it is... well, I'm intending to run the one shots as a way of introducing shadowrun players who have been fed nothing but runs to the punk half of the genre.
Rules wise, far easier to deal with than most. You're rolling two dice for resolution, both of which are fixed size per character and rolling against pretty standard numbers. If you can count to ten you can handle savage worlds. Generally the most difficult thing about running it is remember the order of card suits if initiative cards over lap. Cyberware as written in this or the sci-fi companion does not make things that much more complicated, generally alters a value on a permanent basis.
Compared to shadowrun it's a cake walk. Burst fire rules are mildly complicated to track ammo for, simple to resolve. Suppressing fire is almost blind simple. And that's about the limit of the built in tactical options. Building a character the difference is nearly laughable. I've made characters in ten minutes for people. Resolution mechanics are far simpler and faster to read.
Compared to cyberpunk... probably simpler? It's no harder, the hacking rules are far lighter, and I'm going to say you could get a character together faster for a wider range of intended options. What is missing a bit is the risk in cyberware, or the extent you can be cyber. But that is also part of why making a character is simpler. In play there's more dice involved, but the resolution of those dice is considerably simpler.
You can get the same feeling of cyberpunk easily, it does not have the granularity of shadowrun, but that isn't exactly a bad thing. You'll have a pulpish feel to how resilient your characters are so long as their enemies aren't carrying military grade weaponry, but if they are then you get to see how quickly the system can get lethal.
Cyberpunk is the kind of game that savage worlds actually handles pretty well. It strips out the weakest system in the game(magic) and focuses on things where it makes a whole lot of sense for there to be a relatively thin power band to work with. Interface Zero 2.0 does all of this quite well, then tacks on big mechs and limited psionics if you want them(or just want to scare players with them). Both of which manage to work surprisingly well within savage worlds compared to most implementations I've seen.
I've got Interface Zero 2.0, but I don't know if I'll ever get it to the table. One of the players in my group had a falling out with peeps on the PEG forums years back and he refuses to play anything Savage Worlds.
After my pending divorce, depending on how custody and such works out, I may end up getting another group going to fill up time. If I do, I will try to get Savage Worlds to the table, as I have wanted to give it a shot for a long while. There are so many settings that I enjoy tied to the system.
Having not run SW *yet*... but having played it. I kinda like my cyberpunk high-octane and lethal. My Deadlands game kinda hinted that SW can make that happen in spades.
Casual review of the weaponry and armor in Interface Zero kinda tells me that it's definitely looking potentially nasty.
I played a renegade Shaolin Monk in Deadlands, I liked how they handled the "magic" stuff. While on paper the bonuses didn't look like much (I had Bullet-Time) in mechanical play? It really worked. And my character really felt effective. So I'm thinking Interface Zero will allow all the Matrix-type shit with little effort.
I'm also eyeballing Last Parsec in case I want to expand to full blown space-opera. Anyone use that?
TLP just uses the Science Fiction Companion for its rules and adds in a few extras here and there, so the Companion would be your best bet if you wanted to take your IZ game into space. My group has only done a few one-shots with those rules and they've worked well, though we haven't tried full ship combat using the bigger vessels. Generally anything more than a fight between a couple of fighters or small freighters gets turned into a narrative scene so we can keep things moving.
The one part of the SFC that I really would like to do more with sometime is the mech rules. Those look particularly interesting, and I've always wanted to run some type of mech game. The rules in the SFC look good to my untrained eye but I haven't tested them out yet.
Quote from: Brand55;885761TLP just uses the Science Fiction Companion for its rules and adds in a few extras here and there, so the Companion would be your best bet if you wanted to take your IZ game into space. My group has only done a few one-shots with those rules and they've worked well, though we haven't tried full ship combat using the bigger vessels. Generally anything more than a fight between a couple of fighters or small freighters gets turned into a narrative scene so we can keep things moving.
The one part of the SFC that I really would like to do more with sometime is the mech rules. Those look particularly interesting, and I've always wanted to run some type of mech game. The rules in the SFC look good to my untrained eye but I haven't tested them out yet.
Yeah I was perusing the ship-combat rules last night. I like getting into the nitty-gritty of those kindsa things - and these rules don't look bad. My group *really* enjoyed the Edge of the Empire ship-combat rules, and SW looks a LOT simpler and cleaner.
I'm getting all chubbed thinking about running this system now...
Quote from: Christopher Brady;885700You know, Cyberpunk would be the only thing I'd consider 'hard' science fiction. Which puts Nova Praxis out because of space travel. It's highly unrealistic.
Slightly off topic, but there's the theoretical possibility of FTL travel without violation of general relativity by using Alcubierre drives. It's contentious but it hasn't been disproven yet, one of the biggest sticking points (the sheer magnitude of the energy requirements) has been apparently solved by the improvements of den Broeck and White and the other big one (creating an energy field with negative density) might be possible depending how you interpret the Casimir effect.
Quote from: Luca;885779Slightly off topic, but there's the theoretical possibility of FTL travel without violation of general relativity by using Alcubierre drives. It's contentious but it hasn't been disproven yet, one of the biggest sticking points (the sheer magnitude of the energy requirements) has been apparently solved by the improvements of den Broeck and White and the other big one (creating an energy field with negative density) might be possible depending how you interpret the Casimir effect.
That's not the issue, though. It's radiation shielding, we still haven't beat that one.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;885817That's not the issue, though. It's radiation shielding, we still haven't beat that one.
Well, in its defense Nova Praxis is set in the future and a technological singularity has occurred to push technology to levels that mankind still doesn't fully understand in-universe. So yes, it's still fantasy but at least the game provides some explanation for how things are the way they are rather than just hand-waving everything.
Quote from: Brand55;885826Well, in its defense Nova Praxis is set in the future and a technological singularity has occurred to push technology to levels that mankind still doesn't fully understand in-universe. So yes, it's still fantasy but at least the game provides some explanation for how things are the way they are rather than just hand-waving everything.
Fair point, but I will always fight against it being 'more realistic' than Interface Zero.
Quote from: Imaginos;885748There are so many settings that I enjoy tied to the system.
Rippers, Beasts and Barbarians, Hellfrost, Slipstream, Deadlands Noir, 50 Fathoms, East Texas University, the Day after Ragnarok, Streets of Bedlam to name a few I enjoy.
Quote from: tenbones;885755I'm also eyeballing Last Parsec in case I want to expand to full blown space-opera. Anyone use that?
Contains mostly the same stuff as the scifi companion plus Jumpcore as the default organisation the players work for. Maybe a little bit more info on the races and the homeworlds than the companion, but not much. It doesn't have much of a setting and the other books (Eris Beta 5, Leviathan, Scientorium) are system/planet only settings. Small scale and really more campaign books than setting books imo.
Alternatively you can also look into High Space (http://www.storyweaver.com/High-Space.aspx) which has pretty elaborate rules for spaceship construction and combat. The first edition only had one system (The Lantern) as a default setting, but the new kickstartered edition will have a full setting called the Greater PanDominion.
Christopher Brady and jux, have you looked into Brutal Games' Corporation RPG? I'm not really familiar with it but I've read mostly positive things.
I was line Developer on the book so admittedly, I'm biased. There are a few things I wanted to do different, like a slightly more in depth cyberware system I wrote up, but the company owner went with the Sci fi toolkit version instead. Still it's one helluva game and I'm proud to have worked on it in such a capacity. It also shows how flexible SW can be.
Quote from: Orphan81;886058a slightly more in depth cyberware system I wrote up
Any chance of that popping up anywhere?
Quote from: Christopher Brady;885829Fair point, but I will always fight against it being 'more realistic' than Interface Zero.
Firstly, you don't find 'more realistic' in my statement. So you are fighting with ghosts that live in your head, mate.
But why IZ2 is more fantasy compared to NP is not when compared to realism, but to sci-fi. In IZ2 you can be a two legged a rhino or tiger - it totally breaks the genre for me. I think this design choice was made to compete with the success of Shadowrun.
But IZ2 mechanically should be very solid for SW. But I've got issues with SW as well.
Quote from: jux;886090Firstly, you don't find 'more realistic' in my statement. So you are fighting with ghosts that live in your head, mate.
But why IZ2 is more fantasy compared to NP is not when compared to realism, but to sci-fi. In IZ2 you can be a two legged a rhino or tiger - it totally breaks the genre for me. I think this design choice was made to compete with the success of Shadowrun.
The Hybrids weren't put in to compete with Shadowrun, they were put in because the creator of the game "Dave Jarvis" came up with the idea and thought they were cool.
This became a point of contention to a small degree, as I was more in favor of far more subtle Hybrids where a portion of the fan base and Dave Jarvis himself liked the full on TMNT style mutant Hybrids.
I left Gun Metal Games not entirely on the best of terms. I'm happy with it's success to a great degree, but there were several design choices I was against, and or in favor of something else. Ultimately this is why I parted ways with the company when work on the IZ 2.0 book was completed.
An example of this being the inclusion of the "Bioroid" race and the "Simulacrum" race...
To me, Bioroids are literally just Simulacra by a different name. They're both artificial people grown in a vat for a specific service...But one of the writers really didn't like the idea that Roy Batty and the Puma Sisters are the exact same thing just different presentations.... So that's how we got the "Bioroid" race for Japan.
I still am very proud of the work done on IZ 2.0, it's a beautiful book, and it has some of the best rules and writing in RPG's, design wise thought, I would have tweaked a few things differently.
Quote from: CRKrueger;886070Any chance of that popping up anywhere?
Probably not, the Company Head thought it was to complex since it used decimal points for calculating Cyber Strain ala Shadowrun, rather than whole numbers.
Of course the decimals allowed for the creation of much more granular cyberware like cyber-eyes and their varieties, but I was over ruled in the end and the basic Sci-Fi toolkit cyberware rules were used instead.
Quote from: 3rik;886045Christopher Brady and jux, have you looked into Brutal Games' Corporation RPG? I'm not really familiar with it but I've read mostly positive things.
I remember hearing about this a while back, but no I haven't. Once I save up the pennies, I'll look deeper. Thanks!
Quote from: Orphan81;886096The Hybrids weren't put in to compete with Shadowrun, they were put in because the creator of the game "Dave Jarvis" came up with the idea and thought they were cool.
This became a point of contention to a small degree, as I was more in favor of far more subtle Hybrids where a portion of the fan base and Dave Jarvis himself liked the full on TMNT style mutant Hybrids.
That's funny! My first thought when I saw the degree of mutation was exactly the same as Jux's - I definitely thought it was a "Shadowrun-nod". I agree with your design sentiments - I don't think it should have gone that far. I could see some subtle hybridization, but the TMNT stuff is ehhhh in terms of "genre adherence" (which is a debatable phrase itself), but I can leave it easily enough.
Quote from: Orphan81;886096An example of this being the inclusion of the "Bioroid" race and the "Simulacrum" race...
To me, Bioroids are literally just Simulacra by a different name. They're both artificial people grown in a vat for a specific service...But one of the writers really didn't like the idea that Roy Batty and the Puma Sisters are the exact same thing just different presentations.... So that's how we got the "Bioroid" race for Japan.
/Agreed. My first pass through the book I was asking the same thing.
Quote from: Orphan81;886096I still am very proud of the work done on IZ 2.0, it's a beautiful book, and it has some of the best rules and writing in RPG's, design wise thought, I would have tweaked a few things differently.
/Double-Agreed. I'd be pretty stoked to have had a hand in the outcome of this book too. Kudos. It's a marvelous piece of work. No piece of design is ever "perfect", the nature of SW is toolkit enough to allow anyone to leave what they don't like on the floor. So it's win/win.
Quote from: Orphan81;886097Probably not, the Company Head thought it was to complex since it used decimal points for calculating Cyber Strain ala Shadowrun, rather than whole numbers.
Of course the decimals allowed for the creation of much more granular cyberware like cyber-eyes and their varieties, but I was over ruled in the end and the basic Sci-Fi toolkit cyberware rules were used instead.
You wouldn't have a copy of those rules for, you know... your own personal game, by chance? Huh? Huh? Huh?
I only have the older IZ edition for SW. I've used the excellent adventure generation tables at the back extensively for other games but I never took the plunge with IZ itself. Not sure why, I guess it just didn't click. In the end I just wrote my own little cyberpunk game.
Is IZ 2e much different?
Quote from: Soylent Green;886151I only have the older IZ edition for SW. I've used the excellent adventure generation tables at the back extensively for other games but I never took the plunge with IZ itself. Not sure why, I guess it just didn't click. In the end I just wrote my own little cyberpunk game.
Is IZ 2e much different?
I've only glanced at the first IZ, but from what I remember of it hacking has been much streamlined and simplified. Considering that hacking is one of the things that certain other cyberpunk games seem to struggle with, I consider IZ 2.0's success in that department to be particularly admirable.
Quote from: tenbones;886136You wouldn't have a copy of those rules for, you know... your own personal game, by chance? Huh? Huh? Huh?
I have it on an external hard drive somewhere, but I'll look to see about digging it up :)
I want to like this setting, but after reading it the Savage Worlds rules still rub me the wrong way. I dunno why.
Quote from: Mostlyjoe;886267I want to like this setting, but after reading it the Savage Worlds rules still rub me the wrong way. I dunno why.
I felt the same way about the rules. Then I got to actually play them. Wasn't at all what I expected. You can strip out nearly anything you don't like with ease.
Quote from: tenbones;886269I felt the same way about the rules. Then I got to actually play them. Wasn't at all what I expected. You can strip out nearly anything you don't like with ease.
Have to find a game. It's one of those things where I think I'll have to play it first before GMing it.
Savage Worlds is really one of those games you have to play to grok it. It doesn't read particularly well and it doesn't repeat itself in the core book. That lack of repetition though makes the core book relatively small compared to most core books (and covers multiple eras in core too). Its a great little tool kit. You can strip out stuff you don't like and it doesn't break the system. Like one GM threw out the fear table and instead a fail is automatic shaken and a narrative description of the fear. Of course, the fear table can give you permanent injuries though (mental phobias and -1 charisma from a mark of fear) which some people find unfair (Zachariah got Pyrophobia, Major and Mark of Fear, which was harsh in Deadlands: The Flood, especially with an ally using a Flamethrower as her main weapon and as a face, the mark of fear hurt the character's Persuasion and Streetwise. But Deadlands is Horror too.). But also depends on the genre. I think the fear table is fine in a Horror game one shot, but doesn't work as well in a Supers campaign. Some people don't like Interludes since the card draw makes the story feel forced or artificial by defining what type of story will be told by card suite. I like the Chase concept but not the rules at this point. I like how easy the system is to resolve since success is generally a 4 (+/- modifiers) except for outliers like Parry. So task resolution is just easier than most games that I have played/ran. Prep is also lighter than other games that I have run. Session time is 4-6 hours compared to Earthdawn's 6-8 which I also need as I have gotten older.
Quote from: Mostlyjoe;886271Have to find a game. It's one of those things where I think I'll have to play it first before GMing it.
Yeah this was also the same for me. As it happened, I had a player that is a big fan of westerns, and Red Dead Redemption, and pulled Deadlands out of his ass out of nowhere. Had it not happened... we'd likely not even be having this discussion. Savage Worlds has been one of the biggest pleasant-surprises I've had in TTRPG's in the last couple of years.
Ironically right after that - I discovered there was a fairly large Savage Worlds community of gamers local to me (though I don't play much with them). Look around - they're out there!
I'm not really much of a Cyberpunk fan but I think Interface Zero 2.0 is one of the best Savage Worlds products out there. Very well done. Also useful for developing other Science Fiction game ideas too. There is a lot of good material packed in that book. And the art and layout are very nice to boot.
I finished my first pass-thru on IZ... I'm still digesting it. It's good. Very good. Does a good job of creating its own space in the genre. Setting-wise I'm thinking this might be a great place to shoot to pieces.
My initial "feelings" are -
It FEELS like Shadowrun with less magic. Psionics and the TMNT-isms handle all that. And I think I'm okay with that.
I love the scale of it. LOVE it. But this has as much to do with the Savage World's mechanics as it does with the settings. There's a healthy dash of Mechwarrior and even some AeroTech tossed in.
Another observational item of interest is it appears to de-emphasize "cyber" as much as it gives you plenty of options to gear up in other ways. It uses the same essential system by using Strain - but I "feel" (I fully admit I could be wrong here) that there is no overt emphasis on having your PC's start lopping off limbs to go FULL METAL BORG!!!! Instead - you can simply start that way... for a cost. I think, again, this is a good thing.
The gear list... is robusto! Interface Zero does a good job of packing in different scales of gear above and below just hard and soft armors. Plus there's a *ton* of different kinds of weapons that CP2020 required 5-books to flesh out.
Hacking - As much as I love the idea of VR, it's clunky. IZ makes having a hacker in your group totally viable. And that's a gigantic improvement. Ironically it reads like the hacking ability in XCOM-2. Perfect.
IZ2.0 plus the Sci-Fi splat... sweet Galactus... what can't you do? Guess it's time to find out.
Criticisms - Offhand, I'd like to have seen more Edges. But then I can easily fill those those with other SW splats I find appropriate. I'm sure I'll find more stuff to gripe about once I get into the pit with this system.
Savage Worlds seems to be in a new phase as some awesome companies are doing more and more to the system to make it fit the settings.
Most SW settings are just crappy paint jobs - Wonder Woman's Golden Lasso, D&D's Entangle Spell, Dr. Strange's Crimson Bands of Cyttorak and a net gun are all the same frickin' thing in a "Phase 1 Setting" like Hellfrost. Cool setting, zero setting support from the system leaving it the same bog standard game in drag.
Solomon Kane, Totems of the Dead, Interface 2.0, Lankhmar, hopefully Rifts do more with alternate rules options from an expanding range of toolkits to get the games farther and farther from Savage Worlds Prime.
It could just be the case that the Lego set is so large and varied now that it's as hard to make a boringly implemented setting now as it was to make an interestingly implemented setting back in the day.
Don't forget High Space 2 with it's space combat rules. That's really adding a lot to the system ruleswise. Personally I don't mind the paint job settings, because honestly I don't give a crap about rules. I don't mind it being simple. I also didn't like all those rules hacks in World of Darkness Mirrors. The less time I spend reading rules the better.
I really liked Interface Zero, and I really REALLY like 2.0. I backed it on Kickstarter for a stupid amount as a birthday present for myself, and I don't regret it at all.
Very high up there on my favorite Savage Worlds settings, and I like Savage Worlds to begin with.
(Also, because of my stupidly high backing level, you can see me as an NPC on page 195 :P)
In general I think if A. You like Savage Worlds, and B. You like the Cyberpunk genre, then you will like IZ2.0. But its not going to change your mind if you don't like A and B.