Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 264

Thread: New info from game informer!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217

    Talking New info from game informer! *UPDATED WITH CORRECTIONS

    Ok, it looks like some of the information we got from people who read the Game Informer article was wrong. Apparently those people didn't read it right or something. Anyway, here are some clarifications from the author of the article:

    1. Not sure if the GAF poster was reading the mag upside down or something, but no. Countries don't research stuff, XCOM does. Countries will give you missions with tradeoffs (send us 4 laser rifles and we'll give you 10 engineers etc).

    2. Grappling hook is an armor ability, not a class thing. The sniper in the example was equipped with an armor suit that has a grapple ability.

    3. The cinimatic view is purely presentation, just some eye candy for big moments in combat.

    4. You start out with only 4 soldiers and then upgrade your limit from there.



    Sorry if this is unorganized, it is pulled from a bunch of different sources:


    •Destructible environments

    •In the scenario they showed, one member died. Because of this the other squadmates didn't get an experience bonus

    •Without the bonus, the sniper leveled up still. He was able to choose from two abilities. Either Squad Sight(which means he can shoot anything a squadmate can see) and Snap Shot(which lets him shoot after moving. Something snipers aren't normally allowed to do)

    •You can't recruit specific classes. You can only recruit rookies and then level them up to become specific classes

    •The guys in suits in the screenshots are 'Thin Man' aliens. They're able to leap long distances

    •Challenge is stressed a lot

    •same quick save/load system though they are considering an iron man type mode where you can't load previous saves

    •Firaxis states that they're not rebooting it, they're re imagining it. Using the same core gameplay with modern technology, weapons, audiovisuals, etc.




    There's apparently a 'Heavy Armed Mobile Cover Platform that serves as a powerful rock on which to anchor any tactical advantage' and you can directly customize the heavy troops armor and weapons individually.

    THE VAST MAJORITY OF XCOM'S CONTENT COMES IN THE FORM OF PROCEDURUALLY GENERATED MISSIONS AND ENCOUNTERS, MEANING THAT EVERY PLAYTHROUGH UNFOLDS DIFFERENTLY. (Sorry for the caps, just quoting here.)




    •randomly generated missions, terrain. Developer says you'll never play the exact same mission twice outside of a few story missions which feature in-game cinematics

    •fog of war is confirmed. area starts off with darkness everywhere, and the average soldier can't see ☺☺☺☺

    •enemy spawns are randomized

    •mobile platform called SHIV; customizable for new chasis

    •Sectoids and Mutons confirmed

    •The base's screenshot is accurate. It is now a side shot instead of top down. You can also upgrade your base, like the satellite, with alien technology

    •There was an example in one scenario where Japan had the laser rifle already developed before the invasion because they felt threatened, so that seems random.

    •You have 16 countries in the funding council you need to keep happy. Some provide more money, but others, like Africa, provide more raw resources

    •The sniper units have a grappling hook ability to get on top of buildings

    •Gunners have a suppressing fire

    •you can equip your xcom guys with all kinds of different guns. customization looks like a big deal

    •Apparently there's some sort of cinematic view when your guys get killed. They didn't cite VATS or anything, so I doubt it's too in depth

    •Unexperienced agents can panic, freak out, etc if something bad happens

    •Firaxis designer states that the PC version will have an enhanced interface. He cites Dragon Age: Origins on PC and console as a big inspiration




    •No black blobs in Firaxis's XCOM. The guys in suits are called "Thin Men" and they can use weapons, jump large distances, and puke disgusting goo.

    •No action points. The game uses a move-and-shoot (or move-and-move) dynamic. They don't want people piddling around counting individual action points. Some will call this a concession to consolitis; others will call it useful streamlining.

    •Soldiers gain perk-like abilities when leveling up; some examples given are, for a sniper, Snap Shot (move-then-shoot, not normally a sniper option) or Squad Sight (shoot any enemy anyone on your squad can see -- not sure of the rationale there....).

    •Environments are destructible, as we would wish.

    •Soldiers can still panic, but not to the point of wiping the squad. Likewise, you'll never get plasma-bombed right out of the carrier. They want to make the game more fair, and those were specifically mentioned.

    •The strategic layer is extremely robust. You still need to choose which countries to send missions to, which offers of aid (in exchange for more protection) you'll accept from which countries, which alien technologies you'll research, etc. The back-and-forth between tactical and strategic play remains at the heart of the game.

    •Overwatch, duck-and-cover, etc. are all still very much present, tactically.

    •You can research vehicles, which take the place of a squaddie. They don't gain XP and when they are destroyed they are lost for good, but they provide serious cover and firepower. One example given is a mobile heavy weapons platform that serves as a good overwatcher for a tactical advance.

    •Sectoids and Mutons are in. Cyberdiscs and Thin Men are also mentioned. Evidently psionics are also in.

    •Aliens have their own special perk-like abilities as well.
    Overall it looks really ☺☺☺☺ing fantastic and I am now DAY ONE.



    The article specifically cites a sniper spending their entire turn to take an aimed shot for Massive Damage. Perhaps it's more accurate to think of the game as having only two action points per turn, for Move-Shoot, or Move-Move, or Aim-Shoot, etc.

    Gus, like I said, overwatch is in the game. In, in, in the game. You definitely can set up squaddies who haven't used all their actions in a turn, such that they can do overwatch and shoot the instant something comes into view.




    Reloading costs an action, so it is a tactical consideration. Ducking into cover is the main positioning mechanic they mention. They also mention supppressive fire as another mechanic -- your heavy weapons guy can lay down a barrage that can paralyze pinned units (e.g. remove their actions). Grenades are in, wounding is in. Generally it doesn't sound like there are fewer tactical options, but rather that the bookkeeping is simplified.



    (This part was by the author of the GI article)
    Apologies if the article was unclear, but the deal is that sniper rifles are unusual in that they take a full turn to shoot. You can unlock a move-shoot perk for snipers at some experience level, but your basic sniper rifle takes a full turn to fire.

    Ammo is abstracted. You're assumed to be carrying enough clips to reload as much as you want, but it takes a turn to do so. Suppressive fire is crazy awesome, for instance, but it burns through ammo like a mofo so you're borrowing turns down the road to kick ass now.

    Body positions - AIUI you are assumed to be kneeling behind partial cover etc. They didn't go into a ton of detail here. Personally that's a level of control granularity that I'm not concerned about preserving, so long as I have other awesome ☺☺☺☺ that I can do and creative tactics to explore. Which from what I've seen will not be lacking.


    So yeah, you only have one base. Building different bases has been removed, but you still buy satellite coverage (the new radar) and build hangars for interception in different countries. Your single base is like way more crazy awesome than any base from the original, though, and presents lots of opportunities for more decision-making in terms of digging deeper as well as what kind of expansion facilities you add on (see the screenshot of the "ant farm" that we put online Monday).


    ------------------------------------------

    Without a doubt, this game looks FANTASTIC! I'm worried about them saying they want to make the game more "fair" and toning down soldiers going berserk and whatnot, but still even with that this looks like it is going to be a great successor to the original!
    Last edited by OldManBrian; 01-11-2012 at 04:48 PM.

  2. #2
    It sounds reminiscent of Final Fantasy Tactics or Advance Wars as far as the Move-Action or a number of other tabletop miniature wargames. I don't think that's a bad thing.

    I'm really hoping I get my issue of GI soon. Looking forward to reading this article myself.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,384
    So yeah, you only have one base. Building different bases has been removed, but you still buy satellite coverage (the new radar) and build hangars for interception in different countries. Your single base is like way more crazy awesome than any base from the original, though, and presents lots of opportunities for more decision-making in terms of digging deeper as well as what kind of expansion facilities you add on (see the screenshot of the "ant farm" that we put online Monday).
    I hope they reconsider that. It sucked in UFO:ET. And abstract ammo? Hope they'll have modding tools to restore some of the original stuff they're streamlining out...

  4. #4
    Mixed bag...

    Some things I feel are ok... others, well, I'm a little disappointed.

    Soldiers can still panic, but not to the point of wiping the squad. Likewise, you'll never get plasma-bombed right out of the carrier. They want to make the game more fair, and those were specifically mentioned - ABSOLUTE TRAVESTY... make it HARD!!!! where was that article with the chaps from Friaxis stating.. guys getting wiped out coming off the ramp.. "Thats x-com!". Well??? was it?? Apparently not for the new one.

    ONE BASE??? - Yeah.. because 'THAT'S X-COM!'


    Enhanced Interface for PC - as far as i can see, this is one of the only things i regard as a boon so far.....

    It all sounds like a watered down version..

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,722
    I am fairly happy with most of this actually and am keen to see it in action. The only thing I am not satisfied with is the fact we can't have multiple bases anymore. At the same time, being able to have hangers in multiple countries is enough of a compromise for me. Can you choose where your starting base is or are you stuck to the US?

    Very much looking forward to playing this now.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Mostly sounds intriguing, but:

    The "one base" thing could be a bother, even with supplementary sat cover and hangars, especially if they pre-site it (say, in America).

    Not sure about the lack of TUs, either - the whole move and move, or move and shoot thing sounds more like Dungeons and Dragons than X-Com.

    I hope that the soldiers' stats level up on their own and the perks are the only things we directly choose for them.

    Also, abstract ammo? No thanks. I hope they either let us mod that one out or change it themselves before release. Keeping track of that stuff and feeling the tension of being about to run out when you're facing your last ET are some of the pleasures of X-Com.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Jordan, UT
    Posts
    3,128
    Quote Originally Posted by BandofGypsies View Post
    ABSOLUTE TRAVESTY
    Out of 32 bullet points you find two things to complain about and you call the game an absolute travesty? That seems a bit unreasonable to me. Besides, dropping a nuke on you at the beginning of the level is not real strategic difficulty, it's artificial difficulty that's born out of poor game design. There's a reason why it's impossible to win or lose a game of chess in the first move.

    To me, personally, it's sounds like Firaxis is approaching this in a very intelligent way. They're keeping most of the core tenants that people have been clamoring for while updating and refining some other things. I've said it before, it's unreasonable to expect a pixel-for-pixel remake of a game that come out in 1994; the games industry has had 18 years to evolve since then and so there's inherent benefits that can come from taking an updated approach. You say you want a "new" X-COM, but all you really want is the same X-COM you've been playing for the last 18 years, and so I must ask the question why do you want to spend $50 on something you already have?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Well, in a lot of peoples' cases, as has been said here repeatedly, they want what they already have but in a higher resolution and with a less jumbled and click-intensive UI.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    You say you want a "new" X-COM, but all you really want is the same X-COM you've been playing for the last 18 years, and so I must ask the question why do you want to spend $50 on something you already have?
    To be fair, I (and many other fans) have bought X-Com multiple times already over the years and would GLADLY pay $50+ for the exact same game with bug fixes and higher res graphics. In fact, I still hold out hope that this will happen some day. So I don't think this is a BAD thing.

    However I also think it is important as you say, to realize that that is NOT going to happen with THIS remake. So let's keep an open mind, and hope this sells like hotcakes and gives them a reason to actually do the remake many of us have always wanted.

    I was pretty skeptical at first when I saw the first screens of the battlescape, BUT after hearing all this info I think they are on the right track to make a GREAT game that we'll all love.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Jordan, UT
    Posts
    3,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Well, in a lot of peoples' cases, as has been said here repeatedly, they want what they already have but in a higher resolution and with a less jumbled and click-intensive UI.
    Indeed. There's quite a few games where I would personally love the same thing. However, I wouldn't pay new release prices for that.

    There's been a trend of "HD" remakes of games and usually they're sold at a relatively inexpensive price on XBLA, PSN, or Steam and X-COM would certainly be a good candidate for that. This, however, is not that game. Firaxis has been upfront with saying that this is a new XCOM, not a remake, and so people need to adjust they're expectations accordingly.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    Out of 32 bullet points you find two things to complain about and you call the game an absolute travesty? That seems a bit unreasonable to me. Besides, dropping a nuke on you at the beginning of the level is not real strategic difficulty, it's artificial difficulty that's born out of poor game design. There's a reason why it's impossible to win or lose a game of chess in the first move.
    Re-read what I wrote.... I called the potential lack of difficulty a travesty, NOT the current game in development.. Are we clear? Re-watch the video from the men who are developing this game....They stated what made X-COM was its brutal difficulty.. i find this statement with the watering down of the difficulty contradictory.

    Some things in there sound fine, but there are a few things flagging concern.

    And again, a pixel for pixel remake is not what X-COM fans want either (i believe we've had this conversation many times regarding the FPS).. we want what was in the original, PLUS new features and some better UI where possible. Not subtracting parts of the whole.. Again, are we clear?

    One base is disappointing.. unless the dynamics of how you interact with it are of great depth.

    Reaction fire & overwatch is in.. this is good.

    Soldier XP points - a little cold to this idea but we'll see how it pans out... It sounds a little arcadey getting bonus 'power-up' perks..

    Randomly generated missions - yes, good.

    Morale - Good

    No TU's - VERY disappointing. It makes things much too simplistic.

    Inventory - apparently non existent... (I'll wait to read more here)

    It still sounds relatively good, but there are a few problems I can see... I'll wait for more pics/videos...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    Indeed. There's quite a few games where I would personally love the same thing. However, I wouldn't pay new release prices for that.

    There's been a trend of "HD" remakes of games and usually they're sold at a relatively inexpensive price on XBLA, PSN, or Steam and X-COM would certainly be a good candidate for that. This, however, is not that game. Firaxis has been upfront with saying that this is a new XCOM, not a remake, and so people need to adjust they're expectations accordingly.
    Yeah, I know, but you can't blame them for being disappointed that it's not a direct remake, as they have been in the past. Also, it was you who suggested the $50 pricetag, I never said anyone wanted to pay that much for what I was suggesting - I doubt any of the peeps looking out for a remake were thinking in terms of those prices before you mentioned them. Anyway, I'm fairly happy with what I'm hearing so far, don't get me wrong. There are some things I'd like to see brought more in line with the original because they sound like they're going to take some of the fun out of the game if left as they are, but if we can mod those away I'll be satisfied.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Aegeri View Post
    I am fairly happy with most of this actually and am keen to see it in action. The only thing I am not satisfied with is the fact we can't have multiple bases anymore. At the same time, being able to have hangers in multiple countries is enough of a compromise for me. Can you choose where your starting base is or are you stuck to the US?

    Very much looking forward to playing this now.
    Thinking on the base thing, I guess that's all I really used extra bases for...still, having multiple bases means you have a fall back for when the base defense goes bad.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Yeah. I always operated on the premise that all one's eggs should not be placed in the same basket, and it saved my bacon more than once.

    Mmmm... bacon and eggs.

    So, I wonder: Does having only one base mean base defence is out, base defence is a fail-it-and-you-have-to-load-an-earlier-save situation, or does it mean we'll only be fending off incursions on the hangar bases?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,384
    Like in UFO ET? I hope not. Those got boring and annoying fast.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    Besides, dropping a nuke on you at the beginning of the level is not real strategic difficulty, it's artificial difficulty that's born out of poor game design. There's a reason why it's impossible to win or lose a game of chess in the first move.
    I have to disagree with you there. The aliens were there first so yes, they would have the tactical advantage of first strike. Its a learning experience, the player now knows that the first few soldiers off the boat are more likely to die, so they would place the less important soldiers (scouts) on point.

    Another example, the player just moved his entire squad off the ship and they are all killed by one grenade. Oh he says that's not good maybe next time I'll spread my squad out. That learning experience was one of the most critical aspects of X-Com. The game would teach you how to play and be a better commander as you learned from your mistakes.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanki View Post
    That learning experience was one of the most critical aspects of X-Com. The game would teach you how to play and be a better commander as you learned from your mistakes.
    PRECISELY!

    From this game we're going to see a whole new generation of 'X-commers' who dont know what a smoke grande is.

    Simple, you get shot - you change your tactics, you learn. It's all about profitting from mistakes...

    Having trouble getting out of a vehicle?.. use HWP's... throw some smoke nades down...
    In the dark??.. use some flares....

    I just see this new game really watering these aspects down...

    I dont want to have my hand held during a mission.. or be shepherded over the rough patches... make the player learn dammit.

  18. #18
    It's not like avoiding the first shots or a grenade for that matter was very difficult. We had smoke screens available for good reason. HWPs help. For night missions, you learn to love the flare.
    And you quickly learn not to place eight X-COM soldiers in a big huddle because the enemies will wipe your entire team out in one turn if they can.


    At any rate, I really hope they change the abstract ammo BS among other things, but they've all been brought up.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by OldManBrian View Post


    •Without the bonus, the sniper leveled up still. He was able to choose from two abilities. Either Squad Sight(which means he can shoot anything a squadmate can see) and Snap Shot(which lets him shoot after moving. Something snipers aren't normally allowed to do)

    •You can't recruit specific classes. You can only recruit rookies and then level them up to become specific classes
    I don't like the idea of manually leveling up the soldiers. It is far more realistic (like it was in the original X-Com) that the soldiers evolve without having direct control over how they evolve.

    For example a soldier who has the best (inborn) accuracy is regularly used for sniping and because of that his accuracy gets higher. And not because I decide to spend points on accuracy when he "levels up".

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Lovecraft View Post
    I don't like the idea of manually leveling up the soldiers. It is far more realistic (like it was in the original X-Com) that the soldiers evolve without having direct control over how they evolve.
    It is actually entirely possible to directly control how soliders will improve in XCOM to an extent. The classic example is having one alien left who has panicked or similar (isn't a threat basically) and running doods around with maximum equipment. This builds strength (as a simple example). There are numerous ways of improving stats through direct action in XCOM if you can be bothered taking the time to do so (especially on higher difficulties). I don't mind having more direct control over the process, because all that matters to me is the same depth is retained on the battlefield. Having "classes" is actually a good way of distinguishing types of soldiers more directly, even at the cost of the organic development that the original game had. Both methods have their merits and I'll wait to see how Firaxis take on this goes before I criticize it (as it could work very well).

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    Indeed. There's quite a few games where I would personally love the same thing. However, I wouldn't pay new release prices for that.

    There's been a trend of "HD" remakes of games and usually they're sold at a relatively inexpensive price on XBLA, PSN, or Steam and X-COM would certainly be a good candidate for that. This, however, is not that game. Firaxis has been upfront with saying that this is a new XCOM, not a remake, and so people need to adjust they're expectations accordingly.
    X-Com: Apocalypse was also a new X-Com, and a pretty good one at that. But it was indeed just as hard as the other ones (maybe not TFTD, but... well..).

    But yeah, out of 32 bullet points all were fine, except for three. TU re-imagining, AMMO re-imagining and the satellite + hangar in countries stuff.

    Abstract ammo makes it easier, especially for the rocket-launcher guy. We don't need to waste inventory space with spare rockets.

    The 2-TU thing can be troublesome but i won't delve too deeply into it, because there are ways such thing can work (such as having an entire area to spend that half-TU move command.. such as the area highlighted in the selected soldier screenshot)

    But the one base thing.. Upgradeable sattelite and lease-lend hangars are fine but are they destroyable? If they're attackable, do we have opportunity to defend them? And the base itself, TELL me that we will have to defend it?!


    All the other points look fine. But if you can add ammo clips, vulnerable base/sattelites/hangars then it will be perfect.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    571
    Most of the bullet points were music to my ears. The procedurally generated maps, the destructible terrain. Excellent news!
    Also the fact that aliens are randomly placed.

    The comment about Japan and the laser gun, does that hint at choosing your base location gives you some kind of unique bonus? That could be interesting. Or maybe if you make a country Really Happy one month?

    The HWP description made me wonder about some Alpha Centauri like customization!

    The "One Base" news was disappointing, but I'll keep an open mind about the new scheme with sub-bases.

    The "can't be plasma-bombed" comment made me wonder if he meant "blaster-bombed" instead. Let's face it, if I was an alien commander with a Blaster Launcher and I saw an enemy ship land and a ramp drop down, I'd send a bomb through the back door and it's game over. Even if he meant plasma, It just means that the map was built with a buffer around the LZ or the Skyranger has a belly gun to make some room. That being said, after a few turns all bets are off, and I wouldn't expect safety around my craft anymore.

    The TUs being limited to 2 phases is not what I was hoping for. I'd like to hear more about it, but it could work out as making turns quicker. Most soldiers had enough TUs for a significant move and a shot (or saving it for reaction fire), although soldiers with Blaster Launcher or Rocket Launcher barely had TUs to shoot and reload on a turn. If you used Aimed shot, like a sniper would, then you pretty much got one shot. It might work out. I really was hoping for the same TUs though. I enjoyed micromanaging the steps, trying to eke out every last action I could each turn.

    The ammo situation is a little disappointing, but it looks like instead of worrying about running out of ammo, we will instead worry about reloading at an inopportune time. I can't help but think that there must be an exception for explosive type weapons, but we'll see.

    All in all, I'm still very excited about this game. I eagerly look forward to more info.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Everything they're doing looks great, however I hope at the very least, the main base can be put in any location the player wants.

    I'd be a bit bummed if it was hard-coded to be in one spot every game. The initial choice of base location immediately personalized the game for the player since people played it all over the world. (And even just being able to put it in your state made things that much more personal.) Plus it was an important tactical descision since that part of the world would be getting the best defense against the aliens.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanki View Post
    I have to disagree with you there. The aliens were there first so yes, they would have the tactical advantage of first strike.
    Just because the aliens were there doesnt mean your skyranger pilot should park the ship infront of a sectoid firing squad, IMO the only type of mission where that makes sense and should happen is in terror missions

    Quote Originally Posted by kenthen View Post
    At any rate, I really hope they change the abstract ammo BS among other things, but they've all been brought up.
    IMO its a good thing, ammo wasnt actually something scarce in the original, specially when in the first month you could get laser guns and by the time you changed to heavy plasma all humanoid aliens and your soldiers were swiming in heavy plasma clips, it was only important in heavy weapons, maybe them in this reimaging only have a set of limited uses per mission

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Alguien View Post
    IMO its a good thing, ammo wasnt actually something scarce in the original, specially when in the first month you could get laser guns and by the time you changed to heavy plasma all humanoid aliens and your soldiers were swiming in heavy plasma clips, it was only important in heavy weapons, maybe them in this reimaging only have a set of limited uses per mission
    Yeah, I never ran out of ammo in the original either. All my guys had at least 4 clips each, and that always seemed like enough.

    HOWEVER, I do wonder how rockets and grenades will work. Infinite ammo for them? Hmmmmmm....

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by IllusionOfLife View Post
    Out of 32 bullet points you find two things to complain about and you call the game an absolute travesty? That seems a bit unreasonable to me.
    Then let ME say it's TRAVESTY. But like the other guy you quoted, I too won't complain much.

    Because when the game is SO GODDAMN FAR from what you expect, you simply give up complaining.

  27. #27
    I'm not really fond of the single base or the abstract ammo, but what really made me sad, somehow depressed and suddently not interested in this game is the action points thing.

    And no, please, don't even try to undersell it as a trivial matter, it's huge, and it's bad. And you, Firaxis, should feel bad about it.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8
    No ammo, perks, one base, "making the game fair" and no time units really worry me.

    A single base is perhaps the most worrisome of them all. Does this means base defense is completely out? Or will we only defend the sub-bases? But then, they will all have a very boring layout considering it will be just hangars and sat dishes.

    Making the game "fair" also sends all kinds of alerts for reasons others here already commented.

    I also don't like the idea of dumbing down the moving system. Do modern devs really assume that all modern videogame players are incapable of understanding a slightly more complex game?

    I'm a little worried. This is no longer a blind pre-order for me. I really hope there is a demo for this game when it's released so I can assess the damage for myself, otherwise I'll have to skip it entirely or buy it when it's 75% off. I won't badmouth the game, though, I'll wait and see - just sharing my worries for now.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    17
    Not excited about the 1-base restriction. It removes that dilemma of expanding coverage vs strengthening exists coverage in the game of securing funding.

    Also unhappy about the abstracted ammo. Unlimited ammo? Comon... that should be a very important part of equipping your forces and of course in your manufacturing plans.

    I also dont like the removal of time units. So every soldier no matter how experienced can just perform two actions per turn? And reloading the weapon is an entire action. I dont like that at all. Part of the value of a veteran solider in XCOM was that they had significantly more TU's and can perform more per turn than a rookie. That made sense and worked great. Why take that away?

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Alguien View Post
    Just because the aliens were there doesnt mean your skyranger pilot should park the ship infront of a sectoid firing squad, IMO the only type of mission where that makes sense and should happen is in terror missions
    Park it too far, and the aliens might get back on the ship and bail out. If it's a downed vessel, aliens might see the Skyranger coming and scatter. If you park closer, they don't have the time to do this.

  31. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Alguien View Post
    IMO its a good thing, ammo wasnt actually something scarce in the original, specially when in the first month you could get laser guns and by the time you changed to heavy plasma all humanoid aliens and your soldiers were swiming in heavy plasma clips, it was only important in heavy weapons, maybe them in this reimaging only have a set of limited uses per mission
    You're right, since you were swimming in ammo in the original, let's make this game even dumber in that regard and remove ammo altogether. Let's not make it deeper, that would suck.
    [/sarcasm]

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by vorius View Post
    I also dont like the removal of time units. So every soldier no matter how experienced can just perform two actions per turn? And reloading the weapon is an entire action. I dont like that at all. Part of the value of a veteran solider in XCOM was that they had significantly more TU's and can perform more per turn than a rookie. That made sense and worked great. Why take that away?
    Yeah, that's by far the worst thing for me. I don't like to sound whine and over-dramatic, but it's almost a deal-breaker, for Christ's sake.

    What about exiting a cover, shooting and going into cover again?
    They are essentially killing most of the tactical depth of the game.
    They are turning X-COM in Final Fantasy Tactics. Which is a decent game, mind me, but it isn't anywhere near to the original UFO: Enemy Unknown.

    P.S. The more I think about it the more annoyed I am... How it is that after dozens of remakes, there isn't one single game not just surpassing but even merely matching the overall genius of the original one?
    Not even full budget studios specialized in strategy games seem to grasp what made the original so great. Everytime someone try to "improve" something about this game, they actually end up screwing things.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by kenthen View Post
    You're right, since you were swimming in ammo in the original, let's make this game even dumber in that regard and remove ammo altogether. Let's not make it deeper, that would suck.
    [/sarcasm]
    You still have to reload so the tactical importance of when and where is still there, and just becuase the game assume than you have infinite ammo, that doesnt meant is going to be free, so the only thing left is having to move the clips to the rookies each mission

    So yeah, if you are going to use sarcasm and calling something dumb, at least have the decency of having something to support your argument

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where d'you think? Sectoid Squishing!
    Posts
    3,412
    •Firaxis designer states that the PC version will have an enhanced interface. He cites Dragon Age: Origins on PC and console as a big inspiration
    That at least is great news.

    However - no one getting an experience bonus because one man dies? Huh?

    Not excited about the 1-base restriction. It removes that dilemma of expanding coverage vs strengthening exists coverage in the game of securing funding.

    Also unhappy about the abstracted ammo. Unlimited ammo? Comon... that should be a very important part of equipping your forces and of course in your manufacturing plans.

    I also dont like the removal of time units. So every soldier no matter how experienced can just perform two actions per turn? And reloading the weapon is an entire action. I dont like that at all. Part of the value of a veteran solider in XCOM was that they had significantly more TU's and can perform more per turn than a rookie. That made sense and worked great. Why take that away?
    Wait - so what are the advantages of veterans then, if not extended movement ability?

    Unlimited ammo is dumb - unless maybe for some alien weapons that could need a certain amount of time to recharge but never actually run out of ammo? It's dumb for human weapons though. And having only one base is very bad news for me. Don't we even have satellite bases around the world? If not, how the heck are you supposed to get Interceptors to the other side of the world in time if that's where the attack is happening?

    I hope I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think that other video showed that Firaxis do indeed love the original Xcom - but this info says to me that The Man has stuck his nose in and squished a lot of their ideas, replacing them with things that will keep the console children happy. That is why it's a bad thing the game isn't a PC exclusive - unless of course the PC version is somehow on a separate development track, which I doubt. The Man doesn't like separate development tracks, they cost him more munny.
    So yeah, you only have one base. Building different bases has been removed, but you still buy satellite coverage (the new radar) and build hangars for interception in different countries. Your single base is like way more crazy awesome than any base from the original, though, and presents lots of opportunities for more decision-making in terms of digging deeper as well as what kind of expansion facilities you add on (see the screenshot of the "ant farm" that we put online Monday).
    OK, I only just read that. So, one main base and other 'airfield' type bases then? Can the satellite bases be attacked? Speaking of bases being attacked, it would be good if there was some sort of mini game where your skill could have a bit of an input as to whether you hit the battleship or not, as opposed to the random nature in Xcom. Same applies for the UFO intercept sections.
    I am fairly happy with most of this actually and am keen to see it in action. The only thing I am not satisfied with is the fact we can't have multiple bases anymore. At the same time, being able to have hangers in multiple countries is enough of a compromise for me. Can you choose where your starting base is or are you stuck to the US?
    Yep, I agree with that and I bet you can't decide where to place your base either. Oh well. Unlike a lot of people, I do not simply want a remake with higher res, better graphics and so on, but the remake has to capture the essence of the original game. As a new release, the game will come out at around £20 - £30 (depending on whether you get it online or not) and I for one am not happy to pay full price release for a bit of spit and polish on the original game.

    As I always say with new games, whether it's Fifa or F1 2011 or this one, until I've seen a video or better still a demo (hopefully we'll be getting one), I'll reserve total judgement. As of now though, it does sound to me that too much 'streamlining' is being done, but we'll see. This is after all a Firaxis game and they have released some amazing titles over the years.

    Park it too far, and the aliens might get back on the ship and bail out. If it's a downed vessel, aliens might see the Skyranger coming and scatter. If you park closer, they don't have the time to do this.
    So we can decide where to land now? That's good. I always found it a bit odd that you had to blunder around in the dark for ages before finding the UFO, given that you could surely see it from the air as you came in to land?

    I'm not really fond of the single base or the abstract ammo, but what really made me sad, somehow depressed and suddently not interested in this game is the action points thing.

    And no, please, don't even try to undersell it as a trivial matter, it's huge, and it's bad. And you, Firaxis, should feel bad about it.
    What I want to know is how the new movement system will work in a turn based game? Time Units were perfect - why mess around with the fundamentals? That's the thing I am a little concerned about - it's the fundamentals that are being messed around with here - the things that made the game great all those years ago! Yes, it was unfair at times. So what? This isn't just war, this is an Alien Invasion against an enemy thousands, if not more years ahead of us! Part of what made the first game so great was the learning curve. You had to learn not to just send troops running out on their own, otherwise they'd just get cut down. Speaking of which, I hope our troops can still be taken down with one hit if unarmoured? It would annoy the hell out of me if we had a situation similar to CoD where you could collect a burst of machine gun fire, yet be fine a few seconds later if you took cover.
    Last edited by SectoidSquisher; 01-11-2012 at 08:24 AM.

  35. #35
    I've been playing X-COM on and off again since it was originally released in 1994. I started playing it again this past weekend using the UFO Extender mod after this Firaxis version was announced and have been enjoying it immensely. I'm excited for this new version and I like what I've read and seen so far. That being said, I haven't yet read the GI article for myself so I'm mainly going on what has been presented so far through these forums and the GI website.

    Coming from a tabletop wargaming background, I'm not opposed to the Move + Action constituting a unit's turn. We still don't know what 'Actions' they're going to be allowed to do and we also don't know what kind of 'Perks' are going to be available outside of the ones mentioned for the sniper. We don't know how leveling is going to work. We don't know how movement is going to work. Is each unit going to be able to move 3 hexes? Can you run? Can you crouch? Can you go prone? Can you move while crouched or prone? Do you automatically go into cover if the current hex allows for it? Does terrain affect how far you can move? We don't know what the >> mean next to a few of the units nor do we know what the 4-6 squares indicate. Basically, we don't know a lot of things yet.

    Due to my overly optimistic nature, I'm holding out hope for this. I personally like what I've seen thus far and can't wait for more web previews or to get my issue of GI so I can learn more about this. Not to mention, there is still a significant amount of time between now and it's slated release of Fall 2012 for them to make changes to what has been presented.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where d'you think? Sectoid Squishing!
    Posts
    3,412
    UFO Extender mod? Sounds interesting.

  37. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by SectoidSquisher View Post
    UFO Extender mod? Sounds interesting.
    Go here for more info: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=User:Seb76

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    22
    I tried to clean these up a little bit from OP's post and gave my own categories of Like/Dislike/Meh. My personal thoughts are included in parenthesese behind each bullet.

    "Likes":
    •Destructible environments.
    •Randomly generated missions, terrain. A few scripted story missions will not be random and will feature in-game cinematics.
    •Fog of war is confirmed.
    •Enemy spawns are randomized.
    •Sectoids and Mutons confirmed.
    •The base's screenshot is accurate. It is now a side shot instead of top down. (2D, just like before but it feels more "XCOM" seeing the base underground, I like that quite a bit. I hope that the base acts like Sim Tower and shows soldiers/scientists/engineers moving around your base, sleeping/eating/training/researching/etc based on the time of day where the base is located.)
    •Base location provides a starting bonus. Example: Japan has the laser rifle already developed. (Funny, I would have thought robotics, personally)
    •Procedurally generated missions and encounters. Every playthrough will be different.
    •16 countries in the funding council. Some provide more money, but others, like Africa, provide more raw resources. (Insight into needing more than alien alloys and E-115 to manufacture? I like that. See below for a dislike.)
    •The sniper units have a grappling hook ability to get on top of buildings (Low tech flying armor, nice!)
    •Soldier customization looks like a big deal (With time units out, does this mean doll dressing or actual equipment placement?)
    •Unexperienced soldiers can panic and go berserk (I like that they still do this. See the dislike below about their actions.)
    •PC version will have an enhanced interface. He cites Dragon Age: Origins on PC and console as a big inspiration. (Look at Civ for xbox vs Civ for PC. Firaxis knows how to do this right.)
    •No black blobs in Firaxis's XCOM (There is a god and he plays XCOM!)
    •Overwatch, duck, are all still very much present, tactically.
    •Sectoids and Mutons are in. Cyberdiscs and Thin Men are also mentioned. Evidently psionics are also in.
    •Devs are considering an iron man type mode where you can't load previous saves. (Stop considering and do it! This would be an amazing feature.


    "Dislikes:"
    •16 countries in the funding council. Some provide more money, but others, like Africa, provide more raw resources. (16? Really? Africa is not a country. Neither is Europe. I bet this is tied to the one base thing. Assinine. The world should be fully developed, with countries, cities and geography.)
    •You still need to choose which countries to send missions to. (With one base, I'm worried how I'll cover the world. They should have explained this dynamic (how to cover the world) of changing the mechanic (one base) more because its the biggest freak out issue. I'm very worried that gameplay is shifting to not being able to protect the whole world which I strive to do).
    •No action points. The game uses a action/action per turn dynamic. They don't want people counting individual time units. (This balances gameplay but is a huge break from the way that XCOM plays. I'll take some major convincing that this works. Also it seems like now soldiers can not gain additional actions (maybe a perk) as they could before by gaining Time Units.)
    •Soldiers can still panic, but not to the point of wiping the squad. (If this is true on Beginner difficulty - ok I get it. If this can't happen on Experienced, Veteran, Genius or Superhuman, then they're taking a great part of the game out.)
    •Likewise, you'll never get plasma-bombed right out of the carrier. (See above. Just because the developers didn't use smoke grenades doesn't mean they should change one of the most TENSE moments of the game. Surviving the disembarkment was FUN!)

    "Meh"
    •In combat, a soldier died. Due to this the other soldiers. didn't get an experience bonus. (Hey, let's give players a reason to re-load EVERY MISSION. If the Rookie dies, the Rookie dies, that's the XCOM way.)
    •Without the exerpience bonus, the sniper leveled up still. He was able to choose from two abilities. Either Squad Sight - soldiers can shoot anything a squadmate can see (I'm sure this doesn't include barriers?) and Snap Shot - allows shooting after moving.
    •You can't recruit specific classes. You can only recruit rookies and then level them up to become specific classes. (Why have classes at all? Why not just let us level their skills for the role we want them in?)
    •The guys in suits in the screenshots are 'Thin Man' aliens. They're able to leap long distances.
    •Challenge is stressed a lot (It's XCOM, it should be. Especially now when all you do is fart on a keyboard and win a game.)
    •Same quick save/load system.
    •Firaxis states that they're not rebooting XCOM, they're re-imagining it. Using the same core gameplay with modern technology, weapons, audiovisuals, etc.
    •'Heavy Armed Mobile Cover Platform' (HAMCP? They should find a cool acronym) that serves as a powerful support unit. (I never used tanks before, will they be useful now?)
    •Mobile platform called SHIV; customizable for new chasis (this the thing above?)
    •Gunners have a suppressing fire (not sure how this will be used, must be something new in gameplay?)
    •Aliens have their own special perk-like abilities as well. (Hope there are missions where we have to hunt down specific ones)
    •Apparently there's some sort of cinematic view when your guys get killed.
    Last edited by Limiate; 01-11-2012 at 08:38 AM. Reason: Small changes.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Yeah, I don't think we really have enough info to start freaking out yet. For all we know more experienced soldiers can get a perk that allows them to move after firing, or maybe more experenced soldiers unlock an extra action. We just don't really know how the action system works in detail yet.

    And like I said, as far as perks go, it's a win-win. There is NO downside to soldiers being able to get extra abilities (like the sniper grapling hook), it just gives the player more tactical options and customization for his troops.

    I think base defense is probably out though, at least for the main base. I just don't see how it could work with the "ant farm" design of the main base. While unfortunate, base defense missions where usually just a 1 time deal in most games. (Fusion Ball \ Grav \ Mind Shield Defenses for the win!) If they had to sacrifice it in order to get more commonly used features \ missions in, then so be it.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where d'you think? Sectoid Squishing!
    Posts
    3,412
    Quote Originally Posted by MEdwards View Post
    Mmmm, I likey! Thanks mate.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •