"Next event in X hours" dialogue.. not sure I like it

[katscan]

From what we have seen so far, it appears that the geoscape/base gameplay has been streamlined so that you know when the next event will occur (I presume this does not occur for UFO interceptions and other unknown events). However, I don't like the certainty in research. I don't like knowing exactly how many hours a given piece of research will take... but I guess that's in the research screen ("this will take X hours to complete").. oh well.. I kind of liked the ambiguity of the original, and not knowing what research will be faster than another.

[Schuesseled]

From what we have seen so far, it appears that the geoscape/base gameplay has been streamlined so that you know when the next event will occur (I presume this does not occur for UFO interceptions and other unknown events). However, I don't like the certainty in research. I don't like knowing exactly how many hours a given piece of research will take... but I guess that's in the research screen ("this will take X hours to complete").. oh well.. I kind of liked the ambiguity of the original, and not knowing what research will be faster than another.

Uncertainty just makes the game harder to play, if you know your medkits will be produced in 12 days, and your advanced medkits research will be done in 2 days, then you may as switch the production to something that will be ready when your research is, rather building the soon-to be outdated stuff.

If your research is UNKNOWN, PROGRESS STEADY, how's that going to help you plan out your game.

As for the general, "will be ready in x" dialogue, how could you not like this, in other xcom games, you have to go to every conceivable page, to find out this information, now its on the geoscape. Much better.

[Craprastic]

I'm fine with that as long as I don't see a "Next UFO encounter in X"

[Jeep-Eep]

I'm fine with that as long as I don't see a "Next UFO encounter in X"

That could be justified, if you get some good SIGNINT tech. Just saying.

[coyote_blue]

Also, we have no idea if this is an estimate. Real scientists have to give progress reports and schedule estimates. This might just be an in-game version of that.

[Agent Trunk]

I am fine with this feature as long as it is believable.
As in, it is possible for your organization to predict such things.

[Hortey]

Uncertainty just makes the game harder to play, if you know your medkits will be produced in 12 days, and your advanced medkits research will be done in 2 days, then you may as switch the production to something that will be ready when your research is, rather building the soon-to be outdated stuff.

If your research is UNKNOWN, PROGRESS STEADY, how's that going to help you plan out your game.

As for the general, "will be ready in x" dialogue, how could you not like this, in other xcom games, you have to go to every conceivable page, to find out this information, now its on the geoscape. Much better.

You said it yourself. If you KNEW when something was going to be figured out, it's not really a choice at all. So my question is, why should we not have to make decisions like this in a game that is BUILT around decisions like this?

[Hortey]

I am fine with this feature as long as it is believable.
As in, it is possible for your organization to predict such things.

Commander: What is this?
Scientist: Some kind of weapon fragment I think.
Commander: What does it do?
Scientist: I don't know
Commander: Can you reverse engineer it?
Scientist: I have no idea, maybe.
Commander: What's it made out of?
Scientist: I don't know, something metallic... sir, you just handed it to me.
Commander: Can you make it into a weapon?
Scientist: Seriously sir, I don't know. I don't even know what it IS.
Commander: Ok, I'd like you to make it into a weapon. How long until the prototype is ready for manufacturing?
Scientist: 15 days, 8 hours, 25 minutes and thirty seconds from now.


See how stupid that sounds?

[timewatch]

I'm fine with that as long as I don't see a "Next UFO encounter in X"

That would be a cool feature. One of the research tech could be intercepting UFO communications and predict when and what kind of UFO are incoming so the XCom can be better prepared. Researching techs are suppose to make it easier for humans, and having advanced information is a huge part of any strategic game.

[Craprastic]

But that takes the suspense and "freedom" out of a Ufo attack. In the original you never had an approximation of when a Ufo would appear, you could detect it anywhere in the world as soon as it did, but you see what I mean?

[Mindless]

@Hortey; HA! Agreed

Production can be predicted, you have some idea how long it will take to built 4 plasma guns. Research, as in the first game, should just be a general estimate... as in "the research is going well" or "not making much progress".

I am glad to see some people still say "wait! that's not good!" I have seen to many people grasping at straws trying to justify changes to the original concept every time they are announced by Firaxis. Some of these changes could be good, but some more then likely wouldn't. People just seem to willing to accept everything. Has Back in Action taught us nothing

[Agent Trunk]

Commander: What is this?
Scientist: Some kind of weapon fragment I think.
Commander: What does it do?
Scientist: I don't know
Commander: Can you reverse engineer it?
Scientist: I have no idea, maybe.
Commander: What's it made out of?
Scientist: I don't know, something metallic... sir, you just handed it to me.
Commander: Can you make it into a weapon?
Scientist: Seriously sir, I don't know. I don't even know what it IS.
Commander: Ok, I'd like you to make it into a weapon. How long until the prototype is ready for manufacturing?
Scientist: 15 days, 8 hours, 25 minutes and thirty seconds from now.


See how stupid that sounds?

@Hortey; HA! Agreed

Production can be predicted, you have some idea how long it will take to built 4 plasma guns. Research, as in the first game, should just be a general estimate... as in "the research is going well" or "not making much progress".

I am glad to see some people still say "wait! that's not good!" I have seen to many people grasping at straws trying to justify changes to the original concept every time they are announced by Firaxis. Some of these changes could be good, but some more then likely wouldn't. People just seem to willing to accept everything. Has Back in Action taught us nothing

Just to make it clear, I don't agree that every event should have a countdown timer.
That's why I said "as long as it's believable".
I wish for it to be just a tool of convenience not a surprise spoiler.

[PeppermintShore]

well hopefully they will see this and make it an option you can turn off and on at the beginning of the game. But once you start there is no going back. For me i would like it off, and have it like the old game, poor - excellent. But I love the fact its displayed on the geoscape.

[Cuzin_1t]

I think they should do it realistically. The scientists give an estimate...then it takes twice as long and costs triple the money.

Truthfully though, I like not knowing the exact time as it gives that sense of "did I do the right thing?" Maybe split the difference and have the time as an estimate around which the actual research will be completed will occur....OR just make it a game-play option like Ironman.

[Mindless]

@ Agent Trunk; Like you Avatar.. looks like a rookie

I see what you are saying, I agree with the 2 posts below you... and it is what I kept going on about on the Back in Action (bitComposer) forum back then, the option should be availeble. Gamers should have the choice, between choosing "the way it was originally" or "the way we (Firaxis) think it should be". Every aspect of XCOM should be included, start a new game and you can check or uncheck "unlimited ammo", "single base", "simplified economic system", "show research time", etc...

And even choose between TBS or Realtime with Pause, a option that Back in Action SHOULD have had! (I prefer TBS... always)

That is the other thing I miss with games lately (other then complexity), choise. Remember the old games were you could specify how you want the game to play? Could specify how many weapon choices you want (JA2 - Tons of Guns), how complicated puzzles should be (System Shock), how long the game should take to finnish (Total War series), how realistic bullet balistics must be (the recent Sniper Elite V2)... and so on.

@Cuzin_1t, how is Jo'burg today!? The mother city is wet and cold (PS: Love Adams Family)

[heniv]

Even though I understand the ambiguity of timed research, I kinda like it from a game perspective. Not only does it take into account what kind of tech you get, but how much time (another game recourse) you have to invest in it.

- Shall I research plasma rifles in 48 days, or have laser tech in 20 days and be less powerful, but a lot faster?

Knowing the time adds another layer to re-playability, you could even compare it to StarCraft "builds / build-orders".

[Sectoid Commander]

Even though I understand the ambiguity of timed research, I kinda like it from a game perspective. Not only does it take into account what kind of tech you get, but how much time (another game recourse) you have to invest in it.

- Shall I research plasma rifles in 48 days, or have laser tech in 20 days and be less powerful, but a lot faster?

Knowing the time adds another layer to re-playability, you could even compare it to StarCraft "builds / build-orders".

And I would argue it would add to replayability not knowing. You could say, "I will work on laser tech for now because it is 28 days quicker than plasma, which I will research after" Or... You could say, "Hmm. I'm not sure if it would be better to work on laser tech now or just go to plasma? Plasma might not take too much longer, it might take a lot longer. If I go laser first, plasma second I could try going straight to plasma next time around"

Choice and consequence and the ability to try it a different way as you don't know how it will work out. If it was predictable you might just play it the same way each playthrough as you might justify the extra X number of days for research because you get the extra power.

[nipsen]

I'd go for something like "18 hours 40m to next tier progress report". Maybe some projects could have stages, where you would know the first stage was fast, and the next stage was unknown. Then you would know at the beginning, like in the original, that something will be research pretty fast compared to something else. But you still don't really know exactly how far that research will take you, or what it will lead to until later. Or if it will result in a weapon at the first stage, or require another piece.

That's how laser-weapons worked in xcom, for example. Laser-tech, laser-pistol, laser-rifle -- this was pretty fast, but it took a while. It took longer than researching a plasma-rifle and a clip you would have picked up, for example.

[Inkidu]

That could be justified, if you get some good SIGNINT tech. Just saying.

Yeah, that would have to be the "hyperwave decoder" of this game.

[ShanDaMan]

I want time estimates from Scotty of Star Trek.

Kirk: Scotty, How long until warp drive is repaired?

Scotty: We lost half of Engineering, 2/3 of the crew was sucked into space, we have lethal levels of radiation around the core, and about a million Tribbles in the Jeffries' Tubes! It will take at least 10 hours before I can give you manouvering thrusters, and we should have warp drive in 13 weeks.

Kirk: Spock just informed me that the nearby star will go supernova in precisely 2 hours and 15.382 seconds! We need that warp drive!

Scotty: We'll do our best.

(2 hours and 11 seconds later)

Scotty: Captain, we now have warp drive restored, plus I found the time to increase shield strength, double our weapons efficiency, and I saved us 15% on starship insurance by switching to Geico!

[Ixnatifual]

You could have the scientists provide an estimated research time. The actual research time could then be the estimated time +/- X number of days. Might be more realistic but still provide choice. And as long as X is randomized you can't look it up.

[Schuesseled]

You said it yourself. If you KNEW when something was going to be figured out, it's not really a choice at all. So my question is, why should we not have to make decisions like this in a game that is BUILT around decisions like this?

I'm sorry where did i say this

I want time estimates from Scotty of Star Trek.

Kirk: Scotty, How long until warp drive is repaired?

Scotty: We lost half of Engineering, 2/3 of the crew was sucked into space, we have lethal levels of radiation around the core, and about a million Tribbles in the Jeffries' Tubes! It will take at least 10 hours before I can give you manouvering thrusters, and we should have warp drive in 13 weeks.

Kirk: Spock just informed me that the nearby star will go supernova in precisely 2 hours and 15.382 seconds! We need that warp drive!

Scotty: We'll do our best.

(2 hours and 11 seconds later)

Scotty: Captain, we now have warp drive restored, plus I found the time to increase shield strength, double our weapons efficiency, and I saved us 15% on starship insurance by switching to Geico!

which reminds we of the awesome scene when scotty gets all coma forzen and wakes up next to ol' blindo fordo, ands all like "how long is it really gonna take you laddy"

"like i said, 12 hours"

moral is scottish people lie to make themselves look good.

Commander: What is this?
Scientist: Some kind of weapon fragment I think.
Commander: What does it do?
Scientist: I don't know
Commander: Can you reverse engineer it?
Scientist: I have no idea, maybe.
Commander: What's it made out of?
Scientist: I don't know, something metallic... sir, you just handed it to me.
Commander: Can you make it into a weapon?
Scientist: Seriously sir, I don't know. I don't even know what it IS.
Commander: Ok, I'd like you to make it into a weapon. How long until the prototype is ready for manufacturing?
Scientist: 15 days, 8 hours, 25 minutes and thirty seconds from now.


See how stupid that sounds?

You are forgetting that the military tend to expect answers to unanswerable questions.

[coyote_blue]

@ Agent Trunk; Like you Avatar.. looks like a rookie
I see what you are saying, I agree with the 2 posts below you... and it is what I kept going on about on the Back in Action (bitComposer) forum back then, the option should be availeble. Gamers should have the choice, between choosing "the way it was originally" or "the way we (Firaxis) think it should be". Every aspect of XCOM should be included, start a new game and you can check or uncheck "unlimited ammo", "single base", "simplified economic system", "show research time", etc...

And even choose between TBS or Realtime with Pause, a option that Back in Action SHOULD have had! (I prefer TBS... always)

That is the other thing I miss with games lately (other then complexity), choise. Remember the old games were you could specify how you want the game to play? Could specify how many weapon choices you want (JA2 - Tons of Guns), how complicated puzzles should be (System Shock), how long the game should take to finnish (Total War series), how realistic bullet balistics must be (the recent Sniper Elite V2)... and so on.

I think I understand your frustration with choices, but it was much easier to do things like this in old games than it is in new versions. For instance, putting "single base" on a toggle would be very easy to program...initially. But it would wreck the entire game, which has to be just as good regardless of what the player chooses. If every base is a powerful ant farm, and you choose to have many, then XCOM gets too powerful, too quickly. OR the player runs out of money before he can build many bases, and then that doesn't feel like a valid choice.

They chose not to remake the original XCOM as is. We have to live with that. "Unlimited ammo" and "No TUs" don't sound like dumb-downs, to me, because the character class system is completely new, and replaces it. I can't compare apples to oranges. And I don't think it's logical to talk about toggles. It would be like having a toggle on Street Fighter that makes it play like Tekken. Sure, they're both fighters, but that choice would break one or both designs.

Limitations matter. Great designs make limitations meaningful and valuable. Bad designs use limitations to paper over technological issues or boring features. There's no way to compare this new XCOM to Back in Action (much different management system) or old XCOM (no character classes), until it comes out.

[Hortey]

You said it yourself. If you KNEW when something was going to be figured out, it's not really a choice at all. So my question is, why should we not have to make decisions like this in a game that is BUILT around decisions like this?

I'm sorry where did i say this

Uncertainty just makes the game harder to play, if you know your medkits will be produced in 12 days, and your advanced medkits research will be done in 2 days, then you may as switch the production to something that will be ready when your research is, rather building the soon-to be outdated stuff.

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

You are forgetting that the military tend to expect answers to unanswerable questions.

Yea, true. But the estimate will never be the exact time it finishes. The "going well, going excellent, going poorly" system was fine as it gave you an outline of how soon to expect the research to finish but didn't make choices for you by giving you exact figures to work with. If a stronger weapon only takes 10% longer to research, then it's almost no choice at all. If its going to take just as long or longer for a soon outdated version of tech then no one will even use it.

If you don't like the unknown, I'm surprised you take to xcom games so readily that you will defend these changes.

[Alucardex]

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


Yea, true. But the estimate will never be the exact time it finishes. The "going well, going excellent, going poorly" system was fine as it gave you an outline of how soon to expect the research to finish but didn't make choices for you by giving you exact figures to work with. If a stronger weapon only takes 10% longer to research, then it's almost no choice at all. If its going to take just as long or longer for a soon outdated version of tech then no one will even use it.

If you don't like the unknown, I'm surprised you take to xcom games so readily that you will defend these changes.

Except in the old system everyone who already played the game knew how long things will take.
I don't like gameplay mechanics that favor senior players like that.

[Schuesseled]

I was making the point that being given a choice of producing something that will be outdated before its produced, isn't a choice at all. This is true even if you are unaware of the details of said choice. It is an inept way of making the game, why punish players for making decisions, which are inherently unpredictable to new players.

Yea, true. But the estimate will never be the exact time it finishes. The "going well, going excellent, going poorly" system was fine as it gave you an outline of how soon to expect the research to finish but didn't make choices for you by giving you exact figures to work with. If a stronger weapon only takes 10% longer to research, then it's almost no choice at all. If its going to take just as long or longer for a soon outdated version of tech then no one will even use it.

If you don't like the unknown, I'm surprised you take to xcom games so readily that you will defend these changes.

You don't improve gameplay by camoflaging the decisions players are expected to make by hiding "critical need to know information".

Case and point the reception of Civ V diplomacy upon release and the quickly made update that followed.

Enemy unknown is a game about reinforcing humanities last defenses in order to combat an alien threat. The word unknown in the title refers to the mysterious nature of the beings you are fighting, which is improved as the game goes on. It doesn't imply that the game should be shrouded with ambiguity.

Except in the old system everyone who already played the game knew how long things will take.
I don't like gameplay mechanics that favor senior players like that.

Yes, precisely.

[katscan]

Also, we have no idea if this is an estimate. Real scientists have to give progress reports and schedule estimates. This might just be an in-game version of that.

My wife is a scientist. I have yet to see her say "In 12 days and 4 hours we will have completely research the E Coli genome" or "In 3 days 5 hours and 24 minutes we will complete researching this new protein"

My ass. It's all estimates. That's why it's science and not manufacturing.

[katscan]

Commander: What is this?
Scientist: Some kind of weapon fragment I think.
Commander: What does it do?
Scientist: I don't know
Commander: Can you reverse engineer it?
Scientist: I have no idea, maybe.
Commander: What's it made out of?
Scientist: I don't know, something metallic... sir, you just handed it to me.
Commander: Can you make it into a weapon?
Scientist: Seriously sir, I don't know. I don't even know what it IS.
Commander: Ok, I'd like you to make it into a weapon. How long until the prototype is ready for manufacturing?
Scientist: 15 days, 8 hours, 25 minutes and thirty seconds from now.


See how stupid that sounds?

HAHAHAHA PRECISELY !! Exactly my point.

[katscan]

Except in the old system everyone who already played the game knew how long things will take.
I don't like gameplay mechanics that favor senior players like that.

eh??? I've played the game countless times and I still only have a general sense of how long things take. I don't play with the wiki printed out and the exact research times posted on my wall. If you just play the game like a human being and not a min/max'er you have no idea exactly how long things take to research. Unlike the current system.

[katscan]

You don't improve gameplay by camoflaging the decisions players are expected to make by hiding "critical need to know information".

The issue is that research is imprecise and approximate so you SHOULDNT know this information precisely.. So it's not a matter of hiding anything. It isn't only the MESSAGE that is the problem, it's the MECHANIC of precise research (which I admit was in the prior, but at least it was concealed or made less of an issue via the correctly ambiguous research statements).

[Schuesseled]

The issue is that research is imprecise and approximate so you SHOULDNT know this information precisely.. So it's not a matter of hiding anything. It isn't only the MESSAGE that is the problem, it's the MECHANIC of precise research (which I admit was in the prior, but at least it was concealed or made less of an issue via the correctly ambiguous research statements).

Of course not, but gameplay trumps realism, almost every game i have played, which included research of some form, had definitive research times, you could even see into the future to see what kinds of technology your race/empire/shoeshop could develop into.

The original x-com was the exception, research in the game wasn't bad per say, but it wasn't so special and awesome that I would prefer it over something following the norm.

If you wanted to make a game where the research times were genuinely unpredictable, built that way into the code, so they take different times to complete for every person on every playthrough, fine, I might even go as far as to call it cool. But when you have research that takes a precise amount of time to complete it should be showed as such, I don't like player end randomness, it's not cool or fine. (by which i mean, making research unpredictable by making it not make sense, so everyone who plays the game, cocks up)

[katscan]

True.. complete randomness would be not fun.

But the choices are a fixed value +/- a small % of randomness (like +/- 10% picked at random) or have an ambiguous statement like the original "good progress".. Having an exact time/date of completion shatters suspension of disbelief (however, the crystalids do not)

Unless what we are seeing is an estimated completion time, which would be better.

[Usul]

You are forgetting that the military tend to expect answers to unanswerable questions.

I seriously doubt that. Science is exploring the new and unkown. You just can not put a precise time one that. Even with force or money. Thats implied in "the unknown".

[Cuzin_1t]

True.. complete randomness would be not fun.

But the choices are a fixed value +/- a small % of randomness (like +/- 10% picked at random) or have an ambiguous statement like the original "good progress".. Having an exact time/date of completion shatters suspension of disbelief (however, the crystalids do not)

Unless what we are seeing is an estimated completion time, which would be better.

I like the estimated completion time this way. It's nice that sometimes it goes wrong and sometimes you get lucky. The whole game has an element of luck on top of strategy, and this would fit in nicely.

[Schuesseled]

I seriously doubt that. Science is exploring the new and unkown. You just can not put a precise time one that. Even with force or money. Thats implied in "the unknown".

Trust me, military commander don't care, they wanna know, so you best tell em.

[SupernovaXL]

Here a crazy idea. Can't see it being in the final build but hey.

A research project is given a deadline say 30 days for instance. At a random point in time within those 30 days the scientist come to you with a report, an update of there progress. There could be an issue eg. we need to get our hands on more fragments of this weapon to continue the research so research is halted until you get more fragments.

Or maybe a different mission type where you have to infiltrate an alien weapons factory and get your hands on some schematics.

Or possibly interrogate a certain alien with a certain skill set. I remember from the original when you used a mind probe on some of the sectoids you would have engineer and scientist variants. They could hold clues to allow research to continue.

[Schuesseled]

I don't think that would fly well for the game, a lot of the time when im researching or building stuff, it's coz all my soldiers just got owned, and i need to gear up. having to go get more fragments would be tedious.

[Hortey]

Once the research is done, you will still have to manufacture the items. That should be the only time you know when the gear will be ready and it's really all you need to know. No matter how long the research takes it will still be days or weeks to just make the gear so it's not like it will completely surprise you. I just think it's stupid that the scientists have no idea how something works, but they can tell you exactly when they will know. You simply don't know what you don't know.

I guess I'll just have to deal with it along with all the other old xcom fans that are annoyed with the streamlining of unecessary changes to a single player game. I mean... who cares if vets have more knowledge of the mechanics than new players? It's a single player game... it's not like you're going to get trashed online if you don't know the maps or haven't unlocked your level 50 equipment.

[Usul]

Trust me, military commander don't care, they wanna know, so you best tell em.

That still wont magicly make uncertain points of time certain. If the military wants to know the lottery numbers it just wont happen either.

[Borson]

It depends on the event. Council Meeting you can count down. Workshop items I don't mind a countdown on, especially if it's been produced before (took 8 manhours last time, should take 8 this time.) Research is the only thing really where the countdown would be a problem. I wouldn't mind an approximation countdown, and sometimes you'd notice it's remaining time left would change. [Imagine if you will, I got about 2 days left until finished with this awesome research, then aliens attack the base. You are victorious, but the damage has been done to the labs, and now you have 2 weeks remaining.]

This is kindof in the category of seeing alien health. I should have a clue if they are injured, but I shouldn't know if a weak pistol shot would finish it off or not.

- Have fun