Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aqizzar]

I'd say so yeah.  When aliens invade my base, even pussies like floaters, it's Do Or Die time.  Nobody rolls up in my crib without getting their asses handed to them.

I would say something more contributory to the subject of the thread, that is the X-COM remake and possibilities therein, but I'm partially spoken for already, and I know it wouldn't matter.

[Virtz]

It doesn't sound like you've actually played the game which is a shame. It's a very different blend between realtime and turnbased - the turns are based on a movement point bar like X-com, though, just not as obvious since they move both more freely and more smoothly (from the absense of a grid).

I didn't question it being turn-based anywhere in my post. And no, I haven't played it, merely saw a gameplay vid. Would be nice if you addressed what of my assessment is incorrect, because I don't intend to play it.

[fenrif]

It doesn't sound like you've actually played the game which is a shame. It's a very different blend between realtime and turnbased - the turns are based on a movement point bar like X-com, though, just not as obvious since they move both more freely and more smoothly (from the absense of a grid).

I didn't question it being turn-based anywhere in my post. And no, I haven't played it, merely saw a gameplay vid. Would be nice if you addressed what of my assessment is incorrect, because I don't intend to play it.

If you haven't played the game, and never intend to because you've allready made up your mind, then it's pointless trying to point out that the game is actually quite fun, and worth playing. Whichever parts of your list are incorrect is inconsequential, so pointing them out to you is a waste of both our time.

"Someone told me what the mona lisa looks like, I've never seen it and never intend to but here is why its a crap painting..."

[Virtz]

If you haven't played the game, and never intend to because you've allready made up your mind, then it's pointless trying to point out that the game is actually quite fun, and worth playing. Whichever parts of your list are incorrect is inconsequential, so pointing them out to you is a waste of both our time.

"Someone told me what the mona lisa looks like, I've never seen it and never intend to but here is why its a crap painting..."

So I guess you buy every game you come across because you apparently cannot tell how the game plays from gameplay footage?

Also, shit analogy, bro. This is more like judging the Mona Lisa based on a photo.

[Kagus]

In regards to this talk of having an overhead view for commanding soldiers, or for walking around and building up your base, you know what I'd like to see?  Just once, I'd like to see a game where you aren't the big man.  You're not the sole hero of humanity, you're not the big boss of the World Defense Legion Ltd., you're not even all that important.  You're just another grunt who is sent into the front lines with horribly sub-par equipment to start hunting around in hedgerows for that psychic alien with his plasma rifle and alien grenades and stronger-than-steel plastic armor.

My view of what would be a fun X-Com FPS is where you're suited up and sent out in the skyranger.  You can't control where you're being sent, you're just a rookie.  You can't order your fellow soldiers around, you're just a gun with legs like the rest of your group.  You don't have a say in what HQ does or doesn't do, you're the fresh meat that's handed a rifle and sent straight into the grinder.

You need to follow the orders handed down to you by your CO, and you'd better hurry up or else you'll have more to worry about than the damned aliens.  If you perform well, you'll get promoted.  You get badges, prestige, honor, and maybe even some armor.  Keep going and you'll eventually make your way up to sergeant so you can boss around a couple people and make sure that shit keeps rolling downhill.  If you're a really valuable asset to the organization, you may even have a say in what weapons you get to hold on to.  Congratulations.  Now go clear out that ethereal command room, scum.

If you fail and are horribly murdered, we'll put your name on a plaque.  There will always be another greenhorn to take your place on the next mission.


What we're looking at here is something where you're playing one of those meatshields we all love to use in the beginning of the game.  You'll be sent on missions by the AI, along with all the other AI-controlled soldiers you happen to be teamed up with.  You'll be ordered to peek around that corner, to open up that door, to make your way up that set of stairs, and to charge into the wreckage of that UFO.  As you perform well, you'll be given better equipment to keep you alive, and you may eventually get your own squad of 3-5 soldiers that you can order around in your vicinity.  You'll still take mission commands from HQ.

If you survive through all that, you'll end up as one of those flying heavily armored supersoldiers that tears through the alien scum with his heavy plasma.  You'll get sent on the more dangerous missions that require your experience, and you may even be picked for the elite squad that gets sent to Cydonia to strike the final blow.

But even if you are one of the "Best of the Best", you're still not Alien Enemy #1.  You're still fighting alongside all the other experienced and decorated soldiers that may very well have been fighting with you since that very first crashed UFO in the farmyard.  You're part of a team that does the work, and you're governed by an organization that gets the credit.


All that would require a rather powerful AI, however.  I really think that a little more focus could be spent on upgrading the so-called "intelligence" in games today.

Bah, listen to me babble on...  I do think that a good X-Com FPS is possible, but I personally wouldn't want to deal too much with the base construction or the overall team command if I were in such a situation.  It's a pity that I get infected with "dreamer syndrome" whenever I try and illustrate an idea I think could work.

[fenrif]

If you haven't played the game, and never intend to because you've allready made up your mind, then it's pointless trying to point out that the game is actually quite fun, and worth playing. Whichever parts of your list are incorrect is inconsequential, so pointing them out to you is a waste of both our time.

"Someone told me what the mona lisa looks like, I've never seen it and never intend to but here is why its a crap painting..."

So I guess you buy every game you come across because you apparently cannot tell how the game plays from gameplay footage?

Also, shit analogy, bro. This is more like judging the Mona Lisa based on a photo.

Because games are entirely a visual medium, and gameplay is completely represented via a short video segment. Maybe a photo from say 30ft away. It doesn't convey the gameplay is the point I was making, but don't let that get in the way of the stick up your ass. Wouldn't want to drop a bomb like "manual aiming isn't at all important, you just point in the general direction" and ruin your illusion of complete understanding.

Of course I don't buy every game I come across. But I also don't post "this game sucks 100%" lists without any first-hand knowledge of how it plays, and then challenge people to argue with me about it.

In regards to this talk of having an overhead view for commanding soldiers, or for walking around and building up your base, you know what I'd like to see?  Just once, I'd like to see a game where you aren't the big man.  You're not the sole hero of humanity, you're not the big boss of the World Defense Legion Ltd., you're not even all that important.  You're just another grunt who is sent into the front lines with horribly sub-par equipment to start hunting around in hedgerows for that psychic alien with his plasma rifle and alien grenades and stronger-than-steel plastic armor.

My view of what would be a fun X-Com FPS is where you're suited up and sent out in the skyranger.  You can't control where you're being sent, you're just a rookie.  You can't order your fellow soldiers around, you're just a gun with legs like the rest of your group.  You don't have a say in what HQ does or doesn't do, you're the fresh meat that's handed a rifle and sent straight into the grinder.

You need to follow the orders handed down to you by your CO, and you'd better hurry up or else you'll have more to worry about than the damned aliens.  If you perform well, you'll get promoted.  You get badges, prestige, honor, and maybe even some armor.  Keep going and you'll eventually make your way up to sergeant so you can boss around a couple people and make sure that shit keeps rolling downhill.  If you're a really valuable asset to the organization, you may even have a say in what weapons you get to hold on to.  Congratulations.  Now go clear out that ethereal command room, scum.

If you fail and are horribly murdered, we'll put your name on a plaque.  There will always be another greenhorn to take your place on the next mission.

As much as I love the concept, I dont think it'd work well in execution. Having to rely on AI squadmates for your survival would become incredibly frustrating. As you said AI nowadays is terrible.

It'd be fun though if they did it right, though I dont think it'd sell well at all. Most people want to be the super-soldier, do all the heroic things. They wouldn't get any enjoyment out of playing a mission and just providing cover fire the entire time while AI squad 2 stormed the base and blew up the generators.

[Shadowgandor]

Personally, I like what they're doing now better then what you're proposing. When I envision the game you're proposing, it's basically a generic shooter with an on the spot objective thing. Nah, what they're doing now seems so much more interesting, even though they're well...basically not using anything that made X-Com

[Mephansteras]

I, for one, think that would be awesome Kagus.

[zchris13]

Also, shit analogy, bro. This is more like judging the Mona Lisa based on a photo.

A crappy, out of focus, off-color photo.

[Virtz]

Because games are entirely a visual medium, and gameplay is completely represented via a short video segment. Maybe a photo from say 30ft away.

Someone should tell video game developers to stop making gameplay presentations because they apparently do not represent gameplay and thus are meaningless.

It doesn't convey the gameplay is the point I was making, but don't let that get in the way of the stick up your ass. Wouldn't want to drop a bomb like "manual aiming isn't at all important, you just point in the general direction" and ruin your illusion of complete understanding.

So rather than correct me, you prefer to throw insults. Elegant.

Of course I don't buy every game I come across. But I also don't post "this game sucks 100%" lists without any first-hand knowledge of how it plays, and then challenge people to argue with me about it.

And I said "this game sucks 100%" where? I just listed things I did not like from the gameplay footage and thus why I would not like X-Com to be like it.

[zchris13]

Yes, yes, I respect your right to have an opinion.  But your opinion is uninformed, so rather useless.

Recommended course of action:  shut up and move along.

EDIT in response to reply: NOO STOP FLAMING NOOOOOO

[fenrif]

Because games are entirely a visual medium, and gameplay is completely represented via a short video segment. Maybe a photo from say 30ft away.

Someone should tell video game developers to stop making gameplay presentations because they apparently do not represent gameplay and thus are meaningless.

It doesn't convey the gameplay is the point I was making, but don't let that get in the way of the stick up your ass. Wouldn't want to drop a bomb like "manual aiming isn't at all important, you just point in the general direction" and ruin your illusion of complete understanding.

So rather than correct me, you prefer to throw insults. Elegant.

Of course I don't buy every game I come across. But I also don't post "this game sucks 100%" lists without any first-hand knowledge of how it plays, and then challenge people to argue with me about it.

And I said "this game sucks 100%" where? I just listed things I did not like from the gameplay footage and thus why I would not like X-Com to be like it.

Theres a difference between not adeuatly representing the gameplay involved, and being meaningless. Why would people always clamour for demos if a video was adequate? Controls and so forth have no bearing for you on how fun a game is? Sure you can watch a video of ridge racer (in which the devs or QA testers are playing) and think "wow that looks really fun" but then you play the demo and suddenly all the cars handle like ice cream trucks on ice and the fun is gone.

I wouldn't consider pointing out your confrontational and offensive manner to be insulting, but if you feel that way, tough shit bro. I'm not going to correct you because its pointless and you don't really want me too anyway. You seem to have carefully ignored the fact that I actually did correct you anyway. As I said, you've made up your mind without playing the game, and want people who enjoy the game to disagree with you so you can tell them they're wrong.

You didn't list things you didn't like, you listed "whats wrong with VC." You stated it as fact, then when someone pointed out you hadn't played the game you put the onus of proof on him... Someone who had actually played the game.

Anyway, I don't feel like getting into a huge arguement with you. I just wanted to point out that you'd allready made up your mind, so askign people to disagree with you was pointless, since you allready hate the game without playing it.

[Mephansteras]

I wouldn't mind seeing an X-Com game with the combat system from Fallout: Tactics. Despite that game's other faults the combat system was quite fun and allowed for diverse strategies. If only it had destructible terrain...

[Virtz]

Theres a difference between not adeuatly representing the gameplay involved, and being meaningless. Why would people always clamour for demos if a video was adequate? Controls and so forth have no bearing for you on how fun a game is? Sure you can watch a video of ridge racer (in which the devs or QA testers are playing) and think "wow that looks really fun" but then you play the demo and suddenly all the cars handle like ice cream trucks on ice and the fun is gone.

Gameplay videos tend to show games in a positive light. I think a demo is more likely to detract from rating previously based on hype than increase it (which is why there's less of them these days) and thus I can't see how it'd apply here unless my understanding of the game mechanics is critically wrong.

I wouldn't consider pointing out your confrontational and offensive manner to be insulting, but if you feel that way, tough shit bro. I'm not going to correct you because its pointless and you don't really want me too anyway. You seem to have carefully ignored the fact that I actually did correct you anyway. As I said, you've made up your mind without playing the game, and want people who enjoy the game to disagree with you so you can tell them they're wrong.

I can't deny what you've said about the manual aim since you have actually played it and I have merely seen gameplay footage (where the player acted as if aim mattered) and I appreciate the correction, even if paired with a blatant insult. And I wouldn't deny any other correction if given. However, reacting with "no u, this game is awesome" to any critical claims to me is the equivalent of randomly posting "this gaem sux" without any reasons being stated.

You didn't list things you didn't like, you listed "whats wrong with VC." You stated it as fact, then when someone pointed out you hadn't played the game you put the onus of proof on him... Someone who had actually played the game.

Anyway, I don't feel like getting into a huge arguement with you. I just wanted to point out that you'd allready made up your mind, so askign people to disagree with you was pointless, since you allready hate the game without playing it.

Well, ok. That was poorly worded. I really just don't see it as a good example of how turn-based should progress based on what I've seen and understand from the footage.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

When I watch a gameplay video, I can sort of see what the developer was drinking when it was uploaded.

Usually it's gin mixed with red Crystal Light powder. All block of sweaty cheese on the desk, surrounded by a school of Goldfish crackers. All "World's Greatest Grandmother" mug full of tepid black tea. All crude crayon on construction paper drawing of a dog pinned to the cube wall next to a photo of a silver-haired lady on a harley, skull helmet, flippin' the bird at some police.

This time, I see rye bread sandwich with saltines as only filling. Shower cap when usink computer to keep hairs out of keyboard. Always taps left hand twice before reaching for mouse. This does not fill me with confidence.