Print

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

[Neonivek]

Honestly this is why I hate "teasers"

Especially ones that make me buy games I don't want so I can actually get some gametime with friends "DANG IT DeadIsland!"

[Heron TSG]

Honestly, I never had multiple bases.  I had "multiple bases" and by "multiple bases"  I mean radar stations scattered around with a firestorm on standby.  That was it.  Maybe six or seven rookies to phone in a base defense if they attacked.  I had a main base and that's where everything actually happened.

Really? In my current game I have three intercept locations, a main research base, a main manufactory, two extra radar stations, and now a secret base that I'm loading up with everything I need to take out Cydonia while my men hold off the aliens. Superhuman difficulty is a little intense to only have one base. (I actually lost my first one to a chryssalid swarm before I could research laser rifles.)

[warhammer651]

(response to image spam removed)

Anyways, I usually have 1 main base per hemisphere, some radar bases with small 5 man garrisons and an interceptor per continent and a factory base somewhere in Africa.

then things get out of hand and those radar bases come under attack and 5 rookies with laser rifles have to fight off chryssalid swarms

[Majestic7]

My policy regarding this? Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

I expected something good with MOO3 and bought it the release day. Learned my lesson, never going to expect anything from a game (or buy it), no matter how big a name, before there are reviews, demos etc.

Regarding this whole re-imagining, I hope they update interface and add stuff like ballistics and other things that were not possible in the 1990s. There will be grognards who cry bloody murder no matter what; they treat the original with religious fanaticism. Likewise, there will be fanboys who will cry praise even if the game is a steaming pile of poo. Only have to wait and see. Other games to play till then. Really, I find it silly to get all heated up about a game we don't really know anything about it. It is like getting mad while discussing about an imaginary teapot orbiting the planet.

[lordcooper]

teapot orbiting the planet.

There's a rather good band called Gong who actually have several songs about that.

[Kilroy the Grand]

My policy regarding this? Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

I expected something good with MOO3 and bought it the release day. Learned my lesson, never going to expect anything from a game (or buy it), no matter how big a name, before there are reviews, demos etc.

Regarding this whole re-imagining, I hope they update interface and add stuff like ballistics and other things that were not possible in the 1990s. There will be grognards who cry bloody murder no matter what; they treat the original with religious fanaticism. Likewise, there will be fanboys who will cry praise even if the game is a steaming pile of poo. Only have to wait and see. Other games to play till then. Really, I find it silly to get all heated up about a game we don't really know anything about it. It is like getting mad while discussing about an imaginary teapot orbiting the planet.

I only learned about Xcom by watching spoony, I was surprised how well the game held up. But because I don't have an established love of it, I am far more accepting of changes.

[Toady One]

(please keep the image spam out of every thread)

[Tellemurius]

So im moving back to the npc discussion. I know for a fact that Xenonauts will have friendly military and law enforcement npc in some missions. You guys really do doubt that humans will fight back even if the odds blow against them. People do stand their ground once in a while. If anything they are escorting civilians to safe zones risking their lives.

[nenjin]

I always found it atmospheric that you were literally alone out there, like being the 1st person to arrive at the scene of a murder.

It upped the creepiness factor, and made missions more dangerous because you knew you couldn't rely on civilians to save themselves, so you either had to get in there or consign them to their fate.

[EuchreJack]

People, people - the criticism and worry is NOT unjustified. The first several pages of this thread were NOTHING but hopeful and optimistic, after all. Xenonauts is changing quite a few things, and I've heard nothing but positive things about that game. If there's any problems here, its that the developers are being closed mouth and not justifying the (seemingly) poor decisions we are, admittedly, hearing about second hand. Would it kill them to put out a few details so we had something REAL to discuss instead of rumours? To declare their intent in these various areas?

Not that, in my mind, they've done anything in particular badly (yet), confirmed. But people have always had the worry it was going to be dumbed down, and the few bits of info we HAVE gotten from them seem to indicate that is more likely than when we started.

Good post, two thoughts:
1) "NOT unjustified" is confusing, on my first and second read of your post I thought you were against the criticism.
2) The main difference between this game and Xenonauts is that Xenonauts isn't using the exact same name as the original.  Therefore, Xenonauts can make any changes they wish, as it is more readily identifiable as a different game.  If Xenonauts sucks, it tarnishes nothing.

[Cthulhu]

RPS has info on the magazine article.

Important thing to note for people with baseless speculation about difficulty:

Soldiers still die permanently, fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat, and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly

[EuchreJack]

I think we covered everything the RPS did.  In fact, I should sue them for stealing their entire second point from me.   

[Microcline]

Important thing to note for people with baseless speculation about difficulty:

Soldiers still die permanently, fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat, and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly

This is a fairly standard video game feature, or at least it used to be.

I think that gamers have good reason for skepticism and cynicism.  Game Informer (and most of the gaming press) is known to be a poorly disguised extension of the gaming industry's PR wing.  They rarely say anything unflattering, so finding the truth generally involves reading between the lines.  If the four soldiers were just for a short tutorial mission before moving on to more standard numbers, there's no doubt that the article would have stated this explicitly.

I have yet to see a satisfactory justification for using a class system in X-COM.  Both of the perks mentioned (being able to use squadmates as spotters and being able to shoot after moving) were all things that you could do right from the start in the original game.  While I enjoyed Final Fantasy Tactics, I think it showed some of the major weaknesses of a class-based SRPG.  Overspecialization leads to the illusion of choice; the only strategy is for your melee fighters rush in and attack while your mages spam their most powerful spells and it ends up being a contest of who has the bigger numbers and better rolls.  X-COM was quite different.  As specialization was mostly gear based and soldiers could fill multiple roles with a single weapon type, you were forced to choose the best option to maximize their potential.  I am worried that combat will be reduced to "I have my sniper snipe, my rocket launcher guy fire rockets, my gunner lay down surpressive fire, and my pointman advance, thus I win".

So far the biggest red flags for me are the four man starting squad and the class system.  I think that there are some good things going on.  The art style is dead-on; I always thought that it had as much in common with 80's toy commercial cartoons as it did with 90's comics.  Some of the cuts are justified: the base system can work so long as they moved storage, research, and manufacturing to the main base while keeping hangars and detection regional, and while I would rather see the ammo system expanded on rather than removed, it didn't add much to the original beyond tedium (except in the case of rockets and grenades, which I expect are still limited).  Surpressive fire and regional bonuses could be interesting mechanics, although on their own insufficient to make up for the cut content.

[Dohon]

RPS has info on the magazine article.

Important thing to note for people with baseless speculation about difficulty:

Soldiers still die permanently, fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat, and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly

Even Alec Meer admitted that he was 'worriedly hopeful'. That quote also came from another journalist (the one from Gameinformer), one who spent quite some time with the developpers. Just making sure that we all know where the info comes from.

Also, if I can be nitpicky for once:

Soldiers still die permanently,

Excellent. Doesn't say how often they will be dying though. With a team of 4 at the start, it probably won't be the same carnage-level as the original Xcom. I mean, Firaxis even said that they lost 4 guys just getting of the ramp of the skyranger. That's a whole squad in the new XCOM. Will have to see this one in practice

fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat

Nothing to add here. Doing a Jagged Alliance Back in Action would have caused outcry.

and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly

As Microline already said, pretty standard mechanic. It all depends on how you interpret too badly too. Does it mean lose one squad? Two? Five? Does it mean losing a base? ... No, scratch that, there is only one main base. Screwing up that base defense would mean game over. Cool, actually. In the original Ufo Enemy Unknown, losing your main squad was quite a blow. Losing a base was crippling. But while you could recover from all these situations, the alien AI would keep on infiltrating and taking away your sponsors. Which meant less money (especially if you had lost your main manufacturing base), which meant a harder struggle to recuperate. I hope the new XCOM takes the same approach.

[Muz]

I always found it atmospheric that you were literally alone out there, like being the 1st person to arrive at the scene of a murder.

It upped the creepiness factor, and made missions more dangerous because you knew you couldn't rely on civilians to save themselves, so you either had to get in there or consign them to their fate.

I'm guessing they'd be sort of like in X-COM 3, where the cops/Marsec would be around to shoot aliens, but generally don't show up, or are too poorly equipped to do much real damage.