Anyway in this new XCOM the Sectoids and Muton's don't actually look as scary as they did in the originals, ok I'm lying about Sectoids because they always looked cute (green gut's autopsy and all) but the new sectoids seem like they inter-bred with zerglings, the mutons don't seem like genetically engineered super soldiers but more like Halo Brutes or Krogan from Mass Effect, they don't seem like the lean mean killing machines of the muton's of old.
You've gotta be kidding me. The old Mutons were green hominids wearing
spandex. How much less scary could they be?
I also prefer the new, leaner, more scurrying-looking sectoids. Makes them more like scouts or skirmishers and less like... well... tiny mooks with mind control commanders, basically.
This new XCOM contains less gameplay features which is what I mean about it not being an XCOM game. The artwork is more superficial, you could change the aliens to Halo style Covenant enemies invading earth and call it a Halo game instead, which might make more sense as that's already a franchise being milked for all it's worth. It's the gameplay that makes the game and this doesn't seem like an XCOM game.
What features, though? "Smaller squads" is not "less features." Less inventory fiddling is arguably "less features," but moreso if they're lacking smoke grenades or something and not just doing things differently.
Also in regards to the 4-6 man squad issue, I mean that it's not a tactical/logistical choice anymore, and you won't be able to get that same sensation of coming in with a 12 man squad and leaving with 3 survivors, or having to abort the mission and making it a race to get back to the skyranger with a concious soldier so you don't lose the aircraft as well.
This is true, but I tended to find that my max squad size was determined by how much of a pain in the ass it was to order them all around, not tactical decisions or in-game logistics issues. Less room for massive squad casualties is certainly a little different, but I really don't see that as being a dealbreaker either. Ditto with the lack of a physical Skyranger, though I'd at least consider that one unfortunate.
From the demo it doesn't look like it's got big maps and I doubt you will get the problem of getting shot as soon as you leave your transport (ah the times I used to have to pretty much do a sliding puzzle in the skyranger to make sure it was someone expendable to peek their head out first). It looks like it's pretty easy to know where the aliens are and you won't start off surrounded. There is no RNG to screw you over.
They've stated that some missions will be
huge, though I'm not sure where you're getting the small maps idea from in the first place. I suppose the safer insertion method is a bit unfortunate, but I'm fairly certain fog of war and such are still in, they just work differently.
There is absolutely an RNG to screw you over, it just doesn't kick in
immediately.It's got no random map generation
Story based mission line
No global management aside from choosing where to send your mission (and conversely where not to send)
No real base management because from what I have heard there is no base invasion and apparently all the base building is basically saying build all similar facilities close to each other (apparently having gaps in labs causes research deficiency)
Limited equipment management (and infinite ammo, it's heavy weapons guy packing infinity rockets??)
That's a bit grey at the moment, but it does seem like a valid complaint.
The original had those too.
There was hardly any global management in the original either. Most people had a main base and then several interceptor/radar stations, and some people had research/manufacturing nodes.
There was hardly any base management in the original either, for just the reason you mentioned.
Equipment management was mostly excessive in the original. Hand everyone smoke/regular grenades, electroflares, maybe some people got medkits or stun batons. Giving someone backup weapons or situational ammo was possible in theory but very rarely happened.
To be honest my biggest pet peeve is the whole naming of it. For non-Europeans it seems like a different name being XCOM: Enemy Unknown as opposed to XCOM: UFO Defence while in Europe the original was called UFO: Enemy Unknown so it seems like a cheap naming instead of giving it an original name to separate it from the original game.
Please tell me your complaint doesn't just boil down to having the same subtitle?
Indeed I do, and as a fanboy I can gripe as much as I want of them using the name of the original, I griped about XCOM: Enforcer I can gripe about this.
...come on, man. Don't be that sort of fanboy. It's just not productive in any sense of the word past the point where we find out it's not a graphical update.
I don't see it as that much of an exaggeration, there are a lot of similarities, you have your class based soldiers which have class specific abilities and specialise in class specific weapons, and your enemies follow the same pattern of specific classes, abilities and weapons. The only difference between Mass Effect combat and this is one being a 3rd Person Squad Tactical (pausable) shooter and this being a turn based squad game.
You've also got a squad of soldiers with different weapons and a series of stats, and several sets of enemies that look and act mostly the same but have slightly different equipment and classes.
So clearly, not only is this as much an X-COM game as it is a Mass Effect game, it's also a D2 Necro game.
If this game is moddable it would be incredibly easy to just change it to a Mass Effect Universe and call the game Mass Effect Tactics
This is true of generally everything moddable in generally the same genre. You could change it to original X-COM, Star Wars, or in all likelihood something Wild West just as easily.
Author
Topic: XCOM: Enemy Unknown (New by Firaxis) (Read 962049 times)