Thread: XCOM: Enemy Unknown

  1. #901
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    8,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Leinad View Post
    "Iron Man" mode has already been confirmed (see last part of the RPS interview).
    The indie game I'm working on has an Iron-Man mode -- no saves, permadeath. It's an 80+ hour game. The first person that completes it in that mode (oh yes, we have progression tracking) wins a prize. It's an RPG derivative of later Wizardry, so I thought it was especially pertinent to put such a mode in the game. Yeah, you're gonna suffer, but it's at your discretion -- beat the game, then try the mode. If you're that good, and finish the game, then yeah: we'll give you something. We're already thinking cloth maps and even a staff for the person(s) that finish it that way. Good luck.

  2. #902
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,750
    Same opinion as the interviewer - "The purist in me is still going Ďhmmmí but until Iíve played it I just canít sensibly comment."

    I'll wait for the reviews.

    Ydejin - So, where's your signature on the "Rename Fallout 3 to 2.1" campaign? I mean, since you can't allow the issue of someone holding a contrary opinion to yours on the NAME to drop...

    Detritus - Preach it! Spread the good word! Carry the faith onwards!

  3. #903
    New Romantic ydejin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawn Falcon View Post
    Ydejin - So, where's your signature on the "Rename Fallout 3 to 2.1" campaign? I mean, since you can't allow the issue of someone holding a contrary opinion to yours on the NAME to drop...
    An interesting choice of comparison. I think Bethesda did a great job on Fallout 3, but I think what they tried to do is entirely different from what Firaxis is trying to do here With Fallout 3, it was clear from the start that Bethesda was throwing out all the mechanics of Fallout 1 and 2 and simply building on the universe of Fallout. It was using the background of Fallout, but not the game mechanics.

    That's not at all what's going on here with Firaxis XCOM and Microprose XCOM. Firaxis is trying to modernize the mechanics, but it's doing so by building on top of the existing mechanics. The closer Fallout 2 vs. 3 comparison would be Microprose XCOM vs. Y2K Marin's XCOM (which frankly I don't hold out much hope that it will be either any good or true to the XCOM license).

    On a personal note (and a bit of name dropping), I do feel rather attached to the Fallout series, since I went to school with Tim Cain. We used to play softball together and his personal coaching really helped improve my softball skills. So I don't lightly say that Fallout 3 feels like it earns the Fallout name. Although I haven't kept in touch with Tim, and I don't know how he feels about Fallout 3.

  4. #904
    New Romantic BleedTheFreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,699
    Listening to the recent GI podcast, I really like the idea that the aliens are playing their own game - they are just doing their thing, researching, gathering resources, terrorizing the earth, and these pesky XCOM soldiers keep coming in and getting better and better equipment, so it's time to start deploying new alien types.

    I hope at some point we get an expansion or something that let's us play from the alien perspective, that would be sweet.

  5. #905
    World's End Supernova
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    17,166
    There was an open-source project called The Two Sides that is no longer available due to legal issues for some reason... they had a good chunk of playing as the Aliens completed.

  6. #906
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    1,995
    Quote Originally Posted by ydejin View Post
    An interesting choice of comparison. I think Bethesda did a great job on Fallout 3, but I think what they tried to do is entirely different from what Firaxis is trying to do here With Fallout 3, it was clear from the start that Bethesda was throwing out all the mechanics of Fallout 1 and 2 and simply building on the universe of Fallout. It was using the background of Fallout, but not the game mechanics.

    That's not at all what's going on here with Firaxis XCOM and Microprose XCOM. Firaxis is trying to modernize the mechanics, but it's doing so by building on top of the existing mechanics. The closer Fallout 2 vs. 3 comparison would be Microprose XCOM vs. Y2K Marin's XCOM (which frankly I don't hold out much hope that it will be either any good or true to the XCOM license).

    On a personal note (and a bit of name dropping), I do feel rather attached to the Fallout series, since I went to school with Tim Cain. We used to play softball together and his personal coaching really helped improve my softball skills. So I don't lightly say that Fallout 3 feels like it earns the Fallout name. Although I haven't kept in touch with Tim, and I don't know how he feels about Fallout 3.
    To do a bit of naming dropping I attended a GDC session on designing sequels by Soren Johnson and his rule is that good sequel needs one part new, one part old, one part improved. Personally I think Civ V is a good game in its own right the problem is that part that is that new, like the one unit per hex turns out not to be all that good. Hence it is at best as good as Civ IV and arguable not as good.

    IMO, I think making a good sequel requires that design team have a deep understanding of what made the original game a hit. However, this understanding is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success. MOO3 being a classic example Alan Emrich and team clearly knew what made MOO2 a good game that lacked the experience and skill to implement for MOO3. I'm not that familiar with Elemental but I suspect that Brad knew why MOM was a good game, but it didn't matter much.

    For XCom I am feeling confident that Fixaxis team gets X-Com at deep level. I am cautiously optimistic that they have the skill to turn out a worthy sequel. Of course when you are trying to improve on a masterpiece the bar is very high.
    Last edited by Strollen; 02-05-2012 at 05:23 PM.

  7. #907
    New Romantic ydejin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,591
    GameInformer has an interactive X-Com base online now. You can click on different base parts and learn what they do.

    I thought this screenshot was particularly interesting. In one of the interviews (probably this one) Jake Solomon the lead designer promised we would be able to name and customize the look of our soldiers. Here's a screenshot showing a possible interface to do that.


  8. #908
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,146
    Looks like base layout will mean more than just defense -- some buildings work better when placed near each other, and you can uncover steam pockets in the earth's crust where you can build power stations to save money.

  9. #909
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Strollen View Post
    To do a bit of naming dropping I attended a GDC session on designing sequels by Soren Johnson and his rule is that good sequel needs one part new, one part old, one part improved. Personally I think Civ V is a good game in its own right the problem is that part that is that new, like the one unit per hex turns out not to be all that good. Hence it is at best as good as Civ IV and arguable not as good.
    I would suggest the "one part improved" was a problem as well. Some changes were good, but some not so much. The change in tile values/worth of resources, e.g., was negative. The dropping of health and then just sort of leveling off city growth over time was negative. The way many buildings was reworked meant that many of them had dramatic reduction in value, when tied back into the tiles was negative.

    It felt like they were trying to streamline things, but that failed. Health was already a fairly elegant and superior abstraction to things that came before. Happiness was working really well in Civ IV (I think there is some potential to a global system, though).

  10. #910
    New Romantic ydejin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,591
    Quote Originally Posted by peacedog View Post
    I would suggest the "one part improved" was a problem as well. Some changes were good, but some not so much. The change in tile values/worth of resources, e.g., was negative. The dropping of health and then just sort of leveling off city growth over time was negative. The way many buildings was reworked meant that many of them had dramatic reduction in value, when tied back into the tiles was negative.

    It felt like they were trying to streamline things, but that failed. Health was already a fairly elegant and superior abstraction to things that came before. Happiness was working really well in Civ IV (I think there is some potential to a global system, though).
    Agreed. I thought Civ IV health was a neat way to make different food sources interesting. The fact that all the Civ V resources all basically gave the same bonus amounts made them a lot less interesting than Civ IV resources.

  11. #911
    New Romantic ydejin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Giaddon View Post
    Looks like base layout will mean more than just defense -- some buildings work better when placed near each other, and you can uncover steam pockets in the earth's crust where you can build power stations to save money.
    I'm a bit nervous as to whether there is a base defense -- have they talked about base attacks in any of the interviews/articles?

    Having one base means that if the base gets attacked and you lose, I assume that means game over. That seems a bit much, whereas in classic X-COM usually when a base got attacked and wiped out, that's because it was one of my secondary bases, which were not that well protected. This was a major hit to my resources, but not fatal.

  12. #912
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,146
    Good point -- not sure if there is defense. A loss could still be a hit to resources and not a game over. But it's possible the concept has been removed entirely. Wouldn't surprise me, now that I think about it.

  13. #913
    Mad Chester
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,114
    What would be cool is if you could lose your main base and become more of a rag-tag underground thing like in Resistance. Instead of planning your building you plan tunnel systems and soon become a new race of Molemen.

  14. #914
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    a dark realm
    Posts
    2,942
    Maybe this is because I've never played any of the originals, but what the hell is a "time unit" in reference to the latest RPS article? Are they talking about a HoMM setup where each side moves 1 character per turn?

  15. #915
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Austin, TX Live/Steam: roberdjp
    Posts
    4,775
    It's basically action points, if that helps.

  16. #916
    Goodluck!!
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Blips View Post
    Maybe this is because I've never played any of the originals, but what the hell is a "time unit" in reference to the latest RPS article? Are they talking about a HoMM setup where each side moves 1 character per turn?
    Time units basically = action points in Fallout. A numeric represenation of how much 'stuff' one character can do per turn.

    In X-Com, as I recall, this could differ from trooper to trooper. They got more as they levelled up and some were just naturally 'better' than others.

  17. #917
    New Romantic Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    5,158
    I remember Joe Capricorn had a ridiculous 22 or something.

  18. #918
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    a dark realm
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeArac View Post
    Time units basically = action points in Fallout. A numeric represenation of how much 'stuff' one character can do per turn.

    In X-Com, as I recall, this could differ from trooper to trooper. They got more as they levelled up and some were just naturally 'better' than others.
    Ah ok, same thing as in Jagged Alliance 2 then. Thanks!

  19. #919
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Blips View Post
    Ah ok, same thing as in Jagged Alliance 2 then. Thanks!
    Not really. More D&D 3rd.

  20. #920
    New Romantic BleedTheFreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    6,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawn Falcon View Post
    Not really. More D&D 3rd.
    He's saying Time Units are more like Jagged Alliance, not the upcoming Enemy Unknown, I believe.

  21. #921
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    a dark realm
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by BleedTheFreak View Post
    He's saying Time Units are more like Jagged Alliance, not the upcoming Enemy Unknown, I believe.
    Yeah, I don't think I've ever had first-hand experience with Fallout 1 or 2, but I love Jagged Alliance 2 and can compare it more easily.

  22. #922
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,750
    Quote Originally Posted by BleedTheFreak View Post
    He's saying Time Units are more like Jagged Alliance, not the upcoming Enemy Unknown, I believe.
    Ah yes. See, another reason to object! :P

  23. #923
    Spinning Toe
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lost in time and space
    Posts
    963
    I beat xcom on experienced and genius, using the same strategy I used on beginner, except I learned how to use psionics, which made the games much easier. Once you know what techs to research in what order, and how to make a lot of money buying and selling laser cannons, as well as a certain psionic trick, the game is not very hard, although I still have to reload quite a bit. I don't think I could win without reloading, but that may be the best way to play. Steam says I have played 170 hours, by far the most I have played any game (which don't usually hold my attention for more than a few hours). For that reason alone, I declare xcom the best PC game I've ever played, and I have played many, many games.

    Firaxis, guys, please don't let me down and do the original justice. Please.

  24. #924
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,395
    You should also direct your attention towards Xenonauts if you haven't already. For anyone that just recently played 170 hours of XCOM you'll probably get your money's worth purchasing both the faithful indie re-make and the AAA big studio re-imagining.

  25. #925
    Spinning Toe
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lost in time and space
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by Staff Sergeant View Post
    You should also direct your attention towards Xenonauts if you haven't already. For anyone that just recently played 170 hours of XCOM you'll probably get your money's worth purchasing both the faithful indie re-make and the AAA big studio re-imagining.
    Yes, I plan to get any and all xcom clones I can get my hands on, even the ones that don't have good metacritic scores.

    I'm not sure I should try Terror from the Deep since I understand it's buggy and much harder, especially that you could get hosed by a research bug and not be able to complete the game after having spent many hours playing it. As far as I know there are no fan made fixes to the research bug and no XCOM Extender equivalent, which made the original much better.
    Last edited by ioticus; 03-04-2012 at 02:05 PM.

  26. #926
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,750
    Um, most modern versions of TFTD come pre-patched to remove part of the issue, and XComUtil can fix the research bug anyway.

  27. #927
    Der Schulde World's End Supernova TurinTur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    15,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Staff Sergeant View Post
    You should also direct your attention towards Xenonauts if you haven't already. For anyone that just recently played 170 hours of XCOM you'll probably get your money's worth purchasing both the faithful indie re-make and the AAA big studio re-imagining.
    I would like people stop saying this. Not that is going to happen, but still...
    It's nice to want things, I suppose.


    I don't want a faithful remake, point to point, I want something more, or something else. So to me Xenonauts it's interesting, but it doesn't serve to just forget and ignore the other Xcom game, this one. Because I want a game that changes up more the original game.

    The quid, the real question is what parts are faithful and what parts are improved and what parts changed. I feel, I suspect, I won't agree with all the decisions of the Firaxis team. Parts I would like to see the same are changed (like the base management, classes/perks for soldiers), parts I would like to see improved seems more or less the same or worse (tactical options), parts i would like to change (like the TBS system) are in the other hand the same, I would like something else like "We go" system.

    See? It's not as easy as to say "You have Xenonauts!".

  28. #928
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,395
    I have no idea what you are saying or even if that is a positive or negative response to my post. Judging from the first line it's negative, so sorry for recommending a highly relevant game to someone that just discovered the beauty of XCOM?

  29. #929
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    1,538
    TurinTur, if you re-read Staff Sergeant's post again in context of what ioticus wrote, I believe Staff Sergeant was highlighting what could be considered the lesser known remake of Xenonauts, as well as the obvious AAA title from Firaxis XCom that ioticus knew was coming out. I believe that is right Staff Sergeant? Sharing the love and all that?

    True, there are people who jump up and down about camera positioning, squad limitations and consolitis, amongst other things, and are quick to point out that Xenonauts is the one true path thou art to follow. And with that sort of sentiment, I agree with you completely. But I don't think that is the case in this scenario.

    Ultimately, XCom fans will be spoilt this year. I haven't pre-ordered Xenonauts yet. I'm waiting for the final release to hit so I won't be spoilt by the usual pre-release bugs, AI limitations etc. Also, since the Game Informer coverage, there hasn't been much else release from Firaxis regarding the game?

  30. #930
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Strato View Post
    TurinTur, if you re-read Staff Sergeant's post again in context of what ioticus wrote, I believe Staff Sergeant was highlighting what could be considered the lesser known remake of Xenonauts, as well as the obvious AAA title from Firaxis XCom that ioticus knew was coming out. I believe that is right Staff Sergeant? Sharing the love and all that?
    You are correct. While I am kind of hesitant about some of the stuff that Firaxis has changed, the existence of Xenonauts nullifies any concerns. If I want to play something that is extremely similar to X-COM with modified systems and better graphics, I'll play Xenonauts. When I want to play the AAA acclaimed strategy development studio's modern take on the game, I'll play XCOM:EU.

    I fully intend to buy both (and already have Xenonauts pre-ordered, have for probably more than 2 years now).

Posting Permissions

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