XenoMask Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Wait, what was wrong with turn based mode? I've played all three original games and(and tried apocalypse on real time but played on turn based) I don't notice massive differences .-. Aliens being muppets? What. First game had more cartoony aliens, Apocalypse aliens were... Alieny. You know. Pretty incomprehensible. Well, okay, not literally, but you know what I mean. They are kind of hard to describe. I can give you guys retro future thing though, I did like it because I found it weird, but I can see why people might no like that. I do remember research three D: Though I agree that road vehicles are useless. I liked city better to geoscape because you get feeling of immersion better plus each company has more personality than invidual countries in first two =/ In first two they are just funders, in Apocalypse they all have their own missions(because they have different buildings), you can fight against them and they all have backstory to give them personality. Granted, original concept(and amount of stuff cut from Apocalypse that you can find in game files) would have made Apocalypse much better game but its still great one in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorlom Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 You quoting that post reminded me of Apocalypse, which is my fav XCOM game. And that reminded me of how XCOM fans tend to hate it.Then I actually started to wonder "Wait, I have always assumed that XCOM fans hate Apocalypse because its different from original(plus first sequel to original was basically identical game but reskinned and made unfairly hard so they had different expectations), but is that actually true?" So whats actual reason why XCOM fans dislike Apocalypse? Love the game hate the ending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Wait, what was wrong with turn based mode? I've played all three original games and(and tried apocalypse on real time but played on turn based) I don't notice massive differences .-.Aliens being muppets? What. First game had more cartoony aliens, Apocalypse aliens were... Alieny. You know. Pretty incomprehensible. Well, okay, not literally, but you know what I mean. They are kind of hard to describe. I can give you guys retro future thing though, I did like it because I found it weird, but I can see why people might no like that. I do remember research three D: Though I agree that road vehicles are useless. I liked city better to geoscape because you get feeling of immersion better plus each company has more personality than invidual countries in first two =/ In first two they are just funders, in Apocalypse they all have their own missions(because they have different buildings), you can fight against them and they all have backstory to give them personality. Granted, original concept(and amount of stuff cut from Apocalypse that you can find in game files) would have made Apocalypse much better game but its still great one in my opinion. I enjoyed it I just think they could have done it much better. I also like the retro feel of the future tech, if anything I would have gone further with that. The personality of the individual corporations has nothing to do with the city though. They have that personality because they were designed to have their own agenda not be faceless nations. If the game had been geoscape based they could have easily done the same thing, either with nations, corporations, or preferably both. Just realised we have hijacked the AI thread though, not really the place for Apoc discussion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Hmm, true, sorry for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Not really on topic and has been debated many times! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I already said sorry D: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Ah yes, all the posts were offtopic so I didn't read them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutterjohn Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Hi guys. I own Apocalypse, but it's a MAJOR PITA to get it to work with wine or any modern windows system so I've ended up NEVER playing it much, so I cannot comment on you Apocalypse comments, although I WISH that UI could... Anyways things so far seem to be working OK for what we have already, just need new maps/"intelligently" random maps, and some comp controlled oppos that, well, are "intelligent"(or seemingly)... Just not sold on Firaxis' XCOM and how they are doing it(the cheap simple way)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutterjohn Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) Not really on topic and has been debated many times!whatever works worthily is just peachy for me...[EDIT] HAY! Why don't I have a shinnieness title? I did teh KS... jk/I REALLY don't care as I've been on and off monitoring this project to see what happens v. UFO series/UFO Extraterrestrials series/Firaxis XCOM/etc. ad nauseum... just for another good turn based tactical squad game... (as long as it does NOT feature zombies...) [/EDIT] Edited September 11, 2012 by cutterjohn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazz Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Umm... XCOM 1 had zombies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorlom Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Umm... XCOM 1 had zombies... He's an x-com 3 fan! I don't recall if apoc had zombies or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRiME Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I believe they did with the brainsuckers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazz Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 There were Brainsuckers instead of Chrysalids but effectively that was the same thing. Only less messy. =) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 They weren't really zombies though, I mean they could use guns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorlom Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 They weren't really zombies though, I mean they could use guns So could the horrid aberrations that plagued the first half of the game in 2 of the AfterX games. They had no business being in that game at all... and they just dragged on forever and ever.... Those, the single (disappointing) scripted mission that had a different victory condition and the horny spacewalnut are the only thing I remember from the first game. I hardly even recall the aliens... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 So could the horrid aberrations that plagued the first half of the game in 2 of the AfterX games. They had no business being in that game at all... and they just dragged on forever and ever....Those, the single (disappointing) scripted mission that had a different victory condition and the horny spacewalnut are the only thing I remember from the first game. I hardly even recall the aliens... Wait what. Myrmecol was revealed in second game, not first game Secondly, you are talking about morelmen? Well they weren't brainwashed humans, they were parasitic insects inhabiting zombie like corpse with ability to spit acid. And shoot guns for some reason. Anyway, Brainsuckers don't make you into zombie, its more like invasion of body snatchers (And I do remember Reticulans) ANYWAY; UFO: Afterwhatever series isn't part of XCOM series so dunno why you brought that up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorzahg Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Nice to see the thread is still on topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Agreed So anyhoo, will Reaper AI aim to infect everyone who can be infected? Like all civilians and stuff and not just attack Xenonauts/civilians depending on whos closer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorlom Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Wait what. Myrmecol was revealed in second game, not first game Secondly, you are talking about morelmen? Well they weren't brainwashed humans, they were parasitic insects inhabiting zombie like corpse with ability to spit acid. And shoot guns for some reason. Anyway, Brainsuckers don't make you into zombie, its more like invasion of body snatchers (And I do remember Reticulans) ANYWAY; UFO: Afterwhatever series isn't part of XCOM series so dunno why you brought that up it was brought up by cutterjhon the guy we are responding to or discussing other peoples response to. Also please separate X-com and XCOM. Hyphenate if you are talking about microproses X-com please and thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
targetbsp Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 [EDIT] HAY! Why don't I have a shinnieness title? I did teh KS... [/EDIT] Are you after this? http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/145-How-to-claim-your-Pre-Order-forum-badge%21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftyRighty Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Just not sold on Firaxis' XCOM and how they are doing it(the cheap simple way)... not entirely sure you can call 4 years of a studios times cheap or simple... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XenoMask Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Well, even when I'm not posting this seems to be derailed Sorry if my existence is somehow behind this! And cutterjohn, watch this video It gives you insight on how game development works. Heck, they even had footage of prototype back when they had time units in that game And AI guy can answer on AI question about Reapers I asked? (And I'm not picky about X-com and XCOM, same to me ;P) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 not entirely sure you can call 4 years of a studios times cheap or simple... Well, there a several ways to look at that issue. One thing you ought to know is that the big gaming companies spend way more on art work and sound than they do on any other part of a product. Look at the credits of a big name game sometime and you'll see that actual programming is one of the smallest head counts. That means that the game system (design), AI, features, complexity, and bug removal is getting less attention than the all the flash and boom. So Firaxis may have spent four years on the project and a lot of money and still have produced a nice looking, but crappy game. I don't know. One thing I like about Xenonauts is I know they are putting a lot of time into the design, AI and other programming aspects of the game. That is heartening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gijs-Jan Posted September 11, 2012 Author Share Posted September 11, 2012 On the Reaper front: Yes I think so. But we'll see how this is balanced, before I make any final remarks. (Don't want you guys to get stuck with overwhelming waves of reapers) I also talked to the development team of XCOM:EU, and point is pretty simple: They're aiming for a different target group, instead of the traditional X-com fans. This is just one of the byproducts of being forced to ensure your product can return on the (large) investments. As for AI in XCOM:EU; I don't know the details and I really don't want to sell anyone short. But in these types of games (AAA, lots of graphics polish) you traditionally see the A.I. as being there to enhance/bring out (extra) polish; seeking cover is not necessarily done to provide the player with a challenge, but to showcase animations, etc. E.g. the focus of the A.I. is to complement the polish of the game (and not do any overly stupid stuff), not necessarily provide a challenge. (Which is not the case for all games, but sadly, a large portion; as The-Powers-That-Be require a game to first look good; then play-well, because they know that is what sells to 80+% of the population) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I also talked to the development team of XCOM:EU, and point is pretty simple: They're aiming for a different target group, instead of the traditional X-com fans. This is just one of the byproducts of being forced to ensure your product can return on the (large) investments.As for AI in XCOM:EU; I don't know the details and I really don't want to sell anyone short. But in these types of games (AAA, lots of graphics polish) you traditionally see the A.I. as being there to enhance/bring out (extra) polish; seeking cover is not necessarily done to provide the player with a challenge, but to showcase animations, etc. E.g. the focus of the A.I. is to complement the polish of the game (and not do any overly stupid stuff), not necessarily provide a challenge. (Which is not the case for all games, but sadly, a large portion; as The-Powers-That-Be require a game to first look good; then play-well, because they know that is what sells to 80+% of the population) I have every confidence that Gijs-Jan's AI will be a murderous, treacherous, opponent that would have Napoleon himself run screaming from the keyboard... Well...at least I expect that you are going to take a lot of casualties unless you use good tactics. Personally, I'll take a stable, well designed, balanced and challenging game any day over fancy graphics and noise with a brainless AI. If Xenonauts forces me to think, use good, real world, small unit tactics to win then the AI is "right". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.