Jump to content

I am an XCOM veteran and have now played XCOM: Enemy Unknown.


Recommended Posts

This game doesn't really limit the choices of how you play though, it just limits the amount of especially effective items that you can bring in. You can choose to blow up a lot of cover, like in the old one. Bring in a bunch of heavies with shredders, dual grenades and Dual Rockets. Expect your research to slow down though. Wanna cowboy it up? Bring in a bunch of assaults with titan armor, but your soldiers are gonna have a lot of downtime for their injuries. Wanna play defensively? bring in a mix of Supports and Snipers, but expect to have a harder time in close quarters. They aren't limiting choices, they are limiting resources to balance those choices, which is what you yourself are saying they should do.

I'm getting sick of this whole "developers forcing me to play the game the way they want to play, not the way I want to play." attitude that's been going around the internet. That's how it's always been, that's how it always will be and that's how it always should be. Why? Because they care more about how they want to play, and THEY DON"T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO PLAY. They can't read your mind. If they work on what they care about, those bits are going to be high quality, if they just blindly take shots in the dark about what some random dude on the internet wants, they don't even know how to go about in developing it in a quality way, because they don't have the same standards for it as you do. It's not lazy design. I'm sick of people calling devs lazy for not adding features that they specifically want, but the devs think would take away from the game, either because they think it's a poor design decision, or because they don't have the resources to cover every base. Game developers are some of the hardest working people on the planet, and they are because they care about what they are making. They work 40-80+ hours a week because they want to make a quality product.

Gamer Entitlement gets thrown out a bunch, and I try to use it as sparingly as possible. This is a shining example of it though. If you want to play games the way you want to play them, become a game developer or modder.

I have no problem with experiencing immersion when it comes to video games. My point was, immersion is not the entire point of video games, unlike horror movies. I can see where you're coming from with the immersion angle, because that was something that the original did pull off extremely well. I'm just saying that these specific things you are talking about don't break the immersion for me any more than the silly unrealistic stuff in the first game.

For instance, in the original I always envision rookies getting a speech that goes something like this: "Ok men, you're here for one reason and one reason only; Killing Aliens. In order to prepare you for that, we are going to teach you vital skills to survive and thrive against the alien menace. The first skill you will learn is 'Hot Potato', but before we teach you that, you have to get the chant right. Oh, and by the way, all training exercises will be live fire exercises, during which we WILL be engaging the enemy. Speaking of which, the Alarm just went off. Drop that pistol Scrawny Joe, you get the rocket launcher because you are first in line! Now move out men!"

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What strikes me the most about XCOM: Enemy Unknown is this:

How on EARTH did the manage to have so little content within a 14 GB installation?!?

Now, the game has a certain appeal, it is pleasing in on the eyes, but it's got console written all over it. Too much flash and too little bang.

I've finished the game in a couple of days, and won't run through it again, mostly because I'm sick and tired of the only two tilesets available.

Other thoughts:

Little soldier development - you level them up 5 times in no time, and that's it (plus psi). In the original, they all kept ketting better and better the longer they survived.

Flanking - sure, cute idea, but then no bonus when shooting someone from behind??

NO HIDDEN MOVEMENT! In the originals, just standing around did not mean you were safe - the aliens would come looking for you. Here they just hang around until you trigger them. (except terror missons to some degree)

Clunky interface and bloody annoying action camera. You can disable some of those, but not all.

Little point in upgrading you base. You need some satellites, a bit more power and a couple of storyline facilities, but that's it. The rest takes care of itself.

Pathetic tech tree. you research one more ship type in no time, that blows everything away without problems. And there are so few events taking place that any damage is repaired in good time.

It's funny that nothing today can compare to a game that came out all those years ago, considering the hardware we now possess.

Let's hope this one can deliver...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immersion isn't specific to movies, and if you truly lack immersion when you play games, I suspect you're unusual.

A snippet from your previous post - "Too many choices and you fall back on the familiar." - what's wrong with that? Even if you choose the familiar, at least you have that choice, and someone else may choose to play a different way. There is no negative about too many choices - there is no one forcing you to make use of them all. Whereas a game which forces you to play the way the game designer wants you to play...?

And the rest of that quote -"Less choices force you to think harder to find a solution within your limitations." - it's all about balance. There have to be positives and negatives to every way of playing, and it's up to the devs to balance it all properly. But limiting choice, and railroading the player into doing it their way is lazy design.

This man speaks truth and I'm proud to (virtually) know him :)

Nobody (at least nobody I know) likes to play a game on rails. Ever wonder why games like Grand Theft Auto, Fallout (all of them), and Oblivion/Skyrim are so popular? It's because they give the player some tools and a world to use them in and leave the details of what they actually do up to them. It's called freedom and its importance in gaming to serious gamers cannot be overstated. Now, if all someone wants to do is play a few minutes before work, or they don't really get into the games they play that much then that's fine and XCOM: EU should be perfect for them.

Personally I require a bit more meat on my plate and I also want to be able to eat it with my bare hands if I feel like it. I don't need the waiter standing over me explaining how to use the utensils and then forcing me to only use them with my feet for no apparent reason. Sure I'd have to put a LOT more thought into eating that way but who the hell wants to do it like that?!

Do the other games I mentioned above (or even the original X-COM) have problems? Of course they do. Would I care if you pointed them all out in some kind of weird list? Not one whit. Why? Because even with their issues they still give me enough freedom to have fun the way I want to. This isn't rocket surgery...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How on EARTH did the manage to have so little content within a 14 GB installation?!?
I think most of it is cutscene nonsense and dancing aliens (seriously).
Now, the game has a certain appeal, it is pleasing in on the eyes, but it's got console written all over it. Too much flash and too little bang.
Sums up exactly how I feel about it too.
I've finished the game in a couple of days, and won't run through it again, mostly because I'm sick and tired of the only two tilesets available.
It got very boring to me very fast as well. Not much freedom. Felt kind of like I was watching an interactive movie.
Little soldier development - you level them up 5 times in no time, and that's it (plus psi). In the original, they all kept ketting better and better the longer they survived.
Oddly some people consider that a good thing. Those people baffle me.
Flanking - sure, cute idea, but then no bonus when shooting someone from behind??
It's like it was only half-designed then rushed out unfinished.
NO HIDDEN MOVEMENT! In the originals, just standing around did not mean you were safe - the aliens would come looking for you. Here they just hang around until you trigger them. (except terror missons to some degree)
Yeah this is probably one of my biggest gripes. I don't think they really meant for the aliens to have any brains. They just seem to be pretty pictures that jump up and dance for you when you find them and then you get to throw your single grenade at them (lol fail!). Very poorly designed.
Clunky interface and bloody annoying action camera. You can disable some of those, but not all.
My favorite was when you are in the big UFO's and the camera keeps getting stuck in the ceiling. Good times...
Little point in upgrading you base. You need some satellites, a bit more power and a couple of storyline facilities, but that's it. The rest takes care of itself.
They didn't want the players to have to think about anything. Hell they even give you a guy to run the whole show and just keep you updated once in a while. It's not like you are in command or anything... Oh wait...
Pathetic tech tree. you research one more ship type in no time, that blows everything away without problems. And there are so few events taking place that any damage is repaired in good time.
Again, no thinking required. This was unfortunately by design. They actually had a better one originally and scrapped it for one that wouldn't "intimidate" the playerbase (ROFLMAO! *facepalm*).
It's funny that nothing today can compare to a game that came out all those years ago, considering the hardware we now possess.
Amen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how exactly does XCOM limit you guys from playing the game the way you want to? Please elaborate.

I don't get it, you guys want your strategy games to be sandbox games? That's cool I guess, but I'm willing to guess a lot of people are going to disagree with you if you want XCOM to be more like Skyrim, you know, the game where the best strategy is to literally just run at your opponent and swing your weapon like a 3 year old with a temper tantrum, you're going to have a hard time selling that to X-Com fans. Or maybe you just want your Interceptors to fly backwards when they patch the game, or have seizure mutons.

Like I said before, if that's the game you want to play, feel free to make it, and then tell me how it goes over.

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO HIDDEN MOVEMENT! In the originals, just standing around did not mean you were safe - the aliens would come looking for you. Here they just hang around until you trigger them. (except terror missons to some degree)

I won't argue the rest of your post (hey, it's not like I get a trophy or something if I convince you to like the game after all), but this part is only true on the lower difficulties. On Classic/Impossible, the AI isn't shackled and does a much better job at NOT standing around holding its dick until you find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know what you guys were playing, but the tech tree actually required a lot more thinking in this one. The tree was pretty linear(it was in the first one too) but since you also need weapon fragments to research stuff, and(if you are playing Ironman) you are always in short supply for them, you had to choose which ones were the most important. Interrogations and Autopsies were useless in the old one too, not so much in this one. Labs are usesless, which is really disappointing. They should have tripled the later techs' research time, but that's not a problem with the tech tree.

And why would you need an additional flanking bonus for shooting from behind? The one you get already is already very sizeable.

There's not really too much difference in base design either. They just consolidated all of the expansion limits(living space, workshop space, lab space, stores) into power. The only reason you had to think about base design was because of base defense, which they took out because it's stupid(oh, you're playing well, here's a potential "lose the entire game" scenario). And limited you to one base, which is because the extra bases were redundant beyond having radar bases. Facilities are expensive enough that having a build strategy is critical on Classic or Impossible.

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with the new game's tech tree was simply that things took such a short time to research, so when combined with the lack of events going on, that led to a bunch of stuff being researched very fast late-game. Anyone saying the original game's tech tree was deeper or more complex is kidding themselves, though.

Edited by AvistTorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how exactly does XCOM limit you guys from playing the game the way you want to? Please elaborate.
It holds your hand through the entire game and gives you very few options to choose from when doing... hell... pretty much everything!

You can't level up your soldiers the way you want. The skill perks? pfffft... lame. Hell you can't even choose which class they are.

You can't equip your soldiers the way you want. Why can't I give a heavy a sniper rifle if I want to? Why do they have to choose between a vest and a grenade?! That doesn't even start to make any sense! Ridiculous.

You have almost no choice in building your base other than where to plop the next square. Seriously what's the point of even thinking about that? It never gets attacked so why does it matter? The adjacency bonuses? What a joke. They could have automated that entire mechanic and it would be virtually the same just with less clicking.

You can't even interact with the game world the way you want. Yes I'm talking about free fire. No I'm not talking about using my heavy's single rocket or some other soldier's single grenade. That's just idiotic.

In my opinion they really wouldn't have to remove much from the game other than the cutscenes and some blatantly obvious clicking to make it virtually "Click Go and watch it all happen, maybe you win maybe you don't, then read the credits."

I never said TBS's should be sandbox games. Wow LOL! Talk about reading your own lines into my post and then twisting it into a defense for your own point of view... I mentioned those games as examples of wildly popular games that understand the fundamentals of freedom in gaming. Designing ANY KIND OF GAME and placing it on rails by taking away basic choices the way XCOM: EU does is simply unacceptable to me. It gives me the impression the devs (or their management *cough* jerk that tricked me into buying it on YouTube... you know who you are) are either incredibly unfocused or extremely lazy.

Feel free to misunderstand and/or misinterpret anything I said above. You can even twist my words some more to try to convince us we should like a terribly designed game. It makes no difference to me as I'm unsubscribing from this thread now since I can't be arsed to explain all this again and again and again to everyone and their brother who dislike having to think while playing games. Have fun! :)

Toodles...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, yeah, thinking of it, the interface could be streamlined a lot more.

* Automatically build whatever is required by the plot, else build satellite links and satellites.

* Grant infinite items of any kind upon completing research. You never need more than 2 of any weapon, and you're swimming in plasma by the time you can research it.

* In fact, what's the point of selecting weapon on "soldier equip" if there is only one for each class?

* Why do I have to click weapon/armor/extra item and then select it - just place the 3-4 choices you have in a row.

* Automatic overwatch at turn end, automatic weapon switch for snipers, no action confirmation.

* Streamline all menus that only have a single button into "press any key to continue".

* In fact, better replace that button with a pause key.

EU is filled with "choices" that are so clear-cut that they are not choices at all. I think the abbreviation "EU" suits it well, it reminds you of a certain real-life organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All you that are hating on EU need to realize that it wasen't built for us. It was built for this current generation of gamers and to be a fiancially successful title in the marketplace. By all accounts, it is, and a couple of neckbeards moaning about what is different from UD isn't going to change one bit that they accomplished what they set out to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If below is the way that new generation thinks, it needs games more along the lines of The Sims:

The only reason you had to think about base design was because of base defense, which they took out because it's stupid(oh, you're playing well, here's a potential "lose the entire game" scenario).

"BAAAW I couldn't defend my own base and the game made me lose it, NOT FAIR!"

In the last generation, you became a gamer once you completed Doom on Nightmare or ADOM with one of the Ultimate endings. The new generation still needs a test.

Do an ironman run of Metro 2033 on Ranger Hardcore, then call yourself a gamer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, most new big studio games are flashy, short and dumb. And most interesting titles come from small, independent developers (old Space Empires player here). Like this one.

But once in awhile, they do deliver.

Deus Ex, Human Revolution did.

Whilst not as complex in is gameplay as the original, and hampared by being cross-platform, it is a study in how to design a clever game, from the ground up. It was developed for consoles, but done so in a way that it does not annoy me, which is rare.

Big studios today do not understand that good design is what makes a game, not the wrapping. System Shock 2 is still the creepiest game around, because of meticulous level design, and brilliant use of darkness and sound. Deus Ex (original) is still the best, because of those great locations; the cathedral mission, the underwater base, Vandenberg base... UFO: Enemy Unknows is still the best because it does right all the things that XCOM does wrong.

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a half-assed attempt, wrapped in flashy graphics, best examplified by every UFO crash site in the game being a temperate forest.

Xenonauts is promising, because it looks to be more complex. I WANT complex. Which is why, when the rest of the world plays Galactic Civilixations, I play Space Empires...

It's funny that nothing today can compare to a game that came out all those years ago, considering the hardware we now possess.

Let's hope this one can deliver...

If you really believe that, and you have actually tried the other X-Com clones, there is no way Xenonauts or any other game is going to "deliver" for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've beaten ADOM, but didn't do an Ultra. That game takes way too much time for a roguelike. You can't accomplish that on every playthrough.

If you want a challenge, do Faye's Final Problem on Shiren, then call yourself a gamer. It's considerably more difficult as well as concise.

My problem with base defenses aren't that they are difficult(because nothing in X-Com is very difficult), it's that it's a punishment for doing well. That's a cardinal sin of game design.

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a japanese portable game. How hard can it be? Can't test and don't see any sources mentioning it for that reason. All jrpgs I know of are linear; this means that, most likely, everyone who played the game had to do that problem and did it.

And even if it's hard, the game's small size makes it a mere logical puzzle.

ADOM's length and randomness is part of the difficulty, you can't just get lucky or figure out the solution by trial and error, you have to actually be good. That's why it's still the benchmark.

Yes, you can do an ultra ending on every playthrough you want. You can even do Ordinary Chaos God (harder than ultimate) with a Necromancer.

it's that it's a punishment for doing well. That's a cardinal sin of game design.

It's not. Doom respawns enemies if you kill them. ADOM punishes you for doing well by leveling the enemies up (with possible uberjackal bug). Tetris punishes you for doing well by speeding up.

The punishment shouldn't be unreasonable, such as uberjackals are (ADOM is the benchmark despite it, not because of) or dumb Oblivion leveling of everything.

But aliens attacking your base for kicking their butt? Unreasonable? Are you serious?

And is it really a punishment - you have all your best guys there to defend the base.

Edited by HWP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone saying the original game's tech tree was deeper or more complex is kidding themselves, though.

It was lot more immersive and, well, interesting. Capturing leaders alive to learn more about the various alien missions, navigators to learn about various different UFOs, medics for.. eh, getting some random autopsy/live alien report you haven't gotten, research on food, entertainment, surgery, etc. It was all useless fluff ultimately but it was very interesting stuff to read, none the less.

I'd still have liked to have those in the new game, maybe tag them as "non-critical" so people don't research those before the actual important stuff if that was an issue to remove them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't level up your soldiers the way you want. The skill perks? pfffft... lame. Hell you can't even choose which class they are.

It works out pretty much the same way. Instead of your "Strenght" going up, you pick the perk that gives you another rocket, or another grenade. Wanna increase "TUs" give them the one that gives you a free attack. It's the same effect, but it doesn't require an absurd amount of stat farming. You couldn't choose your soldiers attributes in the first one either.

You can't equip your soldiers the way you want. Why can't I give a heavy a sniper rifle if I want to? Why do they have to choose between a vest and a grenade?! That doesn't even start to make any sense! Ridiculous.

I actually agree with you on the first instance. I really wanted to equip Snipers and Heavies with Assault Rifles because Sniper Rifles suck for the first few levels and LMGs suck, well, all the time. About it not making sense though, that's immaterial. There's a lot of stuff in both games that make NO sense. It comes with the terrritory for soft science fiction.

You can't even interact with the game world the way you want. Yes I'm talking about free fire. No I'm not talking about using my heavy's single rocket or some other soldier's single grenade. That's just idiotic.

What's idiotic is that you COULD pull that crap in the first one, and that the aliens never did. It's much more logical in this one, cover only get's destroyed by explosives(you know, thintg that are actually desinged to demolish other things), or sustained fire from powerful energy weapons.

You have almost no choice in building your base other than where to plop the next square. Seriously what's the point of even thinking about that? It never gets attacked so why does it matter? The adjacency bonuses? What a joke. They could have automated that entire mechanic and it would be virtually the same just with less clicking.

You have steam vents to consider, and whether or not you want to do a Nexus. It's not as thoughtless as how you are portraying it. The first one there really isn't much strategy in making a base besides making sure there is a choke point and also making sure you can dismantle your radar when you need to.

I never said TBS's should be sandbox games. Wow LOL! Talk about reading your own lines into my post and then twisting it into a defense for your own point of view... I mentioned those games as examples of wildly popular games that understand the fundamentals of freedom in gaming. Designing ANY KIND OF GAME and placing it on rails by taking away basic choices the way XCOM: EU does is simply unacceptable to me. It gives me the impression the devs (or their management *cough* jerk that tricked me into buying it on YouTube... you know who you are) are either incredibly unfocused or extremely lazy.

Well, that's up to you if you enjoy broken, easy, poorly designed games with an absurd amount of bugs and the illusion of freedom and consequence, that is good for you. I'm fine with freedom, but it's not the be-all end-all of gaming. I enjoy all kinds of games and to put such an arbitrary requirement for their enjoyment as that is anathema to me. And honestly, I think most of those games are unfocused, and while not necessarily lazy, definitely half assed(I do love me some Fallout 1&2 and NV though).

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a japanese portable game. How hard can it be? Can't test and don't see any sources mentioning it for that reason. All jrpgs I know of are linear; this means that, most likely, everyone who played the game had to do that problem and did it.

And even if it's hard, the game's small size makes it a mere logical puzzle.

Dude, if you like roguelikes, you owe it to yourself to get Shrien(DS, not necessarily Wii). It's really not anything like your bias is telling you. Fay's Final Solution(it's the post-game dungeon) is by far the best roguelike i've ever played, and puts pretty much any Western RL to shame.

You're seriously out of touch with JRPGs if you are thinking that way. Sure, that's a more or less accurate generalization of the mainstream ones, but they make by FAR the best niche subgenres(SRPGs, Wizardry Clones and their good Roguelikes) but the western ones to shame. ESPECIALLY on the portable systems(the Japanese generally only market titles they'd think westerners would find appealing on home consoles, while they prefer portable, so they design for their much more "hardcore" attitude towards games)

ADOM's length and randomness is part of the difficulty, you can't just get lucky or figure out the solution by trial and error, you have to actually be good. That's why it's still the benchmark.

Yes, you can do an ultra ending on every playthrough you want. You can even do Ordinary Chaos God (harder than ultimate) with a Necromancer

ADOM is one of the less random RLs out there. Stone Soup or Slash 'Em(or arguably DF) have more or less inherited the "benchmark" position nowadays, since ADOM has been only recently seen new development since 10 years ago. Don't you need a AoLS to do an Ultra, which is not a guaranteed item?

It's not. Doom respawns enemies if you kill them. ADOM punishes you for doing well by leveling the enemies up (with possible uberjackal bug). Tetris punishes you for doing well by speeding up

Do you know anyone who actually likes the uberjackal effect? Tetris is different as the only "progress" you can make on it is to do ever increasingly challenging levels.

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fay's Final Solution(it's the post-game dungeon) is by far the best roguelike i've ever played, and puts pretty much any Western RL to shame.

I doubt it. JRPG fans are infamous for making tall claims, while in the end it turns out that what "puts everything ever made in the West to shame" is another lost-love-story.

You have steam vents to consider, and whether or not you want to do a Nexus. It's not as thoughtless as how you are portraying it. The first one there really sin't much strategy in making a base besides making sure there is a choke point and also making sure you can dismantle your radar when you need to.

It's so simple it could have been automated. Steam vents are just where you place your steam generators.

No, if you're on impossible with second wave on, you don't want to do a nexus. It's a waste of flight computers and time. There's more space on your base than you will ever need, and uplinks are much much cheaper.

5 uplinks cover 15/16 countries, cost $750+25 power and are built in 14 days.

3 nexus cover 14/16 countries, cost $900+6xFC+75xalloys+24 power, at a total cost of $1290 and 21 days to build. You want to cover 15/16, not 16/16, to ensure you can farm abductions - abductions are super-easy missions perfect for training rookies or just collecting rewards. Excavation barely nudges it, you're going to excavate the top 3 levels either way and won't need the bottom one.

It's one of those fake "choices" where there's really only one right choice and it's painfully obvious, but you can make a wrong choice for amusement.

On second wave with all options the prices are doubled and you have less funding, so this decision to waste $1000 is quite likely to cost you the whole game.

Edited by HWP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's idiotic is that you COULD pull that crap in the first one, and that the aliens never did. It's much more logical in this one, cover only get's destroyed by explosives(you know, thintg that are actually desinged to demolish other things), or sustained fire from powerful energy weapons.

In real life bullets tend to just go through almost all of what XCOM considers "cover". Over a foot of concrete is penetrated by 7.62 while maintaining lethality. Everything but old stone buildings would only provide concealment, maybe help armor protection, never full cover.

ADOM is one of the less random RLs out there. Stone Soup or Slash 'Em(or arguably DF) have more or less inherited the "benchmark" position nowadays, since ADOM has been only recently seen new development since 10 years ago. Don't you need a AoLS to do an Ultra, which is not a guaranteed item?

DF is a slightly different genre altogether. And the point of benchmark is to be stable, not in development.

You can get the amulet in a number of ways, with 99% or so chance if you do it right. Can just wish for it and get it. Also, let's add the option of ordinary chaos god to it, it's also a special ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it. JRPG fans are infamous for making tall claims, while in the end it turns out that what "puts everything ever made in the West to shame" is another lost-love-story.

Well, I'm not a JRPG "fan". I play them, but i don't attach any specific emotion or bias to them. Just like Western ones. Shiren just happens to be an awesome one. I know @play did a couple blogs about the Shiren games, so you may want to check that out. That guys does have a western bias and still really enjoys them, he doesn't think they are the best like I do though.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2008/03/play_the_delights_of_mystery_d.php

And an exert:

Shiren the Wanderer is really very well-designed. It has the tightest core game system of any top-tier roguelike other than Rogue itself. Nearly every item, even supposedly bad ones, has a purpose. Every monster, even those with tricky attacks and abilities, have strategic ways to make them less dangerous, even harmless.

It is not unfair. The great majority of situations have ways out of them. Sometimes, it is true, you may have to make a sacrifice, or the way out is not to have gotten into it to begin with, but there are usually ways to have seen them coming. With good planning and economical use of resources, you can do a lot to ensure you'll have the tools to survive the later half of the game.

It is likely not the same as other random dungeon games you may have played. Although nearly all random dungeon games are inspired by roguelikes, many of them neglect important features. Even among roguelikes, Shiren's a bit special. In the taxonomy of the genre, it's closer to being a Hack-like game than a 'Band, but it's really closest to Rogue itself.

It's so simple it could have been automated. Steam vents are just where you place your steam generators.

Ya, I agree it's simple, even relative to UD but UD's is pretty simple when you get down to it once you figure out how to make a defensible base. I'm saying that you guys are making UD's out to be a lot more deep and complex than it really is.

In real life bullets tend to just go through almost all of what XCOM considers "cover". Over a foot of concrete is penetrated by 7.62 while maintaining lethality. Everything but old stone buildings would only provide concealment, maybe help armor protection, never full cover.

Ya, I'm aware of the penetrating capabilities of modern ammunition, put it's still gonna take a hell of a lot of bullets to completely demolish a section of wall.

Edited by Sinfullyvannila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...