Xenonauts vs Xcom Enemy Unknown

Other bases let you down more UFOs, do more missions, do them reliably, launch concurrent missions (it will take time to refuel one aircraft), etc. Or, at least, expand radar coverage. They are useful and you can complete the game sooner with them. If you go for commerce funding, multiple bases are essential to build up a sustainable industrial base.

But the game is beatable with only one base as well, it just requires some changes in the approach.

Hmm, ok.

But yeah, bases seem to be for protecting funding nations, but since ultimately funding nations aren't important for winning the game you don't actually need to protect them...*sigh* I kind of wish original game would have been advanced enough that aliens really would have played their own game with their mission and stuff instead of it just being penalty score =/ Oh well, at least game allows for rping.

But I tend to get defensive when people talk bad about devs(of any game, well, except some games that everyone agrees to be horrible or are known to be cash ons) in general because I'm interested in video game developing and I'm aware that its not as easy as what people make it sound to be so I can get rather... Err, you know.

I've got a lot of the design and logic/database code finished but I suck at XNA so I'm writing it in such a way that it leaves the core elements exposed in case some day I feel froggy and want to hire someone to put some fancy graphics on it. I'm using Visual Studio (VB.NET specifically).

Bugs don't usually bother me too much unless they are game breaking. I understand how that works and those can always be fixed. However, bad design decisions are another thing entirely and 90% of the ones I see large companies make infuriate me to no end.

It seems like nobody can just make a great game anymore. No nowadays it's all consumerism with grand spreadsheets showing demographics and dollar signs. I understand they are a company and have to sell as much as possible but that's like telling Leonardo da Vinci he better make Mona Lisa a blonde because more people will buy copies of it.

That kind of crap doesn't fly very far with me. Unfortunately that's the world we live in

But yeah, bases seem to be for protecting funding nations, but since ultimately funding nations aren't important for winning the game you don't actually need to protect them...

They kind of are important. Own industry takes a large initial investment, and to make it really profitable, you need to keep collecting E-115. Plus, industry needs at least a second base for best results, and multiple bases help you protect these nations.

It's really multiple approaches.

Bugs don't usually bother me too much unless they are game breaking. I understand how that works and those can always be fixed. However' date=' bad design decisions are another thing entirely and 90% of the ones I see large companies make infuriate me to no end.[/quote']

Agree 100%, and this is such a fundamental issue. Studios have all the talent and money in the world at their disposal, and yet fall down on design decisions on a regular basis. I tend to think that for all their experience making games, they don't have enough experience playing them. Most people with no development ability but who play games religiously (especially those such as yourself who then go into game dev) end up having a better grasp of game design.

It's just a sad fact that in order to reach the top levels of studio-based big budget game design you will not have played games as much as the gamers that end up playing your game. You will not have played games, lots of games, for hours and hours on end, because you're holding down a job and you work long hours there already. There are exceptions with certain studios allowing for 'extra-curricular studies' within the working week but they tend to simply prove the rule. This is why the indie sector is so damn valuable to us right now. Gamers turned creators.

That lifestyle of game creators being game players first has mostly died off. When studio devs say they play games it tends to be a token gesture. Do they have Skyrim saves running into the hundreds of hours? Do they keep up with Dwarf Fortress releases? Have they undertaken epic Minecraft builds on permanent servers? Do they keep up with the indie scene and take part in playing alpha releases? If not then they're not culturally exposed enough to design games that feel good to people in this era. Not to mention the fact that if they've been in the industry for decades they'll have more life responsibilities than making games. There's few of the luminaries who represent that kind of path into game design still making the games at a high level, the way they want to play those games (Will Wright would be one example - managing to make a huge series like The Sims still fundamentally be a fantastic game for gamers).

Nobody would argue with the artistry shown in a game like XCOM. It's just the smaller design decisions that (might) stick in your grill. Especially if you grew up playing the games (like X-COM) that were all about nailing the design - presentation came second.

Alright so I found out yesterday Firaxis is making a new Xcom called Enemy Unkown that is supposed to be very close to basically the best game ever, 94's UFO Defense.

So I become ecstatic, after figuring out how to download and setup the original and a few hours of that I started thinking about the choice of PC vs Console, which led me to do more research on the game, which led me to Xenonauts. Another Xcom: UFO Defense type game.

SO my question is whats up with that? I am getting the impression that Xenonauts is going to be a very close replication of the original with a different story line and a bunch of different proper nouns. Firaxis's game seems to claim to be going for a replica while slighltly simplifying the game (only one base, 4-6 man teams, no time units, which they may be able to make work).

I seem to be able to find more information on Xcom: Enemy Unknown though, so could you guys help me out and give me a detailed response comparing the two?

As they say in the XCEU developer interviews the game is a re-imagining of the original Xcom.

I played XCEU at my friends house. I thought some parts were done well and others not so well. Overall the game does not attract my attention so I will pass and wait for Xenonauts.

One thing that does sound interesting in XCEU is the multiplayer. Has anyone had a chance to try this out?

One thing that does sound interesting in XCEU is the multiplayer. Has anyone had a chance to try this out?

Its nice though I've experienced some bugs in it with flight and such, but Firaxis does fix their bugs so that will not be problem in future. But yeah, its nice but not the main attraction.

Its nice though I've experienced some bugs in it with flight and such, but Firaxis does fix their bugs so that will not be problem in future. But yeah, its nice but not the main attraction.