RikazeMA

WOOT! I'm so stoked! Knew it was time to stop lurking, and just grazing over the threads and actually read some posts. I know you can't say when you'll be releasing for sure, but I hope you miraculously swing a summer release somehow. It'd be a perfect way to spend my free-time over the summer, since the semester will be over and all. =D EDIT: And seeing as how it's 1 AM and I've been doing homework all night, I forgot to mention that at least the Beta will make a kick-ass late birthday present that I bought myself... What, a year ago now? Two? Whatever, it'll be kick-ass, that's for sure!

Finally got some time to play 17.1. It's already been established, but the patch is pretty dang stable. Wasn't able to do Terror Missions because I suck at the game, but no crashing. The game stopped for all the right reasons. Those being, eaten by aliens. Very excited that I got to play for something like 90 straight minutes with ZERO problems. Well, maybe not zero problems, but zero major, or relevant, problems. I can see a real game in there now. I'm really enthusiastic for Beta and eventually Release. Keep up the good work guys!

V17 was already really stable for me, maybe this'll be even better. Thanks a ton Chris! I'll get back to you with problem reports once I've had a chance to get my hands on it.

My only gripe with the weapon balance of the ballistics is the high AP cost on the LMG. Most soldiers can't move and shoot using the LMG in the same turn. Even if they were only able to move 1-3 tiles, it would make a huge difference, at least to my particular play style where I use them in a supporting role. Bumping the AP cost down to even just 40 would solve a lot of issues I have in that regard. Other than that, the weapons actually feel really good to me. Shotgunners are great breach-men, Snipers rules the open field, and Riflemen fill the gaps, hold the lines, and do respectably well in most mid-range engagements. With the prohibitive AP cost of the LMG though, their only efficient use atm would be against larger targets, the likes of which I've not encountered yet, and by the time you'd be likely to face them in the course of a real game, you would probably already have something to replace the LMG.

Ran into same Alien Base thing as Gribbstar. Not a biggy for me, I'd never even been able to play long enough to see one before this patch. Only one CTD so far, tried to decommission an F-17 and then short hang (3-5 seconds) followed by the crash. Other than those, no major problems, just minor gripes that are of the "They'll certainly fix that later, it's not important right now" variety. Edit: And plenty of farm-maps with invisi-civvies vaulting over junk that didn't trip CTD's.

I know you didn't want to have to resort to this Chris, but seriously, thank you. XCOM:EU wasn't scratching the itch for Turn-Based Tactical Alien Shooting that I've had for a while now, and I just don't have the time anymore to acclimate to the graphics and clunky controls of X-Com:UFOD. Hopefully this release will finally be stable for me and I can do something to get my fill from Xenonauts.

Is the invisi-civvies vault crash caused by the map specifically, or the game making a call for a non-existent asset? I feel like if that could be pinned down, then at least a temporary work-around could be found to afford those of us who've never been able to play for more than 15-20 minutes without a crash a better chance at a prolonged game. But then again, I could just be way off the mark because I haven't a single effin' clue what I'm talking about.

Since the Roles got added I've actually been using the crap out of them, though I pretty heavily modify all the basic ones first. I keep the squad comp the same that it starts you out with by default, but mod the kits so they're a little more specialized. Commando (x1) - Pistol + Clips x 3, Smoke, Flashbang, Frag, C4 Assault (x2) - Shotgun + Clips x 3, Flashbang x 3, Frag x 3 Rifleman (x2) - M16 + Clips x 2, Pistol + Clip, Smoke and Frags x 2 Heavy Gunner (x1) - LMG + Clips x 3, Smoke x 3 Field Medic (x1) - M16 + Clips x 2, Medkit, Smoke x 2 Rocketeer (x0, x1 later on when Hunter loses effectiveness) - Launcher + Rockets x 4 (Assorted based on preference/current needs), Smoke x 2 Sniper - Sniper + Clips x 2, Medkit, Smoke x 2 I don't use the Rocketeer's until further in when I need more firepower. I use the Hunter early on to fill that role instead. Medics and Rifleman are interchangeable as needed. Heavy Gunner for just laying down various types of fire support and suppression. Assault gunners are strictly for Breach and Clear, generally kept out of the way or used for flanking maneuvers on the open field. Commando's used as scouting elements and secondary breaching element, hence the C4. Snipers are Snipers except when they're secondary medical elements or support elements. General strategy here is built around the expectation of lots of open ground or having small amounts of cover, and using smoke to make up for that shortcoming, as well as provide cover for moving up. Tactical retreat is a bigger priority than a assault with this mindset. Tactically, it's less about making sure the opponents die and more about making sure my guys live and take as little fire as possible in the process, hence the over-abundance of smoke grenades. People seem to feel shotguns are worthless, but at least early on, the high damage output makes them great, and for Breach and Clear, range isn't really an issue, so Shotguns tend to be ideal. The LMG may be slow moving, but being able to pepper an area and cover a retreat makes them worth lugging around when using these tactics. And then when it's time for the Heavy Gunner to pull back, the Sniper can cover him, and ideally pick off a couple targets in the process, making the next push that much more likely to succeed.

CTD on my second Farmland map attempt. Not actually sure it was from the invisi-civvies jumping something or not though, couldn't tell, stuff was going by way too quickly. It actually kinda seemed like it had more to do with my guys getting shot at than anything else, from the context of what was happening at the moment of crash. (I.E., the sounds of being shot at.) Also, it seems like the tank just will not move on the first mission no matter what, but after that it's completely fine. Not sure if it's only for the first mission, or for the first mission where you decide to bring a Hunter with. Regardless, it seems like the map doesn't matter, just that the tank refuses to get off the stupid chopper, but only for the one mission. Currently, I'm rationalizing it as some idiot forgot to put the gasoline in before the first op.

Confirmed invisi-civvies on multiple tilesets. Arctic, Middle East, and what looked like a supply depot type place, though I couldn't tell because the buildings didn't render. I kinda assume there were supposed to be buildings, the way the ground looked, but they did not, and I was able to walk through the non-existent walls. Seeing a lot of rendering issues, actually, like roofs on the military-base map not rendering no matter how many levels up I go, buildings not rendering, lots of stuff in general not rendering.

The atmosphere makes this game great, just like it did with X-Com. I'll echo the sentiments here, hearing incoming fire in X-Com always made me cringe, but rarely jump, despite how tense the atmosphere was. Xenonauts has taken it one step further, to the point where I can't help but jump whenever a shot comes from the darkness. It's still in Alpha and already it's great, I can't imagine how much better it will be once the Aliens can actually choose to shoot at us.

I really think story designers and writers are underrated heavily in the video game industry, but what you say is true, story designers/writers are practically a dime a dozen... But good ones are like Diamonds, to keep with your analogy. Look at a highly story-driven game like Mass Effect, or look at the success of ToR, or any BioWare game that isn't Dragon Age 2. I think a lot of folks actually in the video game industry kind of miss a very simple thing that movies captured long ago; that some games are meant to be played, and some are meant to be experienced. What I mean is, the difference between a heavily story-driven experience like Mass Effect, where you actually want to know about the characters and the universe you're in, versus a game like Halo or CoD, where it's about the action, usually in Multiplayer. Xenonauts fits into the later category, a game that uses 'not-story' as the body, and uses some story-based elements as some extra bits. Or, to put it in movie terms, Shoot 'Em Up or Smokin' Aces as opposed to, say, Aliens; Smokin' Aces is all about the action, there's no depth to it what-so-ever, but it's still a fun movie. Aliens has that character and story depth that make it what it is though, despite also having a lot of action. Both forms are not only equally viable, but can provide equally as many hours of awesome, everything else being equal, and the problem arises when games hedge on one or the other, thinking they can incorporate both when they can't. The CoD games are a great example of this, with weak single player content and even weaker story-lines; they hedge on the single player aspect in order to try and get some folks to buy it because they want a good story attached to an FPS experience, and fail to deliver. Here's how I feel about story designers and writers, and their place in the games industry; If you want to make a game centered around your story, don't bother pitching it to the big-time publishers, they won't take the risk. (2K -might,- but it's still very unlikely.) Instead, put together an indie crew and turn it into a labor of love, make something from your own blood, sweat, tears, and money. If you're good enough, and just a little lucky, getting noticed will be the smallest of your fortunes. Just don't fall into the trap of that hedged bet, make your game around one or the other, either mechanics to support story, or story to support mechanics.... Or get -really- lucky and make a game that can do both.

For any rebellion, you need Propaganda. That could be the mechanic that 'replaces' the politics of X-Com/Xenonauts. Don't have all the humans come to you, instead be waging a war behind the war; a war of propaganda, for recruits. Also, there needs to be something in place at some point to make the game about offense rather than defense, preferably from the very start. Rebellion's always start small and take the initiative, that's the whole point of a rebellion, particularly against Alien Overlords. So how do you make it about the offensive rather than a zero-sum game of 'Defend, Recruit, Rinse, Repeat'?

I second AD's interest. Not only that, but Betuor seems to have a lot of the same interest in making video games that I do, so I'm really interested to hear the responses for his questions.

Quick side-note, that's insane btw, heard about that just last night, and they were at 800,000$-ish at the time the video I watched got posted. I agree with Gorlom and AD, I think you're misunderstanding the point, as well as the function, of the thermometer, and they've said most everything I would have on the matter, except... Look at Minecraft, that started as an Alpha Kick-starter project very similar to how Xenonauts is doing. Without that early funding, Minecraft may never have gotten off the ground to become the massively popular game it is today. The difference between MC and Xenonauts is that Xenonauts is catering to a niche market, X-Com fans and hardcore TBS gamers who're looking for something with some life and challenge in it. This makes the idea of Xenonauts becoming insanely popular the way Minecraft did less likely, and some extra cash to feed back into the machine certainly wouldn't hurt Goldhawk. Also, Gamers are a motivated and generous breed, we're willing to put time, effort, money, blood, sweat, and tears into something we feel is a worthy cause, and I'm sure most everyone here will agree, a true spiritual successor to X-Com is a worthy cause, at least to us. I'm sure there are some who would go out of their way to figure out how to send Chris donations for the project regardless of whether or not he was 'asking' for them. Which he isn't. He's offering the option, subtly; not directly asking but making his request known. As has been stated, it's not like you have to donate, the game will probably get finished regardless of whether or not you do, and a donation thermometer isn't meant to make you feel bad, it's only there to offer the option should you feel strongly enough about the game.

Well, to motivate why a Laser-based weapon would work like a shotgun, prismatic lens/crystals refracts the light into their various wavelengths to give you a spread-like effect, that could work. Can't say about the rest though.

I prefer the red top-down, though I will agree that it could be muted a little bit so it's not quite so harsh. Honestly, it doesn't bother me, but I can see how it might bother others. As much as I like the stylized view, imo, it just doesn't fit the atmosphere. The alien ships are scariest when you're up close and personal, not so much when you're viewing them in the Intercept screen, and I feel removing the red removes part of the sense of urgency and warning.

1993 - 2004 for me. Was born in '90, and been playing ever since. My earliest memory is from '92, playing F-16 Flight Sim with my dad on his old C486, and I never stopped. Games like Deus Ex, Starcraft, Dungeon Keeper, and Donkey Kong Country idealize what make up good games to me. All of those are games I still play today. And if I ever want a new experience amidst all the trash of the current era of games, I only have to dig up old gems like X-Com to feel like I'm playing something worthwhile again. The Indie sector is clearly paving the way forward in this generation of games. You have projects like Super Meat Boy, Terraria, Minecraft, and Xenonauts that prove you don't have to have 20,000,000$ to make a good game, you just have to make a good game. Every so often someone puts out a nice little gem here and there, but a lot of today's games are too homogenized. 2K's better for this than most of the other big Publishers, still willing to let their Dev's get their hands dirty with worthwhile projects, but still, they have to make money in copious amounts to stay afloat, where-as the indie sector can produce smaller, but better games at a fraction of the cost. I wish we as consumers would let tripe like CoD wither and die... It really needs to.

Gauddlike... Your avatar is PERFECT for this... "No sir, your monkey's right." You just made my day.

Here's what I think. Put up the Thermometer, say 'screw the upgrading thing,' for now at least. I think there are probably an awful lot of us who've pre-ordered, (Like myself,) who could care less about the bells and whistles that come with the premium package. Honestly, the badge and tag? Couldn't care less. The soundtrack (Once the full one is in, if it isn't already.)? Yeah, I might honestly fork over an extra ten for that. The opportunity to show my support to an indie dev group who's doing one of the greatest games I've ever played the justice it deserved ten years ago? Yes please.

Brain gave a fairly poor reason at the end of Enemy Unknown as far as I'm concerned... But I did notice one thing throughout Enemy Unknown whilst trying to answer this question myself... They collected an awful lot of our stuff... Wasn't uncommon to see Cows being autopsied on Terror and Supply ships... And in Supply Bases you could see all kinds of funky stuff, humanoid skeletons that are clearly... Well Human skeletons, amongst other relics of ours. So let's look at what we know: -Elerium is limited. -They kill everything, not just people, but the local wildlife as well. (Evidenced by the killing of cows, which they've no reason for other than stereotyping. I seem to also remember seeing dead snakes and vultures from time to time.) -They won't attack en masse, nor do they send in the upper echelon right away. (Mutons, Ethereals. Also not to be mistaken for not being able to attack en masse; maybe they could've and just didn't.) -They attack in small bands; not sending full battalions even, instead sending in something more akin to a Special Ops squad. -They seem to prefer subtlety and infiltration to out-right war. The one thing this tells us definitively: They want us alive. -Us-. We can also safely assume Brain lied; they prefer to maneuver using political machinations, so of course they're comfortable with lying. (Yeah, pot-shot at politicians, so sue me.) But why do they have so much of our stuff? Why do they have what equates to a biological museum? What's the point? It all comes back to the cows. The Scientists only had it half-right, see. They weren't just mushing down the cows into a nutrient-paste to feed themselves, they also wanted their genetic material. This also explains why they were attempting cross-breeding between Sectoids and Humans; they had to understand the principles of how our gene's would bond to the gene's of other species, and it makes more sense to bond them to something more similar first. And in order to understand our genetic history and diversity, they collected our stuff and studies us, from time immemorial to present day. This all leads up to my hypothesis; the cow abductions, human abductions, and genetic hybridization were all linked. They wanted a docile human race, to genetically bond us to cows, which are fat in the nutrients they seem to so desire. This whole war started over food. They're facing a famine that threatens to force them to extinction. The aliens aren't all buddy-buddy with one another just because they happen to have a good nature towards diversity, they're doing it out of common interest, and a war between any groupings of their respective species guarantees mutual annihilation, where-as warring with the primitive humans at least gives them a chance. This even explains why they don't field much other than Sectoids to begin with, as well as the political machinations and the small numbers of troops they field; an army marches on its stomach, and you can't feed an army if you don't have food. It also explains why the Earthly governments would even consent to an alliance with the Xeno's; they're trading what they see as certain destruction for slavery, which in their twisted minds still gives us a chance. They don't want our Gold, Platinum, what-have-you, they want us. They want us. For food.

I'm gonna throw my lot in with the 'Fine as-is,' camp. Keep that direction I say. Part of what made Enemy Unknown and Apocalypse nightmare inducing games for me was the soundtrack and SFX; very ambient and subtle, the kind of thing that seeps in at the edges of your consciousness over time. The ambient music in Xenonauts does the trick for me, and the SFX are actually far 'better,' (worse for my poor heart,) than those in Enemy Unknown and Apocalypse, imo. And that's the challenge when doing the score for a game like this, I think, is that you need something that builds tension, but does it subtly. It has to add to the atmosphere over the course of the entire game; you can't have any point where the music might instead detract from or break immersion. Enemy Unknown did this very well, Apocalypse less so, but the soundtrack was still good for Apoc and didn't actually take away from the game, even if it was a little too in-your-face at times. Breaking away from the music for a moment and dwelling on the SFX in Xenonauts... Damn. Scares the crap outta me every time I get shot at from the darkness... Good stuff.

I found one of these TV's out behind the power-station type building you always start next to presently, as well as one near the big shipping containers at one point. I agree, they're very creepy. I was definitely having a fit of 'wth?' when I saw those. I was sure they were IAED's (Improvised Alien Explosive Device,) and couldn't bring myself to go within like ten tiles of them.

I actually did find one more gripe I have with Xenonauts, very similar to a problem present in X-Com: Apocalypse. Loading into the BattleScape means you're gonna be without music. It's sad. The music may not be triple-a quality, Hans Zimmer written score or anything, but it's atmospheric, it makes you feel uneasy, and doing missions without music makes them less scary. ls35a, I'm sure the issue will get fixed. We're not quite to Beta yet, (Though hopefully we will be soon-ish,) and there are plenty of changes on the horizon, not to mention plenty of time to give feedback to GH for things like increasing the font. Keep the faith man, it'll come in due time. Edit: Gah, I lied, I had -two- more gripes. Alien reaction fire doesn't seem to always be tied into line-of-sight just yet. I'm sure that's something that will be fixed with the implementation of the full Alien AI though. I just hate that I can't sneak up on the buggers yet.

Howdy everyone. You can all clearly see my name, so I won't introduce it, but Rik is short, or Rika if you feel like giving me an effeminate name. Honestly, I don't care which, I've been called both. I first played Enemy Unknown, (AKA, UFO Defense, though I prefer the British title,) back in early December, after hearing about it for ages and ages. As a student of Computer Science who wants to develop Video Games for a living someday, I'd actually become quite jaded at much of the games industry. Franchises like Call of Duty and Battlefield had left me wanting. Reproducing the same tripe year after year was taking its toll on my interest to play games, forcing me to strain to find titles both new and old that were actually interesting. I found that intrigue in the Indie Sector, with games like Terraria and Dungeon Defenders leaving a big impact on me. After hearing about Enemy Unknown for the umpteenth time, and how amazing a game it was, I decided to give it a go, because Steam had it on sale for 2.50$. I went in with no expectations. I can be a bit of a graphics whore, in all honesty. I like some old games, but generally, if something similar, with better graphics is available, I'd rather play that. Imagine my surprise when I'd realized that I'd never played a game like Enemy Unknown. For my first two weeks of Christmas Vacation, I played Enemy Unknown like it was a full time job, sinking 80 hours into the game. I was even more taken aback by the difficulty, harkened to the old days of PC Gaming where the difficulties lied, and 'Easy' actually meant 'Harder,' 'Normal' meant 'Hardest,' and 'Hard' meant, 'I hope you ate your Wheaties today kid, because you're in for a wild ride.' With modern games, I always play on 'Hard' or whatever the top-tier difficulty is, but remembering how old games scaled difficulty, I tried my first game on normal... I eventually wound it back down to the second easiest, after I had surmounted the learning curve, and realized Enemy Unknown would be no walk in the park. Enemy Unknown was the only game I've ever played that gave me nightmares. And I love that. It stuck out as so horrendously atmospheric and scary at times, that I had the most vivid nightmare I've ever had because of that game. Xenonauts, so far, has been far worse. Every time I hear an alien fire at me from a concealed position, I jump, and not as a reaction to having played Enemy Unknown, but because Xenonauts manages to keep the ambiance in the same vein spiritually as its predecessor. I can't play for extended periods for fear that I'll have another nightmare like that one, and because I'm also a quality-whore and can't make myself play it until it's mechanically all there. (Read: Until Beta probably.) Once the game's 'Finished,' and all that's left is polish and bug-squashing, I look forward to the many nights of nightmares this game will give me.