XenoMask

*eye roll* Anyway, in the end it still that Firaxis' game is reimagining while Xenonauts is remake

My opinion? Firaxis game is fun and addicting as hell. Its also plays differently than original, but it in my opinion has same spirit, in different sense though. As in, old game had that feeling of protecting earth from alien menace and new one also has that, but it feels different... Like old game is horror and tense, this one is tense in fast and furious way. I mean seriously, EVERYTHING in this game is faster than original. Everything. Building equipment, researching, getting missions, etc. Its still very strategic and hard game, but strategies it requires are completely different strategies than original game. So whether you consider it to feel like xcom or not depends on whether you think XCOM is about the setting and concept of researching aliens and their artifacts to combat them and protect earth from invasion or whether its about gameplay mechanics of the original game. I personally play XCOM games for immersion so I personally feel like its XCOM game, but yeah, its opinion based whether you consider it to be XCOM game or not. Gameplay wise Xenonauts does feel closer as it has much slower pace, like the original did. In new XCOM, month in game time is much shorter time than in original and Xenonauts.

There is not much to comment about 2 & 3, I guess I could talk about how intercepting is horrible in all XCOM games except Apocalypse(Note: One in Xenonauts is not refined enough yet to be actually fun, I'll expect that to be done during beta) and its true that it feels different because you can't send teams to multiple locations at same time.(and its never really explained why)

It came of as an ad honinem. In otherwords, you basically said that reviews and "fans" aren't trustworthy because they aren't objective as they don't consider flaws to be major enough Also, I was pretty pissed off at you using ad honinem on me.(Note: To me, fanboy means "Your opinion doesn't matter because you are a fanboy and biased") Actually, I'm still pretty mad. But sorry any way. Silliest thing is, what the heck we are disagreeing about anyway? I too agree with TB's opinion, yet somehow I'm the fanboy. I've just been annoyed at people talking about "Successor to XCOM" thing and otherwise stating opinions like they are facts... Like for example, saying what basically amounts to "They changed things from original which is shame as I wanted game to be good" as thats not objective as game still can be good even if its changed. Even if its changed for worse

I'd say there is quite difference between a drone and a tank Though original game's HWP did look like tank even though it was too small to be one. I have no clue what the heck it was.*shrugs*(yeah, its called tank, but come on, what kind of tank is that small? Then again, I guess.. Eh whatever)

Note that I said that in plural. Meaning that I don't consider Xenonauts either to be a true successor to XCOM series Like I said, there are none in my opinion. I judge XCOM fan games in their own merits and I wish it would become "subgenre"(kind of like how FPS were "Doom clones" or genre known as "Roguelikes") of its own.

Yeah, I know that Thinmen are new snakemen, doesn't change the fact that they count as seperate enemies. Heck, Facebook thing for Thinmen has their "Archive image from 1994" be original sprite. And yeah, I know about retpilian conspiracy thing, I mentioned it along with men in black earlier. Second wave stuff seem to be similar to Advanced settings in civilization game. Why they aren't in game? Dunno, maybe they are to be added in patch, maybe in dlc, maybe unfinished idea, maybe developer debug tool with odd name. It would be great if they are added to game and suck if it turns out to be dlc.(BTW, they are in game, some guy managed to get second wave options available but I'm not sure whether they actually work) Oh yeah, another thing I'm disappointed about: There are no actual new aliens species besides outsiders(which seem to be reference to 2K Marin game?*shrugs* Also they appear to be some kind of constructs, or at least they don't have autopsy or interrogation.). Thinmen are snakemen retooled, Berserkers are Mutons and so on. Meaning that there are technically less different varieties of aliens(technically, as muton berserkers are obviously far different from mutons and such, so I just mean specie wise) as they removed most unmemorable ones.

Yeah and for the "Making hard choices" thing. Its why I don't think its dumbing down, just... Different. It would be dumbing down if it was simply simplifying, but its not, its just reinforcing one game mechanic to extremes. Whether you like it or not. Anyway, there are other things I dislike about XCOM: EU, like the fact that escorts talk too much, there isn't even silly accents for non Americans, there aren't redesigns for snakemen, reapears, silicoids and celatids. Though its understandable as they were four most lamest aliens in original game... Anyway, worse than that is that there aren't alien ranks like medic, navigator, etc I'd have liked to seen modern version of those that don't look identical to soldiers. But WORST thing about remake is that they didn't re-add Alien Reproduction that was cut out of original because of bug while they did add every other original ufo facility. ...What? I'm not interested in same complains you people are interested in, your complains are about gameplay, mine are about stuff I'd have liked to see Like better politics for immersion and such. Would have nice if they had minigun tree, I mean original game had only autocanon, but there is cutout gattling laser... Would have been nice to have Gatling plasma too. They should add that in dlc ;P @anotherdevil: Thats because majority of people are being negative I'm borderline contrarian in that I usually have need to represent the minority! Nah, just kidding, seriously though, first time I did big rant on this thread I mentioned that I could do such rant about EVERY XCOM game and clone. Both in negative and in positive way. Yes, even Apocalypse, though I would prefer only to do positive one. I don't defend the game, I debate arguments I see as illogical. You guys never asked what I like or dislike about the game or even what my opinion on it is. Thats my take on it anyway. Not that it matters as people I'm talking to don't actually read this wall of text meaning I could be talking about My Little Pony for all you know. Its kind of sad when these forum discussion are reminding me of my real life. You know, talking so fast that most people can't keep up nor reply back to me =P

Few things 1) There is one alien base 2) There are not true successor to XCOM.

There is also that I could care less that this is remake of original game Same applies to XCOM fan remake games. Aka every darn XCOM fan game except UFO series. UFO: Alien Invasion is fan remake? Couldn't care less, I like it. Xenonauts is fan remake? Couldn't care less, I like it. UFO Extraterrestrial? Darn, lazy fan rip off, but still pretty fun even though thats because its rip off to the point I can't judge it on its own. I tend to judge XCOM clones on their own, hence why I like UFO series. Same applies to this game, I only compare it to original when people are who compare it to original are making incorrect comparisons. (And seriously, my first post on this forum was about being sick of Xenonauts being hyped up as true successor of XCOM while ignoring its true sequel Apocalypse You guys should really have realized by now that I hate hyperbole(Whether its [x xcom clone is best] or [x xcom clone game is worst] type) unless its positive kind for Apocalypse).)

You call me fanboy while you are being like "THIS PERSON IS 100% CORRECT BECAUSE HE AGREES WITH MY OPINION". With emphasis on opinion. At least I keep seeking out people who disagree with me it seems You can't call me fanboy of this game, its not even on my top ten list of games I love. Which includes Okami(the masterpiece), first two Fallouts(I want to burn Bethesda for third one), The Blackwell series(fell in love after first 10 minutes of first game) and XCOM Apocalypse. Which is absolutely best XCOM game ever made and such only thing that can compare with it is remake with all planned features(http://www.strategycore.co.uk/databank/games/x-com-apocalypse/concepts/ So beautiful that I actually bookmarked it =P) added back in. Thing is, I'm PROUD of being fanboy of games I'm fanboy of, so you who I don't consider to be random annoying(only type of people I ignore on internet, which doesn't really apply to this forum as this forum's community is small enough for me to like pretty much everyone) person on forum wound me. Anyhoo, my opinion is that TB is right. I do consider TU part of XCOM and I did like original inventory system and funny feeling of horror it had. Though Apocalypse improved on all of those stuff Especially inventory since it saves loadouts without mods and TU since it shows how many you use when before you move... They could have improved Interception from lameness that was in original game(Psst, Apocalypse did it better) It doesn't have modern version of ball with eyes and breathing air on mars. They could have done middle in some things, like inventory management that is more than four slots. They could have improved on linearity of research tree in original, but they didn't. They could have made branching weapon paths that original didn't have. I would actually have liked random maps too. They could have made rookies promote to classes based on what they did on missions. They could have made game more realistic or even more impressionable than original without feeling gamey. They could have implemented some of the new features better. I would have liked to choose base location or have finally that darn antartic base with bonuses that none of XCOM games or their clones have. Also why is Swedish only Nordic country in the game? Especially since they seem to use Norwegian names for Swedish soldiers?... Why are helmets(which I find cool. In fact, I prefer faceless soldiers.) pre order DLC only?... However, game seems to be good on its outright, it looks fun and it has spirit of XCOM which is enough for me.(besides, like I said, it can't be better than Apocalypse so I could care less whether its better than original or not, which to be honest isn't THAT hard thing to do as you would just need to improve basic stuff like how in TFTD they added that thing that prevents you using time units after moving if you want to save them for reaction fire and how in Apocalypse they showed how many TU you use when moving and etc) I just feel need to argue with illogical reasoning like that original system was automatically better. To me, its not case of being better or worse, its just case of being different.

So you have right to insult me in deepest way you can offend me personally without me being able to defend myself? Thats completely fair. Anyway, Total Biscuit is doing much better job at what that guy doing review on Finnish magazine was apparently trying to do Explaining why he likes the game despite not liking some streamlining, annoying clipping issues, aliens game being less horror like and things that don't really make sense like one skyranger only.

;-; Meanie

And you didn't reply to me You make me sad sad panda

I can't play the game if you haven't noticed Of course it has issues, release bugs that break the game, alien patrols seem to be on set paths meaning they don't actually hunt you if some of them spot you(though to be fair, thats how it works in original, minus them actually moving before turn 20), etc, but I just find it annoying when reviewer has overly negative review and STILL gives game good score. While not giving reason for giving it good score. That. Is. Illogical. Also, I'm not fan boy. If you disagree, you have to debate it with me to prove it. Annoying part being that since that post is hour old, it'll probably take you to long time to reply. Which is pity because I have rant prepared http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread.php?139641-We-now-know-what-quot-Hero-characters-quot-are/page2 BTW, someone posted pics of four hero units, Otto Zander(that GuavaMoment let's play main character) has lol amount of health.

Mainly because Finland is rather backwater country when it comes to grand scheme of things Aka American marketers' minds. Also, this is like only big gaming magazine there is here. Anyway, that ranting for rantings things doesn't actually happen in many reviews, they just usually have rather sarcastic tone whether they like the game or not. Its more like if movie critic fan of some movie critics loved reviews remake and says nothing about new movie except how great old one was and then just says new one can't compare to it while still giving it allright rating.

ArtSTYLE not designs As in original had art style of nineties cartoons while this one has artstyle of more modern cartoons. Anyway, I read review of the game in Finnish gaming magazine and I'm annoyed. Why? Because it was painful to read through Guy gave game 88 and said something like that there is difference between legendary and good. In otherwords, whole review was talking about streamlining(so much that I now remember that finnish word for streamlining is literal translation of word to finnish. He used it like every other sentence) and differences between this game and original to the point that guy didn't say almost anything about this game besides "This is how its different from original!" and tone was so negative that I was like "Oh my lord, if you still think that this game is still "good" even if original is great, then at least tell us why this game is good and don't just rant about changes. Or at least give game lower score than 88." I mean seriously, one base, guy ranted about everything, inventory, cover system, large squads, stats, not being able to do super soldiers capable of everything, not being able to lose whole squad in first turn due to alien grenade, loss of snakemen, art style changes to floaters/mutons, etc. Only thing he basically said about new game is that "It has better graphics" Yet guy still apparently liked game and played it at least 30 hours.(yet didn't somehow get blaster launchers(he complained about lack of them too =P), which ARE in game. They just don't work like in original game, from what I understand they are basically upgraded rocket launchers) Heck, few times he did mention something about new game like perks and such he was like "Meh, I liked old universal soldier system better". Yet IF YOU THINK OLD GAME IS SO MUCH MORE LEGENDARY THEN WHY THE HECK YOU CALL NEW GAME GOOD AND GIVE IT 88 SCORE IF YOU DON'T EXPLAIN US WHY IT IS GOOD IN YOUR OPINION ANYWAY??? I mean seriously, I'm pretty sure score wasn't paid because its finnish magazine, its just terrible writing Guy didn't feel like game was bad, he was just so nostalgic about old game that he didn't talk about anything else. He DID say something about "Game suffers from being compared to best game of all time" or something like that. Which he handily demonstrates by doing nothing but comparing it to original game I mean seriously, you barely get idea about how game works besides "Its different from 1994 game". Anyway, I stop now being repetive, but yeah, annoys me a lot.

Its modern version of old cartoony artstyle Not sure what your problem is considering you have the Guile's flattop soldier as avatar

Its modern version of original's cartoony artstyle Also what, you colored your units' armor yellow and purple?

I did see one normal gameplay video(on abduction mission) where unit spotted two sectoids who didn't see his units while he was fighting two other sectoids. Those two sectiods just continued to move away while he was fighting other two. So maybe while enemy does patrol, they don't have ability to see what visible units are seeing at least on normal?*shrugs* I'm not sure what parts of ai are restricted on normal and easy.

Like I said, thats one advance of random spawnpoints, maps seem different when from different angle. But yeah, its considered repetition even if experience is different

Hmm, ok, but yeah, that example didn't really explain anything to me because I haven't played Company of Heroes or Warhammer.

I see that I'm getting backstab- I mean, backshotted! Clearly I must prepare for inevitable betrayal

That... Doesn't answer to any of my three points actually

1) Do you prefer to have cards that let you do everything or sub optimal cards to use in specific ways to overcome? Which one is harder and requires more strategy? Which one you prefer? 2) Original game creates random maps from set pieces that look the same. Are you saying that every farm DOESN'T look identical? 80 handcrafted(increased to 100 when counting varieties) has at least completely unique maps even though they will repeat eventually.(though in original they repeat all the time) At least different spawn spots and random enemy placement(and random enemies) will change things just as much as original. Though with different spawn spots it might take you while to notice its same map. 3) Simplified =/= streamlined =/= dumbed down.