Langy

XCOM's sats are apparently purpose-build for detecting the UFOs. You can't just use a regular ol' satellite.

The complexity's there, it's just like chess - simple rules melding together to make a more complex whole. The tutorial doesn't teach you proper tactics or anything, only the basic game mechanics.

This is why you only ever play the tutorial once, or you just skip it entirely (though I wouldn't recommend that, since it does nicely introduce you to all the features of the game and how to progress and everything - which is the tutorial's job).

That's a shame, because XCOM EU is super fun. One of the main things I'm wishing for now, though, is a difficulty level between 'Normal' and 'Classic' - namely one where the tactical combat is 'Classic' and the geoscape layer is 'Normal'. I've been stumbling around a bit in the strategic layer and made a bunch of mistakes that are now sending me into a death spiral, even though the tactical layer is going swimmingly for the most part (that is, I lose tons of soldiers, but I still complete the missions:p).

This shit be fun, and anyone who had any concerns at all about the game not being lethal enough was totally, totally wrong.

Agreed with Ranger in all ways. Difficult ramps up immediately, and it'd be surprising if you play through the first three missions or so the first time on Classic and lose no soldiers.

I know that there are 'bigger' maps than some of the others, but I've seen none that are actually all that large - even the alien base map wasn't that big. It may be that the maps are actually bigger than they seem on the videos, but most of the ones I've seen have been based entirely on a single building, or just the crashed UFO - not the corn fields around the UFO or having to search building-to-building to find the aliens or anything like that, which is stuff that I'd have liked. I think only a very small minority of the hardcore fans will be all that disappointed. I know I'm not, and I count myself among that population.

Neither did the original game's squad sizes. They should never have sent in anything less than an infantry company against those UFOs, or at the very least a full 40-man platoon. They just realized that controlling that many people in a turn-based game isn't in any way 'fun', and by doing so you'd significantly reduce the player's ability to identify with his units. XCOM took this to the next level, by realizing that controlling 24-man squads was never fun in the original, either (nor was it in any way necessary or even a good tactic). I think they've gone too far in the opposite direction, though - an 8-10 man squad would be ideal, I think. Maybe start with 6, going up to 12 total at the end, with SHIVs either taking up two squad positions each or an 8 man team with up to two SHIVs not counting against the squad limits (probably because they're carried outside the Skyranger). Also: Bigger maps might be nice.

Honestly, it looks fine as an alternate-universe spinoff of XCOM, and will probably be pretty fun, but as a third-person game it's significantly less interesting to me than it was as the first-person game it originally was going to be. Those new screenshots look much less interesting than the original ones (and the videos) we'd seen previously.

Features that were removed: 1. Multiple bases 2. Full base placement 3. Multiple teams in the field at once 4. Large squad sizes 5. Detailed inventory 6. Time Units 7. XCOM Base Attacks/Invasions 8. Constructing base defense emplacements I think that's it, but I'm probably missing something somewhere. I'm rather sad about 8, 7, and 3, and a little disappointed at 1 and 2, but 4-6 I have no real issue with. Max squad size of 8 would have been nice (that's the size I always used in the original), but I think things should work out fine anyways. TUs and the inventory are complete non-issues for me.

--- I'll have to second everyone else and say that the demo isn't a very good indicator of the final game. It basically introduces the interface and a basic 'this is what XCOM is about' without giving you an actual ability to really play the game, which is sad:( Sounds like the modding of it can change *some* of that, but not much. I fully expect the actual game to wind up being much better than the demo.

Er. That's because it's a tutorial? It has almost as many things for the player to do as the original X-COM once you're out of tutorial-mode, or even more things for the player to do (depending upon how you define that). EDIT: Anyways, don't listen to Moontie. I, and many others, have found the demo enjoyable as it is and left wanting more. Make up your own decision.

I'm pretty sure that the video you're talking about was just created by the art team as a demonstration of what the game might look like after they actually started programming it - it's just a pre-rendered video demo, not actual gameplay, and the game was never playable in that state.

It originated as a real-life military term from the Vietnam war (it referred to having all of the aircraft from a single carrier go on a single attack mission). It's used more often in gaming now to refer to just an all-out attack with everything you've got.

Probably not, but that'd be because saying 'this one guy did awesome on this job' isn't really all that acceptable in American culture; Jake's on a team, after all, and they've already largely singled him out. No need to effectively denigrate the rest of the team even more by saying 'Jake did awesome'; the flipside to that is 'he did better than the rest of the team', after all.

I'm not sure what Gorlom is talking about in regards to Jake Solomon saying that he sucks; I haven't seen that in any of his videos, and the only one I didn't watch that I can think of was the 'past builds' video.

Well, yeah. It probably starts about 13 years into the future, possibly up to 18 years or so into the future, depending on how they handle it. Remember that the original XCOM was set in 1999 and was published in 1994 (I think? Maybe earlier). Since this XCOM almost certainly doesn't take place in the past, it's pretty obvious that it'd take place 'further into the future' than the original. I wouldn't be all that surprised if they kept the 5-year gap, making XCOM take place in 2017 or so, but I wouldn't expect it to be much more than that. In any case, it hardly matters. The XCOM base has a bare few additions of tech that we don't currently have, like giant holographic projections and the Skyranger and all, but that doesn't really impact much, and if you remember, the original XCOM had much the same type of tech, only lacking the globe.

What's wrong with enemies moving around in teams? That seems much more logical (and difficult to deal with) than having each and every alien acting independently.

It's still the same idea - in X-COM you could only get reaction fire if you don't use up all your TUs, and in XCOM you can only get reaction fire if you don't use up all your moves.

And note that this is exactly the same as in the original X-COM; reaction fire only occurred if the unit had enough TUs to fire after moving/etc. I'm definitely thinking about starting at a higher difficulty, but I don't think we have enough of a sample in order to say much about the alien AI or their spacing throughout the level or anything like that.

Yeah, gotta agree. That was totally awesome. Good to know the Steam pre-order will be available soon, too, though I may just get the physical edition anyways what with it being 'special' and all.

Agreed, Lokik.

I gotta agree; the hidden movement phase has always been the most boring part of this kind of game. Preferably, in the final game the hidden section will be able to blaze by at speed so we don't need to wait for twenty civilians to wander around a terror map.

I doubt much of the ground combat was changed specifically for console-friendliness. As a turn-based game, the original X-COM worked fine on consoles. Changes to the interface are about all that would be needed to make it more friendly to being on consoles. However, yes, some aspects are undoubtedly simplified in order to make the game quicker and easier to play through (like reducing the number of soldiers in a mission, or making it so there's only one main base). I honestly don't believe any of those changes happened either just because or mainly because it's on console, though - I'd expect them even if the game was developed as a PC title first and foremost.

I think the main issue isn't balancing/not balancing. It's your perception that a shotgun is a super-weapon. Shotguns are not super-weapons. It's perfectly realistic to shoot a human being with a shotgun at point-blank range and only wound them (though it'd be a pretty nasty wound, and could kill, especially through bleeding) - and if they're wearing minimal body armor, it might not even do that. The body armor that Xenonauts soldiers wear, for example, should probably be proof against shotgun blasts even at point-blank range (when shot in the torso, which is the strongest part of the armor). The aliens may be similarly armored.