Xenonaut's Cold War Setting

[LordJulian]

Perhaps its just me, but I actually love the Gritty Cold-War based setting that Chris has set up for Xenonauts. After reading the Dev Diary he did mention about the setting being a bane to the success of Xenonauts. I beg to differ, the atmosphere of a realistic Cold War setting where humans are in the inevitable technological struggle against a superior alien civilization was rather intriguing rather than a Sci-Fi-esque approach to this. It made Xenonauts to stood out more on it's own rather than be an exact remake of the X-Com Series.

I feel that the previous X-Com game were rather.... "wacky", and as much as they are more believable in the sense of adapting alien techonology easily into their own, it fit into the typical "alien invasion" story I guess. It's true that the game isn't getting immersion points for a sudden technological advancement to operating hover tanks and wearing star-trek suits in only a matter of months, which I feel that the setting isn't well fleshed out enough to be immersively believable.

Here's what I think of what the Development Team has done right:

- The Gritty setting and the context in the Xenopedia does reinforce the idea of dread and despair of the alien invasion against a technologically inferior Earth

- It's a rare concept away from the mainstream medias of aliens, which makes the game unique in it's own

- Xenonauts Aircraft and Vehicles seemed fairly believable early on, even from the 1980s era

Here's where the immersion fell apart:

- The Cold War lore isn't part of the game, which somehow felt left out

- Technological Advancements through Reverse Engineering seemed ridiculous, in a matter of months we have hover tanks, mass-effect like bases and clothing, and shiny-looking plasma weapons.

- Experimental technologies and weapons of the cold war aren't being utilized well enough to express human ingenuity against a superior foe(I think)

- Too much reliance of current era sci-fi settings (Touch pads on Buzzard Armour and LCDs on computers??!), which felt like a direct advancement to current era's perception of sci-fi tech rather than a more alternative 1980s fast tech advancement.

- You feel super-awesome mid game

The saving grace was the writing of the lore that made me immersed in the game though.

[Dirk Ralthar]

I was a little wary of the 1979 start date at first, but I think it worked out pretty well. (I would hate to be the guy who came out after this was all over and had to go, "You remember all the wars we've been in since the 1950's, all the people who died? Yeah, we killed them to make sure we were good at killing so we'd be ready for this.")

From a game mechanic standpoint, you can't really make a player wait upwards of a year in game to get the endgame tech, the alternative would be to slow down the scale at which the alien invasion accelerates, and many players might grow bored with the game by that point. And the whole point is that humanity needs to adapt and advance as quickly as possible, so they get the most brilliant scientific minds the world has to offer, shoves them in a lab together, hands them an alien plasma rifle and tells them "Figure out how it works, the fate of the world depends on it."

The introduction of things like the buzzard armor and advanced computers in your base (I believe) come after the alien electronics and alien base upgrade technologies. So the development of touch pads and LCD's isn't entirely unreasonable. It stands to reason that some of the tech would advance in a similar pattern to our own, just at a much faster pace.

[LordJulian]

You have a point there, nobody likes to wait that long even for the sake of immersion, but somehow the endgame technological jump concept seemed like a help leap forward in such short time. A workaround could be making the technology robust and at it's most basic functionality, much of the raw substance without the style involved, it probably might not look prett with a stylized downgrade, but it would certainly be more believable.

Or maybe I'm just bothered with the base upgrade art.

[Gauddlike]

I think the main reason Chris regretted the cold war era setting was not because it is uninteresting but because there are plenty of people out there who are (or think they are) experts on the technology of the time.

If Xenonauts had used a futuristic setting for example there would have been far fewer people pulling him up on how the Condor should have been 20% faster or the MiG should have had another 3 missile pylons, how the assault rifle looked a bit like an m-16 so should have been modelled on the version with full auto rather than 3 round bursts and how the light machine gun should have 45% more damage than the assault rifle with 30% more range etc etc.

It is much easier to create your own game assets when you are the only person who actually knows how they operate.

Look at the higher tech tiers and you will see fewer discussions on how they should work compared to the cold war tech that people are familiar with.

As an example have a look at the this thread:

http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php/11677-Better-name-for-the-Foxtrot

It is only talking about the name of one of the aircraft but shows how people can get a bit distracted when the game information doesn't match their knowledge of how the real world would operate.

Edited August 2, 2014 by Gauddlike

[Dirk Ralthar]

I get why a lot of that was done, it is related to game balance. Besides, it isn't an F-16 Fighting Falcon, it's a modified version that is re-designated as the F-17 Condor. You could claim the reduction in speed is related to an increase in weight for the modifications that were supposed to increase it's survivability, same with the MiG-32 the extra pylons were removed to maintain aircraft weight when loaded to avoid impact to the aircraft's high speed. The early M-16's were full auto, but a trained soldier is capable of consistently and repeatedly squeezing off only a three-round burst. And in this combat environment, where there are often civilians running around, ammunition conservation would be more preferable to soldiers who just spray bullets everywhere and hope for the best.

If I had only one real complaint it would be that the M-60 only has a 30 round belt. Again, I know why it was done (for game balance, otherwise there would not be any reason not load everyone with an M-60 at the beginning), it is just feels a little off having it only be able to be used three times and then reloaded, just my opinion. I don't feel there is anything wrong with what was done in the choice of setting.

[Gauddlike]

Well technically it is not an M-60, the image used is more like an M240... Uh oh now I am doing it...

[LordJulian]

Well, I've compared the pics online and the Machine Gun resembles more to the M240. Come to think of it, I should make a retexture of the current MG.

Mostly I think the the nitpicking is about the lack of 'eyecandy' info for the early tech advancement, there isn't enough explanation to why this and that has been done. Say if there is reasoning to use 30 round belt bags has an explanation of combat ops that relied on mobility rather than sustained firepower then I might let that slide. Having a plasma weapon in the game is easy, just throw in a "its sci-fi" card and there you go, minimal explanation needed.

But a 50 round belt box should shut some people up

[Bombrik]

Honestly? I like the Cold War setting. Most games of these type always go with the near/distant future, around 10-50 years into the future but at a familiar enough point where we have SOME connection to it, but still it's something that seems to be the 'default' backdrop. 1990s X-Com started at this and went further and further. The UFO Afterlight series did the same. X-Com put itself closer to modern day, but still ahead of the present. I consider the Cold War and 1979 to be a absolutely perfect moment and refreshing change. Around 1979 was when science-fiction started, such as the movie Alien. The mindset of being afraid of the unknown was already in the people's conscious, as well as a thirst for scientific advancement due to TV shows and movies at the time. Also, the game gives a certain bleakness: You know you are bringing a ballistic rifle to a laser gun fight, so every victory has that underdog feel to it.

The idea of the two powers cooperating would be feasible, given leadership at the time and the Soviets aware that they were in danger of losing their grand Empire. Doing this earlier would of been more difficult, especially the closer to the Cuban Missile crisis we go. The USA (Under Carter at the time), and the Soviets were losing their rough edges due to having come so close to the brink of mutual annihilation. Toss in this 'Iceland Incident', and we got ourselves a high probability of cooperation between the two super-powers.

Technological advancement in a time of war was not unheard of, if you look at the advances made during World War 2. We started the war still fielding cavalry units, old dreadnought designs and prop planes, and ended it with Atomic Bombs, Carriers and a slew of aeronautical advancements. Toss in the influx of this alien technology, as well as the forming minds that would start computer advancement in the 80s and 70s, and LCDs occurring is also more likely. Heck, maybe this world would of jumped from Betamax, straight to DVDs and leapfrogged over VHS and Laserdiscs.

I do feel that the situation of conflict between the USA and Soviets could of arisen, but that would of required a whole new level of the game that, I think Goldhawk couldn't manage at it's resource level: Introduce the game with the base options between either the American friendly areas, or Soviet friendly areas, and all Neutral nations have to be influenced over. If you pick American, then the Soviet areas are unavailable to you, but they act as their own Xenonauts division: Fielding troops, airplanes, chinooks and such. At this point, a 'Xenonauts: The Coldest War' game would have you fighting the Aliens AND Opposing force. The Opposing Force will target aliens, but you as well. You can target the other side, and gain more and more money easily, but you weaken the overall Earth-defense against the aliens.

Course this kind of game exists only in my wildest dreams, and I'm not sure how it can even be MADE. Keep in mind, this is a game by an Indie-developer, with far limited resources, putting up an excellent game. While Firaxis had far more of a budget at their disposal, I feel X-Com Enemy Within/Unknown felt rather..linear. Xenonauts is far more open, and far more engrossing. What Goldhawk Interactive did, was very impressive, and I have not enjoyed a game this much since Jagged Alliance 2, from an era when games had a graphics "ceiling", which was easily reached, so the development had to be all on the game's depth. Xenonauts has depth and re-playability.

Still, I'd love to see some kind of Expansion Pack, as well as an ability to wage war against areas that surrender to the aliens and take it back.

Also, ways to get more money! I'm going broke here! The aliens may win cause I'm having to hock everything.

[Huntota]

It's not just you, i prefer cold war era to imaginary 90s too.

[Gauddlike]

As do I. I was just pointing out a reason someone trying to use this era might find it more difficult compared to an almost completely fictional era.

[aplomado]

I like the cold war setting also.

[Cortlendt]

Cold War setting was a big selling point for me. Using M16s and Mig-31s against alien threat, what can be cooler than that. And then USSR could defect to aliens, its pretty epic. Starting equipment is really believable and coherent.

[Rallige]

I find that fast-paced scientific advancement quite believable.

As far as I know, theory in science FAR exedes what we can test practically today. In other words : our ideas are limited by not having equipment, that is needed to test and use them. I might be wrong here, that's mostly what I feel like. remember Tesla? Dude had some crazy ideas, but had next to nothing to work with.

And then BAM - alien juicy craft gets shot down, giving you power sources, advanced electronics, etc ( read: instruments to fulfill those "impossible" ideas )

Moreover, some kind of "martial law" would be declared upon alien invasion - potentially freeing scientists from burdens of bureaucracy, paperwork, "immorality" and government anti-advance lobbies, all of which, I imagine, contribute greatly to length of modern research.

[LordJulian]

And then USSR could defect to aliens, its pretty epic.

Um, lol. Playing too much Call of Duty are we?

I find that fast-paced scientific advancement quite believable.

As far as I know, theory in science FAR exedes what we can test practically today. In other words : our ideas are limited by not having equipment, that is needed to test and use them. I might be wrong here, that's mostly what I feel like. remember Tesla? Dude had some crazy ideas, but had next to nothing to work with.

And then BAM - alien juicy craft gets shot down, giving you power sources, advanced electronics, etc ( read: instruments to fulfill those "impossible" ideas )

Moreover, some kind of "martial law" would be declared upon alien invasion - potentially freeing scientists from burdens of bureaucracy, paperwork, "immorality" and government anti-advance lobbies, all of which, I imagine, contribute greatly to length of modern research.

Well, I was preferring more towards the scientific advancement of experimental cold war weapons that were astoundingly powerful but were never expedient to produce during the Cold War. If say instead of seeing the usual plasma pew pew shooter we expect from today's usual sci-fi lore we can see ElectroMagnetic beam lasers, Sonic Ray Guns or VTOL combat craft being used in the battlefield that wasn't a blunt imitation of the alien tech but rather a possible avenue of research for those experimental weapons that are deemed possible because of alien resources.