problems Development Hell

[drages]

Hi, I will tell something bold about this games development.

This game development got issues. More then 3 years passed after Kickstarter ( 2018 June Kickstarter started and they already started to make a game before that, so the development/team was already on it) and you still changing designs.. not little ones, not some details but you still try to figure out how to make the main systems like armor. This kind of big design changes needs a rebalance/recalculations/retests of the whole game and this takes time. And you are just remaking your game...

You already gave up many good things like modular old UFO style UFO designs (and now adding a new ufo as modder will be nearly impossible like X-1) and big units, more then 1x1 tile, for both enemies and humans.. 

You change designs every time when some random people tell you otherwise. You did this at everything, you even changed the whole game to a X-1 remake. You changed, geosphere, air combat, ground combat, management.. everything. Some where good, some where unnecessary, some of them ruined it, some of them gave you much more work load for nothing but old lame UFO nostalgia.  

I accept to see that in first 3 month maybe but now, you still do it. This is not acceptable. You can't change a design of a very core system like armor in 4. year of development. I don't talk the changes are good or bad, just you can't do it so late. And if you want to see the results of this kind of systems, openxcom got everything you said for long time. You could try to make some mods on it and test how it works. It would not same but you will get the idea.

Again, you talked about civillian and soldier armor models to be done. Why would you wait for this kind of basic things which won't change in future after 3 years? You give the model designer what you want and 3D modeler/animator does it. There is no excuse to do it so late still. 

Development is ultra slow and it does not work as it should, as you already pass the design loooong time ago and you should have all the visuals and you should be finishing the game these days.. 

I watched some game play videos after your last kickstarter update and the tactical combat was a big "mehh" and dull. I did not see any visual difference then X-1. Animations were bad, not better then X-1 for sure. This is the result of 3 years of development of a direct remake?

Original Xcom got a nostalgia factor and for that reason it will live forever with openxcom even the graphics sucks and there is no animations. X-1 is not, for that reason it's dead as an old game, this is normal. The problem is you can't make same game and success same time in 2022. Most of the backers even forgot that X-2 is a thing..

Yes, I know you will release a "game" someday so it's not directly a kickstarter scam BUT there are many kickstarter games tagged "spam" as the development is very slow after 1 year... we are at 3+ years now and the result is, you know..

I just think there is a big management and design problems about this game and you act like a "hoppy" rather then a funded kickstarter project which people expect something from you. This is not professional and even not amateurish right now for me, someone with games for 30 years.

If I make sad some people, I am sorry. I just said what I think about this project as one of the greatest fan of X-1 and gave 2+ years to mod it. 

Edited February 5, 2022 by drages

[Unkim]

Quote

I watched some game play videos after your last kickstarter update and the tactical combat was a big "mehh" and dull. I did not see any visual difference then X-1. Animations were bad, not better then X-1 for sure. This is the result of 3 years of development of a direct remake?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. Having played a little of the last version I basically came to the conclusion that I honestly can't really see that many differences between this and X-1 other than it's not working properly and it's a worse version of it. I'm aware that this is ongoing development though, however, I'm talking about the game as a whole and not just the current product.

I'll give an example, the whole Cleaner story in the beginning? I get that it's something new and it adds something different to the game. In practical terms though? In my honest opinion, it just felt I was fighting aliens as I've always been without adding anything else to it. Even worse, it was just delaying me getting to the point when I could fight some alien UFOs.

Still believe in the project and I'll play undoubtedly play it because that's just how much I love it. I'm unable to hide my disappointment for these 3 years of development. Really was just expecting something more, something different: better.

[Chris]

Heh, I guess this is karma for the sort of posts I used to make back when I was a modder

What you say is true to some extent. Development on X2 has been harder and taken way longer than I expected. There’s quite a few things I’d do different if I went back in time - maybe I’d even do something else entirely with my time and money.

Nonetheless, your post seems written from the perspective of a modder - someone who comes in when the game is complete. You’re working with mature tools, a mature set of game mechanics and a complete set of game assets provided by the game developer. That’s the sort of work that gets done in the final 5-10% of development, and without wanting to diminish the good work modders do, it’s a lot easier than the stuff that gets done earlier in development. You’re not dealing with any moving parts.

It’s not possible to write a list of features that will be in the final game early in development, nor do the same for the final assets. Game dev is an iterative process, and the more complex and interconnected the project the harder it is to identify exactly how well any part works until you can test it. And you can’t *properly* test anything until you’ve implemented the whole game and connected all the different pieces to one another.

That’s why so much gameplay iteration is happening now. Minimal code changes are required to change the armour model, and I can play and test the mechanics in a proper campaign in a way I couldn’t a year or two ago, let alone near the start of development when the game was just a few boxes on a grid. We’re doing the final civilian assets now because we know the final technical requirements for them, because we know the final lighting setup we’re using in map, which itself is tied to many things including the final method of how we handle terrain destruction, etc. Doing them earlier risks throwing away 30+ models.

I don’t agree there’s been no visual improvement over X1 either. Maybe you disagree, but playing a mission on one of our finished biomes I’m personally struck by how much better it looks than the first game.

Anyway, I wish the game was finished as much as anyone. I know it sucks it has taken this long. But there’s no point us coming this far and releasing something bad, and I’m sure most people will forgive us the delays if we release something good.

[drages]

42 minutes ago, Chris said:

Heh, I guess this is karma for the sort of posts I used to make back when I was a modder

What you say is true to some extent. Development on X2 has been harder and taken way longer than I expected. There’s quite a few things I’d do different if I went back in time - maybe I’d even do something else entirely with my time and money.

Nonetheless, your post seems written from the perspective of a modder - someone who comes in when the game is complete. You’re working with mature tools, a mature set of game mechanics and a complete set of game assets provided by the game developer. That’s the sort of work that gets done in the final 5-10% of development, and without wanting to diminish the good work modders do, it’s a lot easier than the stuff that gets done earlier in development. You’re not dealing with any moving parts.

It’s not possible to write a list of features that will be in the final game early in development, nor do the same for the final assets. Game dev is an iterative process, and the more complex and interconnected the project the harder it is to identify exactly how well any part works until you can test it. And you can’t *properly* test anything until you’ve implemented the whole game and connected all the different pieces to one another.

That’s why so much gameplay iteration is happening now. Minimal code changes are required to change the armour model, and I can play and test the mechanics in a proper campaign in a way I couldn’t a year or two ago, let alone near the start of development when the game was just a few boxes on a grid. We’re doing the final civilian assets now because we know the final technical requirements for them, because we know the final lighting setup we’re using in map, which itself is tied to many things including the final method of how we handle terrain destruction, etc. Doing them earlier risks throwing away 30+ models.

I don’t agree there’s been no visual improvement over X1 either. Maybe you disagree, but playing a mission on one of our finished biomes I’m personally struck by how much better it looks than the first game.

Anyway, I wish the game was finished as much as anyone. I know it sucks it has taken this long. But there’s no point us coming this far and releasing something bad, and I’m sure most people will forgive us the delays if we release something good.

Sorry but I don't tell this from a modders perfective only. As I said I am a hardcore player for 30 years and I am following all the news, developments and watch all the whats happening to the problematic development progresses for all the games, which fails and go on.. I am developing my own game too and I know how hard to come up with right designs and something cool on paper could fail at practice. 

So, I repeat myself. You are developing a remaster of your own game ,which is a standard X-Com genre, which made many of this game already. So you don't discover the world from start. You are making a game which done by YOU and others many times for 20+ years. So I assume that you got already enough forsee and experience for design choices. With this logic, you can't have an excuse to make design changes after 3 years of development. Design is the first thing you do. It's like you try to build a structure without any plans and you change it every time when you add new level. The result will be a) disaster b) very long construction and c) both.

If you design well, you don't throw anything. This is what a good and proper design for. As I said again, you can make little changes at details and even make some big ones to better good, but as I follow, you just change things a) because random people wants that here, very loudly minority, b) you wake up and thinks it would be better if you change X. This is not acceptable after 3 years.. 3..

The armor change is good, and I liked that. Fun part is, I used this method at my openxcom mod years ago. And many games used that armor destroying mechanics at X-Com 1 and 2 as shred already. All the new x-com based game got this. Why do you wait 3+ years to choose this? 

As visuals and gameplay, you may see it good enough but we are not in 2018 anymore. Visuals are not everything of course but X-1 was cool when you made it. Now it needs much more to sell. X-2 does not have revolutionary things to make it unique (as I said before even it's less then X-1 as we lose some concepts from old game which is unacceptable for me, but it's a personal view and adding new things does not make you right to delete old ones) and it's a remake of a mediocre game. I love X-1, but for audience, it was a modern xcom remake which is not so well. Your visuals are better then X-1 for sure as X-1 was a jpg based 2D game.. you can't make something worse then that. For that reason, you should not compare your improvement over X-1 and still the differences are very basic compared a 2022 remake. 

Telling me that you figured the lighting after 3 years to make proper models is not a good sign too. 

In the end, you should not come to me and tell that you changed designs at this time. I expect the game itself after 3 years and you tell me you changed design.. Look from a player perfective please.. 

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by drages

[Chris]

1 hour ago, Unkim said:

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. Having played a little of the last version I basically came to the conclusion that I honestly can't really see that many differences between this and X-1 other than it's not working properly and it's a worse version of it. I'm aware that this is ongoing development though, however, I'm talking about the game as a whole and not just the current product.

I'll give an example, the whole Cleaner story in the beginning? I get that it's something new and it adds something different to the game. In practical terms though? In my honest opinion, it just felt I was fighting aliens as I've always been without adding anything else to it. Even worse, it was just delaying me getting to the point when I could fight some alien UFOs.

Still believe in the project and I'll play undoubtedly play it because that's just how much I love it. I'm unable to hide my disappointment for these 3 years of development. Really was just expecting something more, something different: better.

Ultimately all I ask of our players is that they give the final version of the game a fair chance when it's released, not judging what it'll be based on anything we release during development. If you're happy to do that (and it sounds like you are) then you can post whatever you like about the current version.

The Cleaner thing is good example of what I'm talking about about testing new mechanics within the campaign. I don't disagree with your assessment of the Cleaners in V22 - we hadn't implemented the unique victory conditions for their missions then, so their missions were just standard alien deathmatch missions with guys in hazmat suits rather than aliens. And while it seemed cool in my head to start your organisation earlier in the war and having to research and build your first plane, while choosing whether to research tech for the air war or the ground war vs. the Cleaners, in practice it turned out to be a bit tedious.

But that's something you test and iterate on. I came to the same conclusions as you, and a couple of weeks back we moved to a hybrid setup. Your starting interceptors are back (but only have cannons) and the Cleaner missions are now a series of pre-set missions with a couple of unique victory conditions in there (clearing a large building to grab some intel while enemy reinforcements arrive, and ambush on a convoy against loads of enemies where you can deploy almost anywhere and get the first turn) so they serve to break up the classic UFO missions rather than replacing them entirely. I think it works quite a bit better than before, personally.

I can't promise the final game will have enough changes to satisfy your desires for something different, but it'll have more than the current one does.

[drages]

1 hour ago, Chris said:

Ultimately all I ask of our players is that they give the final version of the game a fair chance when it's released, not judging what it'll be based on anything we release during development. If you're happy to do that (and it sounds like you are) then you can post whatever you like about the current version.

The Cleaner thing is good example of what I'm talking about about testing new mechanics within the campaign. I don't disagree with your assessment of the Cleaners in V22 - we hadn't implemented the unique victory conditions for their missions then, so their missions were just standard alien deathmatch missions with guys in hazmat suits rather than aliens. And while it seemed cool in my head to start your organisation earlier in the war and having to research and build your first plane, while choosing whether to research tech for the air war or the ground war vs. the Cleaners, in practice it turned out to be a bit tedious.

But that's something you test and iterate on. I came to the same conclusions as you, and a couple of weeks back we moved to a hybrid setup. Your starting interceptors are back (but only have cannons) and the Cleaner missions are now a series of pre-set missions with a couple of unique victory conditions in there (clearing a large building to grab some intel while enemy reinforcements arrive, and ambush on a convoy against loads of enemies where you can deploy almost anywhere and get the first turn) so they serve to break up the classic UFO missions rather than replacing them entirely. I think it works quite a bit better than before, personally.

I can't promise the final game will have enough changes to satisfy your desires for something different, but it'll have more than the current one does.

I want to see a great X-2 game. I wanted to tell what I feel and see as a follower. Even AAA games have very bad and broken development periods and we see the results. 

I just want to say, stop designing things and finish what you have. You are not happy with it? Patch it after development.. Do you want to add more? Make it DLC, free or paid.. but finish the game first as it is. We passed the time to change those kind of things anymore. 

I hope the best for you and this game. 

[Chris]

Just now, drages said:

I want to see a great X-2 game. I wanted to tell what I feel and see as a follower. Even AAA games have very bad and broken development periods and we see the results. 

I just want to say, stop designing things and finish what you have. You are not happy with it? Patch it after development.. Do you want to add more? Make it DLC, free or paid.. but finish the game first as it is. We passed the time to change those kind of things anymore. 

I hope the best for you and this game. 

Thanks. Well, I appreciate your honesty then!

I'll bow out of this thread for now because I'm busy, but yeah, we do want to get this game done as soon as possible (and I think it's closer than it looks from the outside).

 

[Kamehamehayes]

10 hours ago, drages said:

I want to see a great X-2 game. I wanted to tell what I feel and see as a follower. Even AAA games have very bad and broken development periods and we see the results. 

I just want to say, stop designing things and finish what you have. You are not happy with it? Patch it after development.. Do you want to add more? Make it DLC, free or paid.. but finish the game first as it is. We passed the time to change those kind of things anymore. 

I hope the best for you and this game. 

I'm confused. You were bashing the game for not having enough new content to justify purchasing it, but now you are rushing the devs into releasing the game as soon as possible? If lack of content is the issue, why would you rush anybody into releasing an incomplete product early? And justifying releasing it early by releasing free updates and DLC later to fix the game's issues is the exact same pitfall that Phoenix Point fell into. People want to play complete games, not unfinished ones. DLCs are supposed to expand the original product into a new experience that allows the game to have more replay value, not to justify cutting content out of game because it is taking too long. 

That said, I am not opposed to releasing the game in an early access or open beta state soon. Much of the community has been craving new content from the game since the Demo a year ago (I am one of those people after all). It might be time to give the community a taste of the game. I am not opposed to DLCs either. If they add a lot of new content that drastically changes the gameplay experience to have a much different feel to the base game, than I'm not opposed to it at all and can improve replay value of the game. 

I feel that the game should be released when it is ready, without being rushed by members of the community into releasing the game too early and without cutting out major content form the game due to time constraints. 

[Komandos]

If you look at the playability that openXcom has to offer and look at the Xenonauts' software limitations (which will make it harder for players to create new mods), it's safe to say that the game is missing its chance.

Personally, I don't care what balance the game will have: good or bad. I'll make the right one myself. But it is important for me whether the game will be convenient for modifications and whether the game will forget the software limitations that Xenonauts 1 had (for example, I could not create my own transport and recruit a team of more than 16 people).

If anyone is interested in my opinion.

[Kamehamehayes]

3 hours ago, Komandos said:

If you look at the playability that openXcom has to offer and look at the Xenonauts' software limitations (which will make it harder for players to create new mods), it's safe to say that the game is missing its chance.

Personally, I don't care what balance the game will have: good or bad. I'll make the right one myself. But it is important for me whether the game will be convenient for modifications and whether the game will forget the software limitations that Xenonauts 1 had (for example, I could not create my own transport and recruit a team of more than 16 people).

 If anyone is interested in my opinion.

Fair enough. The modding experience is very important after all. While I personally want a game that is already great at base, anyone should have the right to change anything and everything about a game. 

I remember looking through the forums some months ago and saw that Goldhawk was going to implement modding tools into Unity and better organize files so the community would have an easier time modding things into X2. I hope this means that X2 will have better modding support than X1 did. 

[drages]

On 2/6/2022 at 3:34 AM, Kamehamehayes said:

I'm confused. You were bashing the game for not having enough new content to justify purchasing it, but now you are rushing the devs into releasing the game as soon as possible? If lack of content is the issue, why would you rush anybody into releasing an incomplete product early? And justifying releasing it early by releasing free updates and DLC later to fix the game's issues is the exact same pitfall that Phoenix Point fell into. People want to play complete games, not unfinished ones. DLCs are supposed to expand the original product into a new experience that allows the game to have more replay value, not to justify cutting content out of game because it is taking too long. 

I did not bash the game because of content. I said if devs got problem about it. Because if you add more and more, you become star citizen. 

and if the development takes too long and even so you would like to have more in your game, yes you can add it as DLC. It's not so good solution but if you passed a time frame, you should do it. You may wait for years without problem but a dev cannot continue to development forever. But this is not the topic of this conversation. 

[Komandos]

12 hours ago, Kamehamehayes said:

Fair enough. The modding experience is very important after all. While I personally want a game that is already great at base, anyone should have the right to change anything and everything about a game. 

I remember looking through the forums some months ago and saw that Goldhawk was going to implement modding tools into Unity and better organize files so the community would have an easier time modding things into X2. I hope this means that X2 will have better modding support than X1 did. 

The 1994 X-com game has very poor graphics. Bad balance. However, thanks to the addition of the ability to modify the game widely (openXcom), people still play the 1994 game. Thanks to the modification - each player gets what he wants. (not what the developer wants).

[Komandos]

I only played Xenonauts 1 because I could modify the game to my liking. Without modification, I managed to complete only two dozen combat missions, after which I realized that the original game settings make Xenonauts not interesting for me.

The field of view is too small. The range of the weapon is too short. The platoon is too small. The firepower of an individual soldier is too small. As a result: the soldiers walk in a dense crowd (Like hedgehogs in the fog), killing each other with "friendly shots".

Edited February 7, 2022 by Komandos

[Komandos]

I have said this many times and I will repeat it again: small group tactics (1-12 soldiers) are present in all tactical games. (And also in all RPG games). The choice of games is huge, the competition is big.

 Platoon tactics (16-36 soldiers) are only present in X-COM:1-2-3 (which are still popular). It is enough not to make barriers to increase the number of soldiers in personal modifications of the game (to keep the maximum number of originals) - and fans of platoon tactics will be added.

[Alienkiller]

I like the Development from X2 and trust the Devs. The direct Rival is getting Upgraded too to the new Level-Era with thing we never thougt to be possible in the last 20 Years.

The new XCOM-Row showed that new Features are possible, the Gollop Brothers upgraded and upgrade that showing with more Features in the Phoenix Point Game. And the UFO ET-Row / Xenonauts 2 bring it fully in and will try to bring the Maximum Level. Which Series we will see.

There the Military-Concepts with Platoons from the Stoneage-Thinking have no room. The UFO ET-Series way / Xenonauts-Row way is the best after playing a lot of such of that SciFi-Projects. That were: fully old X-Com, fully new XCOM, UFO Alien Invasion (Fan Project), UFO After-Series and a lot more, which I have forgotten.

Some of them testet such Stonage-Thinkings and failed completely. That will happen to X2 too if such thinking get used.

Short said: Belongs on the Game which you wanna make. Historical Military Games (like Hearts of Iron, Command & Conquer or an good Jagged Alliance) is interessting for it. Games like our here not.

The best way is the single Soldier System which get the old X-COM-Row, new XCOM-Row, Phoenix Point, UFO ET-Row and Xenonauts-Row.

Kommandos I suggest you play the UFO ET-Row and there you see that at the End Maximum 16 Seats are free for the Final Battle. And it´s easy doable. I used for it 8 Soldiers and 2 Support-Vehicles and won it very easy.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Alienkiller

[Komandos]

3 hours ago, Alienkiller said:

Kommandos I suggest you play the UFO ET-Row and there you see that at the End Maximum 16 Seats are free for the Final Battle. And it´s easy doable. I used for it 8 Soldiers and 2 Support-Vehicles and won it very easy.

If I need to play a small team, then I will take any RPG game, or I will put a small number of soldiers on the ship "Avenger" (X-COM: 1). I can also edit Xenonauts 1 so that one soldier is enough for me to win the final mission. However, I prefer to change the game so that I have a full platoon under my command, which is only available in the original X-COM:1-2-3 and nowhere else. However, I can't change the Xenonauts to command as many soldiers in combat as they did in the original X-COM:1-2-3 game.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Komandos

[Komandos]

3 hours ago, Alienkiller said:

There the Military-Concepts with Platoons from the Stoneage-Thinking have no room. The UFO ET-Series way / Xenonauts-Row way is the best after playing a lot of such of that SciFi-Projects. That were: fully old X-Com, fully new XCOM, UFO Alien Invasion (Fan Project), UFO After-Series and a lot more, which I have forgotten.

I understand that the tactics used in platoon (today) in games are: irrational and ideologically unjustified, but the old X-COM: 1-2-3 (1994-1996) is still a classic that people play. New games in this genre (with small group tactics) are still a one-time use product.

[Komandos]

21 hours ago, Alienkiller said:

There the Military-Concepts with Platoons from the Stoneage-Thinking have no room. The UFO ET-Series way / Xenonauts-Row way is the best after playing a lot of such of that SciFi-Projects. That were: fully old X-Com, fully new XCOM, UFO Alien Invasion (Fan Project), UFO After-Series and a lot more, which I have forgotten.

I listened to a lecture on anthropology on YouTube. So: 10-20 million years in a row, our ancestors lived in groups of 20-35 individuals. And only 15 thousand years ago (before the invention of a productive economy) they also lived like that.

Everywhere on the globe, the optimal size of a group, school class, military platoon is 20-35 people. It can be considered as much as you like the Stone Age, a relic of the past, but such is our nature. A person is psychologically comfortable in a team of 20-35 people. Yes, I know: you can make a game where even 8 people will be enough (the size of a family over the past 10 thousand years).

You can make a game where even 4 people will be enough (family size - the last 50 years). But if a game with 1994 graphics (600x300), with poor animation, with poor balance, with an "irrationally large tactical group" - still gathers more people on the forum than a game with better graphics, better animation, where all attempts to take "irrationally a large number of warriors" - are securely locked for the player, then it is worth considering where the developers go against the basic needs of the players.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Komandos

[Komandos]

Yes. The player does not always need 20-35 subordinate soldiers to complete a combat mission. The player often does not need soldiers at all - the player can easily destroy UFOs on the ground with aerial bombardment. But in order for the player to get a versatile experience and a wide range of sensations, the game must provide him with different opportunities according to his own preferences.

[nullptr]

On 2/5/2022 at 11:59 AM, Chris said:

Heh, I guess this is karma for the sort of posts I used to make back when I was a modder

What you say is true to some extent. Development on X2 has been harder and taken way longer than I expected. There’s quite a few things I’d do different if I went back in time - maybe I’d even do something else entirely with my time and money.

Nonetheless, your post seems written from the perspective of a modder - someone who comes in when the game is complete. You’re working with mature tools, a mature set of game mechanics and a complete set of game assets provided by the game developer. That’s the sort of work that gets done in the final 5-10% of development, and without wanting to diminish the good work modders do, it’s a lot easier than the stuff that gets done earlier in development. You’re not dealing with any moving parts.

It’s not possible to write a list of features that will be in the final game early in development, nor do the same for the final assets. Game dev is an iterative process, and the more complex and interconnected the project the harder it is to identify exactly how well any part works until you can test it. And you can’t *properly* test anything until you’ve implemented the whole game and connected all the different pieces to one another.

That’s why so much gameplay iteration is happening now. Minimal code changes are required to change the armour model, and I can play and test the mechanics in a proper campaign in a way I couldn’t a year or two ago, let alone near the start of development when the game was just a few boxes on a grid. We’re doing the final civilian assets now because we know the final technical requirements for them, because we know the final lighting setup we’re using in map, which itself is tied to many things including the final method of how we handle terrain destruction, etc. Doing them earlier risks throwing away 30+ models.

I don’t agree there’s been no visual improvement over X1 either. Maybe you disagree, but playing a mission on one of our finished biomes I’m personally struck by how much better it looks than the first game.

Anyway, I wish the game was finished as much as anyone. I know it sucks it has taken this long. But there’s no point us coming this far and releasing something bad, and I’m sure most people will forgive us the delays if we release something good.

Chris m8 I backed X1 back when it was on Desura (rip) but can't say the same for X2 due to similar reasons outlined in OP, you lads aren't building the game engine from scratch so what's with the >3year delay? If you need some proper C++ programmers in Goldhawk I can forward you a list and their rates.

[Bobit]

On 2/5/2022 at 6:59 AM, Chris said:

That’s the sort of work that gets done in the final 5-10% of development, and without wanting to diminish the good work modders do, it’s a lot easier than the stuff that gets done earlier in development. You’re not dealing with any moving parts.

I take issue with the broad claim of this statement. It's totally unfair to claim, for example, that the XCOM-Files took less work to make than TFTD. All that being a "mod" tells you is that it was built off of a more specific engine. Yes, simple mods are easy. No, mods that are basically new games are not. You can decide where X-Division stands along that spectrum, but I don't think you want to say things about it specifically.

In context, yes I agree that a %-based system is essentially a flat-based system but with more complex tweakable variables. So if what is normally complex instead seems simple due to consistency, that seems like a reasonable change. And you are right that a %-based system must include more explicit penetration and shredding values, or else it will be dull, since the flat system has innate penetration properties for high-damage low-RoF weapons. And the airgame was a more unpredictable question, something that all XCOM games struggle with.

Also, a tangent:

Quote

You’re working with mature tools, a mature set of game mechanics and a complete set of game assets provided by the game developer.

You're right that this is why making a commercial game is hard. But for hobby games, consider:

• Non-specialized tools are already provided via Godot/Unity/etc
  • And my general opinion is that code knowledge need not go beyond loops/conditionals/maps/IO, provided that unsolvably difficult areas like AI are avoided.
• Game mechanics can be copied whether you are "given" them or not.
• Game assets are quite unnecessary for some players. ASCII and whatnot.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Bobit

[Alienkiller]

I haven´t read everything here about the Development Hell, only overflow it.

Xenonauts 2 is an complete new Game with many best useable new Features, which are doable since a few Years (8 or so). New XCOM 1 Enemy Unknown / Enemy Within hadn´t had them in comming up 2012 / 2013. The first try with them are done with the 2016 XCOM 2 and his DLCs and the smaller XCOM: Chimera Squad.

Xenonauts 2 isn´t the only Game which have the best new Features to upgrade your Ammo, Armor, Vehicles, Fighters and so on as well as give the Geoscape, Basefeatures etc. the best it can give until in the next Generation get more and / or better things doable.

There are only 2 Game Companys which uses this Features fully as best they can. That´s Goldhawk with Xenonauts 2 and Chaos Concept with the UFO ET-Row. That Dev-Teams are small or Medium and get the newest Features in, which the big Companys couldn´t do. Such Games need Time to Develop, Implement and the most important Thing "TEST" them in ALPHA- and later BETA-VERSIONS until they are Stable integrated for an Early Access Version and last but not least Full Version with the complete Storyline etc.

No one wanna have an 1:1 Copy from the prevouis Game. That was possible in the 1980s / 1990s, but not in the 21 Century. The Devs from Goldhawk have noticed that and worked on it since beginning on Xenonauts 2. What happens if someone Pushes the Devs you can see in UFO 2 ET Basegame "Battle for Mercury". The Storyline is there, you can play it fully, but many important Things get is missing. That´s only why the People can´t wait until the already useable Features and / or best new Features which are implementable are stable. With the Help of 2 Freelancers the Basegame there get more improvement, which the Devs wanna bring in already in an improved Basegame "Battle for Mercury". But much more they wanna brought out the Advanced Version "Shadows over Earth". Both couldn´t be done in Time.

Short said: Wait and See, the Game is not Ready for the Public yet. UFO 2 ET wasn´t it too, so the Devs had to cancle (better said outsourcing for the big DLC) much things there to bring the playable Basegame on the Market. The Basegame is stable, fully playable and have about 1/4 of the already useable Features are useable with the Help of the 2 Freelancers. But the other 3/4 of new Features what can be done of the cool Stuff is still Missing and have to implemented with an DLC.

You see that Patientce from the Gamers is the Key. Only that gives the Founders and in many Founded Projects Main-Betatesters, Developers incl. Freelancers the Time they need to make everything stable. If you hurry someone, only Scrap comes on the Market. In our Case if we get pushed and to much seen happend: An 30 % to Maximum 50 % Playable Game with CTDs etc. and the Money sacked. Exactly that you all don´t wanna have.

Edited March 4, 2022 by Alienkiller

[terbro10]

If aliens really do have an influence over Earth society, they may choose to influence those with intelligence and forsake those without [cunning, like nature with the Dodo]. Which are you Goldhawk, which are you?!?!?

[ooey]

On 2/7/2022 at 7:09 AM, drages said:

I did not bash the game because of content. I said if devs got problem about it. Because if you add more and more, you become star citizen. 

I gave up on star citizen a long, long time ago! It seems that quite a few games are in a constant state of development. Take War Thunder for example. They never really fix much (certainly not for joystick users anyway) but just add more content (i.e. a slightly different variant of the same plane). They also changed things that didn't need changing or fixing (I blame the Vodka).

 

One thing I believe about xen 2 is that...

IT HAS JUST GOT TO BE RELEASED IN A "FINISHED STATE" BEFORE CHRISTMAS 2022 AT THE VERY LATEST!

Chris, if you can promise that then at least we can see the end is in sight. At present it feels like the end of the world will happen before xen 2 is released. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by ooey

[Alienkiller]

@ooey: If you wanna have unplayable Scrap like you announce in your latest Post, then go to other Game-Companys which makes 1 Year-Developments.

We here don´t let us rush, hurry or whatever. I said and expalined it very friendly SEVERAL TIMES with many examples what happens if you rush Game-Devs and Private Founders (small, medium Teams) / Game-Devs with patient Publishers (same Teams), then you will get UNPLAYABLE SCRAP as an Game.

There are enough Standard-Publishers (and I know some of them from the big Names) which push the linked Game-Dev-Studios to overflow the Market with unplayable and as biggest Minus unfinished Games.

If you all unpatient Persons need an Lesson for Patience, then we Founders as well as Main-Testers will give it to you. Otherwise go to the unplayable and unfinished short-Time Projects, so that we others can do undisturbed bring out an fully playable and best testet Game on the Market.

No more to say about that.