Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What i hate about XCOM is the restrictive gameplay you need to put up to be able to get into the endgame. You need to be a) lucky with missions and your base and b) follow a clear path of action (build power generators and satellite uplinks and satellites). There is no other way to reach the endgame without losing half the World. Panic Levels feel more than a "we want you to play that way and do it fast else we just fiorce you to lose the game" limiter rather than a real gameplay asset. Heck even if we win 100% of all our missions you will still lose because of panic. Combat is also restrictive and totally dumbed down, instead of giving the aliens a good AI they just gave them a "reaction turn" so they dont get instantly killed as soon you discover them (seriously, why would 3 aliens play cards in the middle of nowhere) and the fact that your soldiers are very limited to it (seriously, your top of the class soldiers can only carry one item? random classes?) and the fact they rather give the aliens artificial boosts (bonus to crit / hit / life) instead of improving their AI and tactics later on shows how much they rushed the game to get it out into the shelves instead of delivering a well balanced tactical game.

What also adds to the pain is the risk of getting a bugging game on ironman ( i got one where i am stuck on the northpole and cannot reload to avoid that)

other than that, its rather fun to play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RNG and the AI cheating like crazy nad fake difficutly are not the same.

XCOM:EU is difficult. But moreoften than not for all the wrong reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dowly: Okay, your small letter writing is just trolling me.

@Fridge: See, THIS is what I meant Shuichi. People who don't get it that panic levels are manageable even if it helps to have luck...

@TrashMan: If you say so :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Dowly: Okay, your small letter writing is just trolling me.

I don't do trolling, I tend to say what I have to say as clearly as possible so the insult is not wasted in case the other guy doesn't get it.

The small text is simply how I feel about XCOM:EU (may its name be forever cursed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Fridge: See, THIS is what I meant Shuichi. People who don't get it that panic levels are manageable even if it helps to have luck...

No, I think all of us knew. The thing they're complaining about is how it force the player to play that and ONLY that way or else they lose the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm, how else would you play the game?

I mean, how? NOT manage panic levels? Not have them at all? Have 10 levels of panic?

Enlighten me how did original not force you play in one only way to not lose game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this game, if I want to play Classic [not even Ironman] then there is only one way to go - Satellite Links, Engineers, Satellite, Satellite, SATELLITE !!! ASAP !!!

If I choose to do anything else then I'm doomed for all eternity. Even if I'm Kratos and I powned any and all of my enemies in all missions without even losing once.

Enlighten me how the original force me to be like that.

Btw, I forgot I said I won't be mentioned EU here again. Sorry, just planned to answer you since you did call me out. I will let the others take it from here then...

Edited by Shuichi Niwa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you can't really compare the two, Xenonauts is by far more complex and hardcore than X-com EU, though XComEU isn't bad, it has some cool stuff aswell.

These two games though appeal to different niches of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In this game, if I want to play Classic [not even Ironman] then there is only one way to go - Satellite Links, Engineers, Satellite, Satellite, SATELLITE !!! ASAP !!!

If I choose to do anything else then I'm doomed for all eternity. Even if I'm Kratos and I powned any and all of my enemies in all missions without even losing once.

Enlighten me how the original force me to be like that.

Btw, I forgot I said I won't be mentioned EU here again. Sorry, just planned to answer you since you did call me out. I will let the others take it from here then...

Umm, but that didn't answer my question: What original DIDN'T force you to do? I mean, you could reach end goals in what multiple ways? You could make what multiple decisions? What facilities it didn't force you to build?(Also, no, you aren't forced to built satellite uplinks, but it helps and is kind of common sense :P)

Also it didn't answer what you would have preferred to XCOM: EU to do instead? Not have satellites? You are complaining about what it had and claiming that original is better without going into details. Satellites are just this game's version of radar coverage.... From my point of view, you could as well say that XCOM: EU and original game sucks because you are forced to research in order to win the game.

Edited by XenoMask

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Umm, but that didn't answer my question: What original DIDN'T force you to do? I mean, you could reach end goals in what multiple ways? You could make what multiple decisions? What facilities it didn't force you to build?

One base vs 8 bases.

Uber-team vs quantity over quality.

Full support of the world vs surviving on commercial production.

High speed run vs slow and steady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to have different definitions of "multiple ways" :P Either way, you still need to prevent aliens lowering your score too low and have arms race. Heck, you can apply different tactics to on that only way on new game too, but of course you won't care about that.

BTW, you can beat game with one base assuming you can survive base attacks or get far enough for them not to be issue because of defenses? Wow, so aliens doing missions to lower your score offscreen IS pointless.

Uber team vs quantity over quality? Umm, unless you save scum, you aren't going to have full uber team. besides, quantity over quality doesn't help much if you just send red shirts through door.

Full support of world is practically impossible and I think surviving on commercial production might have been unintentional in original game. Either way, fact you could do that made funding nations pointless.

High speed run vs slow and steady? what is that supposed to mean? Using tricks to beat game in 18 minutes? Buildings lots of labs to have 200 researchers research everything? Pace you advance maps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW, you can beat game with one base assuming you can survive base attacks or get far enough for them not to be issue because of defenses?

Pretty sure that's how a lot of people did it, usually only a couple extra radar sites. I did it with only one base at all as well (difficulty patched).

Uber team vs quantity over quality? Umm, unless you save scum, you aren't going to have full uber team. besides, quantity over quality doesn't help much if you just send red shirts through door.

First of all, saves are legit, it's not a roguelike, but can be done without too. Second, using one team everywhere gets it uber enough that blasters don't ruin your game. Uber teams were common. But an uber team will be small.

The "quantity" approach is a bit less obvious to pull off. It basically means you have multiple bases and multiple teams. Fly in from the nearest base, train up a lot of manpower that way. For the final mission, load up the Avenger with the best guys that survived. Take no HWP, just 26 guys, psi-amps and special weapons that aren't easily grabbed off dead aliens.

Wait. I forgot psi-amps.

There's also a third major way to play the game - psionic team. As soon as you get useful psionics, forget your soldiering, have the aliens do all the work for you. It works too. I just found it a bit too repetitive for a dedicated playthrough, so I mixed it up with some straight shooting. But it works.

Full support of world is practically impossible and I think surviving on commercial production might have been unintentional in original game. Either way, fact you could do that made funding nations pointless.

It was definitely intentional. Even producing medkits brought in a profit. That's one of the first items. Anything that cost E-115 brought in more profit per man-hour.

Full support is definitely possible, it's been done. If you combine high-speed and multi-base approaches, it's almost guaranteed.

High speed run vs slow and steady? what is that supposed to mean? Using tricks to beat game in 18 minutes? Buildings lots of labs to have 200 researchers research everything?

You only need a few research projects to get to Cydonia, and the game doesn't intentionally strain them out. The only tricky thing is grabbing an alien commander. And there are full three types of missions that let you do it. Once you have a commander, it's nearly a straightaway to Mars.

Or you can have a proper playthrough with all types of missions, most tech researches, et cetera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Par'Gellen: Isn't your edit what I basically said? .-. Well, I guess its not exactly the same thing I said, but mostly?
Yes pretty much. However XCOM: EU just doesn't do that (for me). Sure, they made things a lot less complicated but they took it way too far and wound up throwing the baby out with the bath water. Here are examples of what I mean. These examples are made without comparing to the original. These things stand on their own merits or lack thereof as if there never were an original to compare it to.

1. Strategic game UFO interception. UFO's are very rare and just pop onto the map with no apparent goals other than to make your score go up or down. It doesn't feel like I'm intercepting a UFO filled with alien scum bent on attacking humanity when I send out an interceptor to deal with it. It feels like I'm just clicking a button to prevent my score from dropping and then watching a pretty cutscene. Personally I don't like that and want some more meat in the situation. I doubt they could simplify this mechanic any further without removing it from the game entirely. Pretty on the surface but contains no depth.

How could they have done it better? Take a look at how Xenonauts is doing it. I think they're doing it very well! It feels like something is actually happening.

2. Strategic game base building. Looks great but means nothing beyond planning for getting some adjacency bonuses. It takes about five seconds (if that) to figure out the optimal layout based on where the steam vents are, then you never have to think about it again for the rest of the game. Nothing ever happens with your base that requires it's design to mean anything (not comparing here, this is a standalone fact) so the player never gets to plan it's design so that it is efficient and serves a purpose. Why require a design at all? A simple list telling me I have 4 workshops, 3 labs, 1 foundry, etc. would suffice or just let the computer place everything for maximum efficiency automatically if the graphics are the reason for it's existance. This is an example of something they actually made even more complicated than it has to be without making it more complex.

How could they have done it better? Give some meaning to the layout. Make me choose to design the base in a way that has a purpose whether that be for defense from an attack or setting up an efficient flow for a factory base. These would require more depth in other areas as well for them to work properly (aliens base attacks and requiring your base to manufacture things that you can't get anywhere else like plasma clips and blaster bombs).

3. Soldiers. This is a real biggie and ties into pretty much every other aspect of the game. This entire mechanic is so simple it feels like "Fisher-Price: My First Soldier". Granted they made a very uncomplicated design, but it has virtually no complexity at all!

How could they have done it better? Give the player the ability to decide classes, skills, and loadouts for each soldier and for the love of any deity ever conceived give him at least a small inventory to manage. For the players that don't want to think about it give them pre-designed loadouts based on whatever classes they picked for their soldiers. Win/Win. Weapons like the rocket launcher should not be "skills". That just feels artificial. I should be able to give any soldier any weapon and if his skills are crap with it then he will be shooting his feet and walls but I should still have the option to do it if I want to. I'm the commander! I should not feel like I'm watching a movie here! Also they should be able to pick up items from the battlefield and their AI should be smart enough to stop moving when it sees an alien (not comparing here, this is just common sense children or even little chickens would have). Ugh... I could go on and on all day about this area and I don't have time. Lets just say I'd take this whole design and scrap it and start over.

4. Panic mechanic. I understand why it's there. Something has to keep the player moving and give them a sense of pressure. That's fine but the way they did it makes it feel like little more than a countdown timer with A, B, or C multiple choice questions attached.

How could they have done it better? Design it to have a more organic feeling. Something as simple as having the aliens become increasingly aggressive based on how well the player is fairing would work well. If I'm doing really well against the aliens then I should have to fight tooth and nail to maintain that rather than just selecting from three choices and feeling cheated. If I can't keep up then I lose ground. If I excel then they get even more aggressive. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me...

This is all I have time to write for now. I hope this gives you an understanding of what a lot of us are talking about when we say we want more depth. Would large parts of the game need to be redesigned for these things to work? Of course they would. That's the whole point.

Edited by Par'Gellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@HWP: And how is that different from current game? I mean, one base plus radar bases is still multiple bases :P You can't complete game with only one base even if other ones are useless except for one purpose.

I think saves are legit, but save scumming isn't. Except in type of games like rpgs which have moments that you can fail by chance and never get chance again without starting new playthrough, though I think ironman for those would be interesting as it would be truly roleplaying.

Yeah, psionics were game breaker :P Wouldn't really call it third approach though.

Hmm, either way its bit silly as why would be XCOM be able to do that when its government program basically?

Yeah, but really getting to mars that early is gaming the system. No point doing that besides that you can since fun part is researching everything, by doing that oversight you just ignore everything about the game.

@Par'Gellen: On my playthrough I discovered that UFOs eventually become common when you have enough satellite coverage, but yeah, on early game they are really rare. But how is that no apparent goal except score down different from original game?

(and yeah, they could have improved on it, but they decided to not make it flight sim because it would be 5 minute minigame that would prevent some people getting into fan part. Which is actually what I'm complaining about Xenonauts' system, its boring compared to actual tactical combat at the moment)

Isn't only strategic base layout choice in original game about putting living rooms near entrance/hangars because aliens spawn there? I never really cared about base layout in original since I was filling it for fun anyway.

On soldiers, eh, I like current system but this is taste system anyway. If you don't like class based tactical games then i guess you won't like this game either.

I personally like panic system though I do agree that three/two abduction at time thing is rather artificial. Its not really timer anymore though after you have good interceptors and satellite everywhere, after that it stops being a thing really. Personally though I love little news bits in situation room.

BTW, on XCOM: EU's intercepting: Bizarre thing that I realized is that basic interceptors can take down EVERY UFO type other than overseer and battleship. Provided you give them better weapons. So since battleships seem to appear to scan for satellites, as interceptors and aircraft weapon aren't that expensive, its not actually hard to protect your satellites. There is that though that corpse aircraft boost items help a lot with stronger ufos if you want to minimize risks, but its surprisingly manageable O_o; I mean they are so frail that you would assume that close range lasers and phoenix canon would make them worse, but no....

Edited by XenoMask

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get why the people that don't like it, don't. But I love it. I still love the original. And I like what I've seen of Xenonauts as well. But I feel like Firaxis has given me a crazy good board game version of XCOM and I think it is just fabulous. I'll be playing this for a long time to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was not comparing it to the original as I stated at the beginning of my post.

Ah, sorry about that. Well, my opinion still stands since I find nothing wrong with it ^_^;

@King Burgundy: Hmm, yeah, its interesting, starting locations aren't that distinct and Second Wave options aren't in game yet at least, yet I started new playthrough almost immediately after completing the game. I guess shorter length of game makes it easier since original game is rather long marathon(even ignoring that some part of game is just padding in order to get all research done) so starting new playthrough is really huge time investment if you want to complete it without doing anything else?*shrugs*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok now I can type lol! Sorry I was kind of busy there for a bit. To expand:

@Par'Gellen: On my playthrough I discovered that UFOs eventually become common when you have enough satellite coverage, but yeah, on early game they are really rare. But how is that no apparent goal except score down different from original game?
I wasn't comparing the two. But since you bring it up, in the original when I detected a UFO it made me wonder what it was up to. Not 100% sure why but I just knew that those alien bastards were up to no good and I really needed to take care of their rotten butts before they could carry out whatever mission they were on. Honestly I didn't even care about the score. I just didn't want them to succeed with whatever they were doing. In the new one I just don't get that feeling. It's more of a "Oh look, another one... *click*" kind of thing. Meh...

I played all the way through the game on Normal and then got all the way to the psionic stuff on Classic but the game has just lost it's appeal so I doubt I'll be finishing it again. I haven't seen any uptick in UFO activity and the only country I lost to panic was France. I have satelites over every other country (still talking about my Classic game) and weeks go flying by in the Geoscape with no activity at all. When something does happen I actually feel bad instead of good because it means I have to go play yet another cookie-cutter mission with a squad of elite idiots.

(and yeah, they could have improved on it, but they decided to not make it flight sim because it would be 5 minute minigame that would prevent some people getting into fan part. Which is actually what I'm complaining about Xenonauts' system, its boring compared to actual tactical combat at the moment)
Wow I never wanted it to be a flight sim. That would suck. I think you took what I said and ran to the edge of extremes with it then jumped off. Like asking for extra cheese on your burger then getting one that was 98% cheese and the waiter loads it into a cannon and shoots you in the face with it. :D Xenonauts did it well I think. They gave me some extra cheese without trying to kill me with it. (YOU ROCK CHRIS & GANG!)
Isn't only strategic base layout choice in original game about putting living rooms near entrance/hangars because aliens spawn there? I never really cared about base layout in original since I was filling it for fun anyway.
Again, I wasn't comparing it to the original but you are correct to an extent. The original wasn't a perfect game and I never said it was. It had a deeper feel though. You could actually forget to do things in the original and later on be like "AW Crap! I forgot to order more smoke grenades! This should get interesting..." or "Oops! I really should have moved that hangar to the other side of the base when I thought about it earlier... Now this base invasion is going to get hairy." XCOM: EU just holds my hand through everything like I'm a little old lady that can't remember where I live.
On soldiers, eh, I like current system but this is taste system anyway. If you don't like class based tactical games then i guess you won't like this game either.
I don't dislike them but I do find them very limiting and they lose their appeal with me pretty quickly. "OH! OH! This is fun! HAHA take that. I have a support so that's not a problem... Hmm... Ok now I'm bored... What other games do I have?" I want more control.
I personally like panic system though I do agree that three/two abduction at time thing is rather artificial. Its not really timer anymore though after you have good interceptors and satellite everywhere, after that it stops being a thing really. Personally though I love little news bits in situation room.
Exactly. It's a pressure timer at first then becomes kind of irrelevant (well on Classic I was still having a little trouble with panic in the later stages but I think that's the point). I like the news snippets too :) I just wish they had meaning. Why can't I investigate them? Why can't I use them to discover a pattern of some kind in the attacks? They are nice but sort of meaningless... But now that I think about it that's where most of my gripes with XCOM: EU come from. Garnish without meat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't complete game with only one base
Oh really.

I don't have a ready-for-Cydonia save to prove it - don't even have a working copy ATM - but I know I'm not the only one to have done that.

Wasn't even hard. It was my first playthrough, I got someone else's copy with a couple of saves and just loaded one and went from there, was from early-middle game. Had lasers and alloy armor, learned the game on the go, and never realized that you could have multiple bases.

I think saves are legit, but save scumming isn't.

Define the distinction.

Using saves for these purposes is not save scumming:

- taking a break from the game

- recovering from bugs and crashes

- debugging and game mechanics experiments

- skipping the tutorial when starting new games

- saving exciting moments to replay later

Every other use of saved games is save scumming.

(There may be some more situational exceptions like the five listed above, but nothing major.)

Yeah, psionics were game breaker :P Wouldn't really call it third approach though.

Why not? It's a legitimate way of playing. You got psionics late enough and your initial psi's sucked bad enough that it wasn't such a no-brainer if you went for shortest completion. If you took things slow, then yes, it was very effective.

Hmm, either way its bit silly as why would be XCOM be able to do that when its government program basically?

The police sells homes and property seized in drug busts, they turn some of the cars they seize into police vehicles, auction off the rest.

And that's the police, doesn't get any more governmental than that.

X-COM isn't even a government program, it's a transnational organization that has to practically beg for donations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Par'Gellen: Firaxis xcom's strategical, intercepting and tactics phase went multiple redoes during its course. At beginning it was basically original game in 3d, later at some point they were disappointed with changes they did to strategical phase so they started it from scratch and so on. I don't remember what other incepting ideas they had, but yeah, one of ideas was the flight sim one if I recall right.(strategical layer ideas involved what basically is card game at some point and at another point what was essentially a territory control game but they figured out that even though it was fun it wasn't xcom)

Main reason why TU were removed was apparently that it didn't work well with class system and perks, probably because it gave it even more number crunching because of special abilities and such.

Speaking of news, it'd be nice if Xenonauts would be able to do something with its' news system... But I doubt that since news have same purpose as in XCOM: EU.

Anyway, just checking, would you like games with classes that have system like what Fire Emblem does?

Anyway, can't comment on anything else really since like I said, its matter of taste. As long you don't state your opinions as definite facts, I don't really have anything to say since opinions are opinions xD

@HWP: Okay, let me fix that then: You can complete game with one base resulting in that multiple bases are actually useless as their main purpose is being back up "lives" in case your base gets blown up :P

I define save scumming as reloading save until desired result is gotten. And I find it trouble some since some games are really changed when you save scum to make "perfect" game =/ For example, save scummed XCOM plays differently from non save scummed XCOM.

It was big enough deal that Xenonauts' team made psionics alien only. And in Apocalypse they nerfed it badly.

Hmm, yeah, but I still like XCOM: EU's take on it better as it makes funding nations actually important. Still, I guess alternate path where it breaks independent would have been nice. It certainly was fun in Apocalypse xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never played Fire Emblem so I can't say.

I never try to give my opinions as if they are facts but sometimes my emotions get the better of me when I see something that seems like it was done as a slap to the face of die-hard fans. Especially when I am one of those fans :) It has a personal feel that can color my words sometimes and if I came across wrong I apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Its Nintendo owned series of Japanese Strategy RPGs. Main things being that each unit is unique with their own personality and game has permadeath)

No need to apologize, I sometimes also make mistake of wording my statements incorrectly and not really rarely even xD

Anyway, I honestly believe that Firaxis stuff that worked on this game are fans of the XCOM and thought changes were for better, but I don't really expect everyone to agree with that.(I myself don't really care as I judge game on its own really) But I tend to get defensive when people talk bad about devs(of any game, well, except some games that everyone agrees to be horrible or are known to be cash ons) in general because I'm interested in video game developing and I'm aware that its not as easy as what people make it sound to be so I can get rather... Err, you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@HWP: Okay, let me fix that then: You can complete game with one base resulting in that multiple bases are actually useless as their main purpose is being back up "lives" in case your base gets blown up

You can complete Age of Empires III while never using melee units. Does that mean melee units are useless in the game?

You can complete Doom on Nightmare difficulty using fist alone. Does that mean everything else is useless in the game?

You can complete [insert game] while never using 65%-95% of the game's features. Does that mean ~80% of every game's features are useless?

I define save scumming as reloading save until desired result is gotten.

Reloading a pre-mission save after total squad loss, until you manage to complete that mission, qualifies.

It was big enough deal that Xenonauts' team made psionics alien only.

It was, but it was a completely legitimate feature that was intended to be powerful. Ended up a bit too powerful, but it's still not a walk in the park.

So another major way to complete the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so what do other bases help when it turns out that you can keep up with score just by doing missions without getting more radar coverage and can just research everything in main base?

Eh, thats like saying that using blaster launchers only is major way to complete game. Its ability/weapon/item, just like every other researchable thing that you can help soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×