RE: Research Descriptions

[Assoonasitis]

An Open Letter.

Dear Chris:

I really think that the research descriptions need to be divorced from game terms, even as they still reference them. For example, saying "something something something on the aliens' turn" is kind of immersion-breaking. Rephrasing it as, "something something something allowing our soldiers to act far more quickly" gives the same message while retaining immersion. Bear in mind that this is just an example and I feel that anywhere that game-mechanics are referenced in research files should be expunged. If you want, have a separate section after the report description or beside it or something that lays out everything in mechanics terms, kind of like the UFOpaedia.

Thanks much and regards,

Assoonasitis and anybody else that thinks this is a pretty rad idea

[GizmoGomez]

I actually think it's fine as is. Changing it could/would lead to confusion on the part of new players (and honestly probably me too). I've never had an issue with this game breaking the fourth wall; I actually like it when games do that (MGS, anyone?)

[Assoonasitis]

I actually think it's fine as is. Changing it could/would lead to confusion on the part of new players (and honestly probably me too). I've never had an issue with this game breaking the fourth wall; I actually like it when games do that (MGS, anyone?)

I dunno. I think setting up a little more like the OG would be nice. That way we have the nice sciency stuff well-divorced from game mechanics. I only mention it because the sciency stuff is so well written to begin with.

[GizmoGomez]

Yeah, I know what you mean. The techno-babble (it's a word) is awesome, I love it. If we can have that, and not attract attention to the fact that our head scientist talks about turn based stuff, then I'd be happy. Maybe change alien's turn to enemy movement or something. It just needs to be obvious what it means, but still sound good. (alas, the bane of a writer )

[Jean-Luc]

I've been avoiding spoilers so I've seen very little in the way of research descriptions but generally I do agree that avoiding 4th wall breakage would be preferable as that's primarily the domain of cheesy humour. The research descriptions are supposed to lend credence to a "realistic" (or real rather) world.

[crusherven]

I'm kinda on the fence. I didn't like the way XCOM did this, because finding out what something did or how it worked without using it was near impossible. I like that I can read the science thing, and even if I don't care about the text (and lets face it, a lot of people won't read much of it), I can still learn something useful. Even if I've read it before, I sometimes find myself saying, "Hmm, how does this work again?"

[Max_Caine]

If there is a benefit or some kind of bonus gained from the research the player needs to know in concrete terms what that benefit or bonus is. crusherven puts it quite clearly why. If the benefit is intangible or not clearly stated, then efforts in research will steer towards benefits that are tangible or clearly stated. As a good example, if I didn't know the specific bonuses I get from studying aliens, how could I tell otherwise? There aren't little stat bars hanging over aliens so I can see what's happening. We don't have Mind Probes. If I got an accuracy bonus verses Androns, it isn't listed separately against the percent to-hit, and I may not be able to tell just from the percentage value alone. Where else other than the research are benefits going to be listed?

[Assoonasitis]

If there is a benefit or some kind of bonus gained from the research the player needs to know in concrete terms what that benefit or bonus is. crusherven puts it quite clearly why. If the benefit is intangible or not clearly stated, then efforts in research will steer towards benefits that are tangible or clearly stated. As a good example, if I didn't know the specific bonuses I get from studying aliens, how could I tell otherwise? There aren't little stat bars hanging over aliens so I can see what's happening. We don't have Mind Probes. If I got an accuracy bonus verses Androns, it isn't listed separately against the percent to-hit, and I may not be able to tell just from the percentage value alone. Where else other than the research are benefits going to be listed?

Add a small side bar to the research description that lists in bullet point form the mechanical impact on the game. In your example: "-Accuracy vs. Androns +5%" similar to how for weapons in UFO:EU there was a side bar for weapons.

In a related note, is there a possibility of getting a separate screen for each weapon that shows its statistics and has maybe a little flavour text? I really enjoyed those screens in UFO:EU and would love to have them again, especially for the stats.

[GizmoGomez]

I'd really like that a lot; especially if they listed effective range, penetrating power, and damage. Reload time in TUs would be useful as well. (There are a lot of places where a listed TU time would come in handy)

[Khall]

If you mouse over a weapon in the soldier equip screen, you get a description of it and some stats (damage, range, penetration etc.)

[GizmoGomez]

Yeah, but a dedicated xenopedia entry for each little item would be really great, imo.

Maybe not for things like common magazines and such, but for weapons and equipment, that'd be really helpful.

[crusherven]

I guess I'd be fine with a sidebar summing up the tangibles. I like the current system as is, but whatever.

[Assoonasitis]

If you mouse over a weapon in the soldier equip screen, you get a description of it and some stats (damage, range, penetration etc.)

Yeah, but go play UFO:EU and look at the UFOpaedia reports for the ballistic Rifle and Pistol and other standard weapons. That's what I'd like in the Xenopaedia. It's just a little extra flavour that's really nice.

[Assoonasitis]

I'll actually volunteer to do that, if Chris will let me. I think it'd be a lot of fun and good practise for creative writing.

[Gauddlike]

I thought of the mouseover text as well but then realised that it would only be useful after you have already built an item, not while you were deciding if you wanted one.

I think additional Xenopedia entries for the individual weapons would be nice.

If they were written in character from the individual Xenonauts soldiers who were testing them it would be pretty good as well.

I see the picture and stats as official briefing papers to the tester and his/her observations as the flavour text.

That might also be a good explanation of why they were written in a different style if Chris was to allow others to help write them up.

[crusherven]

Speaking of mouseover texts... it's really slow to pop up. I'd prefer instant tooltips if I have them on.

[thothkins]

Yup, I was hoping that a little bullet point summary would appear at the bottom of each topic.

+10% Damage to Sebilllians

-10% off Snakeskin shoes.

Best of both.

Extending this could even show you which research topics led from it, although I think Chris said he didn't want it to be that obvious?

[Assoonasitis]

Would the Xenonauts be called Tinhats or would Bowl-Heads be better? Tinhat seems more obvious, but I like the conflation of Jar-Heads with calling a space helmet a fish bowl. Whatchu think, guys?

[thothkins]

Glum Head would be accurate.

[Assoonasitis]

Glum Head would be accurate.

Explain?

[thothkins]

Simply the expressions on all of the early build Xenonauts. Only the most desperate, self hating, masochists were considered for duty.

Obviously, later build removed all of that leading to the beacons of optimistic positivity we see in today's expressions, some of which have made their way to being avatars on the forums.

[Assoonasitis]

I hereby submit some sample writing for the approval of Chris/ the dev team. This is for the ballistic shotgun, which I thought would be fun:

Our standard-issue breaching weapon is the Winchester Guardian 1300A, a modified version of the standard Winchester Defender 1300 which R&D came up with thanks to significant input from our troops. The body has been altered slightly to make the weapon more robust while keeping the weight down. The main modification was to the slide-action, making it significantly easier and allowing well-trained troops to fire with alarming speed. The rest of the modifications were mostly to accommodate the purpose-designed slugs we created to deal with the alien threat while reducing recoil, making the weapon not only fast to fire, but exceptionally accurate over short ranges.

The weapon fires special 12 gauge full-bore un-rifled slugs which contain a 25% greater gunpowder charge than standard rounds. This gives each round greater punch but sacrifices some accuracy, giving the weapon a maximum effective range of approximately 11 metres. The decision to use slugs over regular shells was made in light of the... disastrous field-tests involving Sebillians. As one colourful soldier put it, "these <expletive deleted> pellets don't do <expletive deleted> to lizzie except tickle him!" Each clip is fairly generous, loading 12 rounds.

Maximum range: 7 tiles (11.2 m)

Damage: 65 kinetic

Weight: 5 kg

Firing:

Snap: 16TU 83% Acc.

Aimed: 19TU 90% Acc.

[Assoonasitis]

Oh noes, I killed my own thread with fan-fiction. I am a bad cat.

[Assoonasitis]

At the risk of sounding desperate (I'm not, but it'll sound that way), does anybody have any feedback for what I've written? I'd sure appreciate some.

[thothkins]

Not to worry, it didn't sound desperate. Needy, perhaps... but not quite desperate

Isn't there a thread where Chris, as politely as possible, says that he wants to write all of the descriptions himself. For consistent writing style among other things.

No issues with your text really. It's short, which I like in a research description although your >expletive deleted< use of >expletiving deleted< >expletive deleteds< offends my delicate >expletive deleted< sensibilities, in a game accessible for kids.

Edited April 9, 2013 by thothkins