I was referring to your predictions and insulting manner for the PC elitist... and I quote... "cunts". I never once thought you believed what you said yourself.chstens said:
XCom: Enemy Unknown Gets Screens and Details
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Just got the issue with the info in it today, and it says that they are called "The Thin Men", going on to describe them as like the Slender man myths. Apparently they are imperfect copies of humans sent to earth to spy on us.kebab4you said:
Yikes they got an eerie look, got any info about them yet?
Brilliant, it's already on my wish list. I'm pretty much guaranteed to buy this game, baring absolutely diabolical reviews. If nothing else it'll be nice to show support for something other than an FPS.
Gift.
Gift.
Has there been ANY evidence of this? Or is this just boozy-cheese fuelled ramblings?chstens said:
I'm still a little concerned. What happens if we're seeing the other end...Jandau said:
1: How do we make our new shooter loved?
2: Well, we're making this turn based strategy, how about you pick up from our guns and explain how they were made?
1: Doesn't X-Com already have a backstory?
2: Yeah, but we've already done that over.
And I still think the shooter looks like plop - just willing to let it go now.
When I say "PC Elitists", I don't mean the people who say that an up-to-snuff PC is technically superior to consoles, I mean the whiny, snivelling assholes that condemn people for owning consoles, constantly whine about how PC gaming is being overlooked by the gaming press, and THEN say that people should just leave PCs to "people with the intelligence required to use one" when an article mentions it's a pain in the ass to faff about in an .ini file to get the settings you want. People who rightly deserve to be called cunts. And while on the topic of insults, may I direct your gaze to your very own words: "cry more noob".Draconalis said:
Is this some kind of New Coke scam.
"Hey look guys.. we shat all over your beloved franchise, but now we're copying the games you liked and selling them back to you with marginally better graphics. Come on, it's better than that bland looking shooter we're making, right? Money please!"
I'm not really bothered about them changing the setting. Apocalypse tore up most things about the X-Com setting (although it is technically set in the same universe) and still managed to be the best X-Com game yet. What I'm kind of worried about is the lack of innovation. I can already play X-Com, all the games are available on Steam for practically nothing. Can't we expand a little on where Apocalypse left off.. you know, add more to it rather than just endlessly "streamlining". I don't know, it would just be nice to be sold a new X-Com game based on what awesome things you put in, not what you'd taken out.
It kind of bothers me that "innovatating on a concept" has been taken to mean "turning it into a shooter", while "doing justice to a well loved IP" has been taken to mean "remaking an old game and removing things". We already had an attempt to innovate on X-Com in the UFO series, and while it was hit and miss it was definitely getting good by Afterlight.
The screenshots look interesting though, so I'm not judging. Just not really thrilled by the language in this press release.
"Hey look guys.. we shat all over your beloved franchise, but now we're copying the games you liked and selling them back to you with marginally better graphics. Come on, it's better than that bland looking shooter we're making, right? Money please!"
I'm not really bothered about them changing the setting. Apocalypse tore up most things about the X-Com setting (although it is technically set in the same universe) and still managed to be the best X-Com game yet. What I'm kind of worried about is the lack of innovation. I can already play X-Com, all the games are available on Steam for practically nothing. Can't we expand a little on where Apocalypse left off.. you know, add more to it rather than just endlessly "streamlining". I don't know, it would just be nice to be sold a new X-Com game based on what awesome things you put in, not what you'd taken out.
It kind of bothers me that "innovatating on a concept" has been taken to mean "turning it into a shooter", while "doing justice to a well loved IP" has been taken to mean "remaking an old game and removing things". We already had an attempt to innovate on X-Com in the UFO series, and while it was hit and miss it was definitely getting good by Afterlight.
The screenshots look interesting though, so I'm not judging. Just not really thrilled by the language in this press release.
I must admit I am a bit worried about what the devs call streamlining as well...
I enjoyed being able to shift through my inventory to outfit each soldier with a loadout I felt suited to thier strengths, the need to put sidearms and grenades in the belt and holsters for quick access and other stuff in the backpack that can be pulled out when needed but took more time units.
I liked how you needed to check each soldiers stats to get rid of the cowardly ones, pick up the ones with good accuracy for ranged weapons, the ones with high strength to carry the heavy weapons...the fast movers for medics and/or nade throwers/ stunners... etc. etc.
How the UI allowed you to save up time units for various shots, so you dont run to a spot hit crouch and find you cant shoot.
I didnt enjoy the manner a single alien could completely wreck a co ordinated assualt with one alien class grenade...and there was no way to counter it, the ones that just came from a corner and suicide nade explosioned the tiny entries to the space craft... boom half the assualt force down and half the spaceship blown up.
I wasnt too keen on the overly random nature of the shooting either, my highest skilled sniper using an aimed shot and misses an Alien in open at less than 20m, and the alien turns and pops the sniper one shot through the cover the sniper was using.
I also hope they avoid what happenes with the other UFO games that copied the XCom formulae did... missions with such a random difficulty curve you could go from one shotting a single alien to win to being besieged by high level alien life forms that could take a full barrage of fire from all your team and one shot half your guys before you hit the Quit Game option.
The game was about management, managing your resources and personel, managing your battles... taking out the management aspect would reduce it to a pretty looking tactics style game.
I dont care if its on the consoles and PC, as long as the streamlining is used with extreme care, no good saving the patiant if you surgically remove half of what makes up the patiant.
I enjoyed being able to shift through my inventory to outfit each soldier with a loadout I felt suited to thier strengths, the need to put sidearms and grenades in the belt and holsters for quick access and other stuff in the backpack that can be pulled out when needed but took more time units.
I liked how you needed to check each soldiers stats to get rid of the cowardly ones, pick up the ones with good accuracy for ranged weapons, the ones with high strength to carry the heavy weapons...the fast movers for medics and/or nade throwers/ stunners... etc. etc.
How the UI allowed you to save up time units for various shots, so you dont run to a spot hit crouch and find you cant shoot.
I didnt enjoy the manner a single alien could completely wreck a co ordinated assualt with one alien class grenade...and there was no way to counter it, the ones that just came from a corner and suicide nade explosioned the tiny entries to the space craft... boom half the assualt force down and half the spaceship blown up.
I wasnt too keen on the overly random nature of the shooting either, my highest skilled sniper using an aimed shot and misses an Alien in open at less than 20m, and the alien turns and pops the sniper one shot through the cover the sniper was using.
I also hope they avoid what happenes with the other UFO games that copied the XCom formulae did... missions with such a random difficulty curve you could go from one shotting a single alien to win to being besieged by high level alien life forms that could take a full barrage of fire from all your team and one shot half your guys before you hit the Quit Game option.
The game was about management, managing your resources and personel, managing your battles... taking out the management aspect would reduce it to a pretty looking tactics style game.
I dont care if its on the consoles and PC, as long as the streamlining is used with extreme care, no good saving the patiant if you surgically remove half of what makes up the patiant.
Tropico 4 seams pretty good, and it was multiplatform. It didn't innovate very much on tropico 3, but it still got solid reviews.Alcari said:
The thing is, people quite often mistake complexity for depth. A choice that has only one correct answer is generally not interesting for a strategy game. More often than not the game will be more enjoyable for most people by removing it. See Skyrim, they streamlined the stats into 3 and it makes complete sense to me, even though I am a big fan of Morrowind. But they where right to conclude that the old way mostly was just a way to increase health, mana and stamina. The side-effects they gave their own perks etc.Alcari said:
Of course the sentence is suspect, but X-com could profit a lot from the removal of several aspects and a better explanation of certain mechanics.
I also hope they include some sort of 'easy' mode, where you can easily load a game and make it so 'normal' means no saving. X-com is meant to be played like that and people should be introduced to it. Also, I find it hard to stop myself from loading
What you can read into it is under the best case scenario it will have a clunky but functional console port interface (kotor is the only relatively recent one I can think of), worst case scenario is some abomination like Borderlands or Skyrim where the devs seem to actively hate gamers who use a keyboard and mouse.Andy Chalk said:
oh and also this game will be no good unless the strategy portion has a fully destructible environment like xcom 1, 2 and apocalypse
and since this is a modern game they need to add some physics to the environment destruction
and since this is a modern game they need to add some physics to the environment destruction
1-full spectrum warrior was a mulitplatform release and is considered a bright example of strategy on consolesAlcari said:
3-take of the nostalgia goggles they are bad for you.
4-ummm what proof do you have that it will be forced?
maybe there are options if you want to do it yourself or have the computer do it.
like pre determining what loadout you want and the computer will make sure you always have the required equipment.
or the ability to start a game with a base that is already ready for use.
I dont want to need a spreadsheet or a to do list to play a game.
i want to be able to start it up select a loadout for my troops build a base and start playing
nothing else the option would be really nice but if it was forced i would not buy it.
Honestly, guys?
I think this is an awesome thing. Yeah, it might bomb. It might bomb horribly.
But they're trying. They're willing to try giving us what we want, and not just say 'Lol if u wnt ur xcom buy our fps'
I think for that, they deserve a little benefit of the doubt.
Point is, they're trying something that is not particularly in 'vogue'. Nor is it being massively ripped off by something current. Turn Based Squad games are not common now-a-days, the only one I've seen in latest years is Frozen Synapse, and that was by an Indie company that didn't pour billions into development.
If this is for once a company listening to what the fans want, and giving the IP to someone who knows a few things about turn based strategies, I say we applaud them and give them a chance. If they fail, they fail, but if they succeed? From then on, Turn Based Squad games will be back. I think that's worth taking a risk.
I think this is an awesome thing. Yeah, it might bomb. It might bomb horribly.
But they're trying. They're willing to try giving us what we want, and not just say 'Lol if u wnt ur xcom buy our fps'
I think for that, they deserve a little benefit of the doubt.
Point is, they're trying something that is not particularly in 'vogue'. Nor is it being massively ripped off by something current. Turn Based Squad games are not common now-a-days, the only one I've seen in latest years is Frozen Synapse, and that was by an Indie company that didn't pour billions into development.
If this is for once a company listening to what the fans want, and giving the IP to someone who knows a few things about turn based strategies, I say we applaud them and give them a chance. If they fail, they fail, but if they succeed? From then on, Turn Based Squad games will be back. I think that's worth taking a risk.