I never played the original, but liked the demo quite a bit! Two things I’d like to ask/add:
- both the ingame commentary and the demo-review hint at capturing aliens, but I haven’t figured out how to do this. Anyone? Or is capturing simply not in the demo?
- having two squads out at the same time: Savillo stated in his post (which I’m not going to quote because apparantly people feel it’s spoilerish) that you probably wont be able to do two missions in different locations, because you can only have one Skyranger. But how does this fit in with the continent bonus you get for picking North-America as a base, which is something like ‘all aircraft cost 50% less to build, buy and maintain’? Is the Skyranger not considered a plane in this regard? Or do we need other planes for other stuff?
Anyway, I guess I’ll find out for myself soon enough!
Squee
1802
#1. Capturing isn’t in the demo. You’ll get access to a super-taser after you do the appropriate research and make some, then you can equip them to soldiers and try to take aliens in alive.
#2. There are non-Skyranger planes, specifically interceptors. You’ll be buying/stationing interceptors around the world to knock out UFOs. Though you’ll be limited to one Skyranger, you’ll probably have a pile of interceptors as the game progresses.
Tom_Mc
1803
Going off what I’ve seen in the demo, videos and experience with the first game. Every now and then a shot would only wound an alien and they would fall incapacitated instead of dead. There was also a stun rod you researched and could use in melee combat.
The main reason for additional aircraft was interceptors. These are the craft tasked with shooting down the UFOs while the skyranger just delivered your troops to the site.
Tom M
Ahh squee beat me.
Janster
1804
Well this is turning out to be a nice surprise hit… Lovely.
Coincidentally, if anyone wants a copy of Civ V (Steam), let me know… love the pre-order bonus but since I already have it, won’t do me much good.
— Alan
rezaf
1806
About destructability, note that I made a distinction between terrain and environmental destruction. Environmental means blowing holes in walls and roofs, which seems to be still possible, albeit not with targeted shots.
Terrain destruction means leveling a hill or “digging” a hole through one.
This was possible in X-Com, albeit it was only neccessary on very few map types that you saw relatively rarely. In TFTD, it was a bit more frequent.
There were no physics, so the implementation was limited, but it was there.
Apoc added “physics” in that stuff would collapse when you removed the supports (this was a bit of a hack, so it didn’t always work in a believable way).
To me, the natural evolution of this was what they did in Silent Storm, blowing up buildings spectacularly, using heavy weaponry to blow holes into most everything, stuff like that was GREAT.
Now, in this game, they’re falling WAY back and while I can blow holes into walls like in JA2, wholesale destruction seems to be out and I can’t even do what’s possible on purpose unless I’m using explosives. Bummer.
rezaf
Tony_M
1807
I enjoyed the 3 Moves Ahead podcast. I liked many of the questions asked, but I agree when Bruce and Rob get together it can sound a little “Bad Cop-Bad Cop”. From a purely entertainment perspective, the interview would be easier to listen to if there was someone like Tom teamed up with either Bruce or Rob, who has a more transparent enthusiasm for games. (Bruce and Rob are both clearly very keen gaming enthusiasts so don’t take that the wrong way).
Tony
Reemul
1808
Yeah I’m uk based as is GMG , plenty from the USA have had problems normally its just a call to your bank letting them know what and who and they clear your card.
Launch trailer
I didn’t know there was a review already. Game Informer: 9.5/10 (it was in the trailer)
Huh. Interesting. Maybe the print review? Still, that would have been based on some pretty early code, even conducted at Firaxis behind closed doors or something a month ago? If it’s the print review, as I understand it print is months behind the magazine hitting the newsstand. Still, a 9.5 is pretty much what I expect most non-Tom folks to give the game, score-wise.
It’s a print review, I can confirm you. Game Informer is the biggest American gaming magazine.
Tony_M
1813
9.5 is pretty what you can expect Game Informer to give a game, score-wise, when its highly anticipated and they hold an exclusive.
Adam B is likely the guy that is reviewing it, and he’s been super excited about the game since he got to play it, and his posts on the other forum indicate he genuinely loves the game. I don’t think it got a 9.5 because money exchanged hands, and that is a filthy accusation.
Tony_M
1815
I didn’t mean it was a money bribe. But exclusive early reviews do tend to get higher than average marks, even if its an unspoken pressure not to trash the exclusive. And I agree XCOM may very well deserve 9.5.
Savillo
1816
I think it’s worth repeating that we’ve been down this road before with UFO: Extraterrestrials. Even aside from its many issues, hand-crafted maps lessened the game’s replay value.
If you’re OK with playing the same maps over and over, then I suppose you won’t see a problem. Personally, I like to have a little variety, and you’d be surprised how much even minute differences between encounters actually matter a lot in the overall experience.
As for campaigns taking 30 missions … I’ll just say that I’m skeptical. It could be close to the truth, but I think you’ll be playing a lot more than that based on the preview.
Put me in the “I’d rather have a wide variety of nice looking hand made maps than random maps” unless of course random maps can look as nice as hand made maps, which isn’t going to happen any time soon.
I guess to me something like HoMM is a good example - I can play on the same map dozens of times, it’s not exactly the map itself that makes the experience, but the conflict. I expect even if I run into the same map a few times, all that’s going to mean is I know a little more about the layout, but the enemies, their patrols and spawn points, and even my own squad and layout based on where I’m at in the campagin will all be different, so it doesn’t really matter much (to me). Think Counter Strike or DOTA 2 - don’t those by and large have a very small pool of maps to draw from? It’s more about the action than the map it takes place on, at least for those maps. Plus, it would be awesome to get “map packs” as cheap (free?) DLC or as part of patching.
I’m MORE concerned, and I’ve not seen anyone bring this up so maybe I’m wrong, that the maps seem pre-lit independant of what time of day the missions take place on in the geoscape. Is that right? I hope not. I’d like to it to be that while we get the same maps from time to time, maybe one time it’s at night, maybe another time it’s during the day, and maybe it’s a terrror mission a third time. If that IS the case, I really don’t have a problem with how they set it up.
Savillo
1818
BleedTheFreak, I see X-Com as not analogous to Counter Strike or DOTA – those are games where learning the map and mastering map control are part of the game design. X-Com, to me at least, is more about adapting to new, unforeseen circumstances. Randomized maps support that theme.
As for lighting: Lighting doesn’t play a role in the tactical game as in the original, as far as I can tell. It doesn’t seem as though lighting affects visibility, and I haven’t seen any items based on illumination. I’ll be honest that I’ve not really paid close attention to the day/night cycle on the Geoscape and checked to see if the map matched up, but I’m guessing that maps may have prerendered lighting in them.
That’s my thought as well. Not a big deal, but it would have been a neat touch to arrive on the day side of the planet and then (as in the original) have a day time mission. Seems odd otherwise. I guess I can play in the funky holo-view of the globe, then I’ll probably never notice it.
Video tutorial on how to install and run the demo utility.
