UFO: Enemy Unknown, remake by Firaxis

[AlpsStranger]

I'm totally blown away. All of the handwringing from the "ruined it!" grumps is just like water off a duck's back.

This game is damn good, and no amount of angry 90s nostalgia fetishists are going to slow its well-deserved roll.

EDIT: In fairness to the 90s nostalgia freaks, the weird X-Com inventory minigame where you had the specific delays for having a clip on your leg, belt, backpack, etc. was pretty badass. I can totally understand missing that.

The ideal hybrid X-Com, FWIW:

Single base but multiple skyrangers.

Time system from original but the level gain/special abilities from the new game.

Inventory management from original.

 

[Rub'Rum]

I kind of agree with you in that many gamers are too cynical about new products coming out, and sometimes the same old rants get overplayed and redundant. However, your tone is annoying (and probably breeds more rants).

 

[AlpsStranger]

I kind of agree with you in that many gamers are too cynical about new products coming out, and sometimes the same old rants get overplayed and redundant. However, your tone is annoying (and probably breeds more rants).

I get angry when they want to dump all over a really good game just for internet nerd cred. The idiots posting 0/10 reviews on Metacritic should be flogged. There is absolutely no way this game is less than a 7/10 no matter who you are.

EDIT: The rest of the rant isn't directed at any one person, and certainly isn't directed at Rub'Rum.

Almost nothing as good as this has come out in quite a while, and it's tragic that people just have to bash bash bash bash because they can't loot grenades off of dead people or whatever. It's like the other 99.9999% of the game should be ignored because it doesn't have the right and proper inventory system.

Some of the especially over the top complainers keep attacking the art style. I can put that argument to bed in mere seconds.

I can tolerate and understand gameplay-based arguments between the original and the new one, but anyone who is complaining about the art direction needs to stop huffing paint. "Ooh it looks like Mass Effect!" Well, what the hell did you expect? Mass Effect basically equals sleek Spec Ops/Sci-Fi, so the odds that X-Com was going to look a lot like mass effect were probably over 90% in any possible scenario.

This is not Duke Nukem Forever. This is not Doom 3. This isn't even as much of a departure as Civilization 5. Considering the amount of time that's passed and the amount that game design has moved on it's actually extremely faithful to the original.

It's like complaining that stuff in Game of Thrones sometimes looks like stuff from the Lord of the Rings. Of course these same nostalgic sperglords probably do that too. I give up.

So go ahead. I'm sure all the cool kids will hate this one too, just like you hate everything else that doesn't come on 3.5". Jerks.

 

[Rub'Rum]

Spoiler :

internet nerd cred

The idiots (...) should be flogged.

t's tragic that people just have to bash bash bash bash because they can't loot grenades off of dead people or whatever

over the top complainers

needs to stop huffing paint

nostalgic sperglords

Jerks.

I think you missed the point, or just took it as a free pass to spit more bile? You edited your message like 5 times adding more useless aggressive tone every time.

Look, I think we all agree that minor complaints don't warrant a 0/10 based on nostalgia. But if there's something that annoys me more than people with nonsensical opinions, it's people who just make the internet the frothing-at-the-mouth place it doesn't need to be.

 

[AlpsStranger]

I apologize for ranting. I know it's wrong.

It's just that I've been through the same experience dozens and dozens of times. A decent sequel to an old game comes out and is actually pretty sweet. I check forums to see how everyone else feels about it. I instantly get a faceload of

so I've developed an epically short fuse for the "ruined it!" meme.

Now if someone even thinks "ruined it!" within 100 feet of me the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

 

[Sonereal]

Sounds a lot like the reaction to Civilization V.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Sounds a lot like the reaction to Civilization V.

That's not fair.

Civ5 is not nearly as good or nearly as true to its legacy as X-Com.

Now, I admit that I went all chainsaw massacre on the Civ5 haters on here, but the Civ5 hate was so far over the top that it deserved a response. This X-Com game isn't nearly as big a departure.

People are complaining about the lack of inventory shuffling and the fact that it isn't done in a capes-and-spandex style. Frankly, the multiple bases thing in the original was also somewhat overrated, at least IMHO.

I do have one thing I really hate about the new one, but it's not enough to ruin it for me: I really hate the fact that the aliens tend to wait for you and then 'duck and cover' once they spot you. If they removed that then I would say the new XCom is the best XCom without qualification.

I wouldn't be opposed to a gameplay-exact clone of XCom with better graphics, but I don't think it would be half as good as what they've done here.

 

[Sonereal]

Oh, Civilization V certainly deserved some of the hate it got at release. I was referring to how over-the-top it was. At one point, there was a rant thread about how the clouds were shaped.

The new XCom looks interesting enough that I'll probably pick it up on sale. Sifting through the "ruined forever" stuff is easy after my tour of duty in CivV General Discussion.

 

[ddd123]

you have to understand developers get MILLIONS of ***FREE*** dollars only for using a name
name they DONT DESERVE

so they *HAVE TO* mantain the standard set by the name inventors
if they dont its not important if the game is still decent or so, they abused a name and ruined it
and ppl has the right to complain
(im not talking about xcom that i didnt try yet)

 

[Sonereal]

Are you texting?

 

[codepoet]

I hope I didn't come off a complaining in my earlier post...
The game is awesome and you should get it.
I had a couple nitpicks and one of them was also due to feature being hidden since I had not progressed that far in the game yet (the interceptor screen).

The game is in a good state, seriously, when the nitpick that really annoys me is that I can't change the flag icon on the back of my soldiers.

On the topic of one base:
I'm getting used to the new layout. Someone suggested earlier that Skyrangers should be able to be stationed in other places. I'd say no, you either need to have one base like it is or have multiple bases. No in-between. This is because Skyrangers need soldiers, soldiers need supplies, supplies need stores, etc. Next thing you know, you have multiple bases or you have a confusing interface trying to allow a user to maintain all these supplies but without a base...
One base was the most noticeable change so I commented on it, but I'm over it pretty easily: In the original it was rare that I set up more than two Skyranger housing bases anyway (and that second one usually was just to make room for Avengers, Lightnings and Firestorms in the main base). I didn't like having every base be huge due to maintenance costs and due to annoying micromanagement in moving elerium115 around as fuel. Most of the additional bases were just listening posts, interceptor, stores for missiles and one living quarter for the soldiers I'd transfer there solely to fend off base attacks. They've designed supplies for interceptors out of the game and you can station interceptors in countries and satellites provide the surveillance... finally no base means no need protect. In turn it's nice that I am no longer transferring items around; that in retrospect was a rather clunky aspect of the original game.

 

[kgoodrid]

You couldn't choose the stats of your old soldiers, so it doesn't make sense to choose the classes this time - I actually like that.

Getting more interested in picking this up soon, but still short of gigabytes...

Well, I just don't like it because X-COM should be able to say, "we need a trained Sniper" and get that, not "Hey just send me a random mook." Unless of course X-COM has very low influence with Council Nations, in which case they wouldn't be able to pick and choose as much.

The most elite military organizations in the real world decide who gets in, they aren't stuck with random recruits. Of course, X-COM isn't the real world, so...

Not a big deal though at all. Certainly not something that hurts my enjoyment of the game.

EDIT: In fairness to the 90s nostalgia freaks, the weird X-Com inventory minigame where you had the specific delays for having a clip on your leg, belt, backpack, etc. was pretty badass. I can totally understand missing that.

I think the new system works very well. You need to deal with reloading without having to faff about with every single clip of ammo. I certainly don't mind inventory management to that level, but it isn't a required part of the game.

I do have one thing I really hate about the new one, but it's not enough to ruin it for me: I really hate the fact that the aliens tend to wait for you and then 'duck and cover' once they spot you. If they removed that then I would say the new XCom is the best XCom without qualification.

I wouldn't be opposed to a gameplay-exact clone of XCom with better graphics, but I don't think it would be half as good as what they've done here.

I think that is based on difficulty. On higher difficulties some aliens will patrol. There have been several times where I have set overwatch ambushes and massacred small patrols of aliens when they unwittingly wandered into my killzone.

For a 'classic' remake, check out Xenonaughts. It is a bit closer to being a direct modern remake, although it does change lots of things like the setting. I think there is room for both.

 

[AlpsStranger]

you have to understand developers get MILLIONS of ***FREE*** dollars only for using a name
name they DONT DESERVE

so they *HAVE TO* mantain the standard set by the name inventors
if they dont its not important if the game is still decent or so, they abused a name and ruined it
and ppl has the right to complain
(im not talking about xcom that i didnt try yet)

The game is completely true to the spirit of the original so far as I can tell ( I used to have Terror in the Deep as shareware back in the day and starting playing the original X-Com intensely during the lead up to the new one, fwiw ) I'm also no stranger to the early 90s PC gaming scene ( Dark Forces, Mech Warrior, Duke3D, Blake Stone, Heretic, Strife, Hexen, Commander Keen, Biohazard, Myst, 7th Guest, Alone in the Dark, etc. So while I didn't have the privilege of owning X-Com way back when I'm well aware of the game's particulars.

Honestly, none of the changes are about "Dumbing it down" anyhow. "Dumbed it down" is something that Simulationists, particularly those who don't know they are Simulationists, say when something makes the usual Simulationist->Gamist transition that 99% of franchises do.

What happened seems, to me, to be really simple. Early 90s PC TBS developers weren't better or more creative, but they tended to have a Simulationist creative agenda. In 2012, the vast majority of game development is done with a Gamist creative agenda. 99.99% of the time "derp" or "dumbed down" is a generic slander used towards Gamists by Simulationists or Narrativists. As someone who is shamelessly Gamist I've long since gotten used to being the whipping boy for the egos of Narrativists and Simulationists.

 

[PhilBowles]

I get angry when they want to dump all over a really good game just for internet nerd cred. The idiots posting 0/10 reviews on Metacritic should be flogged. There is absolutely no way this game is less than a 7/10 no matter who you are.

EDIT: The rest of the rant isn't directed at any one person, and certainly isn't directed at Rub'Rum.

Almost nothing as good as this has come out in quite a while, and it's tragic that people just have to bash bash bash bash because they can't loot grenades off of dead people or whatever. It's like the other 99.9999% of the game should be ignored because it doesn't have the right and proper inventory system.

Some of the especially over the top complainers keep attacking the art style. I can put that argument to bed in mere seconds.

Take away the differences in graphic quality, and honestly I prefer the older style. The new Muton looks like a villain from a superhero comic, while the Floater looks like a Games Workshop Necron.

Oh, Civilization V certainly deserved some of the hate it got at release. I was referring to how over-the-top it was. At one point, there was a rant thread about how the clouds were shaped.

Oh, the current Rants thread is at a stage where anyone who has something to say that isn't 100% negative gets roundly kicked off. Although from infrequent check-ins, that thread rarely has as much to do with how bad Civ V is perceived to be as with how good Civ IV is perceived to be.

I do have one thing I really hate about the new one, but it's not enough to ruin it for me: I really hate the fact that the aliens tend to wait for you and then 'duck and cover' once they spot you. If they removed that then I would say the new XCom is the best XCom without qualification.

They did a fair bit of that in the original too.

I wouldn't be opposed to a gameplay-exact clone of XCom with better graphics, but I don't think it would be half as good as what they've done here.

There have been a lot of those on the market. I have to confess that despite scepticism I'm more interested in what's been done to 'reimagine' the game than I would be in a Xenonauts-style clone (sure, I'm interested in Xenonauts, but there's just something about having Sectoids and Cyberdiscs by those names and - approximately - looks). I don't know whether I'll consider it as good as a graphically-updated version of the original, but then X-COM Apocalypse isn't as good as UFO. I'm still glad they made it the way they did rather than as another Terror from the Deep.

Well, I just don't like it because X-COM should be able to say, "we need a trained Sniper" and get that, not "Hey just send me a random mook." Unless of course X-COM has very low influence with Council Nations, in which case they wouldn't be able to pick and choose as much.

And in the original they could ask for a trained sniper and get someone with accuracy 40...

Think of it as an emergency response - they probably have limited resources to draw from. After all if the nations of the game universe had armies or even special forces they wouldn't need to send 6-man teams armed with basic weaponry to do the job...

 

[Rub'Rum]

I have a hard time with the narrativist-simulationist vs gamist-storyteller dichotomy. It's the same in table-top RPGs these days "Oh go back to your old grognard ways" vs "oh your game isn't even a game it's just people making stuff up". I love games at both end of the spectrum and I'm glad they all exist. Both sides should be well represented in the gaming world.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Does anyone sincerely think the game is a 0/10, or even a 5/10? I'm really suspicious of anyone who even claims it's a 6/10. I think even the most angry "betrayed" X-Com fan would be forced to concede that the new game is in 7/10-9/10 territory. I could easily see an expansion putting it close to 10/10 territory.

Take away the differences in graphic quality, and honestly I prefer the older style. The new Muton looks like a villain from a superhero comic, while the Floater looks like a Games Workshop Necron.

Eh, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree about the muton.

As for the floater, I think it's far more impressive than a still picture makes it look. They give a really convincing impression of thrust and agility through some very high quality animations.

EDIT: My overall point is actually really simple. You can hate the new game all you like, but just don't try to claim it's merely riding X-Com's coattails. This is a truly excellent game, far better than most of the rest of what's come out in the last few years, and it stands tall completely on its own. It doesn't deserve 0/10s. It doesn't deserve constant moaning and bashing. I think it's fun, and legitimately good, and it gets really old just seeing everyone whine about it and post sabotage reviews on Metacritic.

 

[ColdFever]

I received XCom:EU yesterday, and so far I think:
This is a great game. Thank you.

The gameplay is great, the story is interesting, graphics and music are nice, and the "one more turn" feeling is back. Compared to the release of "Civ5" Vanilla, where I was bored after a few hours, with XCom:EU the fun was just starting after the tutorial, and so far the fun did not stop. The tutorial was a bit dull, like going to school, because it is predetermined and you are not allowed to do other things. But it is probably needed to learn the basic skills that are not described in the thin international manuals.

I really enjoy this game, and the biggest problem I now have is to stop playing... Apart from the great gameplay, what surprises me is the high quality of the PS3 version. I thought I would play this game on PC, but I find playing on PS3 with the PS3 controller on a big TV screen more convenient than on PC with a smaller monitor and a mouse. Of course the PC has better graphics and (more important) no tearing, but so far I think I prefer the easiness of the PS3 version.

This game may not be perfect, but so far to me it looks like the most interesting one of this year. I hope that it will become the deserved success. I am already looking forward to expansions.

Thank you, great effort, Firaxis and 2K!

 

[sherbz]

I get angry when they want to dump all over a really good game just for internet nerd cred. The idiots posting 0/10 reviews on Metacritic should be flogged. There is absolutely no way this game is less than a 7/10 no matter who you are.

EDIT: The rest of the rant isn't directed at any one person, and certainly isn't directed at Rub'Rum.

Almost nothing as good as this has come out in quite a while, and it's tragic that people just have to bash bash bash bash because they can't loot grenades off of dead people or whatever. It's like the other 99.9999% of the game should be ignored because it doesn't have the right and proper inventory system.

Some of the especially over the top complainers keep attacking the art style. I can put that argument to bed in mere seconds.

I can tolerate and understand gameplay-based arguments between the original and the new one, but anyone who is complaining about the art direction needs to stop huffing paint. "Ooh it looks like Mass Effect!" Well, what the hell did you expect? Mass Effect basically equals sleek Spec Ops/Sci-Fi, so the odds that X-Com was going to look a lot like mass effect were probably over 90% in any possible scenario.

This is not Duke Nukem Forever. This is not Doom 3. This isn't even as much of a departure as Civilization 5. Considering the amount of time that's passed and the amount that game design has moved on it's actually extremely faithful to the original.

It's like complaining that stuff in Game of Thrones sometimes looks like stuff from the Lord of the Rings. Of course these same nostalgic sperglords probably do that too. I give up.

So go ahead. I'm sure all the cool kids will hate this one too, just like you hate everything else that doesn't come on 3.5". Jerks.

Now this, I totally agree with. I think the people who always vote 0 if a game doesnt match their expectations are basically control freaks who hate not getting their own way. They have an over inflated opinion of themselves and believe that their opinion is the only one that counts. They are child like, immature, and little of their character resembles fair play. These people are also probably trolls and the sorts of people on the interweb who are unnecessarily rude, obnoxious and insulting. In short, these sorts of people suck!

 

[sherbz]

Does anyone sincerely think the game is a 0/10, or even a 5/10? I'm really suspicious of anyone who even claims it's a 6/10. I think even the most angry "betrayed" X-Com fan would be forced to concede that the new game is in 7/10-9/10 territory. I could easily see an expansion putting it close to 10/10 territory.



Eh, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree about the muton.

As for the floater, I think it's far more impressive than a still picture makes it look. They give a really convincing impression of thrust and agility through some very high quality animations.

EDIT: My overall point is actually really simple. You can hate the new game all you like, but just don't try to claim it's merely riding X-Com's coattails. This is a truly excellent game, far better than most of the rest of what's come out in the last few years, and it stands tall completely on its own. It doesn't deserve 0/10s. It doesn't deserve constant moaning and bashing. I think it's fun, and legitimately good, and it gets really old just seeing everyone whine about it and post sabotage reviews on Metacritic.

If you ask me, metacritic is a flawed system of rating games. What they should do is remove the top 10% of votes and the bottom 10%. That way you would siphon off many of the idiots and still keep it fair. I dont think people who vote 10/10 are idiots, but people who would normally vote 9/10 will vote 10 if they see a load of morons voting 0. The only time I would ever vote 0/10 is if it was a very poor game, and there was a serious bug or something that meant you could not complete it (either that or i considered the game racist or deeply offensive). Fortunately I have never owned such a game. Although after doing a bit of research, i think i would have given this game a 0/10 (and its very deserving of it IMO):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMnMOEB1zmE

 

[Arakhor]

Ah yes. That game. We have dismissed those memories.