New interview with Jake Solomon. Ammo, Bases, etc.
New interview with Jake Solomon. Ammo, Bases, etc.
Confirmed some stuff I already thought about. I like where they're going with ammo though. I mean producing it and putting it on people was the low point of my X-Com experience. Making it a more tactical choice is pretty cool.
Check the comments as well, plenty of good points on why this game (and the FPS) should not bear the XCOM name, too many core changes, too much simplification and no micromanagement.
One of the comments even made me think of a new gameplay mechanic I hadn't noticed they changed as well, instead of your men evolving their skills on a semi-random way due to use of said skills, you get to pick what you want to improve, meaning any casualties you get can easily be replaced by a carbon-copy of that soldier.
I am surprised/confused:
But they DIDN'T make ammo more important. Not quite sure how he can say this. First off, you can't run out of ammo, you can just run out of ammo on your current clip. Not the same thing. No reason to conserve fire. Secondly, if you eliminate the different types of ammo from the original, then you are certainly not expanding on it. I used all types of different ammo in the original (loved incendiary auto-cannon for night missions). Also, if ammo is not an inventory item (except for heavy weapons), then whats to stop me from hanging back and just suppressive firing/sniping anything that even moves, no matter how remote the possibility of a hit/kill. I mean, throw enough volume of fire at a 1% chance hit, and you will get that hit. Only reason NOT to do that is that you would run out of ammo very quickly. Sheesh.That’s the sort of thing that I was surprised people were unhappy about, because the only change I made was alright you’re not putting the clips on your guys, but let’s be honest in the original game the clips were huge and they weighed 1 and the lasers didn’t even have clips. So in our game laser weapons overheat, and you can actually run out of ammo so reload is actually a tactical decision. We actually tried to make that sort of thing matter more. I don’t blame people, but it was a little bit cynical, they were like ‘oh I can’t believe they got rid of ammo’ and we were ‘but we didn’t! We made ammo more important!’
So... no change since it was practically infinite before.
It was a permanent and annoying chore, though. Good riddance.
The "more important" bit refers to reloading taking a serious chunk of time now. In X-Com it didn't.
Assuming you are not playing that way, this does make ammo more important. In the original I would put two spare clips on soldiers and I would almost never run out of the first clip. I basically could just shoot without worrying about ammo ever. That seems to be a fairly common experience. In this game it seems you have to worry more often about reloading which is dangerous in a firefight. You just don't have to worry about running out, which I never dealt with anyways unless I screwed up with the sucky UI (right clicks anyone?)
You may not agree, but I'm pretty sure that's what his quote was getting at it. Maybe you spent every turn auto-firing 3 times at every alien with all of your soldiers and so you actually had to reload your plasma rifle? I dunno...
Anyway. I've never been in a clinch for ammo. I've only ever been in a clinch for ellerium and ammo is the least of your worries if you can't get any 115.
I've run old-school ten man games on confiscated plasma. Most of the guides I've ever seen say that ammo doesn't even need to be produced. So it basically means that you have to make sure your soldiers don't leave their ammo at home (something they should know to do) I'm here to run a clandestine alien fighting organization not tie bootlaces.
I'm glad to see it go. It sounds like you can run out of ammo mid action if reload is a tactical option. Autoshot? one two, click. I like it.
Judging from his nonchalant reaction to putting soldiers into backpacks, and lack of concern towards those player driven experiences that stick with you like the rare ammo scrounging, I'm pretty sure Mr. Solomon and I have a very different views on X-COM and the way we play the game. Those bits of freedom (including the freedom to royally screw the pooch on planning, and maybe even make a heroic recovery) were some of the things that made me love the original.
As to being an optimist, whatever floats your boat. Maybe when this title is released, it'll be wonderful. Maybe it'll be lukewarm mediocrity that makes you a little more jaded towards the industry. Maybe some will just be good consumers, anxiously awaiting the next title they can pre-order. Time will tell. As for me, a bit of pessimism keeps the disappointment at bay.
Not trying to be a cynic, but its mildly annoying that ammo isn't there. I dunno, especially on the heavier weapons, I would run out of ammo (I guess you guys are right, I don't remember running out of ammo on my assault rifles).
I just object to them saying ammo is MORE important now, when thats clearly not the case. You had to reload in the old game too, so that's no change. The only change I see is less types of ammo and unlimited ammo. Both of which do not elevate it's importance, but rather decrease.
And don't put words in my mouth, I never said the game would suck. I just take issue with him claiming increased importance of something that they simplified (some think for the better, some for the worse.. but it is streamlined)
Yeah, not much we hadn't figured out already.
Abilities - items and armour unlocked, as they've said before. We know at least some weapons are locked, but I wish they'd clarify to what degree. A mix of cooldowns and metered uses, well, we knew that. The environmental bonuses... seems a little wierd to me to have these mixed with factors that are abilities but kinda feel like they should be environmental, like the sniper's "Damn Good Ground" thingy. I'd also like to know precisely how they work - is it, for instance, an angle thing based on being in their peripheral vision (small bonus to hit) or out of their vision cone (big bonus to hit), or is it more abstract and state-machine-ish - the game detects that they are in the "in cover" state, you are unaffected by their cover, therefore you get one single-factor bonus?
Ammo clips? As I've said elsewhere, I liked ammo clips for other reasons on top of what he's decrying here, largely where they interacted with the TU system and the inventory - and on their own, I think they could have even played a larger part much as they did in Apocalypse, since it looks like we're manufacturing our own versions of alien weapons this time around. Not really convinced by his "fighting the overall design" thing because I suspect the parts that having objectified clips would conflict with (stuff like not having an in-battle inventory with which to pick them up or drop them) are the parts that some of us feel need changing anyway. I'll be looking forward to a comprehensive mod.
Bases? We'd already figured that stuff out, and I guess we should probably take his calling barracks centralised and not mentioning keeping transport craft at a secondary base as signs you probably can't have teams stationed at them, which is probably going to get annoying for some of us.
Sounds like he's been fed info from here, so that's something. I'd suspect he also reads the comment threads on interviews, too.
As far as your guys and their skills, sure you get to pick what you improve, but I'm sure base stats will be random, and also what class your guy ends up being will be random as well.
Also, where does it say ammo types are gone from the game?
Conclusions: not always to be jumped to.
Yea but that's essentially the same thing as before (reloading). So that doesn't make it more important. And taking away the variety of ammo types does make it less important. But its fine. Let's agree to disagree.
In X-Com, clips were large and most battles you didn't have to reload at all - even though you theoretically were able to.
Either you didn't read that interview or you chose not to believe what JS said. *shrug*
Thanks for the clarification. I did not interpret what he said as 'clip sizes being smaller'. Certainly I understand that would make it a little more hairy.
But still not more important ;P If they want to make it more important, reduce clip size AND make your guys carry a limited amount of clips. Certainly having your heavy be able to plop down unlimited amounts of suppressive fire due to the lack of ammo is kinda silly.
I don't know how could anyone run out of ammo in the original! Lasers had unlimited ammo, plasmas had at least 35 shots per clip (i never used more than 1 clip per soldier!) and you got many from accomplished missions by dead aliens. I never ever manufactured any plasma clips (and i think i never manufactured any plasma weapon either since i always got enough from aliens). Now you shoot some times, then you must spend 1 turn to reload. It has much more meaning and adds to the strategy of the combat.
I start to believe that some people argue just to argue.
Let''s say an assault trooper can take two turns of shooting before they reload. I imagine a suppressing heavy eats it up at least twice as fast. This is of course hypothetical, but I mean he's said it does eat up the clips.
One thing from the interview that caught my eye was an ability only being usable "once per engagement". I've always thought while playing the original game that you should be able to "Force" a squaddie to fire a potentially-life-saving snapshot even if he didn't have the TU's (call it an adrenaline reflex shot) and make it available once per mission per soldier. I can look at the Run and Gun ability the same way. I was worried that these super-abilities wouldn't have any limits at all.
I like it that Suppression chews up ammo and that you have to reload, allowing a break in the action. I have a few questions about Suppression, though. Does Suppression target an enemy, an object of cover, or a location? Will I be able to choose Suppressive fire on a corner of a building that I suspect aliens will emerge from but do not yet see?
If my soldier is taking suppressive fire, does that mean I cannot move him "at all" or that I can't "advance him" into the hail of incoming fire but can safely retreat, or do I have the option to "Go for it anyway" and ignore the suppression with a larger chance of being hurt or killed? Will the aliens have the same options?
to be honest i think jake soloman makes a good point about laser weapons - you could fire them all day and never run out of ammo but no one ever moaned about them? - i actually like the fact he has numbed them down so they overheat - again adds more tactics to the game ,so why should not having the actual clips make any difference?
Without playing the actual game no one knows for sure.My bet is reloading weapons now is probaby quite high in time units or power reserve or action points whatever you want to call it and certain actions use more ammo than others - reading between the lines its quite obvious ammo is more important now as to when to reload cover flank etc - it sounds like you can be in the middle of supressing or charging someone and if you dont use your resourses(tu action point etc) right you can run out of ammo in the middle of a firefight or laser weapons already sound bad for suppressing fire as they will overheat.
What he actually has done is add more tactics and dimension to the game. - yet folks are moaning about the fact that a actual clip is not in the game when the tactics or timing of weapons has been made more important.
I almost forgot what we were arguing about, errr, discussing, in this thread.. Oh yea, ammo. Ok, you guys win, you have convinced me that this is potentially a good change if they reduced clip size but still keep track of ammo and assume reloads are infinite (or plentiful enough to be unimportant). The words he should have used is that we made the use of ammo more important tactically, ie-more reloads, rather than we made ammo more important. Semantics.
I think we were 'discussing' cool downs and whether suppression is a 'debuff' or an actual tactical event that occurs due to a volume of fire in a separate thread. Let me go there now ;P
If they don't, you may have to plan ahead and give your soldiers the time and space to reload safely. =P
It's a safe bet that you can still move while reloading (which is an action) so you're really doing it while preparing for the next engagement.
Maybe it even is automatic if you're not selecting any particular action. It's how I'd handle it...
Yeah, that's pretty much my point. If the AI is sufficient, it could be interesting. If not, it's just a turn twiddlin your whizzle stick.
I do hope that it's just the action part of your phase, but I'm thinking I read somewhere that it's a full turn action. Could be wrong, though.
People have said some pretty interesting things about A.I. The thing I want more of is that they listen. So large explosions and open firefights probably draw more aliens. I know that the two mutons in the gas station example in G.I. one stayed behind and the other advanced and wounded the heavy. That's pretty smart. Stay bottled up and get grenaded into dust or push out and do some damage. In fact if they hadn't had a sniper in overwatch it could have been really nasty.
I want to see more spider-disk action (what I'm calling a transformed cyber-disk). They're supposed to have something like a death blossom attack that could potentially wipe out the whole party if they're too close.
Well at least he was honest with us. (Although personally I feel that you get out of a project what you put into a project.)
"...designing that kind of stuff, you have to devote effort to it..."
They didn't feel it was worth the effort so they didn't bother trying to implement it. Fair enough. I can admire that kind of blatant honesty at least.
(I'm not sure why they even wanted to name this game Xcom in the first place as it stands just fine on its on as a game without slapping "Xcom" on the side of the box.)
Warning JAKE ! ! ! This is another cynical comment of another XCOM fan in your address ! ! !
I can't believe Jake Solomon with his huge team of developers that get payed in thousands and so-called greatly experienced game developers and designers simply succumbed under pressure to even attempt to create game even remotely close to original masterpiece XCOM. Original XCOM was created by a single guy without multimillion budget or hype - All he used was dedication, geniosity and artistic side.
Firaxis unfortunately is not artist studio only soulless money making corporate machine. REAL XCOM fans should boycott game until our voices heard IMHO. Why Jake is declaring ammo not important along with many other things that fan consider EXTREMELY important ?
Game Design and Programming Mythos Games Limited
Graphics and Animation Julian Gollop
Music John Broomhall
Sound Effects Andrew Parton
Quality Assurance Pete Woods
Manual Author Kristian Ramsay-Jones
Managing Editor Alkis Alkiviades
Packaging and Manual Design John Emory
Producer Tim Roberts
Publishers Paul Hibbard
That's everyone who worked on X-Com, and yes you have to count everyone because the game wouldn't be the same. They had years to make the game when most were expected to put out games yearly at most. If you account for that and raises in money and inflation it probably comes out to more than you would think.
Also, you're committing several logical fallacies and you're one rude person. You're not cynical, you're just a jerk.
ammo clips was a wast of space, i still had them for the "IF" chance but the ONLY time i ran out of ammo was when there was no more plasma clips to refill the guns after a mission, so even when i had 2 working guns for a mission, i never ran out of ammo on the battlefield. even when i had 4 people on a terror mission or base mission i never ran out of ammo.
every game has micromanagement even if it is picking what sword or armor you want for Diablo II or picking what stats for leveling up. without micromanagement you follow a reset path, how fun is that? my example: Final Fantasy 7 or fallout, which is funner, which has more management? i love the final fantasy series but i also love the choices you get from games like fallout and oblivion.
saying to get rid of management for x-com is like saying to get rid of management for roller coaster tycoon, or to get rid of management for the Sims, it just doesn't make sense.
They could still have ammo clips without requiring micromanagement..
Click skyranger/weapon info/soldier info, set number of clips to take with you. Click workshop and set manufacturing priorities for ammo clips if your current storage is below a set number etc.
As many have said, running out of ammo wasn't a big issue in original game.. in big part because of the high number of shots per clip, lasers not requiring any and heavy plasma not having autofire. Start of game, those autocannons and heavy cannons actually could run out of ammo. Then there was the 80 item limit as well (which may actually have been partly to blame for the big clips?) and the disappearance of partly used clips after mission is over.. unless you unloaded those clips on your last turn (which was reeaally gamey).
Removing clips wasn't the only solution to any issues the devs saw in the original game. In the new game, if you've got unlimited clips you reload every time you don't need to do something else and outside major sustained firefights, ammo will never be an issue. They wanted to make ammo matter more, so imagine this for an example: limited number of clips carried and reloading throws away any remaining ammo in the current clip. Now you have to make a decision of reloading or not even if you had ample time to do so.
If I were run out of ammo, so I unsheathed the electric stick
For me the clips are not a real problem and it encourages us to use the ability "suppressive fire". It's just that the fans were certainly afraid by removing step by step any micromanagement.
What would worry me the most that we would be unable to enter the UFO crashed.
It would be a crime against the original ! Hopefully not...