1) grenades are equipped once and have "charges" instead of being individual entities (I certainly hope my 'staff of fireballs' err.. grenades, can be recharged back at the castle)
2) abilities HAVE COOLDOWNS (can't be any clearer than that)
3) abilities include silly effects that might as well be the equivalent of 'garrot' or 'deep wounds' or other garbage
4) swords and bows are class locked..err.. I mean, some soldiers can't figure out how to use the trigger on a shotgun
5) UFO assaults are "instanced"
Need I go on??
Thank you for playing, let me direct you to the 'basic game info' thread.
2. Yeah again: So what? I can name a dozen games before WoW that had cooldowns.
In fact weapons in the original Xcom had cooldowns too! Don't believe me?
Grenades needed to be "primed" and rocket launchers needed to be reloaded.
Both actions took a good amount of TU's so most of the time you couldn't use the weapon that turn. Isn't that a cooldown too?
3. Just say which abilities you mean or this argument is completely pointless.
4. That is to make classes more distinct. Would you say that Battlefield copied WoW? Because weapons in Battlefield are class locked too.
5. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
Instances in MMORPGS are levels that get generated for each group entering them seperately. This is done to make sure other players can not interfere with your party. Since there are no other players around in Xcom there can't be any instances!
Before making pointless claims please make sure you know what you are talking about.
1) You are correct. But so am I. The lack of an inventory and streamlining leads to items having limited 'charges'. That's no different than having a wand of fireballs on your hotbar with 3 charges on it. You can argue either way.
2) None of them were trying to create realistic combat. They were all about 'gamey' systems. Why should I have to wait an extra 2 seconds before I can aim well again? Why should any ability be linked to an arbitrary timer? That's WoW. Just WoW
3) Umm.. Let me think hard here. Oh yea, Suppression. Didn't have to dig too deep for that one. It's not an ability, it's the enemy's reaction to a given volume of fire. A sniper using an assault rifle should be able to suppress something. Hell, 3 soldiers using pistols should be able to suppress something if they all fire at the same target. There are other 'magical spells' err... abilities too. Smoke grenades ? An ability? Come on now. Tracer beam rounds? More damage to the enemy? Eh? Can I just mod it to say "Weakness to Magic Spell" ?
4) I know what it's for. That's pretty obvious. But it makes no sense when you apply it to the shotgun or smoke grenades. This isn't Battlefield Xcom so it's irrelevant.
5) You are correct.
Claims as above. Please refer to the thread about basic game information before replying.
Thanks for playing.
3. Yeah let's give every damn units suppresion I bet that will work perfectly XD Again: suppression is a game mechanic trying to simulate a real life theory.There are many great games that handle suppression in the same way (COH?).
Smoke grenades were in the previous game too and they work exactly the same as before. And tracer rounds? Yeah it's not like those really exist... ohh wait! they do....
4. This isn't reality either. I just don't see the point of being able to give a sniper a shotgun when he will obviously be far more effective with a sniper rifle.
So much of this argument is literally semantic mumbo-jumbo I'm surprised a mod hasn't laughed him or herself silly looking at it. It's kind of ludicrous.
2) ?? Eh ?? Everything worked on cooldowns in WoW (or so it seems). The charges, fine: Dragon age
3) Tracer bullets exist but don't increase damage done by other squad members. My bullets don't become magically hollowpoints just because you planted a trace round into a target. They could have implemented suppression properly and limited abilities to other stuff like run and gun or in the zone, which are gamey, but don't taste as bitter.
4) The point would be that I would like to have my support, assault and sniper classes to use shotguns on a closed in building mission. I should not be limited artificially. I can understand LMG, sniper rifle locks, but not shotgun. Give me a negative to hit bonus. Now I'm just being an ass persisting in arguing this point since in reality I am satisfied by the fact that the assault rifles are unlocked so my sniper can be a regular soldier.
Score so far:
Alucardex 1 (point 5) Katscan 2 (point 2, 3 and 4)
Fine.. I will concede point 1 even though I think that's a tie.
Alucardex 2... barely
Tracer bullets- My heavy will cast 'Weakness to Fire' on the floater to enable my archer to do more damage with his flame bolts.
Also you just compared the mechanic with one of the best RPG'S ever made so point for me. XD
3.It's easy to say they could have implemented suppresion differently. Have you tried it? Do you know how this would affect game balance? Well I bet they did and they decided this way worked better. Who are we to judge at this point in time?
Also your whole argument about perks being gamey is just your oppinion. Claiming your oppinion as fact doesn't make it better than mine.
4. Again you just state your opinion as fact and that somehow makes it better than mine?
Also a big fat lol on giving points on a debate when you are involved in said debate XD
That's like making a trainer of a soccer team the referee.
"Tracer bullets- My heavy will cast 'Weakness to Fire' on the floater to enable my archer to do more damage with his flame bolts."
If you state something like that everything sounds silly. For example:
The old Xcom was about a bunch of guys with strange hair and brown overalls shooting at aliens that looked like children and missing them by a completely impossible degree.
This demo footage(around 8:30) says the Tracer Bullet increases the accuracy of teammates, which IS one of the uses of their real-life counterpart (and make much more sense).
Or is that Tracer Beam or something else that sounds like but is totally not related to Tracer Bullet?
On a second thought, why do laser/plasma weapon even need such perk? They are already glowing.
I have to find the other sources that stated tracers increased damage. It would make more sense to increase accuracy.
Listen, my WoW rogue is Level 97, 3 away from the level cap, and smokes the crap out of everything. So don't say that I don't play it.
Now I've been mostly exaggerating, but Alucardex, come on, Dragon Age being the best RPG ever made? That is not even funny or worth exaggerating. The sequels sucked (let's start with the obvious) and DA was relatively linear (yea you can do A then B vs B then A, wow) and gets blown away by games like Ultima 4. But let's not argue about that because you are clearly making things up to irritate me.
You won point 5 pretty clearly, and 1 is a tie. So, since you have not conceded, we continue- Oh.. #2 I won. So it is a total tie right now (I'm sure you will agree). Back to #3 and #4
4) No, I don't think my opinion is better than yours, I just think it's different. Different doesn't mean worse, you know. I just think that locking a common weapon to a class is unlike the original Xcom, where anyone could use anything. Now there really is no reason to lock the shotgun. The class itself can have unique abilities to improve shotgun effectiveness, or make the class otherwise unique, without having to have us go to la-la land to suspend our disbelief. Basically, there are other ways of achieving similar effects.
3) Again, a different opinion isn't bad or good. Just different. Suppression is an "overly gamey" ability, as are a few others they added. Will it be fun in the game ? Yes. Will *I* have fun playing the game? Yes. Do I think it's good for the game? Yes. Is it like World of Xcom-craft? Yes.
Come now. To make you happy I will allow you to assign points for the above issues (since you didn't like me doing it).
I propose I win points 3 and 4, agree ?
PS- I was kidding about the level 97 rogue. That's clearly not correct. He's level 112.
I'm still a little confused on the whole weapons based on classes thing. I could have sworn that at E3 I saw a sniper equipping an assault rifle.
Is there any clear information about this?
Going back to the "why do XCOM fans hate anything that's vaguely a change" statement that kicked this thread up in to a grumpy little snark-fest (Yes, I've been reading - no, saying "maybe a mod should step in here" is not going to get us to do so if someone is breaking a forum rule. Report the post plz, so we can see it >.>') I don't think that's a very fair statement to make.
Simply put, even since this game was announced (and yes, there was much more positivity for this incarnation) there has been a marked shift towards expressed positivity for this game. I don't think claiming otherwise is fair at all. Although, there are still some who are not liking the changes that have happened at all. That's their perrogative at the end of the day but really none of us can say much more than "we like what we see so far" (or visa versa) until the game is in our hot little hands. We might like how it looks to play, but how it actually feels to play it is totally different.
;P I think I was a bit snarky about DA, but it's reputed greatness has always been a pet peeve of mine, heh.
PPS- I love the word snarky ! LOLOL
Ok katscan I guess you win. That was just too much insane trollery for me to argue against XD
Anyway to combate fire with fire Ultima series suuucks. And Ultima 9 is probbly the worst game ever made.
I( would try to get this back on topic.... problem is I have no damn clue what the topic was in the first place.
Indeed, saying another system wouldn't work wasn't my point at all.
Things have somewhat auto-corrected anyway (and the way people are keeping it rather civil in general when it comes to XCOM:EU is a joy to behold), but I'm glad Nosmiric jumped in to clarify. I didn't want to speak for him and possible muddle things even more.
BCD--like I said, I get that you are heavily invested in details. And I've repeatedly said that your opinion, pro or con, is valid. I simply disagreed with your point that, because you don't like how the game is shaping, you are willing to dismiss the things Nosmiric listed as core game play elements. When they clearly are. Are they everything you want to see? Apparently not. Could a different system entirely still be successful and give us that X-COM feel? Sure! But the gist of this thread was whether or not we can put a little trust in Firaxis. And I stand by the notion that if a developer shows a willingness to keep the genre the same, keeps a lot of the gameplay elements, and has a proven track record in that genre, then they are starting off on the right foot. Doesn't mean a radical departure like XCOM is destined to fail, but it takes a larger leap of faith than something like XCOM: EU, which is instantly more familiar to the fans. And I think that gets back to what Nosmiric was saying.
As far as "official moderator stuff", I agree with Codex. Nothing in this thread breaks any major rules. I would like to see people disagree without resorting to name-calling (ie, "troll"), but other than that I'm fine with a little passionate debate.
5) UFO's aren't instanced. Watch the launch trailer(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZdanb02280) at :56 sec you can see the guy grapple ontop of the UFO. If you look in the background you see the downed UFO. Between the turrets on the UFO shooting at you,, you can clearly see the interior of the ship.
If you hate this game so much, go play the original. Or Xenonauts. I hear they got enough money now to add female soldiers and psionics into the game, so it will now be a carbon copy of the original.
Actually, Katscan's gripes are purely semantic and cosmetic in nature. I mean, if a sniper is so good with a sniper rifle why give him a shotgun? As far as I'm concerned it's six of one half a dozen of the other.
If it really bugs you, throw a smoke grenade. ಠ_ಠ
Heh... I love how everyone uses smoke grenades around here. The arguments are just as cloudy and nebulous. It's more opinion rather than having some logical consistency. How do you even prove superior context and / or framework? Do you talk about the game design? Or do you argue military protocol being applied to a game? Do you talk about WoW, Dragon Age, Ultima, etc. Do you talk about spec ops training and how they would all be proficient enough to operate a shotgun and a sniper rifle?
I personally agree with the designers' choice to lock some of the weapons by class because it stays consistent with the overall concept of "choice" and "risk/reward." Would I like to have my sniper to wield a shotgun just in case? Sure. In the heat of battle ... perhaps. Although I'd rather have my sniper shooting his high caliber close range secondary weapon if it the situation gets dicey. (My snap shooting sniper that moves along with the pack and not my squad sight / overwatching sniper.) I mean, why waste time (units) picking up that shotgun?
It's a moot point so let's not fight about it.
Still... HILARIOUS when Katscan gave himself points. Debates are won on the merit of the arguments within the framework by consensus (judges, an audience or both). You ... sir... have cracked me up.
*Throws a smoke grenade of joy (laughing gas)!
You guys were awfully swift, vocal and unanimous when it came to denouncing an unreleased and honestly decent-looking shooter.
Invincible squadmates who need to be revived after being hit by alien laser beams? Why, it's almost like I haven't seen that about 10 million times before! Oh and the chest high walls of every single FPS and third-person shooter in from the past few years were a great touch. Then there are the highly generic legomen aliens that probably took a wrong turn at the auditions for enemies to Crysis, as opposed to having the antagonists of the originals (as shown with XCOM:EU even revised they still retain a lot of their character). Tacking on mass effects system for giving squad orders and such just rounds off a really entirely confused piece of game design.And this general antagonism over the X-COM shooter in these forums, which is okay in my book, because it's not another military dudebro shooter.
I mean looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
It didn't look decent at all, especially the E3 2010 demo and the E3 2011 demo looked like a generic military shooter (albeit with aliens) if ever there was one. Adding insult to injury by still managing to do absolutely nothing with the XCOM IP it was purporting to use was really the main problem (a fixable one though). The situation with the shooter and what XCOM:EU is doing are entirely polar opposites, as is the reaction to the game. Go and check out other sites where the shooter was announced as being delayed. General reaction? "It's not cancelled?". On the other hand, check out the reaction to XCOM:EU from this years E3. It's "OMG can't wait!" or "So awesome" and "Yay X is back" etc. When it comes to XCOM:EU it's pretty obvious that there isn't anywhere near the angry response from old fans to it, which makes your posts incredibly disingenuous or you simply aren't reading widely enough.You guys were awfully swift, vocal and unanimous when it came to denouncing an unreleased and honestly decent-looking shooter.
While XCOM:EU is changing core systems and mechanics, but it's indisputably the same genre and it's indisputably an XCOM game (unless we get into the most deepest silly pedantry possible: EG see Katscan's posts). In general most of the more sceptical elements are still going to give the game a try to see if they like it. I couldn't be more apathetic about whatever has happened to the shooter beyond morbid curiosity, but I could not be more excited about XCOM:EU if I tried.
Now that we have Enemy Unknown people should just lay off the shooter. The outrage is not really warranted anymore. When you thought it was all you were going to get, yeah I see it as a betrayal to the franchise, but now that it's just a shooter. Let it go.
I'm a little twitchy about two delays, but suspending my belief that no game that gets delayed twice will actually be worth the delay, maybe they saw some of the backlash and realized that they need to bring XCOM to the FPS, not the FPS to XCOM. I mean if they make a more tactical and strategic FPS, I'm all for it. However, the unadulterated hate can go now. Either they deliver a good shooter that has some of that XCOM magic, or they'll be mediocre with it. Heck they could deliver a total trollface flop with ponies and swords, but it shouldn't matter, because you know what? We've got Enemy Unknown now.
Otherwise, you can always throw a smoke grenade. ಠ_ಠ
They're promising to keep elements from the original game in the shooter. That alone makes it interesting and worth a bargain bin buy, at least.
But, ah, whatever.
But my favorite part is when people come on here with 40 posts (Guesswho) and declare that I hate the game so much ignoring my 512 other posts.. we all know that the opposite is true. I think it looks absolutely awesome and I will be the first in line to pre-order it. Also, I agree with virtually *all* of the design decisions made including weapon locking (since it's for a game, not a simulator). But, damn, as soon as you try to have a little fun with people, some get all riled up. The only real complaint I had (as most of you know) is voice one-liners, which Jake thankfully allowed us to turn off.
I will continue to refer to it as Xcom-craft and stretch the facts because it's fun as hell (and holds a small, very small) grain of truth.
Anyway it's always nice to have some not so serious discussions here.
I think this is one of the nicest game communities out there and that of course also involves being able to have a debate without any ad hominem attacks like most people on the internet like to do.
1-turning off voice one-liners: someone needs to post this in the achievements thread, I think they were looking for a "speak no evil" achievement.
2-katscan and his 520 posts: Like him or hate him, He is well-endowed. Just look at his avatar!
3-FPS xcom- if Firaxis really wants to capture the true spirit of the franchise, they need to make terrible off-genre titles. They also need to announce a title that will get canceled, and another that has all its funding cut and gets rushed to market. A terrible FPS title would be the first step in line with tradition.
Hate me?? Is that even possible ?? I'm SO adorable ! Just look at that hair !
As for the FPS- Xcom: For it's own sake I hope it got cancelled.
Would be the first game that turned out to be good after going into hiatus so suddenly and for such a long time.
We don't need another Daikatana. XD
In retrospect this was a critical marketing failure more than anything.
I mean come on! They should have really seen that ☺☺☺☺storm coming.
And they could have avoided it so damn easily, just call the game alien invasion, or combatforce earth, or whatever.
With the "true" Xcom now revealed bearing the Xcom name won't even get them any attention nor boost their sales.
I've been a gamer since the beginning of computer games in the 80s and have mostly went for first person flight sims and combat. I have no idea why I even tried XCOM back then as I generally don't like strategy games. It is the only strategy game I ever played more than a day with.
Recently I found out that the original can be downloaded to work on window 7 and I'm playing it once again ... and once again getting my rear handed to me. Just love playing this game and finding it the perfect cure for waiting for Oct 9th.
latest news has it for a march 2013 release... ::As for the FPS- Xcom: For it's own sake I hope it got cancelled.
That means It could be coming out as early as end of march 2013 or as late as end of march 2014.
I doubt it will come out as early as march mostly because we didn't see or here ANYTHING so far.
Plus alot of game come out around that time, so I doubt they will put a game they clearly haven't much confidence in out at that time.