Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mephansteras]

So far it sounds interesting. More 4X stuff on the geoscape, mutating aliens, stuff like that. Less XCOM feel with soldiers, since they don't start off useless and permanently losing them is going to be somewhat rare it sounds like.

[Retropunch]

So far it sounds interesting. More 4X stuff on the geoscape, mutating aliens, stuff like that. Less XCOM feel with soldiers, since they don't start off useless and permanently losing them is going to be somewhat rare it sounds like.

I'm definitely OK with that, as long as there's still a chance - I don't want it to be that they just get 'injured' for a while and then come back, as it loses a lot of the danger, but I don't need them to be dropping like flies.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Seems generic, and I'm highly skeptical of it's ability to actually generate and evolve new and interesting enemies. I predict a lack of content, horribly balanced scaling, and a lot of general repetition in the look and feel of the monsters. I hate the mist/smoke/wall-of-darkness gimmick too... Like, I seen that shit a billion times now, and for me, it's not at all an original take. Also slapping on the 4x title is definitely a ruse-de-guerre that will leave a lot of people disappointed in what this game will ACTUALLY turn out to be.

In short, Gollop talks the talk, but I am doubting his ability to walk the walk. Big talk, far too big talk. It already feels like a lot of pre-existing ideas rehashed together rather than something new and unique that truly integrates a number of relevant mechanics in an original way. A lot of buzz-words have been used, and presumably, a lot of technicalities utilized to make answers seem more interesting. I think we should all chill on this until it gets much closer to release. Also I'm not at all a fan of the art direction. All aboard the un-hype train.

My 2 cents anyways.

[Egan_BW]

Your argument to me seems to boil down to "it'll probably suck because most games these days suck, and it might be badly designed." Cynicism for the sake of cynicism, if you ask me.

[Shadowlord]

Is this thing going to be a thing soon or is it going to be a proto-thing for several more years? I don't evaluate on hype.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Is this thing going to be a thing soon or is it going to be a proto-thing for several more years? I don't evaluate on hype.

Said in one of his interviews not till 2019.

[Retropunch]

In short, Gollop talks the talk, but I am doubting his ability to walk the walk. Big talk, far too big talk. It already feels like a lot of pre-existing ideas rehashed together rather than something new and unique that truly integrates a number of relevant mechanics in an original way. A lot of buzz-words have been used, and presumably, a lot of technicalities utilized to make answers seem more interesting. I think we should all chill on this until it gets much closer to release. Also I'm not at all a fan of the art direction. All aboard the un-hype train.

My 2 cents anyways.

Isn't he the person that actually made Xcom to start off with though? I mean, I'm usually cynical about such ideas but I feel as though he's one of the few people on the planet who's got strong enough credentials to actually pull something like this off.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Sounds a lot like Peter Molyneux around the Fable 2/3 period. All I'm saying is that he's just kind of spouting off all these nice-sounding ideas and we're still two years away from a time when players can get their hands on the game.

EDIT: Cynicism not for the sake of cynicism, but because I think we've all experienced this situation a lot. "Hey, the original game was great! So now we're going to try to make this latest one the best ever!" Etc. A lot of times they end up just getting worse and worse and worse. I'm sure not everyone will feel the same.

[Retropunch]

Sounds a lot like Peter Molyneux around the Fable 2/3 period. All I'm saying is that he's just kind of spouting off all these nice-sounding ideas and we're still two years away from a time when players can get their hands on the game.

EDIT: Cynicism not for the sake of cynicism, but because I think we've all experienced this situation a lot. "Hey, the original game was great! So now we're going to try to make this latest one the best ever!" Etc. A lot of times they end up just getting worse and worse and worse. I'm sure not everyone will feel the same.

Molyneux was known for his rediculousness and moon based promises though even then - Gollop seems like someone who's vaguely more sensible. None of what he's promising is really that big of a deal either.

Procedural monsters aren't exactly new - how well they do this is gonna be interesting to see. The 4x stuff is just a step further in the direction newcom2 was taking, and the rest just seems like a standard TBT game.

Not saying it won't all crumble, it's just that out of the entire game industry, the guy definitely knows how to make games.

[IronyOwl]

Why did I not hear of this until now. Other than so I wouldn't have to wait as long.

Sounds a lot like Peter Molyneux around the Fable 2/3 period. All I'm saying is that he's just kind of spouting off all these nice-sounding ideas and we're still two years away from a time when players can get their hands on the game.

EDIT: Cynicism not for the sake of cynicism, but because I think we've all experienced this situation a lot. "Hey, the original game was great! So now we're going to try to make this latest one the best ever!" Etc. A lot of times they end up just getting worse and worse and worse. I'm sure not everyone will feel the same.

Having played Chaos Reborn, also a (relatively) recent remake of a (relatively) beloved decades-old game, I'm inclined to think he knows his stuff. It did feel like it was growing in strange directions and trying to do strange things at times, but the core gameplay did what it intended to pretty well.

I'll second that sometimes things fall apart for whatever reason, but that this particular guy is probably about as qualified as you could hope for.

[Shadowlord]

I'm remembering how the original xcom had destructible terrain, destructible buildings, and randomly generated maps, and Firaxis, when they released their remake, was like "Sorry, guys, we can't figure out how to do these things. Maybe in the sequel."

Gollop can probably do the things he wants to do which other games haven't done yet. In theory, they don't even sound all that complicated to implement - use statistics/data to determine when to retire units, or shift them from places where they are using to where they are still winning.

The more difficult problem would be for the AI to figure out what to design to counter the player, as opposed to just randomly generating things and throwing them at the player until something works (Of course, that could make sense depending on what the aliens are - they don't have to be smart and scheming like humans).

[Glloyd]

Also, a lot of the stuff that he's proposing is stuff they wanted to do or did partially in X-COM Apocalypse. Hearing him talk about it, it sounds like he just wants to make the game that Apocalypse could have been, which isn't really a huge stretch.

[Virtz]

So far it sounds interesting. More 4X stuff on the geoscape, mutating aliens, stuff like that. Less XCOM feel with soldiers, since they don't start off useless and permanently losing them is going to be somewhat rare it sounds like.

Lame!

Isn't he the person that actually made Xcom to start off with though? I mean, I'm usually cynical about such ideas but I feel as though he's one of the few people on the planet who's got strong enough credentials to actually pull something like this off.

He's also the person who's since made simpler games barely anyone's heard of, like Laser Squad Nemesis, or Rebelstar: Tactical Command. I've become kind of disillusioned with big-name creators from the 80s and 90s. It just never seems to pan out. I'd like to be wrong, but to me so far this is sounding too much like trying to one-up XCOM rather than expanding on X-Com.

[sambojin]

The procedural generation of enemies isn't too difficult to achieve if there's only a certain amount of mutators. Even ones in response to player actions. Especially if there's a few enemy factions to fight, as it can "characterize" them in different playthroughs.

Using a lot of rockets launchers and HE autocannons? There'll probably end up being a higher weighting towards anti-explosive mods, to hopefully get you to try out some new weapons and to ensure you don't just stagnate in tech. In oldCom, lasers were fine, and you could go through a lot of the game with just them. So were plasmas though. The thing is, there wasn't really anything pushing you from one to the other, even though it was an upgrade.

If there's the ability to gain knowledge of various factions, then you'd want different loadouts against different types, and maybe even the need to bring along different specialists to use against each faction. I hope it doesn't end up as just some extra micro management for you though. Also, there's always the chance that the answer to anti-rocket launcher troops is to just take more rocket launchers, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I also hope enemies don't devolve, and aren't always evolving in response to player actions (portraying the aliens/cthuluians trying new stuff out). This will allow for some stranger paths to open up for enemies, no matter your preferred playstyle, even if they don't seem to be paying off for a while. Slightly faster moving crysalids might not end up dying too differently than normal ones, AoE melee ones, super killy melee ones, or slightly more bullet resistant ones (just as you've moved to laser or plasma). But if it would set them on a path of fast->faster->flying->teleporting->"oh crap, how did that happen?" evolution, with plenty of other branches and random bits along the way, then the first two evolutions might not change much in death rate, the last two would be horribly scary. But it wouldn't be apparent that it's *that* much more powerful until the last two, so I hope the AI can still experiment with these things, regardless of player actions.

If different evolutions of different creatures were loyal to different factions, then you could try and pick your battles a bit. If they're the faction with super heavy armoured crabs, no worries for you you've still got some old AC and HC laying around that you could upgrade the AP ammo of a bit. If they're the faction with flying, teleporting crysalids and psi-floaters, they might be the "nope, not risking it" faction if you've got nothing to handle that.

It'd let each playthrough feel a bit more special in its own way, on top of the maps and missions.

[Krevsin]

So far it sounds interesting. More 4X stuff on the geoscape, mutating aliens, stuff like that. Less XCOM feel with soldiers, since they don't start off useless and permanently losing them is going to be somewhat rare it sounds like.

Lame!

Isn't he the person that actually made Xcom to start off with though? I mean, I'm usually cynical about such ideas but I feel as though he's one of the few people on the planet who's got strong enough credentials to actually pull something like this off.

He's also the person who's since made simpler games barely anyone's heard of, like Laser Squad Nemesis, or Rebelstar: Tactical Command. I've become kind of disillusioned with big-name creators from the 80s and 90s. It just never seems to pan out. I'd like to be wrong, but to me so far this is sounding too much like trying to one-up XCOM rather than expanding on X-Com.

Dunno, Laser Squad Nemesis was pretty bloody great even though it was a smaller game. Its tactical combat was pretty damn good IMO.

Of course, Phoenix Point at this time is just a collection of ideas and a very early demo from what we've seen. I have my worries about the mutating aliens thing. If done badly, it reeks of the Dynamic Difficulty of Homeworld 2 and Remastered, where the game pretty much punished you for doing well by doing things that were complete and utter bullshit. And it's very easy to fuck such a system up, especially if your goal is difficulty by way of punishment rather than challenge.

Still, it's an interesting idea and I hope it does get made.