next »

[Inane]

Is UFO Defense still the best one?

Apocalypse has always been the best X-COM game.

Nooo, it's badly balanced, and a broken husk of missing features (what's with all the attacking corporations stuff they put in that doesn't actually do anything besides give you a little bit of weaponry?). And the insane option to play in real-time tactics?
It's still the second best, but geewhiz, it was taken out of the oven a bit prematurely.

[Dragonmaw]

All of the X-COM games are balanced fairly poorly. In regards to new players, Apocalypse is arguably the easiest and most balanced of the bunch, despite it having the most difficult first enemy (the Brainsuckers). UFO Defense had some magnificently bullshit first missions, and Terror From The Deep was just masochistic. In comparison, Apocalypse was a cakewalk (but still hard by normal standards)

Regarding the "taken out of the oven" comment, I agree, But really, all that it means is that they made an amazing game instead of the game to end all games. In regards to the gameplay itself, it's a very smart, entertaining, and altogether welcome evolution of the mechanics present in UFO Defense. I do kinda wish they'd added the whole political system, but I'm not exactly sure what role it would've played in the final product, as it seems more like feature creep.

I think the two things that caught most people off guard happened to be the retro-futuristic style and the reduction in scope. Frankly, I loved both.

I'm obviously a huge devotee of the series, but I consider Apocalypse slightly better (after removing nostalgia) than UFO Defense. It's a much more focused game, in the same way that Morrowind is a much more focused game than Daggerfall.

[Destral]

Nonsense HUD

Damn...

THAT's an X-Com FPS I would love to play

[Vanguard]

So what is the consensus on Apocalypse?  Worthwhile?  A step back from the original? I've never played it before, but it's like 3 bucks on steam.

[Landshark RAWR]

so considering i have never played an X-Com game. Reading this topic, seeing a bit of a lets play for UFO defense, and finding out i can actually get this on steam, my two questions should be obvious: which one should i get? and do you like french onion soup?

[fraxcell]

I would get UFO defense first, and then Apocalypse. Without playing the original, I think Apocalypse would be harder to get into.

Also, I'm not a big fan of french onion soup

[Vanguard]

so considering i have never played an X-Com game. Reading this topic, seeing a bit of a lets play for UFO defense, and finding out i can actually get this on steam, my two questions should be obvious: which one should i get? and do you like french onion soup?

UFO Defense, and no.

The game still holds up really well despite its age.  I played it for the first time this year, and the only problem I had with it was that the buttons use pictures instead of words, so there's a bit of trial and error with learning the interface.

The battles are kind of like a more sophisticated Fire Emblem, but with modern/future technology like guns and tanks instead of swords and magic.  One thing I like about it is how they found the perfect balance between your usual strategy/tactics game where your units are nameless, faceless, replaceable nobodies, and FE-style games where they're priceless and irreplacable.

[Landshark RAWR]

Thanks for the advice, and what the hell is wrong with you people?

[Vanguard]

For the next 24 hours, every X-Com game is $1.25 on Steam, and a bundle of all of them is about $3.

If you don't own UFO Defense now, there's no reason not get it.

[Tanner]

is there a beginner's guide anywhere? it's all so daunting

[Alec S.]

I learned by watching a couple episodes of a Let's Play of the game.

[fraxcell]

There's a pretty good Let's Play here which helped me figure out the basic mechanics. Although that guy does have some strange habits I don't really agree with.

[Vanguard]

I can answer questions about how the game works, and give basic advice.  I probably couldn't tell you how to be a superpro and wipe out the whole alien invasion in two months, though I'm sure there's someone around here who could.

[Nektonico]

It will probably be a good game, but this isnt x-com. Not the same genre, neither game mechanics, nor setting. I will play it, but if you think about it, the great thing about the original x-com games was the game mechanics and nothing more.

[Vanguard]

I disagree.  The game mechanics are great, and probably the biggest draw, but they also did a good job of creating atmosphere and tension considering how little they had to work with on the technical side of things.  I guess that you could say that most of the tension comes from the gameplay mechanics, but eh.

To me part of the appeal of X-Com is stories that come not from scripted events (like the new XCom will no doubt heavily depend on), but from each player's individual stories that arise from what happens in each playthrough.  Like the time that rookie went berserk and saved the day, and later went on to become one of your squad's colonels (and later died to a blaster bomb malfunction).  Or the moment when a valued unit falls under alien control, and you have to make the decision whether to kill them or risk more deaths trying to rescue them.

I think that giving each unit unique stats, and letting them improve and get promotions over time does a lot more for that pseudo-story aspect than it does for the gameplay, but the interplay between the two was really well done.