X@COM (now at R9.3 + MODS + A ROOKIE'S TALE TC)

[Skeletor]

Where can I download/play a non-java version of Rebel Star?

[siob]

another article to get us all hyped up

http://www.next-gen.biz/features/making-x-com-enemy-unknown

[Psiweapon]

another article to get us all hyped up

http://www.next-gen.biz/features/making-x-com-enemy-unknown

"We made sure that there was an element of unpredictability in the AI which often made it seem more intelligent than it actually was."

And boy, did they manage it! The AI would pull weird stunts... who hasn't been combing the entire map for that one last ethereal that is making your troops go batshit crazy, only to find it's on a ridiculous spot in a roof behind your plane, or in the most freaking remote and obscure map border alley?

Or chasing sectoids in farms, almost a la benny hill?

Those devious aliens really deserved the demolition approach.

One blaster bomb to pierce the hull of an ufo. A second blaster bomb to go through the hole, reach the navigation room, and make that nice 2x2 navigation table blow up and take out the crew with them *for sure*

It's a shame that the fluff in Terror from the Deep was much less solid (is it even made by the same guys?) because the enemies were really fucked up, and the land/sea environments really played to their advantage. TftD *really* gave me the creeps compared to it's predecessor.

And then there is apocalypse which is an outright weird game with abortive graphics, and fluff that makes even less sense, but I still played it... being able to recruit RAWBOATS and bashing your enemies up the head with a frickin' PLASMA SWORD were probably my favourite features.

I have even played Enforcer!  which x-com games am I missing? some space-based PEW PEW PEW WE NEED MOAR DAKKA ones right?

[7h30n]

I don't know if this was posted but this article summs up the whole chain of events:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-11-28-the-story-of-x-com-interview

I'm really sad it turned out this way. Julian Gollop is definitely one of the best people in game industry and I long for a game made by him. I would want to get my hands on 3DS just so I can play his latest work - Ghost Recon: Shadow Wars.

On the other hand Mode 7 has a nice treat - Frozen Synapse!

[getter77]

The world needs more quality X-Com in whatever form it manifests---be it a Roguelike or an eventual mega-mod for Frozen Synapse that we all know is destined to happen somehow or another.

[Z]

Where can I download/play a non-java version of Rebel Star?

I recommend the Amstrad CPC version (that's the one I played): link. You need an Amstrad CPC emulator (IIRC WinAPE is a very good one, and should not be too hard to configure, you probably should insert the disk and type RUN"). The map is a bit different than in the Java version (which is based on the Spectrum version I think), and better (more features), I think. Also graphics are better.

Not only the literal 3D kind, of course--3D gameplay definitely adds to a game's depth by giving you more options.

It gives you more options, but also lots of presentation problems and design problems*. Maybe the time spent on making it 3D could be spent better on giving "depth" in other ways while still keeping a 2D game. But maybe an isometric (/tiled/ASCII) main display with a geometric FPP for the targetting mode would keep the spirit and be interesting.

* My big roguelike is placed in a 3D world, and it feels weird that, although trees block line-of-fire, I can shoot my targets by shooting above the tree; or that I can destroy a house's roof with fireballs and proceed to bombard the inhabitants from outside; or that if you are a flying wizard, purely melee-based terrestrial monsters have no way to harm you. Lots of design problems to overcome.

[Psiweapon]

* My big roguelike is placed in a 3D world, and it feels weird that, although trees block line-of-fire, I can shoot my targets by shooting above the tree; or that I can destroy a house's roof with fireballs and proceed to bombard the inhabitants from outside; or that if you are a flying wizard, purely melee-based terrestrial monsters have no way to harm you. Lots of design problems to overcome.

Weird? All that sounds pretty common sense o_o Tactical use of fireballs, yay!

[Z]

Yes, common sense (except the one about trees in some situations), but I feel it gives too much power to missile users. Inventing such strategies should be fun, but using such tricks all the time would probably become boring (unless I create a better interface for defining ballistic curves). And makes it necessary to have a much more sophisticated AI (a similar situation happened in ADOM, where it was possible to stand behind water in Holeinthewall and shoot down Hotzenplotz and his bodyguards (who all could not swim nor use missiles) until they were dead, but it was the only place where you could do that; a better AI that could go around water would save these guys).

[Psiweapon]

Yes, common sense (except the one about trees in some situations), but I feel it gives too much power to missile users. Inventing such strategies should be fun, but using such tricks all the time would probably become boring (unless I create a better interface for defining ballistic curves). And makes it necessary to have a much more sophisticated AI (a similar situation happened in ADOM, where it was possible to stand behind water in Holeinthewall and shoot down Hotzenplotz and his bodyguards (who all could not swim nor use missiles) until they were dead, but it was the only place where you could do that; a better AI that could go around water would save these guys).

Admit no substitutes. Give the fireball recoil.

If you really want to mess with the players, make "cheap" tactics a source of YASD.

[Kyzrati]

* My big roguelike is placed in a 3D world, and it feels weird that, although trees block line-of-fire, I can shoot my targets by shooting above the tree; or that I can destroy a house's roof with fireballs and proceed to bombard the inhabitants from outside; or that if you are a flying wizard, purely melee-based terrestrial monsters have no way to harm you. Lots of design problems to overcome.

I totally agree on this point, which is why I generally wouldn't recommend using a top-down 3D world for a game with a fantasy setting.

Many times in the past while brainstorming various game ideas I've imagined trying to make a fantasy-based game with X-COM gameplay, but one of the biggest problem always seems to be that ranged attacks are inherently overpowered. For X-COM it works fine, though, since everyone relies almost solely on ranged attacks...

I think in X@COM it'll also be a little more obvious what's going on because you'll have a simultaneous side-view while firing which shows the elevation of your LOF, so you can actually see how your bullet is traveling above the tree. I'll put a screenshot of this on my blog soon, and would definitely want opinions on whether or not it's a workable interface element.

[Psiweapon]

If ranged attacks are overpowered, then choose one:

a) nerf them

b) reduce them in number

c) make them the mainstay attacks. As in every warrior carries a crossbow.

d) make melee characters real tanks.

[Darren Grey]

A better solution is to give everyone more mobility options.  Give warriors short movement speed boosts, or an ability to rush at opponents quickly, along with ways to pull enemies towards them and pin them to the ground.  Make warrior-types able to take more hits so they can absorb a few shots as they corner ranged enemies.

[Psiweapon]

And make armor have a real use: big shields that can block a lot of attacks that come from the 90º in front, heavy armors that make a fireball send you a couple of squares flying but not do much damage, things like that.

But I think that "flying + missile spell = recoil"  would be a nice deterrent for spamming: You know you can go flying and bomb some people, but if you do so, your positioning in the battlefield is going to go nuts, maybe you can even hit something behind.

But hey, now that I think of it... that would mean reaction-propelled wizards all over the place, so we would have ANOTHER problem.


In any event, an "x-com action" fantasy game would be awesome.


X@COM, back in topic:

How will the geoscape be rendered? Will it be a ball or will it be a spread-out map??

A spread out-map will suffice, a ball would be awesome for bragging rights, but it looks difficult and would probably be confusing in console...

[Z]

a) nerf them
d) make melee characters real tanks

These two (which seem to actually be very similar, just stated from a different POV) are an obvious solution, but needs to be finely tuned if we want both melee and missile to make sense. Also note that as long as a missile user can shoot without retaliation, he will win the battle no matter how weak is the missile and how strong is the target (unless the missiles do no damage at all, or are slower than healing, thus completely useless).

b) reduce them in number

You mean a limited supply of arrows/mana? Could work, but the game should be designed in a way that this makes sense.

c) make them mainstay attacks

You can make every warrior carry a crossbow, or be accompanied by a crossbowman, but that does not help if you want to have mighty beasts, like giant boars or elephants. (Although maybe it makes sense that intelligent creatures find ways to butcher even the mightiest stupid animals without any risk.) Also it does not makes melee weapon less useless. Again, could work, but would need the fighting system to be designed around missiles.

d) Give warriors short movement speed boosts

Good for 2D worlds, but not helpful against flyers I mentioned originally. But I think making flying tiring physically or mentally (depending on how exactly you fly) and thus possible only for a limited time should solve some of the problems with flying.

e) ways to pull enemies towards them and pin them to the ground

That's like making missile mainstay attacks (as it brings missiles to anyone).

f) But I think that "flying + missile spell = recoil"  would be a nice deterrent for spamming

I don't understand why recoil would be such a nice deterrent.

[Psiweapon]

If a fireball, with flying, sends you five squares backwards, you're going to:

a) lose accuracy
b) perhaps lose line of sight
c) maybe the target is now out of range altogether.

also:

d) if there's something behind you you're going to lose HP too