Re: Game of the year?
psz;330795 said:
Apoc? Seriously? C'mon :-/ That was as close to X-Com as X-Wing vs TIE Fighter :-P
(Which, BTW, rocked)
Your popular culture references are lost on me
I loved Apocalypse, I think it was probably the best out of the 3.
So I cant understand the hatred for it.
The only thing I lacked in it was the use for ground vechiles, as they were pretty god damn useless.
Here you had all these futurustic wonderful 50's inspired cars and they served absolutely no purpose. For the beginning of the game I used them as cargo transporters carrying all the alien loot and that was the only use they ever saw. As for getting to the buildings that were under attack they were to damned slow.
While in combat if they managed to arse themself as to where the ships where attackign they just ended up as sitting ducks that barely lived beyond the first shot. And in the case of that the alien ship would miss they'd just hit the road instead. Causing the vechile to be stranded or chrashing to it's doom or god forbid having a building tumbling down on them.
I really wish they had made them operable within the building missions or as you were boarding the alien ships/ chrash sites. Just as you had the tank, and hovertanks in X-Com.
I guess the androids where the equivalent of the tanks in the first game. They were a nice touch as they were really useful in the beginning of the game acting as meat shields and an effective way of rendering the "face f******" useless. Thought still think more could've been done with them, perhaps researching for upgrades. Using alien technology on them to improve them then just having them go obsolete after awhile when your human soldiers where trained.
Also liked that you could choose between real time and turn based.
Unlike in the previous games where you just had turn based gameplay, as the missions gets pretty repetitive and it's nice to be able to use whole squads at once and not having to move them one by one all the time. As it gets really tedious especially in missions where you have a case of "hide and seek" affliction.
The mission maps was a lot more fun as well as they where designed on that particular building. Meaning that if it was a gun factory that was under attack you'd enter a factory like structure that actually held armaments that were interactive or if it was a school it actually felt like you were in a school building. Yes I know the same applied to X-com as well, shooting a gas station pump would cause it to explode. But I think it really hit more at home in apocalypse. Being able to destroy every piece of interior on a buildings caused some interesting tactical advantages or disadvantages. Whether it was shooting out a walk bridge to stop the aliens from taking that route or shooting it out under them and watching them fall to their doom or having it collapse on someone.
Or plainly sealing of 2 halls of an apartment complex just to blast your way through the apartment in the middle to ambush the aliens and flush them out to their death at either end of the corridor.
I think that economics played a bigger part in apocalypse more then in the previous games. Recently been re playing X-com after reading this thread and money just keeps flowing in and I have nothing to spend it on, the only thing I am in need of is elerium and that cant be bought or manufactured. So there I'm sitting with a fortune having nothing to spend it on.
Where in apocalypse I remember having more of a hard time trying to find the means of allocating my funds in to equipment, research and new bases etc.
I think that something that previous X-com players was disgruntled with was that your only protecting a city this time rather then the whole world.
Which I cant understand I'd rather take that city with structures that can be blown up, chrashed into and city streets filled with cars over that 3d globe any day. After the 134 mission and you have rotated around that globe for the 400 time which you remember so vividly from your ground school geography the glorious shine from it begins to fade in to darkness.
I havent played Terror from the deep more then a few minutes.
But the little I did play it it felt more like an exact replica of X-com rather then a game in itself. The game play was exactly the same, the layout also. Only difference was that the ghrapics were...hmm cant really call them better as they were pretty much the same, they were just different.
With that said does anyone know how to get Terror from the deep to work on XP?
And whats with the hatred for X-com: Apocalypse?
Nottheking;331106 said:
Godawful combat system. Especially when all of your allies insist on an heroism while you wait the half-hour before it becomes your turn to miss.
Oh how I hate to agree with you as the fallout games are the best games I've ever played. But the combat system can be a bit annoying at times, especially with your allies blowing themself up, running of and trying to shoot you in the back as they decide to burst through the crowd with their fully automatic rifles.
As for it taking a long time until your turn there is a simple answer to that problem, just turn up the combat speed.
Waiting for fallout 3 with great anticipation and some nerve wrecking terror that they will have messed it up. But I'll try and keep my complaints or praises until I've actually played the game.