is xcom that good?

[Xeorm]

I may not have been precise enough. It is not the engine in it self, but the choice of engine for the project.

The engine does not care what it displays.

The ragdolls are a buggy problem. If you continuously reload the game the a downed soldier will jump slowly across the floor due the the ragdolls being in effect. With enough reloads you can slide the soldier across the map. To go physics are not the problem is quite simply not true. The destructible environment and the grid is making for tons of bug where you can take cover inside objects. The engine is a problem here.

I have not encountered any of those problems. Those are, in fact partially engine-based flaws which can be resolved by a good code, but that takes a lot of testing and time which the team did not have.

Now you are right it. ALOT of the problems comes down to downright ineptitude of the development team. I am just saying that the choice of the UDK engine is not the best for this particular game. It is not meant to be on a grid with destructible environment

the UDK is NOT the engine, it is the "unreal development kit" it contains the engine plus framework and configuration (and a great documentation) to modify into you own game. This game did - to my knowledge - not use that framework, it used the engine and build on top of that. So no, the engine has nothing to do with the flaws I mentioned. An engine, in it's basic function, is just there to display stuff. It's for rendering the frames. This does affect the gameplay a lot, since things like sleeptime in and of themselves dictate the speed of the game which in turn dictates possible movement etc... But the engine does not care much how the game is build up and how the frames are to be displayed.

You'd be surprised what limitations the choice of engine can have on what one can do. For example, the choice of the unreal engine limits procedural generation of maps. These things aren't always as easy as they seem, though I do think also that they should have limited where the cursor went to cooperate with some areas.

 

[Okulossos]

You are making to big a disconnect here.

That you have not encountered any of those problems doesn't mean they dont exist.

I didn't say that, read my posting again.

Going "good code will fix it" is just besides the point. The engine will have a direct impact on the amount of work it takes to make it work and what you can do with it. I am sorry, but that you have fiddled with the engine doesn't give you insight into how much time that is. How are you able to say this is a time management problem when you dont know how much time is needed to make this work?

Because it is more than obvious. read my posting above again. Many bugs result from a lack of polish. Why do you think a 2GB patch was released just a couple of days after the game was in stores? because they didn't even have time to implement that anymore. the game was rushed and it shows... a lot.
As for the engine. i don't know how exactly much time it takes, but I have done my fair share of programming and designing and I know how code and programs end up looking if you rush them. And often (not always, but often) it is just a matter of looking at the code again and changing small things the get rid of a lot of bugs that just crept in due to taking shortcuts.

I know from my friend that the Hero Engine was the cause of about 90% of the technical problems SWTOR had at launch. Everything from slope to collision detection. We are talking over half a year in now and there are still issue they were unable to solve.

Yes, collision detection and the likes are in fact part of the engine, but look again at the bugs I am ranting and whining about. those have nothing to do with the engine. the ones You mentioned partially have to do with that and i never said anything else .

While I am sure that you are right in time management being an issue, all I am saying is that it isn't the only issue. The UDK was not the best choice for this.

The UDK had nothing to do with it, but if it did, it would not have been the right choice, because the framework used in the UDK is meant for other games. Thus they only took the engine and not the framework or the API. Those are completely different packages with completely different possibilities.

You'd be surprised what limitations the choice of engine can have on what one can do. For example, the choice of the unreal engine limits procedural generation of maps. These things aren't always as easy as they seem, though I do think also that they should have limited where the cursor went to cooperate with some areas.

No, I would not be surprised, but again read above: it kind of bugs I encountered have got nothing to do with any limitations of the engine.

How come I always feel like people in this forum read postings halfway and simply answer to that? I have explained it all in great detail above, so once again with feeling:

- UDK != Unreal engine; UDK == Unreal development Kit, its the complete framework not just the engine.
- No, the engine is not responsible for the gametype, it makes not difference between what it displays.
- Yes, the engine affects gameplay in some areas such as slowdowns, hit detection and physics (if the physics engine is implemented and not exchangeable)
- No, the engine is not the problem XCOM is facing. It may be part of some problems, but I can't confirm them as I have not experienced them. The problems I have encountered show very clearly that the main problem was time which lead to poor implementation and which has got nothing to do with the engine itself.

 

[Okulossos]

-snip-

Listen I think you are missing what people are saying here. There are a large amount of problems that are a direct result of how the engine is used. I mention a few. I could list tons others like.

-Invisible objects

-Destroyed objects that doesn't block line of sight, but does block movement.

-Grid tags on to models they are not supposed to tag onto allowing for you to grapple hook yourself to a position impossible to get out of.

-No-clipping enemies

-Models stacking

I could go on. While you will happily admit these are engine problems, you dont seem to agree that these are the bugs I am talking about. This is the disconnect.

Ah, but I did agree, I only said that I did not encounter any of those. That does not mean they don't exist, it just means that I have not seen them. those are issues with the engine, but most of them are not even related to the gameplay.

There is an engine issue here and while yes it could be fixed with more time, you do not know how much. Stop marginalizing it.

I don't know how much, but that does not matter at all, because as long as they are brave enough to release an unfinished project they have to be able to swallow whatever is thrown back at them. I don't care if it would have taken them another year or two (which it wouldn't - putting on the needed polish would have taken no more than perhaps 2 or 3 more month, that i can guarantee!) as long as they don't release a half finished beta riddled with bugs and problems.

Also since you seem to like to point out the UDK isn't the engine, you probably should keep from being the one pulling it into the conversation in the first place. If you insist on trying to make no relational here you should probably not have used it as example of how you have worked with the engine.

i made an example of how I checked out the UDK to see what the engine is capable of. That had nothing to do with XCOM. You are just misunsing the term the whole time and I am correcting you. I am not bringing it back up, you know... Just say Unreal engine And the UDK will be forgotten .

 

[migreeni]

Yes. Xcom is That good. I recommend you buy it and enjoy the feeling of true desperation by having the Earth invaded by aliens. They will show you no mercy.

So what's so great about it exactly?

Everything! ... apart from two game mechanics issues that I took issue with:
- The camera + ceilings == jesus christ
- Squad management: If you want to change your squad composition, you have to strip down your active member before replacing him/her with a soldier from your reserves (and then refit him/her with previously stripped gear)


But because some people like reasons beyond "everything!", I'll just bring out some of the points that I like about this game:

1. The difficulty!

I love a game that's a challenge to beat and you cannot just steamroll through it. I strongly feel that this game is at its best when played on the Iron Man -setting. It teaches you to adapt quickly to new situations and sometimes learn through trial and error. This is not a game that you should expect to beat on the first try. But when you do lose, you are happy for the chance to correct your earlier mistakes by starting over again.

I started with the Classic difficulty on Iron Man and I finished the game on my 4th attempt. My friends (those who have finished) took as many as 10-30 attempts, so do not feel bad if you don't immediately get it.

I have heard some say that your first playthrough should be without the Iron Man setting. I heartily disagree with those people! Iron Man is at its best when you are discovering new things and are given important choices. It makes you take responsibility for your actions, even if you had to make them ill-informed. Just like when you make real-life choices: You cannot predict the future and you will have to live (or die) with your choices. This is perhaps the greatest thing this game teaches you. Goddamn, I love you Firaxis!

2. The feeling.

The grim, desperate struggle to survive in a world that's suddenly gone all wrong and you don't know why. Our Earth is being invaded and you lead a small unit of soldiers, scientists and engineers who attempt to stem the tide of ever growing terror.

I loved the feeling this game manages to convey to the player. This feeling of excitement and desperation is heightened when playing with a high enough difficulty (I recommend Classic) and the Iron Man setting. Every choice you make will have consequences that you cannot erase, like in so many other games today.

If you like your games easy and less dramatic, use the Easy or Normal settings. I still recommend you always play with Iron Man, because you will get so much more out of this game, even when learning.

I have tried the Impossible setting 15+ times, but I do not recommend it unless you know the game mechanics REALLY well. The impossible setting lives up to its name and REQUIRES you to have luck to succeed. I do not like games where luck is the deciding factor and this is why I did not like the Impossible setting. I do not consider the Classic difficulty to be luck-based at all. If played well, you should almost never be in a situation where you flip a coin to see if someone survives. Having said that, I lost plenty of units because I did plenty of mistakes. But that's okay. In X-COM, you should be ready to lose units as it is part of the game mechanics. The game forgives you some mistakes, as long as you don't do too many of them.

3. The layers of strategy and tactics (2 games in one)!

In X-COM, what you do in missions will affect your strategic game and vice versa. You actually have to make tactical decisions based on your global strategic situation. When you make the tactical choice to destroy a UFO power core, alien weapon or alien body, you will need to adjust your strategical game accordingly. This is done beautifully and it feels very natural and logical when you play the game.

4. The detail

From the different retching animations by virulent civilians to the way human bodies twitch and tremble when being "fed" alien eggs, this game is designed to create a cinematic experience of the alien invasion, that gives credit to movies like Aliens and War of the Worlds and other great titles. The atmosphere was so well done in the original UFO game that I'm amazed Firaxis managed to create something so similar in this modern day gaming environment. The god is in the details and the designers really understood this.

I also really enjoyed the way this game stayed true to the original game in countless details, yet still managed to be its own game and not a copy. Brilliantly done guys!

----

Overall score: 9/10 (The game mechanics issues I mentioned earlier lowered the score from 10)

Great game, loved it, recommend it.