View Full Version : UFO: Aftermath
For those fans of the X-Com series, this game might be worth checking out. It's scheduled for release on 9/12.
My only real concern with it is they are doing some type of auto-pausing real-time combat thing instead of pure turn based like the old X-Com. It might work ok, but I have my reservations.
Edit: BTW here's a link (http://www.gogamer.com/cgi-bin/GoGamer.storefront/3f3b80260473c290273fd0fedee20719/Product/View/001UFO) to gogamer where I saw that it was coming out. There are some downloadable music files and screenshots and a feature list. The game also has a website out there someplace that probably has more detail, but I'm too lazy to look it up for you. :D
Blade6119
08-14-2003, 08:55 AM
a game was realeased a few months ago indepenently by one of the x-com makers and CGW called t the true heir to the first x-com...it got 4.5-5
I think that was "Laser Squad Nemesis" which is an email game and doesn't have single player. I looked at it a few months ago, but I'm more interested in single player computer games than one played via email.
Godzilla Blitz
08-14-2003, 09:38 AM
I'm looking forward to UFO: Aftermath, but I'm wondering if it's going to unfair to try to compare it to the original X-COMs. I would be impressed if they could get everything right in a remake.
Regarding the turn-based verses pausing real-time combat system. As much as I really enjoy the turn-based system in X-COM, I can see its unrealistic nature. Europa Universalis convinced me that real-time movement and combat can be implemented in a hardcore strtegy game without making it a twitch fest. If Aftermath used a similar approach, I think it might work nicely.
Laser Squad Nemesis sounds interesting. X-COM via email? Humm? Could be fun. There was a simple X-COM email game a few years ago that was a lot of fun. Five-on-five, simple maps, but enough strategy that skill would usually win the day. I still have a copy lying around, but I don't know if they (Hasbro, I think) still run the server that you had to use.
I'm almost surely getting UFO: Aftermath when it comes out. I hope you are right GB and the pausing real time combat works well. As far as the unrealistic nature of turn based combat, I don't mind that. For me it's more about strategy than realism. Turn based combat is like a chess match, where real-time is more like an arcade action game to me. If this were a pure RTS I wouldn't consider buying it but the method they are putting forth is at least worth a look IMO. If it allows me to think out my moves and not feel rushed or having to manually pause the game constantly, I'll be happy. :)
Godzilla Blitz
08-14-2003, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Bee
I'm almost surely getting UFO: Aftermath when it comes out. I hope you are right GB and the pausing real time combat works well. As far as the unrealistic nature of turn based combat, I don't mind that. For me it's more about strategy than realism. Turn based combat is like a chess match, where real-time is more like an arcade action game to me. If this were a pure RTS I wouldn't consider buying it but the method they are putting forth is at least worth a look IMO. If it allows me to think out my moves and not feel rushed or having to manually pause the game constantly, I'll be happy. :)
Well said! I feel the same way.
RendeR
08-14-2003, 10:42 AM
Wooohooo XCom here I com =)
I have gotten the old game to work, but I've got so much going on I never have time to spend on it...
JonInMiddleGA
08-14-2003, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by Bee
Turn based combat is like a chess match, where real-time is more like an arcade action game to me.
Thanks. You just managed to describe my feelings better than I could have.
cuervo72
08-14-2003, 11:15 AM
I'm getting too feeble to keep up with real-time games :)
Well, I did some more reading on UFO: Aftermath on their website (mostly the forums). A lot of people are upset about things that are different from X-Com. Here are a couple and my thoughts:
1. You can only use 7 squad members. A lot of people seem upset about this. I actually like this change. With less squad members, you'll gain a greater attachment to them and a loss of a squad member is more critical than in X-Com. I like this change especially when considered with the changes to the UFO:A experience system (where you improve specific stats and can develop squad members to be specialists such as one guy will be the sniper, another heavy arms, etc.).
2. You don't "build" your bases. Every base you get basically is assigned one of 4 functions, instead of the more detailed method in X-Com. This one is up in the air for me. I liked the way X-Com did the bases, but I am open to a new approach. This seems a little too simplistic, but I could be wrong once you get further into the game and have a large number of bases this might be less micromanagement and end up being better overall. I am willing to see how this plays out.
3. You don't build interceptors or have much control over them. Basically, if a base is assigned to intercepting UFOs you will be given the option of trying to down one when they are detected. That's it. Again for me, that's not a game killer but it seems to be another case of simplifying the game.
4. You can't enter buildings. WTF??? I have no idea why they did this. Building combat seems to me to be one of the most interesting parts of this type of game. I still wake at night remembering searching out some of the barns when playing X-Com! I suspect this might be one of the biggest disappointments I'll have with the game. If there's a building, I want to go look around!
5. No tanks or other vehicles. Some people are upset about this, it doesn't really bother me. I have no problem not having tanks or vehicles and just using my squad. I don't really care either way on this. Tanks are useful, but not having them makes strategy on deployment more interesting IMO.
That's what most of the complaints seemed to be about. I think the approach was that unlike in X-Com where you were in control of the resistance, in UFO: Aftermath you are only a part of the whole. Some things (like interceptions) are out of your control to a large extent. I'm hoping that since they are taking away some of the decision making processes in this game compared to X-Com, they will be adding additional ones into the game. I do like the sounds of having more control over development of your squad and each members skills. Hopefully there will be more things like that to increase the strategy and challenge.
The_herd
08-14-2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Bee
Well, I did some more reading on UFO: Aftermath on their website (mostly the forums). A lot of people are upset about things that are different from X-Com. Here are a couple and my thoughts:
1. You can only use 7 squad members. A lot of people seem upset about this. I actually like this change. With less squad members, you'll gain a greater attachment to them and a loss of a squad member is more critical than in X-Com. I like this change especially when considered with the changes to the UFO:A experience system (where you improve specific stats and can develop squad members to be specialists such as one guy will be the sniper, another heavy arms, etc.).
2. You don't "build" your bases. Every base you get basically is assigned one of 4 functions, instead of the more detailed method in X-Com. This one is up in the air for me. I liked the way X-Com did the bases, but I am open to a new approach. This seems a little too simplistic, but I could be wrong once you get further into the game and have a large number of bases this might be less micromanagement and end up being better overall. I am willing to see how this plays out.
3. You don't build interceptors or have much control over them. Basically, if a base is assigned to intercepting UFOs you will be given the option of trying to down one when they are detected. That's it. Again for me, that's not a game killer but it seems to be another case of simplifying the game.
4. You can't enter buildings. WTF??? I have no idea why they did this. Building combat seems to me to be one of the most interesting parts of this type of game. I still wake at night remembering searching out some of the barns when playing X-Com! I suspect this might be one of the biggest disappointments I'll have with the game. If there's a building, I want to go look around!
5. No tanks or other vehicles. Some people are upset about this, it doesn't really bother me. I have no problem not having tanks or vehicles and just using my squad. I don't really care either way on this. Tanks are useful, but not having them makes strategy on deployment more interesting IMO.
That's what most of the complaints seemed to be about. I think the approach was that unlike in X-Com where you were in control of the resistance, in UFO: Aftermath you are only a part of the whole. Some things (like interceptions) are out of your control to a large extent. I'm hoping that since they are taking away some of the decision making processes in this game compared to X-Com, they will be adding additional ones into the game. I do like the sounds of having more control over development of your squad and each members skills. Hopefully there will be more things like that to increase the strategy and challenge.
I was incredibly excited about this game until I read these "features" in the gamespot preview.
This basically goes against everything the X-Com series about. Combat in buildings was the most exciting part of the game. Building bases was great, the other stuff doesn't bother me too much, but bases and combat in buildings was what made X-Com fun.
I'm dying for a developer to make a TRUE sequel to X-Com. DON'T TRY TO FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN. Hell, I'd be giddy with a graphical update to the original.
I really think the X-Com fanbase was abandoned right after the original.
condors
08-14-2003, 12:31 PM
what sequel has a feature removal list?
what did they add?
Originally posted by condors
what sequel has a feature removal list?
Although I love the game, CM4 has a few features that are missing. Granted, not to this extent...
Godzilla Blitz
08-14-2003, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by Bee
1. You can only use 7 squad members. A lot of people seem upset about this. I actually like this change. With less squad members, you'll gain a greater attachment to them and a loss of a squad member is more critical than in X-Com. I like this change especially when considered with the changes to the UFO:A experience system (where you improve specific stats and can develop squad members to be specialists such as one guy will be the sniper, another heavy arms, etc.).
I'm up in the air about this one. I just hope the limit is 7 members per mission, not 7 members in your agency at one time. I like the freedom of X-COM, but I don't think this limit will make or break the game for me.
2. You don't "build" your bases. Every base you get basically is assigned one of 4 functions, instead of the more detailed method in X-Com. This one is up in the air for me. I liked the way X-Com did the bases, but I am open to a new approach. This seems a little too simplistic, but I could be wrong once you get further into the game and have a large number of bases this might be less micromanagement and end up being better overall. I am willing to see how this plays out.
3. You don't build interceptors or have much control over them. Basically, if a base is assigned to intercepting UFOs you will be given the option of trying to down one when they are detected. That's it. Again for me, that's not a game killer but it seems to be another case of simplifying the game.[/B]
Humm. I like the macro strategy behind the X-COM tactical game, and this seems like they are taking out quite a few of the fun decisions that you get to make, but if they have a more robust research tree, and more fun decisions to make elsewhere, then I think I can live without either of these two things. Probably not a game-breaker, in my mind.
4. You can't enter buildings. WTF??? I have no idea why they did this. Building combat seems to me to be one of the most interesting parts of this type of game. I still wake at night remembering searching out some of the barns when playing X-Com! I suspect this might be one of the biggest disappointments I'll have with the game. If there's a building, I want to go look around![/B]
Ouch. This strikes me as potentially a gamebreaker. My guess is that it might have been difficult to do, but still, you've got to make the game so you can more than just enter buildings, you've got to be able to blow them apart as well. The internal environment is critical to any game of this type that I have played and liked: X-COM, Jagged Alliance 1 & 2, even Close Combat. I guess you have to sacrifice features in any game you make, but the game just fell to my "wait-and-see" list with this one. What are they thinking? The interior fighting (shooting through windows, clearing buildings, approaching closed doors, blowing apart walls, tossing grenades into rooms to clear them) is in my mind half the fun in these games, and the most harrowing part of the combat. It would not be the same game if every battle took place outside. Without being able to go in buildings, essentially every building just becomes a big obstacle to go around. Windows don't mean anything. Doors are completely safe. If the game has good AI, and there are other aspects that outweigh this negative, I suppose it could still be a great game, but this one is a big mark in the negative column for me.
I can live without the tanks, but they do add another fun tactical element to the game.
The research tree is supposedly more complex and deep.
From what I've read, just about everything on screen will be destructible which is pretty cool. I still hate it that you can't go into buildings though. Supposedly, they wanted mission areas to be a certain size (about 5 city blocks) and when they got to the buildings they realized the general proportion didn't really work. They went ahead and tried to make it work, but dropped it when it didn't come out like they had hoped. Sounds like a design mistake from the beginning that they couldn't rectify without a complete overhaul.
thirdandlong
08-14-2003, 03:36 PM
Not being able to go into buildings seems to be the only big disappointment to me. Well that and I doubt they include a base defense type mission where the aliens attack you.
In regards to the 5-block radius thing....that sounds much more like X-Com apocalypse than the original. It seems people monkeying around with this genre don't learn from previous mistakes. Mistakes like introducing real time to XCOM.
Most older gamers still consider the original formula an ALL TIME CLASSIC. Why people are fixated on Real Time is beyond me.
Of course I am absolutely pleased to find so many people here who are like minded with me regarding the notion that game play is what is important, not nifty 3D graphics. Then I realize that this community is sort of a focus group for fans of text based sports simulations, and begin to wonder if we really are different from normal people.
Eaglesfan27
08-14-2003, 08:20 PM
X-Com is one of my all time favorite games and the lack of ability to enter builidings will be a big disappointment to me. However, I still think I will check this game out.
Godzilla Blitz
08-14-2003, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by thirdandlong
Then I realize that this community is sort of a focus group for fans of text based sports simulations, and begin to wonder if we really are different from normal people.
FOFC: The Island of Misfit Toys.
tucker342
08-14-2003, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by thirdandlong
Not being able to go into buildings seems to be the only big disappointment to me. Well that and I doubt they include a base defense type mission where the aliens attack you.
In regards to the 5-block radius thing....that sounds much more like X-Com apocalypse than the original. It seems people monkeying around with this genre don't learn from previous mistakes. Mistakes like introducing real time to XCOM.
Most older gamers still consider the original formula an ALL TIME CLASSIC. Why people are fixated on Real Time is beyond me.
Of course I am absolutely pleased to find so many people here who are like minded with me regarding the notion that game play is what is important, not nifty 3D graphics. Then I realize that this community is sort of a focus group for fans of text based sports simulations, and begin to wonder if we really are different from normal people.
completely agree
Godzilla Blitz
08-14-2003, 11:34 PM
Originally posted by Bee
Supposedly, they wanted mission areas to be a certain size (about 5 city blocks) and when they got to the buildings they realized the general proportion didn't really work. They went ahead and tried to make it work, but dropped it when it didn't come out like they had hoped. Sounds like a design mistake from the beginning that they couldn't rectify without a complete overhaul.
I'm sure making games is really hard and I know so little about the whole procedure, but this sounds like a glaring lack of forethought. Wouldn't you check that the buildings would work before you got so far along with everything else so that you couldn't rectifty it if there were problems? And these guys are going to program an AI as well?
Danger, Will Robinson, danger.
Originally posted by Godzilla Blitz
I'm sure making games is really hard and I know so little about the whole procedure, but this sounds like a glaring lack of forethought. Wouldn't you check that the buildings would work before you got so far along with everything else so that you couldn't rectifty it if there were problems? And these guys are going to program an AI as well?
Danger, Will Robinson, danger.
Definitely sends up warning signs. What's strange is if you look through the screenshots at gogamer.com they have some that show the squad in a building. While the proportion isn't perfect, it looks pretty decent to me. Makes me wonder if the problem wasn't something else and they are trying to avoid admitting an even bigger mistake or something else.
Originally posted by thirdandlong
Well that and I doubt they include a base defense type mission where the aliens attack you.
Actually, just found out there will be base missions. From what I gather you can have missions inside buildings, ufos, etc but the entire mission will be inside (you just can't enter a building in an outdoor misssion if that makes sense).
The_herd
09-12-2003, 10:29 AM
UFO: Aftermath has gone gold. Release date is Sept 26 in the UK no info on the US release, Info here:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/ufoaftermath/news_6074994.html
There's also a chat from yesterday up at the game's website with some of the designers. There have been a few changes and it sounds like it still has promise. I just love the whole "fight against alien invasion" theme and will probably buy the game for that aspect alone.
SplitPersonality1
09-12-2003, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by Godzilla Blitz
FOFC: The Island of Misfit Toys.
Well said GB. :)
tucker342
09-13-2003, 12:43 AM
gamefaqs.com said that the new release date was the 23rd....
Originally posted by tucker342
gamefaqs.com said that the new release date was the 23rd....
Well the game's being released in different countries at different times (based on how quickly they can get them distributed), so that's probably why the release dates vary different places you look. I'm just glad to see it coming out very soon. :D
Eaglesfan27
09-13-2003, 10:59 AM
A really interesting chat is up on their home website and the game does sound like it has potential to be a great game. Hopefully, it will remind me of the glory days of X-com :)
The_herd
09-13-2003, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by Eaglesfan27
A really interesting chat is up on their home website and the game does sound like it has potential to be a great game. Hopefully, it will remind me of the glory days of X-com :)
We can only hope. I remember playing X-com in highschool, I spent the majority of one summer vacation playing X-com, I literally wouldn't know what day of the week it was I was so wrapped up in the game.
Blackadar
09-13-2003, 06:37 PM
Yummy yummy yummy. This and Greyhawk: TOEE in the same month - 1 month after Madden.
Eaglesfan27
09-27-2003, 09:00 PM
Well the release is getting close. Hopefully, it will be in the US within the next two weeks. I'm really hoping this can come close to X-com's level of greatness. I miss that game.
Thomkal
10-24-2003, 07:28 AM
The game is definitely out now, so I'm wondering if anyone has it and what their impressions of it are? GoGamer.com has the game as their "madness" offer right now I believe, under $30 if anyone is interested in buying it.
Yossarian
10-24-2003, 08:02 AM
Its been out here for almost a month now (UK)
I like it. Its sadly not a patch on the XCOM games, but as the closest thing available at present, it'll do.
The graphics are nice and its well presented overall, nice finishes etc.. but there just isn't the depth that I was hoping for.
As stated above, you don't have much interaction with your bases. All your time is spent either looking at the 'Geosphere' or in battle.
In battle, I much prefer the turn based combat. This seems more like syndicate (i love that game) or commandos than XCOM.
Its nice. Just not amazing.
Oh, and its buggy as fuck.
sachmo71
10-24-2003, 08:05 AM
Originally posted by Yossarian
Oh, and its buggy as fuck.
:(
andy m
10-24-2003, 08:25 AM
i'm not sure what these bugs you have are, but i have been playing it and not really encountered any. apart from the irritating one where the soldier decides to switch back to his previous weapon / object for no apparent reason.
i prefer it to the original x-com series personally. it's more my kind of game. nicely paced, nice squad development...
i think there is a demo available to try, too.
Honolulu_Blue
10-24-2003, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by andy m
i'm not sure what these bugs you have are, but i have been playing it and not really encountered any. apart from the irritating one where the soldier decides to switch back to his previous weapon / object for no apparent reason.
i prefer it to the original x-com series personally. it's more my kind of game. nicely paced, nice squad development...
i think there is a demo available to try, too.
I've got a good friend of mine who writes computer game reviews. He's currently playing through UFO: Aftermath and should have his review up shortly (I'll post a link to it when it's up). Basically he said that the he liked all the aspects of the game that were like X-Com, but hated everything was different. Apparently the combat system works well, but there are things that just don't.
I think most fans of X-Com would simply be happy with a souped-up, modernized version of the original game, call it X-Com2004 or whatever there you have it. I know I would be.
Godzilla Blitz
10-24-2003, 01:54 PM
GoGamer has UFO: Aftermath on their 48-hour sale for $27.90, in case anyone is interested. I think I'll grab a copy at that price.
Vince
10-24-2003, 04:46 PM
I'll be very interested to hear what you think GB.
Vince
03-07-2004, 05:54 PM
6-month later dola - I almost picked this game up over at CompUSA the other day, but it was still 40 bucks. Anyone given it a spin and want to let us know what you think?
Dutch
03-07-2004, 05:57 PM
Where are some good places on-line to get game reviews?
QuikSand
03-07-2004, 07:19 PM
I miss Bee.
RawIsDan
03-07-2004, 07:23 PM
It is terrible
Yes, it blows. Played for a little bit and never touched it again.
vBulletin v3.6.0, Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.