Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Discuss RPGs, video games, films, series, books. No political, religious or other serious debates, this is a hobby forum.

Moderator: SagaDC

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5649
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Woolfe » June 7th, 2017, 9:54 pm

Drool wrote:
June 7th, 2017, 9:40 pm
Woolfe wrote:
June 7th, 2017, 3:39 pm
No base combat wtf. Base combat was one of the joys of the original.
Eh. I didn't miss it at all. Never cared for it in the originals.
I really enjoyed it. It didn't happen often, although late game it became more common. It was cool to be able battle your way through your own base. And your troops would be spread out all over the place as well.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 8th, 2017, 2:23 am

Well the campaign has concluded, come back one.. two years!
Woolfe wrote:
June 7th, 2017, 3:39 pm
...
That is fine, I have my own long list of pet peeves with the new XComs, which is why I am excited to see what Phoenix Point can bring to the table. I am just saying, that often we too easily overlook the good while we bash and laugh at the low-hanging fruit of mainstream simplifications. And just because we find those game wanting, it doesn't mean that is the common perception or that Firaxis didn't know exactly what they were doing and succeed at it above expectations leaving a huge foot print ( which for example brought to life Phoenix Point, something I can't say about Xenonauts which had more of everything )

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5649
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Woolfe » June 8th, 2017, 4:02 pm

Remo wrote:
June 8th, 2017, 2:23 am
Well the campaign has concluded, come back one.. two years!
Woolfe wrote:
June 7th, 2017, 3:39 pm
...
That is fine, I have my own long list of pet peeves with the new XComs, which is why I am excited to see what Phoenix Point can bring to the table. I am just saying, that often we too easily overlook the good while we bash and laugh at the low-hanging fruit of mainstream simplifications. And just because we find those game wanting, it doesn't mean that is the common perception or that Firaxis didn't know exactly what they were doing and succeed at it above expectations leaving a huge foot print ( which for example brought to life Phoenix Point, something I can't say about Xenonauts which had more of everything )
When I first started playing it, it looked and felt great. But as I continued to play it, it became clear it was a game with potential that had been "streamlined" to death.

Firaxis knew exactly what they were doing. They took a game that was classic in everyone's memories and removed a lot of the stuff that actually made it classic, because people only remembered the bits they liked, not realising that all the other stuff fed into them.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 9th, 2017, 1:43 am

It was streamlined to provide a more casual fun gameplay. A common practice in mainstream titles that keeps the vast majority of their customers happy and pays their bills, while at the same time they invest in user-friendly mod tools to allow the game community to easily create their own experience from graphical tweaks to more ambitious mods.

It seems like you played only the initial release of Xcom and miss out on later refinements( EW added base defense among other things ) and what the community mods offered like long war mod. In either, case your initial experience is common among us ol' timers of the originals BUT doesn't contradict what I said about Firaxis success, who btw had MUCH MUCH harder and riskier job than Julian Gollop.
because people only remembered the bits they liked, not realising that all the other stuff fed into them.
If you are saying that about Firaxis devs, than this is a very arrogant claim. Otherwise, the vast majority of the fan base have been introduced to genre with Firaxis re-imagining, which for them is the only Xcom they will ever know or care about.. That sucks but that how it works.

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 5752
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Zombra » June 9th, 2017, 9:02 am

Remo wrote:
June 9th, 2017, 1:43 am
In either, case your initial experience is common among us ol' timers of the originals BUT doesn't contradict what I said about Firaxis success, who btw had MUCH MUCH harder and riskier job than Julian Gollop.
Curious sidebar, can you elaborate?
Image

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 9th, 2017, 10:43 am

Which part?

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 5752
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Zombra » June 9th, 2017, 7:06 pm

Just wondering what about the Firaxis excursion was so hard and risky compared to what Snapshot Games is attempting.
Not being facetious, just curious.
Image

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 10th, 2017, 3:09 am

I think that generally triple-A game development is much more riskier business than crowdfunded projects, particularly when trying to update two decade old cult classic, in a not too popular genre like turn-based tactics..

The way I see it, Firaxis did the heavy lifting. Updated the formula demands of today's industry, incorporating advancements in game design and narrative. Offering gameplay that both cater to people who have never played an X-COM game and genre veterans ( although the last took few iterations and extensive mod support ) Introduced this game to new and very different audiences, while reasonably satisfying the core fans ( which is not small feat to put it mildly :lol: ).

In-comparison, a known quantity is always easier to work with, especially with your finances secure upfront, playing into the nostalgia of your fan base and catering to more specific need of an established audience, while basically updating proven gameplay with more "complex" mechanics you already had in your previous games (better geoscape, factions in apoc), and finally not constrained creatively to things that were not designed with what is possible today or continuity (iirc which is what Julian did with X-Com and Laser Squad)


tldr; I feel that future of Firaxis XCOM was much less certain than that of Phoenix Point, and that Firaxis tried much more new and different approaches while Julian just retreads the same path for our benefit.

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 5752
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Zombra » June 10th, 2017, 9:09 am

Makes sense, and Firaxis was definitely more of a conceptual trailblazer than Snapshot ... still, Snapshot did take a bigger risk in my opinion. Their $ was not secure up front, unlike Firaxis which was never in any real danger, and Snapshot had no plan B if the crowdfunding campaign failed. The Phoenix game design isn't radical, but I still feel like Snapshot is much more "out there".
Image

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 11th, 2017, 3:15 am

You are correct Snapshot start working on Phoenix point before the crowdfunding project. There are probably many more angles and challenges to this that we haven't considered, but as far as my original point goes and the topic of this thread none of that matter, it is not a competition.

>The Phoenix game design isn't radical, but I still feel like Snapshot is much more "out there".

It will certainly be more of niche game. It is not a bad thing, they aren't looking to reinvent the wheel, just refine the formula for a different audience.

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5649
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Woolfe » June 11th, 2017, 5:17 am

Remo wrote:
June 9th, 2017, 1:43 am
It was streamlined to provide a more casual fun gameplay. A common practice in mainstream titles that keeps the vast majority of their customers happy and pays their bills, while at the same time they invest in user-friendly mod tools to allow the game community to easily create their own experience from graphical tweaks to more ambitious mods.
Feeble excuse. They sold the game knowing that people would buy it expecting the complexity of the original. And they didn't provide it.

They removed entire sections of the game. Elements that were as much part of the gameplay as the tactical combat, they took them away and left some vague veneer to remind old players what was there, and to give new players a suggestion of depth that was nonexistent.

If you have to rely on your mods to make the game good then you are doing something wrong, and what did they do with those mod tools? They attempted to replicate the original gameplay. That is rather telling.
It seems like you played only the initial release of Xcom and miss out on later refinements( EW added base defense among other things ) and what the community mods offered like long war mod. In either, case your initial experience is common among us ol' timers of the originals BUT doesn't contradict what I said about Firaxis success, who btw had MUCH MUCH harder and riskier job than Julian Gollop.
Initial release indeed. I actually tried to replay with the long war mod etc, but the game was just too annoying. I played about 3 missions before I literally just got sick of seeing the exact same map.

I could probably revisit it today and it would be better, but it is too late now. I went from someone who bought most of the originals. To someone who refuses to give firaxis another cent for anything xcom. They only get my civ money because they appear to have finally pulled their heads in and stopped being complete dicks about DLC
because people only remembered the bits they liked, not realising that all the other stuff fed into them.
If you are saying that about Firaxis devs, than this is a very arrogant claim. Otherwise, the vast majority of the fan base have been introduced to genre with Firaxis re-imagining, which for them is the only Xcom they will ever know or care about.. That sucks but that how it works.
I am, and why shouldn't it be arrogant? They sold that game off the back of the originals. They used my, and many others love of the originals to push their game. Giving snippets and meetings that played up the original aspects, and then pulling a bait and switch.
There was an article, where they literally said that they made the original, and then ripped it out. (Part of why the modding was a bit easier, as a lot fo the stuff was actually in there.

This was not a brand new game with no previous fans. This was a game that had a very strong core following, a lot of influential people played that game, and they influenced those who had not. The game would not have had the popularity it did, if not for the original.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 11th, 2017, 7:17 am

Sound like someone didn't make an informed purchase..

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2017, 9:05 am

Woolfe wrote:
June 11th, 2017, 5:17 am
...They sold the game knowing ... ... ...
That entire post could be (and essentially has been) said of Bethesda's abuse of the Fallout IP; something they did for the same ghastly reason. It's an insidious practice.
Last edited by Gizmo on June 11th, 2017, 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lord of Riva
Adventurer
Posts: 825
Joined: October 14th, 2014, 10:18 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Lord of Riva » June 11th, 2017, 9:08 am

i wish the game was a bit more colorful. Not saying it should look like Overwatch or something but like this (as seen in the linked videos) it looks rather drab.

Otherwise im looking forward to it, even if im not a backer.

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 11th, 2017, 9:31 am

Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2017, 9:05 am
That entire post could be (and essentially has been) said of Bethesda's abuse of the Fallout IP; something they did done for the same ghastly reason. It's an insidious practice.
I have been on that train for a long time, at first it used to be cathartic and a way to find common minded people with shared experience among the hordes of the newer more causal crowds. But after two decades its mainly occupied by angry disenfranchised people with chip on their shoulder they need to feed... that why I try to avoid these discussions

Anyway, back on topic I will say that: this is different situation than with Beth, a game is more than the sum of its parts and everyone has a different idea what made classic work, and finally the reality of game development and franchise management almost never align with hope and dreams of long time fans.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2017, 10:33 am

Remo wrote:
June 11th, 2017, 9:31 am
its mainly occupied by angry disenfranchised people with chip on their shoulder they need to feed...
... But isn't this is because they were aggressively disenfranchised, and had a bit chipped off their shoulder? (by Bethesda; who used them for hype) :?
Anyway, back on topic I will say that: this is different situation than with Beth, a game is more than the sum of its parts and everyone has a different idea what made classic work, and finally the reality of game development and franchise management almost never align with hope and dreams of long time fans.
And yet it was because they discarded the sum of its parts, and cherry picked the insignificant, but recognizable aspects that could (non-invasively) drape their TES clone in a newly minted "Fallout" skin. —Essentially to sell 'Nutella' in a Vegemite jar. The core essence & appeal of the brand was not there; but it was the same color. :|

**Was this the case with the new X-com? (Haven't played)

It's funny, I watch that video, and (subject matter aside) it looks to play more like a Fallout 3 should than FO3 did; but then... so do Superhot, and Fallout 2 for that matter. :roll:

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 5752
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Zombra » June 11th, 2017, 12:06 pm

"Hey Gizmo, want to go get a beer?"

"That reminds me, Fallout 3 sucks!"

Oh well, drink up buddy Image

So anyway, there's this game called Phoenix Point. Let's try to keep it on topic, huh?
Image

SagaDC
Global Moderator
Posts: 3470
Joined: May 2nd, 2012, 5:51 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by SagaDC » June 11th, 2017, 12:57 pm

Looks like the campaign wrapped up earlier this week. The game is successfully funded, but they missed out on the last couple of stretch goals. They released a couple of new updates, including one that has a picture of a rather huge alien blob.

https://www.fig.co/campaigns/phoenix-po ... 86#updates
https://www.fig.co/campaigns/phoenix-po ... 87#updates

They're currently accepting late pledges, which can be done through Stripe. That uses a credit or debt card, though. I don't think I see any PayPal support yet.

There are also a few new videos floating around showing off the Phoenix Point demo. UnstableVoltage did another livestream, this time with Julian Gollop and Allen Stroud in the comment section answering questions. It's pretty long, but it's also pretty informative. It also looks like they gave a copy of the Alpha to another Youtuber who did a much short video about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToPMquZxpK0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3OG6-PYADc

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2973
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Gizmo » June 11th, 2017, 1:31 pm

Zombra wrote:
June 11th, 2017, 12:06 pm
"Hey Gizmo, want to go get a beer?"
Teetotaller 'til the bitter end. ;)
So anyway, there's this game called Phoenix Point. Let's try to keep it on topic, huh?
I'd have said it was. I watched that video, and it has me interested. It seems to play more like the way a Fallout 3 should; than the official FO3 actually did.

This (below), is what got my attention the most:
SagaDC wrote:
June 5th, 2016, 9:11 pm
It's definitely worth noting that the Crabman has both a normal Hit Point bar, but also five smaller "location-based" Hit Point bars, each with a special effect for depleting health in that location. Disabling the right arm would disable the claw-based melee attack, while disabling the left arm would disable the Crabman's gun. Disabling the either leg would reduce the Crabman's movement by half, and presumably disabling both legs would immobilize it entirely. Disabling the Crabman's head would impair it's vision.
... And it would seem to derive directly from Fallout; (or something the FO devs may have copied).

This clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uMePkH8oX0 would seem to suggest that Pheonix Point (combat) plays like a cross between Fallout 2, Shadowrun. and Gears of War. Does that seem apt to anyone?

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Julian Gollop's "Phoenix Point"

Post by Remo » June 11th, 2017, 3:52 pm

Gizmo wrote:
June 11th, 2017, 10:33 am
**Was this the case with the new X-com? (Haven't played)
Thank god to that. Fool me once shame on me...

Btw, which was your favorite MicroProse x-com and why ? UFO defense, Terror From the Deep, or Apocalypse..

And did you know that Julian did quite a few turn-based tactics before and after his time with MicroProse, using various formulas but seemingly considerably less complicated than x-com UFO defense.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests