The new X-com 2 point system is incredibly frustrating and has been made "dumb". The variation of characters has been "streamlined" out of it and having played it and the original, I much prefer the original's AP type system. (its problems could have been fixed using other methods)
"Dumb"? How so? Because you can't access inventory? Nothing to do with 2 AP system. You could have inventory taking 1 AP or entire turn. Your movement is show clearly how far you can go before taking action becomes impossible. It is clear, precise and offers tactical depth beyond "do everything" and "Do math each turn".
"Dumb" may have been a poor choice of words. "Simplified too much" may be better.
That is exactly the point, any complexity that may have been there, is now gone. You either Shoot, move then Shoot, or if you have the right abilities, Shoot and Shoot, Shoot and Move.
Whereas before you could, move shoot move, shoot move shoot, shoot shoot shoot, move move move. And now that you point it out, you could also perform other actions as well, beyond just moving or shooting. Tho that is a different issue.
Thus it is simplified. Now the problem I see with the simplification, is that you have lost fine control. Oh you want to move 1 step and fire. Sorry thats 2 whole moves. That is what I am talking about. In all fairness they removed a lot of the "additional functions" like inventory etc, so it was easier to do that sort of reduction, but for me it has lost a lot of its tactical appeal. Which in a tactical combat game, is significant.
Mandemon wrote:And how can you say variation has been taken out in it? Each character has different class and thus different stats. Someone who has better aim has better chance of hitting someone. Perks and equipment decide what one can do.
From what I recall and what I am reading, movement, which is core to what we are discussing is the same for each "class type" with only armour offering variation. I could be wrong, but I haven't been able to find anythign to confirm or deny it.
Stats are there, but they mean less as you can't choose the Class for your soldiers.
Mandemon wrote:Can you explain anyway better than calling it "dumb"? No offense, but after seeing way too many arguments devolving into "It's dumb because you can play it on console", any attempt to explain why it's "dumb" needs better explanation or I will automatically dismiss it as "Another who can't think beyond Complexity = Good"
Nope nothing to do with console, and as I said poor choice of words, altho that is how I feel. It is "simplified" so much it is "dumb". Thats not a console thing, its a mass market appeal thing.
I apologise but my dissapointment in the whole game is due to many elements. Because everything in this game has been "Simplified". Each individual element by itself is not THAT bad, but when you add them all together, and start looking at the level of detail that was removed, the game becomes, well "Dumbed down" is the best term for it in this case. The most pertinent example is the use of satelites. That is outright DUMB
. Not the concept, the concept is fine, but the implementation is terrible, and makes absolutely no sense. The Base design also is pointless. Why even bother having the base if you aren't going to make use of it, the only reason it is there at all is because people would have bagged them out if there wasn't base building. The abduction missions, oh you can choose 1 of 3, why can't I ty and get to them all? Squad numbers, reduced to 4 + 2, why because managing so many soldiers is hard. Grey Market, can't sell stuff you build, oh wait no you can, but only when we choose it. Science and Engineering, don't worry about facilities, the base building has all the facilities, oh sure you can build extra buildings for a bonues, but you don't need to because we will give you free scientists and Engineers if you do well enough.
I could go on, but i won't as I need to go do some work...
Sorry for the rant, i am just so dissapointed in a game that had so much potential. But it is so much less than it should be.
The original was a game I played a lot. I would finish it then play again, because each time gave me a somewhat unique experience, and I enjoyed it. I couldn't even be stuffed playing past the second mission on my second play through of the new one.