Let's play by devs

And there are still people who don’t believe the Epic-thingy is just an extra year of beta-testing before the real release :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I don’t really care about the all Steam VS Epic thing, but it does seem the true game will only be complete with DLC5.

By now, the only thing that remains a mistery to me that can make a difference is the difficulty system. Our troops have full armour and powerful enough weapons when the game starts, and I’m guessing that is a sign the game will reverse the typical XCom’s difficulty curve, putting the endgame much tougher.

As for the rest, we were expecting many more systems: the willpower system leading to the PTSD, the limb system to the cybernetic replacements, the post-apocalyptic setting to much harsher weather conditions in some maps, the awesome lore and briefing construction to many more mission types than “go here, kill everything”… Time will tell


Rather then constructing multiple rigid mission types, ala. FiraXCOM, I would rather see more depth in core mission types. The original pitch was “no right win/loose conditions: only actions and consequences”. I promise it is the last time I bring Invisible Inc as an example (it’s probably a lie though), but even though this game has pretty much one mission type (find the room with the thingy you can here for), a personal objective can greatly vary:

  1. reach the main objective as the reward is something important for you
  2. objective isn’t as important, but get as much money as possible - that means covering as much ground before security level rises, hacking as many saves and using items to convert extra power to cash, grab and sell as many items one can, pickpocket as many guards as possible with our “anarchy” agent
  3. go for a side objective, and get a good boon
  4. gameplay driven objectives revolving around survival: escaping to elevator when things go south, reviving or dragging out a fallen teammate, or just going through the mission we are not equipped to deal with, with minimal losses.

Those things keep game interesting, and what we aim to do depends on your agents, current needs, mission types available to us, corporations we go against. While mission objective is always the same, what we need to get out of it is up to us.

To some extend original UFO had it - going for stuns and capture, or trying to preserve UFO for research was a different type of experience, then straight up kill with as little risk as possible.

I am disappointed that “optional objectives” in PP as of now are simply boosts to will - something that is pointless to pursue outside immediate boost in current battle - a boost in completing a static objective, for a predetermined reward, rather then being an objective competing with our “main” mission for alternative reward).

I hoped factions will add an extra variable to the way we approach and prioritise missions, but if 1.0 is like BB5 it won’t be the case.

That’s a very interesting approach. I have Invisible Inc. from Steam Sales (-75% off), and ashamed of saying I only played first mission and then forgot about it. Now may be a good time to return (but with PP 1.0 coming, I probably won’t)

Rigid, but not that rigid: There was variants.
FiraXCOM 1 had the meld mcguffing and FiraXCOM 2 had the rulers, chosen, dark events and SITREPs. The main objectives stayed the same but now you had to take into account all the variants. I’m at least expecting something like that when missions are in Mist zone or close to havens and not just “increase bad guys counts by 1”.

SITREPs were probably the best addition to FiraXCOMs - forcing to shake up party composition, allowing different classes to shine, and new recruits to be lvled up. Meld was a nice way of patching a pretty major design flaw. Both were great addition, which fixed some major issues those games had.

Other stuff, in my opinion, still suffer from the “overbearing designer’s had problem” - they are too static. Once you fought and figured them out once, they are not interesting. Randomise traits on Chosen were a nice attempt, but they failed to shake things up. It’s a kind of idea, I wish Pavonis had a chace to play with.

It’s the same reason I would rather explore deeper fewer mission variant, then create multiple shallow ones: enemy placement, pace of the mission and structure is pre-determined (even ambushes play out the same!), which means once you seen it once, it becomes a routine.

XCOM2: WotC is stuffed with unique content, but I sitll couldn’t bring myself to get deep into 2nd playthrough. It just resets to autopilot way too quickly. It doesn’t help that XCOM2 removed whatever few mechanics there were, that would connect strategic and tactical layers (alien capture, not destroying alien ship parts).

OK, after initial disappointment after watching those 2 videos I have changed my mind a little bit.

I suppose it still will be fine to play Backers Build 5 with cinematics, lore, balancing, some UI improvements and without those damn bugs.

If game:

  • won’t be hanging or falling into some strange idle state where player can’t do anything
  • will give more feeling of progression with faction items
  • will give meaning to some underdeveloped items
  • introduce more bases over the globe
  • have outcome for all events and story missions,
    then it will be a minimum to have nice experience with the game.

Then I will definitely wait for modding support and all DLC (free and paid).

I too doesn’t care about epic deal. I will use game without epic launcher. I will just run it occasionally to check if there is no update online.

There is quite much of it to be expected…

Invisible Inc. has those incredibly punishing and incredibly rewarding moments that prevents you from sleeping if you go to bed after it.
Once you understand how patrols and guard vision work it becomes easier (although you always forget that damn guard that was in this room and have to play cat and mouse and find the elevator ASAP). There are some OP items that can greatly help you (TAG pistol) or even make it impossible to lose (having 2 invisibility capes should make it unlikely for you to lose, 4 makes it sure but good luck finding that much).

Invisible Inc. has a short campaign (you can finish it in a few hours of play) that made me accept to lose without save scumming (not that you have much of a choice outside the easiest difficulty). Accept defeat and restart, better luck next time. You want punishing, you’ll be punished.

A great game and each campaign plays out differently (lots of “good” RNG on items, programs, layouts, guard paths that can sometimes be a puzzle to get through).


What impressed me the most, is that in spite of pretty major procedural generation, in terms of levels and items at your disposal, it is unlikely for you to roll a campaign which would be unwinnable. Each obstacle can be manipulated or bypassed in multiple ways, even if some of them might not be obvious for new players, and once you learn some basic (like preparing an escape plan at the end of turn, if there is danger of getting spotted) a loss is a result of multiple mistakes and greed, rather then a simple mistake.

It’s one of those rogue-lites I found to be skillbased, rather then luck based - I was able to reliably win it on expert+ when I was playing it on regular basis, and get my butt handed back to me everytime I jump back in. Kinda like Spelunky. Uuuuu, speaking of… Spelunky2 2020? :star_struck:

Anybody else that called out hallelujah when they noticed you can have TWO planes on 1 base?
Maybe they announced this somewhere but I hadn’t read about it yet.
At least I won’t get stuck with 1 manticore while not finding any bases.:rofl:

1 Like

They did? I didn’t noticed that. Oh you mean indicator on the top of the screen? We will see. Unless nothing will change between recording of the video and full release then yes, we should be less restricted with actions on the globe.

I take it all as a matter of managing expectations: I played Backer Build 4/5 for 33 hours, and I have this idea of playing BB1/2/3 for as longer. So, 50 hours minimum! For a unfinished, featureless, bug-ridden game, lacking QoL, advanced testing, so on. In BB5, didn’t even research anything from the factions, since the game kept hanging, so there’s quite a lot do discover.

Of course, us being humans and all, just a tiny speck of disappointment is bound to happen. It’s like being promised Messi in your team, and you end up with Lewandowski. And Lewa is super cool and scores 5 goals in 9 minutes, but, you know… Not the greatest of all time and such…

You are addressing wrong person with such reference. I don’t care about football so much. :slight_smile: And Lewandowski is currently the best player from my country so, well, I would probably prefer to meet him rathet than Messi. :wink:

Nevertheless, I couldn’t create mods for Lewandowski or Messi. :smiley: Here I will probably try to alter the game according to my point of view on it.

Yes and he mentioned it as well I think (not in comparisson to BB). I doubt they’ll turn it back to one because it has been one of the biggest feedback points I’ve read on the forums

Does anyone know when part 3 will be out?