Phoenix Point is a masterpiece

Phoenix Point Game Feedback
62

shrug with skills allowing at will to boost Aim and move closer/farther from the enemy at will it plays in a way similar to XCOM to me: almost every shot is 100%. I like individual Bullets being accounted for - that adds variety to weapons and how they interact with armor: though I hear the game doesn’t manage to keep all weapon types relevant due to drastic increase in enemy armor - abandoned my playthrough after 10 hours, so can’t confirm/deny this by itself.

As to ballistic spread: it’s narrow enough that in my time with the game I didn’t see anything interesting happen. I think there is potential there, with how positioning could change our potential damage, but for example rather then flanking enemy with shield, it is far more optimal to pixel hunt for when the animation exposes enough fleshy bits for the reliable shot. It’s just a lengthy process of doing a very simple thing, with not much thinking or planning to do. Tactics game, without tactics is just not very appealing to me. It also might be a problem of me trying to get friendly with Synedrion, and their maps were just a complete mess, implementing round buildings into a grid based game.

4 Likes
63

Allow me to begin by saying that I have played XCOM UFO Enemy Unknown, XCOM Terror from the Deep, XCOM Apocalypse, Firaxis XCOMs, Xenonauts, UFO Aftermath, UFO Afterlight, UFO Extraterrestrials, JA 1-2…and many other games of the genre.

As you can understand I love this genre, which was started with XCOM UFO Unknown and I have to admit that I had high expectations from Phoenix Point.

I have been a Game Designer/Producer and I owned a gaming studio for several years, so I understand how it is to run a game development studio (budget, corporate, etc.) while you are trying to develop a game (Game Design, management, testing, etc.). I’m saying this because I feel like the game has been rushed, it is not finished and it has not been QAed adequately.

On the release day, I had cancelled all my appointments, I turned off my mobile, I informed my partner that today is AFL day (Away From Life) lol, I made a nice hot cup of tea, I installed the game and started playing for the first time. I was so excited… and I have to say that it felt so nice…in the beginning…The atmosphere, the story, the mechanics…and after a few hours I started noticing everything that has already been said in the Forums. The bugs didn’t bother me, as I know that with a few patches the issues will be resolved (and I can understand that the release had to be rushed probably because it couldn’t be delayed yet again and/or because of financial reasons), but the problem lied with the game design itself. I will not go into detail, as a lot of people have already addressed most of the game design problems (balancing, difficulty curve etc.), but I wanted to add here something that it hasn’t been mentioned before.

For me, one of the most important elements of this genre, is the research and development in the game, which in my opinion is an essential component of the game loop. You discover new technologies (for weapons, weapons modifications, armor, accessories, etc.) via acquiring tech and try to reverse engineer it (still a thing in Phoenix Point) or by discovering new tech through your own efforts in your labs. This is so underwhelming in Phoenix Point, to the point that it makes you wonder whether this game is actually finished or not. You do not feel like you are significantly advancing in tech and you never receive this “gratification” effect that you are equipping your soldiers with better equipment to fight against the enemy. Vehicles? Where are the upgrades for the vehicles? In my opinion Firaxis XCOM 1-2 did that very well, even if later in the game your soldiers become uber-soldiers.

I tremendously respect Julian Gollop and I thank him from the depths of my heart for creating a genre which has given me many many hundreds of hours of immersive and satisfying gaming. He is the one who started this genre…but I can not accept that Phoenix Point is a masterpiece.

A rough diamond? Perhaps…but definitely not a masterpiece. This is a very strong word for a game that was competing against its “own legacy” and failed to deliver.

I uninstalled Phoenix Point yesterday and I hope that in a few months I will install it again and play the game Jullian Gollop wanted us to play.

Just my 2 cents…

8 Likes
64

First point, it’s no way already a masterpiece.

Second not any game unpolished and with weird balances and with significant amount of bugs and feature that probably worth some tuning… have the potential of becoming a masterpiece.

PP is obviously no common game, and I agree it has the potential, but I won’t say it will be a masterpiece, I believe there’s still high level challenges to solve before that.

Last point, it’s just a feeling, I’m no expert of the game in this current state and don’t intend to, I think I’ll stop a Normal play and will try an Easy play but will still not attempt do Sniper/Assault squads, and I’ll stick try be neutral. Past that, I’ll store the game for later.

1 Like
65

Not at will, you have to buy them with WPs. Managing your WPs is a large part of the tactics in PP. The tactical choice is not whether to engage in pixel hunting or not (I have never done this and I’m not even sure how to do this, or why), it’s between maximizing reach and/or damage or keeping reserves. Basically all classes are OP once combined with another class, but most of your soldiers are glass cannons and all have limited “fuel” (WPs). The importance of the ballistics is that they force you to spend WPs unless you are willing to deal limited damage.

66

I have been taking the game in small doses from the day it was released (because children, work, etc.). After the first three days I felt like you did. I restarted the game a few times on different difficulty levels. Then it suddenly clicked: I had been playing the game wrong, approaching it like the xcoms. Since then I have been having a blast.

On the whole masterpiece, or diamond in the rough… As I have said in my first post, I say that PP is a masterpiece in the context of it being a remarkable achievement that is facing much undeserved criticism.

67

If you find WPs to be a limited resources then you might want to revisit your tactics and strategy. Most of the mission can be finished way before that becomes an issue, simply because meta is a panic cascade. You invest some of your WP at the start and then just reap it again and again. The way I see it, you could make it infinite and it won’t make much difference because of how everything else works.

68

I second that.
Is it just me or shields got smaller since BB1-BB2?
All engagement distances got smaller as BBs progressed and soldiers could run further and further, even without Dash. What is the point of the ballistics and targeting system if it has very little influence on the gameplay? Why so? - In old builds, you could spray with assault rifle and get a lucky headshot and disable a limb. Now you need to spray into a single point size of a coin to do the same, so why even bother taking a shot with low accuracy if you can dash/run to a better position?
Cover like trees became a noob trap for the same reason, as all fights are happening at much closer distance it’s very easy to get an angle on someone in the “cover” such as trees.
Then comes the whole thing with destructible environment where glass blocks bullets and the only weapon capable of shot through is cannon, but only in some cases. Again the whole ballistics thing is wasted here.
Don’t get me started with overwatch, combination of ballistics and dumb AI pretty much guarantees that your soldiers will shot in the least useful moment hitting obstacles or plane walls as enemy runs behind them.
I’m sorry but something being cool feature is not enough to warrant a praise if said feature doesn’t make much difference or interacts badly with other systems.
Why do I have a feeling that different people designed BB1 and what we have now?

4 Likes
69

So far in my experience I have not found WPs to be infinite. I do try to maximize advantage from the WPs scattered on the map, though I have not made a conscious effort to game the system.

But as you have been playing the game since BB1, I am sure that you are right and that currently there are ways to game the system. So what are they? Are you referring to specific soldier builds?

70

No idea what “game the system” means in this context. We provided feeback to all broken builds in previous BBs. Some of that got fixed but even more where added. Therefore we can concluded that “It’s the way it meant to be played”. The builds I’ve tried myself is multiclassing everyone into sniper and using sniper rifles + some GLs and Cannons. It’s ridiculously effective and eventually gets boring. Seen some people letplaying with actual assault rifles and shotguns… probably their first playthrough. Others where using infiltrators mixed with sniper or berserker to pretty much solo missions.

71

If anyone is interested in example of good ballistics, try JA2 1.13 with New to Hit Chance system. The game draws you a predicted bullet spread. It’s not just a circle but an oval that changes shape depending on individual properties of the weapons/attachments, stance of the soldier and his skills. The gameplay consist of a lot of fire exchange between sides, because there is suppression mechanics and it’s better to land a 1 out of 10 shots than try to run across the field and become an easy target. There is an actual bullet drop and recoil, so when shooting at larger distance or in bursts you can compensate accordingly.
All weapons, even pistols, have much large effective range than a soldier can run. What it means is that flanking has to be done in several turns and preferable by a fire team instead of a single guy as it’s done by Firaxis and PP. Targeting limbs is a big part of the game as a lucky headshot is very luckily a death (some types of helmets vs some time of ammunition can save you), the same with arms and legs as limiting mobility or accuracy can be a game changer. Weapons such as machine guns are specialized tools for suppression, they are not just some weird looking thingy to spray and pray. The same is with sniper rifles, so you can’t just give it to everyone. All weapons have their dedicated roles and purpose, some are multi purpose, some are more specific. Like you carry a pistol because it’s an actual backup weapon and not just something that takes 1 action to fire at worms.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that PP isn’t good because it doesn’t have all those features, it simply doesn’t have a good interaction between few features that it has. That is the core issue.

3 Likes
72

bought it on winter sale… will be playing that while waiting for this game to get patched up… the freeze bug made it impossible to progress.

73

I played JA2 1.13 quite a lot some time ago. IMO, it sounds way better than it actually plays. Some of it because of engine limitations, some because of the tediousness that comes with attempts at complex simulation in turn based tactics. Also, ultimately the ballistics in 1.13 in and of themselves don’t really change the way the game is played; it’s all the other stuff that is changed from the base game that does, and not all of it for the better, as far I can recall.

I can see the appeal of a complex simulation like in 1.13 in a modern engine like PP, and perhaps there will be mods that attempt to do that.

Personally, I prefer the path taken by PP and if there are issues with WPs it’s a matter of balancing and adjustment. But, and correct me if I’m wrong, your position is that (1) you want a simulation, and (2) there are issues with game mechanics, so (3) you want the issues to be solved by removing these game mechanics and replacing them with the game mechanics of a simulation.

I can understand (1), and I believe you on (2), but I can’t agree with (3).

74

JA2 already include most qualities of 1.13 version, it includes flaws or questionable designs, 1.13 fix very few.

Show exact bullets spread is bizarre when anyway there’s a chance to hit. JA1 (and 2?) system is more coherent, there’s also a random in a spreading, if you miss an enemy the bullet could hit one in back with a shift in los. It’s very very similar to PP.

75

I started an Easy play (gee the first special missions are boring, this should not be for me, but Normal got me bored) and got something very weird, all start soldiers but one had the sniper special skill, that said I’m reluctant to take it because of the will cost, as attributes have increasing cost, it’s potentially a huge cost of SP but eventually not from a single class point of view and saving SP from not picking a second class. I’ll consider the option.

Anyway when I noticed it I wondered if it was a hint for Easy, everybody snipers.

76

That’s quite an arrogant statement. Perhaps you haven’t used NCTH. Without it, all ballistics is limited to installing battle scope on every weapon and have headshot galore

Read last paragraph of my last post. Now this feels like a waste of time.

77

I can’t say, as I didn’t play betas. What I found however, that it is often unnecessary to flank shielded arthrons: a right arm nicely sticks out of it, and it is the main concern. One can also disable head with some pixel hunting (wait for animation to reveal as much head as possible before free aiming). So a single sniper plus two quick aims, can nicely disable an enemy - which is a problem, as from what I understand shields were designed to counter long range frontal assault specifically.

3 Likes
78

What are you talking about? This is how aiming cursor looks in NCTH:

Moerges made a very detailed educational lets play, here he talks about one of the aspects of NCTH:

79

To those of you who are JA fans, if you haven’t played it yet, check out Silent Storm. (It goes for cheap on the steam store all the time).

1 Like
80

Yeah, I played with that aiming reticle and I remember reading all about it. It was a long time ago so I did caveat that “as far as I can recall”. Because I remember that there were also all these bags to carry stuff in and then you had to drop them when entering combat. In practical, terms, for someone who doesn’t care about rng, it’s just a different way to calculate hit chances. I’m not sure I’m explaining myself well, but one way to look at it would be that doing the 1.13 ballistics on the original xcom would not make much difference, just as doing it on JA2; it would make a huge difference if 1.13 was implemented in f-xcom.

Sure, I read it, but elsewhere in this thread you disparage PP gameplay elements as magic and advocate for ditching them and taking what seems like a realistic military simulation approach. If I’m mistaken and you are, in fact, advocating rebalancing the existing features, then you have my apologies.

81

People seem to not understand what “masterpiece” means. If you think a couple of the mechanics are cool, and the game has potential, that is NOT a “masterpiece.” That means you think it could become a masterpiece.

I posted all my feedback threads, maybe someone will read them. But otherwise, I’m pretty done with PP and the forum. They seem to have ignored the masses of feedback on RT, and lacked the capability to come up with a solution as good as the community ones. So I’ll just ignore the game, and won’t buy the sequel till I know it’s actually good.

Honestly, this is the wrong time of year to worry about the game, even for the Developers.

Merry Christmas everyone.

7 Likes