There is no there, there

Phoenix Point Game Feedback
1

PP represents a breakthrough in turn based tactical management… it is, perhaps, the most interesting innovation to come along in several years… It is for this reason I purchased the expansions early on…

That the authors of this system at times seemed not to understand their own system, ie dash with zero AP, now corrected, that is forgivable when one understands the extent to which they were reaching for new ideas…

What is not forgivable, and the reason the game should never have been released in this condition, is that there is no game here… a game system, yes… even a brilliant game system… a game world, that exists too… a world that merits exploration and that has the depth to carry a story…

But to say the game itself is unfinished would be to suggest it exists at all, and it does not. Instead, what do we have… a screen that gradually fills with red while we run the same missions over and over, with the rare and occasional plot line thrown in that is really just more of the same with a little script… this is not a game for so many reasons, including the fact it lacks involvement on a personal level…

There are no villains, no plot (other than a gradually filling red screen and a couple of missions at the end… I don’t even have representation in the game, rather I am just some disembodied spirit… no place to aim my wrath, and nothing really to care about…

So while the balance is not there, that can be fixed… as the game system itself is solid. Moreover, there is a world here that is interesting and worthy of exploration. But that said, there is nothing going on… and having beaten the bloody thing I have absolutely no reason to return to it, ever, despite now owning the as yet to be produced expansions…

4 Likes
2

I was wondering who I even am, in the game. Who is the Phoenix Project? The operatives? They are replaceable and obviously not the leaders. Who or what is giving the orders, who is holding it all together? An AI, like “the Director” in the TV series “Travelers”? I was expecting to learn more about it as the game progresses… a shame if that is not the case.

3 Likes
3

I strongly disagree that this is necessarily a bad thing. It’s a matter of taste. For example, when playing Firaxis Xcom (especially Xcom2, and even more WotC) I really wished it would be more like PP is now. A few still board cutscenes, some text with voice over, and that’s it, thank you very much.

One thing that I’m missing is item description, that would add some additional lore, but I assume that is still to come.

But spare me being the Commander, surrounded by Central, the Engineer, the Scientist and the, for the love of all that it is holy, spare me the Ethereals and the Chosen and their ceaseless bblabbing.

Edit: typos

4 Likes
4

you (the player) are director sitting somewhere in the base, but you can’t see yourself. This is little issue that noone adresses you or talk to you directly. FiraXCOM made this story telling to put you in some specific body, but this is just a cosmetic thing.

5

It appears that you want a game of tactical skirmish… this game should suit the bill once they allow for head to head play… a natural fit…

And you are correct that implementation of story line and rpg elements can be poorly done… but they can also be done well… done well, the world becomes a place one wants to revisit…

6

A personal avatar could be introduced in a variety of clever ways… done well, it would open the game to a host of new adventures… perhaps the ambush mission could gain some real traction…

As is, the men must be wondering where their orders are coming from… or even what the plan is, as there seems to be nothing active in regard to a plot…

7

Maybe in a sequel. Current game wasn’t designed to be like you wish it to be.

I haven’t noticed that they wonder about my presence or if they have any doubts in my plan. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like
8

That is because you are only there in spirit… :slight_smile:

9

No, it’s not that. I just think that narrative in games works best when it is not relying on crutches from other media. The point of playing a game is that the player can create his or her own narrative.

For example, I really liked how in the first F XCom any one of your troopers could be the “chosen one”. Or how in the second XCom (or was it only in WotC?) you could take snapshots of your soldiers.

By contrast, I was very disappointed with the protagonism of the Commander in Xcom2.

One of the spectacular achievements of the original Gollop XCom was how it made you care about scarcely a bunch of pixels and a name.

When it comes to PP, it has great lore, distinguishable factions and leaders, a ton of customization options for the troops (I don’t mean the cosmetics, I mean different builds)… This is where the narrative comes from for me.

So in that sense the real problem is also balancing/difficulty/panda evolution and general lack of polish, because all that impacts the storytelling.

10

I’ve played most of the classic turn based games, and to me what finally puts me off playing anymore is the impersonal feeling if the game. In all the Xcom games I named my troop s and felt loss when one died, but here, oh there goes another one time to recruit another clone. I know there are customisable options for the troops but I really have no desire to to it, and I don’t know why. I backed this game with high hopes and just feel let down by it. There is another new game released today that I’m going to go and play, hopefully at some point I’ll come back to PP and be happily surprised.

4 Likes
11

I agree… the more organic a game is the better… as it allows the imagination to work at the same time that it creates the flexibility for innovation and unexpected outcomes…

To the extent the game succeeds very well… as a kind of sandbox… As an example, I was able to ally with the technos and Anu at the same time… was friendly with Synedrion , sp?, and was on my way to an alliance with them before I lost interest… pretty sure I could have allied with all three at the same time… something I have not heard raised here, so I don’t know if others have had similar success…

I didn’t care for the commander in XCOM 2 either… I am certain we could come up with other such failures… but I could provide a laundry list of games over the years where such involvement worked to create the sense that I was actually in the world, and that the events mattered to me personally…

It was this organic approach that held my criticism at bay for several weeks…

Somehow, a red screen does not for me a game make…

1 Like
12

I always ally with Anu, Synedrion and NJ, and I don’t get involved in their wars when they happen, so it is entirely possible to do this.

Personally, I’m not sure if I like it - it is odd that faction A would share with PP their research when PP is also allied with Faction B, and there is a war between faction A and B.

I think PP should be able to remain neutral and stay away from the faction wars, but to get access to shared research they should have to commit to one of the factions, and it they break their alliance to avoid going to war, to lose access to shared research from there on.

However, the biggest issue for me in the late game was how easy it was to roll over anything the Pandas were throwing at me. There was 0 urgency, except that, which was impelled by boredom and a desire to get it over with.

13

Late game is always a challenge… without a strong narrative it is almost a lost cause…

1 Like
14

You know, come to think of it, right now I can’t think of a single game where there are tactical battles and a strategic overlay that gets this right. Just some games that get it slightly better or slightly worse.

15

Original Sin 2 comes to mind… I am not into the whole ‘I am becoming a god’ thing… but that said, it was an engaging story with lots of memorable characters and an outstanding tactical backdrop…

16

I didn’t play it (Larion games are not my cup of tea), but of course there are more than a few RPGs and action games that get the late game right, what I meant is games with tactical battles and a strategic overlay, like the XComs.

17

Original Sin is pure tactics laid on top of an rpg…

As to pure strategy… historical sims work well, and were actually my original path into gaming some many years ago… in my youth I was an Avalon Hill fanatic, and later SPI… if you even remember them… board games, not computer… the largest was a WWII sim that took up two rooms to lay out…

The reason that historical sims work well is that the narrative is built in…

But you are correct, it is hard to think of a non-historical strategy game that gets this really right… I will give that one some more thought…

Still doesn’t make a game out of a red screen though… and the sad thing is that with a proper team put to building a history and narrative backdrop to the game it could have been a masterpiece instead of a late game slog no one wants to make because no one really cares…

18

For sure, in my recollections all good board games (non computer, whether historical or not), have a great late game, because you are playing with/against other players. (As long as the difference in skill between the players is not too great.)

But returning to PP, this is where I think we have to agree to disagree:

I think that with polish, balance issues taken care of and something to add urgency and challenge, the narrative would take care of itself. You could even do away with the red bar. Conversely, without that, any narrative grafts by way of characters, or plot elements would be for nothing.

19

Vol… this is one of those cases in which I hope that you are right and I am wrong… in any event, I hope our own discussion will be of benefit to the devs as I think there is some good food for thought there…

1 Like
20

+1 - I’m with you there in spirit, though I can also get some pleasure from narrative driven games, when that narrative is done well.

I think there’s a good few turn based games that get the narrative elements right, but when a strategic overlay is also included, the challenge is how to make that narrative work, whilst maintaining freedom for the player to follow their own path. I don’t think games are quite there yet.

Turn based games where I’ve enjoyed the narrative the most; Silent Storm, Blackguards, Invisible Inc, Dead State but none of those can really be classed as having a strategic layer in the way that Xcom type games do.

I think the closest I’ve got to enjoying narrative alongside a strategic layer is UFO Afterlight, although I’m not all the way though that game, the battles go repetitive quite quick.

Beyond that, maybe the Elemental or Age of Wonders series of games, between the two Elemental edges it - the difference being that in Elemental I pretty much made my own stories up, (and Age of Wonders’ narrative is pretty wishy washy) but in any case they’re focused a lot more towards 4x with the tactical battles being pretty rudimentary.