KickStarter Phoenix Point - the new game from X-COM creator Julian Gollop

[Van-d-all]

Another problem for Gollop is that by the time Phoenix Point will be "complete" with Dlcs, patches and released to steam, it may face the Xcom 3 announce or even release.

They'll probably announce it, not way is it going to be released a few months after announcement. They don't work that fast.
And even so, I still prefer Phoenix Point. As long as that retarded chance to hit mechanic doesn't exist, I'm happy. Plus that it simulates bullets and trajectories and destructible environment and with high caliber weapons you can shoot through cover, yeah, very happy. Not to mention the free aim.

Somehow I have a feeling, the FPP shooting mechanic will make it's way to nuXcom 3, even more, become a mainstay in the genre (and only memorable aspect of PP).

 

[fantadomat]

Few guys gonna admit it here, but Firaxis has set a standard for modern turn based with Nuxcoms. Deal with it.

Don't know really,never played it. It looked dumb and repetitive to me. Still you talk as if there is a genre here,when in reality there are no other games like xcom2,which came 3-4 years ago. This one is the first to try and make such a game. nuxcom sold well because of youtube hype and peer pressure.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

This one is the first to try and make such a game.

There was this German attempt that failed couple years ago.

 

[Mazisky]

Few guys gonna admit it here, but Firaxis has set a standard for modern turn based with Nuxcoms. Deal with it.

Don't know really,never played it. It looked dumb and repetitive to me. Still you talk as if there is a genre here,when in reality there are no other games like xcom2,which came 3-4 years ago. This one is the first to try and make such a game. nuxcom sold well because of youtube hype and peer pressure.

What about Shock tactics, Phantom doctrine and Xenonauts 1 and 2?

 

[orcinator]

Hiring external teams for art typically ends badly.

Buying assets instead of making everything by hand is the norm, especially on unity.
Does make me wonder if the Hasbro soldiers look that way because they really thought it would be a good look or if they got a deal on some premade asset pack and decided to only make original monsters.

 

[Galdred]

Yet another review lamenting the lack of voiced characters:

PHOENIX POINT REVIEW
BY MARCELLO PERRICONE 03 DEC 2019 0
PHOENIX POINT REVIEW
Released 03 Dec 2019
Developer: Snapshot Games
Genre: Turn-Based Strategy
Available from:
Direct
Every person is the hero of their own tales. Whether it’s Starship Troopers’ bugs or XCOM’s aliens, being the Earth’s saviour has always held an imperative allure. X-COM’s creator is fully aware of that, and Julian Gollop’s latest title exchanges the vastness of space for the depths of the ocean, pitting humanity against mutated seafood borne out of a virus unleashed by the melting of the polar caps. It's a bit contrived, as a plot, and it utilises the creatures’ virus and habitat to endanger the Earth, adding a timer until its irreparable demise.


You are the ‘leader’ of Phoenix Point, HQ of the Phoenix Project (In Phoenix, Arizona?-ED). I say this hesitantly, because the game does not bestow you a rank, title, name, or position, and generally makes zero effort to give the organisation any character whatsoever. You are unceremoniously thrown into the command chair by a video message from the previous Phoenix Project leader, with no knowledge as to why or how you were chosen, or even where you were when the message reached you. Your character and Phoenix Point itself are a blank slate. Halo Reach’s Noble Six has more character than you do.

Spoiler

After a brief tutorial where you guide two (eventually three) soldiers towards Phoenix Point and clear its flight deck, the game opens up into the base management and geoscape strategic layers, allowing you to scan the world for points of interest and send out dropships to investigate them. This is how you contact with any of the three NPC factions that are trying to survive the Pandoran Pandemic in their own way. The way you interact with them and their havens -- be it protecting, stealing from, sabotaging, or raiding -- will determine which quests and services you get from these groups.

Unlike Firaxis’ XCOM, Phoenix Point is much more proactive. Aside from defending bases and human havens within your area of operations, you can do a lot of active searching for missions as well. Each aircraft has an operational range it can continuously fly around until it runs out of fuel and needs to resupply at a base or friendly settlement. It only needs to go back to a Phoenix Project base when soldiers or vehicles take damage or need a new loadout. Interestingly, you can field several aircrafts in different AOs around the world, allowing you to hit multiple regions at the same time and launch missions in quick succession while the dropships are still in transit.

The tactical missions themselves are vastly different from what we’re used to seeing in this space. PP doubles XCOM’s action points to 4, allowing you to move or shoot up to four times, depending on the AP cost of each action. Special classes abilities, like the Heavy’s Jetpack or the Assault’s Dash, require Will Points which are gained or lost when performing or suffering good/bad actions. This works well enough to create an interesting balance between spamming abilities and making sure your soldiers don’t panic due to low Will. The AP system works well with most classes aside from the Grenadier and the Sniper, who are currently under-powered thanks to poor balancing between mobility, accuracy and shot costs.

Phoenix Point also swears off the classic, visible percentage shot in favour of a more opaque health colour system. When aiming at an enemy, you get a series of white chevrons on their red health bar indicating how much damage each shot will make -- the whiter the chevron, the higher the chances of hitting. However, bullets are also fully simulated objects, meaning they can hit cover and be completely blunted by the surface in front of the enemy.

These mechanics are perfectly sound on paper, but the way they intersect is frustrating. Your soldiers display all the tactical awareness of a floppy jellyfish, being unable to tilt their weapons around a light post or aim for the enemy’s exposed parts when taking a shot. They are even unable to crouch when in the line of fire of another soldier, resulting in highly vexing instances of toally avoidable friendly fire. This dogged refusal to behave like humans instead of little computer men has shattered my immersion on more than one occasion. In XCOM, even though bullets are not ‘real’ projectiles, soldiers will still crouch when you aim in their direction and flinch when a weapon is fired at close range. Phoenix Point’s lack of detail in this area is disappointing, and it makes you risk shots that would definitely down an enemy but may also end up hitting your own people.

Phoenix Point tries to compensate for this by allowing you to manually aim shots. The health bar/colour system still applies, meaning even perfectly aim shots may still miss, but it gives you a bit more control over where in the enemy’s body your troops are targeting. The interesting aspect here is the ability to target different limbs to generate different results, similar to Fallout’s VATS. Shoot an arm out and the enforcers drop their shields, shoot a leg out and they start bleeding to death and can’t move far, etc... Unfortunately, given the game’s accuracy system, even aiming around a friend can still end up with you unloading half a magazine into the back of their head.

Keeping to the theme, Phoenix Point has a lot of depth to logistics. You must manufacture every single armour, weapon, and item your organisation uses -- or take them from the field/allies -- creating a constant need to be aware of your stocks. While larger items like guns and vehicles can take many days to complete, supplies tend to be practically instantaneous. A good thing, since all ammo magazines and grenades used will need replacing.

To make full use of those items, the game features an inventory system for each character, composed of three slots for ready use, and several more in storage. You are free to stop and rummage through your inventory at any time, although moving items from the ready belt to the backpack costs an action point. When finding items in the wild and in loot crates, you can open the inventory and load your soldier up with objects mid-mission, but going over their encumbrance results in mobility penalties.

Speaking of soldiers, Phoenix Point’s treatment of “the squad” is equal parts detailed and shallow. The game lack’s XCOM 2’s breadth of customisation options (although is on-par with XCOM: Enemy Unknown), but each character unlocks a second class at Level 4 which allows for the mixing and matching of talents/perks from different trees. At the same time, the game only features three classes to start with; you can unlock a Psi Soldier later on, though that requires side-factions stuff. Weapons do not follow the classic upgrade-tier formula either: damage and range are based on which faction made it. It is an interesting system, but Gollops’s never been one for in-game help - you’ll end up doing a lot of experimenting.

As the creator of XCOM, comparisons between this, the original X-COM and Firaxis’ own XCOM take are inevitable. I feel it’s important at this point to talk about Phoenix Point’s lack of character. While the game does have a semblance of a story complete with side-factions and faction leaders, it lacks other nuances, like base personnel. This really makes you appreciate how important Central Officer Bradford was to Firaxis’ XCOM games. The presence of a couple of named characters representing dozens of individuals is an extremely effective narrative tool -- one that Phoenix Point ignores to its detriment.

The bases seem to be completely automated, both maintaining themselves and performing activities like research, food production and manufacturing without human oversight. No explanation is given as to where your first soldiers (and dropship pilot) come from, or who is operating the base and keeping it operational when these are on deployment. The base management -- just like the combat, the soldiers, the enemies, and everything else -- feel cold and distant; an engineer’s game, lacking the human passion and artistic flourishes that made the Firaxis’ version feel so human. In Phoenix Point, instead of the Commander of an international, vital organisation, you feel more like an RTS-god magically overseeing everything through the power of clicks and interfaces.

As important as I feel the above is, the biggest issue I had with the game is its inherent detachment. Phoenix Point commits one of the cardinal sins of game design: allowing bad things to happen that you have no control over. A lot of modern games give player’s choice and make the consequences known, or at least go some-way towards highlighting why the bad things happened. Phoenix Point feels very detached, and leaves some distance between player actions and the end result. Sure, sometimes you will lose soldiers to bad tactics or planning, other times it’s because your sharpshooter will fire three revolver shots into the box in front of them and the soldier standing on the other side, instead of leaning one inch to the right and avoiding both to hit the enemy. It is the kind of event that can’t be planned for, nor can it be avoided, and ends up punishing the player regardless of where the fault lies. That lack of accountability is, in a word, very frustrating (That’s two words-ED).

This is a very different strategy game to anything currently available. In a weird way, it’s an experience removed from time - a re-imagining of X-COM that draws a little bit from modern interpretations, but also sticks close to design goals and ideas twenty years out of date. Some issues I had with the original X-COM linger, and Gollop also doesn’t seem to have found that human touch that made Firaxis’ own take so appealing.

Phoenix Point works, and is overall pretty good - the strategic layer puts you in charge of multiple squads, vehicles and bases while at the same time conducting diplomacy, research and managing logistics. Truth be told, I almost wish that I could play Phoenix Point without the tactical battles, as at the moment the tactical layer feels sterile, and can be a bit obtuse. For all its highs, it also boasts some serious lows, and the end result is equal parts interesting and slightly off-putting.

That said, maybe they have a point about the lack of character: I never cared for XCOM "characters" as they felt detached, and they stroke my nerves on a lot of occasions, but I really liked the scientists in UFO:Afterlight having proper character sheets and being usable in combat (even though it was not super advisable).

 

[Mazisky]

Hiring external teams for art typically ends badly.

Buying assets instead of making everything by hand is the norm, especially on unity.
Does make me wonder if the Hasbro soldiers look that way because they really thought it would be a good look or if they got a deal on some premade asset pack and decided to only make original monsters.

Considering how many classes look exactly identical to Xcom 2, i think it was a deliberate choice.

 

[Black]

Already 3 DLCs out for a total of ~25 bucks? Good job, *nglo G*llop. You take Epic's chinabucks to "make sure your game is as good as it can be" and still shit out dlcs.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Already 3 DLCs out for a total of ~25 bucks? Good job, *nglo G*llop. You take Epic's chinabucks to "make sure your game is as good as it can be" and still shit out dlcs.

I'm pretty certain that's just pre-order at this point.

 

[cvv]

Yeah I think the first DLC (probably the cosmetic one?) is out in February, the others will come throughout the year. Just like with XCOM.

 

[Black]

pre-order

That's not good either, it just came out and there's already DLC for it.

 

[cvv]

pre-order

That's not good either, it just came out and there's already DLC for it.

A DLC roadmap like that has been completely normal for a while now. Or do you wanna go back to the time when you could buy just a blank Season Pass, without knowing what you're actually getting for your money?

 

[rashiakas]

Played this for 10 mins and reinstalled xcom2.

 

[fantadomat]

Few guys gonna admit it here, but Firaxis has set a standard for modern turn based with Nuxcoms. Deal with it.

Don't know really,never played it. It looked dumb and repetitive to me. Still you talk as if there is a genre here,when in reality there are no other games like xcom2,which came 3-4 years ago. This one is the first to try and make such a game. nuxcom sold well because of youtube hype and peer pressure.

What about Shock tactics, Phantom doctrine and Xenonauts 1 and 2?

LoL totally forgot that those existed. They are pretty mediocre at best,alos i believe that PD is not a xcom clone but TB rpg,could be mistaken tho.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Besides Xenonauts 1 (and hopefully 2) are structured more like original rather than nu-Xcom.

 

[Black]

Or do you wanna go back to the time when you could buy just a blank Season Pass, without knowing what you're actually getting for your money?

I'd rather go back when you had a base game + one or two expansions for it, each having almost as much content as the base game.
Besides, as I said, it's not just that there is DLC. It's that they took Epic's money (which was supposed to be used to make a game as good and complete as possible) and are shitting out DLC on top of it.

 

[Raghar]

Or do you wanna go back to the time when you could buy just a blank Season Pass, without knowing what you're actually getting for your money?

I'd rather go back when you had a base game + one or two expansions for it, each having almost as much content as the base game.
Besides, as I said, it's not just that there is DLC. It's that they took Epic's money (which was supposed to be used to make a game as good and complete as possible) and are shitting out DLC on top of it.

And I want games to have copyright expiration after 5 years after commercial release. But I'm partially senile who has some expectations, and don't understand why profit is important.

 

[Raghar]

Few guys gonna admit it here, but Firaxis has set a standard for modern turn based with Nuxcoms. Deal with it.

Don't know really,never played it. It looked dumb and repetitive to me. Still you talk as if there is a genre here,when in reality there are no other games like xcom2,which came 3-4 years ago. This one is the first to try and make such a game. nuxcom sold well because of youtube hype and peer pressure.

What about Shock tactics, Phantom doctrine and Xenonauts 1 and 2?

LoL totally forgot that those existed. They are pretty mediocre at best,alos i believe that PD is not a xcom clone but TB rpg,could be mistaken tho.

When you don't play Phantom Doctrine as XCOM, it's passable. (But I heard that main developer basically sabotaged project and then ran to another company, and it shows.) But the STORY should be most important part of spy tactical game. And story in Phantom Doctrine sucks.

 

[Jarpie]

Played this for 10 mins and reinstalled xcom2.

That bad, huh? must be pretty fucking shit.

 

[Shog-goth]

Apart from the rest, did you take a look at the additional "bonus" content? Even here there is an atmosphere of sloppiness and approximation, the artbook is embarrassing, the OST soporific and, on top of this, you get a 500 pages anthology to remember how much interesting lore was spent in vain to get to this ridiculous mess and parody of a real game, that would be a shame even on mobile.

 

[Alpharius]

Lul, my soldier just destroyed a mission objective he was taking cover behind. He was on overwatch and crabman came around the corner and boom all bullets gone into the objective. Also had to get into melee with melee crabman chipping at another objective cause it was impossible to get line of sight on that crabman any other way. That thing had some enormous invisible hitboxes.

I've noticed the overwatch and heavy cover in general are not very usefull, cause you'll never know if some piece of wood will block line of sight. Not sure the if realistic ballistics in this game are an improvement over nuxcom rng fest anymore.

 

[Swigen]

I've noticed the overwatch and heavy cover in general are not very usefull, cause you'll never know if some piece of wood will block line of sight. Not sure the if realistic ballistics in this game are an improvement over nuxcom rng fest anymore.

I knew it!!

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Lul, my soldier just destroyed a mission objective he was taking cover behind. He was on overwatch and crabman came around the corner and boom all bullets gone into the objective. Also had to get into melee with melee crabman chipping at another objective cause it was impossible to get line of sight on that crabman any other way. That thing had some enormous invisible hitboxes.

I've noticed the overwatch and heavy cover in general are not very usefull, cause you'll never know if some piece of wood will block line of sight. Not sure the if realistic ballistics in this game are an improvement over nuxcom rng fest anymore.

whats the point of cover if you can almost automatically hit some tiny part of some creatures nose poking out from behind "full" cover from 200 yards?

There is nothing "realistic" about this type of "ballistic model". I think people just hear or like to say "ballistic model" or "projectile physics" and think it means something is really sophisticated. It just means the computer can draw a line from the end of the gun to the target and apply gravity and force to the projectile, there is nothing realistic about being able to hit some wart on a monsters ass from 800 feet in the middle of combat. Its fucking ridiculous. its not more "realistic" than "to hit" numbers, probably less.

 

[fantadomat]

Lul, my soldier just destroyed a mission objective he was taking cover behind. He was on overwatch and crabman came around the corner and boom all bullets gone into the objective. Also had to get into melee with melee crabman chipping at another objective cause it was impossible to get line of sight on that crabman any other way. That thing had some enormous invisible hitboxes.

I've noticed the overwatch and heavy cover in general are not very usefull, cause you'll never know if some piece of wood will block line of sight. Not sure the if realistic ballistics in this game are an improvement over nuxcom rng fest anymore.

whats the point of cover if you can almost automatically hit some tiny part of some creatures nose poking out from behind "full" cover from 200 yards?

There is nothing "realistic" about this type of "ballistic model". I think people just hear or like to say "ballistic model" or "projectile physics" and think it means something is really sophisticated. It just means the computer can draw a line from the end of the gun to the target and apply gravity and force to the projectile, there is nothing realistic about being able to hit some wart on a monsters ass from 800 feet in the middle of combat. Its fucking ridiculous. its not more "realistic" than "to hit" numbers, probably less.

Yes,in real fire fights cover doesn't make you immortal too.

 

[ybfelix]

"Manual aiming", "ballistic model" is a weird mix of abstraction and physical reality. It implies the soldiers, monsters and map objects actually looked, positioned and distanced exactly like what's on screen, instead of a chess board representation. So under several layers of probabilistic abstraction, you suddenly get down to nitty gritty of "can you shine a laser pointer on that antenna poking out of that debris?"