QUOTE(dishwasher @ Oct 11 2012, 02:27 PM)
Are you playing on consoles? Cos I don't see how a top down point and click turn-based strategy copies from a 3rd person game, controlled by maneuvering each character with a gamepad, ala action game. Maybe you're playing on a console and don't know that the PC version is different? I dunno, I can only guess.
I did love VC, but the battles were decidedly scripted, and some missions were ridiculously silly. Ever ran your fastest character to the checkpoint in 2 turns, ignoring all manner of strategic thinking, just to get S rank for a mission? Cos that's what some missions required. VC was not so much a strategy game as it was a 'puzzle' game. Find the right combination of moves to make, and viola, rank S. XCOM has, as far as I can tell, randomly occuring missions taking place in all manner of locations, with AI instead of scripts determining how events play out.
Playing this new XCOM using a gamepad looks pretty good actually. Makes more sense with the UI compared to kb/m.
About VC, the second and third game are less scripted. Lots of random missions you can take.
Like how VC to you felt like a puzzle based (which is silly IMO), XCOM is more of a luck based.
Ppl have been saying how they've missed a shotgun in point blank range in XCOM. Seriously?
tl;dr
this new XCOM shared a similarity with VC. Just like how XCOM shares a similarity with Fire Emblems (perma-death in particular), FFT, Jean d'Arc, etc...They're all in the same genre.
I don't see anything wrong with it.
This post has been edited by ray148: Oct 11 2012, 02:47 PM