Johnnyfan12
Well-Known Member
I wasn't so much thinking of time units specifically, though I still prefer even that to a system where shooting, then firing is considered a "special ability."Consider Xenonauts, the "true" successor to X-Com, and how its tactical battles are an absolute slog. Time units is a terrible and outdated system. The two-action system is an incredibly efficient innovation that allows the game to move at a brisk pace. I love X-Com, but I doubt I could go back. Enemy Within promises a strategy layer overhaul, which is really the weak link of the new XCOM.
Besides, on the time units vs two-action system, there already exists a best-of-both-worlds alternative: Valkyria Chronicles. You have a movement meter that depletes as you move, and you may take your action any time. It's both simple and tactically versatile. The next X-Com would do well to steal that idea.
But movement method aside, I contend that original X-Com is superior to the remake in a multitude of ways:
*Freedom to accelerate technological growth, provided that you have the funds... and the fact that your personnel actually do have to be paid, so you are getting more or faster production and research in exchange for money. In the new one, you "earn" personnel who never draw a salary and somehow make production cheaper. Silly.
*The UFO-fighting minigame has basically been reduced to a diceroll in the new game.
*The new game almost entirely contrives which enemies you run into and when. Somehow you always magically end up fighting the easy guys first and ramping up to Mutons, Cyberdiscs, etc. In the original you might end up fighting a Cyberdisc on the first mission and just have to escape. You might run into Mutons before you see Floaters. You might make it through a whole game without ever seeing an Ethereal. I like the randomness and the not-cater-to-the-player-ness.
*You're allowed to build more than 1 Skyranger. Tension ramps up in the frequency of attacks, rather than the contrived "somehow there are always 3 terror missions at once and you are only allowed to pick one!"
*Free aim.
*Actual line-of-sight. New game contrives percentages based on no cover, full-cover, half-cover. Realistically, a lot of the shots at a guy in half-cover are physically impossible without destroying the cover, yet the shots will often pass through the wall to hit the target.
I'm sure I'm forgetting some things, but those are my biggest gripes.