General > Discussion

UFO:AI, my comments and criticisms

(1/8) > >>

Adrian Magnus:
I commend the magnificent effort and energy put into the game by all the people involved in making UFO:AI. I love the game you guys have created. It may be incomplete, it may not yet even have all the features of the original, but down the road it's going, it stands to surpass UFO:EU in many regards. To think that you are doing this all during your free time for no monetary recompense is something amazing and worthy of praise.

Winter, in particular, stands out. In my opinion, his creative vision of trying to infuse realism in the game and keeping things down to Earth makes the game so much better. It feels more like I'm really in charge of an anti-alien fighting force, fighting a real desperate battle against a true alien threat.

I wish I could invite the lot of you for a drink, you deserve it.  :D


Okay, now that I'm done saying how awesome I think you guys are, it is time for the suggestions and criticisms. I try to be polite, but please forgive me if I come-off as unnecessarily scathing, I do that on occasion. Also, I understand the game is incomplete. When I mention something that's missing, I mean it's not in the game or in the TODO lists. Note that the following are in no particular order, I just wrote them down as they came to mind.

1. The future scenario is very pie in the sky. It's basically, "yay world peace!". It really doesn't detract from the setting at all, in my opinion, but it's not exactly realistic. In particular because it completely ignores the problems that will be raised over the next century by peak oil (petroleum extraction stops going up, prices shoot through the roof, hilarity ensues), and global warming (it's happening, there's still debate over whether it's humanity's fault, but it's happening). But whatever, it's really not that big of a deal.

2. I don't like that the world has been united into six different countries. That ignores a number of geo-political realities on a large scale. I think it really is best if you just go back to the old "many sponsor nations" thing of the old game. You could probably have the European Union and US+Mexico (removes 60% of illegal immigrants by turning them into US citizens!) as new things. Along with Russia re-united with a few of their old Soviet holdings (Belarus, Kazakhstan, part of Ukraine, others). Africa, Middle-East, and Asia are never going to be united entities, at the very least not within a century. South America and Ocenia, eh maybe. It's more serious than #1 but, again, not that big of a deal.

3. Okay, this storyline problem is very important. I'm finding it extremely inconsistent that an over attack on Mumbai, followed by overt attacks on major population centres, is followed by only covert activity on the part of the aliens as well as a covert human response. "Vague statements to ease the populace" isn't going to fly, the people are going to demand action, and they're going to demand high-profile action. I think the original's approach of a covert alien incursion being met by a covert human response is both more consistent, and more realistic.

4. Plasma weapons. You guys did a good effort at trying to make the concept work, but... it doesn't. Plasma weapons are something that sounds cool and is a staple of science fiction all over, but it's also one of the most unrealistic weapons ever. While your particular version looked more plausible than the others, I decided to ask the guys at StarDestroyer.net for their opinion (they're good about that sort of thing). The results are not good. The most important posts are the first two in the first page, and the first two in the second page.
(BTW - don't pay attention to anything brianeyci says)

Now, I'm not suggesting that you change it this late in the development cycle. I think your plasma weapons are really cool. I just thought you guys should know they're not as realistic as you seem to believe they are.

5. The plasma blade is actually realistic, since it's basically a glorified blow-torch. However, I take issue with some of its mechanism. The foam, it's exceedingly complicated and adds several points of failure to the whole thing. It's would be much better to change that to a magnetic field, as plasma usually has an charge. The magnetic field turns-on when the weapon is activated, no need for proximity detectors. Also you don't have to worry about a magnetic field not achieving a proper seal. One of the general principles in designing stuff is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid), and a magnetic field is far simpler than a system for deploying magical ultra-hardening paste.

6. I'm confused regarding the shotgun. The in-game UFOpedia suggests both slugs and flechettes cause "blast" type damage. The online wiki suggests they both cause "normal" type damage. Which is it? In any case it should be slugs cause normal and flechettes cause blast, no?

7. I can get head-shots halfway across the map with the sniper rifle while the user is standing-up. I'm not sure if this can be implemented, but the way it should be is sniper rifle is accurate only when used while crouching. Those things tend to be heavier than assault rifles and quite unwieldy. There's a reason why real life snipers usually lie down on the ground, and it's not just to make themselves less visible.

8. Incendiary weapons don't do the "area denial" thing described in the UFOpedia. I suppose it hasn't been implemented yet, which is understandable, but I'm not seeing it in the TODO lists. That's a bit disappointing.

9. The Aliens could use their own rocket-laucher or grenade-launcher equivalent. They had one in the original game, IIRC, it fired guided missiles. The usefulness of non line-of-sight weapons would presumably not be lost on the aliens, so I would expect them to have something to compensate their other two heavy weapons.

10. There seems to be a problem with the hospital system. I can't heal more than five soldiers at a time. I built three bases, each with its own hospital. I should be able to heal five soldiers per base, right? Well, I can heal no more than five soldiers globally.

11. There's a certain lack of difficulty in the later missions, when one have advanced weapons a plenty. I expect this is partly because you haven't implemented some of the more dangerous adversaries yet, but I'd also like to recommend that missions later in the game have you facing larger alien forces. The most I've seen is eight.

12. Regarding nanocomposite armour. Why is it that the males get this massive chest-plate and the girls get a puny little thing? It's supposed to be armour not a fashion statement, there's no reason whatsoever why the girl's version should show-off their boobs. By all rights it should be a solid plate like the dudes have, and one of equal thickness. The normal body armour doesn't have this problem, sure you can see that the females are females but it doesn't hug their breasts like the newer one does.


EDIT - This isn't related to the game itself, but the wiki's design is just terrible. I should not have to click on a link that takes me to a separate page to read just a paragraph or two. Large pages covering a broad topic is much easier nd efficient than having each and every sub-division have its own page. The worst offenders are the "Damage Type" and "Skill" pages. You could easily put everything that those links lead to in the page itself.

Winter:
Thanks a lot for your comments, Adrian. I'll try and respond point by point.



--- Quote from: "Adrian Magnus" ---1. The future scenario is very pie in the sky. It's basically, "yay world peace!". It really doesn't detract from the setting at all, in my opinion, but it's not exactly realistic. In particular because it completely ignores the problems that will be raised over the next century by peak oil (petroleum extraction stops going up, prices shoot through the roof, hilarity ensues), and global warming (it's happening, there's still debate over whether it's humanity's fault, but it's happening). But whatever, it's really not that big of a deal.
--- End quote ---


Since I first joined the project, I haven't been a fan of the 'world peace' premise, but it was needed to stop the rest of the backstory from getting over-complicated. I think we handled it in the most realistic way possible. Rising standards of living and enhanced personal freedoms, as well as a touch of ruthless oppression here and there.

We certainly have plans that, during the course of the game, the peace will fall apart in places.



--- Quote ---2. I don't like that the world has been united into six different countries. That ignores a number of geo-political realities on a large scale. I think it really is best if you just go back to the old "many sponsor nations" thing of the old game. You could probably have the European Union and US+Mexico (removes 60% of illegal immigrants by turning them into US citizens!) as new things. Along with Russia re-united with a few of their old Soviet holdings (Belarus, Kazakhstan, part of Ukraine, others). Africa, Middle-East, and Asia are never going to be united entities, at the very least not within a century. South America and Ocenia, eh maybe. It's more serious than #1 but, again, not that big of a deal.
--- End quote ---


Eight, not six. ;)



--- Quote ---3. Okay, this storyline problem is very important. I'm finding it extremely inconsistent that an over attack on Mumbai, followed by overt attacks on major population centres, is followed by only covert activity on the part of the aliens as well as a covert human response. "Vague statements to ease the populace" isn't going to fly, the people are going to demand action, and they're going to demand high-profile action. I think the original's approach of a covert alien incursion being met by a covert human response is both more consistent, and more realistic.
--- End quote ---


You have a point here, and we may change that angle at some point. Not the attacks on Mumbai, but a big military action presented as a smokescreen for PHALANX.



--- Quote ---4. Plasma weapons. You guys did a good effort at trying to make the concept work, but... it doesn't. Plasma weapons are something that sounds cool and is a staple of science fiction all over, but it's also one of the most unrealistic weapons ever. While your particular version looked more plausible than the others, I decided to ask the guys at StarDestroyer.net for their opinion (they're good about that sort of thing). The results are not good. The most important posts are the first two in the first page, and the first two in the second page.
(BTW - don't pay attention to anything brianeyci says)

Now, I'm not suggesting that you change it this late in the development cycle. I think your plasma weapons are really cool. I just thought you guys should know they're not as realistic as you seem to believe they are.
--- End quote ---


I just work with the stuff I'm given, and I'm no physicist. I've registered on their forums to invite them to lend their expertise to make UFO:AI more realistic.



--- Quote ---5. The plasma blade is actually realistic, since it's basically a glorified blow-torch. However, I take issue with some of its mechanism. The foam, it's exceedingly complicated and adds several points of failure to the whole thing. It's would be much better to change that to a magnetic field, as plasma usually has an charge. The magnetic field turns-on when the weapon is activated, no need for proximity detectors. Also you don't have to worry about a magnetic field not achieving a proper seal. One of the general principles in designing stuff is KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid), and a magnetic field is far simpler than a system for deploying magical ultra-hardening paste.
--- End quote ---


Can do that.



--- Quote ---6. I'm confused regarding the shotgun. The in-game UFOpedia suggests both slugs and flechettes cause "blast" type damage. The online wiki suggests they both cause "normal" type damage. Which is it? In any case it should be slugs cause normal and flechettes cause blast, no?
--- End quote ---


No, 'blast' governs only explosive damage. Both ammo types should cause 'normal' damage. Which really should have been renamed to 'impact' damage.



--- Quote ---7. I can get head-shots halfway across the map with the sniper rifle while the user is standing-up. I'm not sure if this can be implemented, but the way it should be is sniper rifle is accurate only when used while crouching. Those things tend to be heavier than assault rifles and quite unwieldy. There's a reason why real life snipers usually lie down on the ground, and it's not just to make themselves less visible.
--- End quote ---


No idea about that, I don't code.



--- Quote ---8. Incendiary weapons don't do the "area denial" thing described in the UFOpedia. I suppose it hasn't been implemented yet, which is understandable, but I'm not seeing it in the TODO lists. That's a bit disappointing.
--- End quote ---


It will definitely be incorporated at some point. When, I don't know, but it is on the books. As for the inconsistencies -- I'm writing from the point of where the game ought to finish, not where it is right now, to save us a lot of rewriting as the game progresses.



--- Quote ---9. The Aliens could use their own rocket-laucher or grenade-launcher equivalent. They had one in the original game, IIRC, it fired guided missiles. The usefulness of non line-of-sight weapons would presumably not be lost on the aliens, so I would expect them to have something to compensate their other two heavy weapons.
--- End quote ---


We do indeed have plans for an alien infantry launcher of some type. A projectile sniper weapon as well. However, both are still in the formative stages.



--- Quote ---12. Regarding nanocomposite armour. Why is it that the males get this massive chest-plate and the girls get a puny little thing? It's supposed to be armour not a fashion statement, there's no reason whatsoever why the girl's version should show-off their boobs. By all rights it should be a solid plate like the dudes have, and one of equal thickness. The normal body armour doesn't have this problem, sure you can see that the females are females but it doesn't hug their breasts like the newer one does.
--- End quote ---


That armour was made by the original team, long before we took over, and they didn't have a very consistent art style. I've always hated that model to the very core of my being. Unfortunately, we have no better armour models to replace it, and no one capable of animating and texturing who can spare the time to improve it.



--- Quote ---EDIT - This isn't related to the game itself, but the wiki's design is just terrible. I should not have to click on a link that takes me to a separate page to read just a paragraph or two. Large pages covering a broad topic is much easier nd efficient than having each and every sub-division have its own page. The worst offenders are the "Damage Type" and "Skill" pages. You could easily put everything that those links lead to in the page itself.
--- End quote ---


Believe it or not, it used to be a lot worse. There are some old bits of nastiness remaining, like the ones you quoted, but overall the wiki is a joy to navigate compared to what it was. Since the Skill and Damage Type descriptions are no longer in the in-game UFOpaedia, they haven't been updated or maintained in a long long time.

Regards,
Winter

blondandy:
I am a physicist. If you want help, please ask.

Adrian Magnus:

--- Quote from: "Winter" ---You have a point here, and we may change that angle at some point. Not the attacks on Mumbai, but a big military action presented as a smokescreen for PHALANX.
--- End quote ---


I'm not sure why the attacks on Mumbai need to stay, or why PHALANX itself needs to be a huge secret (well yes I do, it's to justify you controlling 8-man squads instead of mid-sized military formations), but large military action as a smokescreen for PHALANX works just fine to keep things consistent.



--- Quote ---I just work with the stuff I'm given, and I'm no physicist. I've registered on their forums to invite them to lend their expertise to make UFO:AI more realistic.
--- End quote ---


Well, nothing's perfect. Like I said, I don't think it should be changed at this stage.



--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---Plasma knife, magnetic fields, etc.
--- End quote ---

Can do that.
--- End quote ---


Exellent! I can help if you want.



--- Quote ---No, 'blast' governs only explosive damage. Both ammo types should cause 'normal' damage. Which really should have been renamed to 'impact' damage.
--- End quote ---

Okay, so the description of 'blast' damage is wrong, since it says buckshot qualifies as 'blast' damage. Though now we are faced with a different issue. Why would I want to use the shotgun saboted slugs when flechettes do more damage? If slugs are 'normal' and flechettes are 'blast' then you'd use slugs against armoured opponents because their armour is not as strong against that as against flechettes. But with both the same, I see no reason for using slugs at all.


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---Sniper rifle, crouching, accuracy.
--- End quote ---

No idea about that, I don't code.
--- End quote ---


Well, it's not a high priority thing anyway. Just look into it when convenient. If it can be done, great. If not, then that's unfortunate but not a huge detriment.



--- Quote ---It will definitely be incorporated at some point. When, I don't know, but it is on the books. As for the inconsistencies -- I'm writing from the point of where the game ought to finish, not where it is right now, to save us a lot of rewriting as the game progresses.
--- End quote ---


I just wanted assurance that you haven't forgotten about it, since I didn't see it in a TODO list anywhere. If you are planning to incorporate it at some later date, then good.


--- Quote ---That armour was made by the original team, long before we took over, and they didn't have a very consistent art style. I've always hated that model to the very core of my being. Unfortunately, we have no better armour models to replace it, and no one capable of animating and texturing who can spare the time to improve it.
--- End quote ---


Ah, I see. You noticed the model sucks but can't do anything to fix it at this time.


--- Quote ---Believe it or not, it used to be a lot worse. There are some old bits of nastiness remaining, like the ones you quoted, but overall the wiki is a joy to navigate compared to what it was. Since the Skill and Damage Type descriptions are no longer in the in-game UFOpaedia, they haven't been updated or maintained in a long long time.
--- End quote ---


Well, glad to know you've worked on it.



--- Quote ---nohting
--- End quote ---

You seem to have skipped items 10 and 11. Well, 10 is really a bug report, guess this wasn't the right forum anyway. I want to revise 11 in any case:
In the late game, the frequency of missions with 6-8 aliens needs to increase and the frequency of missions with 4-5 aliens needs to decrease. I think it's a waste of the player's time to have a squad outfited with nanocomposite, plasma weapons, and particle weapons, only to have to fight four aliens, one of which is waving around a sword and gets shot before it can do any damage.

Winter:
I didn't respond to 10 or 11 because they're not in my area of expertise. You need to talk to one of the coders about that.

Still, since we're already planning variable-size PHALANX teams, larger alien forces should be incorporated at some point.

The main difference between flechettes and sabots are close-range power vs. medium-range accuracy. Sabots are supposed to be a lot more accurate across the board while flechettes excel at the close-up kill. Not very much stat balancing has been done, though, because most of us are busy busy people.

What I'd really like to see is some kind of 'repository' for various people's modded .ufo files, so that lots of people can playtest with lots of weapon stat variations. Then, with feedback left by the testers on the repository, we can home in on the stats that work best together.

blondandy, do you mind if I ask about your exact credentials?

Regards,
Winter

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page