some thoughts

[SSS]

I've been recently playing UFO:AI(2.2.1) and I must say for quite some time I really enjoyed it. Unfortunately there are many things I didn't like.

I feel cheated a little because the game isn't finished (yet?). Game version is 2.*, there's no where word "beta" and on project main page last news about changes indicates that all the game needs are minor tweaks like "Weapon balancing". I felt little disappointed when I noticed so many things are not implemented or don't work well. To make things worse from the wiki I can see that instead improving existing features developers are trying to make new functionalities. I think that finishing "basic" game first and then adding new features like "Off-base UFO Yard" might be a better choice...

But the thing that irritated me the most is lack of usability. To do simple things I have to click so many times, often repeat same things again and again. That's not only fault of UI, some things are broken by design. Why do each scientist or "worker" need to have name? I mean why do they have to be distinguished? After building a workshop and trying to "populate" it I must tick boxes and count in my mind how many slots in workshops are left. Maybe ordering them like in original UFO wasn't such a bad solution? Or maybe one can go one step forward and remove workers and scientist - scientist are in a package with a built lab.

Setting up a ship is another issue. Instead of many tabs and clicks, the ship could be equipped on one "screen". Instead of making it easier I noticed there are proposals to make additional tab for pilots. By the way I think pilots idea is not a good one - for now UFO:ai is strategy game not Sims.

There's more things I don't like: showing white text on white snow or inconsistencies in buying/selling and transferring equipment (to transfer a ship form one base to another it takes time, but selling the ship and buying same model in another is instant). But for now I' d like to see how do you respond to critic

[Destructavator]

2.2.1 is over a year old, I'd suggest you try 2.3 which has a lot of things re-vamped and is nearly a whole new game.

We're very close to an official 2.3 release, we need to fix a few issues, but you can already download an installer for it and it fixes many of the things you mentioned - especially the interface and "usability" you mentioned.

If you don't use SVN you can grab a Windows installer here:

http://ufoai.ninex.info/forum/index.php?topic=2830.msg33021#msg33021

If you use Linux its very easy to download and compile the game.

If you have a Mac things are a little more difficult...

[Kildor]

Well, at first, there was not any words about "finished game" from developers. It is release, not final. There are design documentations, proposed techtree and storyline, so current additions is adding missed basic functionality.

And you really ought play to 2.3 version, there have been many fixes and improvements in usability side of the game.

[Duke]

But for now I' d like to see how do you respond to critic

The project has already responded

As you are by far not the first user to bring up those issues, each of them is either eliminated or at least improved in current trunk code (2.3), except for the 'hire scientists by checkboxes' thing. But there is a lot discussion about it and it will probably move to 'hire by number'.

I don't know where you DLed the game from, but on the SF project hp, the whole project is tagged as 'beta'.

[SSS]

Sorry I didn't know that "last stable release" is almost 2 years old. It makes my previous post quite stupid. But again the project main website is misleading - informing people about last changes in news section and not providing links to playable is confusing. You can't expect that the players will know development cycle or check SF tags or releases' dates (or maybe you like replaying to annoying posts like mine ). Anyway, sorry for wasting your time and thanks for link to the last builds (btw, maybe such link should be put in download section of project website?)

[SSS]

(btw, maybe such link should be put in download section of project website?)

Well, maybe it's not such a good idea. I gave version 2.3 a try and I am quite disappointed. It's far from "stable", game crashes so often that it's impossible to play it. :/

[criusmac]

Chances are uh, is this a map compiling problem?

I'd suspect the maps aren't compiled, but since I don't know how it works, I can't be sure of this.

Does the game crash the first time you try to enter a combat zone?

Anyways, the developers seem to like getting crash reports to tinker with.. It's their hobby I think. While the latest development version isn't stable, and does crash, it shouldn't crash a lot... I think... While I myself get crashes on almost every run, It's usually something I myself didn't do as required by the current development version... Like recompile all the maps, again, which seems to need to be done a lot for some reason. But once that's done, it doesn't usually crash...

But yes, I try to avoid the development version as much as I can in games too since it's not stable, or balanced, or (insert problem here). This development community however really tries to push everyone to only play the development version, and judging from the many posts I've read, playing the stable version is frowned upon.

Basically, it's development version and, not much other choice here... You seem like a stable version player though, like me.. My personal suggestion (which doesn't represent anyone else's) is to try a different game for now, like X-Force, or Battle for Wesnoth.

If I'm wrong, and you have no problem working through all the bugs of the development version, I recommend you post the crash logs and other important information in the development bugs section, or possibly here, and let the developers fix it, so you can continue trying to play this game.

(Edited to be less certain sounding since I'm really kinda clueless)