So I've beaten AL (normal diff)

  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 Meneliki



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 09 December 2012 - 03:16 PM

Not a bad game, but I do prefer Aftershock. AL has the edge in production value, but it is severely lacking in tactical depth. In Aftershock it felt like my victories were a result of clever tactical planning, whereas in AL it just sorta felt like i was dragging my squad around the map, shooting everything. The lack of clear indication of where my squaddies can and can't see(i.e. LoS mode) was irritating, most of all. The special sight modes were cool, but I didn't feel like they were integrated properly. I'm seeing enemies i shouldn't be able to see and it wasn't immediately clear why. Also the values in the cfg files were screwed, i was hearing aliens from WAY too far away. Modded that myself to fix. Anyway, long story short, Line of Sight in AL was completely messed.

There also wasn't any real tactical depth to the Geoscape part of the game, either.Conquer territory, build stuff on it. Next. Seemed to leave alot to be desired.

Lastly, the combination of art style/sound on the weapons made them feel cartoony and not terribly dangerous/violent.. Why did a chaingun firing sound like a silenced SMG? lol

Anyways, all in all, it was a good game. The playthru was 25-30hrs so it was interesting enough to keep me playing. I also didn't find it terribly difficult, either. I've seen ppl post on this forum that its really hard, or they're having issues with the Beastmen.. personally, i didnt. they went down fairly quick for me.

I've also just beaten the new XCOM game, which I loved but again I didn't feel there was a tremendous amount of tactical depth beyond "Where should I move this guy and who should I shoot at?"

Also, I've been playing a bit of UFO: Extraterrestrials. I'm loving that one. Decent tactical depth. Brutal and unforgiving, but that makes the victories all the more satisfying. It is, however, a shameless XCOM rip. All the other "XCOM homage" games like AL/AS etc take the formula and put their own spin on it. UFO: ET puts no spin at all. It's literally a straight remake with a different name. Still, it's fun and I'd reccomend it.

Anyway. AL score IMHO:

Visuals: 3/5
Sound: 1/5 (lame weapon noises and that old lady(Ute?) drove me nuts lol)
Gameplay: 3/5 (not tactical enough)
Overall: 3/5

Just my 0.02


#2 trepach



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 26 October 2013 - 12:55 AM

UFO Aftershock was not flawless either. I had so much fun with it - the variety of weapon types: from sniper rifles to shotguns; the variety of damage types, ammunition, weapon attachements, grenadess, noninterchangeable classes made it one of the games with the bigger weapon availability.

On the other hand - dumb-rushing AI; shooting over the roof of an underground base; weak cultists and mutants; mechs so heavily armored it gets boring killing them with hit and run all the time; weapon range mechanic where a single step away can save you from otherwise certain heavy damage.

It sure is fun to have multiple choices of weapons and use the one that suits you in ASh, but having to research, adapt and use the weapons that suit the current situation was also good in AL. ANd I'm talking on the hardest difficulty here. Playing Ash was not challenging even easy and boring and repetitive, while AL puts you in a completely different situation over time. And yes, I'm playing on the hardest difficulty.

AL requires a good technological setup and weapon loadouts, not like ASh where you can beat half the game without even having to change the loadout.

What AL really lacks is a good cover system. I know it has one, but it gets unlocked too far at the end where you dont need it anymore.

As a drawline:
Aftershock = weapon variety;
Afterlight = technological variety
Aftermath = best tactical combat system with its "peek around the corner technique"(which becomes useless after you get the psi pistols)

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users