Xenonauts 2 - Gameplay Trailer

[HiddenX]

Publisher Hooded Horse released a new gameplay trailer for Xenonauts 2:

Xenonauts 2 - Gameplay Trailer | Turn-Based Tactical Alien Invasion

More information.

 

[JDR13]

Is this a direct sequel to Xenonauts. I couldn't get into the first game despite wanting to like it. The mechanics were solid, but it just looked and felt bland to me.

 

[Carnifex]

Xenonauts initially hit me as bland yet when I dug in, I found some surprising depth and enjoyment. It did take a bit of playing to get there, for sure. And, if I remember right, it's a fairly tough game as well.

I'd be rather keen on this one if it's a sequel, for sure.

 

[Stingray]

It's not a sequel in the usual sense, it happens in an alternate timeline from Xenonauts 1. Here's the official description from the devs, most relevant stuff bolded by me:

Xenonauts-2 is a large and complex strategy game loosely inspired by the classic X-Com games from the 90s. It is not a direct sequel to the first Xenonauts but rather an updated and improved portrayal of similar events. The time period of the game is no longer the 1970s but instead the modern day, however the action now takes place in an alternate history where the Soviet Union never collapsed and the Cold War never ended - you can thank extraterrestrial interference in human politics for all of this!

The Xenonauts have already existed for decades when the game begins, having been formed as a joint NATO-Soviet organisation to secretly study the fragments of a crashed extraterrestrial craft found in Iceland (the discovery of which nearly sparked a nuclear war until the Americans agreed to share it). Unfortunately, little useful knowledge is gained from the remains and the Xenonauts fade into irrelevance as time passes - despite having circumstantial evidence that the aliens are continuing to visit our world, they are unable to prove it.

The game begins when the aliens begin an open invasion of Earth. Half a dozen hostile UFOs appear in our skies, attacking several major cities. The various world powers attempt to defend themselves in vain, unable to track the UFOs and suffering heavy losses on the few occasions their fighters manage to find their targets. When the UFOs retreat after a day of sowing terror, both superpowers agree a united global front against the aliens is needed - as long as the other isn't in charge of it.

Despite being an intelligence / research organisation, the Xenonauts are chosen as the compromise candidates to co-ordinate the defence of Earth. The Commander is the only military officer sufficiently highly regarded by both sides to be an acceptable candidate for leadership of the organisation, and is put in charge of assembling a "first response" force capable of operating anywhere in the world. The price of their support is that any research acquired by the Xenonauts be shared with the funding nations.

The game therefore begins with the player taking charge of a small organisation and having to quickly grow it into something capable of defending the planet. The aliens, meanwhile, are broadcasting messages promising that any who surrender will be spared. Humanity begins the game united behind the Xenonauts, but failure to effectively defend their territory will lead entire regions of the world to conclude that they are better off taking their chances with the aliens!

Finally - a few familiar faces are returning in the alien and Xenonaut ranks, but remember that nothing from the first Xenonauts is considered canon for the sequel!

 

[Kordanor]

And thats probably better that way. I think this scenario is great, and I don't think we need to have like "now earth is destroyed" or "now we need to follow aliens to mars" scenario or something like that.

I did back it on Kickstarter in 2018 and I am obviously looking forward to it. Xenonauts 1 already going into a direction which I prefered over Firaxis XCom. While Firaxis XCom simplified mechanics, Xenonauts was actually expanding on them. So even the first Xenonauts felt to me a bit like XCom getting a bit of Jagged Alliance.

 

[Couchpotato]

Tomato Tomahto as they say. Both games are enjoyable but at the end of the day Firaxis's XCom is the better game. Wanna know why? Mods and modern graphics.

 

[Stingray]

Playing Phoenix Point last year made me realize/remember just how terrible the combat system/mechanics are in Firaxis' XCOM games.

 

[Couchpotato]

I can agree with that just because Phoenix Point is also better then Xenonauts. The story sucked, I mean it's terrible, and it's buggy as hell. Sorry it has to be said once again.

 

[Stingray]

Didn't run into any bugs at all when I played Phoenix Point w/ all DLCs last year. 150 hour completionist'ish playthrough. You're probably right that its story isn't as good as XCOM, but I wouldn't say it's terrible, it seemed fine for a game of that type. Gameplay matters far more to me anyway.

I didn't play Xenonauts 1, but this new one looks much improved, pretty sure I'll give it a try once it finally comes out.

 

[Couchpotato]

Then your lucky I played it when it was released on Epic and after patches on GOG. Also yeah the combat worked well, but me personally I need good game-play and story.

Otherwise I lose interest fast and both XCom's has a passable story campaign. I'll play Xenonauts 2 but a lot of complaints online are pointing out it looks like the same game.

 

[Stingray]

The problem with these X-COM-like games is that the story is always essentially the same whether it's the original X-COM from the 90s, the newer XCOMs, Phoenix Point, the UFO games, Xenonauts, or whatever. Gameplay is the reason they exist.

When it comes to top tactics franchises, Jagged Alliance has so much more room for interesting stories than X-COM-likes do, it's a shame that 20 years of its potential has been wasted.

 

[Tony]

For me, I like XCom more than Xenonauts and Phoenix Point (though I'll always buy all of them) because the single base versus multiple bases changes the focus. One base plays more like a traditional RPG, even if I have to focus on more than six party members after a while. Both Xenonauts and Phoenix Point come to a point where it's just management, and you're so distant from all your faceless squad members all at different bases all over the place, and lose the connection you maintain in the new XComs. And XCom just has more of what I want in a game. Xenonauts and Phoenix Point got some good mods, but not like XCom does. Last time I played XCom, I had ninjas, and Force-wielding Jedi, and Halo type super soldiers.

But, the one single base to upgrade is key for keeping the focus, in my opinion. XCom is a game I play to the end, the others I get bored and stop playing at some point.

 

[Stingray]

When I played Phoenix Point I worked out of a single base, the main one. All other bases were just stopping points to occasionally rest or heal characters, but you don't necessarily even need to do that - for example, with the Festering Skies DLC (I think?) you get an item you can install in your planes to rest your characters inside the planes. So I don't see the "multiple bases" distinction as really being relevant, but it's true that you need more characters overall and more planes in the sky with Phoenix Point. None of my guys were faceless though, in fact I knew the ins and outs of my different characters way better in Phoenix Point than I did in XCOM 2.

 

[domein]

Finally xcom game where i can bring 20 dudes to the field, and leave with only 5 standing, instead of bringing only 4 and savescumming if one of them gets unlucky hit.

 

[Carnifex]

I had no bugs with the first game either, since others have mentioned that. And while this doesn't seem to be a true sequel it still sound intriguing to me!

 

[Kordanor]

Well, the release version did have plenty of bugs. Most of them not problematic. However the final mission (which on ironman you couldnt repeat) was also quite buggy, which was one reason my 150h or so playthrough failed.

Will definitely not play Ironman on Xenonauts 2

 

[screeg]

I played the heck out of Xenonauts 1 and fiddled around a little with Xenonauts 2. The ground game (which is basically the whole game) is almost exactly the same. He basically redid the entire thing with all the features and conveniences he wanted for X1, which seems weirdly neurotic and pointless to me. The improvements are more along the lines of a few post-release patches than a remake.

 

[JDR13]

For me, I like XCom more than Xenonauts and Phoenix Point (though I'll always buy all of them) because the single base versus multiple bases changes the focus. One base plays more like a traditional RPG, even if I have to focus on more than six party members after a while. Both Xenonauts and Phoenix Point come to a point where it's just management, and you're so distant from all your faceless squad members all at different bases all over the place, and lose the connection you maintain in the new XComs. And XCom just has more of what I want in a game. Xenonauts and Phoenix Point got some good mods, but not like XCom does. Last time I played XCom, I had ninjas, and Force-wielding Jedi, and Halo type super soldiers.

I definitely prefer XCOM as well but not for that reason. I really wanted to like Phoenix Point though. I purchased the Day One edition with all the DLC, but it just didn't grab me. It seemed convoluted, and it's sooo damn long. I also found the battles boring compared to XCOM.

I get why some people don't prefer XCOM though. It's flashier but also somewhat dumbed-down next to other games in the genre.

 

[Pladio]

Phoenix Point just didn't grab me. I tried playing through one game and got bored after the nth Pandoran base attack. I felt the progression to be way too slow. Research barely did anything at each step just slowing down game progress for you to build bases around the globe so you can travel around.

Like @Tony said it has many more management layers than I am interested in in a game like this. Additionally, the combat itself just isn't as interesting to me. Yes, I can shoot body parts, but 90% of the time, the goal is to kill enemies quickly rather than shoot off body parts, so you end firing at the body part which does most damage. The main exceptions were big-size enemies, where disabling an important body part was crucial, or two other examples being the pain chameleon who keeps going invisible and the one who becomes useless simply by shooting its arm off.

It has some very annoying mechanics too like those enemies that keep shooting worms- which are mainly a distraction (although much better than during initial release where they one-shotted the entire team) and the mutations that held the towns that had to be shot from a certain distance in the building so you had to count tiles to ensure you weren't in its blast radius.

All in all, I would say I have had much more fun with XCOM2 than I did with Phoenix Point. In theory I should have loved Phoenix Point, but there were too many distractions and things that added very little or nothing to the actual enjoyment of the game.

Nowadays I would have a harder time playing XCOM2, but mostly because it's now an old game and many other TB games have brought in really nice mechanics that XCOM2 just didn't have like the AP executions.

 

[bjon045]

Phoenix Point could of so easily been better. I just wish it had far less Pandoran Base spawn - less defense missions and more optional assault missions. It seemed to have a mechanic where every time you cleared all the bases from the world more would instantly spawn. One base a month should of been the maximum - it just wasn't enjoyable at mid/end game doing the same mission over and over again - and like what Pladio said this was combined with a lack of progression with the research.

I would of liked more weapons that were objectively better than lower tier variations i.e. Assault Rifle -> Laser Rifle -> Plasma Rifle -> Gauss Rifle like in the original XCOM.