Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

299 Comments

XCOM 2 Review

3
  • PC

Firaxis delivers a fantastic sequel in many regards, but a large assortment of technical issues plague the overall experience.

XCOM 2 comes with two very different difficulties. I don’t mean that it has two different difficulty options when you start the game (it has four of those), but in terms of there being two different elements of the game that I struggled with. One was fully intended by the developers, involving intense, chess-like battles against an alien force. The other was with the game’s performance, in ways that Firaxis clearly did not intend. When everything is working as it should, XCOM 2 is a fantastic sequel that expands and improves on the original in several ways. When things are falling apart, it becomes a frustrating mess that made me want to quit and wait for a future patch. As it stands today, the quality of XCOM 2’s good elements made the game worth wading through some of its more infuriating problems.

Set 20 years after Enemy Unknown, XCOM 2 sees Earth being occupied by the alien force rather than invaded by it. They won the war, assumed power, and now hold the human race firmly under their control. A resistance of humans has taken up arms against the aliens, and the player assumes control of their faceless commander. Rather than playing defense against alien invaders like the last time, the sequel has you going on the offensive against alien oppressors. While this doesn’t drastically change the overall makeup of the game, it does have gameplay implications.

The metagame is critical, and doesn't give players much time to relax.
The metagame is critical, and doesn't give players much time to relax.

A metagame revolving around constructing a base and managing a world map is back, but in a different format. Instead of building a stationary base, XCOM 2’s home base is a captured enemy aircraft known as the Avenger. Without land to burrow into for expansion, you now add to your base by clearing out rooms of alien debris and repurposing them. It’s functionally similar to the last game, but the aesthetics of the metagame have been altered in a cool way to fit with the new timeframe. I enjoyed flying around the world map in my mobile base, feeling like I was reaching out to other corners of the globe to expand XCOM’s message.

Going on the offensive also has implications for the “boots on the ground” half of the gameplay. Considering that many missions involve the human forces infiltrating enemy bases or strongholds, you’ll occasionally start with your squad concealed from the aliens. That adds minor stealth mechanics to the turn-based strategy, and it’s fun to try to set up the perfect overwatch ambush for when you’re finally ready to launch an acid grenade into a group and announce to the enemy that you’ve arrived.

Both halves of the game carry with them an inescapable sense of tension. A new danger in the metagame is the Avatar project, which is an alien weapon that threatens to cement the occupier’s control of Earth. The progress of this project’s development is indicated by a red meter at the top of the world map, which fills in as in-game time passes and the aliens construct new facilities dedicated to Avatar’s construction. I felt a sense of dread every time another red box was added to the meter, and it made me question every decision I made during the metagame. Was I spending too much time scanning for intel and supplies? Should I be accepting every guerrilla ops mission that’s presented to me? Do I need to restart and prioritize different threads of research? I questioned myself at every turn, and found that the inclusion of the Avatar threat greatly added to the tension of the metagame.

While the first game was no walk in the park when it came to its tactical battles, XCOM 2 ratchets the difficulty up substantially. After about 15 hours of struggling through the default difficulty setting (possibly made worse thanks to some poor metagame decisions in the early stages), I swallowed my pride and knocked it down to easy. Even then, I frequently encountered disastrous missions that left most of my squad gravely wounded or dead.

These things suuuuuuuck.
These things suuuuuuuck.

Much of this difficulty is tied to powerful enemies, both old and new, that can cause chaos for your team. Vipers can use their long tongues to snatch your soldiers from behind cover, coil around them, and render them useless until they’re rescued. Seemingly innocent civilians can morph into hulking Faceless creatures that attack with powerful melee strikes. Stun Lancers can sprint across large portions of the screen in one turn, and immediately incapacitate soldiers with a swipe of their baton. Sectopods still represent an immediate and terrifying threat to any soldier on the battlefield during the late game.

To combat these threats, players have access to a wide variety of classes and abilities when it comes to assembling their ideal squad. Rangers utilize swords for dramatic melee strikes, specialists deploy drones to heal friendlies and hack enemy robotics, and new psionic soldiers can learn several powerful abilities that damage or outright control your foes. In a game where your maximum squad size is six, it’s tremendously useful to bring a couple psionic soldiers to the battlefield and add powerful enemy fighters (complete with their own abilities) to your ranks.

All of the classes feature interesting choices as you progress through the ladder of abilities, with some real game-changers becoming available later in the game. I particularly enjoyed my highly ranked rangers, thanks to the Bladestorm and Reaper abilities. The former automatically strikes at any enemy that enters melee range, even when it isn’t your turn. The latter allows you to chain together multiple melee strikes, provided that the last strike killed the previous enemy. If you encounter several mid-level enemies in the same general area, it’s possible to go on a satisfying killing spree as you dart from foe to foe and strike them down with your sword.

No matter how overpowered I made my squad or how easy I set the difficulty setting, I wasn’t able to remedy the cavalcade of technical issues I had with XCOM 2. The most immediately noticeable is the inconsistency of its performance. I played on two computers, and the framerate dropped frequently even on one computer that clocked in far above the recommended specs. Camera angles tended to miss the action whenever they move away from the isometric perspective, like during action-cam shots and hacking sequences. On more than one occasion, the hacking screen was completely obscured by a wall, forcing me to click blindly until I eventually hit the initiate button. I was sometimes unable to move soldiers to specific squares, despite the UI clearly indicating that I should be able to. The action sometimes halted for 15 or 20 seconds at a time for no discernible reason, even when it was my turn (negating the possibility that this bug was caused by offscreen aliens moving around). Roofs of buildings would often remain opaque when I tried to move my soldiers on the floor below. Several missions forced me to reload earlier saves due to bugs that made them impossible to complete. One wouldn’t allow me to evacuate my sharpshooter at mission’s end, and another wouldn’t allow me to pick up a mission-critical objective despite clearly standing on the indicated spot. Another mission got caught in an odd loop that kept warping an enemy around the map and ragdolling him off a bridge, which repeated for several minutes before I gave up on ever regaining control. I had encountered so many of these bugs that I could only laugh when I tried to load the final mission, only to be greeted by a crash and the “XCOM 2 has stopped working” prompt.

Corporal Waluigi is immune to garlic.
Corporal Waluigi is immune to garlic.

I want to come back and spend more time with XCOM 2, but it won’t be for the bare-bones multiplayer mode. These one-on-one battles give you the initial novelty of getting to play around with enemy units’ abilities (an experience relegated to psionic mind control in the campaign), but waiting 90 seconds for opponents’ turns in less-than-engaging battles can’t match the tension and progression from the single-player campaign.

It’s those two distinct difficulties that make me want to return to XCOM 2. The intended difficulty makes me want to come back to try things differently, to bump the setting up to normal and try to make smarter metagame decisions early on to see if I can hang in there and survive a second go-round. The difficulty I experienced with the game’s performance makes me want to wait a few months, and then return to see if this game that I thoroughly enjoyed will be patched enough to ensure that all of its difficulty was fully intended by the developers. I loved XCOM 2 when it worked, but its numerous bugs, glitches, and other performance issues severely handicapped my overall enjoyment of it.

299 Comments

Avatar image for siroptimusprime
SirOptimusPrime

2076

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By SirOptimusPrime

I 100% agree with Dan's review. I didn't even get to play more than 4 hours because every time I launched the game, I'd get 20-40 minutes in before an inevitable crash to desktop/game would hang before or after kill cam shots/loading would skyrocket to 3-4 minutes and then crash/textures would fail to load in and I'd be fighting in an impossible to traverse plain of non-existence. It's partially my fault, I will admit, for having a not-so-great PC, but if someone like Dan is having largely the same issues it's no longer just a "me" thing.

The worst part is, I want to play this. Holy shit, I should have 40 hours in this game by now. Instead, I uninstalled it and don't plan on going back until the performance issues are resolved. If they aren't, I'll just wait 5 or so years when (if, even) we can brute force it to run better than it currently does.

Avatar image for gringbot
gringbot

114

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By gringbot

Finally, a honest review. Yeah I'm pretty disappointed as well, the game not only needs performance updates, but balance tweaks and better camera/movement control, too. Then when you look closely at 2k's history with patching and comare that to the amount that needs to be done, and I wouldn't expect these issues to be solved until their next paid expansion. They did it with Beyond Earth, Xcom1, and Civ5, hard to think it'll change. They've only mentioned performance issues in relation to patches, nothing at all in terms of balance. The game needs to be heavily updated for me to enjoy it, I've decided.

I finished a stage just recently and never felt more unsatisfied from an Xcom mission. I used to play xcom1 on ironman classic and that feeling of weight is gone, because I'm stuck save scumming due to all sorts of things going wrong, not just gameplay reasons but just trying to get the game to do what you want it to do. In Xcom2, one turn is all it takes to become unrecoverable if you get enough bad RNG, in Xcom1 bad RNG and bad strategy would have to occur after consecutive turns for the run to end.

Also, no controller support (which felt better then the keyboard in xcom1 imo), bad keybindings, and huge delays between turns make playing it just feel clunky. I get there's a lot of great game there to dig into, but what makes it so disappointing is that it's buried under a mountain of minor issues.

Avatar image for mems1224
mems1224

2518

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@shingro: then they should have released the game in 6 months when it works right. You can't expect them to review a games based on what might be fixed months from now. Firaxis released a buggy, poorly optimized game that absolutely gets in the way of the gameplay

Avatar image for alistercat
alistercat

8533

Forum Posts

7626

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 27

Edited By alistercat

I actually uninstalled XCOM 2 just now, which I almost never do. Waiting for some patches. I didn't do it for Fallout but for this... I just got fed up.

Avatar image for bisonhero
BisonHero

12794

Forum Posts

625

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

@kazvon said:

In about 6 months this will be a hell of a game, right now it's quite a mess.

Yeah, I'll buy this game during the Steam Summer Sale or something in July, but I'm not going to reward developers for releasing unoptimized code at launch. No rush, XCOM: Enemy Unknown/Enemy Within is still fun to play in the meantime.

Avatar image for artisanbreads
ArtisanBreads

9107

Forum Posts

154

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 6

Edited By ArtisanBreads

I think this game is really fantastic and personally I really haven't had technical issues. Having an absolute blast with it. Love all the changes from the first game.

The only bug I know I have seen is on the strategy map some timer values went negative, which would have been a disaster, but after some event it reset the issue and everything that was a weird negative value triggered.

Avatar image for alwaysrun
Alwaysrun

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

A more succinct review from Giant Bomb there ever was. Excellent review Dan and as honest and non-fanboy review score of this game you'll get anywhere. X-com 2 is like a blood rare steak you ordered medium well...uncooked.

Avatar image for drockus
drockus

181

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By drockus

Don't think I've ever disagreed with a GiantBomb review score this much, even though it's not a horrible score, but oh well. Playing on an i5 with a 970 and 8mbs ram and no real issues. Just sometimes a short delay after I'm discovered by the aliens and some bad camera angles for the action animations. I was iffy on the original Xcom, and found this one much more to my liking - I'm also much more invested in characters, being able to give them ridiculous outfits and backstories. Playing on normal, and haven't found the difficulty to be too much, though admittedly I do occasionally boot up autosaves after some disastrous moves.

Avatar image for north6
north6

1672

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By north6

All in all, surprising to see this as a 3, coming from GOTY. THis is a better game in all respects IMO.

I didn't have any performance issues (slowdown, etc). I had some odd behavior when rounds changed during the enemy rounds, but only once or twice, and I believe on both occasions I did a streetlight hack that gave me control of some far off soldier, which screws with the alerting/expose behavior AI.

I only experienced one of the bugs Dan noted above, "I was sometimes unable to move soldiers to specific squares, despite the UI clearly indicating that I should be able to." Probably one of the two items below.

1. May be viewing the wrong height tier to move. This is just a difficult to solve UI problem, not a bug or glitch. I'm not sure why it lets you target a grapple point and then not change tiles on that tier if you aren't viewing that tier. The way he describes similar items around problems moving from floor to floor make me think hes probably this issue.

2. There is actually a bug when you try to move to a position on the corner of your screen now and then. If you refocus the camera it works fine.

Avatar image for mocbucket62
MocBucket62

2689

Forum Posts

1106

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 7

Good review Dan. As much as I want to play this, I'll wait until a good patch comes in to fix these problems. Plus, I have a Mac, so that could be even worse than what is going on with the PC versions.

I just hope those same people from Rooster Teeth who shilled for Fallout 4 and mocked Jeff for his review(s) of the game don't sell out to XCOM 2 and do the same thing to Dan. They might call Dan someone who drinks Fine Wine and Cheese when in reality Dan probably drank a Baja Blast and ate Taco Bell's Quesadillas and Cheesy Roll Ups when writing this review. They probably won't.

Avatar image for whitegreyblack
whitegreyblack

2414

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

I always hold up the user base of GB as a good example of a group on the internet that is, by and large (and with a heaping help of assistance from the awesome moderation team), able to have calm, rational discussion and a decent level of discourse about video games... until a 3-star review is published for a major franchise.

It's 2016. I expect better out of my game releases and my GB comment sections - I think you should, too.

Avatar image for etherd1774
etherd1774

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

happy to see a nice rating of this game. not a paid 91/100 4.5/5 becasue this game does not deserve those. thanks dan.

Avatar image for grayfoxbr
GrayFoxbr

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I've played almost 20 hours of the game...but holy Warren! It's a great game but i never had so many crashes to desktop. It's really annoying. I 100% agree with Dan's review.

Avatar image for afields101
afields101

103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Its weird how people think that GB do this for some kind of publicity, I agree 100%. Video games should surely, by now, be able to reach a level of quality that does not include crashes and messy bugs at launch. Same applies to Jeff's Fallout review, we should all expect better. If the game is delayed for polish, it should arrive with little to no 'jankyness'. This was acceptable 3 years ago but this will not stand in today's market, Optimize and clean up Video games for the love of games, this industry is looking bad...

Avatar image for keichan
Keichan

148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Keichan

Thank fuck, a reviewer taking into account the multitude of technical issues as part of the score, not something that they list as a minor negative and then gloss over.

XCOM 2, among many, many other problems, such as 2+ minute load times and ever-present framerate drops, notably has a vicious memory leak. Over the course of a 2-3 hour play session, it steadily climbs to 100% usage of my 8GB of memory, before turning into a slideshow and forcing me to end the process. I've made posts on the steam discussion boards asking for any sort of news on whether the issues will be addressed in the near future or not, and have only been met by Firaxis PR claiming that, "They know that there are issues," and the Firaxis Defense Force screaming at me that patience is a virtue, as if I were brutally attacking their beloved game.

Does anyone remember Magicka's launch, and what a huge mess that was? Or how Arrowhead scrambled to release patch after patch, even going so far as to work weekends, to get their game into a playable state for the majority of people? Where the fuck is that kind of work ethic or integrity with such a big budget, highly anticipated release from a developer with far more experience? All I see from the XCOM 2 devs are tweets about their playthroughs, as the game apparently runs fine on their systems, and it infuriates me in a way that I can't begin to describe.

I made it two missions in before a CTD today, immediately after a very hard-fought victory, which, of course, sucked any sense of accomplishment or enthusiasm out of it. This kind of shit is completely unacceptable, and the fact that the game got rave reviews from most websites in spite of it is pretty terrible.

EDIT: By the way, @danryckert, you probably couldn't evac because despite the 9-tile area that the evac zone visually encompasses, if there is anything obstructing your ascent on one of the tiles, you can't evac from it. I noticed this when I evacuated from inside of a building because my grenadiers had effectively torn the entire structure apart. There was a space of 3 tiles within the evac zone that I couldn't use because the floors above them were still intact.

Avatar image for lukecostello
LukeCostello

29

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By LukeCostello

My experience with this game has been top notch! Lots of improvements on the gameplay side of things, a bump up in graphics too. I may have just gotten used to the bugs and glitches that plagued the last game, but I found my experience to feature decent performance and that regular action cam jenk that I have come to love in these games. The fail state in this game I like much better than the last, I really like its doomsday clock look, you really feel the apocalyptic looming over you as you try and stave off the inevitable destruction of the world.

I really like the "new and improved" classes in the game, I think each one shook things up in terms of their role, although I'm really gonna miss snapshot. I had one tiny but critical nitpick with the UI though, it may have just been me but I really got used to the old movement tile look and for some reason on more than one occasion I ended up dashing to places I thought I was only using one movement point on, these missteps were followed up by a string of curses, as I frantically looked around the stage for a way to protect my exposed team member from an oh so eager alien assailant. However the core game (or at least what I enjoy most about it) still seems to be intact. In Xcom you are constantly forced to make the best out of bad situations sometimes it's picking the lesser of two evils, sacrificing one of your men or prioritizing your continued survival over much-needed supplies. There also the classic short term critical decision of "should I take this shot?" or the frequent "please please please, dear GOD please make this 35% shot!"

This XCOM is a meat grinder in terms of difficulty. Instead of going into missions feeling ready and prepared like I did during the previous XCOM, I was surviving the missions rather than completing them, about 3 quarters into my time with the game the thought process that went through my mind at the beginning of each mission as I stretched my inadequate array of equipment across soldiers was "I'm really not sure If I can walk away from this one" as my features hardened with grim detirminiation and my eyes became steely in preparation for my next bout.

I really do feel like Dan's review of this game is a little harsh, the technical issues I experienced with this game pale in comparison to the flood of online issues and frame dropping that Just Cause 3 hit me with, a game Dan gave four stars. I think XCOM two is a solid 4 stars and I would urge anyone who enjoyed the last game to buy this one.

was running it on an imac from a couple years ago, and was getting 30-50fps,but nothing unplayable, especially for a turn based game. If people are having issues with the PC version and they have a powerful desktop mac, give it a shot!

Also if anyone is interested I finished the previous XCOM on my third try on normal iron man, I would also like to mention that the sole survivor of the tutorial in that run was named (by the game) Jesus and he was also the soldier you sacrifice to save the world

Avatar image for lukecostello
LukeCostello

29

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@keichan: This is going to sound real stupid but TO ANYONE HAVING ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT TECHNICAL ISSUES! Run the game on a mac desktop on lower settings, my techinical issues with the mac version of this game were nonexsistent on that platform.

Avatar image for lowestformofwit
lowestformofwit

343

Forum Posts

128

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Yeah, I was going to pick this up day one but after all this performance talk, waiting for a patch or two...

Avatar image for nethlem
Nethlem

828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I wonder how many of those "performance is shit" complaints are coming from people who never bothered to look into the graphics options. The games "auto detect" settings are utter shit and some of the "next gen features" are just giant performance killers. Voluminous anything, advanced shaders, insane AA modes and shadows seem to be the settings that kill performance.

Running the game in border-less windowed mode also seems to have improved the experience for a lot of people. But for me the game never crashed, it runs pretty decent considering the settings and my hardware. And it's not like a some stuttering will ruin the gameplay, it's still a turn based game so performance doesn't impact gameplay that much.

I've also experienced the occasional animation glitches/game logic freaking out for like 20 seconds/bad camera angles. But they are hardly game breaking and a growing selection of mods is steadily taking care of some of those issues. Even UE needed a lot of mods/DLC to actually turn it into the gem of a game it's considered these days.

Avatar image for gaftra
gaftra

556

Forum Posts

59

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@keichan: I hadn'y heard about the mem leak but I've totally been suffering from it! Good to know someone else had that problem. Well... not good necessarily.

Avatar image for mofaz
Mofaz

62

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'm the last one to defend this sodden, personality-less, zero atmosphere, turd of a game (that somehow still manages to play worse and have less depth than Jagged Alliance 2) which is also a completely broken piece of shit that is getting stellar reviews, reminding me of the completely broken dogshit Empire: Total War which got the same exact treatment (and is now remembered as a savage piece of garbage), but really?

You had to put it on easy? Then played it like, once?

Were you even trying? If it weren't pointing out the actual technical flaws of the game, I'd call this review worse than worthless since you don't even manage to play the game properly and thus wrote a completely misleading review. The game isn't even that god damn hard.

Avatar image for ezmo85
ezmo85

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Thank you Dan, for knocking this game for its bugs and poor optimization (also for single-handedly causing its metacritic score to drop below 90, lol). While I absolutely LOVE this game so far, it's incredibly frustrating that my SLI 970s cannot hold 60fps at all times, even on the lowest settings on certain maps. While I can understand the critical acclaim for this game in general, it's very important to point out the glaring technical issues to Firaxis. This is not acceptable in 2016. And Dan seems to be the only critic willing to knock the game for it. Good for you.

Avatar image for keichan
Keichan

148

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Keichan

@nethlem said:

I wonder how many of those "performance is shit" complaints are coming from people who never bothered to look into the graphics options. The games "auto detect" settings are utter shit and some of the "next gen features" are just giant performance killers. Voluminous anything, advanced shaders, insane AA modes and shadows seem to be the settings that kill performance.

Running the game in border-less windowed mode also seems to have improved the experience for a lot of people. But for me the game never crashed, it runs pretty decent considering the settings and my hardware. And it's not like a some stuttering will ruin the gameplay, it's still a turn based game so performance doesn't impact gameplay that much.

I've also experienced the occasional animation glitches/game logic freaking out for like 20 seconds/bad camera angles. But they are hardly game breaking and a growing selection of mods is steadily taking care of some of those issues. Even UE needed a lot of mods/DLC to actually turn it into the gem of a game it's considered these days.

Regardless of hardware or settings, the following issues are ever-present to those who are experiencing issues with performance:

  • Constant and sharp framerate drops, usually associated with the texture pop-in that UE3 is known for, such as when transitioning between rooms, loading into an area in the skyranger, entering or leaving the geoscape, or just plain BEING on the geoscape. It also happens randomly, apart from the obvious culprits, and tanks more and more the longer the game is running.
  • XCOM 2 eating all of the system's memory, regardless of the amount available: 8GB, 16GB, 32GB, it doesn't matter. It will eat all of it if you play for long enough, forcing you to wait for the inevitable crash, or restart the game yourself when it begins to lock up your entire system.
  • Worsening performance the longer the game runs, which is possibly the fault of the memory leak, but seems to happen regardless of how much memory is left unused.

The following are issues that seem to be a matter of design or poor optimization, which everyone is experiencing:

  • Unreasonably long load times, typically two minutes or longer, which worsen for those experiencing the problems above. It is believed that this is tied to poor optimization or dev code left in the game, as pressing capslock during the return trip on the skyranger disables all rendering, causing the image to freeze, but shortening the load time by approximately 30 seconds or more.
  • Bizarre hitches and delays during combat. Pauses of up to 30 seconds before or after enemy or soldiers animate or move; the sectoid's reanimation is notable for this, as the game can sit there for a very, VERY long time after he initiates his attack before it actually connects with a corpse to reanimate it.
  • A myriad of assorted bugs and crashes, many of which render the game unplayable to those experiencing the worst of them, or at least far less enjoyable, as it can rob the feeling of victory from you when getting that victory involves wading through any number of issues to get there.

I work as a computer technician, in case you or others like you want to blame ineptitude or OS issues for the problems with XCOM 2, rather than the game itself, and I have a respectable computer. My GPU is a GTX 970, my CPU is an AMD FX-8350, and I have 8GB of PC1600 DDR3 RAM. Even on the lowest settings, with absolutely everything off, the game will hitch and stop and stutter, it will eat all of my memory, it will crash to desktop whenever it pleases without so much as a freeze, and if it doesn't, the game will be unplayable after 2-3 hours in any case.

tl;dr: The game is fucked, and changing the settings doesn't help, as if that wasn't the first thing that we all tried.

EDIT: I'm not trying to bite your head off, guy, but the Steam discussion boards are full of this kind of, "Yeah well get a better computer," or "Try lowering the settings," or "Try these .ini tweaks." They don't work. Also, since I can't play XCOM 2, which I was really looking forward to, I have nothing better to do than shitpost.

Avatar image for ezmo85
ezmo85

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@nethlem: I'm running SLI 970s, 16GB memory, i5-3750. On at least one specific map, my framerate drops below 45, even on the lowest settings (I'm running at 1920x1080). I agree that this doesn't necessarily effect gameplay too much, but for me it still breaks the immersion. Also, I tried running in borderless window mode. No difference. I scoured the internet for INI adjustments, tried several other things, no difference. That's unacceptable performance. All that being said, I'm willing to put up with it because the game is fantastic otherwise. Here's hoping patches address these issues sooner rather than later...

Avatar image for cautionman
Cautionman

73

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Man, this game--what a mess. It runs pretty well for me, technically speaking--but there are some really, really frustrating bugs that plague the latter portions of campaign. Near the end, I had gotten through the brutal final mission and was pretty close to finishing things when the game decided it would just stop. Reloading old saves during the mission crashes the game, and the only other saves I have are hours earlier. Super frustrating, and it's a really disappointing scenario for someone that's put in around thirty hours to have things fall apart in the last mission. What a disappointment.

Avatar image for xanadu
xanadu

2157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I guess Im one of the more relatively lucky ones. I dont really have any issues besides some hitching here and there. Some of the load times are a little longer then normal but only by a few seconds. This whole release though is just weird to me. PC only, no controller support outside steam controller, and no Nvidia driver was released for the game. It's almost as if most of Firaxis is working on a different game and Xcom 2 was just put out as an after thought.

Avatar image for drockus
drockus

181

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By drockus

So after talking with two other friends playing the game, turning off anti-aliasing and ambient occlusion has put the game in a state of only minimal technical problems for all of us. We all have similar rigs (970s, 8gb ram, and various i5s). Load times are fine, frame rates are fine (between 60-180), no more than 5 second pauses during alien activity. The only bugs have been camera-related. Note that turning off AA and AO doubled performance, so try that if you haven't -- strongly doubt Dan did.

Avatar image for bisonhero
BisonHero

12794

Forum Posts

625

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By BisonHero

@north6 said:

All in all, surprising to see this as a 3, coming from GOTY. THis is a better game in all respects IMO.

Jeff has said numerous times that the way they review games is to look at each game on its own merits, relative to its time of release. Super Mario 64 got a bunch of perfect scores, but hundreds of games that have come out since are as good or better than that game, so do they all deserve 110/100? 120/100?

XCOM: Enemy Unknown got 5 stars, but just because XCOM 2 might have better game design doesn't make it an automatic 5 stars. It got docked for having fucked technical issues, and some other minor complaints from Dan.

Avatar image for assirra
Assirra

521

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

As much as it sux to have technical issues, i am glad at least one site takes that stuff into account when doing reviews.

There is is a reason why more and more games release as technical mess, reviewers don't care.

Avatar image for ulyssesmcqueen
UlyssesMcQueen

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I love this game. It's been one of the best experiences I've ever had in gaming (and I've been playing video games for almost 25 years). It's a damn shame that this review will steer people away from playing it. If you are at all interested, I would recommend reading other reviews. Giving The Witness a 5/5, Firewatch (and Just Cause 3) a 4/5 and then XCOM2 a 3/5 (same as SW:Battlefront) is ridiculous. What about the technical issues people had with those games? Yes, Firaxis has to address a lot of problems with the upcoming patch, but XCOM2 is totally playable for most folks, it's fine, for me it crashed twice in about 60 hours of playing time (I'm on vacation, ok? I beat it yesterday, it was an awesome week... no regrets). There are some slightly annoying hiccups but I'm confident that Firaxis will fix those - while this review won't get updated, which will lead GB peeps to believe that it's a lot worse than Enemy Unknown in the future, which is simply wrong. I would recommend The Witness to about 20% of the people I know, Firewatch to about 50%, and XCOM2 to 90%. It's a fantastic game, start on easy, even if your pride says otherwise, to get a feel for what you need to do in the campaign, then crank it up once you feel comfortable. No other game has led me through such drama in such a meaningful way. After beating it, it's a 5/5 for me for sure, and I will continue playing it until XCOM3 comes out.

Avatar image for tactis
tactis

385

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

Just finished the game. It was a hell of ride but the technical issues were insane, I had the game crash my entire computer (powered all the way down) twice in a row during the second to last custcene lol.

Avatar image for bane
Bane

1004

Forum Posts

438

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Bane

I'm surprised at the score.

On one hand this is easily a four star game in my book. Steam says I've got 47 hours played so far. In that time I haven't had a single crash or bluescreen, and only one single instance where I even thought about the technical competency of this game. That single instance was when 13 enemies activated in a single turn and the AI noped the fuck out (only one or two enemies made any moves each turn). Other than that it's been a whole lot of awesome XCOM. It's an improvement over EU/EW in just about every way.

On the other hand if the technical issues are as bad and as prevalent as the internet would make it seem, well, okay then. I haven't experienced any of that myself, but if Dan did I'm glad he knocked the score because of it. Review scores need to reflect any technical issues encountered, if for nothing else than to push back against games being released in a half-broken state. I do wish Giant Bomb gave a second, post-patch score later on so people could see that the technical issues were addressed.

The score does make me sad though. If you're a fan of this series don't write it off. It's a fantastic sequel.

Avatar image for lethalki11ler
lethalki11ler

1819

Forum Posts

18650

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

I really want to play this game but I need a console version. May be best that it didn't come out on PS4 though, with technical issues like that on PC can you imagine consoles?


Thanks for the review Dan!

Avatar image for kalli
Kalli

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kalli

While I really like the game, I'm also putting it down for awhile due to bugs.

Currently I'm on a mission where once I kill all of the aliens it doesn't end, the alien turn just starts and stops immediately. Re-launched the mission twice and it occurs on each map. Probably a bug somewhere with how many aliens it assigned to the mission. I could skip it, but really, once I hit a bug like that in a game it just kills any desire to play it.

Avatar image for sticky_pennies
Sticky_Pennies

2092

Forum Posts

308

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

I'm not sure if you're aware, Dan, but the performance problems in this game can almost entirely be fixed by disabling VSync and reducing the Anti-Aliasing to FXAA. If problems persist, I've heard reducing Ambient Occlusion works. I haven't tried that, though.

Avatar image for conciliator
Conciliator

105

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@sticky_pennies: that and any number of other suggestions have worked for some people but there's no 100% reliable fix for the performance or hanging issues right now.

Avatar image for conciliator
Conciliator

105

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I would personally give it 4 GB stars out of 5 because I really do think the core gameplay mechanics and updates are just phenomenal. But I can't argue that the technical side is not a disaster. Fortunately for me the worst of it has just been the insanely volatile framerate. But I've also run into insane camera angles and panning, long hanging between turns and occasional teleporting enemies but most of those have been sporadic and not too detrimental to my gameplay experience.

Incidentally, has anyone else found that bladestorm is kind of...crazy? I've had rangers with bladestorm slice guys from across the map. I even saw a citizen bladestorm a faceless for me lol as crazy as that sounds.

Firaxis' response to this has been extremely disappointing as well, being entirely non-committal about it for the first couple weeks before finally responding with the patronizing "delete your mods, update your drivers, turn down settings" routine. I really hope they are truly working on getting to the bottom of the larger issues.

Avatar image for canadianmath
CanadianMath

203

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Peoples's continued treatment of reviews as statements of fact to be attacked and debunked, continues to make me shake my head. This game isn't a one star, nor a two star, three, four or five star game. It's a game. And Dan rates it as three stars in his opinion. That you really, really, reallythink otherwise, does not make it so.

Now, I'm not talking about people simply disagreeing and saying what they think of the game. No. I'm talking about the people here that are flat out stating that this game is good, or is bad, or is X, or what have you, in such a way as to say that Dan is wrong, that he has somehow used the review system poorly.

I'll just be over here, thinking that the best game of all time is either Pokemon Crystal or The Old Republic. It's a very lonely place to be.

Avatar image for spctre
spctre

349

Forum Posts

36

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Helpful review, now I know to take a wait and see approach with this one.

Avatar image for avavii
AvaVII

17

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spctre: The new Nvidia driver fixed all of the issues for me. I now have a steady 60 again like in the review version. Retail then was fuckAD for me as well. 18-30 fps, bugs and stops and crashes. Now it's like during the review phase.

I would like to see GB go back to it and give it 4 stars after everything is smooth. Otherwise it would be a shame for this wonderful piece of software.

Avatar image for jedikv
jedikv

493

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That's the thing about first impressions - you only get to make it once. Unfortunately it's not been a smooth launch and I think this rating is a good indicator of it.

@avavii said:

I would like to see GB go back to it and give it 4 stars after everything is smooth. Otherwise it would be a shame for this wonderful piece of software.

Avatar image for gbuchold
gbuchold

14

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Thank you for offering the only review I've seen so far that calls out the unforgivable technical problems here. This game is good, and when it actually gets finished it will be great, but holy hell the obsequious fawning and incessant 9.6 ratings are unhelpful when bugs are this omnipresent. If a feature of the game (Ironman) is literally unplayable because any crash will doom it, a crashy product should be met with appropriate scorn.

Avatar image for sea_strong92
SEA_Strong92

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Even with the technical issues, this game still sparks interest in me, which is odd since the XCOM franchise wasn't even on my radar. After watching the quicklook, the issues the game seems to be having looked identical when playing games like Civ. 5 where the CPU is computing other player turns as fast as possible. I wouldn't be surprised if it is something similar.

Avatar image for halfdane1975
halfdane1975

299

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

I really love this game though !

Avatar image for schnoo
schnoo

289

Forum Posts

209

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@bane: In terms of mechanics I like most of the changes but the amount of bugs made me put down the game after about 5 hours of play though I might go back if they fix some of the problems. While I have had a few crashes and unfinishable mission, my biggest problem is with line of sight. Line of sight was a bit of a problem in the previous game but in this one it's a whole lot worse, maybe it's because of the level design, the missions in this one seems to have a whole lot more buildings.

Avatar image for zevvion
Zevvion

5965

Forum Posts

1240

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 2

Edited By Zevvion

@schnoo: It's pretty funny how wildly different experiences with this game are. I have put quite literally 20 times more time in it then you (over 100 hours now) and haven't had any crashes or game breaking bugs. In fact, I only experienced 2 bugs so far.

Also don't know what your issue is with line of sight. It works perfectly. Much better than the previous game since you can now tell whether you will have LoS or not before you move.

@gbuchold:You are being extremely hyperbolic though. I have finished Ironman 4 times now. Haven't had an issue with it once. 'Literally unplayable' is quite literally not true.

Avatar image for bcsbud
bcsbud

6

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@DanRyckert: First of all, thanks for the review, it is very cool.

I played on two computers, and the framerate dropped frequently even on one computer that clocked in far above the recommended specs.

Question: what was the PC-s description (video, processor, ram etc.)? Just wanted to know if I need to buy a new PC or the existing one is enough (GF860m, i7, 8 Gb ram) or not... thanks in advance!

I used to play with older x-coms and love them still but at the moment as I see I gonna wait a little before purchasing it!

Avatar image for trottyvek
TrottyVek

441

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 7

I'm not excusing the performance problems, they're pretty fucking bad, but as a fan that wanted to play this game I learned to deal with the frequent crashes, load times, and weird dead time. What sucks is for how great so much of this game is I still finished it with a very "meh" feeling. I can't put my finger on what was missing, but this lacks something Enemy Unknown and Enemy Within both had.