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 kendoebi
kendoebi

24

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I mean, it's the score from the site that gave mario maker GOTY. I love giant bomb but I don't take their scores too seriously ;)

Avatar image for iamawesome
IamAwesome

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This is why a lot of games today are a technical mess. People are way too accepting for this shit. I really enjoyed the game even if it performed like crap! It should have been at least a 4 or even a 5 star!

Avatar image for bluefish
bluefish

876

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@solh0und: WOO FOR A HOPEFUL CONSOLE RELEASE.

...it could happen.

Anyway, bummer about the score. That's rough...

Avatar image for luxus
Luxus

81

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

I hope GB turn away from the star-rating and maybe go with the Kotaku-way. Or you know, drop reviews all together?

Avatar image for thewildcard
TheWildCard

715

Forum Posts

64

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

Maybe it's good there wasn't a console release at launch after all. I was disappointed how many more bugs Enemy Within had compared to Enemy Unknown, and this sounds worst than either of those.

Avatar image for theterriblefamiliar
TheTerribleFamiliar

210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Anyone who says they have played dozens of hours of this game and have not seen a technical issue is a liar or was playing a different game than I did. I've captured a lot of my plays and they reveal numerous issues. The most frustrating for me were those that happened during the tactical battles. Dan lists a few. I've seen many.

Troops that I put in overwatch will fire and when my turn begins again, they will have been teleported to entirely different portions of the map. In one case, my unit was placed below the level geometry. I was able to run around freely and fire into enemy units directly above me without being spotted. It was the most useful ability any of my soldiers have had in the game.

I've fired on enemies in adjacent spaces with a 100% success indicated and then missed. This has happened many times.

I've damaged enemy units who have had their damage reset on the next turn without any abilities being used on their side.

Then there are all the performance problems. I'm running on an i7 5820k with an r9 Fury X. My rig can play Witcher 3 at over 60fps in 1440p. It crawls into single digit framerates during large portions of XCOM 2. Unacceptable for a PC only release.

There's a great game in here, but it's marred by technical issues. I wouldn't call them severe, but I wouldn't call them infrequent either.

Avatar image for facktion
facktion

73

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@koolaid: Whether this is a conscious policy decision or not, I applaud giant bomb for taking this stance on technical issues in games since it seems to have been a sticking point with Jeff in particular for a while. Developers really should be held more accountable for releasing busted games.

Avatar image for thelastgunslinger
thelastgunslinger

619

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 9

I had the same exact hitching issues until I dropped the game from 8xMSAA (which it defaulted to for some reason) down to 4x. Completely removed them in my experience.

Avatar image for ekrnikku
EkrNikku

7

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Kinda wish I hadn't read this. I didn't even realize the amount of technical bugs there were until it was mentioned in the review. Now I can't stop seeing them (goddamnit). I still agree with the 3/5 but to me this is a solid 4-5 because I have yet to encounter a mission breaking bug. OPINIONS PEOPLE! Its just a videogame, don't get so mad. I guess thats asking too much though.

Avatar image for cactusapple
Cactusapple

179

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Well if you're reading this, firaxis drone, you can tally up mine as a lost week-1 purchase due to you rushing out yet another game that is not ready. Ill wait for a sale.

We all have far too huge backlogs to be putting ourselves through this shit for yet another shoddy release, hopefully enough people are coming to similar conclusions that the amount of money being left on the table by lost release-price purchases is becoming significant enough for companies to actually finish their games before release.

Avatar image for vashyron
Vashyron

310

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think the game had the potential to be five stars, but it's squandered by a mess of technical issues. At the point that I have to uninstall the game because it's glitched so hard, I'm probably going to just come back to it a few patches later.

Choppy framerate and longer load times are one thing. Annoying, but okay. However, when the VO just stops playing all together and enemies are running through walls because apparently those walls aren't actually there, I cool on a game real fast. Especially when I pretty much lose because I'm playing on Ironman and can't go back to undo that.

Avatar image for azrailx
azrailx

604

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By azrailx

I'm not disagreeing with the review, but those who are talking about difficulty in this game, Dan is just bad at it. Plain and simple.

@theterriblefamiliar: I have had little to no technical issues, fight me at lan!

Avatar image for defaultprophet
defaultprophet

840

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@azrailx: I disagree. Even with a full team of colonels with the best weapons/items/armor and near the end game I'm still coming out of a lot of missions with 3-4 dudes wounded on the regular. That just isn't something that happened in Enemy Unknown.

Avatar image for sunjammer
Sunjammer

1177

Forum Posts

408

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 7

I loved this review. I am enjoying the game a LOT but the technical issues seriously do detract in amazing ways. Even with all that stuff ironed out there are things to this game's design that would still make it a 4/5 at best for me (mostly the way information is doled out in constant "surprises" making restarts almost required for progress), so I think a 3 is very fair.

Avatar image for murbillray
MurBillray

36

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Completed on my toaster in one run with semi-regular hitching, semi-regular action-camera glitching, 1 bug where it said I would lose a solider if I evac'd (I evac'd anyway and didn't lose anyone) on Veteran with only 2 dead soldiers. I loved every minute, and was surprised it ran as well as it did tbh, as I was minimum spec.

Game is challenging but it's not outrageously hard if you've played the previous one and don't do dumb stuff like leave guys flanked or move under overwatch or take low-percentage shots instead of hunkering, moving, destroying cover, using an ability etc. Like I said, I only lost 2 guys.

3 is a little rough imho (I'd go for 4), but hey, everyone has different experiences etc.

Avatar image for huser
huser

1452

Forum Posts

81

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Ouch.

It's a shame to see the review score take such a hit, but as someone who has played XCOM2 to completion, I will vet that the technical issues are FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKED at the moment, and then I again, I applauded Jeff for taking 1 star off Fallout 4 on consoles because of the technical glitches and performance trouble, so only fair it's applied here as well.

Once they iron that stuff out though, and of course, aside from the performance and technical issues, it is REALLY good. But no turning the other cheek for this.

Yeah, given the end of year awards and FO4 I wonder if this will be the GB mandate going forward of not forgiving these kinds of issues even in games that are otherwise favorable.

Avatar image for slust
Slust

8

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Slust

@theterriblefamiliar said:

Anyone who says they have played dozens of hours of this game and have not seen a technical issue is a liar or was playing a different game than I did. I've captured a lot of my plays and they reveal numerous issues. The most frustrating for me were those that happened during the tactical battles. Dan lists a few. I've seen many.

Troops that I put in overwatch will fire and when my turn begins again, they will have been teleported to entirely different portions of the map. In one case, my unit was placed below the level geometry. I was able to run around freely and fire into enemy units directly above me without being spotted. It was the most useful ability any of my soldiers have had in the game.

I've fired on enemies in adjacent spaces with a 100% success indicated and then missed. This has happened many times.

I've damaged enemy units who have had their damage reset on the next turn without any abilities being used on their side.

Then there are all the performance problems. I'm running on an i7 5820k with an r9 Fury X. My rig can play Witcher 3 at over 60fps in 1440p. It crawls into single digit framerates during large portions of XCOM 2. Unacceptable for a PC only release.

There's a great game in here, but it's marred by technical issues. I wouldn't call them severe, but I wouldn't call them infrequent either.

These are the complaints i find baffling. I've had several of the issues the people have reported such as the long load times, frame rate drops, pauses between turns. But then to read these reports of these crazy issues like troops teleporting, 1000% misses, and enemy health resets is just bizarre to me. Ive not seen any of this. Also are you sure the 100% miss wasn't a dodge?

Avatar image for huser
huser

1452

Forum Posts

81

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@tennmuertiI: I'd tend to agree with the gist of this, though given the whole justification of the plot of this game was that not many people beat it on classic ironman, not feeling safe to do so because of technical issues seems at least to raise an eyebrow.

Avatar image for theterriblefamiliar
TheTerribleFamiliar

210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@slust said:

These are the complaints i find baffling. I've had several of the issues the people have reported such as the long load times, frame rate drops, pauses between turns. But then to read these reports of these crazy issues like troops teleporting, 1000% misses, and enemy health resets is just bizarre to me. Ive not seen any of this. Also are you sure the 100% miss wasn't a dodge?

Don't know what to say except that I envy your experience. It's a fucking mess of a game in my experience. I've had to savescum may way through large portions of the battles because of the technical issues. I won't give Ironman a chance until a patch makes improvements.

I think I may have finally learned my lesson after preordering this, Assassin's Creed Unity, and Halo Master Chief Collection.

Avatar image for psykodoughboy
Psykodoughboy

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Psykodoughboy

This game has been a complete disaster for me

Avatar image for hunter5024
Hunter5024

6708

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

I've put like 12 hours into Xcom 2, and I basically did a double take when I saw the review score. That's the tricky thing about technical issues I suppose. Really like this game, I wish everybody was having an experience as positive as mine has been so far.

Avatar image for murbillray
MurBillray

36

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

For the crazy weird bugs, the only one I can think of that may happen without a visual indicator that's *meant* to happen is the enemy health regen. A few of them can do that, and if they break LOS or you've hitched and can't move the camera to see them, you won't see the +2 pop up.

As to the other crazy bugs reported that I haven't seen, if it was a dodge it should say 'dodged', and I don't *think* the enemy units can get the skill that means they take no damage even if it's a hit, like your troops can. Even then the 'Unbreakable' or whatever it's called should probably pop up. But I guess you might miss those if, again, you've hitched. As for teleporting, if there's no Viper on the field your troop shouldn't get moved against your will. What a weird bug. I'm glad I didn't see any of that.

The comments did make me remember another glitch I got to add to the 3 others I had in my full play through (which were hitches, cam-glitching and an incorrect UI infobox), which was troops not wanting to move to a square you wanted them to. The fix for that was to rotate the camera, move your cursor out of the intended square and then try again.

Avatar image for questengine
Questengine

59

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's a really spectacular game, but there's no excuse for all the technical problems. The way it hitches on my machine would make it unplayable if it were an FPS. As a turn based game, it's just an annoyance though. Gaaa.... wish I was playing it right now!

Avatar image for azrailx
azrailx

604

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@defaultprophet: I guess I'll hold off against fully arguing against this till I beat the game but I will say wounded aint dead.

Avatar image for nukleon
Nukleon

276

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

3/5 is maybe a bit harsh but it does seem kinda disappointing that the game doesn't run very well at all. The load times are bad for seemingly no reason, and there's several weird bugs, some of them potentially requiring a reload. My personal favorite is one where it stops animating one soldier, so they just teleport to their destination and aliens fall down dead for seemingly no reason.

Avatar image for viggynash
ViggyNash

145

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I found out that there were torrents of a pre-release dev version of the game, so I went and tried that to compare the performance. Because it's a dev version, it came with a handy ANGRY RED SCREEN every time something went wrong, such as an animation not playing or some preset data being incorrect. And it happens all the time. I don't know how early a version that dev version is, but there were a ton of technical issues in that version. They really should have pushed back the release date maybe a couple weeks to clear that stuff up, because it's kind of absurd how buggy it is.

Avatar image for jedikv
jedikv

493

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

So you got a bigger problem with Dan highlighting the technical issues than you do with firaxis actually releasing a significantly buggy game? Also the star system isn't something you use to compare games like-for-like, it's not gamespot or ign.

I get there are technical issues (caps lock toggle at mission end LOL), but this game is a solid 4/5 stars as of release. Without the technical issues you can debate whether its 4 or 5 stars, probably somewhere inbetween, but thats a problem with a 1-5 scale. Saying this is a 3 is just abyssmal, as the performance problems, though frustrating, are far from debilitating in a turn based game. I mean just look at the last series of reviews...firewatch 4/5 with performance problems, mario and luigi paper mario 4/5...even though the game is literally no challenge and has weird pay2win amibo stuff, just cause 3 4/5 with both gameplay and technical problems. Are you seriously telling me xcom2 at release is WORSE then all of these games? I feel like Dan was just the wrong person to play this game, as its just not his thing (heavy strategy and hard).

@slust said:

These are the complaints i find baffling. I've had several of the issues the people have reported such as the long load times, frame rate drops, pauses between turns. But then to read these reports of these crazy issues like troops teleporting, 1000% misses, and enemy health resets is just bizarre to me. Ive not seen any of this. Also are you sure the 100% miss wasn't a dodge?

Don't know what to say except that I envy your experience. It's a fucking mess of a game in my experience. I've had to savescum may way through large portions of the battles because of the technical issues. I won't give Ironman a chance until a patch makes improvements.

I think I may have finally learned my lesson after preordering this, Assassin's Creed Unity, and Halo Master Chief Collection.

As someone on the otherside of this, your wallet will thank you for it, and you'll have a far better experience with gaming.

Avatar image for shishkebab09
shishkebab09

154

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

I still can't get over how stupid the cover art is.

Avatar image for deactivated-64b784185035a
deactivated-64b784185035a

4

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Yeah the tecnical hitches are a real bummer. So far in 20 hours, 4 complete hard crashes that will crash my whole comp(streaming to steamlink so not sure if BSOD) then huge fps drops and numerous times the audio has gone off sync.

But the gameplay and the game in genral is still great so despite the issues I keep booting it again and again.

Avatar image for unusual
Unusual

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Unusual

Great review, this game is a great sequel, and does a lot of interesting new things, but I really dislike how it still has a lot of the same issues I had with the previous one. As well as being inexcusably buggy for being a PC only title.

Avatar image for monkeyking1969
monkeyking1969

9098

Forum Posts

1241

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 18

Very fair review, but in the end a game I simply avoid because I really don't like games where hours into playing them you realize you are destine to be screwed because of early errors of tactics/strategy.

Avatar image for slag
Slag

8308

Forum Posts

15965

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 45

@cav829 said:
@slag said:

stuff

You're not wrong and you make good points. To my own point, I'm not really trying to grill Dan over his score here. I loved Fallout 4, and yet I'm happy Jeff was willing to point out the technical issues it had. I love XCom 2 so far, and think it should be called out for its technical issues. But at the same time, Just Cause 3 escaping without being called out for its technical issues when it was more broken than XCom and just shy of being as broken as Fallout 4 on consoles causes the reader to question it. I don't think you're all crazy even though the game has run well for me so far!

I guess up until now there hasn't been a standard practice as to how reviews and scores reflect technical issues here. Maybe that might help? I dunno. I'm sure every review site and reviewer wrestles with how to deal with this topic.

And as for how the industry handles it, that's a whole larger topic. Obviously based on the issues people have seen, it was probably released at least a month early.

I think in an ideal world a transparent consistent metric would be great.

I don't have a good answer for this because I think technical issues are a case by case basis thing , so you can't just simply say one star deduction for performance everytime (e.g. that would have not been nearly punitive enough in my mind for Simcity). My read on Dan's review is XCOM2 is a 4 in his mind if released in a good state. What was nice about Jeff's Fallout 4 review is that it was clear how much deducted for performance (1 star) given the score he gave it for consoles. XCOM2 is PC only so Dan doesn't have that luxury.

as far as Dan not punishing JC3, I get where you are coming from. He might have evolved how he scores that after seeing Jeff's review, or perhaps he docked XCOM2 harder because there isn't a good version to play unlike JC3. This is what he said

For a game that's almost wholly based around creating gigantic explosions at every turn, the PlayStation 4 version of the game has a difficult time keeping up when things get really chaotic. While liberating towns or destroying especially large items, the frame rate frequently dips dramatically. I never felt like I lost control over Rico or missed shots (thanks in part to the game's generous auto-aim), but it was disheartening to see these technical issues considering how smoothly the PC version ran even during the most explosive situations

fwiw that doesn't sound as bad as the issues plaguing XCOM2, so it might have also simply been those issues in JC 3 did not bother him as much. And I think that is likely the case here

contrast that with this

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.

To me that reads that the technical issues really hindered his enjoyment of XCOM2, whereas in JC3 they were just a nuisance to him.

But you are right, it's hard to know as a reader how much the technical underperfomance is ever reflected in scores. In all three cases Jc3, F4 and XCom2 I feel Gb has handled it pretty well. The one in recent memory where I felt they were lacking was the score for Batman: Arkham Knight , but that was likely an oversight due to E3's timing and I think Brad did not get to touch the incredibly jankyPC version. (I think he added that clarification to the review later)

Avatar image for art_vandelay
Art_Vandelay

214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Very good review. Especially a game that can be so harsh (ironman) should be running somewhat reliable.

Let's hope that they take this and other reviews to heart and patch it soon.

Avatar image for vonsoot
vonsoot

249

Forum Posts

60

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 1

No joke on the performance, it's like developers are optimizing for the 1% lately. Good review, bring the hammer down on the shoddy and minimal QA we've seen in the last few years in gaming. Maybe publishers and dev's will start throwing more funding at better QA and testing before going for a cash grab and 'fix it later' damage control marketing.

Avatar image for sarcasticmudcrab
SarcasticMudcrab

552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This site is losing the plot, 1st no Bloodborne in GOTY, now x-com 2 gets a 3/5. I know this is primarily an entertainment site, and that it does well, but you could go back to ACTUALLY video games.

Don't forget your roots!

Avatar image for yellownumber5
yellownumber5

801

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 5

"As it stands today, the quality of XCOM 2’s good elements made the game worth wading through some of its more infuriating problems." That sounds like 3 stars. I bet that the underlying game being good makes the problems even more frustrating.

Avatar image for gnosislord
GnosisLord

157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I really love XCOM 2, but I know that I'm much more forgiving of technical issues than the average player. That said, even I couldn't push through some of these issues. I had to close and relaunch the game midway through the final mission, because every lighting source freaked out in a horrible strobe effect. It was bad enough that I physically couldn't see the map anymore.

Avatar image for noodleflush
noodleflush

14

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By noodleflush

It does seem weird to me that something like Just Cause 3, which was supposedly riddled with game breaking glitches, framerate issues and general gameplay issues, can get a 4/5 but XCOM2 gets a 3/5 (both reviewed by Dan). The way that Just Cause was talked about both on the podcast and the quick looks totally put me off of buying it, but having watched the quick look of Dan playing the XCOM2, it did nothing but strengthen my desire to play the game. Seems like inconsistent reviewing to me and is quite frustrating.

Avatar image for stoutlager
StoutLager

619

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Well fuck. That's a bummer. I was actually considering getting a gaming capable PC just for this as the last XCOM remains my favorite game released in the last 10 years. Guess I will wait a while. Maybe pick up the extra special dlc added ultimate mega: it works this time honest: edition.

Avatar image for lhson
lhson

42

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This site is losing the plot, 1st no Bloodborne in GOTY, now x-com 2 gets a 3/5. I know this is primarily an entertainment site, and that it does well, but you could go back to ACTUALLY video games.

Don't forget your roots!

lol

Avatar image for m3cha
M3cha

101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Definitely my situation albeit with less game-breaking bugs. The technical performance - hitching, stuttering, the game halting for up to 20 seconds at a time - paired with the odd inconsistency of the UI when moving my soldiers on the battlefield - for example, the cursor would fidget between two squares even though my mouse is stationary and untouched - plague my gaming experience.

I really love XCOM 2, but the technical issues are insane. I hope Firaxis puts out a patch that remedies some issues soon. For instance, there's poor 21:9 support in menus and true SLI/Crossfire support is missing. For a PC-only release, I would expect some PC-centric features to be present.

Having to reload a save because my soldiers move into the square adjacent to where I clicked, thereby sending them to their doom, is extremely frustrating. I've put 20 hours into the game and when it performs well the game is amazing; Then the framerate drops from 60 to 25, the camera clips through some geometry, and I get an ALIEN ACTIVITY alert that is completely black but filled with engine sounds.

Avatar image for ptys
ptys

2290

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

Always enjoy a sensible read from Dan.

Avatar image for neozeon
NeoZeon

769

Forum Posts

40

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Kudos to the staff here for calling games out more on this kind of thing in the only way developers/publishers care about: The final score. I've been on board with that line of thinking since GB gave Skyrim the GOTY award...unless it was the hilariously broken PS3 version. Didn't save me, as I had already made the terrible decision to buy that train wreck on launch day, but the idea that something would be called out for a problem in any meaningful way was a great thing to see.

As for XCOM 2, well, I'm glad I don't buy games at launch much anymore. Make no mistake, I do feel for all you duders who got hit by these performance issues, but I'm happy to wait till the "Complete Edition" or whatever comes out. Not a fan of saying that since I loved XCOM and XCOM:EW, but here we are. Couple that with the story things I've heard and that stupid turn timer being added and I don't feel too bad about waiting for a sale.

When it comes down to it, any game that you can hit Caps Lock to speed up load times in isn't worth the effort. That doesn't make any damn sense! Also speaks volumes abut how "happy" people are about the design changes when one of the first mods for your game changes them (The turn timer adjustment/removal mods) back to the way they were before you screwed with them.

I know it's early for GOTY talks, but I already see a "Biggest Disappointment" nomination in XCOM 2's future.

Avatar image for shingro
Shingro

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

For me personally, X-com 2 is an amazing 5/5 game, best in class tactical considerations interwoven and whatnot (only thing I don't like is the game "cheating" in your behalf on aim rolls, guess people just got too salty about normal statistical deviations)

Expected umbrage over the score? NOPE! If someone said "Giant bomb gives Xcom 2 a 3/5 I'd say "Yeah, that's giant bomb cast's experience with Xcom 2."

This is the giant bomb thesis, we know who they are, so we know how to parse the score with the type of game it is.

By and large? They're not a crew that have enthusiasm for real deep turn based strategy, at least not so much that they would overlook technical issues like they would for something else (skyrim goty). And hey, maybe if Dan was in on those deliberations things would have been different

It's fine! It's who they are and what they value. It just so happens it doesn't gel with most others this time.

Myself? I couldn't care less if I'm staring at a wall when the shot goes off, the thing that's kept me glued to the game is a really strong flip on the franchise, encouraging you to be aggressive, but also manage risk in a flavor that only Xcom has and why it's been a beloved franchise

Thing is, the appetite for games mean launches are often rough, game reviewers have to review a game as it stands on release. Most games (even very obscure stock like Ar no Surge) get post release support, patches and fixes.

so in 6 months, this game will be fine, and the strategy will still be top notch, and the review will be up for a version of the game literally no one will be able to play. It's all very strange.

Avatar image for clockwork5
clockwork5

102

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@phraxic: It's not complicated. Don't release a buggy game and expect to get great reviews.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@neozeon: To be fair, the turn timers aren't a big issue as people are making it out to be unless you're the type who just refuses to adapt. Otherwise, it's just fine. You just have to adjust your playstyle accordingly.

Avatar image for neozeon
NeoZeon

769

Forum Posts

40

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By NeoZeon

@gaspower: True, though I honestly don't like the concept of them in a turn-based game. The logic behind them makes sense, your crew being a group of guerrilla fighters who have limited time to take back their planet and all, but it seems like a forced way to add drama over some other design choice.

Who knows though? I could end up playing it one day and loving the timer idea. It's really the bugs/performance issues that are keeping me away at this point.

Avatar image for stanleynipple
stanleynipple

144

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By stanleynipple

I had so many technical issues on my playthrough that I would even agree with 2 stars. It's a good game but I didn't get to enjoy it fully due to the plethora of technical issues. It's like eating the world's best kobe beef but being forced to do so inside an airport bathroom with many loud international shits being taken right next to your head.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@neozeon: By the way are you talking about the Avatar project meter or the turn timer in certain missions? If you're talking about the missions, they give you somewhat ample turns to complete them depending on the mission (the least was 8 and the most was 12) though early on it might seem difficult but after awhile you get used to it. Also almost all of the missions with turn timers start you on concealment so in the first few turns you'll be able to dash through without risking an activation as long as you still remain careful of course.

If it's the Avatar Project doom ticker, it's actually more forgiving compared to the last game since there are ways to set back the progress early on unlike in the last game wherein you were forced to get satellites ASAP so you don't get so screwed later on when countries start leaving.

Other than that, the technical issues I can pretty much agree on that since its really dependent on your tolerance to it.

Avatar image for sharkman
SharkMan

1117

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@evohero said:

Unfortunately, Giant Bomb doesn't roll with updated reviews like other outlets do, and taking two stars off for what reads like largely performance-related issues is a pretty big stain on this game. No excuse for poor optimization on a delayed PC exclusive, of course, but as a fan of the GOTY deliberations this already feels like a "Ehh *shrug* I wasn't really ready for more XCOM anyway" discussion come December of this year, which I think is unfair since the gameplay is just that much better to feel like a sequel without feeling like more of the same. This was never going to win GOTY 2016, but now it might be one of the last games cut from a "Most Improved" category at best.

But my personal top 10 list already has a spot for this carved out, so that's all that matters, I suppose.

games should be done at time of release, completely pc focused and the large team that they have this shouldn't have happened.