User Score
8.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1687 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 16, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I like this game.

    But I can't help feeling that it should have been so much more. Had it not been hyped as a re-imagining of the original, beloved UFO: Enemy Unknown I probably wouldn't feel quite as let-down. As it stands, while there is much that is good about this game (I actually found myself warming to the smaller squad sizes in combat, despite this being one of my greatest initial concerns) there are nonetheless, many things that smack of a lack of effort

    I really do not like the new engineering and research model, through which I can only build laser rifles (for example) if I have the requisite minimum number of engineers on staff. Huh? I should be able to research or build stuff regardless of how many scientists or engineers I have! - just make it take longer to achieve results - like it did in the original. This in an unnecessary mechanic and an annoyingly artificial way of stunting the player's advancement.

    At a strategic level, it all feels very 'linear'. One of the best things about UFO was the way that - at the very least one had an impression of freedom.

    Combat is a mixed bag - it retains some of the suspense of the original and eliminates those annoying hunts-for-the-last-alien by including a nifty little feature which has your team sometimes getting a clue as to the enemy's location by having them hear movement during the alien turn. Yet it cannot be denied that it is hugely simplified. No inventories, set classes, no choice on the type of shot (auto, snap or aimed replaced by 'fire') and perhaps most importantly the character statistics which were so vitally important in the original appear to have been discarded entirely. The 'overwatch' read - opportunity fire - ability no longer relies on the character's reaction stat to determine if and when they fire during an alien's movement - they simply open fire.

    Getting read of action points/time units makes for a more fluid, fast-paced tactical experience but it also diminishes a lot of the scope for freedom. I do not like the fact that someone can move and fire while a character who stays put the entire turn can still only fire once. Then there are the problems others have mentioned such as only being able to fire at aliens. You cannot activate the 'fire' command unless there is a visible bad guy to shoot. What's the point of having a destructible environment if you can't wantonly blow it to pieces?!?!?

    Despite all this, as I said as the start, I do actually like this game. Whether that is a sad indictment of the dearth and quality of strategy titles available today or because it's a good title in its own right only time will tell.

    I'd give this a 7 if taken as a one-off but only a 4 if viewed as part of the UFO/XCOM family (so, yeah, a 5 overall - go figure).
    Expand
  2. Oct 17, 2012
    5
    I have bought the game as I am/was a huge fan of the original series and because I am an old school gamer (36 year old). I have obviously finished the game after playing furiously and I have this sensation of emptiness...
    Opinion:
    Short, easy and somewhat poor AI, because as the difficulty increases basically the AI cheats by lowering your % of hit on enemies. Very dumbed down version of
    the original , mainly to suit mainstream console gameplay and as long as you have 6 guys in squad, anything combination works as the games is fairly linear. Also poor graphics on PC version. This is not 1999 anymore and we deserve better texture packs and a lot better quality on cutscenes.
    As mentioned before by other users, there is a script decided before every mission starts (after you launch it) on which all the hits and miss of your team have already been setup. You can save and load 1001 times and the results will be exactly the same. This is not strategy this is watching an interactive slideshow. They have just removed all the char stats from affecting the game and they are just there for cosmetic value.
    Despite all this still a fun game to play through on a weekend on normal difficulty, a week on classic and 10 years on Impossible :P
    Buy at your own risk (you will be disappointed if you played the original)
    Expand
  3. Nov 29, 2012
    0
    At the time of submitting this review there was 629 positive reviews and 87 negative reviews, this will be the 88th negative review, I dont know how 629 positive reviews made it in here, probably newcomers that never experienced the pioneer legend that is the original XCOM. the xcom remake from Firaxis released in 2012 is an insult, it is a cash grab, it does not honor the original game, is is a husk of the former game. In several interviews, dev blogs and news updates the devs clearly stated they were going to improve on the initial game, that they were fans of the original, they knew what fans wanted and had been listening to them for years etc, and bla bla bla their life was changed because of that XCOM original ALL LIES, all hype built to increase sales. Talk about apples, apples apples apples and more apples, and on the day of release they effin release an ORANGE. They exploited the XCOM name to make themselves rich, they simplified everything and took customization away from the original, this game was rushed to the market, and is not worth it, do not buy this game, replay value is nil, streamlined storyline, linear to the max, very very dissapointed, damn you greedy cash grabs STOP ruining legendary masterpieces, 629 positive reviews ? are you guys on crack ? Expand
  4. Oct 9, 2012
    10
    This is a 10 for me. It is fun to play not tedious like the original. You can spend hours playing and actually enjoy it. It is somewhat simplified compared to the original but that is not a bad thing. Great graphics and cut scenes while playing, a lot of tech to research, money management, base management and of course awesome missions that are the meat of the game. Bottom like if you are looking for a complicated and hard core strategy game than this is not it. If you are looking for a fun yet challenging strategy game this should be on your TOP list to try. Expand
  5. Nov 26, 2012
    5
    A decent game in it's own right, and it works well as a tribute to the 1993 original as it contained enough of the original themes to make me nostalgic. That being said, it's way too dumbed-down to be considered the same caliber as it's predecessors were.

    Almost everything is generic and automated, from how the organization itself is administered to how the soldiers interact with the
    environment when on tactical missions. It leaves you very little choice, and even less room for variation. The soldiers lack any distinguishable traits whatsoever, except for appearance and nationality at least; as they've removed evolvable stats in favor of a primitive class-system with very limited perks as they rank up. Inventory has also been standardized, and you can't even pick up equipment from fallen friends or foes on the field. The option to construct new bases is gone, as is the option to properly control air missions. The tactical missions lack interactivity, as you can no longer free-aim to destroy obstacles (or just for fun) and all bullets fly in a straight line only to disappear into thin air if they miss their target, effectively removing the joy of unintentional collateral damage and the unpredictability which follows it. Aliens just stand around in groups awaiting activation rather than roaming the field and positioning themselves favorably from start, and you can only deploy a maximum of six soldiers to a mission (four at the start - you have to research in order to reach the maximum six). Maps are small and very predictable too, usually you just move forward in one direction jumping from cover to cover massacring one alien group at the time until you're done.

    Multiplayer could have been awesome, but it's way too unimaginative to even be considered "ok". Here too, they've stripped your options down to a minimum. Only mode is 1vs1 squad elimination, even though single-player mode offers various settings which could have been extremely fun in multiplayer; and you use a simple "buy-for-points" system when building your squad rather than something more sophisticated (and rewarding). Also there's no progression whatsoever besides a place on the very primitive win/loss ratio-based ladder. Perhaps a system like the one they've implemented in Shogun 2: Total War would be better? At least it gives the player a feeling of achievement, something the present system doesn't provide at all.

    All-in-all... This is a game that offers very little variation, very little choice and a downright backwards level of interactivity. It makes most the decisions for you by limiting your options to the extreme. It works well enough as turn-based action, but as a strategy-and-tactics-game it fails miserable. Especially considering how successful the originals were in that aspect.

    If you avoid comparing it to the original franchise, which is actually way more complex and rewarding than this game is despite the fact that it's been almost twenty years since their release; you'll enjoy playing through it once. The replay-value however, is almost non-existent due to the previously mentioned lack of choices, variation and interactivity.

    The only real strength to this game is the fact that it contains just enough of the original games to reimburse your enjoyment of those. At least that's what it did for me: Made me reinstall the oldies and play them instead.

    I'd advice anyone to do the same ;)
    Expand
  6. Oct 27, 2012
    4
    There are good things and bad things in this game but bad things overwhelm the good ones:

    -the choice of reducing the party to 4 members at start is too much restrictive, this also aggravates another problem with the randomness of the game, losing a man is too easy in the early game with a lucky alien hit and with so few men, losing 1 is much much important

    -the choice of having so
    few hp on your men is very bad and makes the game less strategic and tactical since every situation is basically dead or alive, they should have implemented more partial hits, injuries to legs and arms and stuff like that, and less criticals and coma and instant death

    -maps are too small and linear and once you understand them you lose a lot of feeling of the old xcom, it seems all much scripted

    -the strategy and managerial part of the game is basically absent, once you figure out the 2 3 best moves to do the replayabilty is nearly 0, you have to manage your base in the same boring way, and also so many structures are useless

    -research is very boring and linear, and since its not balanced you basically can research everything without putting any effort into it

    So in the end the tactical combats are decent, and fun for a while but the lack of strategic elements makes the game fall down soon and there are really not many reason to play again like there were in the original xcom, it feels like it is a one time adventure.
    Expand
  7. Oct 28, 2012
    6
    I'm a huge fan of the original game, and I just finished the Enemy Unknown campaign in about 40 hours of game play. I enjoyed one play through, but I probably won't replay it. As a stand-alone game, I would rate this as a solid 8, but as a continuation of the X-COM series, it's a 6 at best. For my money, this game is worth about $15-$20.

    "X-COM lite" is probably the best description I
    could come up with. In 18 years (that's right, 1994 b**tches!!) since the original game was released, they've made no serious progress towards a better game mechanics. Other than the graphics, I can't find any aspect of this new X-COM game that is better than the original. Every aspect of the game has been dumbed down and hollowed out to the point of making it almost foolproof. Thanks for not letting me fail, my self esteem has never been better thanks to this game. But seriously, all the developers had to do was take the original game, add modern 3D graphics and they'd be done - instant classic reborn for the 21st century. Instead they had to tinker with the mechanics of the game in some serious ways to make it "easier" and more "accessible". I get it, the original X-COM was not the most user friendly game to play, but ultimately it's complexity was part of the reward of the game. It was a lot more fun to save the world when you were fighting as the underdog, and every little action made a difference when things were in the balance.

    You kiddies have fun with your little 6 person platoon. Back in my day, we'd regularly go into battle using this little craft called the "Avenger" that could shoot down the biggest ships and carried a 26 person platoon ready to deploy at the crash site. Now get off my lawn you kids!
    Expand
  8. Dec 15, 2012
    0
    The game looks good. But that´s it. This is not a X-Com game at all. You can clearly see, that its made for console. Nearly every strategic element was erased. And to make it worst. The maps are not randomly generated. So you have to play the same maps again and again and again and again.... and again and again and again ... zzz ZZZ zzz ... and again and again and again and again... zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ... and again and again .... zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz .... and again .... zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZzzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZzzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZzzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZzzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZzzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ zzz ZZZ... Expand
  9. nop
    Oct 22, 2012
    5
    This game is a marketing success but a creative failure. I loved original XCOM game and really wanted to enjoy playing this remake. But several hours into the game I started to feel that I've been cheated. Imagine a "reboot" of original Quake, where you can only carry two weapons, regenerate health while moving from one waist-high cover to another through linear levels, watching unskippable cutscenes after every few minutes. This is what you feel if you played XCOM/UFO games before. Shallow and dumbed down kids-friendly piece of mass entertainment. Seriously, I'm surprised that after infinite ammo they didn't add regenerating health. Base building is a joke compared to the original. Geoscape is just a pretty animation. This is earth defense simulator minus the simulator part. This is a game where radio stations can work from underground caves, satellites can hover above arbitrary location on the globe and psionics only works if you break glass window first. Expand
  10. Nov 5, 2012
    0
    A dumbed down console version of one of the greatest games ever. And it fails to even come close to matching the original design with its shallow strategic layer, gimmicky and repetitive tacticals, and missing critical content that was a hallmark of the success of the original. How the developers could have missed the clue boat when the original was there to be studied is beyond me. I would be ashamed to have my name associated with this piece of fluff. Expand
  11. Oct 27, 2012
    1
    I was looking pretty much forward into playing this game as it woke memories from the past. I pre-purchased from Steam and went on to play as soon as it was launched.

    The game has really nice graphics, only it has so many bugs I am currently stuck at the base after playing the tutorial. Reading 2k games forums, I am not alone. Its a big bummer to pay 50 EUR for a game and not get past
    the tutorial.

    I have emailed steam, notified 2k games and never got a reply. Well my friendly suggestion to anyone is wait until price drops to 5.99 or the game is fixed because if you are unlucky enough to run into a bug your game is over.
    Expand
  12. Oct 14, 2012
    10
    Superb. Feels very much like the real deal but with an updated engine and annoying fiddles removed.

    I noticed one review saying they hated it because you can't save everyone and you will lose countries. Well.. Yes... You will.. Sorry that's unavoidable. It's about winning the war, not the battles and figuring out which countries you can cope without is a big part of the game.

    Also of
    note in this is the way you get attached to your soldiers as you build them up. To the point where you actually feel really bad if one of your favourites dies, which is sadly likely. And this is what makes it a dynamic unfolding drama of your own making rather than a lot of the super-structured games where you just win win win.

    The tactical combat in this is genuinely brilliant. Cover and the use of flanking is VITAL in this game and all the better for it.
    Expand
  13. Oct 10, 2012
    10
    Very good..a lot like the 1993 version which is a game i would play for hours on end,has almost all the things I used to to dream that version had..it is a little simpified compared to the 1993 version..but hey thats our fault we stoped calling friends and family out for being too stupid to fact check things and we let them be intelleculay lazy well this is the end result and it will continue to be so ..games that takes brains are long gone..so enjoy your ride into idiotacracy .. Expand
  14. Oct 10, 2012
    8
    This is a really, really good game. However, it's not X-COM UFO Defense or Terror from the Deep with updated graphics, physics and interface, which is what a lot of fans were hoping for. I grew up playing X-Com, Civilization, Command&Conquer, etc etc, all those good classic games. I've been getting one disappointment after another with today's developers trying to give their "spin" of the classics, my latest gripes were Civilization 5 and Diablo 3. That being said, this is NOT one of those cases. This is actually a really good succesor of the franchise, the moment you open your mind and realize that not EVERYTHING has to be the exact same as the older games. Most of the bad reviews and complains are coming from die-hard fans of the franchise (I'm one of those), that wen't into rampaging rage the moment they didn't find the very exact game in the very exact layout, literally. This game has 80% of the original X-COMs, they took some stuff out, added some others, and overall made a great game. Look, I agree, I'd love to have loadouts, inventory and the extra basic movements with action points, like crouch, kneel, etc. I'd also like to have the similar Geo-escape, the Auto vs Aimed shots, the destruction of ground, and other smaller features they left out. However, not having these things DO NOT make this game a bad successor of the X-COM franchises. It definitely does NOT merit the "0 scores" fans are giving it. You have to be objective in this case, it's not the exact same game, it's not what probably you were expecting, but it's not a bad game at all. Considering the other X-COM disasters, and today's games, this one is a standout tittle. They amped up the action, gave it nice graphics, the new base layout/design is actually a better idea graphically and logically than the original games, the individual progress of your soldiers through abilities and classes is a very VERY good implementation, and overall they did achieve the "grim feeling" of the original games. Music could've been better, but still gives you that scary feeling like the older games, not as much tough. The parts of the game that I didn't like were the handholding to the point of annoyance of the starting missions, the cheese cut scenes and attempt of background story could've been left out, the lack of randomization of maps/landing zones and the feeling of a linear progression. Conclusion: This is a great game, a decent successor of the X-COM series, but it's NOT the exact same game as the old ones. There were several features left out that could've made the game even better, but there are also couple of really good additions. Overall is a modern age X-COM, it does deserve a good rating and you'd truly enjoy it if you get in your head the fact that this is a new game, not a X-COM UFO Defense with modern graphics, it's in fact a new game. There are some bugs here and there, nothing horrible; the game is not "dumbed down" as many are saying, it doesn't have the same level of difficulty as the classics, it's true, but the features left out from the original games DOES NOT grant it the tittle of "dumbed down". Please take with a grain of salt the "0 scores", those are really not objective reviews, they were wrote in anger by fans of the older series that would give ANYTHING a "0" just because it's not the exact same game or maybe just to say "I used to play the older games and nothing will be the same". Expand
  15. Oct 10, 2012
    8
    Great strategy game! A lot like the original in some aspects, in some others it´s different. A little too much click sounds in the interface though, still looking for a disable option. Otherwise, great solid recommendation.
  16. Dec 21, 2012
    2
    A terrible remake of the original. The 2012 remake took everything that made the original great and unique and screwed up, on every, single, point. Destructible environments? Cool, it's be nice if I could actually shoot at them. Inventory system? NOPE. Micromanagement? NOPE. Oh come on Firaxis, I can only construct a single base, and only a single alien base appears in the game? Yep. Okay, wow, this game really captured the spirit of the original (heavy sarcasm). If you enjoyed the original you will be greatly disappointed with this game. While not a "horrible" game in itself, as a remake, It's not worth $49.99. At all.

    There were so many possibilities in the original, but X:COM Enemy Unknown (Not to be confused with the good one) is extremely linear. The game holds you back and doesn't allow you to proceed until you've done what it wants. You cannot hire scientists and or engineers, The game basically comes to a halt until you complete a certain objective, you are unable to sell anything you manufacture, or the majority of alien tech for that matter. That was a major source of income in the original, with the monthly council funding being necessary in the long term, you could stay alive if you were low on cash by selling corpses and plasma weaponry. Here you can still sell alien corpses, but at a ridiculously low price. You'll sometimes get ship components, damaged ones have little value and intact components are necessary for high-level manufacturing and are hard to come by, so it'd be pointless to sell something you need.

    I know I'm just nit-picking, but there are just so many things wrong with this game that could have easily been worked out. Take the chance-to-hit rolls for example. Wait, did I say rolls? lolno, X:COM decides who lives and who dies before the mission even starts. "The sequence of hit and misses will be, 1 hit, 2 misses, 2 hits, 1 miss, 3 hits, 4 misses, 1 hit, 1 miss, 2 hits, 1 miss, 1 hit..." It's fate. There is no rolling system. 5% chance to hit? 95% Chance to hit? 40% chance to hit? They're all the same. If you re-load a save it will still be the same. An alien will move to the exact same square, fire the same shots, and hit you the same number of shots. At least in the original There was a short algorithm for calculating shot hits and damage, not here. Not worth your time, you can get the original for 4.99 USD retail price and it's vastly superior. Who cares if the graphics aren't current generation? That's the only downside. If you like strategy/micromanagement, it's the perfect game for you.

    /rant
    Expand
  17. Nov 7, 2012
    0
    No, no, no, no, NO! This game is terrible. 'Requires some brains and patience?!' said the USA Today. Hahaha This game is a very limp, vapid and pale imitation of the original. There is not depth, nor emotional connection to the characters and limited control akin to painting by numbers. This is a very real and very sad representation of what the games industry is all about today. Very similar to Hollywood. REBOOT! 'Hey what happened to the character development of the original?' 'Charawhat kid? Look at the explosions!!'
    'Yeah but the original had depth and a story line to it'
    'Depth? Look at the boobs on that generic female co-star' Pathetic.
    Expand
  18. Nov 20, 2012
    2
    Terrible game, full of glitches and annoying AI tactics. The main flaw being the "2 turn" system in battles. Because making any movement takes a full action, scouting is almost impossible without alerting whole squads of enemies unless you move forward 1 tile at a time. This means you do not get a chance to react to any enemies you encounter, in fact the enemies get a free turn when they enter your vision resulting in unfair situations were they'll move TWICE as far as they should be able to, while you sit there unable to take shots until the aliens have spread out and disappeared. Worse yet is when the aliens scout for you, if they come across you on their own turn THEY GET TO GO AGAIN. This results in many ambush situations you could never predict. When a melee character can kill you in 1 or 2 hits, you'll be screaming as you watch him clear the entire map to walk right up and kill your men that are hiding behind useless cover. Speaking of cover, it's almost 90% destructible as well meaning even in well placed areas all they'll have to do is attack you once to destroy your protection and another for guaranteed hits leaving your only option to never use any area you think might break apart. This is an issue because the aliens have you greatly outnumbered and you can't have yourself wasting turns attacking walls while they can. The camera system is garbage too, walls are only see through while your mouse is over them and good luck grappling onto roof tops, the camera only elevates 3 levels so climbing inside ships results in the game being unable to tell where you want to go usually pointing you towards the floor below you (this isn't a problem in more open maps but very frustrating for snipers). All in all, this game would be so much better if the battle system wasn't so grossly in the enemies favor, even playing on normal mode expect to constantly lose men or be forced to quicksave every turn. (Speaking of saves, autosave doesn't save at mission start AND saves every time someone dies or takes damage. So when you want to avoid mistakes, you must make sure to reload IMMEDIATELY before it overwrites your auto save in 1 or 2 turns). Expand
  19. Nov 21, 2012
    4
    This is quite a good movie... what? its a game? No strategy element - You just click buttons and it tells you what to do. This game is so dumbed down. Players nowadays don't want to think longer than 3 seconds. Firaxis, First you ruined Civ and now you ruined X-COM. Im never going to buy another product from you again, although you probably don't care now that you sold your soul. If you smoke weed and live in your parents basement, this game is for you. Expand
  20. Dec 27, 2012
    2
    After about 3 hours of my life into this game I cannot go on with it. The art, ridiculous. Who throws grenades the size of a mango? That's not practical. Who holds guns half the size of their body? These guys, apparently. I feel like I'm playing a child's game but filled with gore and guts. Perhaps they're only targeting child-like adults with this game, Even the dialogue was terrible and made me want to vomit. I really did not like this game and I never really played the old XCOM series either so I'm not running any sort of comparison between them. I don't understand what other people see in this game. It may have been good for them, but I definitely don't plan on hanging around wasting my time... Perhaps I am too logical a person and have "been there" and "done that" far too much to enjoy this game. Expand
  21. Oct 28, 2012
    5
    Reworking a classic like X-Com is obviously gonna be a challenge. But the continuous failure of gaming companies to get the feeling of the two original games right is just amazing. Once more almost everything that made the original such a great game has been removed, and meaningless fluff has been added.
    The worst part is the incessant hand holding the game forces on you. Two hours into
    the game I`m still waiting to be allowed to choose for myself what to do in my base, but am being guided around as if I`m completely brain dead. In between all this insulting babysitting there are endless cut scenes with pointless dialogue, so that whenever you do try to explore your base you risk one of the uninteresting inhabitants giving you a dull explanation for why you can`t be where you clicked, complete with panning cameras. The whole experience in the base makes you wish there was some option to turn the entire guided experience off. It`s not as if you need to hear a single word being said by anybody anyway.

    The actual tactical game is so simplified it doesn`t even compare to the original game. No inventories, not enough space to really be tactical, poor camera controls and the endless loss of game controls as the camera pans around to give you that utterly meaningless "movie" feel. The first NPC encountered even insists on talking for about 5 seconds every turn while you sit and wait for her like a moron.

    Compared to this the original dropped you in at the deep end let you explore the game yourself. There were no cut scenes and endless droning dialogue to waste your time, and you had detailed base and tactical control. Why is it so impossible these days to just let players play the game on their own?
    Whatever merits this game has is totally lost in all this, at least for me. I`m sure members of the fluoride generation used to being treated as imbeciles will enjoy it, but for seasoned gamers it is unbearable.
    Expand
  22. Apr 20, 2013
    4
    It's pretty, but it's not much of a game. They stripped the original gameplay down to bare bones, then tacked on a ton of Hollywood glitz.

    It seemed like they would have preferred to make a movie. XCOM:EU is great when it comes to voice acting, swooshy camera movements, and scary hissing aliens. There's not much plot and the characters are paper-thin, but it has excellent low-level
    production values such as animation, art, and sound effects. The gameplay is merely a way to make you sit still so that you can appreciate how much work they put into the visuals. Expand
  23. Oct 16, 2012
    7
    Cool game, but there is no way this deserves a 10. Way too little content in this game, with graphics relative simple it's seems a waste that there are so few locations. Overall the game feels rushed and buggy... On normal difficulty the game is also quite quick to complete even with everything researched and all environments played though several times. Fun but hardly AAA material.
  24. Oct 22, 2012
    2
    Go in knowing that this game is designed to make you feel as much pain as they can, as a result the difficulty curve is nuts. You will go from all silly easy missions where you take almost no damage at all to an endless series of losing your whole team forcing you to reload saves over and over until you work out some way to beat the mission.

    If you are attracted to games that require
    replaying the same level 10 times in a row, then this is your game. If however you do not like being hit in the face with a hammer this is not your game. Expand
  25. Apr 3, 2013
    4
    Picking up weapons/medkits from fallen comrades, throwing weapons to eachother, psi abilities, crouching, different types of firing (scatter shot/aimed shot/burst fire), an inventory system for every player...

    These are just a few of the things XCOM EU has left out of their game, and it seriously suffers from replayability for that. I about uninstalled the game when I found out I
    couldn't take a medkit from my critically wounded medic to heal him.

    While the original was difficult and hard to get into, Enemy Unknown suffers from the opposite end of the spectrum endlessly 'streamlined' gameplay with very few paths or strategies to win the game
    Expand
  26. Jan 16, 2013
    4
    In the near future when aliens invade earth and start destroying everything they find you get put in charge of earths last stand; an organisation called Xcom. You get given a secret underground base which you are constantly expanding in order to combat the aliens from here you can send out satellites (which will track down enemy UFOs), build facilities, launch fighter planes (to take out UFOs) and send out troops to different parts of the world. As you progress further through the game you will find out more about the aliens and eventually travel to their mother ship and take out their leader.
    Xcom is a turn based strategy game in which you use guns to combat an alien threat which also includes blood so 12 is a pretty accurate rating for this game. The game can get very addictive when you play it and can leave you playing for hours but it can also be extremely frustrating at times for example if all your best troops get shot or if the games physics make no sense what so ever (unfortunately this happens quite a lot). Xcom can make you very angry at times but it can also improve your knowledge in strategic thinking over time.
    The gameplay of Xcom is a turn based strategy with simple movement and shooting based on chance the problem with the game is that there is so many glitches to do with the animations and objects in the world for example I have shot through solid objects way to many times to be just a glitch that they forgot about and the chances of shooting aliens make no sense whatsoever for example if you shoot at an alien behind heavy cover while standing right next to him you will not have as much chance as if you where shooting at him from behind while standing miles away
    My verdict on this is that it is a good game to play if you want to play for a long while if you don
    Expand
  27. Oct 10, 2012
    10
    Absolutely Stunning. A game that takes strategy, decision and luck. This game definitely improves from the old XCOM and you should buy it. This is one purchase you wont regret.
  28. Oct 10, 2012
    9
    Also, look at the reviewers previous reviews. 10 for Dead Island but 0 for Xcom? You mad? Don't understand why people do things just to be generally annoying.
  29. Oct 11, 2012
    10
    I have been a old school gamer and have played the original x-com and the jagged alliance games as well. With the Xcom: Enemy Unknown I can say this is definitly the spiritual successor of the original. I have been waiting for a turn base tactically game that was actually any good and my long wait is over. There are so many details in this game and you can tell alot of love and thought was put in this game by that set details. I give Firaxis mad props for them tackling the remake of one of the best games ever made in x-com. It is similar to the original but also it is definitly not the same game as it. This is a good thing, there is a lot less micro managment that would bog down the "fun" factor in the game and the fun factors are all-a-plenty! The core game play is tactical turn base combat, and the game brings this in spades. You actually worry about your soldiers surviving and when they die you will feel it, especially if it a veteran soldier that fall in combat because what they bring to the table as they gain levels is hard to get back. This type reaction give you a emotional attachment to your soldiers as the game progresses.

    I can say more about this game but just talking about doesnt it give it justice. Just go buy it and see for your self. Its one of the best games I have played in long long time and worth every cent I payed for it.
    Expand
  30. Oct 12, 2012
    10
    Great game! Fun and scary like the first, for everything it lost for the console tards it gained some features or something that is improved on the first game. A must buy if you like TBS or XCOM. Now we don't see just one X-com, we see X-COM and XCOM in the IP :D (buy it on PC) Mods will put the stuff back in one day!
  31. Nov 6, 2012
    6
    Firaxis's reboot of X-COM streamlines much of the old mechanics in the original game, but the result is a mixed bag as it's plagued by many bugs that affect the overall enjoyability. Having clocked about 97 hours on the Steam version, what was an enjoyable experience starting from normal mode became frustration as I spent more time with the game. Some of the frustrations I've experienced so far were enemies that teleported in and out of view at the end of a turn, SHIV (tank-like units) that get stuck or can't shoot, line of sight issues, and rocket launchers not hurting target is just a taste of the what's to come. Although not gaming breaking on easy and normal modes, these bug heavily affect game play on classic mode where you can lose entire squad due to any of the above. For example in my classic playthrough, I often get three or more enemy groups teleporting in front of my squad and wiping them out (this happens often).

    Also, the way the game decides on your chance of hitting is finicky and broken. You can miss often when your shot chance is 75%-100%. If your shot chance is 50%, don't expect to land any shots at all. Having an MBA and taking more than enough math courses (and statistics) for several lifetimes, it makes you scratch your head why you sometimes fail to connect on even 85% chance to hit shots. I've never had problems with other games that rely heavily on chance (like Final Fantasy Tactics) before until now. Even the original X-COM was fair in determining chance and probability.

    All in all, the game is enjoyable when the game engine decides to behave itself. However, I would not recommend paying full price for this game until Firaxis decides to patch up the bugs. You should be relatively fine if you play on easy or normal modes. But if you play on any other modes, expect to see severe bugs and broken game mechanics often.
    Expand
  32. Dec 17, 2012
    1
    A well polished turd.

    Just like Fallout 3, just like Civ V, XCom Enemy Unknown looks great with smooth gameplay, and is boring as hell. If you know the original , this lame copy of the truly great original Xcom is not worth a jewel case purchase next year. The scenarios are way too easy, the multiplayer system is a joke, there is just non of the startling surprises and sneaky tactics
    that made the original such a fun game. If this is what major game review sites rank in the upper 90%, I'm only buying used games from this point forwards.forwards. Expand
  33. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    The game is boring. It adds nothing but new graphics. Its had all the strategy tactics and choices ripped out. Leaving just shallow game play. 10 hours in and the game became a chore to play.
  34. May 12, 2013
    4
    Well if you are 10 yrs old and can't remember the original, this game will be awesome to play. However, if you know anything about the original, please leave your expectations in the empty box after you purchase this or you will be disappointed. How a 20 yr old game with graphics that seem older than that can still be more fun today than this game was is beyond me, but it is true. As other reviewers have pointed out the one glaring thing that disappointed me was the lame fog of war. In the original if you walked around a corner you could get blasted in the back of the head and not even know what happened, just like real combat. In this you walk around the corner see the alien behind you then watch it go and hide so you get a chance to get your bearings and attack, super lame. In the original I actually felt technically inferior to the aliens as I watched them dismantle my squad in a matter of minutes even late in the game. In this if you make it past the first few months forget about it, you are on cruise control from there. It's as if you switched place with the aliens and now you are the technically superior force, watching aliens cower from you. What a joke. I wish this let's make our game so the biggest simpleton moron can play it in the name of making money tradition would end, SOON. Expand
  35. May 30, 2013
    2
    Man I wish I would have played the Demo before buying this game. Got sucked into the hype big time. This game has the most cumbersome interface I've even encountered in a PC game. Just don't get what all the X-com fuss is about. The game is totally boring and after playing it for about 45 minutes I couldn't delete off my computer fast enough. Like other folks have said, this game is really dumbed down, it has a feel of an old 1980 or 90's game, perhaps that's what the designers wanted but it's not my cup of tea. Expand
  36. Oct 14, 2012
    6
    As a turn-based game, it's an enjoyable if simple title. As an installment in the XCOM series, it's a dumbed-down disappointment that tries too hard to be action-packed and cinematic over offering a deep and rewarding tactical experience with much replay value. If you' don't know what XCOM is, or can forget you know what XCOM is, you stand a decent chance of having fun during at least your first playthrough. If you're an oldschool XCOM fan that can't forget this is supposed to be an XCOM game, you're going to be disappointed unless you're really good at lying to yourself. Things like the Inventory are a joke (go ahead and choose between a scope on your rifle or ONE grenade) as is the aircraft "inventory" system, which consists of picking which gun a jet flies with, and then using silly 1-shot consumables during an engagement to give the aircraft buffs. The game plays like it's on rails as well, limiting what you can do like no XCOM game before and putting more emphasis on the storyline and cutscenes, which lowers the replay value. Would you like to sell your outdated weaponry when you're done with it? You can't. Would you like to put in the time, effort and resources to field another skyranger so you can respond to TWO threats in a reasonable amount of time instead of one? Can't. Would you like to tell your heavy to bring a plasma rifle instead of his crummy default LMG? Can't.
    Despite neutering your options and creativity, the game can be enjoyable, just don't go in expecting it to be XCOM, no matter what the title says. Go in with zero expectations, and you can only be pleasantly surprised.
    Expand
  37. Oct 18, 2012
    6
    So i was about to buy this game for the xbox 360. Thanks to a friend of mine, he lend me his pc-version to first test the game. Thanks!
    I would never ever pay 60
  38. Oct 18, 2012
    10
    Despite some minor issues like the consolized interface, XCOM Enemy Unknown is a worthy successor to the original XCOM game and one of the best strategy games I have played in a long time.
  39. Nov 2, 2012
    5
    So (35 years old lover of the original here) how is this game?
    This game is not so bad as someone described it, still be assured, this is NOT your old XCOM.
    What i found very bad? The AI is more like an AS (Artificial Stupidity) and tries to compensate by cheating, hitting 100% and dealing tons of crits (not making the game harder btw, just annoying), is this THAT bad? Yes 'cause leaves
    no feeling of strategy... in a wannabe strategic game, the aliens will always behave like stupid, just they hit you more often and harder.
    You can ONLY equip 1 main weapon (only the one fitting for the class the game chose for yr soldiers), 1 side weapon and 1 (or 2 if you unlock certain perks) grenade/Medikit/Stunner/etc.
    The campaign is way too scripted, i tried as hard as i could to make it last longer (squeezed 70some hours out of 2 games classic+impossible) but that just means grinding mission after mission (after a while they start repeating).
    I only listed the bad aspects of the game, so why a 5? 'cause for a while you can have some fun with this alien game... For a while, then you will put it on yr shelves and leave it there forever and go back to the old (real) X-COM.
    Expand
  40. Oct 17, 2012
    8
    Please consider my rating an 8.5 (I'm a big fan of the idea of adding .5's to this system, and am still a bit confused how an overall user score of 8.1 can come about with everyone forced to give x.0 ratings. But that's neither here nor there.)

    XCom: Enemy Unknown is a truly addicting gaming experience. Luckily (?) for this experience at least, I had not thoroughly played the original
    XCom back in the early 90's, so the lore of the game was new to me. Most of the negative reviews I've read are from people contrasting this game to the original. The game isn't without it's faults. There are some unusual bugs that pop up from time-to-time. A few have been very nearly game-killers (the inability to go through a door when the level has only one door you need to get your soldiers through, etc.) - but with so many firefight options (including later abilities to psionically control enemies) you can even get through the buggy levels. The other major negative I'd like to point out is the tedium that sets in after so many battles. One of the first things I'd like to see developed are new, more creative maps, because you do start seeing the same maps repeat over and over. While the levels are semi-random (you never really know where enemies or objectives are going to be located), the game play for any level is just the same. Locate the objective (usually a UFO to infiltrate, pedestrians to save, etc.), strategically place your soldiers in the most tactical positions, hunker down and shoot. What really makes this game for me is the building phase of the game. You are tasked with building facilities which allow you to construct new and varied weapons, armor, aircraft, satellites, and so forth. Your soldiers are constantly gaining experience with each fight, and although their skill trees aren't large (would love to see expansion here, too), it is ridiculously satisfying to level your crew up. With the ability to name and outfit them to your choosing, you really do feel like the CEO of a fighting machine. As such, you also become very invested with your troops, and when one drops in combat, it can be an emotional experience, because there are no reincarnations here. If a soldier dies, he dies for good. With that everlurking fear, how you strategically place troops on the battlefield becomes that much more important. You really do want to keep them alive. Watching a soldier fall who you've spent 20+ missions building up and training is excruciating, and can leave a serious hole in your roster. But crunch all you want, you'll build more! The graphics are really quite superb, I'm most impressed with the HQ build screen, a cut-away view of your facilities that is bustling with activity.

    Even as I became a bit bored with the gameplay, I just couldn't quit, and still haven't, the game is definitely replayable thanks to a lot of random factors built-in. It's been a while since I'd purchased a game that became a MUST play after a day of work. And it's been a while since I've been so enchanted by the way a game works that I'm already hungering for additional content. If you can play this without thinking "Oh, this is dumbed-down version of the original", then you're in for a real treat. Buy this game, it's one of the good ones.
    Expand
  41. Nov 22, 2012
    5
    A very mediocre turn-based console game. Read some of the negative reviews before purchasing, and take my word as a decade-long tactical games fan: this game offers NOTHING new. Nothing at all. There is absolutely NO reason to play it. Actually, I believe that even an RPG like Dragon Age: Origins had more of both strategic and tactical choices.
    Very dissapointing, unbelievably overpriced.
    Oh, and the voice acting is atrocious. Borderline criminal. Expand
  42. Oct 14, 2012
    8
    As a fan of turnbased games I really appreciate this game. A very solid game overall. After all I just think that they wasted a lot of potential in this game, in terms of character progression, different level styles and tactical possibilities.
  43. Jun 9, 2013
    5
    Enjoyable experience and a solid purchase, but felt just a TAD too casualised to really be 'X-Com' to me. Late to the party, just logged onto MC for the first time in ages and thought I'd go through some of my purchases for posterity's sake.

    TACTICAL
    +Feels frantic and tense, at least in the early-mid game before your dudes get bulk health.
    +Looks nice. A good visual update to the
    series.
    +Options you didn't have in the original, like suppressing enemy units and flanking. In some respects combat more tactical.
    -Heavy class becomes more or less useless except for suppression and rocket-launcher by the mid-late game.
    -Squads felt too small and made losing a unit even more crippling than the original.
    -Inventory dumbed down ridiculously: Why can't my soldier in powered jetpack armour carry more than one grenade or rocket?
    -Dumbed down targeting in the original, blowing open a wall with your plasma rifle was a viable tactical option, for example
    -Action system abstraction can sometimes be grating.
    -NO RANDOMISED MAPS. This was probably my biggest gripe. Cripples replayability, criminal lack of effort. This would've been a 7 for me otherwise.

    GLOBAL
    +Looks shiny, sounds cool. Very atmospheric, and the cutscenes/lore for everything is generally pretty good, even if they do recycle some templates.
    +Progression felt very rewarding, expanding options tactically by where you decide to expand and establish satellites.
    -Arbitrary dichotomy where you always have to choose one nation to ignore. Can we seriously not just buy a second skyranger?
    -Only one base no base defense? That was a vital part of the original game.
    -Randomised classes for recruits could mean highly unbalanced teams enjoy your four useless Heavies who will just take up space.

    That's all I can remember from playing this last year. Decent purchase, but nothing special and a lot of design decisions which seem highly questionable. It would've been nice to maybe have a more modular version of the game where you could get more strategic depth by enabling old-school options at the start of the campaign, to appeal to both audiences.
    Expand
  44. Oct 12, 2012
    9
    The best way to review this game is to address the "problems" other people have mentioned:

    "blah blah the thing i loved about xcom was i could have loads of different soldiers and customise their names etc" - hire new soldiers from the training school. Customise them in the barracks. You need to diable the tutorial in the options menu first. (only the suit colour was pre purchase bonus
    - play the game before writing a review.
    "you cant duck behind cover and there is unlimited ammo...this losies strategic variety". You can duck behind cover by hitting the shield icon called Hunker Down after moving. Ammo was deadwood and needlessly over complicates the game and loadout -play the game before writing a review.
    "the difficulty is too high and i can lose my best soldiers all in one mission and countries leave too easilly" - the original had elements of needing to be predictive too. You can lower the difficulty at any time. Save before every mission. - Buy easy games then look up walkthroughs on the internet if you don't have the brain for this kind of game.
    "the camera angles are bad my soldiers often rush into the wrong area rather than changing levels". This is true, that element could have done with some polish but you can avoid most problems by simply being more careful before moving between levels and using the keyboard to change height in steps rather than spinning the mouse wheel. Also get into the habit of using the rotate camera buttons that are pointless in most other games but essential here.

    Overall it's a faithful and competent re-imagining of an all-time classic. A very slightly flawed masterpiece. 9.5
    Expand
  45. Oct 31, 2012
    6
    A squad of soldiers in turn-based battles against evil aliens. This concept worked in 94/95 and still works today. I always liked the theme in XCOM. Defending against an alien invasion, doing autopsys, researching new weapons, equiping your soldiers, fly out into the night and show those alien greenheads out the door - it was fun in the old games and it's still fun in Enemy Unknown. The downsides: I don't want to give the narrative about console ports on pc again, but... here it is: mediocore graphics, simplified game mechanics, slowly responding interfaces, reduced tactical complexity tue to reduced control options, cheesy cut-scenes, railroaded storyline...

    The bright side: Only a few minor bugs at release (positive thing... I'm old...), no major balance problems. Nice story and technology concepts.

    Enemy Unknown is not a bad pc game and it's not one you will remember in two years either. But it's still a pleasant experience to play and probably worth your money.
    Expand
  46. Oct 13, 2012
    9
    As a hardcore XCom fan i have to say im very impressed with this, not sure what people are saying that if you have played the original it wont be as fun? im having lots of fun? im "probably" about halfway through it and have enjoyed every moment of it. No, its not the original but it wasnt set out to be. I find it much more tactical then the first game as in this one the AI is quite intelligent and you have to use the cover system and back each of your squad members up and think of every possibiltiy, which is nice. the graphics are great and give a good "personal" feeling to the game with the dynamic camera. The ant farm style base is great and gives a different feel to the game as you can see what is going on in your base like recently captured aliens being held in the containment etc, I rated this a 9 as no game is perfect in my view, it is a very good game but i would like to see certain functions be in there like someone has said when your troops initially upgrade from rookie to select which paths they take as i had 6 snipers in a group of about 12 soldiers and without hiring more soldiers i could not get the other classes which were needed, even then wasnt always certain. Also found the interface when i move my soldiers in a ufo tends to not zoom inside the ufo as id like and alot of the time see the roof when i go to move, which is a pain sometimes but its very minor. All in all from what i have played so far about 16 hours worth its a very impressive game and appeals not just to fans of the series but new ones alike. Id recommend it to anyone. Expand
  47. Oct 10, 2012
    9
    This is a very very good strategy game at the tactical level. I think the Strategic level needs a little work, and the itemization of weapons and gear needs more options. But with that said, I have been playing pretty much non stop since release and I see a lot of replay-ability. With DLC coming, i can see spending many many hours on this game.
  48. Oct 11, 2012
    10
    XCOM: EU is a thoroughly enjoyable sequel to the franchise, with a good balance of missions, technology, suspense, and gut wrenching decisions as you are forced to prioritize your way to victory. The graphics and engine work flawlessly together with only a few minor graphical glitches. The suspense and feelings of loss when you make a bad decision or joy at pulling off a flawlessly executed strategy encourages you to push deeper and deeper into the game to fully explore it's plot. Normal difficulty seems properly tuned for players new to XCOM, Classic is definitely a challenge right in line with previous games and the Ironman feature of a single autosave makes it even more daunting.

    In 30 hours I've only encountered one AI glitch where the turn would not end a quick save game reload fixed. There are only two minor complaints. The lack of a "tech tree" where you can see how far along a research path you are, something previous game iterations lacked but a useful addition if you lose track what was coming next. The second, squaddie role assignments are random, forcing you early on to mix up new teams to ensure you have two-three of each role instead of being able to pick.

    TFTD was one of my favorite games when I started PC gaming in the 90's and X:EU does NOT disappoint in this regard. A modern, playable re-imaging of XCOM that comes highly recommended.
    Expand
  49. Oct 14, 2012
    7
    XCOM: Enemy Unknown Review

    I came in thinking that Firaxis was just giving us the original XCOM with a slick graphics upgrade. I was pleased and saddened by some of the changes to the original formula of the game. After finishing XCOM:Enemy Unknown on Classic I can say that Firaxis did a commendable job, but it is very apparent that much of the old gameplay that gave the original a
    tense, tactical feel was taken away in favor of a more streamlined approach. Graphics and Sound:

    The graphics have a feel that seems to fit the original look of the game. The special effects and sounds for the weapons fit the game very well and definitely sell the game. The switching camera angles can also invoke a sense of achievement or trepidation depending on if you're seeing one your soldiers gunning down an alien or a new deadly group of aliens coming into view. Sometimes enemies will appear to stand on thin air and there seem to be clipping issues with some flying enemies becoming stuck in ceilings and being completely invisible unless you blow the roof away. These aren
    Expand
  50. Oct 13, 2012
    10
    The game is brilliant! it doesn't handle you with kiddie gloves. it roughs you up. til you man up.

    It strives to capture all the great things that nostalgic players wanted from the old XCOM. including the "this is not a cakewalk" feel. Ok ok so I was playing on "classic" difficulty level, which is one step higher than normal. But they got it right!

    Almost all the negative reviews
    you'll see here are out of frustration from how to manage getting credits and not go overboard with accumulating upkeep costs for your facility. Admittedly if it's your first run through the game, you'll probably face this problem. Since you are faced with a wide array of things to upgrade and work on, and it's easy to overlook the main credits making path to keep things afloat, namely satellites.

    I've been playing this game 2 days straight now and I'm strongly attached to my squad members, and spend a few mins before every mission just to make sure they look right for their characters before they deploy.

    The tactical squad combat carries the whole title. It's lovely and its tense. which is not an easy thing to do on a turn-based game (think jagged alliance?). Admittedly the assault class seems to be overpowered next to others. But other classes are still very helpful as support. The cover system is very simple and clear enough.

    Managing resources is a tight rope, and being able to hold on to all countries is a challenge. Base facility management also adds the cool element of "adjacency bonuses", meaning if you cluster your power generators together you get more power.

    It's a rare gem that can't be missed!
    Expand
  51. Oct 14, 2012
    9
    This game is fantastic! Very well done and is (almost) all I hoped for in a reimagination of this old classic! I write "almost" because there are a few things lacking, but nothing serious.

    First the good things: The game! Yes, it does almost nothing wrong. I know there are a lot of people ranting over the things that are missing compared to the old game. But really, this is an
    reimagination and most things have been changed up - and for the better. Inventory management is quick and intuitive, no more 10 min. inventory checks before each mission. The research tree is expanded and you are able to customize everything from troops and items to vehichles. More varied missions. Nice cutscenes and input from NPC's adding to the atmosphere and storyline. MUCH more emphasis on tactics - make too many mistakes and you are seriously punished, think before you move and you are rewarded. Soldiers have different classes, contributing to the tactical thinking. Base building requires more consideration. Resource management! Probably the single most mportant enhancement if you like this sort of game! Depending on difficulty level, you really have to pay a much closer attenyion to your resources than in the old Xcom. You can no longer mass produce laser rifles and sell them off, this is a big plus as it keeps the end game interesting! Even though you are 4 months in you can still make mistakes that can cause you to lose the game. This and much, much, more!

    It is a teeny weeny lacking in the original atmosphere. The music, although good, is a bit too upbeat in my opinion. You just don't get the same creepy sensation... Then there is the clunky characters, guess it is because of the console adaption, but come on, some of the guys got hands twice as big as a normal person's head. Finally I wish they would have spent a little more time on finding talented voice actors.

    But all on all highly recommendable. If you loved the old game you shouldn't be dissapointed.
    Expand
  52. Oct 18, 2012
    6
    As a fan of the X-COM franchise I was all eager to get my hands onto this game finally. Long story short: If the (3D-)graphics wouldn't be so nice, this would be a major disappointment. In the traditional X-COM games I loved the variety of options I have, and the simplicity yet power of the user interface. In XCOM:Enemy Unknown on the other hand I feel extremely limited, up to the point of having the feeling that most of steps I have to make to be successful are pretty pre-defined (and not hard to figure out), e.g. order of research. The above mentioned user interface is clearly inferior to the traditional X-COM games: things are well hidden, you click too often, mouse- and keyboard-input are somewhat not streamlined (aparently optimized for gamepads rather). A consequence of both shortcomings is that I feel less attached to "my crew", "my station" and "my mission".

    Another - for me personally - really big downside is that simply destroying stuff (buildings, etc.) is happening far less and has far less strategical meaning than in the original games. Yes, it looks nicer, but in the old days you could really blow up an UFO from afar with 4 guys using rocket launchers if you wanted to. No more today.

    Don't get me wrong, XCOM: Enemy Unknown is not a bad game, but that is a consequence of the timeless game concepts. Sadly, Firaxis failed to pick up on the huge opportunity to bring this to the next generation - despite the very nice 3D-graphics everything else seems to have been cut down, simplified/banalized and not thought through.

    It will make you play it once with a lot of joy, but it will not make you love it for months and play it over and over again as the good old XCOM from 1983.
    Expand
  53. Oct 26, 2012
    5
    A decent game let down by a marketing strategy to parade it in on the shoulders of a colossal masterpiece. Though it does not, by any stretch of my experience, deserve the 0 scores it is getting, I do understand and share much of the old Xcom fans' gripes about this instalment. My take on the game's overall shortcoming is basically this - they critically misunderstood the very core essence of Xcom. Instead of pitting you up against an unforgiving and overwhelming invasion and then enabling you to rise above the challenge through various game mechanics; the game offers you static, mediocre invaders and a linear path to salvation and then sets up arbitrary handicaps through game mechanics as a means of creating a challenge. Although the resulting level of challenge is somewhat similar, the resulting level of satisfaction is devastatingly different. It felt more like I was fighting the game developers and trying to get around their in-game hurdles than actually fighting off a relentless alien invasion. A shame really. Expand
  54. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    The game is gorgeous due to both exceptional graphics and design. I loved the turn-based combat and really enjoyed leveling up my crew with gear and skills.

    I'm giving this game a score of six mostly because of it's low replay value. I had a similar experience to some other reviewers in that I was obsessed with this game when I first got my hands on it, but after about 25-30 hours into
    it I got really sick of it... I no longer felt the need to upgrade my crew because they already felt maxed out, the environments and missions did start to feel repetitive, and pretty quickly I ran out of things that seemed worth researching in the lab. Despite having so much fun in the first days of owning it, I really can't see myself stomaching another playthrough.

    All of this being said, Xcom is a great game and for a lot of people, 25-30 hours of grade A, engaging game play is worth the price of admission. My only recommendation might be to wait until the game goes down in price if you are looking to pay 50 bucks for a game you can sink dozens and dozens of hours into.
    Expand
  55. Nov 6, 2012
    0
    This game makes a point of everything that is wrong in the current game industry today. You create game and for maximum revenue the game is created for multiple platforms, thus the game are limited to the limitations of the poorest platform. Yes the beloved Xbox or Playstation. XCOM deserves so much more that XBOX and Playstation.

    Yes the name is almost the same, graphics are nice,
    sound is nice but the nice things stop there. The rest of the game is poor at best, but utter **** is a more suiting word for it. Back in the good old days, a company name MicroProse released a tactical strategy game that was challenging on every department. The game play was way before it's time, and like Doom it was responsible countless clones that never actually could compete. There was only one Xcom, the rest of the clones, although some were quite enjoyable, none of the could ever compete with XCOM: UFO Defense.

    This "new" XCOM lacks everything the old game had. From tactical movement, to base building, to interactions. In short almost everything XCOM was, except for the name is lacking in this release. My recommendation, if you enjoyed XCOM: UFO Defense and spent countless hours replaying the game stay away. If you haven't played XCOM: UFO Defense before, don't even bother. This game is nerfed down to the limitations of the XBOX and Playstation. In short, this game rates as close to zero as one can get.

    Nerefed down review: STAY AWAY! Firaxis and 2k games don't deserve our hard earned cash for this crap.
    Expand
  56. Jan 19, 2013
    0
    Dear Sirs programmers if you're creating, excuse the expression, "a piece of **** please do not call it a cult name.Thanks for the time wasted.From Russia with Love.
  57. May 13, 2013
    2
    Honestly the game is ok with graphics. They look nice, but they don't behave realistically. My soldiers panic all the time, and I fail missions constantly because of it. The aliens get too strong too quick. Am I the only one who missed flanking an alien with 100% hit chance?
    Anyways I deeply regret buying this game on steam.
  58. Oct 16, 2012
    8
    I've not played this game fully as I've been engrossed with Dishonored. I've completed the first few missions and like what I've seen. It's a nice strategy game with pretty graphics. I haven't had the 'one more go' element that some people have had. That doesn't mean it's a bad game though. I read that it's been massively simplified more the new generation. I don't have a problem with this as I'm not the quickest of cats and want enjoyment from my games :) Once I've finished Dishonored (which is a 10 out of 10 for me), I'll continue my progress. My initial impression is this is a solid 8 out of 10. Expand
  59. Apr 5, 2013
    2
    Thank god for demos!! Make sure you try the free demo on Steam before handing over the cash. As a hardcore strategy geek, I have been considering this one for a while, and have to say, I'm siding with the naysayers. Too much time spent on lame cut scenes, 'story', and other visual effects and way, way too little time spent on strategic depth. This is not a bingo. I had more fun playing Orcs Must Die than this tripe. Seriously lamenting the old school at this point. Expand
  60. Mar 10, 2013
    3
    I had high hopes for this remake of this classic. Unfortunately this is yet another wasted opportunity, Firaxis has struck out again (I also disliked Civ 5, Civ 4 was much better).
    I don't mind the dumbing down of gameplay if what was left in was well designed. But the game is a disaster horrible interface, average graphics and a really bad AI that cheats in frustrating ways. Civ 5 had
    an overly complex interface that looked pretty but wasn't very functional, the XCOM interface doesn't even manage to look nice. I would have preferred a single screen for each soldier that shows everything about the soldier their equipment, stats, abilities etc. Instead, in different parts of the game I see different information, and some is always missing or hard to access. So much button clicking, so many ugly game screens.
    I wish Firaxis would just sell the rights to these classics to a developer that has some talented designers/programmers. They obviously have none themselves and it's a shame to waste these licenses.
    Expand
  61. Oct 10, 2012
    10
    XCOM: Enemy Unknown is solid. Period. For those of you who have been playing games for years and like various aspects of many types of games, this one will satisfy you. Turn based strategy. Check. Shooter vibe. Check. Base building. Check. Difficult decisions. Yes. Desisions matter. Umhum. Feels like you're "in the game." Absolutely. Fun and re-playable. You see where I'm going with this.
    Give XCOM a chance and it'll surprise you at the most unexpected moments in both great and devastating ways. These moments are always interesting though and happen in ways that never leave you feeling cheated.
    This team deserves to be supported. A little creative searching can yield a slightly cheaper result if pricing is a problem for you. I have over 40 games on Steam and XCOM is my shining star that I'm most proud of and that I'm most likely to recommend to others. It's the game I going to want to talk about months after completion and maybe fire back up again from time to time.

    Firaxis,
    Congratulations and thank you for implementing your ideas for an XCOM reboot so well. I know that you know that you have a special product under your belt. Now the rest of us know it as well, and most of us agree that it's unique, fun, and relevant in today's gaming space/market.

    Knocked it out of the park!
    Expand
  62. Oct 15, 2012
    8
    Don't you hate first day of release 10 scores, I mean how can they ever be accurate. Anyway, this is a very good squad based tactical shooter, but that is all it is. All the other xcom features are gone or simplified to the point they no longer matter. The base is just 5 menus, the whole Ant Farm Idea is just eye candy, very pretty eye candy but you never have to use it and even if you do, only the main ops section does anything. They gave up aliens invading your base for a pretty backdrop. UFOs are rare, which is strange for a game about UFOs because shooting them down in large numbers was kind of the whole point of these games. There is only 1 Alien base in the entire game, aliens do not establish bases in areas you failed to defend, you just get this one base and this is part of the main plot anyway. EG part of the story and not at all random in anyway. Cover in battles is so messed up you can be hit through solid walls without the wall being damaged or have zero percent chance of hitting an alien that is stood right next to you. Despite this, the battles are still very good. Aliens do not move around, they spawn when triggered, either by the player walking through invisible triggers that makes them suddenly appear, or by dropping out of the sky like magic or by just popping in to existence in front of your very eyes. Not very convincing. Again, despite this, the battles are still very good. You can play game without any fighters are all, some of my fighters have never been used or only used once after over 20 hours of game play. Unlike the original game where you had a lot of UFOs to shoot down and needed those fighters, that is just not the case here. Most of the time your dealing with UFO landings, but you never see the UFO fly to the spot and land, it just happens. Terror attacks on cities, abductions and a host of other missions make up the core squad based game play, this is what makes the game worth an 8 score on its own. Worth buying just for this if you like Squad based combat. As for the title making it sound like a UFO Enemy Unknown game, that is just a way to sell a Squad based game to an audience that may not have brought it if it was called ET Invasion or something. It may look like an UFO game but its not, there is no RPG elements in this worth speaking off, no strategy worth talking about. Just Squad based tactics, 1 out of the 3 elements that made the original game a classic is all that is left.

    My advice to those considering buying is this, if your looking for a Warhammer 40k style table top battle system for the PC then this game rates an 8 out of 10 and you will love it. But if your buying this game because you want a modern UFO Enemy Unknown (UFO Defence in the USA), dont bother, your wasting your money. I am going to score this game based on its squad gameplay and give it an 8, if I was to score it based on what it should have been as a UFO clone, it would only have gotten a 4. So if you want UFO Enemy Unknown DO NOT BUY THIS GAME, but if you like squad combat and thats all you care about, you will love this.
    Expand
  63. Oct 13, 2012
    8
    Let me just start out by saying this game had me hooked. I lost track of time, and before I knew it, 6 hours had passed, and I was starving. This game was incredibly addictive and fun. The sense of urgency was there, along with the frantic drive to decide which research project will save more of your troops, and a new dependency on choosing which countries to help, and which ones you have to let go. I loved the dependence on tactical positioning, with cover and height advantages, to get the most out of your troops, and the leveling system of the squad was excellent. Singleplayer is excellent.

    Now for what I didn't like as much. Multiplayer was weak at best. A fun distraction, but don't count on it being worth the purchase price. Singleplayer does have flaws as well. Not to get into spoiler territory, but I thought they could have done more work on the ending (more on the cinematic part/wrapping it up, as it ends rather abruptly IMO. Also, the enemies could have been more dynamic on the map. While they revealed themselves a good number of times, and that ruined my day on multiple occasions (when I was already fighting 2 cyberdisks, a pack of crysallids shows up), or I revealed a group of aliens while outflanking the group I was fighting, most of the time, it was a game of cat and mouse, with me being the cat. Not to say this wasn't like the original, but I just expected the aliens to be more dynamic, given the 18 year gap. This could be in part due to the small squad sizes, which, at the beginning is prohibitive, but by the time you have 6 colonels with plasma, 6 is all you really need.

    Compared to the original, this game weeds out a lot of the tediousness of the first, while maintaining the strategic pleasure of the first. The only thing I would add would be the ability to pick up the equipment of your fallen soldiers, as I found it annoying when my soldier carrying the item I needed kicked the bucket, leaving me without it. Multiple bases in the original were mainly to expand your interceptor coverage, as my main base could have housed all the necessary buildings for building and researching what I needed (along with psionics and all that jazz). Considering that, limited to one base with interceptor bases wasn't a bad thing IMO. The exclusion of time units similarly was not a problem, as the 2 action system actually makes your individual actions far more important. In the original, you could go into a room, see it's full of enemies, take a shot, and then run back out again. Also, stopping your unit when you saw an enemy was a crutch. The new game succeeds it's predecessor in that regard, by making each action a crucial choice.

    Overall, this game exceeds the original, which is to be expected of a game that comes out 18 years later. Multiplayer is fun, but not a reason to buy the game. Picking up dead soldiers equipment should certainly be added, but it was not a game breaker. More dynamic enemies would be appreciated, rather than knowing you're going to stumble upon enemies in this area, with little deviation (there was times they took me by surprise, but not many).
    Expand
  64. Oct 15, 2012
    9
    Simply put, in spite of many defects, this game is magnificent. The mix of combat tactics, base management, research, and basic rpg is an almost perfect combination which still keeps me longing to play more.
    Sure, the interface is extremely dumbed down (while in combat, I was definitely missing a soldier's list in the UI) and has evident usability errors (for example: basic shortcuts,
    common to every soldier, vary depending on the soldier's additional abilities, which prevents using them quickly and is just dumb), and a deeper base and research management would've been welcome. But there's still a load of variables to account for, and they're all tied in a string of consequences that will need accurate planning. And. The fighting is awesome. Sure, there are bugs (line of sight is not always clear, and sometimes hidden enemies can be targeted more easily than ones that are almost in the open) and even more missing features in the interface. But it's still deeply tactical and terribly fun. With a better interface and bugs fixed, this game would deserve a 10++. Expand
  65. Oct 15, 2012
    8
    A fun game that might have been a classic if it was a little deeper in the tactical combat and if the base command segments got some extra development time. Despite this, it's still a great, well-made--but light-- version of the original. There are noticeable though mostly trivial bugs and the UI is a little rough, but it still creates that "just one more turn" feeling. Definitely worth playing, but it probably won't be a game you think about 5 years from now. Expand
  66. Oct 12, 2012
    9
    The Good: Solid strategy and tactics game. Recreates the important elements of the original with the strategy and tactical layers working together, in addition to RPG elements. XCOM presents gameplay that has both depth and breadth.

    The Bad: One of the worst hand holding tutorials I have ever seen in a game. The 'tutorial' seems to last for ever, hours, and should probably more
    aptly be called 'Story Mode.'

    The Ugly: In an attempt to make the game look slick, and appeal to a wider audience, they employ many camera tricks to make the game look more action based and cinematic. While the concept is solid the execution was poor. Many times the camera is pointing at nothing interesting and the characters clip into walls and set pieces. Good idea, bad implementation.

    Overall: Love it.
    Expand
  67. Oct 13, 2012
    10
    As an old fan of the original XCOM game Im very pleased to see that this game brings the heart of the original into a real smooth and fun new game. That being said, its not the original game with new graphics, its a new game. That aside its just as captivating and time absorbing as the original. My guess is that there is over a hundred hours of fun in this game, so I see my money well spend. - My wife and job disagrees of cause. A solid 10 from me to a game that shows, that a good idea don't always involve MMO to become a great game. Sometimes the idea is so good that it can carry itself for over 18 years ;) Expand
  68. Oct 10, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Possible spoilers in review.
    Fantastic game, very smooth release (few bugs that I have encountered). I am now about a third through the campaign (classic difficulty); and find myself yelling at my soldiers on screen when they mess up (because I'd never miscalculate tactically, heh). I feel like, on classic, I am struggling to beat back the alien invasion and every move is vital. Being my first playthrough; if I didn't save often and then revert to said saves, I'd have already lost.
    I've heard this game is not like the original X-Com; I never played them though. However it is extremely tactically based on missions and has very good strategic development/deployment in the 'Geospace.' The graphics are fantastic, the UI is a bit unresponsive (mouse).
    The bad: some of the battle cutscenes are ridiculous. The shooter has no real LOS but still is able to fire and hit (although 2K says it's more of a graphic misrepresentation of what is really going on). When I have already broken a window/opened a door and go to shoot; it shows me breaking the window again before I fire; not very immersive. I am prior military and our tactics were to always engage with 3x the numbers, flanking, combined firepower and fields of fire. You only get to take 4 to 6 soldiers on a ground combat mission and only 1 aircraft on air intercept missions. The maps are also quite small so that you don't have to really hunt for the enemy. Also you only get one Strike Team (one Skyranger: troop air carrier) to manage per mission. I would prefer things to be bigger; maps 4x the size, multiple ships in air combat, and multiple Strike Teams. Squads in real life are about 10 men, with platoons being about 3 squads and companies being about 3 platoons (90 total men in a X-Com company). You would never send a Fire Team (half a squad) to clear a city block by themselves. Although I do understand adding more soldiers on a mission might weigh down the fast paced combat action; be a load on the computer; etc. Also, when hiring rookie soldiers you can't pick their gender or nationality but you can change their first, last, nick name, and appearance. But if a soldier goes down on a mission you can't pick up that critical medipak or stunner or grenade, etc. he was carrying and use it (no inventory system during combat).
    All in all, a very well spent $50. I can't wait to see what they do with expansions, DLC, and mods.
    men women nationalities ammo pick up items
    Expand
  69. Oct 14, 2012
    9
    Played at least 20 hours on the weekend, had to restart multiple times due to some really bad choices but I'm having a blast. Firaxis removed a lot of busywork like overblown inventory management of the original and thus streamlined this game but in a good way. My only real complaint is about the camera. It bugs frequently during the action scenes and fighting on multiple elevations is very frustrating because often there is something (roof) clipping and blocking your view. Expand
  70. Feb 3, 2013
    5
    Thanks Firaxis, for forcing an operating system upgrade in order to to play it. We feel that probably should have been flagged in larger fonts. We also hope Steam will refund our money- guess we'll find out next week or whenever Steam support deigns to respond to our tickets. Regards, Your customers with XP.
  71. Oct 13, 2012
    9
    An incredible reimagining of a classic. Firaxis have managed to identify all the things (with one exception) that made the old game great, while streamlining the tedious parts. What's particularly impressive is how they decided to make the tactical gameplay and soldier advancement DEEPER than the original game, rather than SHALLOWER, as is the tendency these days.

    I'd love to be able to
    rate this game a 10 out of 10, but two major things prevent me from giving it that perfect score. For one, the maps aren't procedurally generated as they were in the original. Rather, the game draws maps randomly from a large pool. Fortunately randomization of spawn points and other things as well as a large map pool to begin with prevents it from becoming boring. The second issue with the game is a bug where in some of the more vertically complex map, the ceiling flickers in and out, making it difficult to see what you're doing. Expand
  72. Oct 16, 2012
    8
    A good game that could be an outstanding one if it wasn't for the numerous bugs, the shoddy user interface and an unfinished feel. Despite these the game gets the important things right: the atmosphere is great, the choices are tough and the tactical combat satisfying.
  73. Oct 18, 2012
    9
    Minor UI and lock up issues aside, this game has taken my interest away from other fantastic games due to its unique style and gameplay that we have not seen in years. Hard not to recommend. Every night becomes a battle with "one more game."
  74. Oct 17, 2012
    8
    So here is a flawed gem.
    In so many ways true to the "spirit of the original" there *has* been dumbing down to streamline the gameplay (partly to cut down on 40 mins turns on the tactical map and massive complex infrastructure on the geoscape but clearly this has mostly been to fit the game on consoles) Gone are the big teams as sky ranger now only fits 6 (4 at start of the game) however
    the shiv tank is one slot now not 4, gone are having multiple bases worldwide although there are hangers for interceptors on each continent but only 1 skyranger at main base. Most of the soldiers stats are gone and AP's have been reduced to 2 (move and shoot, move and move or big move, there are some exceptions with the skill unlocks) And most of the toys have been locked into a soldier "class" speaking of which, the troops now are not general purpose grunts that have stats on every weapon type they are given classes early on which locks them into a weapon type (again less stats to worry about) and the inventory is locked in pre mission so if one of your guy drops (say your sniper) then no one else can pick up the sniper rifle.

    And then there are the bugs.... OH so many bugs, this game could have done with at least a couple of months of QA and bug squashing. There's bugs with nearly every aspect of the game, some are just cosmetic amusements like xbox control highlights showing up on base GUI when you are running in mouse only mode, some impact gameplay such as making it difficult to accurately select the right tile to order a soldier to inside a UFO with multiple levels (they have a tendency to jump over the wall I want them to hide about and stand in the open on the other side on the lower level) and the UFO roofs tend to come in and obscure stuff forcing a camera rotate to see what you are doing and then there are bugs that can break the game outright such as the first time I played multiplayer my mate started to chat to me in my turn and then I killed one of his guys and his chat box broke stopping him from doing ANYTHING thus ending what was turning out to be a great little match, oh dear.

    So why the high score? - Well the truth is the game is actually REALLY REALLY GOOD FUN!
    Yep, sure this game kind of makes the hardcore xcom fan in me rage a little that AP's are gone, the tactical was previously a "frightening foray into the unknown" and is now a chest high wall cover simulator (like playing a turn based gears of war) which sort of reduces it to a move here and cover creeping ambush style where as in the first xcom you would end up with a cluster**** of grunts all over the place trying to stay alive. So why is it so great? Difficult to pin down really, I mean on the technical side pacing is better, there is now genuine interaction with the environment (guys jump over walls, lean out around corners etc) and oddly enough the class based squad thing actually works (having spent so long with a mixed class team game like TF2 etc) and surprisingly enough although the inventory and multi role sides are gone out of the tactical side of the game it's actually LESS frustrating to play then the first (not sure at this point if that's just the 30 something me who is approaching it then the teenage me of the first game) as you get down to working with guys skills and abilities you have in the field.


    You don't spend so long micromanaging your base(s) and the geoscape which was once the nerve centre of the game where you moved it round to select bases ufo's and missions is now a "click here for next event" button, that said there's still a robust tech tree to research, the usual autopsies and interrogations are present and correct and you still have to balance your finances between costs, expansion and getting new toys for your guys.
    Base building is quite interesting with adjacency bonuses forcing you to plan your base layout instead of just plonking anything anywhere and you have quite a lot of choice even if it's just a single base. Overall I can see where the die hard fans of the original game might be a little upset the changes that have been made make the game much more accessible to a larger demographic and by and large it actually pays off.
    I'm a real fan of the original but I for one am not disappointed in the game (apart from the bugs which I hope get patched out) - those that want to retread the original game with fancy graphics are served with the open source UFO AI game (also built on the unreal engine) which is also a great game and the contrasts are interesting to see as that game in a lot of ways is truer to the original XCOM then this is.
    Expand
  75. Oct 17, 2012
    10
    The only ones who rate this game with negative scores, are old folks that can only compare directly to what is taken out of the old XCOM games. I think that says enough. Pro's: + Very intense and exciting, backed up by a good usage of luck (might frustrate players who feel they aren't in control) + A lot of though choices to make, deep tactical elements, especially in battle + The combination of perma death of your soldiers, an excellent AI and a difficult setting, make up of a great experience
    + Allows for one of the best player-driven narrative I've ever seen.

    - Some camera issues
    - Strategic layer overarching the tactical missions are a bit thin, and don't live up to the complexity and realistic feel of the game

    I recommend this to anyone who has some love for hard-knock, immersive strategic games.
    Expand
  76. Oct 13, 2012
    10
    Well done Firaxis! Amazing work. I would have rated with 95%, however rounding gives a 10. I have over 20hours of gameplay and haven't encountered a single bug. I don't know, since when I had to see something like this. 1990s or when? My only point of criticism or better nostalgia is the ability of the aliens to invade your base... Most of the concept has been reworked and overall improved e.g. no more insane macromanagement is needed. Micromanagement is a lot more tactical and action orientated and a lot less logistic. It is definitely the best turn based strategy of the decade. Keep up the good work Mr. Solomon! You managed to revive Microprose from its ashes. I gave you a 10, but now we are expecting to see XCOM: Terror from the Deep. ;-) Long live turn-based strategy games! Long live XCOM series! Expand
  77. Nov 21, 2012
    6
    Visual execution is good. But as an Xcom remake it fails at many points. Many eyecandy and too few results, its clear someone in a high seat did not know WTF Xcom mindset should be. Waste of money player side and producer. 6 char limits give No way to have any tactic at all, and doesn t stand at all. Too small maps sometimes even corridors
    Too short reshearch = limited wprkshop options
    too = limited tactics
    air and land "cavalry" ain t there.
    No replay value.

    If you know what i m talking about go see Xenonauts...i downloaded the demo after JA:bia failure and this Xcom, and finaly, even being alfa, someone seems to be knowing whats its doing.
    Too bad they haven t the funds this Xcom Has.
    Expand
  78. Nov 28, 2012
    5
    A fun and addicting game on normal. Bugs and bad-AI-so-cheat-compensation kill classic or impossible modes. Because the developers didn't develop any worthwhile AI for the enemy in this game, they cheat for the computer on classic and impossible difficulties. You don't notice it in normal because you can actually go blow-for-blow and win. All you have to do is advance, stay in cover, and shoot, and you'll win on normal. What you don't notice (because there aren't that many patrolling alien squads in normal) is that alien packs don't walk around the map, they randomly teleport anywhere on it and then aggro when they see you. In the higher difficulties you can't go blow-for-blow, but instead have to use flanking and/or luring tactics. Except that enemies can teleport anywhere if they're not in your Line-of-Sight and attempting to perform any remotely tactical movement will result in another pack of aliens spawning in your LoS.

    This results in only one tactic that works, which is also extremely boring: creep forward with one scout, trigger a single alien group, run back to the rest of the squad sitting in cover and overwatch, and hope aliens follow you. Nothing as exciting as sitting in overwatch for 50 turns, right?

    The base-management is trivial as well. There are no research dead-ends, you can research everything fairly quickly so there isn't any strategy in researching. Satellite and panic management is the only remotely strategic part of the base-management.
    Expand
  79. Oct 10, 2012
    9
    Don't let the nostalgic grumps fool you. They beat off to reams of tables and pointless micromanagement and wouldn't know good, solid game design if it had its way with their cat. This game is extremely good and is head and shoulders better than the original. Only nostalgic people and toothpick-counting sperglords have reason to complain.

    The only truly bad change is the weird
    "encounter script" where the aliens run for cover. Expand
  80. Oct 20, 2012
    8
    A disregard in providing an adequate tutorial meant the learning curve for this game esp in base management requires many hours of trial-and-error. The combat phases are the highlights whereas the base management are a hassle and really not very approachable. The plot is almost non-existent with generic NPCs, poor voice-acting and characters that you dont really want to relate to - they're boring, lack character and dont really do well to drive the so-called 'story' along. There are also technical hitches such as movement square elevation selection issues as well as camera angle bugs and a lot of weird glitches abound. Played for around 20 hours before repetition and a lack of long term appeal sinked in. Get Dishonored instead. As an avid RTS/Strategy gamer, I say wait for this game to hit the bargain bin. Oh and did I mention they've dumbed the game down for consoles as well as made the UI more tailored towards consoles, abandoning PC UIs? Worth a try but not really a game that you'll play ever again. Expand
  81. Nov 29, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A solid remake all-in-all. I played the original DOS games and most of the sequels, which are hard acts to follow. This newest incarnation manages to have the core of what made the original extremely fun: well crafted turn-by-turn combat, variety of weapons and equipment, resource management, researching and reverse engineering alien tech, etc. The graphics are very good; the temple ship is truly a masterpiece of a stage. There is a lot not to like as well, of course. Normal difficulty is too easy, taking 40 hours to beat for me. XCOMEU is far less complex than the original, in a bad way. Combat has been oversimplified, with the boring "move, shoot, repeat" scheme. The original with time units was much more fun; you could spend all your time units shooting, moving, swapping a weapon out oof your pack, or all three. I was displeased to discover that there was only one alien base in the game (several in the OG). The end stage, while very fun, was disappointing - no Mars? Really? Very anticlimactic ending. When you investigate a crash site, you are dropped practically on top of it in a tiny area. The enemies are now "aggro'd" WOW-style and just stand around until you approach. They don't move around otherwise. I miss the old crash site maps which were larger and required exploration. The maps in general become repetitive. I also think the overall atmosphere of the game is too tame; the eery stage music of the original is permanently etched in my brain. Oh, and lastly, where is the Snakeman? A lot of negative points said here, but as I said, the heart of the original is still there and I was glued to my PC for the few short days it took to beat it. Worth buying. Expand
  82. May 27, 2013
    7
    This is the first and only X-COM game I've ever played, so I'm not rating it down because it isn't the same. I'm rating it so low because it is not a strategy game as it is billed. There are several major reasons for this.

    First, the "random" aspects are not actually random. I'm not talking about how savescumming is prevented due to the random seed. I'm talking about how the computer is
    a cheating bastard. I had a mission once where the first enemy to fire scored a critical hit every time. It didn't matter which enemy was shooting, where they were shooting from, who their target was, where their target was, the cover their target was in, or if the enemy that was shooting took their shot before or after another enemy moved. I tested this by retreating continually and forcing the enemy to follow me to take their shot. I crossed the entire map back to the start point, and without fail the first shot taken by the AI every turn resulted in a critical hit.

    Second, the cover system is absolutely horrendous. There are four levels of cover. 0 is no cover. 1 is "half" cover. 2 is "full" cover. 3 is "full" cover with the Hunkered Down ability active. These aren't the actual numerical values as the game uses them to calculate anything, they're just my observation. Okay, now that I've explained that, forget about it, because the game will. Enemies can and will shoot you through walls. The shots will visibly pass right through them. They will shoot you through floors. They will shoot you through bus stops. They will shoot you from fifty feet into the adjacent room behind a solid wall where the only way you can see them is from their red outline because even the camera can't see them. A car provides the exact same amount of cover when it's intact as it does when it is a smoldering wreck. It's very annoying to get hit by an enemy who is making a shot that is simply not physically possible.

    Third, the computer is a cheating bastard. Yes, again. They don't follow any movement rules, it seems. When you encounter enemies they immediately interrupt your turn to move into cover. Floaters can teleport onto your flanks at will. Berserkers can interrupt your turn to move. Thin Men will literally drop from the sky on your flanks. Sectopods can take three actions per turn. Enemies will spawn right in the middle of your squad. Groups of enemies will teleport around the map if you lose sight of them. In other words, there is no strategy involved in placing your units, you just need to hope the game decides to be nice.

    Fourth, squad panic is simply awful. XCOM is supposed to be the world's most elite military force. So why do they act like they've never been in a firefight before? One of your units takes a hit, and your other members of the world's most elite military force turn all the way around, take aim on the person beside them, yell "HELP ME!" and shoot them in the face. Losing a squad member because they got shot through a wall is bad enough, now you're just rubbing it in for no good reason.

    Fifth, global panic. The first thing I want to point out is how incredibly stupid this sort of conversation must sound. "Hello, is this XCOM, the world's most elite military force focused on fighting the alien invasion? This is the President of the United States. We have decided we are being invaded by too many aliens to require the help of the world's most elite military force focused on fighting the alien invasion. Please stop saving our citizen's lives." The second thing is that the system is simply broken. Not taking a mission in a country increases the panic levels of all the countries on that continent for some reason, not just the one being attacked by aliens. This means that no matter how well you are playing the game, you will eventually lose. A game where you are guaranteed to lose is a very badly designed game.

    Sixth, I have an underground complex filled with advanced technology, soldiers who can practically blow things up with their minds, multiple satellites over every continent, multiple heavily armed interceptors stationed on every continent, but when three cities get attacked by aliens at once I can only send one group of six people while the other ninety-three soldiers twiddle their thumbs in the Barracks.

    To summarize, XCOM: Enemy Unknown is not a strategy game. It fails at the most important element of a strategy game: Rewarding strategy. It would get a 0 for that reason, but it's actually quite entertaining once you realize it's not a strategy game and start to play accordingly. That, and it changes the lights on my keyboard to coincide with the enemy turns and I think that's neat.
    Expand
  83. Apr 2, 2013
    6
    A disappointment. Certainly the best XCOM game since Terror from the Deep and a ok game for what it is but that's about it. It's short, dumbed down, the production values are iffy, the RNG combat mechanics stupid and annoying, the art style terrible. Too bad Firaxis didn't want to make a truly great game. They just wanted to make an accessible game.
  84. Oct 10, 2012
    10
    Played XCom in every form since 1990/91.
    This game is excellent.
    Flaws limited unit tactics, and some very small maps (though some are big) most map sizes are fine.
    Good things very nice graphics easy play for people new to the game. Kept very close to all the things I like about XCOM whilst I accept todays market is not the 20 year old market that had no problem with complicated and
    steep learning curves.
    Accessable to all gamers which I like super multiplayer fun. Will be even better multiplayer when all the game formats let the game team create multi format - multiplayer.
    Loving the game loving the fact its obvious that the coders played and liked the series.
    Looking forward to completing it on the Ironman/impossible mode I am playing at the moment.
    The AI is very challenging in the harder modes but that means you must accept your troops will die (often). I give it 9.3/10 in the hope future DLC or a second game improve unit tactic choices and increase the map size's throughout. Though as it stands from a stuanch XCOM fan thumbs up :)
    Expand
  85. Jul 18, 2013
    9
    Overall a very successful reboot of the X-COM franchise. The general tone of the game and mood of the turn-based combat are near perfect. The graphics are fine. Sound and voice work are solid. The divide between base management and tactical battles is also good. It is possible to knit-pick quite a few areas where the game is underwhelming: Tactical maps are too small and too similar. LOS is obscure. There is no tactical mini-map. The squad size is too small. These are all relatively minor points that could be addressed in an expansion or patch, though I doubt we will get one. The real key to enjoying this game is to do a first play through on easy and learn the mechanisms. When you understand how it works you can re-try on harder difficulty until you find the level of toughness which is personally most enjoyable. Overall this game is a definite buy at or under $20. With luck there may be future versions of this game which improve the tactical controls and increase the strategic complication! Let's hope so. Orctowngrot: timtimjp@yahoo.com Expand
  86. Jun 20, 2013
    5
    Too dumbed down for my taste. I'm an X-Com fan, but not a hardcore one, I'm not one of those guys who're still replaying the game every other weekend after some 20ish years, I'm just an average (more or less) gamer, and this felt like a seriously watered down version of a strategy game. It's not bad, but it's not good either, just average at most. The UI is a joke, clearly designed for consoles. The battlescape is clearly designed for consoles, there is no free aiming, everything is constrained so the game works ok on a gamepad, in fact, now that I think about it, having used a mouse made everything so much cumbersome! Going through menuses, selecting soldiers abilities on battle, everything was tedious thanks to using a mouse. This is not a bad strategy game, it's just a lousy PC strategy game. Oh, and the plot sucks big time and boring. Expand
  87. Oct 11, 2012
    9
    Have always been a fan of turn based strategy games and this is clearly one the best I have seen in a long long time. As a commander, I prefer a clean and tactical UI that does not require to much micro-management. All controls are intuitive and easy to learn. This is important because it allows you to focus directly on the game rather than impeding your gaming experience with a steep UI learning curve. Tactical combat is fun and challenging that requires you to think ahead.

    There are some minor glitches/bugs in the game but none of them are game-breaking or will affect your gaming experience in general. These can be fixed easily in later patches. Unlike other reviews where users have complained at not being able to 'shoot' at the ground, just ignore these hypocrites. I call them hypocrites because they want this game to be very real and yet they do not behave like 'real' commanders should i.e. Shooting at things that matter and NOT on the ground.
    Expand
  88. Oct 11, 2012
    9
    I grew up playing the original X-com. I tore through it, all of the sequels, all of the knock offs, and then played them all again. I spent month, not hours, MONTHS of my time on the computer playing that game (kind of sad, I know). Is this game just like the original... no. Of course not. It's it's own game. It's everything a reboot should be. The designers told their own story, their own way. But, they threw in so many ties to the old games that the only complainers are the ones that would never have been happy under any circumstances anyway. It's a great game! If you've never played X-Com, this game is a blast! If you an old fan, you get to relive the old memories in a new and interesting way! Expand
  89. Oct 12, 2012
    10
    XCOM: Enemy Unknown pays homage to the original by giving you what the original title couldn't. With updated graphics and physics engines, you don't feel like you're destroying the same space craft over and over like you did in the original. With character customization, all of your soldiers aren't clones of each other like the sectoids are. There were those that complained about the 1 base limit, but what they do not tell you is that one base is enough. You start out with 4 hangars world wide to store your aircraft, so strategic placement is still there. Research is still a must, and you have more development processes than the first one offered. This isn't dumbed down at all, it's revisited and they removed excessive micromanaging that was taking away from the player experience. Do yourself a favor and play this game. The complaints about bugs in the game are based on the initial release, and 2 days later they already had patches out for them (PC). Don't drag this game down based on reviews that are now obsolete. Expand
  90. Oct 13, 2012
    9
    I do miss some function that was in the original game, but I think Firaxis has made up for that with a few things I am really enjoying. They have somehow made me very protective of my few but effective soldiers. They made me actually WANT abductions to occur so I had a faster opportunity to obtain scientists, engineers, and money. The base interface is intuitive, looks great, and they nixed the need for multiple capture rooms (huzzah!). In the original game, I can't tell you how many times I have tried to get soldiers to a good position and ran out of points to move them there, so I think the move/rush feature is awesome. I want to create multiple bases, but being able to cover the same areas with satellites is not a bad trade. Maybe we'll see it in a DLC, who knows. The half-cover/full-cover dynamic is simple to pick up and hard to master. A fantastic addition to the game. Frankly, I couldn't be happier about my decision to play this game. Never been happier to drop $50. Expand
  91. Oct 14, 2012
    10
    As long you're not an anachronistic gamer, who dislike remakes and argue only in terms of his limited experience, and if you like turn-based tactical games, this might be the best game for you, for hundreds of hours. I'm probably a so called X-COM veteran, which means that I played all titles, even "Interceptor", I enjoyed the UFO series, and tons of open source remakes. I played every single turn-based game since 1990. Firaxis does not create too complex games, so most of their titles are not made for experienced players. So I was expecting not too much. But my current point of view is that it is one of the best turn-based tactical games I've ever played, but you need to give it 10+ h, until it gets harder and more interesting, after the enemies got grenades and better weapons, armor, and a tactical brain. After 15 h on "Classic" and "Iron Man" it got nice, finally, I'm losing 1-2 soldiers per battle, which was one of the first suprises to me, which will change soon, I hope. I like most of the changes, because it is nice to see a different approach, because this genre is so overused. This game here is more tactical than most X-COM titles, in my opinion, even if you see less statistics and have less opportunities to count on them, due to cover and "cliffhanger" mechanics. But I miss economic features, i.e. ammunition production, which can be costly. X-COM was about team and company management. This part is very stricted now I'm missing self-organisation features from X-COM, which means: I'm not sure if it depends if I shoot a big UFO or not. UFOs and missions appears erratic to me, at least it's unclear to me and is a big minus. So I just click on "scan" for new UFOs, 1-2 abuctions and 1 special mission per month? Seems scripted to me. In old X-COM you knew that there is a relation between your missions and new bases. They cancelled radars, but added satellites which appears as radars on the map, which is somehow funny, and not only this: satellites are connected to subterranean (!) uplinks. I miss the management of 2-3 bases, but I see that this overtax some people. The ant farm base look nice, on first glance, but seems redundant to me, because the buildings are too big for a clean view and user navigation, so you're using the top buttons most the time. But I like how cover is handled, how the graphics looks like (for a turn-based game), the story (most X-COM stories are great), and the similarity to the first X-COMs. Expand
  92. Oct 14, 2012
    10
    No, this is not XCOM: UFO defense. If you want to rehash history, play the original as it is available from several sources. This game while having similarities to the original, stands firmly on its own. They have done an excellent job with both the game play and modern graphics while retaining the essence of what the original was all about. I love it; hours and hours of turn based fun!
  93. Oct 14, 2012
    7
    playing this game is like drinking whiskey with too much ice cube... you know it is whiskey, its smell like whiskey, but the taste is dilluted by water.. played in classic difficulty and finish it in 2 days (around 20 game play) i've played original x-com back in the 90's..and of course i got high expectation on this version.. while graphic is good, the gameplay somewhat roughly similiar.. it less some of the features that make xcom is uniquely xcom such as : limited role for all item, aliens research material, no artwork for the alien image which i think they should have because its cool, ground combat became so linear basically just run ahead and shot whatever alien you encounter (compared the exploration of the old game), no research material regarding alien motive and purpose (the old xcom you will research UFO type, capture several alien commanders, to slowly reveal their movites and purpose of the atacks,) pace of game is to fast (dont think its logically possible to research all alien technology, reverse engineerd and kill the alien boss mereley under 1 year, human is not that genious!!).. to sum it up.. although the game still fun to play.. but its a simpler version of UFO and wouldnt be able to capture the original game greatness.. good effort but too bad.. they could make it much more better Expand
  94. Oct 16, 2012
    8
    Great game! I was already a fan from the original sequence and I am really satisfied with their work. They made it more dynamic (you can complete a fast mission in 15 minutes), the old one could even take 1 hour to finish. There is obviously flaws and some things that i wish it had. It seems they held back many things, and probably will come as a DLC. Therefore, I don't give them the maximum score because of this financial aspect. Expand
  95. Oct 16, 2012
    7
    Lost points for: 1. Excessive bugs 2. Over-simplification of key features 3. Purely arbitrary nonsense Unfortunately the game released with a slew of graphics bugs, and more importantly game altering/affecting bugs like randomly appearing aliens. The occasional glitch on release is fine, but in this case playing a mission without noticing a graphics glitch is almost impossible. The biggest problem for me comes from the over simplification of key aspects that made the original XCOM games interesting. Let me start off by saying that I fully agree that managing 20 soldiers per squad was tedious, and the game benefited from streamlining in that sense, BUT, and this a big but, they ended up taking way too much off the top. You're hard limited to a squad of 6 members and one squad only, these soldiers have zero inventory, they just simply have the items they can equip and nothing else.

    Ammo doesn't need to be managed, grenades and other usable items are an "X uses per combat" deal and skills are simply cooldown based. Pointless weapon restrictions also exist and for some reason my Sniper cannot equip an assault rifle even though they had no problem using one before they became a sniper, the heavy weapons class also has this pointless restriction but for some reason the other two classes do not. While you can swap people in and out of your squad before the start of a mission, you cannot create pre-set squads either. All soldiers can be fully customized and the only unique thing about them is the flag on their backs, all males share the same body type and females have the exact same problem, no variations exist in height and for that matter the voices all sound the same as well.

    Another big problem that ties into this is that it's not possible to have more than one squad or respond to more than one event at the same time, to me this is a huge issue, especially since the rewards are the exact same every single time, even near the end of the game, 200 currency, 4 scientists, or 4 engineers and sometimes a squad member. This results in being almost forced pick the region that's in most panic as the mission you handle because the rewards basically suck and there's no incentive to take 200 currency over the loss of a country's support on the council. So this begs the question of why the game was dumbed down so much that you can't build multiple dropships, have multiple squads and respond to multiple attack/abduction sites at once?

    This, coupled with stupid and often times arbitrary things like the previously mentioned weapon restrictions, really hurt the games sense of freedom and depth of strategy. For example, if I am going to assault a landed UFO I know that most of the fighting will be close range, high mobility fighting with limited field of vision. I have two options, take a sniper who will be pretty useless, or swap the sniper out for another character. Neither of these is particularly appealing to me, instead I'd like to be able to just equip my sniper with an assault rifle or a shotgun and use them that way but I can't. Or better yet, why can't I have both? If I give up enough inventory space and other things there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to carry a sniper rifle with 10 bullets and an assault rifle with 90. Sure I wouldn't have grenades, a medkit, a pistol, a rocket launcher or infinite ammo, but I could customize the soldier to be what I want them to be. Unfortunately this extends further into combat, hit %s are very random and you honestly shouldn't base your decision to shoot on it, I've hit plenty of 25% shots and missed plenty of 90%s. The only way to be sure that you don't miss is to get 100% hit chance and this isn't realistically possible in most scenarios so missions boil down to finding cover and abusing the hell out of Overwatch which is essentially a guard/interrupt feature. On the same topic, cover itself is random in effectiveness and ranges from grossly overpowered to completely useless, I've had characters killed through full cover before and I'm not convinced that this was due to a bug but rather just how cover is intended to work, so the only surefire way to survive is to load up on hitpoints/medkits and kill the aliens before they kill you. That being said you WILL die in long drawn out battles regardless of how smart you play, the computer simply has higher damage/accuracy values than you can ever hope to see, moreso they're almost impossible to flank thanks to a stupid "introduction" mechanic that happens every single time an alien comes into view for the first time. This gives the aliens instant control of the game and lets them move to cover which is a complete joke.

    Overall not a bad game, but if you're looking for an authentic XCOM or TBS feel, it might be better to skip it, there is no way this game 10/10 like the fanboy reviews claim but it's certainly not 4/10 either.
    Expand
  96. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    review for russian speakers people.
    Это хорошая игра, но XCOM 94го года в был в разы лучше. Все что
    разработчик смог улучшить это графику. Все остальное стало хуже. Что больше всего раздражает: теперь в игре нет такого понятия, как пуля - реального физического объекта; есть понятие попал - не попал.(никаких больше случайных убийств шальными пулями) Никакой разрушаемости в игре нет, пули пролетают сквозь двехметровые стены. Как вообще в ТАКТИЧЕСКОЙ игре можно было так наплевать на реализм. В общем кто не играл в первую xcom, советую это сделать, вы сами поймете, какая новая xcom получилась отвратная, благо что ее можно купить в steam, не заморачиваясь с dosbox'om. Expand
  97. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    when I first started playing this game I thought it was fun. The graphics are really cool. It was not, to me at least, an easy game to beat. But, after a while it started to seem ridiculously difficult. In order to shoot at (and usually miss) an alien I would have to stand out and expose my self to their next shot. Which many times would kill my soldier. After finding that I could not shoot at and hit an alien at a distance I would walk right up next to an alien and my chances of hitting him would still only be 1%. And sure enough I would miss the shot and bye bye soldier on the alien's next turn. The game started to feel very scripted. It seemed like the strategy component of the game was an illusion. Much like winning a game on a slot machine by luck is an illusion. To those who don't know, slot machines pay off at predetermined pulls of the handle. It can pay off at the 50th pull of the handle or the 500th pull of the handle etc. etc. The only luck involved is if you are the person pulling the handle at the 50th pull. It got to be boring to play after that. And I lost interest. I think this game is getting to high of a score for its playability level. I recognize all the hard work the game creators put into this game and I appreciate the effort. But I don't think they succeeded in making an Xcom worthy game. Expand
  98. Nov 27, 2012
    5
    At first i like it ... but only one base - squad is limited to 6 - why ? All countries finance 6 ! persons only sqad. You need for example weapon fragments to build somethig - what for alloys - ok , ellurium ok but weapon fragments ? I have for example undestroyed weapons but no ineed weapon fragments and i cannot destroy it myself. You are unable to move invetory of one soldier to another. If you shot alien his weapon is always destroyed . Enemies waiting to find you but may appear from nowwhere. Its not like strategy but america comics lonely hero ( 6 heroes) versus weak horde of enemies. It shoud be tottaly diffrent - vast armies versus aliens not so many but with better technology and extremely hard to beat Expand
  99. Dec 21, 2012
    6
    As a remake, the game seriously needed two different reviews. For XCOM-veterans this is going to be a slight disappointment. Then again for people who never knew of XCOM's this is better choice, making it 8/10.

    XCOM is all about a strange alien threat that spreads throughout the Earth. A resistance movement is established and player is set to be as a commander. You make decisions how to
    improve your base of operations, manage funds, soldiers and technology improvement. There is a storyline while you fight back. First you encounter only small alien crafts and rather feeble aliens, but as you progress the tougher the enemies. Combat is tactical and strictly turn-based, but is well behind of similiar games (like Jagged Alliance franchise). Compared to old XCOM-games this is heavily simplified, and players looking for gaining an edge over aliens find themselves rather stripped from tools.

    New thing in tactical fighting is positioning, i.e. flanking opponents. Your chances to hit increase a lot, but this effect concerns your own soldiers too. There is also suppressive fire, which does the opposite and hinders enemy chances to hit your troops.

    Replay-value is low if not non-existing. Players can search their limits by increasing game difficulty, but because there are very little variety of factors that can change there's not much point trying to beat game on higher and higher difficulty levels.

    I can't recommend this for XCOM-veterans unless you pick it below $10. For the rest of the people, $20 should be the limit. The game is not horrible, but standard pricing near $50 is simply too expensive of what you get in return.
    Expand
  100. Oct 17, 2012
    0
    One of the most anticipated games of the year for me so I couldn't wait to get my hands on it. Followed the developer videos and ads and liked the additions to the game and gladly, this feels like a true successor to the original. and here it comes.... However, this game includes some of the irritations of the first game. You carefully surround an enemy position and 3 or 4 of your squad have a 91% hit chance (or thereabouts), gleefully you click fire on one squaddie after another only to miss all round. With 91% hit chance? This problem does not seem to happen with the aliens who can happily kill their way through your entire squad. My problem is not that this happens, but that you get a hit chance which seems to be bugged or quite meaningless as this happens time and again. On top of this boy is this buggy. I have to control alt delete out at least once a session because a squad guys control becomes locked and will not respond. Perhaps once ever 2/3 hours. Another irritation is that sometimes you want to do something and try and click an option to do it. Your guy will path a completely different way. So it becomes a move save sort of a deal and writes off the ironman option I was keen to try. Dying to bad choices is one thing. To buggy controls is another.

    But, for all that, this is a true successor to a classic original and worth persevering with. I very much like the "ant farm" base building and view in particular. The game does feel a bit linear at times and is in danger of being dumbed down. With tactical options for the player reduced and alien abilities that are frankly ridiculous at times. For instance, certain alien types have the right combination of movement and ability to be able whipe out entire squads with no recourse for the player. Unfortunately, sometimes they do and you just reload. Annoying as you have no recourse but they rarely seem to realise what they can do relying on massive accuracy and throwing you a bone with the odd blunder which feels like game developers showing the player a bit of charity.

    I would like some more DLC to expand the potential and unlock some longevity in terms of making it feel even less linear but if the balancing I mention and the bugs are sorted out this is a classic that holds true to the spirit of the original while building on the concept in the right way. I was also expecting more strategic options from the base making it feel a bit more like a global campaign was taking place but this doesn't seem to be there and I am quite far in. Overall I am a tiny bit disappointed but not hugely so. I am expecting the bugs will be patched out which will help a lot and hope for future DLC to unlock more strategic options. This has the makings of a classic that people will be buying for many years to come, its just not quite there yet.
    Collapse
Metascore
89

Generally favorable reviews - based on 57 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 56 out of 57
  2. Negative: 0 out of 57
  1. 88
    Is it better than the original? No. One can’t imagine X-Com 2012 being an all-time-classic and people still playing with it, months from now (let alone, years). Is it a ‘true’ X-Com game, however? Definitely. Remorseless geeks are in for shivers and swoons when they meet their beloved foes: mind-controlling sectoids, zombifying Chrysalids, Cyberdisks, Ethereals… [December 2012]
  2. Dec 18, 2012
    95
    XCOM: Enemy Unknown is a worthy tribute to its progenitor and hopefully the start of something brand new for players who've been dying to get a good squad-based strategy game that lets them not only think, but feel as well.
  3. Nov 14, 2012
    90
    Amazing tactical complexity, satisfying strategic depth; slightly dodgy ending, but your own stories are more important anyway. A modern classic.