Are the newer XCOM games good in terms of strategy games?

>>377159182
I think so

Does XCOM 2 let you tab out with sound still playing and the game not paused? I remember at least the sound stopping in XCOM 1, which was really fucking annoying when you're playing while shitposting

>>377159182
Not nearly as deep as the originals, but still pretty good

>>377159182

the second one isn't

Stealth is a bad mechanic.

>>377161507
Only if you're bad at the game
Making one perfect attack while in stealth and wiping out an enemy convoy in one clean swoop is the best feeling I had playing vidya in the last few years

>>377159182
fixed dice rolls. if you try to savescum the shots will repeat over and over. all possible combinations are set at the beginning of each turn

so no, pure garbage

>>377161507

Stealth isn't a mechanic in XCOM 2. Concealment is. And it's just there for ambushing and reconnaissance.

Only LW2 goes full retard and makes stealth a necessary strategy.

File: .png (180KB, 500x405px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 500x405px

>>377161938
there's an option to toggle seeds before you start a new game...

File: cute mini-viper tries to fool commander.jpg (60KB, 600x801px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x801px

>>377159182

>>377161938
>if you try to savescum the shots will repeat over and over.
So it doesn't let you cheat? How is this bad?

>>377159182
>turn based
>strategy

Choose one, any idiot slowpoke can win if he has infinite time at his disposal to think.

>>377162759
I think the argument is that when you make a choice because it says 80% chance to hit so you move somewhere else hoping for a better %, but in reality the game knew it was a 0% chance because it determined you'd miss before you started is kind of shit. Like don't let me save scum, not lie to me about my odds.

>>377162759
Isn't there an option to turn this off?

>>377163160
technically it was always 0% to hit a shot you missed from the veiwpoint of a achronous universe

>>377163076
That's what RNG is for

>>377163160
That's like saying the odds of getting a specific poker hand aren't true because the deck's order is predetermined at the start of a game.

>>377163160
You had 80% at the start of the turn and you failed then.

>>377163535
>rng means it requires skill
This is why RTS are dead and we can't have nice things.

You offload careful balance and need of player decision-making skill to a skinner-box construct that artificially lengthens the game without making it more deep.
Rather than challenging the player's intelligence and skill and rewarding him when he pull off a well thought strategy to win an engagement you simply have a completely arbitrary system go "lolno, fuck you, here's a complete loss and you can't do shit about it"

If you don't like RNG's just play a strategy game that doesn't use it. The newer XCOM games happens to have a squad level cover/concealment focus where accuracy is a major consideration, so some amount of randomness is expected.

>>377164595
False.
The original XCOM still had a RNG part but it was compensated by having ballistic simulation meaning that by being smart in your positioning you could pad your chances by being able to hit a different target than the one you aimed at, in that case a smart decision by the player would end up helping him fight the RNG, in nuCOM this isn't present, there is no ballistic simulation, it's a strictly binary "hit thing/don't hit thing" that doesn't reward positioning other than cover and flanking (present in the original XCOM as the directional armor values)