XCOM: Enemy Unknown

 PC
User Score
8.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2608 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,075 out of 2608
  2. Mixed: 329 out of 2608
  3. Negative: 204 out of 2608
Buy Now
Buy on

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
view
per page
  1. Cytokinesis
    Oct 27, 2012
    7
    I fell in love with this game when I first started playing it, but then something went horribly wrong. If you only intend on playing the game once or maybe twice then this game is a fantastic gem; a great experience. If you want to play more than that then it has some surprises in store. First of all the UI and controls are ok but they could be so much better on the PC. Every once in aI fell in love with this game when I first started playing it, but then something went horribly wrong. If you only intend on playing the game once or maybe twice then this game is a fantastic gem; a great experience. If you want to play more than that then it has some surprises in store. First of all the UI and controls are ok but they could be so much better on the PC. Every once in a while (rarely but it happens) you just get royally screwed by these forced camera angles. Also sometimes it just won't let you click on a space and the cursor doesn't even show up. This happens a ton when you use grappling hooks and it makes them unusable. At first the game seems like it has a lot of depth but you will exhaust it soon after a couple playthroughs. You will know where aliens are waiting for you on maps and the base building is really, really shallow. The lab is completely worthless and spamming workshops is the best strategy. Research is extremely shallow as well. There just simply aren't enough things you look forward to getting. All they needed to do is add completely random maps and balance the base building/satellites/research and this would have been an absolutely phenomenal game able to be enjoyed for hundreds, maybe even thousands, of hours. Right now you are probably looking at about 20-50 hours before you realize there is nothing more for you in the game. It's a real shame.… Expand
  2. oliver1h
    Nov 14, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game had plenty of potential...Unfortunately they are mostly unexploited...My problems with the game boils down to these: 1. The maps are too small and repetitive (The makers of the game said the player will not see the same map during the campaign...Well that is not true) 2. The maps are too scripted (Enemies wait for the player to reach a trigger zone, than they start to move around and attack. They do not move around the map by themselves.)3. Weapon upgrades are too linear (Laser is better than simple projectile weapons, plasma is better than laser and projectile weapons etc.)4. The campaign is too short 5. Weak tactical layer (no stand, crouch, lay...) 6. Weak strategic layer (Build satellites, workshops, power generators, laboratories, and a few other building and that all...It is nothing like in the old UFO:EU) 7. You can't chose the nationality of your soldier (why can't we?) 8. You can't place your base where you want on the geospace (why can't we??)… Expand
  3. Lobotomius
    Oct 28, 2012
    3
    Quick summary (mostly for those who played original series):
    The good:
    - Interesting action and movement system. - Four operatives classes (Heavy, Assault, Sniper and Medic) and their little perk systems. - Money issues. Yes - that's good. Adds difficult choices into the game. New guns this month or new base facilities? In old UFO and XCOM you never had money problems (except first    Quick summary (mostly for those who played original series):
    The good:
    - Interesting action and movement system.
    - Four operatives classes (Heavy, Assault, Sniper and Medic) and their little perk systems.
    - Money issues. Yes - that's good. Adds difficult choices into the game. New guns this month or new base facilities? In old UFO and XCOM you never had money problems (except first month maybe, but mainly because of facilities constructions).
    - Everything that is researched gives some benefits.

    The bad:
    - World of Warcraft style aliens packs with "aggro" behaviour. For those who don't understand. Aliens stand in group and do nothing unless you (or civilians) are close enough to "activate" them. Even worse is that when you aggro them they have they own activation movement. It's most annoying on terror missions, when aliens are aggroed on civilians then they discover you and activate again to move closer or hide better.
    - Simplified old game. Only one base. Can send only one fighter at a time to intercept alien crafts. Only 4-6 agents during mission. Very little variety in fighters and fighter equipment.
    - Research goes to fast and easy (at least on Classic difficulty). I didn't even have to build a single research laboratory yet everything was going way to fast. I never had money to introduce most of my discoveries. Especially with certain alien interrogations.
    - Cover system is somewhat odd. Sometimes a soldier just hiding behind a wall is considered a target, because he can lean out of it to be a target o_O. Sometimes it is possible to hit someone through a solid wall. Sometimes (on destroyed packs of lorries, hiding behind driver's cabin for example) you can't shoot out of a cover, because game doesn't recognize destroyed walls.
    - Hit or miss shooting system. You either hit or you miss. Bullets that don't hit disappear and do no damage at all. Compare to old UFO and X-COM where astray bullets destroyed random stuff, sometimes hit further aliens/civilians/x-com operatives.
    - Awful voice acting. Especially the council... "Remember. We will be watching". Boo hoo.
    - Chrysalids are now laughable enemies.    … Expand
  4. 21-5-73
    Oct 9, 2012
    7
    Aaah, remakes. Many of those, lately. After the Jagged Alliance one (true mess), here it comes XCOM.
    Being an old XCOMJAFTSStorm veteran, i think i'm allowed to a little cynism. Well, let's recap the pros and cons, shall we?
    UP: -New Graphic Redone: after 18 years, it was expected. Visual glitches and cameras bugs? They were expected too. If we wait, the patch will come. -New Turn    Aaah, remakes. Many of those, lately. After the Jagged Alliance one (true mess), here it comes XCOM.
    Being an old XCOMJAFTSStorm veteran, i think i'm allowed to a little cynism. Well, let's recap the pros and cons, shall we?

    UP:
    -New Graphic Redone: after 18 years, it was expected. Visual glitches and cameras bugs? They were expected too. If we wait, the patch will come.
    -New Turn System: simpler, faster. Nothing to discuss about it.
    -RPG Characters Personalization: faces, voices, armour colors, perks, nicknames. Nice adds.
    -More Objectives: very limited(defuse bomb escort save), but always a plus.
    -PERMADEATH MODE: for serious gamers.

    DOWN
    -Inventory Is Gone: EH?! What the...? I cannot pick objects, i cannot use objects or weapons unless i equip them before mission? I cannot save my dying fella with a soldier who didn't start with a medi?Unrealistic at least. Dumbed down at worst.
    -Only One Base: HUH?!? No more transfers, no more base specializations, NO MORE BASE DEFENCE MISSIONS?? Guess the magichated words: dumbed down.
    -Enemies wait like morons until you see them: i didn't believe it, then i saw it. What the hell? You're the invaders, brainless idiots, just invade! You expect me to blast you, and only then you make your whole turn?!
    -DOOM3 Greatest Hits: exception to last rule, sometimes they appear FROM NOTHING, like teleported, in your line of sight. Alien Powers? Human Bugs?
    -All the World is country: you can kiss goodbye desert, arctic, farm scenarios. Gonna fight in Egypt? Pennsylvania market! Well, I was expecting way less from the guys who ruined the civ series with the V chapter.
    The game is fun, dynamic, entralling. But dumbed down. Don't compare to the original, and you've a good game. You DO compare, and you've some irrealistic, simplified remake that's better than others(after-series, extraterrestrials, ecc).
    I am an old player, the original was my life, yet I mantain an open mind.
    But I'm gonna beddy-bye with two night demons in my ears: Dumbed and Down.    … Expand
  5. AxeMan
    Oct 13, 2012
    6
    Good game but provides a lesser experience than the original. I wasn't expecting nor desiring just a re-skinning of the original, but I wanted something that would give me the same level of experience that I had playing back in 1995. Unfortunately, there is not the same level of tension and malice that was in the original. The music, fog of war("where did that shot come from?!"), dynamicGood game but provides a lesser experience than the original. I wasn't expecting nor desiring just a re-skinning of the original, but I wanted something that would give me the same level of experience that I had playing back in 1995. Unfortunately, there is not the same level of tension and malice that was in the original. The music, fog of war("where did that shot come from?!"), dynamic enemy placement and movement, dynamic battlefield inventory(" yes kiddies, when Bob went down, I ran through a hail of plasma bolts to pick up his medkit and heal the team."), aliens attacking your bases, soldier skill advancement, and other mechanics made me feel like the threats were everywhere and that I was in control to deal with the threats. With the current game, the removal of so many game mechanics for the sake of "streamlined gameplay" feels more constrained. I guess you can only make so many decisions on a gamepad controller...and continuing on this thought, this game, like many others, has been designed, primarily, for a console. It is an unfortunate truth, but most non-MMO games are oriented to consoles because that is where the money is, and console players are not seeking the same type of gaming experience as a PC player. I don't have a problem with the game itself, it is OK, not my bag, but it's OK. I pose to you if this game had not used the X-COM IP, what would you have thought of it? For me, I would have given it a pass, but since it had the name, I bought it,and with it some expectations. It's a shame. PC gaming reality has set in. Deep gameplay now goes no further than a console controller.… Expand
  6. DonMike
    Oct 12, 2012
    1
    I'm very disappointed on how this game crashes and becomes unplayable when multiple interceptors are sent to deal with an alien aircraft. Didn't anyone test it?
  7. Ixam
    Oct 9, 2012
    7
    In short, good game, not great, probably worth $20-30. You have to ignore the payed reviewers, ie all the 10s that seem to think this game has nothing at all wrong with it. It is similar to the original in structure and gameplay, but in general it is highly simplified. Everything is simpler, this makes it less frustrating and tedious, but also means you have less control over pretty muchIn short, good game, not great, probably worth $20-30. You have to ignore the payed reviewers, ie all the 10s that seem to think this game has nothing at all wrong with it. It is similar to the original in structure and gameplay, but in general it is highly simplified. Everything is simpler, this makes it less frustrating and tedious, but also means you have less control over pretty much everything. For instance, in combat, there are no more TUs, no more saving TUs to look around the corner after your move, or saving TUs for reaction fire. There are no more individual stats, so you don't have to go through and sack half the soldiers you hire because they aren't brave enough. While this is pleasant in some respects, it does mean that any time things go wrong, it is almost always because of some random number generator in the game. There is no saying: "what could I have done differently?" It is just a matter of chance in combat. Honestly the worst thing in the game was that it lacks the tension and suspense of the original. I was never creeped out or put on edge by what is happening. It feels more like an action game than a game of suspense. This is mostly the result of the music and the alien appearance sequences. In the original, if your character moved somewhere bad, he just died, in this game, the aliens have a spawn cinematic and don't get reaction shots when you soldiers first appear. There is no concern about walking into a room and getting instantly killed. This makes the game much easier, but also makes the game much less suspenseful. Perhaps there could be a game mode where aliens don't have cinematic sequences, and also get overwatch shots immediately on spawning. So all in all, much much easier than the original, still quite fun, and not worth $50.… Expand
  8. gllq
    Oct 16, 2012
    2
    As below. Player who know only 'today' games, will be please. Player who remember 'old ones' will be displeased.
    New Xcom is primitive. Far less tactics options, clearly stupid inventory (only one granade per person, OR medipack, OR balistic shirt... so stupid). Small 'tunel' maps. Classic difficutly level is rather simple, coz maps and options are veeeery limited. Go forward, click on    As below. Player who know only 'today' games, will be please. Player who remember 'old ones' will be displeased.
    New Xcom is primitive. Far less tactics options, clearly stupid inventory (only one granade per person, OR medipack, OR balistic shirt... so stupid). Small 'tunel' maps. Classic difficutly level is rather simple, coz maps and options are veeeery limited. Go forward, click on 'wall' or smt, shoot. Thats all. In this case, simpliffying taking out a 2/3 tactical and strategic depths.

    (sattelites cover only one country, no matter China or Rpa or France, Only ONE plane to use in action [Xcom is weird organization, they have only one combat pilot per world ;)])

    Ufos also are veeery respecting for human borders. Gemrany ufo is germany and thats is.    … Expand
  9. Atticas14
    Oct 13, 2012
    3
    I heard their goal was to streamline the experience but I personally think they just dumbed it down. The geoscape is now nothing more than a button to "scan" for UFO activity which advances the story. My main complaint is the elimination of the soldier inventory, there's no more interacting with the ground or worrying about overloading your soldier; I liked that extra depth. Also squadI heard their goal was to streamline the experience but I personally think they just dumbed it down. The geoscape is now nothing more than a button to "scan" for UFO activity which advances the story. My main complaint is the elimination of the soldier inventory, there's no more interacting with the ground or worrying about overloading your soldier; I liked that extra depth. Also squad size is now capped at 6, and the aliens aren't active on the field until you find them... If anyone is looking for a modern x-com rather than a x-com re-imagining, check out Xenonauts.… Expand
  10. Bobwolf
    Oct 22, 2012
    3
    Where to start...

    1st of all this is not like the original game. Far from that. The game is now very simple and linear. You have the impression that the game force you to make some choice. You also have the impression that the game is holding your hand and tells you all the time what to do. Almost every feature of the OG has been remove. No more inventory, no more base defense/attack.    Where to start...

    1st of all this is not like the original game. Far from that. The game is now very simple and linear. You have the impression that the game force you to make some choice. You also have the impression that the game is holding your hand and tells you all the time what to do. Almost every feature of the OG has been remove. No more inventory, no more base defense/attack. You only have one base. The soldier management is bad. The tactical gameplay is also very simple. You have very few option.

    The only good about this game is graphic. They are very nice but that's it.    … Expand
  11. Zeusbot48
    Oct 12, 2012
    6
    This game could have very easily been a 9, but two things are holding it back, one is that it has been significantly simplified compared to it's predecessors. The game is still fun, but not quite as engaging or replayable as it's ancestors. The other serious negative is the incredible number of bugs. I don't think I have ever even played a beta build of a game that was this buggy. Line ofThis game could have very easily been a 9, but two things are holding it back, one is that it has been significantly simplified compared to it's predecessors. The game is still fun, but not quite as engaging or replayable as it's ancestors. The other serious negative is the incredible number of bugs. I don't think I have ever even played a beta build of a game that was this buggy. Line of sight bugs out fairly often, with soldiers unable to shoot on enemies that are clearly in sight, shots are frequently taken through walls, the camera on large ufo missions pops to the exterior view so you can't see your soldiers, bits of terrain flicker and move your soldier to the wrong position when you try to use them for cover, perks fail to trigger, denying your soldiers their benefit, unit's abilities disappear, meaning they cannot shoot and are useless, and the strategic objective has bugged, leaving me unable to advance the campaign and forcing me to restart. There is no excuse for releasing a game in this state. Especially when it has so much potential.… Expand
  12. Megatanis
    Oct 30, 2012
    3
    Aaaah yes..XCOM. So, are you seriously telling me Sid freaking Meier and Firaxis are redoing my favourite game ever? Wow, I thought at first, I'm in for a real treat. Not. To keep it simple, after more than 10 years(15?), I expected more. After civ5 one had to see this coming, since good old Sid seems to have a new philosophy: "streamlining". Oh you gotta learn to fear this word. ItAaaah yes..XCOM. So, are you seriously telling me Sid freaking Meier and Firaxis are redoing my favourite game ever? Wow, I thought at first, I'm in for a real treat. Not. To keep it simple, after more than 10 years(15?), I expected more. After civ5 one had to see this coming, since good old Sid seems to have a new philosophy: "streamlining". Oh you gotta learn to fear this word. It basically means they are taking a great game, stripping it of most of what today is apparently considered "complex" by the average gamer, and pumping it up with cool graphics. This new xcom is not a terrible game, to be honest. It is playable, it is also vaguely enjoyable for some time. But after you stop and think that the intro cutscene probably takes more space on your HD than the whole original game UFO defence, you start wondering. So, lets see. 1) No random maps. It does get old, fast. Aliens are placed in the exact same places. So, if you get the same map, it's a breeze to complete (and it's very boring). 2) more or less the same tech tree as in the original UFO. Now this was a letdown. So you have the usual laser techs, autopsies, some fighter techs. There are two more armors (which you will never use if you know whats good for planet earth) compared to the original, and that's as "modern" as it gets. Oh yeah and plasma, the mid-late game uber tech. I remember not developing plasma in the old Ufo just because I liked the idea of human soldiers in their blue personal armors and armed with mankind's best laser wapons, so yeah, I'm doing the same in this one. Game is easy anyway. 3) No inventory for soldiers. I'll pause a sec here. So now you may equip one main weapon, one secondary weapon, and ONE extra item. One. Extra. Item. Next time you have to decide if you want to bring ONE grenade OR wear a nanofiber vest under your armor, just remember the magic word: streamlining. It's not b******t, it's streamlined. See how easier it is to accept. Streamlined, I'm starting to like the sound of this. 4) No more Time Units. Now, this is sort of a meh. It's different from the original, not necessarily worst. It makes the game VERY boardgamish, like I don't know, bloodbowl, or necromunda. I like bloodbowl and necromunda. Actually, one of the games that comes to my mind A LOT while playing this XCOM is the pc version of bloodbowl. THe game also plays a lot like a blood bowl game, including the "hmm should I or should I not blitz that guy" feeling (if you played bloodbowl then you now what I mean. If not, well go play bloodbowl! Now!).
    5) Only one base. Very streamlined. 6) max of 6 squad members at a time. Oh now this is SO streamlined! Old XCOM was like 14? 16? and NO, it was not tedious, it was damn fun. It's a war, you are saving earth from an alien invasion! and you get a plane that can carry only six men?? 7) overall tactical combat is faster and cooler (cooler, not better..),and, yes you guessed it, streamlined! no more crouching, aim or snap shots (or auto), you got cameras following your dudes all over the place, cutscenes when you get out of the skyranger, cutscenes when you first meet a group of aliens, cutscenes when you leave the mission, cutscenes when you RETURN TO BASE after the aforementioned mission..no, I'm not kidding, there is a cutscene for almost every tech, autopsy, live alien interrogation. Only cutscenes in this game probably take more space on my HD than all the games I played in the 1990-2000 period. 8) soldier promotion. A random class is awarded to your soldiers upon completing their first level. Cool, I though at first. So if my rookie kills his first alien from a distance, he'll become a sniper for having demonstrated his particular aptitude with long range etc etc.. no, not at all. It's random. So no more "this guy is a sniper because you decide his stats are good for a sniper class. No, he IS a sniper, he can only use a sniper rifle. Also, when soldiers level they increase their 4 stats (old ufo were like 8 but hey! streamlined!).
    So bottom line, not an awful game, it has it's moments. As a successor of the greatest classic series of all times, it fails. Some would say miserably. Will be all but forgotten in a few months, while UFO and Terror from the deep will proudly sit in my pc forever, reminding me of how scary and hard and awesome saving earth in 640x480 may be. So tell you what Firaxis, I wanted to be wise and analyze and examine and think this out before voting. But then I decided to streamline my thoughts, so you get a 3 (because I played it a bit and it's not total crap)
    When in a tactical simulation you may choose between 15 hairstyles for your soldiers but you can't crouch, something's terribly wrong. Or streamlined.

    p.s. Firaxis is paying royalties to the Warhammer 40k brand I hope. ALL your soldiers and equipment look like space marine stuff. Even in their light beginner crappy armor and armed with a lousy assault gun, they look like uber cool Ultramarines with bolters blazing    … Expand
  13. mauvix
    Oct 12, 2012
    3
    You probably wont like it if you played the original one.

    Also, its not creepy. It has good graphics and animations, but IMHO it lacks the creepy sounds and music from the original. In the old one you even had to throw ligh rods to be able to see in some areas, that doesnt happen in the new. So, overall, the whole atmosphere of fear is out, still your soldiers keep dying a lot. The    You probably wont like it if you played the original one.

    Also, its not creepy. It has good graphics and animations, but IMHO it lacks the creepy sounds and music from the original. In the old one you even had to throw ligh rods to be able to see in some areas, that doesnt happen in the new. So, overall, the whole atmosphere of fear is out, still your soldiers keep dying a lot.

    The original one also gave you a lot of more options, although I liked SOME of the solutions they used to accelerate the game´s pace. However, it could have been more tactical.

    Its cool to customize your soldiers, but you should be able to choose the path for each of your soldiers to follow (to become a sniper for example) but you cant. The game does that automatically for you.

    Some say it was dumbed down. It was, it doesnt matter how many people denied it. It was marketed as a remake but its a new (and simpler) game. I would have loved to see the old xcom reffited to allow for a faster pace (the old missions could take hours), but in the process too much flavor was left out.

    Sorry, but in the end, old midi music was creepier than this Final Fantasy Tactics with aliens.    … Expand
  14. AtoningUnifex
    Oct 14, 2012
    5
    Ignoring the whole XCOM remake comparison (this is jist a different game with a similar story) and looking at the gameplay itself... it's annoying. I started off playing it and was instantly struck by the very limited number of equipment slots, the forced nature of having to choose from simultaneous attacks, only being able to attack UFOs with a single interceptor (which if that fails youIgnoring the whole XCOM remake comparison (this is jist a different game with a similar story) and looking at the gameplay itself... it's annoying. I started off playing it and was instantly struck by the very limited number of equipment slots, the forced nature of having to choose from simultaneous attacks, only being able to attack UFOs with a single interceptor (which if that fails you can't send another). It seems unrealistically limiting.

    Fighting past these initial impressions i got on with playing and for a while really got into the fast paced action style of play, would have probably given this a 7 at that time. Then i got further into it and realised that actually the controls are awkward and clearly converted from concole, rather than designed for PC, and they can be unsresponsiv too. Numerous times I've been unable to move or select things and even the wrong thing has been activated. The most damning thing, in my opinion though, is the game cheats - I know that's a stupid thing to say but it actually really does. I was having significant difficulty on a mission and decided to cheat myself - play a move, save after success etc. What i discovered is that even though the chance to hit may say 66% (which it did in my case) no matter how many times i replayed a particular shot, with the same soldier in the same position it missed every time. Must have retried about 20 times. So now I'm left wondering what exactly IS deciding whether shots hit or not, because it doesn't appear to be chance!! This on top of all the other little niggling bugs, glitches, limitations has really damaged my enjoyment of the game and left me feeling very mediocre about the whole thing.    … Expand
  15. Devalinor
    Oct 10, 2012
    7
    Good game, but too much dumbed down.
    No inventory
    No crouching
    No more ammo needed
    Not a real X-Com game
    If you have ever played X-Com Ufo defense you would know what i mean.
  16. Nesterhews
    Oct 12, 2012
    5
    Take Xcom and remove all the unique strategy elements that made it popular. Replace those with pretty graphics and quality voice effects, add in a poor ending and you have a fairly mediocre game. Not as bad as apocalypse but not worth 50 dollars.
  17. Kalous
    Oct 16, 2012
    4
    It's a simple fact if you've played the original X-COM UFO Defense this game will be a disappointment. While not a bad game in its self, the visual effects and game play can be considered enticing it is in no way a faithful recreation. The main reason is that they have stream lined the game for the average gamer in today's age. For example, maps are no longer randomly generated and inIt's a simple fact if you've played the original X-COM UFO Defense this game will be a disappointment. While not a bad game in its self, the visual effects and game play can be considered enticing it is in no way a faithful recreation. The main reason is that they have stream lined the game for the average gamer in today's age. For example, maps are no longer randomly generated and in comparison very small. Each town map will only consist of 1-3 enter-able buildings and there is no longer the heart-stopping event of walking down your own ships ramp. To compensate for this they have lowered the amount of enemies you will encounter, and the amount of troops you can field. Also the "LOS" system is completely different then the original game as well, its been reduced to a "gears of war" style based combat that will have your units being able to shoot through walls, trucks, and the occasional entire building to hit an enemy on the other side that is only 'visible' to 1 of your squad members. In tandem with this aliens them selves are no longer random as well, they are strategically placed in groups around the map and will not ACT in any way until one of your units spots the group, giving the aliens a free 'ACTION' move. Therefore if you come across a map you've already played you are able to take strategic positions against a group of aliens you haven't even discovered. Further limitations occur within the base, currency is never a problem even when they removed Construction times on items, and the ability to sell what you make. Only one base is available and it will never come under attack. Also the game is incredibly rushed the larger alien ships seem to appear almost instantly and can be shot down by normal-human aircraft. After you clear just a single of these vessels you get the ability to trace the UFO back to where they come from, and develop powers for your units. The only reason they say this game can provide "Hundreds of hours of game play" is because they Expect multiple play throughs, which again is a contradiction to the original where 100 hours may not finish even one.

    The final result is, if you haven't played the originals in an extremely long time or at all you will have an extremely fun time as it is a successful game (even if it is extremely easy unless on the hardest difficulty). Although if like me, and you have the DOS version installed on your computer which you boot up now and then, this game will feel like a disappointment and I would not recommend the purchase at 50$    … Expand
  18. hb7phoenix
    Oct 13, 2012
    5
    To put it plainly - it's been watered down way too much. No soldier inventory, no turn units (which gave you so many more tactical options than here) - instead some arbitrary 2 move/shoot actions, no multiple base building, a stupid system that prevents you from actually helping every country (terror missions - in the original, you could actually do them all if you were smart with yourTo put it plainly - it's been watered down way too much. No soldier inventory, no turn units (which gave you so many more tactical options than here) - instead some arbitrary 2 move/shoot actions, no multiple base building, a stupid system that prevents you from actually helping every country (terror missions - in the original, you could actually do them all if you were smart with your base building/soldier management), no micro management of your base (I do like the ant farm view, just wish I could zoom in), a UI clearly made with consoles in mind.

    If you're brand new to the series, you will most likely enjoy this game a lot. If you're a die-hard fan of the original like me, you will most likely be disappointed once the novelty of playing a new XCOM game has worn off.    … Expand
  19. Luukdeman111
    Oct 9, 2012
    10
    Let me just start this review of by saying: This game is fantastic... It is, however, not 1993 XCOM with updated graphics. If that's what you wanted, don't buy this game and please don't bother us by giving 0 point reviews here.

    As I said, this game is different from UFO: EU(X-com: UFO Defence in america) it is however not worse or dumbed down. They may have simplified the tactical    Let me just start this review of by saying: This game is fantastic... It is, however, not 1993 XCOM with updated graphics. If that's what you wanted, don't buy this game and please don't bother us by giving 0 point reviews here.

    As I said, this game is different from UFO: EU(X-com: UFO Defence in america) it is however not worse or dumbed down. They may have simplified the tactical combat, but simplifying is not the same as dumbing down. Dumbing down is making the game easier and losing strategic depth in the process, simpifying is making a game easier to understand while trying to maintain or improve strategical depth.

    And XCOM: EU does the latter. The strategic base management is probably even more complicated than it was in the original and the tactical combat is, while streamlined and symplified, just as deep or even deeper than the original game.
    It now involves units working together instead of having 14 nearly identical soldiers just scouting if every direction. Ammo is now more important unlike what many 1993 fanboys are saying. Guns still need reloading you just don't need to equip your soldiers with ammo anymore. And most of all there's the completely new cover system. Now, when you move your soldiers, you actually need to think about flanking aliens, because shooting aliens in full cover isn't going to kill them. I've come across a situation where my assault soldier tried to flank an alien but revealed another alien in the process which left him exposed. I then moved my support soldier in to throw a smoke grenade to protect my assault and used my heavy to suppress the flanking alien to avoid him shooting at my assault... Tactical situations like that would almost never occur in the original X-com so i completely disagree wit people who say this game is dumbed down.

    The things that were simplified are mainly things like Time Units and i think the new system is actually better. It might kill the nostalgia a bit but this system is faster, easier and makes every decision more important and rewarding.

    So, to come to a conclusion: I think this game is absolutely brilliant! I normally wouldn't give a 10 to a game. But I'm sorta doing this to cancel out the zeros that were given. Because even if you preferred the old X-com, it's ridiculous to say this game is worth a 0...    … Expand
  20. MrZero
    Oct 13, 2012
    4
    An abortion of a classic. (FYI -- beat the game on normal within 2 days, straight A's on monthly reports)
    First off, all battles are pre-destined; no individual rolls per move. Example: 2012 Xcom: EU -- When the battle starts, the AI now knows and has determined (regardless of aim percentage) what will hit, and what will not hit. You can save a game during a battle and soldier one will    An abortion of a classic. (FYI -- beat the game on normal within 2 days, straight A's on monthly reports)
    First off, all battles are pre-destined; no individual rolls per move. Example: 2012 Xcom: EU -- When the battle starts, the AI now knows and has determined (regardless of aim percentage) what will hit, and what will not hit. You can save a game during a battle and soldier one will always make a shot, move soldier 2 to a particular grid square, he will make a shot and soldier three will miss. Re-load the game, and the EXACT same chain of events will happen! Then, depending on "AI difficulty," the aliens will then move in for the kill and miss or hit. Keep in mind, it already knows exactly what can and can't kill you, so depending on the difficulty setting ... it either misses or hits you as it sees fit.
    In the original, you could re-load the game, and have the same soldier shoot at an alien -- every time you re-loaded, it "re-rolled" the move, and depending on the shot percentage, you would either hit or miss. The same was true for the alien movement. If you had a 25% chance to hit, you actually hit your target once or twice out of four or five times.
    Anyone who's played games developed or associated with Sid Meier knows the AI is a HUGE cheat. Who here has ever played any Civilization game and attacked an AI opponent, who was still in the Stone Age, with tanks; only to find out that upon attacking, that same AI opponent has miraculously teched to modern weapons and tanks, too.
    So, regardless of how well you do with your tactics, it doesn't matter -- the AI "decides" when you win or lose, with the illusion you've somehow outsmarted it. Poor, poor AI design.
    Now onto the other horrible changes -- You can no longer customize your soldiers as you see fit. In the original XCOM, you had approx. 50 slot to place items on each soldier and it required a significant amount of micro-manage. This though was not a chore, but a pure charm, considering that what, how and how much weapons/items your soldier was carrying, determined speed, stamina, shot percentage, reload speed, etc. Every choice had its pros and cons. In 2012 XCOM -- you have 4 slots per soldier, and each slot only holds a certain type of weapon/item, i.e. slot 1 main weapons (a rifle or machine gun), slot 2 sidearm (pistol) slot 3 class specific item (rocket launcher, smoke grenade) slot 4 misc (medkit, grenade, ext.) That's right! Each soldier can only carry ONE!!! grenade now (unless you waste an xp upgrade on them so they carry two) You get one rocket, one grenade, one medpack with only one use.
    On top of that, you can only have four soldiers per mission (upgradable to 6), which makes the game unnecessarily hard in the beginning, considering there can be a dozen or so aliens (who NEVER miss, depending on difficulty), and your capped at 4. That's at least a dozen incoming alien grenades at a four-man squad, whose max aim parentage is capped at 25% (not that it matters) on higher difficulty.
    Is an alien behind a wall or a tree? Want to shoot that obstacle out of the way so another squad-member can have a clear shot? Well guess what? That ability is gone now, too. Unless you can see the alien, you can no longer shoot freely at random objects, unlike the original -- that's a HUGE removal of tactics.
    Remember, that means you    … Expand
  21. macronus
    Oct 14, 2012
    0
    This game can be awesome if you console game and love gears of wars, halo, other similar games, but if you play original xcom, jagged alliance 1-2, you highly dissapointed what the hell is this.
  22. JanGodwod
    Oct 15, 2012
    4
    For today standards this game is very neat. Of course, PC version is bugged as hell - but I've managed to get through the game even with the glitches (2 interceptors stuck screen, ufo roof, bad controls for walking inside ufo, impossible targeting with rocket launcher/grenades, over 100 saves etc.).

    Old version is still better for me. The new one lacks: - equipment managing (picking    For today standards this game is very neat. Of course, PC version is bugged as hell - but I've managed to get through the game even with the glitches (2 interceptors stuck screen, ufo roof, bad controls for walking inside ufo, impossible targeting with rocket launcher/grenades, over 100 saves etc.).

    Old version is still better for me. The new one lacks:
    - equipment managing (picking up, leaving behind etc)
    - free shooting (clearing walls for sniper etc)
    - action points instead of two movements
    - UFOPEDIA! - the Archive provided in Lab is a JOKE! There should be UFOPEDIA with nice drawings
    - realism - have You seen lock on Sniper rifle? Is this a cartoon or action strategy?
    - UFO ranks: medic, navigator etc.
    - random missions
    - random number generator
    - more things to research
    - more base management
    - chance to sell produced items
    etc.

    After playing it on normal. I want to launch my old laptop and run a whole night of old xcom on DOS. I paid 40    … Expand
  23. Samhandwich84
    Oct 14, 2012
    3
    A simplified but still fun version of the X-Com franchise. However, the game is currently plagued by MANY bugs both minor and campaign ending. I will more than happily change this score when/if these bugs are fixed. Until that time though, people need to know that both the single and multiplayer components may not be playable if they fork out for this full priced game.
  24. spleendamage
    Oct 10, 2012
    8
    This game is hard to review, mostly because it is a "re-imagining" of one of my favorite games. The short story is: I like it. I am playing it. So, it gets an 8. Could it have been better? Oh yes. As an X-Com remake, it falls a bit flat. Simplified is a commonly used description, "on rails" is how I'd describe it. It seems that somewhere out there in a secret gaming steering committee, anThis game is hard to review, mostly because it is a "re-imagining" of one of my favorite games. The short story is: I like it. I am playing it. So, it gets an 8. Could it have been better? Oh yes. As an X-Com remake, it falls a bit flat. Simplified is a commonly used description, "on rails" is how I'd describe it. It seems that somewhere out there in a secret gaming steering committee, an edict that games must become less complicated has been issued. Unfortunate if you believe, like me, that original X-Com succeeded, at least in part, due to it's complexity. Why should saving the world from an alien threat be easy? It shouldn't. This XCOM wants to do away with all logistics, deeming them "un-fun." Managing multiple bases and multiple away teams is a hassle, they seem to think. And trying to arrange how multiple assets will deal with multiple simultaneous threats is just a big pain, in their book, much easier (and fun-ner?) to just pick one from a list. Weird trigger based alien spawning, channelling the action in corridor sized maps, tiny squad sizes, no free fire, blah blah, you read all this before. So yes, it's not a very good remake of X-Com. But that's not all a bad thing. It's still a good game. Some games are better for their simplicity. This game does some things pretty well. It's tense and fun, soldier customization is nice (could be better - why can't I pick my class or home nation?), there are advanced difficulty options (Ironman mode!), cut scenes are fun, kill cam is nice. However, there are things it could do better without changing the nature of the game as it was envisioned. Graphics rendering is sometimes sluggish, there are tons of clipping problems, there are camera and movement bugs, voice acting can be a bit shaky, textures could be a bit nicer, an option to remove the additional click for ability confirmation would be super. So despite all of this which mostly sounds negative, I still think it's an 8. Good enough so that when I get home from work tonight, I'll be playing XCOM.… Expand
  25. Lnzu
    Oct 13, 2012
    6
    The tactic is nice in this game, but the strategic level is broken. Unbalanced, user unfriendly -- the main problem is that the game won't allow you to act when you want, you can only react. Given that you can choose only one mission out of three each time, the panic level (the one that determine how well you do worldwide) will increase and increase, so you'll lose some countries anyway,The tactic is nice in this game, but the strategic level is broken. Unbalanced, user unfriendly -- the main problem is that the game won't allow you to act when you want, you can only react. Given that you can choose only one mission out of three each time, the panic level (the one that determine how well you do worldwide) will increase and increase, so you'll lose some countries anyway, you can do nothing about it. You can decrease their numbers (quiters), but you can't save all, even on normal. It's like every time three new fires starts and you can put only one out. And you can do nothing to prevent that. If you're lucky random missions and council orders will help you, but that's save&load game, which sucks. You don't have the power as a gamer to act when you want -- scan territories, put down alien infiltrations, you only react, and if you're not lucky with random events, you're screwed. I drop the game, as soon as I realised I can't be a commander, I can't sent several squads to investigate simultaniously different problem sites. WTF, I mean -- why I can use only one squad at a time, and on top of that I can't give'em order to go and survey the country I know being under threat. I can only react. With one squad. I say **** that **** I want to run an efficient organization, Xcom, not this crappy excuse for "last hope of humanity". **** it, it could be a great game if not for it's strategic component. Unless it's fixed, this game doesn't worth your money. It's frustrating all along, aside the tactical battles.… Expand
  26. peikko
    Oct 15, 2012
    4
    If you want x-com then try UFO series as this game isn't at all a good successor. Customisation of units and arming is poor compared to other similar titles. You can only change one item in your backpack; cannot choose troop specialisation. But you can change hair cut and appearance, not sure of the tactical advantage there. Cannot knock them for trying to update x-com; but in interviewsIf you want x-com then try UFO series as this game isn't at all a good successor. Customisation of units and arming is poor compared to other similar titles. You can only change one item in your backpack; cannot choose troop specialisation. But you can change hair cut and appearance, not sure of the tactical advantage there. Cannot knock them for trying to update x-com; but in interviews we constantly heard what big fans of the original they were - so why did they dum down so much? Console income? If you want a slow motion version of gears of war then this is your game. Definitely style over substance...… Expand
  27. tdctaz
    Oct 12, 2012
    3
    Don't buy this game unless you are from the new generation of console players which don't want to make any real tactical decisions. Any one who has played the old XCOMs, Jagged Alliance 1 or Jagged Alliance 2 will hate this game.
  28. Flamingcanine
    Oct 10, 2012
    5
    Not the Xcom you were looking for sums it up.

    As the dev diaries throughout the game wait for the release stated, anything difficult or somewhat "Not fun" like base defenses or assaults have been cut out, as has the ability to send a reasonably large squad. It has been replaced by a Decent perk system for each soldier class. The Difficulty has a huge gap between Medium and "classic"    Not the Xcom you were looking for sums it up.

    As the dev diaries throughout the game wait for the release stated, anything difficult or somewhat "Not fun" like base defenses or assaults have been cut out, as has the ability to send a reasonably large squad. It has been replaced by a Decent perk system for each soldier class.

    The Difficulty has a huge gap between Medium and "classic" which truly brings out the soldiers inability to shoot, while making the weakest aliens capable of killing swathes of units in full cover with one or two shots.

    Multiplayer is fairly fun, stripping away the already incredibly barren strategic layer to do combat with up to a arbitrary six units each. Choosing the units is a headache for human soldiers due to it being a cluster of lists, and the aliens lack any customization other then their individual names. Furthermore, instead of allowing humans vast customizeability like in the campaign, the units are effectively pigeonholed into three to five "sets" of skills.

    Worse, there are roughly only a dozen maps total, and only five Multiplayer maps, complete with knowledge of the best cover.

    While not a bad game, it is a thouroughly mediocre game for the time spent developing it, and it is not spiritually a successor to Xcom: UFO defense. It's a very different fish for sure.    … Expand
  29. carlbme
    Oct 14, 2012
    10
    As much as I really wanted to enjoy this game, I'm finding it more and more difficult to do so. How can I shoot through walls? Where is the randomization that allows for the better gameplay? I'm growing more and more tired of replaying the same maps, listening to the terrible voice acting, and having to wait on stupid cut scenes. The squad consists of people from all around the world, yetAs much as I really wanted to enjoy this game, I'm finding it more and more difficult to do so. How can I shoot through walls? Where is the randomization that allows for the better gameplay? I'm growing more and more tired of replaying the same maps, listening to the terrible voice acting, and having to wait on stupid cut scenes. The squad consists of people from all around the world, yet they all sound the same. No random maps, repeating maps, no base building, terrible voice acting, etc...

    Yet another disappointment. The only good thing about this is I got a copy of CIV5 with it due to the pre-order.    … Expand
  30. yolktern
    Oct 9, 2012
    9
    I have to admit, I was afraid that this game would be a perfect example of a game where it was built up and then was just mediocre (Skyrim anyone?). Went ahead a bought it and I have to say, that wasn't a mistake. So I came here to see what others were saying and was pleased to see the majority agree with me. I also wanted to address the main objection the ones that gave it a negativeI have to admit, I was afraid that this game would be a perfect example of a game where it was built up and then was just mediocre (Skyrim anyone?). Went ahead a bought it and I have to say, that wasn't a mistake. So I came here to see what others were saying and was pleased to see the majority agree with me. I also wanted to address the main objection the ones that gave it a negative review have: it's depth of strategy and, stemming from that, those who say that just wanted a retexturing of the original (which, if Firaxis did that, they would be saying "just get the original on Steam for 4 bucks, Firaxis just sold us an update"). They call it "tactics" but what they really mean is strategy (tactics being squad based planning, which this game clearly has and if they say it doesn't they don't know what they're talking about). Is the global strategy dumbed down? Yes, yes it is. Is this Xcom circa 1990? No, no it is not. Examples? Sure: You can no longer manufacture things to sell to the countries for money (there is a different, simpler dynamic). Manufacturing of guns and weapons as far as I can tell is instantaneous (don't really have a problem with that, but since the major complaint is that this isn't a retexturing of the original, I'll put that in there). There are no longer any ammo conservation concerns during missions, you just need to worry about reloading (though there are a limited amount of special abilities). You can have only one base (but you can have an high number of interceptors and satellites so that, in my opinion, makes up for it espc since in the original the presence of your base had no effect on the game unlike real life or this game). The manner in which you build your base has consequences, unlike the original one. Can you ignite the entire map and let fire spread? Yes. Destructive environments? Yes. But you can't shot a GUN at a wall (you can throw grenades or fire rockets however [more realistic]). The basic complaint here from the negative people is that it isn't Xcom. They wanted a simple retexturing and updating of Xcom. I can understand that, but it's also something that you can get elsewhere (UFO Afterlite series for example). What they fail to realize is that there are a number of things that were annoying and negative about the original. Cone of sight? (Kantai *COUGH*) Who sees in that? If an alien is right next to someone but not within a side square they're not gonna see it? Gimme a break. TUs are still there but they have been updated to be more realistic, because, seriously, why does it take time to turn around in the original? The first part of a mission in the original might as well be a ballet with all the squad members twirling around to get around the vision cone. No sniper rifles in the original (seems like an oversight to me. Yes they had "rifles" and "heavy weapons" but that seems kind of dumbed down now doesn't it (Kanti, Lysh *COUGH*). There are more, but there is a character limit here.

    This Game actually expands the tactical and strategic options beyond the original. I'm sorry, but having to manage you backpack like Kanti complains this game took out, that's not tactical or strategic. Being able to construct a base that makes sense and has position bonuses (like this new game does), makes sense. The main point is this. If you want the exact same, original, authentic, experience and gameplay you got from Xcom, but with updated graphics DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. I don't want you buying it and then coming here and throwing a fit because it's not the same, exact Xcom. But if you want a different, enjoyable experience that takes most of the good of the original and adds new concepts and ides to it while still being true to the original, then you can't go wrong here. Are there some things that I miss? Sure. Are there some things here I didn't even know I wanted? Hell yeah there are. Would I recommend this game? Def. And that, in the end, is all that really matters    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

7
#7 Best PC Game of 2012
11
#11 Most Discussed PC Game of 2012
8
#8 Most Shared PC Game of 2012

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
89

Generally favorable reviews - based on 57 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 56 out of 57
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 57
  3. Negative: 0 out of 57
  1. PC Master (Greece)
    Feb 6, 2013
    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. Armchair Empire
    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.
    Read full review
  3. Hyper Magazine
    Nov 14, 2012
    90
    Amazing tactical complexity, satisfying strategic depth; slightly dodgy ending, but your own stories are more important anyway. A modern classic.
See all critic reviews »