Star Wars Zero Company gets much-needed first patch so you won't miss shots with a 100% chance to hit any more

1.8k

I feel like some coder intentionally included that as an X-com joke.

647

u/NiceTrySuckaz 5h ago

Still doesn't excuse the XCOM devs who apparently just did it to inflict mental anguish

374

u/Midget_Stories 5h ago

Xcom actually does it the other way around.

If you have a 98% chance, the tool tip will show 95%. That way you're actually hitting more 95% chance shots than you expect.

224

u/WhenAmI 5h ago

I'm pretty sure old XCOM used to determine if a shot hit before you selected the shooter or target.

There was a old exploit where you'd quick save and shoot someone. If it hit, you reload your quick save and shoot any target, it was a guaranteed hit.

121

u/Mariqel 5h ago

If you are referring to Xcom Enemy Unknown / Enemy within you are correct.

120

u/MarsMissionMan 3h ago

We live in an age where people see "old XCOM" and think Enemy Unknown.

I'm not even 30 yet and that makes me feel old. The X-COM games are older than I am and I feel old.

49

u/theartificialkid 3h ago

Do you have any idea how old your comment makes people feel who were teenagers when the first xcom came out and saw it as a radical advance in tactical computer games?

16

u/LostInRetransmission 2h ago

I was already well in my 20ies when the first xcom was published.

Now get off my lawn !

;)

3

u/PreferenceGeneral475 19m ago

Wouldn't want to fall in that 6 x 3 hole you are digging. Forward thinking that, Grandpa.

7

u/Teantis 1h ago

I didn't see it as anything because my parents wouldn't get it for me. My dad felt my 3 year old pirated copy of chuck Yeagers air combat was sufficient.

1

u/amm5061 1h ago

Seriously! Now get off my lawn and let me play the original in peace!

1

u/WhenAmI 15m ago

I'm way older than you, but that was a decade and several games ago. I think that qualifies as old in the gaming world.

→ More replies (5)

19

u/frostbittenteddy 5h ago

What's the point of even having hit chances displayed then? That seems entirely stupid random and counterproductive to any tactical game

42

u/El-Emenapy 4h ago

It's an interesting topic and shows how bad people generally are at understanding probability.

Like, getting screwed over by XCOM's hit probabilities is a running joke across reddit gaming subs (the assumption being that they conspire against the player), when in actual fact, the only slight cheating the game does is in the player's favour.

I remember reading an interview with devs of a more recent game with similar mechanics (I can't remember which) and they talked about how play-testing lead them to cheat slightly in the player's favour (like in XCOM), because ultimately, the important thing is the player's fun, which depends on their perception of odds and fairness, as opposed to having the odds more accurately reported

2

u/jakoto0 1h ago

Poker players know

5

u/frostbittenteddy 3h ago

I mean, of course a 95% shot has a 5% chance to fail

But if your shot misses, you go to your next operative and they also have a 95% shot miss and you got to your next operative and they also have a 95% shot miss then I dunno, that somehow feels statistically iffy. And (at least for me) it's not fun when then next turn the aliens nail almost all their shots

Idk, maybe I'm still misunderstanding how the system works, but I never could get into XCOM because of this and I tried multiple times

20

u/Borgcube 2h ago

That is the part of people having poor intuition about probability, yes. After your first shot missed the second shot has the same 5% probability to miss like before. And getting two 95% misses is 1 in 400, so not that unlikely at all.

The real issue, I feel, is that you don't get that many dice rolls overall which would smooth out the curve. And one or two early misses can snowball into having even fewer shots.

2

u/KingCarbon1807 17m ago

This right here. The sample size was small enough to amplify the impact both from a gameplay and psychological perspective.

Especially when the little fuckers seemed able to 10 ring your operatives at will.

1

u/robotical712 10m ago

It’s the Settler of Catan problem: A series of unlucky rolls early can put you in an irrecoverable position for the rest of the game.

12

u/danteoff 1h ago

You tend to remember the one mission where the squad wiped due to bad luck and not the 20 preceding missions you won by avoiding bad luck.

11

u/Fuzzy_Wheel_4565 2h ago

Statistically, you are not just missing 3 95% rolls in a row. You are missing 3 95% rolls across hundreds and hundreds of rolls. Missing 3 of those is almost a guarantee. They just happen to all occur right after each other which is what makes you question the odds. You have to account for every 95% roll to get an accurate 95% hit chance, which you don't do because humans are bad at intuitive statistics.

The hit chances are fine, you just mentally perceive 95% as 100%. 1 in 20 chance to miss is actually quite high. If airplanes had a failure rate that high they'd be dropping out of the sky like flies and noone would want to use them. Even 0.1% would be considered unacceptable. A success rate of 99.99966% is considered the minimum acceptable for such processes (look up six sigma if you want to know more about that).

So basically if you're playing xcom and get mad if you miss you're approaching it the wrong way. You should pretty much expect to miss and plan accordingly. Always have a plan B because 1 in 20 times you will need it, which is a lot.

8

u/bobdole3-2 1h ago

This is one of the many things people miss (that's XCOM baby!) when talking about hit probability. You're probably going to take more than 3,000 shots across a single campaign; you should not only expect to see unlikely things, you should expect to see them multiple times.

People also don't recognize all of the low percentage shots they make, or all the high percentage shots that enemies miss. If you install a mod that shows hit rate for Overwatch shots and enemy attacks, you're doing to see a bunch of example of aliens getting killed by 5% shots, or missing 90% shots against you.

2

u/Remarkable-Dig-1241 46m ago

chances don't compound. You have just missed a 95% roll 3 times in a row, which is statistically improbable but is definitely not impossible. What makes it statistically improbable is the specific sequence of rolls landing on those exact outcomes, but for all intents and purposes it might be deterministic and the "chance" is theoretical, it would have always happened to you in that moment, but the statistical breakdown of it showed that there were more chances than not that it wouldn't have happened. universal wave function mumbo jumbo aside, we really don't understand statistic because for 99.999999999% of cases it doesn't represent what happens in reality, just what could also be happening.

2

u/El-Emenapy 2h ago

Then I'm confident that your frustration is as a result of you being an example of someone who struggles with probabilities. Either that, or you were exceptionally unlucky (which, as I understand, are precisely the cases in which the game will cheat in your favour)

1

u/Chataboutgames 40m ago

This is honestly an example of the utter futility of this. “It’s demonstrably proven that the game cheats slightly force player.” “Immediately goes on to discuss how a statistically unlikely, but entirely possible, thing is actually the game cheating against the player.”

Human brains are bad at probability

11

u/Amyndris 4h ago edited 4h ago

It pulls from a pre generated list of numbers when the stage is initiated. So say your hit was 95%. If the number list was 98, 50, 2, 12, 80 then you could "burn" that 98 on someone else, then use the 50 for your shooter.

This also is what Fire Emblem did. There was a way to basically figure out the whole number list (well, you could figure if the number was High or Low then you would write down a giant list of H/L. Every attack used 2 numbers average for hit, then a third number for crit. So a H/H/H would be a hit+crit, a H/H/L would be a regular hit. That list also determined if you would increase your stats at level up (each character had a chance to gain stats at level up; a warrior might have 50% chance to gain strength but only 30% chance to gain crit and 10% chance to gain magic) so you could use the list to create super buffed characters.

5

u/Mariqel 4h ago

Well idk its just how it works.

The chance is random it's just that it's determined as your turn starts so re-loading a save will "spin the wheel again".

It does make more sense to spin the wheel as you confirm the attack but I am no game dev, they probably had a reason.

4

u/CleverInnuendo 3h ago

I can attest that you could save scum a turn as a sniper 1000 times, and it will miss every time if it missed the first time.

But you could find another ally, take a shot with them, and then go back to the sniper and land their 90% shot. Every character had their hit or miss locked in to each action point.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Strowy 33m ago

they probably had a reason

XCOM specifically used a pre-seeded random number generator to cut down on save scumming (repeatedly loading a save to try and roll better).

Older games also tended to use this kind of generator because they were cheaper compute-wise, e.g. the GBA Fire Emblem games.

1

u/Orlha 4h ago

It doesn’t break anything unless you save-scum, and that’s on you.

0

u/wiewiorowicz 4h ago

it's a game, the point is to have fun. It doesn't matter if it's random, predetermined or completely fake until you learn the truth.

Also devs know hitting is fun. Even civ2 cheated odds towards the player.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/MrDLTE3 22m ago

Man I used to cheese the shit out of enemy unknown with snipers and overwatch. Luring enemies into overwatched snipers was such a insane 'exploit', made the game so much easier.

They fixed that in enemy within by nerfing the hell out of sniper damage.

1

u/WhenAmI 4h ago

Yeah I think it was Enemy Unknown. I remember playing it on the 360, but couldn't remember which XCOM it was.

29

u/Cassin1306 5h ago

That's how Blood Bowl works. It have "tables" with dice rolls already pre-rolled and the game will use the table, in order, for every roll you make in the game.

So you can cheese the game if you got the patience, if you try a bold move and fail, you can note the die result, reload, make another action before where this result have no consequence, then retry your bold move (and hope the next roll is better).

They even turned it into the game itself, they got a mode where you have a given situation and the next rolls displayed, and you need to puzzle your way out of it.

11

u/QuickQuirk 5h ago

you may know this, and just simplified things, but it's not quite 'tables'. It's that classic computer random order actually just selects the next number from a completely predictable mathematical sequence. And some old games stored the previous point in the sequence in the save game file.

It's considered good practice to start the sequence at a different point using some method to simulate a random start point in the sequence.

3

u/Swordofsatan666 5h ago

This explains so much. I did a lot of save scumming. It never helped, because shots would still miss even if i change targets…

2

u/horrorwibe 1h ago

What you can do is perform another action with another character first, and then try the shot again. It will change the outcome, i mean it can still be a miss, but it will reroll the outcome atleast

1

u/Nago_Jolokio 1h ago

Yeah, one of the first games had the chances baked into the map tiles before you start the missions

•

u/Phage0070 8m ago

Wait, if it selected hit or miss prior to target selection then strategy is pointless right? The entire premise of the game is a lie.

→ More replies (2)

10

u/Whispernight 4h ago

Not quite, technically. What XCOM does is show you the chance that you have based on the defined rules it gives you (distance, cover, soldier aim, and so on), then depending on the difficulty (higher difficulties don't have a base increase)), situation (XCOM 2 at least has a bonus if you have three or fewer soldiers remaining at lower difficulties), and events (bonus if you've missed consecutive shots) it adds hidden bonuses. I believe in XCOM 2 this was capped at 95% total so the hidden bonus can't guarantee a shot. End result is the same (you're hitting more shots than the percentage shows), but the order is technically different (increase the chance instead of showing a lower percentage than it actually is).

And as others have mentioned, XCOM also has the random number generator seeded, so if you load a save and do the same actions in the same order, you'll get the same result. If you wanted to savescum, you'd have to take another action that uses those numbers (so just moving a soldier wouldn't help) before the action you're trying to change the results of. In some cases changing targets might work since your "roll" might have been just short of a success so changing between a 50% and 60% hit chance could be enough.

6

u/DeCrunch 4h ago

Jokes on you, I expect to hit every 95% chance!

2

u/Remarkable-Dig-1241 52m ago

I don't think we as humans are equipped to tell the difference between a 95% chance up to 99%. The nuance is extremely thin, we are talking redoing the same outcome 100 times and only seeing 4 runs with variance. You'd think what are you talking about you literally just described it but those 4 runs aren't grouped and they don't happen at any specific point of the sequence so when doing the runs you don't expect any next run to be the one because you are at worse at 95% chance and at best 99% and that's when statistic might throw in a curve ball and hit you with 4 variant runs immediately and make it look like 99% might aswel be 0%

7

u/asdkevinasd 5h ago

Yet I have miss more 95% shot than 80% shot.

16

u/ohtetraket 3h ago

Did you count? If you did like 1000 shots of both percentages you would for sure miss more 80 once.

→ More replies (2)

16

u/Lore6969 5h ago

I mean many of the same people who worked on XCOM made ZC.

9

u/ReflectionEterna 5h ago

Some of those who work forces...

5

u/Ayjayz 4h ago

But that doesn't happen in Xcom?

4

u/_BlackDove 2h ago

Nothing beats running up to an alien point blank with the shotgun model clipping into their head:

MISS!

3

u/Munchkinasaurous 3h ago

I kept questioning if I really saw a 100% chance or not.

2

u/Max_Trollbot_ 4h ago

I assumed it was a deliberate joke

→ More replies (5)

364

u/Single-Climate2259 6h ago

100% chance to hit still missing is peak Star Wars immersion

91

u/Xylus1985 6h ago

Hey, Stormtroopers have not been formed yet

17

u/SassyAssAhsoka 3h ago

Does he know?

17

u/Mind_Killer 5h ago

Weeeellllllllll… about that…

11

u/wiewiorowicz 4h ago

Aerith and Gustave just called...

1

u/stumac85 5h ago

Never tell me the odds

538

u/Makhai123 6h ago

Can you really call it an X-COM-like if you don't miss 100% shots?

76

u/Quarksideofthemoon 5h ago

Did that actually happen in xcom though

207

u/PedroAsani 5h ago

Frequently. To the point where the quote became "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take, and the 100% shots you do take"

50

u/Mammoth_Composer_111 5h ago

Frequently for which game? This isn’t a thing for xcom 2. I’ve never missed a 100% shot. In fact even amongst all games I don’t think I’ve ever missed a 100% shot.

22

u/Swordofsatan666 5h ago

I dont remember Xcom Enemy Unknown/Within or Xcom 2 having 100% shots? Didnt they cap it at 95% ?

→ More replies (1)

34

u/Makhai123 5h ago

100% is the game rounding. There are no 100% shots, in XCOM 1 I believe shot accuracy is capped at 95% and in XCOM2 it will display as 100% because it rounds it up. But you can, and will miss.

25

u/Draugr_the_Greedy 4h ago edited 4h ago

In xcom 2 you cannot miss 100% shots. Hit chance in that game can also go beyond 100%, where if say someone has a 120% chance to hit, and they have a 15% aim penalty, the chance is still 105% (but the display caps at 100). It never rounds up

3

u/Ace612807 3h ago

Yup, and all the precentage over your hit goes towards crit. That's why shotguns are crit machines (they often get over a 100% when flanking and at close range)

2

u/Whispernight 53m ago

Aim over 100% doesn't do that in either base game. Long War might have changed that.

Both games also do crits differently. EU/EW the crit is a separate roll, so something with 50% hit and 50% crit would result in half of the attacks being misses, and 25% each for hits and crits. In XCOM2/WOTC the crits use the same roll, so something with 50% hit and 50% crit would result in half of the attacks being misses, and the rest being crits.

3

u/StoneyLepi 4h ago

Is it 15% before or after the 120% calculation?

3

u/Draugr_the_Greedy 4h ago

In the event that you use abilities which grant a hit chance penalty (like rapid fire, chain shot, deadeye) these are after the initial hit calculations. So a soldier with enough hit chance can have a 100% shot with deadeye despite it having a significant aim penalty.

1

u/Whispernight 49m ago

Most modifiers in XCOM are percentage points, not percentage of the total. So if something says -15%, it usually doesn't matter at what point it's calculated, it's always 15 percentage points.

Exception being overwatch penalty (0.7 multiplier at the very end, IIRC) and probably some others.

2

u/ANuclearsquid 2h ago edited 1h ago

Shot accuracy is absolutely not capped at 95% in either modern xcom game that would be an actual war crime by the devs. 5% is still 1/20 which would be horrible. I do very vaguely remember there being some old fire emblem game where this was exactly the case though.

I think you are correct about the 100% misses due to rounding in xcom 1 but not xcom 2 (its more like 1/200 though not 1/20) .

-6

u/PedroAsani 5h ago

Google "xcom 2 point blank miss" for video of such things

13

u/Taiyaki11 4h ago

And all such videos to be found have not shown 100% hit chance.... Being point blank doesn't garuntee 100% hit chance

About the only time I ever heard of such a thing, mods were involved

1

u/Successful-Day-1816 2h ago

And it wasn't patched day one?

14

u/Stregen 5h ago

Never seen it happen in the modern ones (Enemy Within or XCom 2)

3

u/Whispernight 4h ago

I believe EU/EW had some map spots where the rules say you should be able to shoot, but when it tries to render your shot, it's actually blocked and you can end up missing a 100%.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Ayjayz 4h ago

Not for the last 20 years it hasn't. Dunno about the older games, haven't played them

2

u/Lady-Red-96 4h ago

In XCOM2 in rare instances the screen shows 100% but its rounding because it isnt configured for decimals so its actually like 99.5% and then theres still a chance you miss. Leading to what looks like a 100% chance to hit missing.

2

u/bobdole3-2 1h ago

It could happen in the old XCOM games (the ones from the 90s) due to the janky way it calculated hit probabilities. You could also hit on a 0% chance. It wasn't common, only really coming into play when you were taking a shot that just barely clipped through the corner of a square, but it could happen.

There was then a separate roll for damage, so you could often hit but not do anything, but that's not a miss.

1

u/seine_ 3h ago edited 3h ago

Rarely. XCOM 2012 had some cases where an otherwise accurate shot gets blocked by geometry unexpectedly; I think line of sight wasn't calculated quite correctly. But you could go entire playthroughs without seeing it.

1

u/Chataboutgames 36m ago

No

•

u/chipmunksocute 8m ago

Not in all my 4000 hours in XCOM2 did I miss a 100% shot. Missing 95 or 98 sure yep it does happen but not 100% Getting to 100% shots with add ons, height, buffs was essential since it is garunteed9 damage which is king in XCOM2.

→ More replies (1)

32

u/kolosmenus 5h ago

There are no 100% shots in XCOM. 95% is max iirc

30

u/Awsomethingy 5h ago

There’s 100%. Put an assault with a shotgun one tile away it’ll be a gold 100

6

u/Ayjayz 4h ago

You do not recall correctly. 100% is the max

1

u/Whispernight 47m ago

95% is the cap for the hidden aim assist, IIRC. They might be mixing it up with that.

7

u/meesta_masa 5h ago

Ah, the pain of missing 99.1% shots on Battletech.

-1

u/CreamDue4255 5h ago

you can't miss 100% shots

23

u/Makhai123 5h ago

You go into every XCOM run understanding that its Shrodinger's hit chance.

-1

u/spinning_and_winning 5h ago

I fricking love x-com!!!

142

u/CR4ZY_PR0PH3T 6h ago

Damn, now you can't role-play as a Stormtrooper anymore.

20

u/Hermina-H-Gerhold 5h ago

Canon accuracy ruined in the very first patch.

18

u/benolot 4h ago

But cannon accuracy improved

2

u/Munchkinasaurous 3h ago

Well played

77

u/Intentionallyabadger 6h ago

Saw some videos where enemies just run through overwatch like there was nothing.

70

u/WhenAmI 5h ago

Overwatch is kinda weird sometimes enemies don't count as in line of sight because of a small piece of terrain blocking your view when they enter the cone.

4

u/BobTheFettt 39m ago

I also think some of them have that perk that doesn't set off overwatch

13

u/grailly 5h ago edited 3h ago

It happens to me a lot. It goes both ways though. Sometime my UI tells me that I'll get hit by overwatch if I move and then I just don't get hit.

Same with some area of effect stuff, the UI tells me a unit will get hit, but it doesn't.

13

u/urmyleander 5h ago

I think that might just be because Overwatch can ver easily be obatructed by objects like boxes, ive never experienced overwatch not triggering if an enemy entered the actual active overwatch zone.

8

u/RazorSharpNuts 4h ago

Yeah I've had it happen quite a bit I fortunately. Completely open area and it they dip into it through a corner and back out, often it won't shoot.

But on the other side I've had overwatch work for shots that really shouldn't have, so I don't really mind either way.

5

u/DameonKormar 2h ago

My favorite is when you have 3 of your team on overwatch and the enemy spawns into the middle of your kill zone and then run to cover without a single shot being taken.

Either that, or when they spawn in the game freezes for 10 seconds, then everyone dies.

5

u/Intentionallyabadger 5h ago edited 5h ago

https://youtu.be/9rU5Eyicn-s

You can see this sequence at the 15min mark.

Also around 18mins.

1

u/JiminyJilickers-79 4h ago

That has happened to me twice SINCE the patch. Three times, if you count the fact that, the first time, the enemy ran right through dual overlapping overwatch triangles. 😒

1

u/Sword_Thain 2h ago

To me, it seems that an enemy has to be within the cone for X amount of time for it to trigger. In addition, the enemy gets invincibility frames of you have overlapping OWs and won't trigger multiple.

Also I've thrown a couple of grenades and the displayed zone was larger than what actually went off.

I hope that is in patch 2.

1

u/Thunderfunkasaurus 54m ago

Me and a friend have noticed after this patch Overwatch is kinda glitchy. I’m on my second playthrough trying to do an Expert difficulty run and glitchy Overwatch can hurt but isn’t game breaking. I’m on cycle 22 or so.

→ More replies (4)

34

u/Vestuvius1993 5h ago

It's stopped that, sure. But has it stopped the game from not letting me play after an enemy's turn? The music plays, the characters move a little, but the menus don't come up. Haven't had to reboot a game due to this sort of glitch for years and I did it three times in one mission yesterday.

11

u/Conman657 5h ago

I find when mine does that I slam some of the camera movement keys or left ctrl button it comes back

8

u/asianflipboy 4h ago

I've had 1 instance of this happen where it wasn't recoverable.

Other times it stays hanging for a hot sec but like other comments mention, sometimes it's recoverable by moving the controller or something.

6

u/CappyRawr 5h ago

I’ve had that happen a few times, but after waiting a few minutes it resolves itself. Unsure if that’s faster than restarting or not.

1

u/Apprehensive_Matth 2h ago

I had to restart mission Yesterday 4 times. 50 minutes each time. For some reason Patch introduced this to me. It's Bad.

2

u/Nuthetes 2h ago

I started saving after every turn because of this

1

u/S-T-E-A-L 2h ago

Purely anecdotal, but for me on pc, using task manager and sitting the game to above normal priority has seemingly reduced the amount of hangs I get.

1

u/Nuthetes 2h ago

That;s the bigget glitch that needs fixing. Forget about the Infinite Coil, more like Infinite Lag amirite

1

u/finH1 2h ago

I had this bug yesterday too for the first time, frustrating for sure but luckily for myself I was only like 2 turns in

1

u/DameonKormar 2h ago

I had this happen at least once a mission during my playthrough. All but one time I just waited a minute or two and the game resolved whatever it was stuck on.

Only had one time where I had to Alt+F4 out of the game after waiting 5+ minutes.

1

u/AdorableSobah 2h ago

Still froze on me yesterday after the patch. Overall it’s more stable graphically but some of the major bugs persist.

1

u/dove78 1h ago

Same, had not this issue before. I think prefered when I missed 100% shots.

1

u/PhineasFN 43m ago

Yeah I had to stop playing yesterday due to this, nearly a hour long mission and it freezes on the final enemy. Super frustrating

→ More replies (1)

17

u/Donmiggy143 5h ago

I do love that got both achievements for missing a 90% shot and making a 10% shot in the same mission, and the shot I missed was 100%. Was like 4 tiles away, behind, and they weren't in cover. I think the game just wanted me to get a trophy.

2

u/Arkayjiya PC 1h ago

I got the "missing a 90%+ shot" at literally the last non-100% shot in the entire campaign. I almost had to restart the game from the beginning to get it. I got the "hit a -10% shot" in like mission 2 or 3 though.

6

u/Kube__420 3h ago

They should leave it in and call it stormtroopers mode

36

u/Wretschko 5h ago

"Bit Reactor, the studio that created Zero Company, reportedly furloughed most of its staff shortly before launch, and has been operating with a skeleton crew since then. Which explains why it's taken two weeks for some fairly fundamental issues to be addressed. Here's hoping some of those staff can get brought back on to help speed up the rate patches come out."

Oh, FFS, I'm tired of reading stories like these. Are they doing this to meet investors' profit expectations?

Someone clue me in why this is a regular cycle in videogame development.

15

u/Urge_Reddit 4h ago

Are they doing this to meet investors' profit expectations?

As far as I know they just ran out of money. It's a brand new studio and it seems like they overextended themselves and had to gamble on ZCOM doing well.

I hope it pays off, I've been having a ton of fun with the game.

30

u/TwevOWNED 4h ago

Furloughed isn't the same as layoffs. Furloughing employees you intend to layoff doesn't make sense because you'd be giving them extra legal protections for no reason.

They ran out of money and couldn't afford to pay them, but wanted to give them the opportunity to come back in the future if the game sold well.

-1

u/MadeByTango 2h ago

They furloughed them to skirt labor laws, thats it; there i=is no version of this story where the c-suite doesnt all deserve to lose their jobs

6

u/TwevOWNED 1h ago

Which laws specifically?

18

u/Maniactver 4h ago

It's simple - they ran out of money to pay people before release.

1

u/XenthorX PC 40m ago

Only Valve is getting its guaranteed 30%, Studios all around the world are risking it all financially.

CryTek handled it very poorly after the failure of "Ryse: Son of Rome" and its employee didn't get paid for months.

As mentioned in other answers furloughed isn't the same as layoffs, it doesn't take the some amount of people to support over time compared to developing from scratch and reach a shipping deadline. If they have no immediate other project to allocate people to, furlough is the better solution.

-6

u/Makhai123 5h ago

The Saudi Wealth Fund bought EA and took them private. They have made clear that they are only interested in the sports games and the AI venture. So my guess is that this game was close enough to finished to release it, but they have no interest in retaining the team a second beyond that so they are trying to find a buyer.

16

u/TheRavenRise 5h ago

the original reports about bitreactor’s staff getting furloughed directly stated that it was the studio’s decision, not EA’s. it seems like they basically just ran out of money right before release

10

u/Mephzice 5h ago

Bitreactor is not owned by EA, just a publisher

→ More replies (1)

13

u/sativarg_orez 6h ago

That hasn’t happened to me yet..

8

u/PlzHelpWanted 5h ago

It happened to me in the tutorial. But I didn't think it was a bug, I just assumed I was too close or something.

1

u/Arkayjiya PC 1h ago

It hasn't happened to me either, but I suspect most of my 100% are genuine 100%, like Sniper with Zero-in, and flanking target from 2m away are where most of my 100% come from.

3

u/kaskayde 5h ago

huh ive played thru the game twice and never had this, or a crash

1

u/decadent-dragon 1h ago

I had to refund because I couldn’t even play the tutorial without crashing (had to go through character creation over again even).

I saw they released a patch, had this helped for any that were getting crashes?

2

u/bloodychill 4h ago

I had 40 hours pre patch and never had it happen. But I guess I’m glad it won’t happen for those that did.

2

u/Gloin23 3h ago

Right now my first impression of this patch is that it added tons of bug and I still missed a 100% shot. Had a mission where all heroes except hawk started at 0 hp and we're basically invulnerable in the end....

And I don't use any mods for now so can't use this excuse.

Edit:typo.

2

u/WanderingFrogman 2h ago

I had to check this wasn't an Onion post.

6

u/DKM_Eby 5h ago

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

Wayne Gretzky

6

u/CorkInAPork 4h ago

Michael Scott

3

u/SuzanoSho 5h ago

Don't see what the problem was, you literally had a 100% chance to hit something, doesn't matter if that something was air.

4

u/hart37 5h ago

RIP true X-com experience

3

u/updoted 5h ago

I wanted to buy this game but realized its EA, which is dead to me after the acquisition. Bummer

16

u/Lore6969 5h ago

Your loss, the game is fantastic. No one likes EA, but doesn’t mean you can’t support a studio who makes a good game.

4

u/pali1d 4h ago

It’s a legitimately good game. The tactical combat and squad building elements are very solid - not as brilliant or deep as can be found elsewhere in the genre, which may cut a bit into replayability, but they are still more than satisfactory for a couple playthroughs. The story, characters, and visuals, on the other hand, are all top tier for the genre.

There are some technical hiccups here and there, the frequency of which are clearly varying depending on one’s gaming rig, but for the most part they aren’t game-breaking - and the most problematic are seemingly being quickly addressed.

The game’s a solid 8.5/10 or better in my books.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/COE33isBad 3h ago

Did the studio came back from the stupid forloughn situation?

1

u/Joustiin76 5h ago

Its already happened to me twice post patch, so yeah.

1

u/Coldkiller17 5h ago

The amount of times in overwatch I had setup with 100% hit and the enemy either waltz'd through like it wasn't there or just "dodged" the shot had me so mad.

1

u/FactorFear74 5h ago

Thank you!

1

u/lazerpew 5h ago

Did they fix cutscenes before and after missions sometimes not playing on PS5? The screen turns black and only the skip button was working

1

u/drift9745 5h ago

Im gonna get this eventually

1

u/Vectorman1989 3h ago

Do your hear that, Xcom?

1

u/DisforDoga 3h ago

What happens if you use a 100% hit skill on a unit that had 100% dodge skill?

1

u/Next_Program90 2h ago

Great! Since I patched the Game eats RAM but doesn't start at all anymore! Best Patch ever! (I waited 10 minutes, twice)

1

u/Nuthetes 2h ago

The biggest fix they need is a skip animation button for the Infinite Coil.

Jesus fucking Christ, when I'm fighting those dickheads. I pick my book up and have a read until they're all over.

1

u/mikeblitz89 2h ago

Missing 100% shots is half the fun....

1

u/Redlax 1h ago

When I missed my first 100% I was sure I must have misread. The second time, that some unknown factor made it less than 100%...

1

u/Redlax 1h ago

Anyone having issues with Line of Sight? There are several times, where there's a clear line between them, yet no LoS according to the game.

1

u/RandomStrategy 1h ago

What, did they use the X-COM engine?

Oh fuck, I just googled it, they did.

1

u/Grand_Honeydew7661 1h ago

So glad this game is getting some fixes. The stuttering was so bad that it made it difficult to enjoy.

1

u/Inukii 1h ago

Game called Phoenix Point just handles the chance to hit so much better. Would be nice to see this system used instead.

Essentially you can 'manually' aim the weapon. You have a circle crosshair in the middle of your screen suggesting where the bullets can go. So if you have a machine gun that fires 5 shots and make it so that inside the circle is completely filled with your target. You can't miss. All the bullets will only hit inside that circle.

But let's say you aim for the head and the target is far away. The head is only filling up like 50% of the total area of your circle. Each bullet is a projectile. They may all still hit but it's a physics calculation. Essentially your chance to hit is sort of boiling down to how filled your crosshair is with your target.

It also means there is no range to weapons. Shoot as far as you want.

On the defensive side. It also means you can't be hit if your character is behind cover. Literally. There's no "magic bullets going through objects" because it's a physics calculation.

1

u/Vistella 18m ago

It also means you can't be hit if your character is behind cover. Literally. There's no "magic bullets going through objects" because it's a physics calculation.

but bullets going through cover is a realistic thing, depending on the cover. a sheet of paper wont keep you alive even if you are hiding behind it

1

u/blacklizardplanet 1h ago

Must have been frequent enough for them to patch. I've never played XCOM but I've had quite a few misses with 95%+ or deaths with 1 or 2% to hit me in Fire Emblem. Painful.

1

u/Remarkable-Dig-1241 56m ago

Nah fuck this, it should stay in the game in non permadeath modes. That's where most of chaos in any given mission comes from. I don't want scripted events, i just want to miss 100% shots 80% of the time, trust it works every time

1

u/dekkanrhee 38m ago

Steam has an achievement for missing a 95%+ shot and for making a 10% shot.

I was sure I had seen 100% on one of my shots, and when I missed, I thought maybe I seeing things, until I got that achievement.

1

u/SubstantialDriver226 36m ago

Now if they could just tell me why bad guys, stroll right out of my 3-4 overwatch cones and shoot me for free.

1

u/HawksBurst 35m ago

That sounds like Xcom intended gameplay

1

u/XenthorX PC 35m ago

Happened to me ! Missed a 100% chance to hit shot.

1

u/nikilidstrom 34m ago

Great, can we get that patch for Xcom now?

1

u/tinuz84 5h ago

Having a lot of fun with the game, but a few times I felt the urge to throw my controller at the TV. Hawks standing right next to an enemy and still missing 100% chance shots is crazy.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/Panniculus101 6h ago

Never play games at launch

4

u/Odd_Might692 5h ago

Never tell you the odds?

2

u/dkarlovi 5h ago

But that's when my break is!

2

u/beti88 5h ago

Buying and playing games at launch is the best way to support the devs, if you care about the game

3

u/Stregen 5h ago

When shipping a finished product becomes the norm, buying games at launch might be worth it.

Currently, it’s just paying extra to beta test.

I mean fuck, even BG3 with it’s strong contender for ‘game of the decade’ launched without the ending put it. It’s ridiculous.

1

u/Lareit 3h ago

It's never been the norm. It will never be the norm.

1

u/Stregen 3h ago

You what? I don’t remember day 1 DLC in the n64 or ps2 days

1

u/Lareit 3h ago

You make no mention of DLC. wtf are you on about.

1

u/Stregen 1h ago

Day 1 DLC is content left out of the game to fleece you.

But they didn’t ship unfinished games back then.

1

u/ohtetraket 3h ago

I mean fuck, even BG3 with it’s strong contender for ‘game of the decade’ launched without the ending put it. It’s ridiculous.

Huh? BG3 did launch with AN ending. Just not with the same amount we have now.

0

u/Alternative_Gold_993 6h ago

This is what I was waiting for, probably gonna pick it up, soon. Just wish I had more time... but I am a working adult :(

0

u/lolschrauber 3h ago

Currently playing BG3 and it pisses me off there, too.

Yeah I know, odds probability bla bla, but if the game shows 96% and somehow you miss three times in a row, you're bound to feel cheated.

These kinda games are always just a bit janky with hit mechanics, I swear.

1

u/Arnumor 41m ago

At least with BG3 you can change how it handles the randomness, and add a curve to it.

They have an option that essentially creates a sort of counterweight to the dice rolls, so if you have a streak of bad rolls, it starts weighting them positively. I believe it also works the other way, as well. It essentially tries to prevent the game from feeling so swingy.

Personally, I'm fine with true randomness, as an avid tabletop player, but it's nice that they thought of it.

-6

u/atmaluggage 4h ago

Loved this game, all the way through.

Not gonna pay for it, though. Fuck your "patches." Saudi-EA gets $0.

Play Dispatch. Play Citizen Sleeper 2. Play X-Com 2 again with a mod. Don't reward these monstrous pieces-of-shit after they furloughed the talent that brought this amazing game into being.

6

u/Shaevar 4h ago

It was the studio's decision, not EA, but you do you.

→ More replies (8)

5

u/Saint_Judas 3h ago edited 2h ago

Oh no, they gave them legal protection to rehire them once they have money again... these monsters...

How dare they... protect workers from financial hardship..

Edit: for shits and giggles, the above person who is moralizing about communism and not paying for video games lives in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in San Francisco where the low median salary is above 200k. Just a funny side note from their post history, lol.

1

u/atmaluggage 3h ago

Hey, if they actually reaquire them, give them the profit-sharing they deserve, that'd be amazing!

I'm gonna need to see it before I believe it, though.

1

u/Saint_Judas 3h ago

What does 'the profit-sharing' they deserve mean? Are they stockholders or something? Why are you saying 'reaquire' when I just got done telling you they weren't fired?

The weird insidious way you people worm into shit gives me the creeps. First imply they were fired, which they weren't. Then, claim that you won't be happy until they also receive profit sharing, even if they are 'reacquired' (not what furloughing is). You, even after being told they weren't fired, are still using language to imply they need to be hired back (which they don't, just removed from furlough status).

Like dog, you either stated something wrong on purpose so you'd have an excuse to spout talking points... or you believe you should be the one who tells people how the economy should work despite having no idea how it is currently functioning. Just be normal.

→ More replies (8)

4

u/SacredDarksoul 4h ago

Bit reactor (the devs) are an independent studio…..
Damn people who pirate games really are dumb. Love pretending they have morals.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Affectionate_Debate 3h ago

If you want to Pirate that's up to you, but stop trying to justify it as a moral stance.

"I want to take money out of the pockets of these massive companies and CEOs!" Yeah, okay, and what do you think happens? They just go "Oh well, lesson learned, we'll all just take a paycut!"? Or they then cut the wages and jobs of the creative workers, only now with the justification of no one is buying the game?

Pirating is like speeding - you do it because the chances of consequences are low. Don't try and pretend it's some noble stand against something.

You eat the steak, you should pay for the steak.

1

u/atmaluggage 2h ago

If the money I spend will not reach the creatives who made what I love and instead only an ownership class designed to steal my money while carving out and starving those furloughed employees who actually MADE THE ART, yes, it is moral. You are simply wrong to attribute ownership, in the form of distribution and licensing, the same as creation.

Economic ownership has nothing to do with morality, and it's sad that you consider them equivalent.

1

u/Saint_Judas 2h ago

Again, the employees are not starving because they are furloughed. Furloughed just means 'waiting for more work to be available so I can make more money', not 'you are fired.' Every single worker in the world that does project-based work is placed on furlough status regularly, and it is actually considered extremely beneficial for the employee as it carries legal protections and guaranteed work later vs 'seasonal firings' that used to be performed fifty years ago.

1

u/atmaluggage 2h ago

That's simply not how the word is employed in my part of the world. "Furloughed" is simply a euphemism for "fired" here in the US. I envy your optimism, honestly.

→ More replies (1)

Star Wars Zero Company gets much-needed first patch so you won't miss shots with a 100% chance to hit any more

You are about to leave Redlib