UFO: Alien Invasion Review

February 29th, 2004 by Marv

Cybrid, this week, has taken a look at the technical demo of UFO: Alien Invasion. A lot of people emailed about this game here at LinuxGames and here is what we honestly thought about it.

19 Responses to “UFO: Alien Invasion Review”

  1. mrew Says:

    Well, it’s far better than the review implies. I had none of the troubles experienced by the reviewer – sound and everything works perfectly out of the box.

    The control system may seem a bit clunky if you’ve never played the original UFO games, but if you have it’s intuitive and easy to play. All we need now is more levels. For something that’s free, this has considerable promise…

  2. Anonymous Says:

    What a horrible review. The sound worked perfectly for me, the reviewer probably just has his system setup improperly. Also, I have a hunch that the reviewer wanted to give the game a bad review just because everyone else was praising it. Either way, that was a fscking technology demo. WTF do you want?

    What a terrible review. I’m gonna have to stop reading off of this site.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    I mean.. it’s the quake2 sound code!!.. It worked fine on my SB live with alsa 1.0.1.. I just unziped the tarball, chmod +x’ed the executable. and ran the program.. no problems what so ever.. it will be a very promising game when the UI is more polished.

  4. Anonymous Says:

    I could review every game under the sun, but if I was a moron with a crappy linux install, I’m sure that I wouldn’t like any of them. You said “hopefully many of the nastier bugs will get ironed out before a new release is thrust upon us” I say: hopefully you will fix your damn system before you ever try again to present your ignorant opinion as a review on a popular site. Maybe you should go do a review for

  5. Anonymous Says:

    I understand that you know this is only a tech demo and that things need to be fixed, but here is my review.
    -I agree with the installer, but at least they have a binary. Loki Installer is not hard to use and if they don’t have one in a month I will do one for them as I have to learn it anyhow.
    -I cannot comment on the sound because I am on 56k and wanted to play this year.
    -Graphics I agree with you.
    -Little harsh about it being the cause of a kernel panic. Sure games can do that, but I have played it for over 3 hours on 2.6.2 without problems. As for interface it took me 2 hours to discover you can squat…
    -I don’t know why you would need to reconfigure X to play the game. Perhaps you don’t have the lower resolution in you config file. I have 1024×768, 800×600, 640×480 as my screen resoultions. If I hit ‘ctrl’+’alt’+’+’ it changes the screen res, but the desktop stays the same. I dont know if this is the problem, just a wild guess.

    SubSection “Display”
    Depth 24
    Modes “1024×768/60Hz” “800×600″ “640×480″
    Virtual 0 0

    -You note it is early alpha and bugs need to be fixed, but I THINK those ‘show stoper’ bug you found were not the games fault.

    It is hard to review an alpha game, and you have good intentions. I look forward to future reviews and some sort of attempt to fix your computer.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    That’s a harsh review for an [b]alpha tech demo[/b].

    Also, my mileage varies. Sound worked fine from the get-go. On the other hand, playing in windowed didn’t work very well, it lost the cursor all the time. Fullscreen was good.

    I also disagree heavily on the gameplay. Of course it has little replay value, the majority of the game isn’t yet finished, you know? But even what is there definitely asks for a couple of games.

    I, for one, am eagerly awaiting the next release.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    Like other people who have posted here, I haven’t experienced any kernel-panics, sound-problems or other kinds of trouble with this game (config: AMD Athlon, SB Live 5.1, GeForce4, SuSE Linux 8.2, ALSA).
    I think it rocks a lot for a techdemo.

  8. Worf Says:

    *) Sound: on my system i didn’t have a problem with my ogg libs. And for a Game in that early stage it’s ok if there are issues on some boxes

    *) Gameplay: This is awesome. I was a big fan of the old UFO games, and this game really does take what allready was good, and improoves what can be improoved. Sure, the interface needs some stuff – like some pupup labels on the buttons and configurable keys for example.

  9. Anonymous Says:

    Just sliped right into the game like I was playing the original X-Com series on my 386 many donkey years ago.

    The only gripe was the lack of gear and maps! ;p

    p/s: I know its a tech demo!

  10. magnwa Says:

    What game? UFO Invasion hasn’t released a game yet, they’ve released an alpha tech demo. That means you guys are suppose to do a preview of the game, not a full featured review. It’s not time to do a review, and if you keep putting out crap reviews like that, nobody will ever release early, release often, for fear of getting bashed by people who know very little.

    Honestly, this site has been very poor for the past few years, and this doesn’t raise the quality one bit. It wasn’t even a full page review, and to be quite honest, most of the problems experienced by the reviewer have more to do with his install of linux than with UFO: AI issues.


  11. cburke Says:

    But seriously, it is obviously too early to give the game a [i]review[/i]. I mean, you’re essentially criticizing the game for being in early stages of development. That’s not only unfair, it is not useful either unless you intend to review the game every time they have a major release. Since most of your complaints are an artifact of this being an [i]alpha tech demo[/i], how are we, the readers of your review, supposed to know if the game is worth trying when [i]beta 0.1[/i] or whatever comes out? Will there be another review titled “All the stuff I complained about before is gone” or “Still a tech demo” depending?

    I appreciate Linuxgames doing reviews of games that otherwise may not get reviewed. And I appreciate that it can be hard to find Linux games that are at version 1.anything. :) But at least try to stick to games that claim to be somewhat functionally complete.

  12. theoddone33 Says:

    Someone who likes this game got all their thugs together to post negative comments. Only people affiliated with the project would be that defensive. Good job kids, you showed us all.

    I don’t even care about the review… I read it and it didn’t sound as negative as you all think. You guys act like the man just set your mother on fire.

    Also, it’s great to see people assuming that a “crappy linux install” or a “misconfigured system” is the cause of the problems the reviewer had with the game. Here is some news for you… you’d better be [b]absolutely positive[/b] that the problem is a misconfigured install before releasing anything. Assuming things is never a good practice for people who want to put out a quality game.

  13. Anonymous Says:

    Hey, this is a technical demo, you cannot rate the “replay”. There are three maps to demonstarte the modified q2 engine.

    The music is great by the way. Better than in some commercial games.

  14. Anonymous Says:

    This “review” really is really a poor judgment on behalf of As has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, the recent alpha release of UFO: Alien Invasion was intended as a Technical Demo, and at no time should have been subject to the same reviewing standards afforded to a commercial, officially released or “v1.0″ game.

    By all means, discussion, opinion, dissertation, and constructive criticism of the Technical Demo ought to be promoted. But please don’t overlook the fact that the UFO developers are offering us an inside look at their concept-in-development, and any discussion of the project this early on ought to focus primarily on the potential of the game. If this cannot be done, then I strongly believe that it ought not to be “reviewed” or editorialised at all. please live up to that promised of “For the People” and support the Linux gaming community rather than unfairly judging it. These types of pre-release, alpha, or early beta games need to be either “previewed” or written as a “first look” article. Absolutely no good comes from needless or unfair negative PR. These games need to be nurtured and promoted first, lest they die out — and only once the community has nurtured them to stable, mature, or advance releases should we begin to “review” them.

  15. leinir Says:

    Right people, go read on the blurb for this review: It specifically says that it was made after repeated e-mails requesting a review of the game. They give you what you ask, and you start bitching. Now, take a step back and tell me, how mature does that seem to you? ;)

  16. Anonymous Says:

    I just have to ask:
    Why didn’t the reviewer *COMPILE* the source code to the tech demo?

    I didn’t really have a choice in the matter, what with running PPC/Linux on an iBook to play it, but I had like a 5 minute issue with fixing the makefiles to handle a ppc compile, and copying my new improved binaries into the unzipped game dir, and it worked flawlessly.

    Can’t say I tried sound though, what with having my laptop muted most of the time anyway, but it turned out to be surprisingly enjoyable for a tech demo.

    — vranash

  17. Anonymous Says:

    It’s already been said that it’s unfair to review a techdemo, but putting that bit aside, I think the review is clearly underrating this game.

    You mustn’t forget that this is not the product of a company, that this is not a game for the bleedy edge of graphics cards.

    Haven’t you noticed that, compared by today’s open source standards, this game looks fantastic? The music is very impressive as well. And we needn’t mention that even though the gameplay is kind of a ‘rip off’ of X-Com, the concept is proven and works. Better taking that than reinventing the wheel and making a lot of mistakes along the way. They’re going the safer path and there’s nothing whatsoever wrong with that. Subtract some points for originality, but that wouldn’t harm the game at all.

    That was one very strange review there.

  18. Anonymous Says:

    I noticed many have disagreed with the review. I agree with them.

  19. JwR Says:

    What I find as my main source of criticism for the review is its lack of information about how the game actually plays. The author spends time addressing everything that he finds wrong with the game but in the end negelects to capture what the actual gameplay is like. The author says something to the effect of “it is like syndicate with more confusing menus”, which is pretty much worthless to me and I assume other readers who are not as well versed in gaming. Rather than creating a buglist and handing out scores it would be more worthwhile to focus on the content of the game so that people know what the game is about and whether it is something that may interest them despite its short-comings.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.