The New XCOM

[thalaw2]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/xcom/video/6268231?tag=recent_updates;title;1

Seems to me they're going in a totally different direction.  No more RTS or turn based gameplay?!?!?!  I would prefer they made the game more like Mass Effect than what it seems like.  I'll wait to pass final judgement though.

[BentonGrey]

That's great, let's make it NOTHING like X-COM, that's fantastic.  It seems like a neat game, but it doesn't seem to have any particular claim to the name "X-COM."

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Exactly my thought.  I looks like a good game, no doubt, but it has nothing whatsoever to do about X-Com other than people fighting aliens and that is hardly a rare theme.

The setting's not X-Com, the game play's not X-Com, the aliens aren't even X-Com.  It's not X-Com.

So why make a game using another game's name and not even try to make them related?  Simple.  Name recognition and free publicity.  The new games already been given front page articles just because of its name.  It's getting discussed here and other places online just because of its name.  The name = $ no matter what game it's attached to.

[BentonGrey]

Yeah, it's the nature of the beast, but it still disgusts me.

[lugaru]

I'm on both sides, I love the way this game looks but I regret that turn based strategy games are super rare these days.

I would hope that 'dragon age' would create a market for at least more pause, think a little, unpause games (a la freedom force). I love a little strategy.

Edit: btw any X-COM veterans here? Talk about a BRUTAL game.

[crimsonquill]

I've been a huge fan of X-COM for many many years.. got the first game not long after it was released and was addicted to it from quite some time. Stuck around for the first sequel Terror From The Deep but got sidetracked from gaming for awhile afterwards due to school and family issues during the time period. I missed all of the X-COM games since then and when I finally did return to the franchise it was primarily because of fan games which updated the original game and made me wonder if an official reboot might be possible.

I was so much a fan of X-COM that I own all of the paperback books spun out of the games and for a time had a few posters on my wall that I made myself which was based off my memories of the games when I took art classes. Of course those posters were given to a friend of mine when he moved away.

I am looking forward to playing the PC version of this game. While some folks are complaining that the aliens from the classic games are not featured I think they might be hidden within the game for the die hard fans just so they have a nice surprise when they find them. The FPS take on the game I believe comes from the game engine they decided to use and since most "sci-fi thriller" games these days use that format it probably just seemed logical to go with what the majority of gamers are playing now. Sure I wish they could have found a way to bring the full classic game experience into a full 3D world but who knows what plans lie ahead if the game sells well enough to warrant a sequel. I also love the retro '60s Men In Black feel for the game because I was a huge fan of Destroy All Humans as well and it just fits the old drive-in movie science fiction environment that these games need to keep the surreal paranoia of that time period.

- CQ

[thalaw2]

The first X-COM is my all time favorite PC "sci-fi" thriller.  I was more afraid playing that game in the dark than I ever was with Doom 3 (and probably did a lot more cussin' too).  I never got Terror from the Deep as poor reviews kept me away.  I came back with Apocalypse.  I really think that game has not truly been topped....maybe by some of the Tom Clancy stuff, but it's different genres.  I passed over the other X-COM games because they went away from the turn based and RTS (I think Apocalypse invented RTS) style i liked. 

This new game isn't the first X-COM FPS, but I thought that after the poor performance of the that one that they would take the franchise back to the roots....silly me.   Why should they try to compete with Star Craft II when they can compete with BioShock?  I guess it takes too much work to put in the micro management elements that made the first 3 games a hit.

The first game was so good it didn't need a good story to behind it because managing a team made you care about the "characters".   

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

I am looking forward to playing the PC version of this game. While some folks are complaining that the aliens from the classic games are not featured I think they might be hidden within the game for the die hard fans just so they have a nice surprise when they find them. The FPS take on the game I believe comes from the game engine they decided to use and since most "sci-fi thriller" games these days use that format it probably just seemed logical to go with what the majority of gamers are playing now. Sure I wish they could have found a way to bring the full classic game experience into a full 3D world but who knows what plans lie ahead if the game sells well enough to warrant a sequel. I also love the retro '60s Men In Black feel for the game because I was a huge fan of Destroy All Humans as well and it just fits the old drive-in movie science fiction environment that these games need to keep the surreal paranoia of that time period.

You haven't seen the previews then, because it's not just the game style or monsters.  Nothing at all comes from the classic game.  This one's set in an iconic 1950's America with all that entails.  No interceptors, no X-Com style bases, nothing from the first game at all.  They're just using the name to get publicity is all.

While we're on this kind of subject, why is it that all these classic genres aren't being made any more, tactical games, classic style rpg's and the like?  There is a reason, as it turns out.  I saw an analysis of the cost of game production, and the cost to produce a top shelf game has double every few years while the price of the games themselves has remained stable.  As a result. why it once took 100,000 copies to make a profit, it now takes 1,000,000, so game companies aren't willing to take risks, innovate, or invest in anything but the most profitable genres.

[crimsonquill]

You haven't seen the previews then, because it's not just the game style or monsters.  Nothing at all comes from the classic game.  This one's set in an iconic 1950's America with all that entails.  No interceptors, no X-Com style bases, nothing from the first game at all.  They're just using the name to get publicity is all.

I have seen the previews.. but I hardly judge the whole game on just what little we have seen so far. Yeah, I'll give you that it definitly has the feeling that it was a unrelated period alien invasion game in development hell and retooling it with the XCOM name as an established franchise name to help boost sales.

But if you wanted to expand on the origin of XCOM then you would need to explain the reasons why the strike team existed in the first place and it's kinda hard to add the bases, intercepters, and troops if you were just a small group of Men In Black that find themselves neck deep in an invasion they had no idea was coming or how vastly unarmed they really are at first. In the game footage we can see that the player can cannibalize the aliens technology for creating new weapons and most of XCOMs major tools come from their decades of dealing with invasions. That's one the the big factors from the first game is that you are establishing XCOM just as they are ready to handle the invasion head on and pretty much dropped into a storyline already in progress.

Like I said, doesn't mean that XCOM 2 wouldn't get the fans to that near future classic game world where you have the flight simulator for shooting down spacecraft, base building, troop hiring and training, and then the whole R&D stuff on top of it.. but just use the FPS stuff for the combat phase of the game. But for now it just makes more sense to go for the survival horror mood for the first game just to suck people into the world where the aliens have already been here and are hiding among us.

While we're on this kind of subject, why is it that all these classic genres aren't being made any more, tactical games, classic style rpg's and the like?  There is a reason, as it turns out.  I saw an analysis of the cost of game production, and the cost to produce a top shelf game has double every few years while the price of the games themselves has remained stable.  As a result. why it once took 100,000 copies to make a profit, it now takes 1,000,000, so game companies aren't willing to take risks, innovate, or invest in anything but the most profitable genres.

I definitly can see that.

- CQ

[lugaru]

As a result. why it once took 100,000 copies to make a profit, it now takes 1,000,000, so game companies aren't willing to take risks, innovate, or invest in anything but the most profitable genres.

That, combined with wanting to maximize profits. Too many games are made on too few engines. Fallout 3 (which I love) is a great example. The people at Bethesda respected the themes of the game but they also realized it would be a lot cheaper to make it an oblivion clone than a new top down turn based game. If a company had a high quality, cheap turn based engine you would see more games like this. Like how The Witcher only exists thanks to NeverWinter Nights 2.

As for the game I do hear that there is some base element (as in you have a base) like the original so research, recruitment and deployment are likely gonna be a factor (as in a podcast I listened to mentions those elements but they COULD be dropped even though they exist now).