By Alec Meer on April 14th, 2010 at 8:51 am.
Yeah, you heard me. X-COM, the game to end all games, is finally getting its long-rumoured remake/sequel. [Boom. Internet explodes.] Wahoo, basically. Yes, it is indeed a first-person shooter – it is extraordinarily sad to wave away X-COM’s traditional genre, but c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game? Let’s wait and see where they take it, at least.
Contrary to ancient prophecy, this tantalising do-over isn’t being made by Ken Levine, but rather is pitched as a game from 2K Marin, the Bioshock 2 chaps. Though it also seems 2K Australia (née Irrational Australia) are heavily involved. Sparse announcement details and the first in-game screenshot are below…
Click upon the curious, space-donutty shot above for a bigger version, and pore over it carefully – you may dig up more details than are at first apparent. It’s also worth keeping an eye on the minimalist new website.
Here’s the sum total of details so far…
2K Games announced today that XCOM®, the re-imagining of one of gaming’s most storied and beloved franchises, is currently in development at 2K Marin, the studio behind the multi-million unit selling BioShock® 2. Currently in development exclusively for the Xbox 360® video game and entertainment system from Microsoft and Windows PC, XCOM combines the strategic core of the groundbreaking franchise with a suspense-filled narrative and distills it into a tense and unique first-person shooter experience.
“With BioShock 2, the team at 2K Marin proved themselves as masters of first-person, suspenseful storytelling, and with XCOM they will re-imagine and expand the rich lore of this revered franchise,” said Christoph Hartmann, president of 2K. “Players will explore the world of XCOM from an immersive new perspective and experience firsthand the fear and tension of this gripping narrative ride.”
XCOM is the re-imagining of the classic tale of humanity’s struggle against an unknown enemy that puts players directly into the shoes of an FBI agent tasked with identifying and eliminating the growing threat. True to the roots of the franchise, players will be placed in charge of overcoming high-stake odds through risky strategic gambits coupled with heart-stopping combat experiences that pit human ingenuity – and frailty – against a foe beyond comprehension. By setting the game in a first-person perspective, players will be able to feel the tension and fear that comes with combating a faceless enemy that is violently probing and plotting its way into our world.
“Violently probing”. Snicker.
You’ll be hearing much more about XCOM (look ma, no hyphen!) soon. I would strongly advise staying your jerking knee until then. Those few words above, these two mysterious screenshots? That is all you know. It’s not Enforcer. I promise you that.
14/04/2010 at 08:54 the army of none says:
In before angry internets man rage.
I say that because I myself had a bit of a “oh god, why would they defile this altar of gaming” moment before stopping and reading a bit more.
14/04/2010 at 10:16 subedii says:
I stopped and read some more. It didn’t exactly inspire me with confidence.
I don’t actually mind a first person perspective but if this is to be an X-Com I can already see it losing a lot of the stuff that made the original great, namely
- Randomised levels (OK, these could be deathtraps, but that was the point). These simply don’t work in an FPS, at least not so far. I suspect this is going to be a very story-led approach, which would make it far more linear. Which again, could be good but unfortunately that also likely means:
- No more management / research / etc. because those things probably don’t work in-line with a more linear story-led FPS either. Still, I could be wrong on that one.
So what does the game have going for it? Well despite the fact that this is 2K Marin, we need to remember that way back when, Irrational games was responsible for SWAT 4, which was an extremely awesome tactical FPS. Levels weren’t random, but things like enemy placement and objectives were, and that was enough. You could also set your team’s equipment going into the missions, and the gameplay was slow paced and tactical, and very tense.
I could easily see a first-person XCom following this model, and I think an evolution along those lines would suit the franchise really well if it’s to be brought into First Person (plus RPS actually reported once on a Zombie variation of SWAT that 2K were trying to make before). But there’s another problem. SWAT 4 is from an era of tactical shooters that no longer exist, publishers are pretty much afraid of those games. If you look at the other tactical shooters of the era, Rainbow 6, Ghost Recon, they got ridiculously Hollywood-ised and ended up turning into action games instead of the tense tactical affairs they used to be.
I mean, in Rainbow six you could literally plan through an entire mission, and simply let the AI carry out your orders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai1Uk1kMcn0
Naturally this was considered too “complex” for a modern market and no big publisher would touch that with a ten foot pole, so instead we get health regen and run and gun gameplay, but slightly more lethal.
I think that’s the biggest hurdle any new XCom game faces. XCom by its very nature was that it was pretty in-depth and tactical (and had a fairly hefty strategic element attached to it as well with the base and resource management), but publishers typically want mass market sellers. Which complex games aren’t, not normally.
14/04/2010 at 11:27 mrmud says:
SWAT4 was from Irrational (i.e what used to be 2K Boston and not 2K Marin)
14/04/2010 at 15:04 Robert says:
Angry internet person here. But I get angry about the mangy dogs feeding on the body of this newspost. Them hounds are not satisfied until they have rend everything into pieces.
People need to stop proclaiming genre-ownership to a franchise. And, while we are on it. Lose the double standards.
X-COM -> XCOM: Oh my god, it’s not the same as 10 years ago!
Bioshock -> Bioshock 2: Oh my god, it’s the same schtick!
Including all kinds of disclaimers, I’d say that XCOM will be the true sequel to Bioshock. Bioshock was arguably an awesome game. They took an idea (system shock), marinated it with 2K Marin-sauce and made it into an intelligent game. You can’t sequel that in the usual sense. You can do what you are good at – in my opinion – and it might actually become a nice game.
If you want games ever to rise above the pulpy image it has now, you might want to treat it like you treat other arts. Intertextuality – or equivalents – are a big part of it.
14/04/2010 at 16:53 monkeybreadman says:
If this is like SWAT4 in a XCOM costume, i will be happy
14/04/2010 at 18:16 Michael says:
Just for clarification, have they announced this game as a tactical fps? From the tiny blurb, I get the feeling they’re going for a straight-up vanilla fps with the generic space marine replaced by an FBI agent. Regardless, I can’t really muster up any anger about this development. The strength of the X-COM series was never it’s story. The plot of every X-COM has been aliens are seeking to invade, and the player must build up their agency to ward off these invaders. In fact, they could have set this in a similar but legally distinct universe and saved a bit of cash. It’s the same problem I had with Fallout 3 really.
14/04/2010 at 19:02 Oddtwang says:
@Robert: How on earth did you miss the opportunity for a 2K Marin-ade gag in there? What kind of RPS reader are you?! :P
14/04/2010 at 08:56 Cael says:
They act like bioshock 2 was anything other than a mediocre console shooter, this is going to be horrible.
14/04/2010 at 08:56 Baboonanza says:
I’ll jerk my knee whenever I want!
Seriously, what is a the point of a new X-COM game if it bears no relation to the original? Even if it’s a ‘first person tactical shooter’ that’s still nothing like X-COM.
What fans are asking for isn’t a new gameset in the X-COM universe, it’s a proper bloody sequel that plays like the original for christsake. It wouldn’t even have to be a AAA game, a turn-based strategy is inherantly cheaper to produce than an FPS.
In closing:
Cock your honour.
14/04/2010 at 08:58 Baboonanza says:
‘overcoming high-stake odds through risky strategic gambits ‘
Pull the other one, it’s got weasels on it.
14/04/2010 at 10:43 archonsod says:
To be fair, I always dreamed about an X-Com FPS.
14/04/2010 at 10:56 poop says:
I disagree and cant wait to make use of classic unique xcom weapons like LASER RIFLE and ROCKET LAUNCHER
14/04/2010 at 12:12 Corporate Dog says:
I can’t truly work myself up to the sort of righteous lather that some Fallout fans manage, but I guess I don’t really see the point of this, either.
I don’t play a lot of shooters. I don’t play ANY shooters, really; Mass Effect and Fallout 3 are about as deep in the pool as I care to swim, and that’s because they have stronger RPG pedigrees.
X-Com is a tactical game at its core, with a lot of seamless management bits built in. Strip out that, and you’re left with a bog-standard yarn about alien invaders that we’ve already seen many times over. It’s ‘Men in Black’ with a militant edge. It’s ‘X-Files’ with a more comic-book feel.
Now, I don’t have an altar at my home, where I make dark sacrifices to the gods of Isometric Turn-Based Gameplay (memo to self: build one). If this were to be a tactical, squad-based shooter (ala Rainbow Six) with the rest of the management details largely intact (and updated), it’d probably still pique my interest. But the press-release doesn’t really lend itself to the conclusion that this is the sort of game they intend to build.
2K Games gets the benefit of the doubt, I suppose (never played Bioshock; have a whole lotta love for Freedom Force), but I was really hoping for something a little more special with this remake.
14/04/2010 at 13:05 Mr_Day says:
@archonsod
I was worried I was the only one – I remember being incredibly excited, and subsequently very disapointed when they announced X-Com Alliance and canned it all those years ago. That was an fps and basically had the plot of Stargate: Universe.
We used to say it had the plot of Voyager. But Voyager was just Star Trek Again, The Next Iteration. Delta whatrant? I have no idea what you are talking about, I am going to teach an alien to love.
Also, I can’t quite forgive them for Enforcer. I only even have that as part of the complete X Com pack, and out of curiosity I let it burn away a part of my reason to live.
14/04/2010 at 19:54 Hmm says:
“did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game? Let’s wait and see where they take it, at least. ”
What is an AAA title? SERIOUSLY. Will Civ 5 be an AAA title? And is it outdated in this day and age?
Let’s stop with this bullcrap, first the piece of cow dung known as Fallout 3 that raped the original concept (but still found its audience because it plays like an FPS and is bloody! Yeah! Awesum!), now X-COM?
Civ has a unique gameplay, will we consider it a nice compromise if it’s turned into an FPS, too? Because “none makes turn-based games anymore, so accept it”.
14/04/2010 at 21:56 Adam Bloom says:
A triple-A title is a title with one more A than a double-A title. Duh!
17/04/2010 at 02:58 ohnoabear says:
I have to wonder what about this game makes it X-Comy. I mean, the most striking feature of the X-Com games is its strategic layer of resource management built onto a solid core game (the TBS tactical battles). That and its mood of creepy ambiance, which later games in the series completely abandoned.
There really was no story, at least none worth mentioning. It was more about the story you told through your actions. It doesn’t have a signature art style, like Fallout–the art mostly aped the style of 90s comic books.
So, there’s no point just using the name, because let’s face it, X-COM is kind of a niche thing by now. It’s not the sort of name that could make money as an expensive AAA game all by itself. Really, the only people who are going to care are the people who’re most turned off by it being a first person shooter.
Hopefully that means they’re going to try to infuse the spirit of X-COM into the first person shooter genre. Come on, research and manufacturing between missions? In a moody, squad-controlled tactical battle from an experienced FPS developer?
Heck, if it’s an halfway decent FPS with any sort of interesting meta-game tacked onto it, that would be enough to be both a potentially great game and worthy of the X-COM name. Hopefully that’s what we’re getting, and not a linear story-driven FPS.
14/04/2010 at 08:57 mrpier says:
Get your ass to Mars!
Edit: From the blurb this sounds more like X-files the Fox Mulder story
14/04/2010 at 08:58 Acosta says:
*CRIES*
Why? Why? It was beautiful in my mind and now there are only ruins,
My day is ruined, thanks 2K.
14/04/2010 at 08:59 Jason says:
Not an X-COM remake.
This is an X-COM remake in the same sense that X-COM Enforcer and X-COM Interceptor were remakes. It’s not. It’s just another cynical attempt to exploit a beloved license with some shit they will pump out that lets you shoot aliens in the face.
14/04/2010 at 09:01 Alec Meer says:
When did you see the game? Can you tell us more about it?
14/04/2010 at 09:03 Jason says:
In 2001, when it was called Enforcer.
I know you’re duty bound to push the PR, but give it up. This is shit.
14/04/2010 at 09:06 Alec Meer says:
We’re not duty-bound to push anything, Silly Paranoid Person, but we’re also not in the business of deciding exactly what a game is and how good/bad it’ll be based solely on 50 words and one screenshot.
14/04/2010 at 09:07 GT3000 says:
Well Alex, after departing the temporal rift in time, it’ll have lackluster story elements with forgettable characters. The gameplay while mostly fun lack polish and could’ve used more time in the theoretical game development oven. It gets a 72 from metacritic based on 20 reviews. You guys rate it 6 jibberjabbers out of a hootenanny.
14/04/2010 at 09:11 Baboonanza says:
@Alec
While the poster above is being a bit silly, the quality of the game isn’t what people will be upset about.
IT could be the best tactical FPS or whatever the hell it is that has ever been made, but it’s guaranteed that it won’t play anything like the good X-COM games. That is what people are upset about, we want a new X-COM, there are enough FPS games already.
14/04/2010 at 09:12 NuDimon says:
I really hope they pull this off. It’s a nice universe after all. It’s got more potential then just being a turnbased tactical strategy game. If they were to go back to the roots they would need to go the DoW route of a more taskforce based RTS. After all, the series did go downhill at a steady pace since the first one came out.
14/04/2010 at 09:12 Ian says:
I want that rating system to exist.
14/04/2010 at 09:14 GT3000 says:
@Alec
Sorry, X key is right next to C.
@Baboon
I jest my friend. I am excited to see any meaningful expansion of the game I love.Turn-Based or not.
@Ian
It does. You’re welcome.
14/04/2010 at 09:49 Jason says:
In what way am I being silly?
I said it my first post – they’ve done this before. Twice. Three times if you count Alliance.
It’s just the standard “Well, we’ve got the XCom license – it’s got aliens in it. That’d make a good shooter and we can get a few extra sales out of the people that half-remember XCom being good.”
I appreciate your improbable optimism Alec, but come on.
To address the BS Fallout 3 comparisons – FO3 changed perspectives and cut some gameplay. This is morphing XCom into a different genre entirely.
14/04/2010 at 09:57 Alec Meer says:
Why would anyone want to make something like Enforcer again? It’s not like it was a smash-hit.
All I appeal for is a wait for more information before making absolute judgements.
14/04/2010 at 10:59 Alec Meer says:
Oh, I’m not even slightly surprised. Trying to introduce just a little hope is hardly disingenuous, however.
And you’re right, posting game announcement news on a games website is trolling. We’ll never do it again.
14/04/2010 at 11:28 Lilliput King says:
Could be pretty good if it nicked all the global map strategy from Terror From the Deep and just replaced the appalling away missions with SWAT 4 style heavily randomised pseudo-realistic tactical squad command.
Actually, that could be incredible.
14/04/2010 at 12:49 Manley Pointer says:
No fan of X-COM played it thinking “It would be so awesome to see this universe in an FPS!” Why? X-COM was one of the best games ever, but that had everything to do with the tactical gameplay, the random levels, building your forces, building your base, etc. It had NOTHING to do with the larger world the game took place in. There’s nothing unique or interesting about the X-COM version of our planet, and it’s not like the game had a wry or memorable perspective on human/alien conflict.
So when they say “X-COM FPS,” read that as “generic FPS about aliens invading Earth, coming from a developer that already made one boring, already-almost-forgotten sequel to a much more original game.” How could anyone get excited about that?
14/04/2010 at 15:56 dyphemism says:
I think it’s fair to say that XCom is turn-based strategy and base-building — and perhaps little else. To pull a switch-up on the genre, in my view, does deduct from its XCom-iness, no matter what other surface features you might decide to carry over.
At the same time, who’s to say it will be a bad game? It might not be faithful, but being unfaithful can be a hoot (especially if it stars Diane Lane).
Random thought: What if multiplayer drew from the Natural Selection model of troop command? Can we at least agree that could be awesome? My mind whirls with possibilities.
14/04/2010 at 23:54 DK says:
“We’re not duty-bound to push anything, Silly Paranoid Person, but we’re also not in the business of deciding exactly what a game is and how good/bad it’ll be based solely on 50 words and one screenshot.”
No, but you are “in the business”. When has wait-and-see ever led to a genuine improvement? Not condemning without evidence is all fine and dandy, but it’s not as if something like this has never happened before – and it always turned out the “naysayers” were right after all.
If you ask people for a little hope, I ask you for a little memory.
14/04/2010 at 09:04 JohnArr says:
“I would strongly advise staying your jerking knee until then.”
The Meer knows something! To the rack with you!
14/04/2010 at 09:06 Greg Wild says:
My soul! My soul!
They just dropped kicked my youth in the goulies. It got through to my soul.
14/04/2010 at 09:25 Spacewalk says:
That screenshot’s pretty awesome though.
14/04/2010 at 10:08 dartt says:
*SLAP* SNAP OUT OF IT YOU BIG GIRL!
Calm down, go play Enemy Unknown (it still works you know) and then look forward to what might well be a fantastic reworking of the X-COM formula.
I’m actually starting to get very excited; I’m hoping for full campaign co-op so we can form a HERO SQUAD!
14/04/2010 at 10:11 HarbourMaster says:
There are some god damn funny comments on this site.
14/04/2010 at 10:49 Greg Wild says:
Pah!
I was playing X-Com 1 at the weekend!
14/04/2010 at 09:06 Larington says:
They might – MIGHT – be able to pull something off with this, maybe do a hidden & dangerous-esque (dangeresque, you might say) system of being able to control squad members in a tactics mode or you walk at the head of a squad and they move with you *intelligently* and maybe, again, MAYBE this will work.
Really though – haven’t publishers learned that doing a sequel that crosses genre lines is generally inadvisable? You inevitably end up upsetting the original audience by doing it and theres little in the way of PR that can make up for that.
14/04/2010 at 09:11 Larington says:
Potentially, it’s a gaming equivalent of taking a serious film like Citizen Kane or a horror film like Alien(s) and making a romantic comedy sequel.
14/04/2010 at 09:16 GT3000 says:
I think the Alien Queen and Ripley could’ve worked it out. It might be a RomCom but it might be a coming of age film where women learn to rely on another and that chest-bursters can be used for love as much as war.
14/04/2010 at 09:31 Springy says:
Aliens might not be the best example considering how it was a significantly different film thematically to its predecessor.
14/04/2010 at 09:41 Stu says:
Ooh, Alien/Aliens could be a great example; the original was a creepy, atmospheric horror film and its sequel was a gung-ho guns-blazing action film.
15/04/2010 at 13:41 Alastayr says:
And the third one was a Fincher-esque examination of the value of life to the hopeless and the broken, and the fourth one was Buffy resurrected in space.
14/04/2010 at 09:09 mrpier says:
I like the first person bit, I thought X-Com Alliance was a brilliant idea at the time, and still do. But FBI-agent?
So many thoughts racing trough my mind right now, let’s hope it will be a brilliant shooter at least.
14/04/2010 at 15:59 Jason Lefkowitz says:
You can just imagine the brainstorming meeting.
“X-COM? What the hell is that? You mean X-Files?”
“No, it was a –”
“Man, X-Files was great. Why didn’t anyone ever make a game out of that?”
“I’m not talking about X-Files, I’m talking about X-COM, which was a –”
“Yeah yeah, whatever. It had FBI agents, right? I remember there being two FBI agents and everyone wondering when they’d get it on.”
“That’s not X-COM, it’s X-Files, which is totally –”
“I know! Our game can have the two FBI agents, and then there can be quick-time events where they try to get it on. PRESS X TO MASH FACE WITH WHATSHERNAME SCULLY. The geeks’ll love that.”
“But that has nothing to do with X-COM, which was a –”
“Are you still talking? Why are you still talking? We’ve got GOLD here. Get me Scully’s agent on the phone!”
14/04/2010 at 09:10 robrob says:
Finally, an Enforcer sequel!
14/04/2010 at 09:11 GT3000 says:
My face crumpled into a frown when I read this. Touche’.
14/04/2010 at 10:01 Pod says:
Fnufact: I bought Enforcer for 50p from Gamestation and it gave me a lot of enjoyment for that 50p.
14/04/2010 at 09:11 Scypher says:
…but c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 … was going to be a turn-based strategy game?
You don’t have to rub it in! :(
14/04/2010 at 14:52 Clovis says:
Haha, now you know how us adventure gamers feel! Turn based strategy is the new Gaming zombie! (until CivV comes out)
(I also love turn based strategy, so now I’m extra sad)
14/04/2010 at 09:11 Dawngreeter says:
I have come here from 1981 to say that I am willing to show enthusiasm in regards to this reimagining.
14/04/2010 at 09:30 Subject 706 says:
Actually, if large publishers had any kind of sense, they’d diversify a little bit, and not turn everything into a grey mass of FPSes.
At least the new Jagged Alliance will stay true to its roots…please don’t take that away from me. PLEEEEEASE!
14/04/2010 at 14:18 terry says:
Wait three years, there’s a game coming out called Rebelstar Raiders which will blow your mind.
14/04/2010 at 09:12 John says:
Bethesda managed to turn Fallout 3 into a shooter and made a lot of money along the way. Granted, they retained plenty of features too, but the game stood on its own and was successful as a result.
I can understand why people are upset about a change of direction here though. I never played X-com, but I imagine if someone turned Deus Ex into a dance game I’d be a bit miffed. I think it’s fair to be upset about the game’s direction, regardless of its final quality.
14/04/2010 at 10:00 phlebas says:
if someone turned Deus Ex into a dance game
This must be done. Now.
14/04/2010 at 10:14 Mitza says:
Are you serious?
I still don’t understand how Fallout 3 got all those praises. I just don’t get it. That was a bad game, yet everyone orgasms when they hear about it.
14/04/2010 at 10:36 Casimir's Blake says:
That might actually make Deus Ex more fun…
14/04/2010 at 10:39 phlebas says:
Serious? Why not? It sounds a hilarious idea.
(Aside: I enjoyed Fallout 3 a lot. It had its flaws but seemed true to the original games in a lot of ways – but then I generally find combat the least interesting part of an RPG by far, so didn’t really mind the change from turn-based to first-person-with-an-interesting-mechanic. The X-COM games, on the other hand, had a much tighter focus on the game mechanics and less on building an interesting world and characters, so a reboot as an FPS franchise seems more obviously inappropriate.)
14/04/2010 at 09:12 clippa says:
“Xcom”
Yay!
“first person shooter”
Oh
“Bioshock 2″
Oh, f*ck
You build me up, buttercup baby, just to let me down, and mess me around :(
14/04/2010 at 10:09 Pema says:
There.
You said it all.
If it is like Bioshock2, it will be a poor game.
14/04/2010 at 09:13 SwiftRanger says:
X-Com: Alliance was looking awesome and innovative, don’t see why this couldn’t work as long as it will be much more than a linear six-hour slugfest.
That being said, just because new FPSs pop up every day doesn’t mean there should never be a turnbased tactical game in the vein of X-Com or Jagged Alliance again. It has been way too long since Silent Storm and Jagged Alliance 2. 2K got free rein here, just like they do with Civilization.
14/04/2010 at 09:13 dog says:
wasn’t fallout 3 quite popular though?
14/04/2010 at 11:44 EthZee says:
It was quite a popular game, yes; but this may be due to the simultaneous release on consoles. Plus, at the moment it’s fairly unique; there’s not much like it out there on the 360 or PS3.
I myself own Fallout 3, on PS3. I quite enjoy it; but I mainly enjoy it because I am able to be a berk and fire tin cans and teddy bears at people’s faces (and then their heads explode and the blood goes ffft through the air in slow motion).
14/04/2010 at 09:13 Ian says:
Okay, so which X-COM game is it that I should be going back and playing?
I never played any of ‘em and every time I remember to go look at them I see all the different ones, panic a bit, and then put it off again.
14/04/2010 at 09:18 GT3000 says:
Terror from the Deep.
Barring that UFO Unknown.
Armageddon was harder than was enjoyable. It can be if you’ve mastered Unknown and TFTD.
14/04/2010 at 09:21 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
UFO: UNKNOWN, hands down. The very best of them all.
14/04/2010 at 09:36 Ian says:
“Enemy Unknown” is what Steam is calling “UFO Defense”, right?
14/04/2010 at 09:41 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
Yes, thats the American title i believe. Pity you missed out on the whole pack being sold for uber cheap on steam a while ago.
O already owned the games, but bought them again, as they are just that great.
14/04/2010 at 12:33 Lilliput King says:
Terror from the deep, Ian!
TERROR FROM THE DEEP
Ahem. Really good, even now.
14/04/2010 at 09:15 Acosta says:
Alec, I know you really dislike the prejudgements but try to understand us. X-Com being a FPS basically makes it impossible to replicate the X-Com formula, and that automatically makes irrelevant if the game is good or not, what we know is that it won’t be the X-Com we love, it won’t try to improve or even replicate what made this name so big in first place.
In RPS we have had this discussion a thousand times: why even bother to use a name if you are not interested in the spirit of it? It´s an insult to the people who have keep playing and keeping alive this name for years. It´s cynic, senseless and absurd, except from a business point of view.
14/04/2010 at 09:18 Alec Meer says:
Adhering to original genre/perspective is not the only way to stay true to original spirit. All I’m asking is wait and see. The genre is the only thing anyone knows so far.
14/04/2010 at 09:24 Acosta says:
What about this:
“Puts players directly into the shoes of an FBI agent tasked with identifying and eliminating the growing threat”
Would be wrong to extrapolate that sentence and think that there is no going to be base building or team management?
In any case, if only for respect to you I’ll just shut up. I’ll wait and see, but my hope is near to zero.
14/04/2010 at 09:25 Alec Meer says:
What part of that sentence says the only thing that’s involved is shooting things in the face? “Identifying” is an interesting word, no?
14/04/2010 at 09:43 Acosta says:
I don’t assume it will be about shooting aliens in the face, but I would like something that made me think this is close to the original.
Civilizations keeps being a 4X and nobody thought it needed an “exciting new perspective”, Firaxis just keep improving or tweaking it in different interesting ways. With X-Com we already saw two attempts (three with Alliance) to put it under a “new perspective” and both fell flat. That’s why I’m very apprehensive to this, especially when I remember how hopeful I was with Interceptor and the painful memories of waiting for Alliance (I knew Enforcer would be crap and it was), I just can’t ignore it.
In any case, I will wait and watch their proposal.
14/04/2010 at 09:46 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
Hmm, that makes it sound loads like the X-Files. Cause in the games, it is retrieved bodies and scientists that uncover the threat.
Id guess that these FBI types are uncovering the aliens in disguise that infiltrate governments.
Also of interest is the fact that its America vs The Aliens.
Why else wouldnt they have the agent be an X-COM agent.
They entire purpose of them is a multi national (So you could track them anywhere) task force specifically opposing the aliens, instead of just inside the US of A.
14/04/2010 at 09:16 clive dunn says:
Can we have a seperate thread for people who actually got out of the RIGHT side of the bed this morning?
This is great news!
p.s Is there any way to manufacture an incident where my memory is wiped and i can play all the x-com games again (for the first time). Dammit, i bet in the future they have special pills for doing it.
p.p.s Looking at that one screenshot, it looks like it’ll maybe be a countryside setting rather than a metropolitan one. I approve.
14/04/2010 at 09:47 Lars Westergren says:
A FPS. Oh good, I haven’t seen one of those in a while. >_<
@clive dunn
"Can we have a seperate thread for people who actually got out of the RIGHT side of the bed this morning?"
No, you can't! You people can go play with the elves in happy rainbow land. This is the goddamn internet, here we are all angry buddy, all the time!
;)
14/04/2010 at 09:17 Sobric says:
Well here’s my knee-jerk:
I’m disappointed that it’s an FPS and not a… a… whatever acronym UFO and TFTD were (RTS?). I’m sure it will be a fine game, but I suspect the knee jerk comes from it not being more similar to the original. If it follows a Rainbow 6 style approach to tactical FPSing, however, it may well be highly enjoyable – they could also get an automatic 10/10 in my mind if they release with Mod tools (what developers can’t/won’t deliver, the community probably will).
For anyone who is going to say: Why do we need a remake of the original, when it’s perfectly fine?! Well, I disagree. I’ll leave the debate of Audio and Visuals, since the original XCOM art style looks fine to me, but going back and playing it now (inspired to after the April 1st 1983 day) leaves me wishing that there was a UI overhaul somewhere.
P.S.:
*Spools up Angry Internet Man Machine*
FBI agent?!? What the fuck? “XCOM” is the agency that was set up to fight the aliens, screw the FBI! Goddamn console pussies, ruining our games, taking our jobs etc etc
*Spools down*
14/04/2010 at 09:17 toni says:
in the 50 words they tell you that it will be a first person shooter.
not a turn-based strategy game. what’s NOT to understand ?
hey we make a fps set in the universe of a total different game and use its name for sales without having no other connection to the original whatsoever, just like we did with System/Bioshock. You know how it goes ! We just don’t respect game properties and its roots, we just wanna convert everything we can find and lay our hands on into the most profitable game genre present, the fps and use all the angry internet men rage for more publicity about our atrocity. it rhymes, therefore it must be true.
14/04/2010 at 09:18 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
Though i understand studios dont like taking risks, and using an established name garuntess more people at least look at it, i lament the fact that they cant come up with some original IP.
No matter how good the game eventually turns out to be, I bet i am going to feel that the X-COM title that they slap on is exterrainious (does that count as a pun?). Its not like the aliens or places lend themselves particularly well to shooting (Grays and corridors?).
But if they do manage to catch the tension of turning a corner with no AP (You thought the coast was clear) and having a crysalis in front of you, that could be something.
14/04/2010 at 09:18 Ashen says:
I fail to see why this is being made.
There was nothing particularly interesting about X-Com’s setting. What made it great was the gameplay mechanics.
So what’s the point of digging up a decade old forgotten IP to do a game in a completely different genre?
14/04/2010 at 09:29 Tei says:
“Brand value”. The most hardcore fans of XCom will buy it anyway, even if his pure shit. So using something with a existing fanbase, you start with a minimal public garanteed. Also, theres existing “product image” about the product. And is proven to “work”. You don’t know if a Tarzan videogame have public, but you know a XCom game will have public (note: bad example).
This is somewhat like buying Ferrari, buring all the factories, firing all the workers, and building cheap cars using the Ferrari logo and corporate image. It will sells.
14/04/2010 at 09:39 Ashen says:
Again, what exactly is the brand value of the X-Com IP? Sure, it’s a cult classic, but it won’t ring a bell to the mainstream audience today. Especially console audience.
This will be an AAA game with a multi-million dollar budget. The hardcore X-Com fanbase that is going to “buy it anyway” won’t even begin to cover the expenses.
14/04/2010 at 10:17 Tei says:
Ashen. “This will be an AAA game with a multi-million dollar budget. The hardcore X-Com fanbase that is going to “buy it anyway” won’t even begin to cover the expenses.”
Hence… we have the Tarzan line.
Is a proven fact that the “XCom settings” work. People like that settings. So is a safe bet. And these people are conservative. Maybe the “X-Files” line (you are a FBI agent) is added to take adventaje of the mainstream.
14/04/2010 at 16:44 Sonic Goo says:
The value of the brand is that you can inspire much internet frothing with just 50 words and a few pictures. You can’t buy that kind of publicity… oh wait.
14/04/2010 at 09:19 Darth Roxor says:
This is bullshit. Especially the part on the official site that talks about taking it to the first person, to properly feel the TENSION AND FEAR! Excuse me, but I didn’t need any goddamn first person to feel the tension while invading an alien base in Terror From The Deep.
‘c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game?’ – So, basically, what you’re saying is ‘shut up and take everything they give you up the arse’? This is Fallout 3 all over again. Classic franchise rape through something completely unrelated incoming, I bet it will have a cover system and regenerating health, maybe even superserious Bioshock-styled ‘moral choices’ like ‘Save the zombies from Chryssalids to get Elerium!’. But, of course, all the media throughout the world will just keep repeating ‘haters gonna hate, console shooters are teh future!’.
14/04/2010 at 09:21 GT3000 says:
HATERS GONNA HAT-..Right. Well. You know what’s up. Ahem. BITCH HARDER?
I joke. Seriously, give it at least a press release. This is just a teaser.
14/04/2010 at 09:20 sigma83 says:
In the same vein: Dungeon Keeper. WHERE IS ITS.
14/04/2010 at 12:25 Corporate Dog says:
They’re remaking it from an immersive new perspective.
You’ll be the hero sent into the dungeon.
14/04/2010 at 13:01 Manley Pointer says:
@Corporate Dog:
Funniest thing I’ve read all day.
Then again, if it was multiplayer, with several players as dungeon keepers and another player in full Diablo mode as an invading hero…I would buy that.
14/04/2010 at 14:29 Corporate Dog says:
@Manley: There’s a pen-and-paper RPG called ‘Rune’, that was released alongside the computer game of the same name, and covers the same thematic territory (you’re a Viking warrior who lives for the slaughter of his foes, yadda, yadda, yadda).
The RPG features what I felt was a novel mechanic, where traditional Dungeon Mastering is done in a round-robin fashion, and the DM scores points for all the traps and creatures he springs on the player.
I always felt that the RPG would be awesome, if it were translated back into a computer game, and featured a construction set that would allow everyone to pre-build their own dungeons, which they would then spring on their fellow players in the course of a multiplayer session.
Could make for a pretty cool multi-player roguelike.
14/04/2010 at 09:20 Tei says:
XCom is sacred. Period.
Is somewhat (to the gaming world) like the best of the 50′s horror-sciencie-fiction movies, like the invasion of the snachers, the invisible man, …
We can’t touch it, because is made of silver on our imagination and memory.
You can’t touch it, because if you try, the result will be campy (oh the horror) or unfaithfull.
Arguabilly XCom Apocalypse (the 3th XCom) was too much campy… but it was accepted, because was inside the serie. Now the serie is closed.
I don’t say is imposible, a genius can do things normal people think are imposible, I will not say is hard, … I have problems completing a puzzle with 3 pieces, other people think such puzzle are easy. What I am saying is that tryiing and failing, is something like a sacrilegy, something that just can’t be ignored.
14/04/2010 at 09:21 The Colonel says:
I suppose they did manage to reimagine Fallout whilst keeping all the things that made Fallout great. I want to cry. I swear making money wasn’t the primary driver for all game decisions in the past…
14/04/2010 at 09:21 clive dunn says:
@Ian. I’d recommend going all the way back to Rebelstar Raiders on the Spectrum.
14/04/2010 at 09:23 Mr Pink says:
Given that Mr Meer aludes that we’re not hearing everything about this game, isn’t it possible that this could be a hybrid between the original X-COM and an FPS? i.e. instead of playing out engagements in a turn based strategy engine, it’s played as a squad FPS?
That would be an interesting proposition at the least :)
14/04/2010 at 09:27 Mr Pink says:
And isn’t this idea backed up by this statements from the press release?
“XCOM combines the strategic core of the groundbreaking franchise with a suspense-filled narrative and distills it into a tense and unique first-person shooter experience.”
14/04/2010 at 10:51 archonsod says:
If it did, I may want to have it’s babies.
14/04/2010 at 09:25 Wilson says:
I’ve always thought a first-person X-Com thing could be pretty great, but it would have to be very different to your average shooter to really be X-Com. If they don’t have destructible terrain I will be very upset. Also, squad members that can die and be replaced by rookies. And lots of reloading games to save heroes from stupid deaths (if, like me, you weren’t that good at the game :) )
14/04/2010 at 09:27 d0c says:
I wish it was April the 1st again.
I know I should really hold judgment but from those few words it already sounds like a bad idea.
14/04/2010 at 09:29 Matzerath says:
I hope they get pressed for time and have to use the original game’s art assets like they did for Bioshock 2.
14/04/2010 at 10:52 archonsod says:
What, so every five steps down a corridor the screen blacks out and displays the legend “Hidden Movement”?
14/04/2010 at 09:29 PleasingFungus says:
“…c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 was going to be a turn-based strategy game?”
Arguably the exception that proves the rule, but… Civ V? (It even has [i]hexes![/i])
14/04/2010 at 09:34 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
Good point.
I remember spending the whole day in a haze because of the hexes. I mean, its Civ! I can no longer attack from right above a city! Crazy days indeed.
14/04/2010 at 09:45 jRides says:
You beat me to it Mr Fungus!
14/04/2010 at 09:29 Hulk Hogan says:
….Jacob’s Ladder?
14/04/2010 at 09:29 Ovno says:
Hope its good, doubt it will be, every time anyone has tried to do something other than a turn based strategy with the XCOM license so far it’s ended up being unbelievably bad…
I’m sure this will be no exception.
Pity I was really excited at the thought of a real sequal to XCOM not just something using its name…
14/04/2010 at 09:36 Dawngreeter says:
@Ovno (in case reply thing fails)
Turn based strategy has also ended up being unbelievably bad (Aftermath/Aftershock/Afterlight). Not to mention that even in the original run Terror From the Deep was good only by virtue of being a reskin of Enemy Unknown while Apocalypse was… significantly less good.
14/04/2010 at 10:55 archonsod says:
I actually liked the After* series. Mind you, I also enjoyed Interceptor.
14/04/2010 at 09:29 BIG D says:
I love X-COM! Yeah I want this to be faithful to the original but times have changed. We fear this game because it won’t be much like the original in its game play but I think most of all you can’t ever get around that nostalgia of games of our youth! A shame but at least we HAVE the original to play, and its the best!
14/04/2010 at 09:32 Hulk Hogan says:
also
omfg they’re making fallout 3 into an fps this game is gonna suuuuuuuuuuck! – us before fallout 3 came out
omg omg i love this game i want to give everyone at bethesda a bj – us after it came out.
wait in see before getting those man boobs all in a rage, brother. hulk hogan believes in pleasant surprises
14/04/2010 at 09:52 Okami says:
For me it was more like:
Before FO3 came out: OMG, Bethesda are making a new Fallout game. They’re the worst RPG producers outside of Japan, they’ll rape the franchise.
After FO3 came out: OMG, Bethesda aren’t only the worst RPG producers outside of Japan, they also suck at making FPSs. Seriously, why is this company still around? All the animations are still beeing made a single person and it’s obviously still the 12 year old intern, who also happens to be the son of the CEO.
14/04/2010 at 11:07 blah says:
@Okami: Thinking the same. Although I have to hand it to Bethesda, that they made a huge profit for recycling so much content e.g. (animations, textures, models) in comparison to overall development costs (probably why all the Special Edition/Collector’s Edition stuff got made – PR budget rampage!…).
14/04/2010 at 09:34 Flimgoblin says:
20B Funstuff announced today that CivZation®, the re-imagining of one of gaming’s most storied and beloved franchises, is currently in development at Ion Storm, the studio behind Daikatana. Currently in development exclusively for the Xbox 360® video game and entertainment system from Microsoft and Windows PC, CivZation combines the strategic core of the groundbreaking franchise with a suspense-filled narrative and distills it into a tense and unique first-person shooter experience.
14/04/2010 at 09:39 Peter Radiator Full Pig says:
My eyes! They are melting!
Seriously, that was harsh, man. Those words are toying with real emotions.
;P
Also, is it by chance that my captcha is EMC2? Or E=mc^2…
14/04/2010 at 09:43 Flimgoblin says:
Sorry ;)
The Daikatana is rather a bit on the mean side (and thoroughly unfair) – just happened to be the first lot that popped into my head.
14/04/2010 at 09:35 c-Row says:
So, when will they turn Syndicate into a racing game?
14/04/2010 at 09:41 Flimgoblin says:
We need some sort of indie->mainstream mega-hit to get turn based strategy back on the publisher’s radars (which is the only way you’ll get a AAA version)
XCOM might well be a fun game in its own right, but “alien invasion” is hardly the most unique of settings, so I don’t see them getting anything from it other than a whackload of nostalgia to trade on (ok, so they get plenty from it ;)). Meh maybe I’m just old and cynical these days ;)
Fallout had its own particular brand of post-apocalyptic (being retro 50s post-apoc) at least…
aaaanyway, new AAA strategic FPS title announced about alien invasions and the like – sounds cool.
14/04/2010 at 10:06 Kieron Gillen says:
I admit, I have no idea why Stardock aren’t making an X-Com clone. It strikes me as exactly the sort of thing they’d jump on. Abandonded mainstream genre, through a medium budget at it and raking in the cash.
KG
14/04/2010 at 10:44 Subject 706 says:
At the moment they are probably too busy with another game set in a genre which is mostly dead to publishers these days, namely Elemental : War of Magic.
But yeah, they really should. If you read this Brad, help us poor strategically-starved gamers!
14/04/2010 at 12:08 Mario Figueiredo says:
I remember (more like, I think I correctly retained this memory) from way back, after Rebelstar was launched on the Spectrum, an interview with Julian where he admitted how hard it is to develop a turn based tactical shooter. I cannot really remember if he was speaking about the fact this had been mostly coded in BASIC, or because — and this is what my memory tells me the genre is very hard to balance right.
I think what Julian did in XCOM was truly unique. If any of you guys remember Rebelstar, balance and AI issues would soon show their ugly face all over. It was another time then, though. And it was still one of the greatest games for the Spectrum.
In this day and age however, I don’t know how many will want to risk doing a tactical combat shooter. And let me tell you, this genre is my favorite genre of all. You can see how much I have been missing it. But there’s more than just a lack of mainstream interest in it, that justifies the fact we don’t see one since Jagged Alliance. A game that incidentally only served to remember us all how hard it seems to be getting it right in terms of game balance. SInce X-Com I know of no other turn-based tactical combat shooter EVER did it right.
I don’t know if a company like Stardock can afford to risk it. But I agree that indies are our best hope. Especially if they stick to the essentials and build the game from there… instead of trying to do everything in one title (which is often the problem with AAA who can’t afford to do it). Jullian Gollop had been already developing this genre for 10 years before he came up with X-Com.
14/04/2010 at 15:04 Clovis says:
@Mario: Since Jagged Alliance we got Silent Storm. It had good mechanics, but for some reason I never really got into it. Oh, it even had highly (or fully) destructable environments.
14/04/2010 at 09:46 Iain Galloway says:
See if they keep the base-building aspects of the original series, but replace the tactical interface with AAAFPS, that’s got the potential to be up there in the “awesomest game evar” list.
I suspect, though, that it’ll “just” be an AAAFPS, with “only” the setting from the original. That’d make me sad :(
14/04/2010 at 09:49 Lu-Tze says:
This could be the best game ever. It could be the new Deus Ex, and become a First Person Shooter that stands above all others, and is heralded as being one of the great innovators of the genre. It could be.
But even if t is, people will still hate it for not bringing that classic X-COM gameplay into the 21st century.
14/04/2010 at 09:49 James G says:
“By setting the game in a first-person perspective, players will be able to feel the tension and fear that comes with combating a faceless enemy that is violently probing and plotting its way into our world.”
Do some people not get this feeling from other perspectives?
I’ve never been much enamoured with the industry’s obsession with first person titles, partly down to its tendency to embody the more ‘twitch’ gameplay. which I’m not very good at. I had always assumed it was just driven by relative ease of production, popularity with a large section of the the demographic and a difficulty and reluctance to attempt something less tested. Is this just a choice of words for marketering of what they realise is going to be an unpopular genre shift, or do so people genuine feel like that.
Does seem like an odd move overall though. I have no particular affinity for the XCOM games, having only picked up the first on Steam in a sale, and not having played it too much because I completely suck (even more so than I do at your average twitch shooter. Perhaps I just suck at games). However this seems to be a far more significant genre shift than the FO>FO3 changes, and unlike FO I’m not aware of any particular affinity for the XCOM universe. I suppose as a squad based tactical shooter you could reproduce some elements of the game, but otherwise it does seem to be the case of using the name as little more than a marketing tool.
On a related note, I’d love to see a developer try and release a turn-based AAA. It probably would bomb, I agree, but its a hypothesis I want to see tested damnit. We know the market isn’t entirely dead, as games such as GalCivII and Kings Bounty have managed to do respectably, but I realise that this doesn’t translate into a similar return on the substantially larger investment made in your average AAA.
14/04/2010 at 10:05 Subject 706 says:
I would not be so sure it would bomb at all.
It all comes down to how they make it. It’d probably be very much cheaper to make than an AAA FPS, for starters.
14/04/2010 at 09:57 Devrey says:
I don’t get it. I like turn-based games and I will like them in 2011. What does that make me? Weird? Old? Or simply an uninteresting small part of gaming demography?
14/04/2010 at 12:30 Corporate Dog says:
All of the above. I’ve come to accept it. You should too.
I also get wood when someone mentions the word ‘hex’. Better than the blue pill, it is.
14/04/2010 at 09:59 Dubbill says:
Even if they were making a TBS it’d come out slightly wrong, like Afterlight and all the other clones. I’d rather deal with the disappointment of this being a FPS now than the disappointment of a 7/10 TBS in 18 months time.
14/04/2010 at 09:59 JohnDoe says:
I think its really stupid when you buy a licence then remove the part that made it memorable.
14/04/2010 at 10:02 Turin Turambar says:
“Adhering to original genre/perspective is not the only way to stay true to original spirit” -Alec Meer.
Uhh… yes, it’s the only way. Adhering to the original genre.
What do you think it’s the original spirit of X-Com? “Fighting invading aliens??” No, that’s not the spirit, even if that was the basic “story” of the game.
The original spirit of X-Com is controlling a squad in a tactical game and directing an anti-alien organization in the geoscape mode. In other words, the spirit of X-Com is being a strategy game. Because it’s was a “pure gameplay” game, like it was more common years ago.
If you make a fps game where you fight aliens, perhaps with a bit of tactical orders a la SWAT 4 (a Irrational game), and a briefing screen where you can choose what to research, that’s not staying true to the original spirit.
14/04/2010 at 10:24 Devrey says:
Amen.
14/04/2010 at 11:36 N says:
Damn straight.
14/04/2010 at 14:49 RogB says:
the man, he speak sense
14/04/2010 at 18:31 Bret says:
Nah. Turn based? That’s the delivery medium, not the spirit.
I served my time. Let me tell you about the spirit of the damn alien war, man to man.
So, it’s mid July. Somehow, I signed up back at the end of January and served since without winding up in a pinewood box. Simms, that’s the name of the guy I knew best in the squad, he had nearly as much time in the field as I did, and a hellofalot more kills. Still used a laser pistol. And, let me say this, even if none of the rooks believe me. He was the toughest sonofabitch born.
So, we head out one fine July evening. Some dumbass in shotcreek maine or some other stupid small town, he claims to have seen a black crab,big as a man. Oh, we all laugh, but command says we send out a team to check on it.
When we get there, town’s empty. No people, no bodies. Simms and me take point. And I find a discarded lump of human skin on the ground. Seen some odd things, but that took the cake as far as nightmares were concerned. Simms looked a little shaken, and not much scared him. Took on a Reaper with a tun prod, if you can believe it.
Well, we’re about to call in when the radio starts squawking. Somebody spotted something. Big crab, like we were told earlier. Sending a guy to check.
And then the whole mess goes straight to hell. Turns out it was a Snakeman trap. Civvies shamble out of the corridors like B movie zombies, snakes start firing, and the whole damn city is trying to kill us. Simms and I, we start running back to the ranger, but it sounds like we might be the only ones. Whatever those crabs were, they were doing… something to the other recon teams. Know there’s a scientific name for it, but all I had then were muffled screams and the sounds of brave men committing suicide to avoid it.
Well, we’re almost to the ‘Ranger when Simms gets jumped by one of the zombies. I shoot it off of him…
And one of the crabs comes bursting out, and gets him. And now both him and the crab are coming for me.
Somehow, I make it to the ship and yell for an evac. The pilot objects, as it seems I’m the only man aboard and wasn’t this a simple check on some civvy mention a bug eyed martian. I pulled rank, based on there not being another signal coming in, but as we lifter off, one of the things caught onto the wing, and…
Well, that’s the damn spirit of X-Com. Dying alone and afraid from some nightmare we couldn’t imagine before it was laying eggs in our guts. The TBS part was merely the best delivery method.
14/04/2010 at 19:56 Joe G. says:
Sorry Bret, that sounds more like the spirit of Gears of War.
14/04/2010 at 10:02 Dan Pryce says:
If they make it a bit like Star Wars: Republic Commando but much more involved and put emphasis on the maintainance and construction of bases, this might not blow. I do think it’s a mis-step to make it an FPS – no-one’s saying a Turn Based Strategy can’t be popular on consoles, look at CivRev. But if they insist on making it an FPS for the console tards, the best thing they can do to appease the core fanbase at the same time is to make the base building side of things as much like before as possible (even if they have to have an autobase option so the trigger happy console plebs can get straight into the action) and have the option to issue commands to your troops while paused at any time.
That, to me is the best case scenario. More than likely we’ll get a fundamentally sound shooter with a bland projectable protagonist and medicore story – something like last years Wolfenstein.
14/04/2010 at 10:04 Stu says:
If only Irrational had any experience in creating squad-based tactical first-person games. If only.
14/04/2010 at 12:28 Corporate Dog says:
I noted a distinct lack of the words ‘team’ and ‘squad’ in that press-release, else I might agree.
Still too early, sure, but if we can’t use the Intarweb to read tea leaves, what’s it good for?
14/04/2010 at 10:04 Pod says:
The COM universe and surrounding story are Flimsy at best. Infact, I’ll sum it up:
“Aliens are invading earth. Please stop them!”
Any other details about the ‘detailed story’ was probably imagined by your 12 year old game. What am I getting at? I just don’t understand why they would use this licence, rather than just make up a new one?
14/04/2010 at 10:05 Pod says:
“12 year old brain”. I wasn’t logged in when I did that so not edit edit :/
14/04/2010 at 10:11 ShaunCG says:
Without exposing too much of my incredibly nerdy X-COM fanboy past… yr wrong. UFO: Enemy Unknown had a pretty basic story but from TFTD onwards there was always a lot of fluff, fictional history and even short stories intended to expand the universe. Of course if you got the games without the accompanying manuals then you’d be forgiven for not knowing this. ;)
It wasn’t *incredibly* rich (not comparable to… let’s say StarSiege or Warcraft III) but there was enough there to drive a thriving and at its best unusually literate fanfic scene back in the ’90s.
That said I do agree with you to the extent that the X-COM games were rarely about “story” in the sense of narrative progression and character; they were about generating your own stories through their incredibly rich atmosphere and sense of being perpetually fighting against overwhelming odds. C’mon, who *didn’t* name at least some of their own soldiers?
14/04/2010 at 11:43 archonsod says:
Xcom had a fairly strong storyline. They went from an X File inspired genetically modified invaders from Mars schtick in the original UFO through to an Aliens Were Here First Lovecraftian riff in TFTD, and managed to go from there to a Post-Apoc 1950′s metropolis-faces-B-Movie-Extra-Dimensional-Invaders setting, complete with humanity colonising Mars.
One of the things I liked about the original were the flavour pieces, like how you could research alien entertainment systems which gave you an insight into their culture, but didn’t affect the game in any other way. The actual combat became repetative by around the mid game.
17/04/2010 at 01:48 TurboLento says:
I disagree. For each installment of X-Com, and observed individually per game (ignoring continuity from previous games), the story was complex and deep. But it wasn’t told by intro movies, cutscenes or dialogue, but rather by shifts in gameplay, such as AI behaviour, new species and ships you met, and by your own advancement which allowed you to find more about the enemy technology and intentions through the UFOPaedia (which transmitted the majority of the narrative).
14/04/2010 at 10:06 ShaunCG says:
I GOT ERECTION.
And hey, if a AAA FPS title opens the door (snicker etc.) for a lower-budget strategy-based title then that would be neat too.
14/04/2010 at 10:10 Psychopomp says:
I reiterate
This better be something along the lines of Brothers In Arms, or Valkryia Chronicles, or I’m going to ragequit gaming
14/04/2010 at 10:10 Psychopomp says:
Or even Swat 4, for that matter
Edit:Delicious replyfail :(
14/04/2010 at 10:11 Freudian Trip says:
For all those wondering why they didn’t just start a new license. This comments thread has 100 posts in an hour. Thats why.
14/04/2010 at 10:11 http://www.us-moncleroutlet.com says:
http://www.us-moncleroutlet.com
14/04/2010 at 10:11 gulag says:
Headache with pictures time. What if…
What if the game retains it’s original two tier structure, but instead of an isometric RTS, the terror missions are carried out as a squad based FPS using mechanics similar to Brothers in Arms / Republic Commando with context sensitive orders issued to AI squadmates?
Maps with randomly determined elements around the size of a Counterstrike map themed around familiar X-Com environs would suit. License the Destruction 2.0/Frostbite tech to allow you players to pull all the old X-Com tricks and your golden.
Spruce up/streamline the global map/base management, retain the strong story/unlock progression and you have a game that is ‘true’ to the spirit of X-Com, integrates FPS in a sensible way, and above all, kicks ass.
14/04/2010 at 10:18 Sobric says:
@ gulag
If it allows me to rename my soldiers, then that sounds amazing.
On the other hand, people aren’t exactly enamored with mainstream development at the moment, hence why nobody thinks it will turn out like this.
14/04/2010 at 10:24 Psychopomp says:
Do you really think it’s going to be like that, though? I won’t be surprised if it’s a 9 hour long corridor shooter, with light RPG elements. The “tactical” part is where you can tell your entire 3 man squad to go take cover over there. Procedural generation? That sort of replayability would cut into their DLC sales.
Not only will I not be surprised, but it’ll sell a bajillion copies too boot.
Also, I think anyone thinking of SWAT 4:XCOM EDITION is fooling themselves. The 360 is the lead platform here.
14/04/2010 at 10:31 gulag says:
Do you really think it’s going to be like that, though?
No, not really. :/
14/04/2010 at 10:52 Pew says:
Indeed! I do hope the FPS bit only refers to the actual field work, but it is 2K and it is 2010, so those chances are slim.
Let me unlock new weapons, jetpacks and vehicles by doing missions. Let me build bases and teams. In fact, just look at the last Battlezone and Uprising: you don’t need a persistent character to attach to in order to enjoy the game. You need a persistent world where your control and management is what counts, together with your skill in operating the one or multiple units and blasting away things.
I can definitely see a lot of ways how integrating the FPS POV into X-COM can work. As a 6-8 hours singleplayer FPS game with tacked-on multiplayer, I cannot. Why bother even calling it X-COM in the latter case? The only people with an attachment to the brand will be alienated (huhuhu).
In fact, why even announce it at all? Now all they have said is that it is an X-COM FPS. The only result they are going to get is nerdrage and minor hope from the few optimists. That only leads to an initial “booo!” which they will have to follow-up with actual good news in order to turn that into a “kinda want” or “must have!”. They might as well just have released a screenshot and a minimalist site, followed by E3 footage and details. Then again, 2K is not known for being good at marketing :/
14/04/2010 at 13:51 tiktaalik says:
Okay, so that actually sounds good. I wish I thought it was going to be like that :/
14/04/2010 at 15:08 Jason says:
Don’t worry, there’ll still be that fantastic moment from the first XCom games where you man the conveniently placed turret to fight off the suddenly spawning wave of Chrysalids!
14/04/2010 at 16:14 Vitamin Powered says:
@Psychopomp
The trick with combing procedural generation and DLC is for the DLC to expand the scope and capability of the generator; more building types, different terrain styles and tweaked algorithms. Procedural Generation doesn’t render DLC moot, it just redefines it as a method to sell greater potential in the generator.
14/04/2010 at 10:17 c-Row says:
Why would anyone want to make something other than a turn-based strategy game out of the franchise again? It’s not like they were smash-hits either.
14/04/2010 at 10:17 Dan (WR) says:
The Space Hulk game mixed a mission strategy map with some basic first person perspective – and that made me wet my knickers. What if they could have something similiar working here, with the player sending squadmates to certain points on a strategic map and having access to their helmet cams while controlling his own FPS avatar? Or something.
Don’t get me wrong, I rolled my eyes at reading the press release, but it really doesn’t tell us much at all.
14/04/2010 at 10:19 Robin says:
Seems like some softwarehouses can only think of “big budget + mass market (action) games”; they don’t understand the concept of “small budget + niche market games “.
The identity of X-Com was based on its gameplay, not its setting/story/characters, so changing it = make a total different and unrelated game. That’s also why, when you talk about “X-Com games”, Interceptor and Enforcer aren’t even considered: they’re just different games with a label “X-Com” placed on them. (Oh but, resuming an old and loved brand makes the press exited and “activates” the fans, so here is served a lot of costless viral marketing).
14/04/2010 at 10:22 Schizoslayer says:
This is not what I want to see in an announcement about a new X-COM Game.
Had there in fact been any attempt at a proper sequel at any point in the last 5 years then maybe this news wouldn’t be so disappointing. I second the comments that there is no strong backstory or universe to the X-COM games and any tension you felt was a result of the game being horrendously difficult rather than any kind of story or level design.
However if you want a fix of tactical X-COM gaming then you can do alot worse than checking out UFO: Afterlight by Altar or in fact buying the original X-COM on Steam.
14/04/2010 at 11:28 jalf says:
Yeah, Afterlight was surprisingly good. Aftermath was rubbish, and I never played Aftershock, but Afterlight was actually a really cool game.
14/04/2010 at 11:28 jalf says:
Oh, and do I need to say that I’m still waiting for an Afterthought expansion? :D
14/04/2010 at 10:22 Matthew Reynolds says:
It could work. One example that comes to mind is Metroid Prime. Different perspective, same atmosphere, and just as fantastic.
14/04/2010 at 10:23 [21CW] 2000AD says:
Man it’s hard to make me go from ubridled joy to serious reservations in one sentance but “New Xcom and it’s an FPS” does that. Trying to think of worse and all I can come up with is “New Dungeon Keeper and it’s a JRPG”.
Man I hope it’s a prequel, ‘cos if it’s an Xcom game where you’re not part fo Xcom?! That makes as much sense as a Doom movie where it’s genetic experiments gone wrong instead of deamons from hell!
14/04/2010 at 10:27 Michal says:
Hello,
If you guys prefer x-com as strategy look at this freeware game:
http://ufotts.ninex.info/
It’s still in making, but one mission demo version is already available. It’s like old x-com, but with higher resolution, better graphics (still being remade) and new features.
14/04/2010 at 10:28 Darren says:
I was at work to day and I was uneasy. Dogs were howling, the birds….they refused to fly. Customers did not ask “Any cheaper for cash?” when buying a TV from me. I found that even the babies that cry for their parents to take notice of them while said parents look up facebook and youtube at the net kiosk were silent.
Something was wrong. Something was…….different. I felt a great disturbance in the force.
I came home and checked this site out….and now I know why these things were happening. I fell, excited…but I feel a little apprehensive. Well, here’s to hoping.
14/04/2010 at 15:14 Clovis says:
It’s a trap!
14/04/2010 at 10:28 HYPERPOWERi says:
I don’t care about the X-COM universe as much as I do about its gameplay. This bit of news get a FFFFFUUUUUU from me. ):
14/04/2010 at 10:36 Cinnamon says:
Yeah, all that stuff about re-imagining, franchises and rich lore. This is going to be a fantastic game for brand managers and IP lawyers and I expect this press release to give them all stiffys. Not so great for people who enjoyed playing the original games.
I expect the game to do fairly well since it is a console shooter and they no doubt have a moody protagonist to put on the box art.
14/04/2010 at 10:35 Vivian says:
I have no problem with it being an fps if it’s going to be good. What does worry me is all this stuff about ‘reverence’ and x-coms ‘storied lore’, because that’s Hollywood bullshitese for ‘will merely be a retarded lukewarm reheat of memorable moments from previous entries in the series, with the gaps filled up with a McG film’. It’s been said before and it’s pretty much correct – sequels are only better if they improve on, change and generally fuck around with the concept, not ‘revere’ it like spazzy monks.
14/04/2010 at 10:35 Alexander Norris says:
People are forgetting that Irrational did the SWAT series. From the press release, it seems like they’re aiming for a tactical FPS, and SWAT is basically what X-COM would be in first person anyway (except with a whole lot less gruesome deaths).
In other words, there is hope.
14/04/2010 at 12:41 Corporate Dog says:
I dunno. I came away from that press release with the opposite impression.
They throw the word ‘strategic’ around a lot, but as I mentioned earlier, I didn’t once see the words ‘team’ or ‘squad’.
SWAT 4 with aliens and all the fiddly management bits of X-Com WOULD make for a good game. I’m just not operating under the impression that that’s what we’re getting.
14/04/2010 at 13:54 jRides says:
Your forgetting this is for an X-Box too,and what x-box user is going to have the patience to learn anything other than what button makes gun go bang? No, they probably sold this to their money men by saying “Modern Warfare vs Aliens!” and then went and found a franchise to tack onto it.
14/04/2010 at 15:17 Clovis says:
@jRides: Good point; only simple shooters get released on teh consoles. That’s why they didn’t release Dragon’s Age on the 360.
14/04/2010 at 15:38 Corporate Dog says:
I’m the happy owner of an Xbox 360. It’s a wonder I haven’t drooled on myself yet today.
Though, to be fair, my understanding is that Dragon Age was somewhat nerfed in the Xbox release, with a fixed camera, and a clumsy-to-use Talent/Skill bar.
I don’t have any regrets about picking up ME2 for the Xbox. That’s the platform I started the series with, and it just feels right to be sitting on my couch while I play it. But with Dragon Age, I’m SO glad I picked up the PC release. If there’s any recent high-profile release that was meant to be played on the PC, Dragon Age is most definitely it.
So… I guess you both have valid points. Let’s hum a few bars of Kumbaya, shall we?
14/04/2010 at 10:36 Dean says:
No.
(Seriously, while the game may well be utterly awesome, it’d be awesome regardless of whether it was XCOM or not. Which is why it’s impossible for XCOM fans to be excited about it. As the XCOM relation has no bearing on the quality of the game whatsoever)
14/04/2010 at 10:40 Flint says:
I actually hope this turns out to be good, I could go for some scifi shooting in this era of constant modern warfare.
14/04/2010 at 10:40 Sarlix says:
Boooo
14/04/2010 at 10:45 nabeel says:
I wonder if this will be anything like Division 9, the scrapped tactical shooter that Irrational pitched. It was supposed to have SWAT 4-like tactical first-person combat, and a strategic layer of base building and resource management.
14/04/2010 at 10:51 Curvespace says:
This’ll likely coincide with the release of ‘Black Mesa Tycoon’, a micro-management sim game putting YOU in control of the day-to-day running of one of the worlds most mysterious fictional top-secret laboratories.*
Aaaanyway. Art design is going to be tough as hell on this title. The original game had a B-Movie schlock about them which might not transpose well into a tense FPS scenario. I doubt anyone is going to soil when a three-foot Grey sporting a laser-pistol jumps out from behind a shrub. Once you’ve removed this aspect of the game, along with the -turn-based gameplay, you have to wonder how much of the franchise (*shudder*) will remain intact.
They’ve really got their work cut-out here I think. Good luck to ‘em anyway. I’ll reserve judgement [on this cynical gaming development] until it’s realised. ;)
* Hmmmm, now there’s a Theme Hospital mod that never needs to happen…
14/04/2010 at 11:11 Sobric says:
Actually, I think it is possible to pull off B movie aliens with tense FPS – the contrast between purple aliens and zombie crysalids might sharpen the horror of the latter.
Imagine: creeping along a suburban terrace, spotting a floater with his ridiculous purple cape and pewpew gun. “Hah, what a silly creature” you think as you site your own pewpew and then:
“oHSHIT CRYSALID KILLITKILLITKILLITKILLITKILLITKILLIT! why is half my squad already dead? why has sarge dropped his gun and is cowering in the corner? why is that rookie looking at me with a blank expression while pulling the pin on his grenade? IS THAT A BLASTER BO–”
The more I think about it, the more I’m actually coming round to the idea of an XCOM FPS. But only if they keep the Geoscape. And if it’s actually good.
14/04/2010 at 12:07 Curvespace says:
Well, hopefully they can figure it out in a way which does not come across as slightly ludicrous. I’d be interested to be in the various meetings where they are pawing over concept art of ‘little green men’ and trying to convince the publishers/funders that it’s still a good idea :)
I’m with you though – if they can capture the ‘s*** —> big fan’ moments of the original then it could be quite engaging.
Has anyone mentioned psionics yet?……….and they’re the guys who did BioShock 2…….hmmmmm……
14/04/2010 at 10:57 Okami says:
On a side note: It’s bullshit press releases like this one that seriously make me consider quitting my job in the games industry. Of course you always know that you’re just a wage slave for soulless corporate bastards who feast on a steady diet of human misery and little puppies, but usually you just suck it down and think of the paycheck and all the alcohol you can afford with it. But it’s messages from marketing like this one that confront you with the cold and hard truth of it all – you’re working for devils who enjoy nothing more than raping your childhood!
14/04/2010 at 10:57 Web Cole says:
First of all, I admit I’ve never played an X-COM game, for whatever reason
But it sounds right up my street: TBS with very detailed hero units. And I practically have a hero unit fetish, and there really aren’t enough games that do that sort of thing right. (DF being my favourite game evers)
So yeah, I’d rather have had original X-COM remake than a FPS.
14/04/2010 at 16:33 Corporate Dog says:
DF?
15/04/2010 at 11:25 Web Cole says:
Dwarf Fortress, my apologies, I am rather acronym-happy at times.
14/04/2010 at 10:59 Rinox says:
Why exactly isn’t it possible for an AAA game in 2010 to be a TBS strategy a la original X-Com anymore? It’s a serious question.
Are we so obsessed with shiny moving things and fast-paced action as a culture? I just don’t get it. The lure of a game like the original X-com(s) was in the gameplay more than in the technical awesomeness, I think we can agree on that. So why would it be impossible to sell a similar game with modern-day graphics/mechanics/design optimalisation without resorting to the ubiquitous first-person 3D genre (that seems to be invading RPG’s more and more too)?
Is it related to the expansion of the gaming genre, perhaps, and the subsequent existence of blockbuster games? Games that are largely bought by uninformed crowds who know they’re not going to be playing the best game ever but are just looking for a cheap thrill? But why the need for the X-Com franchise to be revived then? Surely (as this thread suggests) those veterans won’t take kindly to a complete reworking of the originals…and the new public doesn’t care. I don’t see how it works. My head hurts. :-(
14/04/2010 at 12:12 Psychopomp says:
Conviction is the way it is because “market research” showed them that most people saw “stealth as too punishing. Too slow.”
Deus Ex just broke one million sales here recently.
Modern Warfare 2 is the best selling piece of entertainment, ever.
Good luck selling a turn based strategy game to these people.
14/04/2010 at 11:02 Mr Labbes says:
As someone who doesn’t know the franchise, are any X-Com games besides the first two any good?
14/04/2010 at 11:09 Larington says:
I did try some of the later X-Com games like terror from the deep and, umm, was it aftermath, I think. They never managed to suck me in.
14/04/2010 at 11:18 Cinnamon says:
Apocalypse is a good game if you don’t compare it to the original too much and can overlook it’s numerous flaws and annoyances. That is, the core of the game is still good and not rotten at all, in some ways an improvement, definitely more worth playing than terror from the deep. It was the only game other than the first to be made by Julian Gollop.
I would recommend the unofficial clone UFO: Extraterrestrials more though.
14/04/2010 at 11:18 SirWhat says:
whats wrong with TBS? everyone likes TBS. ask around how many people have played HoMM series or Civ series.
TBS doesnt have that crashboombang visuals of FPS genre but it alllways will have loyal players (like me) who like to spend some evenings alone playing with old “just one more turn”.
14/04/2010 at 11:20 NikRichards says:
Personally when I saw this headline I was hoping for a really shiny version of UFO: Enemy Unknown, turn based, with an fully implemented physics engine, maybe a greater range of tech.
Not that I’m saying there’s no whoop to be had from an XCOM FPS, it’s just not something I’ve ever wished for.
14/04/2010 at 11:26 Ffitz says:
Well, I woke up in a filthy mood this morning and this hasn’t helped at all.
I’m trying to see the bright side here, along the lines of “Geoscape to manage bases, and a brilliant FPS section for the missions”.
Except, except, except.
It’s coming out on the cockbox. So that’s cut out the intelligent parts of the game at a stroke. Can’t leave the ADHD console boys with nothing to shoot for more than a minute. And base management is confusing, you know?
And you’re playing an FBI agent? Oh dear. I imagine some long, convoluted sub-X Files plot story about discovering the aliens, discovering XCom (give me back my hyphen, you bastards!) as some secret US Government agency and getting co-opted into the fight to save FREEDOM and USA! USA! USA!
So, you know, what with this interminable bloody election already exhausting me, I just don’t have the energy to get excited about the tiny, tiny chance that they won’t fuck this up.
And yeah, if I had the money and the skills, I’d make the game I want to play. I don’t, though, so I have to put up with other people’s efforts, many of which I love dearly. This, however, sounds like a 99% likely abomination.
I’ll gladly, happily eat my hat if I’m wrong. This could be great. But I don’t expect it.
Ah, bollocks, perhaps I should just go back to bed and write the entire day off.
14/04/2010 at 12:46 Corporate Dog says:
America saved the whole, entire world from Drugs and Terror. It’s natural that we’d also tackle the War on Aliens.
14/04/2010 at 11:27 jalf says:
Kneejerk, kneejerk!
Well, I hope that 1) they retain some kind of squad-based aspect (Lone supersoldier singlehandedly beating back the alien menace would be kind of defiling the series), and of course 2), that they *also* bring back a more traditional strategy game version.
But anyway, it’s X-Com, so yay. (but what the heck is that FBI stuff about in the press release?)
@Turin:
So you’re saying for you, the original X-COM games would have felt the same if they’d been about, say, getting the harvest in before it starts raining?
I think the story had a fair bit to do with the “spirit” of the game.
I also think you’re right to some extent that strategy *does* play a large role in the “spirit” of the games. But it might not have to be the exact *same* kind of strategy. It might not need to be turn-based, and it might not need an isometric perspective, and it might not need a lot of other things that the original games had.
But saying that the only way to adhere to the spirit of the original games is by doing the exact same thing with better graphics is just a silly idea.
14/04/2010 at 11:43 Devrey says:
Also in the news: Syndicate.
14/04/2010 at 12:06 EthZee says:
…Third-person action game with bullet time.
14/04/2010 at 18:11 D says:
Hey! Starbreeze made the Riddicks right? Those games were awesome. Also, Syndicate wasen’t turn based, so making this into a 4 person coop FPS / 1 person switch-around FPS doesn’t break the spirit of the original at all. This is awesome news.
14/04/2010 at 11:49 Wednesday says:
Why? I mean, it may well be a great game, but X-Com’s universe was a colourful, DOS thing. Not really notable enough as a universe to set a big interesting FPS in.
…so, no X-Com, no real X-Com.
Bah.
14/04/2010 at 12:01 pimorte says:
So am I the only person here who is completely unimpressed with the XCOM games from what they’ve tried?
I bought the pack for $10, gave the first one a few shots, and was deeply unimpressed at how luck-based the game seemed to be. Considering my people die in one shot, have horrible aim (even when crouching with aimed shots), and land in unknown territory every time (free to die to unavoidable reaction fire from aliens as they get out of the ship).
A squad-based tactical FPS actually sounds like an appealing idea to me.
14/04/2010 at 12:18 ShaunCG says:
Your soldiers really, really suck when you start, and they die in droves. Even for relatively weak aliens you need firing lines of 2-4 soldiers to ensure you can take it down. Autoshots are king at most ranges.
Tbh I’ve rarely gotten that far with the first two games when I’ve returned to them years after sinking ungodly amounts of time into them as combat is so glacially paced and utterly unforgiving. I’m far more impatient these days than I was as a teen. ;)
Apoc is easier to return to due to being designed for real-time mode, and the fact that you can train your soldiers to improve their abilities, but it can still be utterly brutal at times.
14/04/2010 at 12:23 Psychopomp says:
You were playing it wrong.
It’s okay, we all did horribly for the first 20 attempts too :(
14/04/2010 at 13:27 mrpier says:
Autocannons and high explosive ammo are your friend until you get access to lasers and plasma weapons. If the aliens are standing in front of a wall you’ll probably hit the wall with at least one shot and the blast will take out the alien too, otherwise expect to use several shots to hit something.
14/04/2010 at 15:23 Clovis says:
Personally, I played Jagged Alliance first. When I tried XCOM, I though it was kinda’ meh. So, maybe try out some Jagged Alliance. JA does feel slightly less crazy random. That was one thing that annoyed me in XCOM too.
Yes, I’m sure I was doing it wrong though.
14/04/2010 at 12:16 Yargh says:
There are a few things I’d look for in an XCom game:
1. Disposable soldiers, in XCom the individual doesn’t count for much it’s the team that wins the war. I do want to control recruitment and training though.
2. Destructo terrain and buildings, I like making my own doorways and cover, procedurally generated maps.
3. Dynamic campaign, help keep the game replayable.
4. Customisable base(s)
5. Some sense of needing tactics and teamwork during engagements, definitely no run’n'gun gameplay, preferably with a pause function so I get time to think.
After that I don’t really mind what they do, 1st person, 3rd person commander’s view, hired guns style helmet cams, everything on a top down map…
14/04/2010 at 12:23 salejemaster says:
fail =].
14/04/2010 at 12:25 innokenti says:
My basic opinion is that this may turn out to be an awesome game. It may be the Best Game Ever. But what was the point of sticking the X-COM name on it? Did they think they would attract X-COM fans? That’s just naive, because they should have done a little reading and realised that they’ll have to push five times as hard to get it accepted by them. And then they won’t buy it if you can’t do that.
And anybody else who doesn’t care about the X-COM name? Well, they’ll buy it on the game’s merits, not because it’s called X-COM.
*sigh*
14/04/2010 at 12:39 Vinraith says:
@innokenti
Indeed. I find I can’t even work up any rage about it. It’s just a bafflingly silly thing to name a game of this sort, as though someone made a “high-octane” action movie and declared it a remake of Gone With the Wind.
14/04/2010 at 12:49 EthZee says:
Or Hamlet.
14/04/2010 at 15:26 Clovis says:
Or The Divine Comedy
14/04/2010 at 12:33 Vinraith says:
X-Com was defined by its gameplay, not its story or setting, so this really just doesn’t matter. Call me when someone makes something that plays like X-Com, rather than something that’s just called X-Com.
14/04/2010 at 12:35 Crush says:
Hmmm… sacrilicious, more cool artwork on covers of OXM http://www.allgamesbeta.info/2010/04/june-oxm-xcom.html
Thats said I’m incredibility skeptical this game can invoke any of the feelings the original X-Com could especially when it came to terror and suspense.
14/04/2010 at 12:40 Mario Figueiredo says:
Alec,
I think they can pull this one off. I learned a lesson from Fallout 3 (I was a vocal antagonist to this game when the first details were made public). I understand better today you can take a myth and, inspired by it, do something new and wonderful. I think much of the opposition steams from our natural over-evaluation of our past experiences. Experiences that we lived during the “best years of our lives”. Yet, when I fire up my Spectrum emulator and play Rebelstar, or when I play XCOM on DOSBox, I cannot anymore replicate the same joy of those times.
But there’s something that needs to be said:
Fallout 3 is not Fallout as much as this game will not be X-Com. And the original Fallout actually presented us with a gameplay experience that made possible for Fallout 3 to not be too detached from its predecessor. Yet, this new X-Com cannot do that. It’s too much of a genre switch to be ignored.
But neither can I ignore that, for a big studio, there is simply no way they could risk a turn-based tactical shooter. For my part, I’m hoping they turn up with a great FPS/RPG experience. I could probably even buy it. But X-Com is never going to be back while the IP stays on the hands of the big corp. The franchise concept cannot afford risks. It cannot afford offering anything outside the current mainstream trends. Which is not to say it cannot do great games. Fallout 3 was a great game, period. But X-Com genre was not an FPS. And X-Com was praised as one of the best games of all times for what it was, not what it could have been.
My only annoyance was thus the title of your article.
14/04/2010 at 12:44 Rory Hart says:
No it isn’t some horrible thing has risen from a crypt and is wearing it’s skin!
14/04/2010 at 12:45 EthZee says:
Alright, this is how it works? Fine. You can have X-COM as a first-person shooter for consoles. But we’re going to want something in return.
I want Gears of War 3 to be redesigned as a turn-based strategy game. With hexes. They pull out a first-person shooter, you pull out a hex-based game! That’s the Chicago way!
14/04/2010 at 13:07 HermitUK says:
You’re missing a trick here. We take something like CoD or Halo and turn it into a Police Quest style adventure.
Forgot your Russian phrasebook? Oops, the terrorists realised you were an American spy and killed you.
Didn’t install Norton in your armour? Oh dear, your AI companion has caught a computer virus and gone mad.
14/04/2010 at 18:56 Bret says:
You joke, but Bungie’s sense of humor in a text adventure could be a good bit of fun.
14/04/2010 at 12:48 Link says:
An X-COM FPS catered to the mainstream audience? I’m not holding my breath.
Ah, it’s too bad Firaxis doesn’t own the X-COM IP … two ex-Microprose franchises in the capable hands of a proven turn-based strategy game developer, produced with great care for our beloved PC gaming platform.
One can only dream.
14/04/2010 at 12:56 HermitUK says:
I’m looking forward to the bit where the story is delivered to us on dictaphones hidden throughout the world. Alien dictaphones.
14/04/2010 at 12:56 Ermnotreally says:
If it’s an FPS, it’s not a sequel.
It’s not a remake, either.
It’s a shooter, using the universe as an excuse. Because, well, shooting aliens was so, liek, TOTALLY UNIQUE AND NEW.
And not how X-Com approached it and merged research, TBS combat and fun stuff like mind control and remote controlled exploding footballs with destructible environments.
Yea.
Totally a recipe for win, that.
FAIL article, FAIL formulating, FAIL idea, FAIL.
14/04/2010 at 13:00 Tom Davidson says:
I’m baffled by all these attempts to revive the franchise’s story. No one played XCOM for the story; they played it because it was a brilliantly-designed tactical combat game with a tolerable strategic layer. It happened to be about aliens and kept its tongue in cheek, sure, and these things contributed to our fond memory of it, but it could have been about Nazis or cyborg pandas and I’d wager we’d still remember its quality.
An XCOM game that isn’t a tactical combat game is like a Scrabble game that uses colored pixels on a board to reimplement Pictionary. It might still be awesome — in fact, I may have just invented a great game — but it isn’t Scrabble.
14/04/2010 at 13:09 JuJuCam says:
Honestly the way people here carry on it’s like they expect installing the new X-COM will make all the old ones somehow impossible to play.
14/04/2010 at 13:25 Psychopomp says:
We’d be fucking happy with a straight up purely graphical remake of the first one at this point, with some streamlining to the interface.
14/04/2010 at 13:17 LionsPhil says:
Ooh, that sounds intrig—
“it is indeed a first-person shooter”
“isn’t being made by Ken Levine”
“the Bioshock 2 chaps”
All interest, evapourated.
14/04/2010 at 13:26 catmorbid says:
Without knowing anything more than the vague words and meaningless screenshots, I can’t help but be cynical about this title. Like some other said, I don’t mind the first-person perspective, but unless you’re making it open-ended with strategic/management elements (not just “buy new shit at beginning of each level”), I doubt this will draw in many of the fans. Sure, I’ll probably check this thing out anyway when it comes, but It’s very unlikely it’ll be anything but a mediocre linear shooter – just like most new games anyway.
I hate to pull the console card here, but I can’t resist: because of consoles, we can already forget any deep and meaningful strategic elements. At maximum, it could have some very superficial management and strategy elements, but nothing that’d even compare to the variety in original XCOM. Some innovations would be surprising here. I mean, it’s not like procedurally generated environments are impossible to make, they just take more time, guts and talent than the guys making this title probably have.
[/cynicism]
14/04/2010 at 13:32 Kester says:
What is wrong with you all? There are aliens disintegrating a man! Dying horribly is absolutely the spirit of XCom :D
Seriously, I reckon this could be pretty good. The thing that the Bioshock and System Shock games did really well through the audio logs was get across the sheer terror and despair of ordinary people caught up in events. I think that’s a great fit to the XCom universe, especially if they manage to give the same emotional depth to your squadmates before they get turned inside out in front of your eyes.
14/04/2010 at 14:17 mrmud says:
It is not made by irrational, it is made by 2K Marin…
14/04/2010 at 14:19 Kester says:
But they are all ex-Irrational Bioshock guys, right? I do have trouble keeping up with who’s gone where.
14/04/2010 at 18:13 D says:
24K Boston = Irrational, 24K Marin = No idea. Notice I did the 24k because of their DLC sizes.
14/04/2010 at 13:40 Saiko Kila says:
“True to the roots”… “FBI agent”… “By setting the game in a first-person perspective”… There’s only one person who could make it good, but he’s gone for now. When he finally cometh back the World will end. Well, maybe that’s better than being eaten by low-poly flying rings leisurely shooting plasma in the countryside.
14/04/2010 at 13:49 jackflash says:
Maybe some of us could band together and just make a new renderer for the original X-COM, sort of like making a new tileset for Dwarf Fortress?
14/04/2010 at 13:51 stormbringer951 says:
Well, damn.
When I saw the headline, I dared to hope that X-Com would have a proper sequel. This is probably going to be a rehash of Enforcer or the (cancelled) Alliance rather than a proper sequel (in the vein of Genesis).
For fans of the real X-Com, go have a look at UFO: Alien Invasion or UFO: The Two Sides.
:(
14/04/2010 at 13:55 Jon says:
…Yeah, I’m going to go back to Silent Storm 2, a game about nazis that still managed to get most of the gameplay of X-com down right.
And *didn’t* decide to just be another cinematic driven FPS. Entire genres have been born and died since I played Duke Nukem 3D, and wow, the cinematic driven fps is still the sa-Yo Jon, I’m really happy for you…I’ll let you finish. But Halo had one of the best gameplay additions of all time! It introduced vehicles and health regen!!
Yes, incredibly minor variances to the genre. This is a big problem, there is a sizable part of the gaming community that loves FPSes. Am I complaining? No, I like them too. But not every game has to become one. Stand up. Say no. Alec, I’m sure you’ll say be hopeful, but I’d rather be assertive and wrong, than just sit there while the game companies tell me what I want.
14/04/2010 at 14:02 IvanHoeHo says:
I don’t get why would they use this IP for a FPS. Fallout 3 works(-ish – after it’s modded) because the world was interesting. X-com/UFO, on the other hand, relies completely on its gameplay, and it is nothing without its combat mechanics and its management aspects. I wish companies would stop misusing franchises.
It’s always better to be pleasantly surprised than to see opportunities squandered. It is the way of the internet.
14/04/2010 at 14:03 Tired of all this says:
The merits of Fallout 3 had nothing to do with the Fallout license, and those merits extended to ultraviolence, mods, atmosphere and exploration.
14/04/2010 at 16:14 Corporate Dog says:
Wha-?
I dare say that the atmosphere you speak of as a merit is pretty well chained to the Fallout license… unless you’re suggesting that there are OTHER games out there, which have you shooting lasers at mutants while the Inkspots croon a haunting little ditty in the background.
14/04/2010 at 14:06 Why says:
First Fallout 3.
Then Syndicate.
And now X-Com?
My hate knows no bounds.
15/04/2010 at 01:42 Tom O'Bedlam says:
*yawn*
15/04/2010 at 11:57 You mad says:
But don’t you see?
Molesting old franchises = Originality!
14/04/2010 at 14:14 Ryuga says:
This is the most cynical and useless idea for a remake I’ve read about in a long time. If they’re gonna pull this one off, they really have their work cut out for them.. Personally, I don’t have much hope that this game will be anything but an abysmal failure. But I suppose we shall see.
As for the call not to pass final judgment, well, let’s not. But if we’re not gonna have an opinion about this (does it sounds like a good idea? a great idea? brilliant? idea of the century?), then I think the comments thread might as well be disabled.
In closing, I think Cartha. .wait.. X-COM FPS should be leveled, burned, and plowed with salt.
14/04/2010 at 14:27 Doug F says:
This gives me some hope that it could be good.
14/04/2010 at 14:45 WCG says:
Yeah, we sure need another first-person shooter, don’t we? We’ve had a terrible drought of those. It’s almost as if mainstream game developers are as imitative as television producers. When will they take a chance with something new, like a first-person shooter?
And I’m sure glad they’re taking the X-Com name to make a game nothing like one of the greatest games of all-time. I would absolutely hate having to play a great game like that again. And this way, I can save my money.
2K Games must be so proud of being exactly like everyone else AND ruining the name of one of the greatest games ever.
14/04/2010 at 14:49 DaveyJones says:
If they can manage to make randomized levels work, as well as make it a fun FPS zwith strong RTS/TBS elements… I may never buy another game. However, it’ll most likely end up looking like Freedom Fighters: Aliens! Which hey, may not be bad, but nowhere near the mark they should be trying to hit. Speaking of FF, a sequel would be lovely right about now…
14/04/2010 at 14:50 Pardoz says:
Once they’ve finished making XCOM, the first-person shooter about an FBI agent, they can go into TV production and make a show about wannabe opera singers performing arias in front of a panel of cruel, snarky judges and call it “The Sopranos”.
14/04/2010 at 17:01 Ryuga says:
This! Ten times.
14/04/2010 at 14:51 Seras says:
“but c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game?”
i care more about getting an awesome new turn-based strategy game than i do about getting another generic AAA shooter.
14/04/2010 at 14:55 RogB says:
command and conquer: renegade.
it might be ‘in the spirit’ of C&C but it certainly aint C&C
14/04/2010 at 15:04 Mr_Day says:
You are absolutely right.
Unlike C&C, Renegade had decent multipla *is taken outside*
You can’t deny the truth! Renegade was a lot of fun in multiplayer! *is shot*
14/04/2010 at 15:21 Throdax says:
This comes as a bit of a surprise…. I really don’t see how they can translate the tactical decision that was present in X-COM to a FPS…
-What will determine the accuracy of the shots? My aiming? To aim at a head shoot and to “miss” because some random stat? Might as well not aim…
- Since we are now a soldier, what happens if we die? Game over? Guess I’ll send a ton of rookies while I sit in the landing craft sipping cappuccinos
- Will our super FBI agent also pilot the crafts that shoot down the UFOs?
- Where is the tension of turn points? Should I try one more auto shoot or save those points to crouch and wait for opportunity fire? Sure the FPS can had its own kind of tensions, but not the X-COM tension.
- Will our FBI agent have the power to purchase new bases outside the USA (gasp!)?
- I can’t wait until the release of the Battle Isle TPS/Platformer…
The UFO series from Altar, although tried to capture those feelings with varying degrees of success during the 3 games, but at least they tried.
X-COM is dead, long live X-COM
14/04/2010 at 16:12 GetOutOfHereStalker says:
this is worse then rape, murder, and the holocaust combined.
these guys should be tried for war crimes and executed.. move over catholics, these guys are fucking kids harder then you ever can.
14/04/2010 at 16:14 GetOutOfHereStalker says:
now when the new generation thinks of x-com they’ll think of that awful fps that touched them in their no-no spot instead of the tbs games.
14/04/2010 at 16:31 apa says:
oh yeah! While they are at it, they should make “Dreamland Chronicles: Freedom Ridge”. I was so waiting for it…and then it was canceled:
http://commanderx.xcomufo.com/dreamland/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dreamland_Chronicles:_Freedom_Ridge
http://ps2.ign.com/objects/014/014211.html
14/04/2010 at 16:38 Nick says:
“did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game?”
Civ 5? Or is it not triple A?
14/04/2010 at 16:40 PASTRIES says:
“gripping narrative ride”
UGHHHH
14/04/2010 at 16:42 Adrian says:
First person….. Bioshock 2 developers….. this is gonna suck!
14/04/2010 at 17:08 Jacques says:
D’intcha hear? The Dungeon Keeper license was sold over a year ago to some Chinese MMO company.
14/04/2010 at 17:10 Jacques says:
Sorry, that was a failed reply.
14/04/2010 at 17:14 Bret says:
I just want to say that if the Blaster Bomb is properly implemented, this will be one of the best games ever.
14/04/2010 at 17:16 Sam C. says:
Oh, they say you are an FBI agent, but this is what really happens: you go to investigate a UFO crash site. driving up in your unmarked sedan and start filling out your paperwork when – BAM! A Skyranger roars in, and twelve rookies with high explosive packs pile out, level the place, and leave. Cut to your broken body in the flaming ruins that was a farm. THE END
14/04/2010 at 17:21 Hat Galleon says:
Oh no
Oh no oh no oh no
XCOM WHY
I really, really want this to be good. So badly. I want an Xcom game where you have to conduct missions and have co-op and have to clear out cities with minimal civilian casualties and essentially Xcom if it wasn’t turn-based and was instead a tactical FPS with squads and teammates, and still the base management and item management and vehicle management and such. That could be amazing. This will probably not be that, from what they’ve said so far, but I hope BEYOND HOPE that it is something like what I mentioned or something better.
Please don’t mess it up, 2K.
PLEASE
14/04/2010 at 18:21 DJA says:
When I was a kid everyone I knew that was in to games would talk about stuff like this all the time (XCOM the fps! Doom but you can talk to the monsters! or whatever) but always in a positive, wouldn’t it be cool kind of way. It’s easy to say that this will suck but it’s far more fun to think about the ways that this could be great.
14/04/2010 at 18:48 Wulf says:
My interest really depends on whether this is a shooter with procedurally generated areas. Could anyone here say that they wouldn’t be excited to see that? All they’d have to do is make it a bit like Natural Selection and have procedurally generated areas, that could be a real hit, like nothing else on the market, and yet it could still be true to XCOM.
Do I have faith that they’ll have the imagination that I do, and the willingness to pull through on such a title? I honestly don’t know. But if this is a procedurally generated strategy-shooter based on the XCOM Universe, then… well, what can I say? I’m on board. I’m willing to give them a chance. I just hope they won’t make it a linear, not-procedurally generated corridor shooter with no strategy elements.
It’s interesting that 2K Australia are involved, too. Hmmm.
14/04/2010 at 19:00 Mario Figueiredo says:
I’m not following you on this one, wulf.
How come being procedural makes it acceptable? If I want procedural generated content for no other reason than… IT IS procedural generated content, I go and watch fractals for a couple of hours. That should set me straight.
14/04/2010 at 19:48 Wulf says:
Then it’s a lack of understanding in regards to procedural content. That’s actually kind of sad, really.
Okay, I’ll update you.
These are good reads:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21165
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_generation#Video_games
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=537
http://www.introversion.co.uk/subversion/
Procedural generation can be used to slot prefabricated chunks of levels together, even thousands of them, in new and interesting ways, and for outdoor areas you could use procedural geometry, a mix of the two could easily create areas which are entirely unique every time you play. The problem with SWAT IV is that people learned the levels and just sent the AI through, they knew where all the enemy forces were, they knew the terrain, and it was easy.
Now with procedural generation, you could have differently shaped ruiins, indoor areas that are different every time you walk through them, hills, mountains, and bridges that weren’t there the last time you played, and this adds a completely new element to strategy, because it means that people don’t auto-win just by knowing the level, since there’s no strategy in that at all, that’s just following a script, and anyone can follow a script.
In fact, Valve tried to do something like this in Left 4 Dead, by having chunks of levels which changed every time you played them, so that you couldn’t just trudge through the level the same way every time. If you look at Borderlands that had procedurally generated guns much as is mentioned in one of the articles above, and if you take a look at Subversion, you’ll see that it’s possible to generate entire cities which can be walked around on foot level.
If you think ‘procedural’ == ‘fractals’ and that’s that, then hopefully you’ll have learned a lot more by the time you finish reading this post and the links provided.
At the moment, we’re at a point where we can take that a step further, and have genuinely unique levels. That ruined town wasn’t there last time, this complex has a completely different layout, those mountains, that tree range, those bridges, all of that stuff has all moved around! In other words, players are challenged by levels which are never the same, and for a strategy game that’s absolutely perfect.
For a number of genres, procedural generation is the future.
14/04/2010 at 19:50 Wulf says:
Oh, and…
http://www.minecraft.net/
The land, ores, monster placement, monster generation, trees, and almost everything else except for the player and the impact the player has on their environment is procedurally generated.
14/04/2010 at 20:11 Mario Figueiredo says:
Don’t patronize me Wulf. I’m a software developer, thank you.
Instead answer my question. Which was, how on earth does procedurally generated content suddenly makes a game better?
14/04/2010 at 20:13 Alec Meer says:
Have a discussion, not a hissy argument, or I’ll wipe the whole conversation.
14/04/2010 at 20:15 Wulf says:
@Mario
“Don’t patronize me Wulf. I’m a software developer, thank you.”
I felt you were patronising me with the fractals comment, I felt patronised so I responded in kind.
“Instead answer my question. Which was, how on earth does procedurally generated content suddenly makes a game better?”
I answered it. In my explanation I covered why I thought that strategy games would benefit from randomised maps provided via procedural generation.
@Alec
Fair enough.
14/04/2010 at 20:26 AS says:
@Mario Figueiredo: “people don’t auto-win just by knowing the level” is it in a nutshell. Procedural generation lets luck back into the equation, forcing people to actually think about playing instead of spamming grenades here, run into there, and collect points.
@Wulf: It doesn’t have to be procedural generation, either – it could be as simple as destructive cover, point being the Frostbite engine for BC2. Rush maps have a set flow, but because the terrain can be changed strategy can change on the fly from attempting to leapfrog between buildings to ranged attacks due to the enemies blowing out your buildings. Destructible terrain seems to be the middle ground between the two sides, allowing the game to be more dynamic.
14/04/2010 at 20:37 Wulf says:
@AS
I agree, I love destructible maps (and I’ve spoken highly of RF:G for having them). I think procedural content and destructible content can go hand in hand though to create perhaps the best strategical experience ever. In fact, there’s an isometric open source game that does almost that, and it does it very well. In a strategy game, how much fun it is is in how varied the levels and areas can be, at least I feel that’s the case.
Plus, procedural generation stops “mapathy” from setting in.
14/04/2010 at 20:40 Mario Figueiredo says:
@Wulf
Don’t worry. I think that was directed at me. My reply was initially more… colorful. Alec deleted that. So I rephrased. Only, I did it before he posted. So it may seem it was directed at you, but it was really me.
Anyways, I completely disagree. Procedurally generated content is just one aspect in a myriad of game elements that can turn failure into success. It’s not because content could be procedurally generated that suddenly I can see light at the end of the tunnel. Even if I did it right, everything else involved in making a game could ruin it. And I must remind you words were:
My answer is no. I wouldn’t. Or maybe, possibly. I’d be first a lot more interesting in many other things before procedurally generated content factored in my evaluation of the game.
@AS
Procedurally generated content and randomized content are not the same thing. I can do the latter without ever touching the former. Even though some purists may disagree and complain it’s a form of procedurally generated content, I think Wulf was aiming for a little more than simply random content.
14/04/2010 at 20:51 Wulf says:
@Mario
As a seasoned coder myself, I would argue that any form of randomisation within a game is procedural content, but the very virtue of randomisation. That’s basically what it means to be procedurally generated, to randomise, to make different on each generation.
We can agree to disagree, but I think procedural generation (or randomisation, if you wish to call it that) is necessary for future games to thrive, we need to move away from set pieces and more to living worlds, and I think that procedural generation is the way to do that.
Procedural generation factors into my interest for all of the above reasons, and I feel it’s necessary to point out that if Minecraft had set levels, it wouldn’t even be nearly as interesting. This is something that Notch appears to feel the same about, because he’s said as much on his dev blog many times. Set pieces can get boring really fast, and procedural generation is the future because it means that there are no set pieces, we can have AI and generation that can get to the point where randomised elements can look like set pieces, but could be different each time. I feel that backing away from that is lazy, but that’s just my personal opinion.
14/04/2010 at 21:12 Mario Figueiredo says:
Well, we will indeed have to agree to disagree because procedurally generated content does not necessarily mean randomized content. What it means is the ability to generate content on the fly from your code base. The randomization aspect is completely optional and may not be present in your algorithms. Read your own links.
PGC (allow me, just so I don’t have to type it all the time) is used already by a good number of games to reduce its size on disk. It’s also used as a technique on 3D development to produce small variations to different copies of a texture, to give a little more realism to the scene. It also has serious applications in AI or game world responses to player conditions and actions, as Left4Dead “Director” shown us.
But if indeed you mean randomized content when you say PGC then yes, I would agree this would be a bonus to an FPS.
14/04/2010 at 21:26 Wulf says:
@Mario
Errr…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_generation
I know I linked to this earlier but I realise it’s necessary to link it again, it’s also necessary to point out the opening paragraph to you, especially the very first sentence: “Procedural generation is a widely used term in the production of media; it refers to content generated algorithmically rather than manually.”
There is no randomisation in the world of computers, and you should be familiar with this, it’s just an algorithmic approximation of randomisation, but it’s not truly random, this has a lot to do with the binary nature of hardware. Therefore, any random element within a game is algorithmically random, and generated from an algorithm within a procedure. Therefore, logically, any randomised element is actually procedurally generated, for the reason I’ve just explained.
My point is that whenever you create a random element in a game, you’re actually creating a procedurally generated element, whether you want to accept that term or not. It’s procedurally generated because you’re relying on an algorithm to imitate randomisation to create an element that will differ each time the player plays through the game. And because current hardware (except for perhaps quantum computers) is currently unable of true randomisation, to say that you’re creating random elements is a bit of an oxymoron. You are, truly, creating a procedurally generated element. I didn’t link that article just for laughs, I did it for the benefit of this argument so that we’re on the same page.
Where we differ is that you seem to have some stubborn position where you want to say that procedurally generated elements aren’t procedurally generated, and yet the case is truly to the contrary, and I’ve provided enough evidence of this. Once this has been established, hopefully we can move beyond it. You might be using procedural generation on a smaller scale, but you’re still using procedural generation, and to understand fully what procedural generation is you need to read the article.
I don’t mean to patronise you, but we really shouldn’t be having this argument… it’s absurd in the worst possible way.
What you’re failing to understand is that procedural generation can come in small and big pieces, it can be within an algorithm, it can be a small part of an algorithm, but the keyword here is algorithm (I really shouldn’t have to be explaining this). So what you’re talking about is meshing procedurally generated pieces of code with static pieces of code, that doesn’t automagically make it an impossible thing, because ‘random’ in the sense of computers is impossible, completely impossible, instead you’re just misunderstanding what procedural generation is.
I urge you to read my links. It’s there in the first sentence, you can’t miss it.
14/04/2010 at 21:35 Alec Meer says:
Enough! Move on, forget it, have a nicer day as a result.
14/04/2010 at 21:38 Mario Figueiredo says:
I agree. It’s best it stops here…
14/04/2010 at 21:44 Wulf says:
In fact, I’m just going to add one last thing for everyone. Even if Mario doesn’t…
Static Construct:
An NPC has a conversation with you, after the conversation they perform one action, which is defined by calling an animation.
Procedurally Generated Construct:
An NPC has a conversation with you, after the conversation they can perform three actions, these three actions are defined in the code, but the computer picks which one, perhaps via rand() (just to keep things simple), this can change each time the player plays and depends on no other elements. This is procedural by its very nature, because this result is ‘generated algorithmically rather than manually’.
This can happen on small scales, or it can even extend to determine the size of mountains, or the placement of buildings on the landscape. None of this is ‘random’.
14/04/2010 at 19:09 Diogenes says:
Couldn’t agree more.
14/04/2010 at 19:12 Koozer says:
Heey, the X-COMs were turn-based strategy? Never knew that.
*checks Steam prices*
14/04/2010 at 19:45 Bret says:
Cheap.
You need the first one, like water, or food, or air.
Get it.
14/04/2010 at 19:53 Skyvik says:
You’ve got guns, you’ve aliens, you’ve got giant skull-shaped explosions – I can see why an FPS might make sense.
However, if I had the rights to the best turn-based game ever made (you heard me right, chess boy)
then I would be thinking to myself – hmm, I wonder if there is a platform with hundreds of millions of users, a very large proportion of whom have already shown themselves to be people who like to play games on said platform and where games don’t require fancy expenso-graphics.
Then I would go off and make an old-fashioned turn-based squad game for Facebook and retire to swim in my piles of money. Who wouldn’t want to throw chrysalids at their friends?
14/04/2010 at 20:29 Vinraith says:
There are really two things to hope for here, if we want to spin this positively.
1) That this, despite this silly branding, will be an interesting tactical FPS. There simply aren’t enough of those, and there are even fewer of them outside the “soldiers in a war” archetype. I’ll grant that the flagrant misuse of the X-Com name is a concern from the start, but it’s not impossible this will be something interesting despite the name.
2) That the inevitable wailing about real X-Com games will inspire someone to make exactly that: a real X-Com game. The name isn’t important, so there’s no reason they need the rights to the franchise, X-Com was defined by its gameplay and a studio interested in recreating that unusual blend of contextual metagame and turn based squad tactical combat could do so without having to ask anyone’s permission. Surely the outcry over this is proof enough that there’s a market for such a thing, and surely X-Com’s continued success and popularity is sufficient evidence that a large budget and fancy graphics aren’t particularly vital to the process. Indie developers, small strategy houses, and other off-mainstream game makers to your marks!
14/04/2010 at 20:33 AS says:
@Vinraith: I’d like to see a set of graphics made for Sleep is Death from X-COM, that has the potential to be incredibly interesting. A rookie trooper seeing his squad get shot down around him, seeing partners die while arming the grenade and dropping it in the middle of the squad, even the Skyranger captured by aliens, leaving no place to run.
14/04/2010 at 21:13 Outdated says:
>FPS
So it won’t have the gameplay of the UFO: Enemy Unknown and Terror from the Deep.
The only good thing in the entire series.
>Narrative
Based on what? There’s practically no fucking story to X-Com. Not even the alien research tidbits amount to much.
>360 AAA-title
And there goes any chance of this being decent.
Fuck. Hearing this after the Starbreeze guys owning the copyright to Syndicate is just heartbreaking.
14/04/2010 at 21:47 ascagnel says:
From the Kotaku comments:
“Until I hear otherwise, this is what I am assuming:
The world map control is exactly the same, but now when you land it turns into an FPS version of Valkyria Chronicles, reskinned with Plasma Tanks, Blaster Launchers, civilians, and UFOs.”
I got to play a bit of Valkyria Chronicles, and it was the closest to X-Com that I’ve seen in a long time. It’s missing destructible terrain (a common sticking point of every wanna-be also-ran X-Com clone), but gets the turn-based combat right. A twist, to add to the strategy: you can directly control a squaddie, if you choose, allowing for better aim — or a complete miss.
If they go in that direction, I’ll be tenuously excited. Still, so little has been released that I feel its unfair to judge. If this is the SWAT 4 team, then I have full faith in them doing something good with it.
14/04/2010 at 22:41 pkt-zer0 says:
At times like this, I’m incredibly glad that Starcraft 2 and Civ 5 and Street Fighter 4 have not been turned into FPS games for the sake of ‘immersion’.
15/04/2010 at 00:19 WiPa says:
I HAVE RAEG.
15/04/2010 at 04:06 Haborym says:
I am an X-COM fan and I want a proper sequel :(
I may play this game, I may like this game, but it will never be an X-COM game to me, just like Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game.
On the other hand if Julian Gollop were designing this game I’d be behind it 100%.
15/04/2010 at 05:13 Jayt says:
Rarrr I’m an angry internet man.
15/04/2010 at 07:53 drewski says:
I’m pretty OK with this. A FPS that isn’t some generic WW2 or “modern combat”, on rails snooz-a-thon? Yes please. The XCOM universe is a great place to set a shooter – alilen invasion being second only to global conspiracy in the “times in which it’s OK to shoot everything” heirarchy, so I’m not too bothered if it’s not a genuine sequel to the original games.
Maybe once 2K get the license up and running again, they can let someone else do a more authentic, strategic sequel.
15/04/2010 at 08:05 Rugged Malone says:
At this rate we’ll be lucky if it doesn’t turn out to be an MMO.
(Although an MMO based on the original X-COM gameplay would be pretty damn sweet.)
15/04/2010 at 08:07 Magic H8 Ball says:
“Currently in development exclusively for the Xbox 360® video game and entertainment system from Microsoft and Windows PC”
And it’s made by 2K Marin, the Boredomshock 2 guys? Oh yes, that sounds extremely promising, I can’t wait!
Can’t say I care much for it though, they already raped the franchise with Enforcer and all these buggy, ugly and stupid post-Apocalypse spin-offs. So it would be like complaining about Mothership Zeta after Fallout 3 was already released.
15/04/2010 at 14:15 drewski says:
Try some Prozac.
15/04/2010 at 10:03 Flakfizer says:
Coming next – Lemmings reimagined…
As one of the titular Lemmings you will get to experience the thrill of first person platform puzzling across an entire level. The groundbreaking ‘hands off’ gameplay means you will watch as you walk towards the end of a ledge and hope the AI chooses to hep you out…..
15/04/2010 at 17:54 Illium says:
Im one of those old X-Com fans who even gave Apocalypse and Interceptor a fair chanse and came to like them for what they were, lots of longing and dissapointment on the two scrapped games and shattered hopes for Enforcer.
Now Enforcer had its crisis and became something terribel instead of what ppl might have hoped for.
I also liked all those Clones eventhoue some of them differ alot from the 3 first X-Com games.
Maybe X-Com Enemy Known will be more then expected from this sneak peak, but the FBI thing makes it feel like a total different game as so many have pointed out, Someone said it smelled like USA vs Aliens not global funded X-Com vs Aliens and I agree, kind of kills whole point in calling it X-Com, isnt it?
I always wanted a new X-Com game or at least a Clone that have Multiplayer in some way, LaserSquadNemesis gave me huge hopes for a MP X-Com TBS.
Make a simultaneous turns for players and AI “hidden movements” turn not unlike civ.
Point is a co-op X-Com, perhaps similar to DoW II’s campaign-invite a friend option.
The idea of having two players making joint missions, two transports and flank the aliens, research different trees and send each others supplies or tech.
I liked the alliance concept they had in the X-Com Clone UFO: Afterlight, perhaps solve MP issue with the ‘invite friend to campaign’ abillity and let it start here,. a player could choose which faction to play once you made a pact with the aliens to fend off new threat a common foe. Huge tech-tree and more stages where the story development changes accordingly to your research and special mission events and choises, letting the game expand beyond one Geoscape and a end game mission like mars in X-Com 1 and other dimension areas in X-Com 3, always wanted it to be more, conquer alien bases off world and thus make the game bigger like X-Com Interceptor. – well,.. however they would solve all this, it would speak to me as a good sequal or indeed worthy Clone.
Ofc it would have the basics;
Base building, Troops, Research, Workshop, Interceptors, Geoscape & Away missions where you direct your squads tatically and if needed be just stun/kill the new type of alien, loot and drag the corpse into the transport and flee. Have different ranks on the Aliens and not just Commanders as in the Clone Extraterrestrials, loved when you got tech unlocks from medics in TFTD or obtained location on a alien colony from a Navigator. Sell alien corpses for extra income aswell as alien artifacts, track down alien activity by checking areas where your funding is low.
Use alien or alien-terran hybrid gear. Each Troop have Stand, Kneel, Prone, Aimed, Snap and Auto depending on armor and weight.
I dont know what exactly the rest of you X-Com fans have been longing for but it seems like moste of us think TBS with random generated Missions and a Geosphere is the fundation of what we want in a sequel not FPS.
But aye well see how they bring this new FBI Agent based-game about. Erhm I mean this new X-Com about.
I could let this one pass, aslong as they make yet another game but this time something we have been longing for.
Oh one thing about Steam Interceptor,.. Fix the damned alien jaming probe!
16/04/2010 at 09:36 Mudge Pendragon says:
Sadly I don’t believe this will do any justice to Xcom.. in fact I thought so little of Bioshock 1 I don’t even own 2.
I still have xcom on my system now as I type.. whilst change can often and is more than often for the better in the long run, I think fps really loses the point of what Xcom was..
To date there has never been another game that has captured me like Unknown did the research of tech, the terror missions the watching the world for those little blips of alien caft …
I’m sure I’ll look again when there is more on the game.. but at this point.. I shall continue to breath.
17/04/2010 at 01:51 sinister agent says:
re-imagining
Right, that’s enough for me. I’ll commit this to the ‘to forget’ pile until I hear someone reliable raving about it. No point getting worked up about it, but I’m not going to get my hopes up for anything that come with that kind of zazz either.
22/04/2010 at 12:30 BigBros says:
Some hazy details from someone I never heard of on some Internet forum:
http://www.strategycore.co.uk/forums/New-X-COM-Announced-t8069.html&st=40&p=95762#entry95762
Don’t know if I do not want…
01/05/2010 at 23:18 Grim says:
Im not too sure about a FPS X-COM but I might check it out. I really like the TBS aspect of the original. Appearantly none of you have tried the game UFO:Extraterestrials released in 2007. While not claiming to be an X-COM sequal it is the closest thing to the original I have had the pleasure of playing. You all should check it out. I believe the publisher is Chaos Concepts but not sure.
ufo.ufo-extraterrestrials.com is the website and I believe the are releasing UFO:Extraterestrials2 in the Q4 this year as well.
02/05/2010 at 12:08 Yargh says:
Alec, your preview of the new game does indeed make it sound quite interesting, one to watch to make sure it retains the ‘XCom feel’.
06/05/2010 at 17:19 New Age Gamer says:
“c’mon, did you really think a AAA title in 2010 (or 11, or whenever it ends up being released) was going to be a turn-based strategy game?”
There is no logic in that statement.
Turn-based games have their public and their niche, just as action games have. Always have been, always will be, and that’s nothing to do with specific years or times. If anything, it has to do with retarded marketing executive brats pulling the shots at game developer companies. It’s only unfortunate that *they* don’t play computer games to begin with, and as such they’re not electable to represent the gaming public.
By the same reasoning, we should all be playing turn-based games exclusively and not action games, since the very first video games in history were action titles and not turn-based. Turn-based games came LATER, as an EVOLUTION of MERE action games.
Action games = old.
Turn-Based games = new age.