XCOM
polycounter lvl 18
I guess it's official now.
http://www.xcom.com/xcom.html
I like how they don't mention 2K Australia at all.
http://www.xcom.com/xcom.html
I like how they don't mention 2K Australia at all.
Replies
2K Marin is 2K Australia, is it not?
I need my revenge against those terrifying mind control aliens. mother fers.
wat
I suppose if it's a success they will have revived the brand and maybe consider making another strategy X-COM?
Bioshock in the X-COM universe?
Not so sure about that, if its a success they'll make another shooter sequel, if its not a success we wont be seeing an xcom game again for quite some time.
Its systemshock -> bioshock all over again.
its a fail/fail situation.
unless you really like shooters and believe enemy unknown is an antiqued game with no gameplay values at all.
No offense, 2K guys, but right now the X-COM fan inside me is just feeling the tension of fear that comes with an old franchise full of good memories being re-awakened. I know I should be excited about this, but I just can't..
Was scared as hell as a kid.
Guess ill pass this one to keep the memories good.
It's not the first person perspective that is the scary thing, I could live with that, but its the fact that it seems to be a story based ego-shooter, meaning, centered around one character.
I could think of a million ways to do a good squadbased firstperson tactical shooter with basebuilding elements, research, inventorymanagement and dragging the neverending casualties of squadmembers back to the flier, it would actually be kind of cool,
but ridding the game of all the things that made xcom really good is just plain weird, it's not like we have an abundance of these kind of games, thirdperson or firstperson.
I'm a bit sceptical about all this. I mean an Operation Flashpoint with flying saucers could be kinda neat, but with 2k inevitably pulling in a huge budget one would imagine it's going to wind up a fairly homogenised in an attempt to maximise sales, particularly if Bioshock is anything go by. For all its pretentions to heady ideas, that game does play it very safe and rather overly streamlined when it comes to gameplay.
Why can't they just make System Shock 3 already, only not dumb it down like they did Bio and make it a true RPG classic instead... Argh...
you cannot be serious...
I sentence you to an eternity of self flagellation with a fork
Also, how come no one has commented on the image above that's actually from the official website? I'm still hoping it's some kind of joke, because if their idea of appealing to our retro tastes is releasing screenshots that look like something from the days of Bryce 3D and X-COM Apocalypse, then.. I dunno, I guess I'm just sad then..
Yeah.
http://boards.polycount.net/showpost.php?p=1106705&postcount=78
He does have a focus on hero-type games, tho, so I hope he doesn't change it into a 1-man-army kinda thing. That's just not x-com.
baaaaaarrrrrfff
barf barf barf
And no, this isn't him. He's at Irrational, formerly 2K Boston. X-Com is being developed by 2K Marin (and 2K Australia, from what I understand).
Gotta love how they keep ruining these great ole PC games by changing there origins to work on consoles.
Suppose Syndicate by Starbreeze will be a shooter aswell?
IF you want old Xcom.. Go play old XCom!
They are raising this brand from the dead merely to cash in. What a shame.
That kind of thinking is why the series turned sour the first time around :P
What good is there in embracing change if it's not good change?
Is it really so much to ask to keep the game in the same genre?
the problem is that I have been playing the original X-Com for the last 15 fucking years. I love the game and all, but shit, a decent sequel would be nice.
The real topper is that there is a glut of shitty, boring, 5 hour long "story" fps games-- a retarded blend of mindless hand exercises combined with sub-B movie action scenes and plot.
Sometimes when you're asking questions about the validity of a vision or a reboot or sequel, the most valid choice is "should not exist". It's true of SW prequels and special editions, it's true of Indy 4. I think it's true of every X-COM sequel, real or spiritual, of which this gets to be added to the heap.
I don't want to play an FPS game with just a few reminders tugging at me at the edges of what the game it's copping from. Like standing in a control center with a holographic globe as a sly nod to the Geoscape? I think I'll pass, thanks.
But then I remember hearing that the original X-Com was a Turn-Based strategy game. Real-Time Strategy games don't work on consoles, but Turn-Based Strategy games can be adapted to console controls just fine. There is no excuse! This is just a lazy marketing decision that will ultimately dilute what little sway this franchise commands in the hearts of its fans.
On a side note, I don`t consider X-com a series tbh, there is only ONE as far as I`m concerned :shifty:
But even so I have to admit what I played of Xcom, the missions the atmosphere of them, the dark and the searching and the destruction, was good.
I dont know this does not appear to be a good thing. I was hoping someone was going to make a new Xcom but more accesible. I dont mean easy, I mean an Xcom that isnt too obsessed with the miniature details.
I can see this sort of how civilization has evolved to civ4, extremely easy to play, but still quite complex.
but I can also see this as if they would have civ5 be a first person shooter
You know what, I played fall 1 and 2 after playing fallout 3, and I thought fallout 3 is the better game ultimately.
Fan nostalgia doesn't necessarily translate into the game actually being as good as they remember. Maybe they were better relative to when they came out, but they're just ok now.
TBH, I played Deus Ex 8-9 years after it came out, and it was still one of the best games I had ever played. That's an achievement.
Except fallout 3 didn't skip genres that much, it's still a solo-roleplaying game set in the same post apocalyptic world, all games in the series had exploration, and all had roughly the same skillsystem and such.
I mean, I don't mind seeing what people do with games when they make new versions, fallout 3 might not be fallout 1&2, but it still was a worthy game in the series.
Can't they just call it FBI: enemy unknown, considering xcom doesn't form until several years later?
There's the thing, who played the game, and said I want less scope, I want to be one person, in a linear narrative.
First Person Shooter doesnt seem to be what XCOM is about at all.
Lets hope Edios Montreal don't screw Thief 4 up, probably my favourite series...ever!
Well, see that's just my opinion. It's great if you enjoyed it, I mean, I enjoyed it also, but the game, in my opinion, was broken. The gamebryo engine is extremely dated looking, and the gameplay itself was just so boring. Blowing up someones head with V.A.T.S the 20th time just isn't as fun. I can't bear to even look at let alone play the game again. With the first 2 fallouts, the replayability is there. Doing a run as a dumb as a brick character, then being a suave charmer character the next, or being a woman and selling your body for bottlecaps. Something about 3 just didn't have the same flare for me. It wasn't the move to first person that did it, that could have been alright but I feel as though more than that was lost. The story was awful, the quests, the dungeons. It really did feel like an Elder Scrolls game (And, my opinion about Oblivion is about the same. Good at first, eventually extremely boring, no replayability. )
I won't hold my breath for this game, but, i can hope that Deus Ex 3 and Thief 4 are good. I have no doubts X-Com will be enjoyable, but it certainly won't be the same.