2K Dates XCom With a Brand-New Gameplay Trailer

[Inkidu]

Gaming Purist. n. Any person who believes his or her beloved game should die alone in the miserable ditch of obscurity and fade from the annals of history rather than get a sincere reboot that gets new people interested in the franchise once more.

Syn. Selfish, delusional, notalgia-shaded, self-defeatist

In seriousness. I've never heard of X-Com before now, but now I'm excited to play it, and maybe the other games. Strategy doesn't do overly well on consoles either.

So yeah, in less harsh words. Would you rather see it never come out again, or get a sincere reboot?

 

[Vankraken]

The series has had a hard life with 2 known project cancellations (genesis and alliance), 3 cash-in titles (terror from the deep, enforcer, interceptor), and the only true sequel published to be forced out in an rushed and incomplete state (apocalypse).

What 2K is basically nercoing the series to cash in its name to generate buzz and have basically nothing to do with the X-Com or general UFOlogy the series was based on.

I seriously was hoping the game died in development after the horrible reveal they had at the last E3.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Would you rather see it never come out again, or get a sincere reboot?

Personally, I'm fine with the former.

Enemy Unknown, Terror from the Deep and Apocalypse were a neat little trilogy. I still play them from time to time. They were a trilogy in the sense of being 3 games that shared an evolving yet similar gameplay structure but also in terms of having an overarching storyline. While each game was different, there was an overarching continuity.

This game does not have the gameplay and is not part of that continuity, so what the hell is the point of calling it X-Com? At least Enforcer and Interceptor could claim to be part of the same continuity even if they dropped the ball gameplay wise.

I don't resent the game. What I resent is the allegation that I'm stupid enough to want to buy something because they gave it the same title as something I used to love in my teens despite the fact it's completely different. They could have called it something else and I'd be pretty excited about it, but as it is I just feel slightly disgusted at the really cynical attempt to exploit my nostalgia.

As for 'having it come out again'. Yeah, there are plenty of games out there heavily based on X-Com. I have the UFO series, Frozen Synapse very recently, and Xenonauts looks to be an almost direct remake. X-Com fans are pretty well catered to as fans of a minority genre go. I don't care about the survival of the IP, I care about the features which made the game worth playing, and I don't see any of those here so yeah, why the hell would I care about the survival of an IP I've been perfectly fine without for over 10 years? The only reason I would possibly give a crap about an X-Com FPS is the storyline, which as I've mentioned they've abandoned and which wasn't the reason anyone played the game anyway.

The issue is not 'OMG they changed X-Com', the issue is 'why the fuck did you use that IP?' It's not a development issue, it's a marketing issue. I resent some marketing twats essentially trying to trick me into buying a game because I'm a fan of a long dead series. It's just cynical beyond belief, and rather than having the intended effect it makes me want to punish the studio by deliberately not buying a game which actually looks sort of okay.

 

[Vankraken]

Gaming Purist. n. Any person who believes his or her beloved game should die alone in the miserable ditch of obscurity and fade from the annals of history rather than get a sincere reboot that gets new people interested in the franchise once more.

Syn. Selfish, delusional, notalgia-shaded, self-defeatist

In seriousness. I've never heard of X-Com before now, but now I'm excited to play it, and maybe the other games. Strategy doesn't do overly well on consoles either.

So yeah, in less harsh words. Would you rather see it never come out again, or get a sincere reboot?

Actually the series is known to people who like strategy games and to a lesser extent PC gaming. When the originals came out on Steam they were some of the highest selling games for a rather lengthy time.
Also its not a sincere reboot because it has nothing to do with the original. This is set in the 1950's as an USA organization similar to the X-Files against polygons while the original X-Com was established 1998 (game starts in 1999) as a multi-national special ops entity against multiple species of aliens including the classic Gray (called Sectoids in the game).

The original was a tactical turn based strategy game while this new game is generic FPS. X-Com also had a FPS cash-in game called enforcer which was horrible along with a flight sim cash-in which was less horrible. The series never really made enormous commercial success (the strategy games did fairly well) and is mainly remembered for the outstanding gameplay and ground breaking innovation that the original made in the tactical strategy genre. Nobody gives a crap about the non strategy games under its name.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Of course, the other option is that we're just being massively trolled, and that 2k is counting on fans of the original series going apeshit in order to generate more publicity for a fairly mediocre looking new FPS in an over-saturated market of FPS games.

But that would be even more cynical, and I can't support it either.

Regardless, I plan to just let this game go the way of Interceptor and Enforcer, those well remembered and well loved gems of the series whose names have certainly gone down as milestones in the history of gaming and are widely remembered with great affection years after their release.

..or not, because they were bland and added nothing original. Amazing how noone remembers games like that even if you attach a famous IP to them. Weird, huh?

 

[Terminal Blue]

If you want to sit there and believe the franchise wasn't dead in the water, fine. You can go play this thing they called a game:

Which was released 10 years ago, and which noone remembers or gives a shit about, and which actually made sense as a shameless cash grab because it was released when X-Com was still a relevant franchise. Look up, half the people posting here never played an X-Com game in their lives, what's the point in using that IP for a totally unrelated game in 2011?

Saying 'well, this is better than enforcer so we should all be celebrating' is like saying eating boiled celery is the best thing ever because at least you're not eating shit. Enforcer was a crappy cash grab but so what? It's been 10 years. Do we need another attempt to milk that cow without any of the things which made it fun in the first place?

As I said.. who the fuck cares about IP for its own sake (except maybe star wars fans). Saying fans should be happy just because a game is getting released with X-Com on it and it doesn't look completely shit is a really flawed argument. If someone released a game which incorporated the features I enjoyed in X-Com games, they could call it 'rainbow vajazzle adventure' for all I care and I'd still buy it. But I don't see any AAA studios doing that right now because clearly there's not sufficient market for it.

You're right, X-Com is dead. It's dead, we've buried it, and despite the occasional hiccup we remember it pretty fondly. We don't need someone digging up its corpse and draping its skin around a completely different game in some stupid attempt to sell some random FPS to people who liked X-Com.

Reads above post..... LOLOLOLOL

Why are you... Wait.. did you think I was being serious?

Actually, I just scrolled down my Steam list and found I actually own Enforcer and Interceptor. Got them with the X-Com bundle when it came out. Never installed them. Never played them. Never will.

Like I said. The continuation of IP doesn't matter, we've lived without it for 10 years without jumping off a bridge. What matters is that we got some good games out of it a while back. What's hateful here is the element of deception in trying to use those good games to sell a completely non-sequitur game with no relationship at all.

I mean seriously.. how fucking hard would it have been to pay your marketing people to sit in a room for an hour and come up with a new title?

 

[The Random One]

It's like they systematically removed everything that made Xcom fun and/or interesting and replaced it with stuff found on Bioshock's cutting floor.

Just noticed this: go to the 45 second mark in the trailer. There is a clock tower with lightning striking around it. The time on the clock is 10:04, the exact time the lightning struck the clock tower in Back to the Future. Since the game is set in the 50s, that's a pretty damn funny little nod...

I'm such a nerd, I can't believe I noticed that...

Considering I immediately thought of BTTF when I saw the clock tower, I'm amazed I didn't notice that...

 

[Vibhor]

Its not really X-Com anymore, is it?

Yes its XCom now. You know, "streamlined for the audience" thing?

Since when is changing everything streamlining? It has no connection to X-COM at all. In fact, it goes against established lore.

*Sigh*
I hate explaining a joke but here goes.
You see, the name was first written with hyphen i.e. X-Com. Now it is written without hyphen i.e. XCom. So this is why I call it "streamlined for the audience"

 

[Vibhor]

-snip-

Comparing shit to bigger pile of shit are we?
I believe you are playing the wrong game. X-Com series was known for turn based strategy, not third person shooters. In fact, the X-Com series(the first two, coz the third one sucks) had the most detailed turn based action for its time(it still is fucking brilliant). A good sequel for the X-Com doesn't exist. The second one is just a mission pack sequel and the third one is absolutely bad(I cannot put a finger on what is bad about it). A good sequel would just need to update the graphics, change the settings, fix all the bugs and add more items and enemies. I think 2K is trying to make money off the Bioshock setting(games set in 50s make money).

 

[SIXVI06-M]

So it's Crysis 2 in the 1950s?

Pass.

If you've played previous XCom series, you probably won't make nearly as crass an assumption just based on what you saw.

No, I don't think I ever heard of this "Xcom" thingummy before. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/5379-Review-X-Com-Revival-Package]

Watch those assumptions. They'll be the death of you.

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

But they can't just create a game without considering the merits of its predecessors - the whole 'build an alien extermination empire' thing was the best thing about X-Com.

I could swear in a magazine article (PC Powerplay - XCom was the feature on the cover) they said they'd be bringing back building and research and making tons of money D:.

Gosh- if what you say is true, I might wait a bit and see what people who've played the game say about it before buying anything -_-.

 

[Chaos Marine]

The series has had a hard life with 2 known project cancellations (genesis and alliance), 3 cash-in titles (terror from the deep, enforcer, interceptor), and the only true sequel published to be forced out in an rushed and incomplete state (apocalypse).

What 2K is basically nercoing the series to cash in its name to generate buzz and have basically nothing to do with the X-Com or general UFOlogy the series was based on.

I seriously was hoping the game died in development after the horrible reveal they had at the last E3.

You clearly have no idea what you're babbling about. Enemy Unknown and Terror from the Deep are considered the best two.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I could swear in a magazine article (PC Powerplay - XCom was the feature on the cover) they said they'd be bringing back building and research and making tons of money D:.

What they said and what they mean....

Different things entirely.

If it still leads to chest high wall shooting, and we've not seen anything of the building and research...I'd splash out on Frozen Synapse instead.

 

[SIXVI06-M]

I could swear in a magazine article (PC Powerplay - XCom was the feature on the cover) they said they'd be bringing back building and research and making tons of money D:.

What they said and what they mean....

Different things entirely.

If it still leads to chest high wall shooting, and we've not seen anything of the building and research...I'd splash out on Frozen Synapse instead.

To tell the truth, I did feel a little bit uncomfortable because I think I unconsciously spotted the chest high walls... and something in me sank...

But I want to believe in XCom!

Oh well, guess I'll just go for an X-Com Apocalypse marathon instead :3

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

But I want to believe in XCom!

There are still updated versions of UFO/Terror being developed here: http://www.xcomufo.com/links.html

But Xenocide has already been lost.

 

[BrotherRool]

I haven't got anything on the game, I just don't know why they call it X-Com. My best guess was that someone say Bioshock and thought, hmm we need to make a scary game with some sort of old-fashioned aesthetic but what? And then they saw the Fallout reboot and said "look people like having tactical games rebooted as shooters" and had a brainwave and realised the X-Com could do both of those things?