Trailers: XCOM - Gameplay Trailer

[acer840]

Did 2K games win me when after this trailer I bought the Original X-Com UFO Defense: Enemy Unknown from STEAM?

And this really isn't X-Com, and if it is, it's not Cannon, because the original X-Com was assembled in 1999.

 

[Phishfood]

I've spotted another problem here.

The choice is "spend turret now or get better guns later"

a la, if you are getting raped up the ass now from crappy guns you have to spend your only chance to get better guns later. Hrm...

I had a similar beef with the original deus ex a couple weeks ago.

"You did the whole level with non-lethal takedowns? here, have some bonus lethal ammo!"

anyhoo, this is in my "wait for a steam sale" category. It looks ok, but it ain't x-com and it ain't even special.

Can't wait for xenonaughts.

Also, try UFO:AI. Its buggy, but not bad.

 

[Aureliano]

You killed John Holmes! You bastards!

Seriously, that guy in the home movie was PACKING.

Onto the game itself: it looks really fun. The 60s stage setting and crew look really cool (I wanted to see what their 60s ladies looked like in the field, but no joy yet), the aliens and their technology really freaked me out and it seems like they're actually going for story. Love the alien world too.

You know what isn't fun? A gratuitously hard isolinear turn-based RPG with almost no story that took forever and/or save-scumming to get anywhere in. And given that it looks like there will be a tech tree in the remake or reboot or whatever, I'd say we aren't missing anything important.

In the early 80s, it was 2-d keyboard controlled tiled dungeon crawlers. In the early 90s we had a war between early side-scrollers and very basic first person 3-d dungeon crawlers. In the late 90s we had isolinear action/turn based games. You know what we have now? First-person shooters and shooter-RPGs. It's what you get now, the games can still be good. Suck it up.

 

[Lord Draenor]

This looks really interesting. Should have used a different name maybe but that's about the only thing I see wrong here

 

[Vankraken]

You know what isn't fun? A gratuitously hard isolinear turn-based RPG with almost no story that took forever and/or save-scumming to get anywhere in. And given that it looks like there will be a tech tree in the remake or reboot or whatever, I'd say we aren't missing anything important.

In the early 80s, it was 2-d keyboard controlled tiled dungeon crawlers. In the early 90s we had a war between early side-scrollers and very basic first person 3-d dungeon crawlers. In the late 90s we had isolinear action/turn based games. You know what we have now? First-person shooters and shooter-RPGs. It's what you get now, the games can still be good. Suck it up.

Genres are not limited to a time period. Most genres of games existed back in the Atari days and they continue to exist today. Civ 1 was a turn based strategy game and it continues to be a turn based strategy game. Just because modern warfare is popular with the masses doesn't mean Civ needs to change its format to appear to a different market. X-Com is THE tactical strategy game that all others are judged against (in the western market anyways) and as such it is revered by the strategy community as one of the foundations of the genera.

The problem is developed IPs have weight in what kind of experience you are going to receive and it applies just as much to a game like X-Com as it does to Halo, Call of Duty, Civilization, Mario, Fallout, etc. The difference between something like Fallout 3 vs this "XCOM" is that Fallout still involved an alternate timeline 1950's retro nuclear age style post apocalyptic America with vaults, energy weapons, deathclaws, brotherhood of steel, dark humor, and it was still an RPG. XCOM has none of the lore, feel, or gameplay of the original. If you watched the video and they never said or had XCOM in the video then you wouldn't be able to guess its based off X-Com. That is the reason people are so upset is because they took the name and made a game with no actual relation to the original games besides kill aliens.

 

[jmarquiso]

Alright, just gonna put it out there, I hiss at this game. It is not X-Com, because X-Com is a turn-based strategy game with some base management stuff set in a near future, at a world-wide setting with a semi-cartoony aesthetic. This game is not those things.

So was Fallout.

I don't know, since this is supposed to be a prequel of sorts. Having recently replayed the original, I see a lot of the influence the original had on this, and I actually like it so far.

 

[Quesa]

This would look like such a good game... If they weren't trying to tell us it's X-com.

I don't even understand the logic of calling it XCOM. It won't sell more copies to fans, because it differentiates so much from the original games, and it won't sell to people who aren't fans, because they have no prior basis for whether or not it's a good series, if they even know it's supposed to be a continuation of a series.

Well, it would look like Mass Effect in the 50s if they weren't trying to tell us it's XCOM, haha. Oh chest high walls, where would FPS' on the console be without you. How innovative.

 

[MajorMurray]

My god it's like the old arguements of games in the early 00s all rolled up into one. The, "Warhammer 40k Stole Starcraft, or other way around. " or "Fallout 3 doesn't feel like the old fallouts." I like this game, it blends many elements I want to see in a game. Never played original XCOM, but damn does that name sound cool. This is my opinion:

I think these devs are big fans of X-COM, but they don't know how to make a strategy game like X-COM. They make shooters, so they are making a game to keep X-COM alive. Or they are just using a game IP they used to play and love to lift themselves into the spotlight showing what they can do. What is so wrong with linear gaming and scripted events, dammit that is what gaming was founded on, and I've had some pretty awesome scripted moments in a game. Looking at this gameplay trailer, or interview however you want to put it shows me that this game is in capable hands. The fact that they recognize the 60s as such a hard time tells me that they know what they are doing. So please, keep your mind open. If we attacked a game that took pointers from others we would be bitching about how Bioshock stole Fallout's feel.

 

[Boom129]

Alright, just gonna put it out there, I hiss at this game. It is not X-Com, because X-Com is a turn-based strategy game with some base management stuff set in a near future, at a world-wide setting with a semi-cartoony aesthetic. This game is not those things.

It is in fact a shooter involving aliens that is set in a 1960s ish period with a realistic artstyle. Which could be great! But it isn't X-Com.

I think this game would do better as an original IP. Those who have fond memories of X-Com don't want to see it become a shooter, and everyone loves an original IP.

Edit: To clarify, I genuinally think this game has excellent potential. I'm really big on setting and like the person in the trailer says, 1962 is a fascinating year, and the game could really go into the politics of both America and of the Cold War as a whole. But that's a lot to ask and from what I saw in the trailer it seems we have:

Stupid and Cliche one-liners ("Now THATS what I call firepower!")
Coverbased shooter combat (the person says that you can't stand toe to toe with the aliens, it doesn't look that tough, the smg is powerful and your health regenerates fast)
No real strategy (I say this because look at how fast time units regenerate. It's crazy. Also, once you level up a few agents, why ever use anyone else?)

Not convinced people.

I remember one time before when a strategy game was turned into a shooter with a different setting. A lot of people disliked it but it turned out pretty good.
That game was Fallout 3

 

[Frankster]

I think these devs are big fans of X-COM, but they don't know how to make a strategy game like X-COM. They make shooters, so they are making a game to keep X-COM alive. Or they are just using a game IP they used to play and love to lift themselves into the spotlight showing what they can do.

This line demolishes your argument: "When we played the original xcom, we felt sort of, almost overwhelemed with choices in between missions"

They are not big fans of X-COM for no fan would ever say such a heresy.
Only game they might seem to inspire themselves from would be xcom enforcer which is universally agreed to be a blight on the series name, at least interceptor had its fans.

None of what i've seen so far shows any respect or love for Xcom, only contempt and disgust at having to throw in some terms to have to call it an xcom game like that guy steve in marketing told them to.

I remember one time before when a strategy game was turned into a shooter with a different setting. A lot of people disliked it but it turned out pretty good.
That game was Fallout 3

Why people keep citing fallout 3 is beyond me, it's not a good parallel to this situation at all and betrays their own lack of understanding of what is causing the rage.

Fallout 3 was a fallout game, it had lore and setting elements that clearly established it as such. The rage came from either the purists seeking a similar game design to the first 2 and so raged at the perspective shift and those loremasters who found all sorts of continuity errors which flew over the heads of 90% of ppl anyways.

 

[Andrew_C]

As many have said, as a Bioware-style cover based shooter/rpg it looks interesting, and I really like "the bright new world" thing going on in the level design, but as a prequel to X-Com, it's inevitably disappointing.

I know it's too much to expect a new turn based, or even real time strategy game from a big name studio in this day, but I'm still disappointed.

And apart from anything else running all over the base to organise inventory, agents and research would soon get on my nerves. I got far too much of that sort of thing in Mass Effect, (and the Myth games). Not that there looks to be much research to be done.

Edit: spelling grammer

 

[ASnogarD]

I see a few guys pop in and spout off that fans of XCOM shouldnt complain, and instead judge the game on its own merits...

Thats rubbish, consider how Halo fan would react if they turned Halo into a Farmvile type because the casual market makes more money ?
Gears of War meets Angry Birds ?
God of War meets Bingo ?

If the game was a original IP... no issue.
Instead we have what was fondly remembered as a tactical and strategic title masterpiece of its day, turned into yet another [ expletetive ] FPS... FFS we have more than enough FPS titles around to satisfy any gun horney nut job out there for life.

I am not naive, I know a true XCOM style game wont make much money and a AAA studio would NEVER make one as such... but to announce a X-COM game, and then make a game that is so far removed in genre types is basically a slap to the face.

The Fallout comparison doesnt hold water, this XCOM doesnt even pretend to have any similiarities... Fallout 3 at least kept a lot of the lore, the RPG elements, the VATS system at least allows a none twitch reflex player make tactical decisions.

 

[Worr Monger]

It's really a crappy situation...

The game actually looks really cool. Unfortunately, it will never live down the fact that it has the XCOM name, and is an FPS. Some people simply cannot look past that. And I don't blame them. X-Com was an awesome game, and I get just as annoyed when my favorite games of old get turned into bastardized versions of themselves.

If they simply named this game something else, I think it would get a lot more respect... and I also think it would sell just fine, without the XCOM name behind it... there are plenty of people out there that never played the original X-Com anyway.

It reminds me of something my brother does... He's an old school Nintendo fan, loves the Castlevania games, especially the recent: Lords of Shadow. I told him he should try God of War if he enjoyed that (because why not? It's similar, and easily just as awesome.) But nope, he won't do it.... it's just another "one of those games". If Lords of Shadow didn't have the Castlevania name behind it.. he NEVER would have touched it.

The name alone can make or break a game for some people... and it's quite amazing.

 

[The3rdEye]

My god it's like the old arguements of games in the early 00s all rolled up into one. The, "Warhammer 40k Stole Starcraft, or other way around. "

Different settings, but both isomentric RTS

or "Fallout 3 doesn't feel like the old fallouts."

I remember one time before when a strategy game was turned into a shooter with a different setting. A lot of people disliked it but it turned out pretty good.
That game was Fallout 3

Different play mechanics, same setting, enemies, UI elements, etc. You can actually make an extensive list of things they did keep, spanning all areas of the game. In the end, you could still see Fallout 2 in Fallout 3.

Same enemies? No sectoids, no floaters, etc. ME Husks and geomentric shapes.
Same setting? Nope, it takes place 30 years earlier and exclusively in America.
Same UI? Calling your recharge meter TU's?... no. It's a recharge meter. Period.
Same mechanics? Squad from 1-24 human troops? Well, 1-3. Armored weapons platforms? Nope.
There is nothing left of X-Com IN XCOM that doesn't apply to any other sci-fi action-RPG or FPS game aside from occasional naming conventions.

(I'll make a quick note here since no one seems to have mentioned it and it's something from the originals that I REALLY loved... you brought your own tanks to missions, which were repairable and reusable. Seems having your own tank to blow shit up might have been worth keeping)

I like this game, it blends many elements I want to see in a game. Never played original XCOM, but damn does that name sound cool.

Play Bioshock on your console while playing Mass Effect on your PC, with the word "Xcom" suspended between the two. Same effect.

They've changed the genre, setting, characters, set pieces for those of their own series and lifted elements from other games where they themselves have no experience (squad based combat). Interestingly enough, it's being released on the same day as Mass Effect 3, the game whom they're borrowing so liberally from.Whether that's suicide or an attempt at "Mass Effect was awesome, but it left me wanting even MORE. Hey, this 'Xcom' game looks like it has a similar feel to it"... actually the more you think about it that way the more likely it sounds. Borrow a treasured IP, gut it and stuff it with you old graphical assets while pulling the combat from the(?) #1 squad-based sci-fi action RPG game on the market.

Go play it then (UFO Defense/Enemy Unknown or Terror From The Deep), they're available on Steam for a song and dance. Go find out exactly what they're trying to tell you this game has any connection to.

This is my opinion:

I think these devs are big fans of X-COM, but they don't know how to make a strategy game like X-COM. They make shooters, so they are making a game to keep X-COM alive. Or they are just using a game IP they used to play and love to lift themselves into the spotlight showing what they can do.

That much I can follow you on, emphasis mine. However, the original series was limited by the technology of it's time. The content available to the player should be GROWING, not decreasing. (Feel free to point me to the following) No resource management, I've yet to see their research tree, no airborne interception missions... Besides, they've already shown what they can do with Bioshock 1 and 2 which brings me to...

What is so wrong with linear gaming and scripted events, dammit that is what gaming was founded on, and I've had some pretty awesome scripted moments in a game. Looking at this gameplay trailer, or interview however you want to put it shows me that this game is in capable hands. The fact that they recognize the 60s as such a hard time tells me that they know what they are doing.

2K Marin only has 2 other titles under their belt, both of which are based in the 1960's, so if there's any suggestion that this "Xcom" taking place in the 60's has some kind of deep hidden meaning, they are patently full of shit. They're not innovating, they're playing safe by recycling and have a renowned license to back everything up. Someone more malicious than I might imply that they are recycling talents AND assets in the process.

So please, keep your mind open. If we attacked a game that took pointers from others we would be bitching about how Bioshock stole Fallout's feel.

They didn't call Bioshock "Fallout", or a reboot/reimagnining of Fallout, not to mention Fallout 3 coming out AFTER Bioshock.

Again, I have no problem with someone giving me a delicious orange for me to savor, but I will punch them square in the face if they start making videos and presentations in an attempt to convince me that the orange is an apple.

 

[Vankraken]

The grand issue is about respect and brand integrity of the X-Com name. This XCOM seems like a decent game and could be fun (a bit too scripted for my taste) but they threw the X-Com IP into the situation and it is making everybody who holds value in the name X-Com into anger mode (myself included) because it does not reflect the values, lore, and feel of the original games. They are using NOTHING from the original games besides the name (which is misspelled) and the closest thing i see from the original was taking time units and turning it into a form of mana.

If they made this game and named it Section 42 or whatever and nobody would be upset and would judge the game based on it being an original IP and probably be fairly excited based on what they have seen. Instead had to start up a shit storm by using the X-Com IP and not use any of the original material.

So was Fallout.

I don't know, since this is supposed to be a prequel of sorts. Having recently replayed the original, I see a lot of the influence the original had on this, and I actually like it so far.

What could you possibly see that is in any way related to the original besides guys with guns shooting aliens? If that is the case then Resistance and Halo fit the qualifications for spiritual successors of X-Com.

 

[chimeracreator]

So was Fallout.

I don't know, since this is supposed to be a prequel of sorts. Having recently replayed the original, I see a lot of the influence the original had on this, and I actually like it so far.

What could you possibly see that is in any way related to the original besides guys with guns shooting aliens? If that is the case then Resistance and Halo fit the qualifications for spiritual successors of X-Com.

I'd say that Halo has more to do with the original X-COM than this does. You have body armor in that, just like in the original X-COM. You have lots of normal human soldiers die, just like the original X-COM. Finally you have a wide variety of aliens, just like the original X-COM.

The only things this new game has in common with the original is that ducking behind cover is a good idea and the name.

 

[MajorMurray]

Ok then, look at it like this. I have two things to say, and neither of them are putting 2k Marin in a good light.

One, They are using controversy from them taking the name of X-COM so that they can launch themselves out of obscurity and into the spotlight. I hadn't even heard of the game till I watched a person defending it's right to exist. For a small game company, there is no bad news. However I don't like it, you could think it's what they are doing.

Two, they want to completely rewrite X-COM to fit their image or their understanding of it. They are fans, but they are the kind of fans that say it would be better if they did this or that. I don't this is the case, but it could very well be.

Now, listen. I am happy to see this trailer, with the developer actually showing us the game and all it's features. I like squad based shooters, I miss my Ghost Recon. I like the resources for squad abilities, while it may look like it is taking pointers from Mass Effect, I don't get that feeling from it. I think they are just trying to keep X-COM alive, because come on, if they weren't making this game, would you even be thinking about X-COM. Or would you be thinking about the next big release. There games that the more I hear the less I like, that's Battlefield 3, War in the North, and Mass Effect 3. But the more I hear XCOM from 2k Marin, the more I like. I want to see this game come out, and you should too. When it does come out, watch a let's play or, read a review, rent it. See it for yourself. And just to help the sake of an argument, I've already bought the original X-COM, I'm about to play it.

Also I like that you can send agents to preform missions on their own while you preform missions, that's something I really like to see in a game like this. That's all I'm gonna say, no point in continuing the argument. This is just the point of view from a gamer.

 

[Halceon]

"If that combat intelligence, that fierce hunger to understand the enemy from the inside out is key to what we feel makes an xcom experience mechanically."

No, you blithering fool! Mechanically an X-com experience is derived from the assymetrical, from a handful of earth's finest being worthless and having to learn how to hide and be scared again. From the need to outmanouver, from the need to predict what you can't even see yet.

Also, I hate this hero-oriented thing. Did the squad do anything at all? Kill anyone? Draw fire? As far as I could see, they were merely toolbelts. Which is dumb. One of the beauties of X-com was the fact that you could have your best man, a hardened veteran of 30 missions, die to a blaster launch on the first turn he gets out of the transport.

 

[Vapus]

As an oldschool xcom fan all I can say is this looks HELLA dissapointing.. Pretty much gears of war meets brothers in arms using xcom as a label to sell it.. sigh..

 

[Rythe]

After the disclaimer that I've been an X-COM fan long enough to own an original copy, my issues with this game are...different.

At first I was disappointed in this new game because of what they were doing to the name, but there wasn't enough info to really get a feel for the game itself and the initial alien concept wasn't that great.

Eventually, I was mildly interested in the concept of the aliens, like there was a glimmer of potential there.

Now I'm just disdainful of this game, even if the glimmer of potential remains for the part of the aliens that you'll barely interact with, that being their world and culture and not invasion parts.

First off, this video reveals a game that reeks of design by committee. They made a deal of checking off their politically correct boxes despite how at odds it put their version of the 1960s with the actual historical context. To top off their ignorance or dismissal of history and context, was our hero really using a German SMG instead of something like a Tommy Gun? In the 60s? (Or at least something more appropriate. My movie and TV based knowledge of post-WW2 weaponry maaay not be the best...)

Then the aliens themselves crib heavily from the Anti-Spirals of Gurren Lagann, and I'm pretty sure the game has no idea what 'living technology' actually entails given their vision of it is 3D geometry wars. The poltergeist zipping the dude around and leaving him in a wall basically cements the idea that they're just borrowing affective bits and pieces from other works and throwing them in the pot without any real rhyme or reason or understanding then trying to cover it up by throwing the BS technobabble on thick. That said, the terraforming business was actually a little interesting as was the view of their dimension or whatever the hell that was, but overall, the in-game aliens were incoherent and utterly unimpressive in the firefight.

Speaking of unimpressive, let's look at the gameplay. They may have had godmode on for the demo, but the weapons had no weight other than getting to see the little health bars go down. Which begs a huuuge question - why are there health bars at all? That smacks of terrible design and aesthetics if your visuals give no indication that shooting at stuff is doing anything until they suddenly fall over (Also an artifact of stealing Mass Effect's gameplay). Then they pulled out an 'advanced' weapon for us to see as they shot up the titan and I was stuck wondering what the big deal about this dull, uninspired 'advanced' weapon was. This is Mass Effect without any of the care that obviously went into Mass Effect. I really hate chest high walls at this point too.

But then they made a big deal of whether or not you use captured alien tech in the mission or brought it home for research. As was mentioned before, this is terrible game design. A power gamer always takes the tech back with them for long term rewards and the people who don't are shooting themselves in the foot by hurting their ability to trick out themselves and their squad. Not that the squad seemed to do much other than provide the aliens something else to shoot at and extra ability slots. Even more worrying, the ability/Mass Effect stuff was their revamped and improved combat. I hate to think what they might have been running with before.

Now the gall of it all is that they also took what effectively was MP/Mana/Energy and called it Time Units and then tried to pretend it made any sort of sense. It was a fragile move to begin with, but it completely shatters into a bloody mess the moment they said it was a move to placate X-COM fans because, of anyone out there, WE KNOW BETTER.

Like I said, there is so much here that smacks of design by committee and/or people who aren't particularly good at crafting worlds and making games. I'll give the dated graphics the destructo terrain bit towards the end. It's a tradeoff to put the game on consoles, but everything else is pretty much amateur hour. At least design-wise. There seems to be at least a few good artists and coders behind the table of idiots running the show.

In short, I seriously doubt this game will be anything other than an average mess based on this trailer.

Edit: Nope, not a German SMG.