Troubled XCOM Shooter's Website Disappears

[MopBox]

The original XCOM did that, the only reason they were cut in the new one was because those aliens sucked.

They didn't do anything but waste the bullets you used to kill them. They had no purpose.

You mean the blob guys they used as a terror weapon? It's true they weren't all that effective but that's beside the point. I meant more like enemies that confound human understand. Men in sharp suits fighting hostile geometric shapes with no discernable motive in a pristine slice of American suburban hell, now that's a setting!

 

[Parakeettheprawn]

Won't be surprised if it is cancelled, that other 90's strategy game turned fps reboot Syndicate bombed despite being a pretty good game. And with the success of that other X-Com game I think its pretty clear people aren't interested in FPS re-imaginings of classic Strategy games and just want their classic strategy games to become modern strategy games, who would have thought?

I liked the first half of Syndicate, but the second half, just got really stupid.

Spoiler

I dont buy a damn syndicate game to be the good guy you dumbass devs! Let me put a bullet in that bitches brain!

I am agreeing with you SOOOO MUCH right now you would not believe. At least the co-op doesn't cop out like that. Hell, I still play the co-op it was so enjoyable.

I am envious. I got it on PC and none of my friends picked up the game so I wasnt able to partake in the Co-op campaign.

I solo the co-op. If you have the right build and level up, you can solo it on hard. Look up RequiemFallen if you want to finally see what it has to offer. I'll help you out.

 

[Parakeettheprawn]

They had a great tech demo and were looking to hybrid management sim with Bioshock, XCOM, and Mass Effect with a great art style and genuinely unique enemies... .

I give you the genuinely unique enemies, but everything else about the tech demo just kind of seemed like a retread of other titles. How many versions of Bioshock does a gamer actually need?

Bioshock is pretty much just used to mean "inventive and non-standard weaponry/abilities". Really, it was more like Mass Effect, XCOM, and Republic Commando, with a little of Fallout 3 with the AP style commands and squad controls. I seem to remember you even zoomed out to a view like in EU to command your squad, the game pausing like in Brothers in Arms.

Yeah, I mean you're probably right but it really just semantics. But my point remains the same, hell, mass effect two was the lazy mass effect and do you really want to buy a lazy version of mass effect two?

...not everyone wants their game to be D&D rulesets. If anything, Mass Effect 1 was probably one of the easiest and sloppiest RPG combat systems I ever saw. Mass Effect 2 pretty much made it a TPS, I'm not gonna argue that, but you keep suggesting it's just one game, when it's a crossroads of several. I -would- love a Republic Commando, Mass Effect, XCOM hybrid game with first person gunplay, tactical squad control/progression, gameplay centric choices that define my play style, non-linear mission progression, and management sim elements when not fighting it out with aliens.

 

[Parakeettheprawn]

Non-conventional aliens?

THEY WERE BOXES AND GEOMETRIC SHAPES.

It was like the modelers got lazy and said "lets just make them all boxes."

The original XCOM did that, the only reason they were cut in the new one was because those aliens sucked.

They didn't do anything but waste the bullets you used to kill them. They had no purpose.

So your argument against it is "I heard that an earlier attempt at this didn't go well, I didn't particular like their designs, therefore they aren't good"? Wow, okay then, have fun with that. If we went by that line of logic, a lot of games and genres would be dead by now.

 

[MopBox]

They had a great tech demo and were looking to hybrid management sim with Bioshock, XCOM, and Mass Effect with a great art style and genuinely unique enemies... .

I give you the genuinely unique enemies, but everything else about the tech demo just kind of seemed like a retread of other titles. How many versions of Bioshock does a gamer actually need?

Bioshock is pretty much just used to mean "inventive and non-standard weaponry/abilities". Really, it was more like Mass Effect, XCOM, and Republic Commando, with a little of Fallout 3 with the AP style commands and squad controls. I seem to remember you even zoomed out to a view like in EU to command your squad, the game pausing like in Brothers in Arms.

Yeah, I mean you're probably right but it really just semantics. But my point remains the same, hell, mass effect two was the lazy mass effect and do you really want to buy a lazy version of mass effect two?

...not everyone wants their game to be D&D rulesets. If anything, Mass Effect 1 was probably one of the easiest and sloppiest RPG combat systems I ever saw. Mass Effect 2 pretty much made it a TPS, I'm not gonna argue that, but you keep suggesting it's just one game, when it's a crossroads of several. I -would- love a Republic Commando, Mass Effect, XCOM hybrid game with first person gunplay, tactical squad control/progression, gameplay centric choices that define my play style, non-linear mission progression, and management sim elements when not fighting it out with aliens.

Right, that's exactly my point. Not everyone wants their game to be an actioneer shooter either, but every game on the console seems to go that way.

 

[Parakeettheprawn]

They had a great tech demo and were looking to hybrid management sim with Bioshock, XCOM, and Mass Effect with a great art style and genuinely unique enemies... .

I give you the genuinely unique enemies, but everything else about the tech demo just kind of seemed like a retread of other titles. How many versions of Bioshock does a gamer actually need?

Bioshock is pretty much just used to mean "inventive and non-standard weaponry/abilities". Really, it was more like Mass Effect, XCOM, and Republic Commando, with a little of Fallout 3 with the AP style commands and squad controls. I seem to remember you even zoomed out to a view like in EU to command your squad, the game pausing like in Brothers in Arms.

Yeah, I mean you're probably right but it really just semantics. But my point remains the same, hell, mass effect two was the lazy mass effect and do you really want to buy a lazy version of mass effect two?

...not everyone wants their game to be D&D rulesets. If anything, Mass Effect 1 was probably one of the easiest and sloppiest RPG combat systems I ever saw. Mass Effect 2 pretty much made it a TPS, I'm not gonna argue that, but you keep suggesting it's just one game, when it's a crossroads of several. I -would- love a Republic Commando, Mass Effect, XCOM hybrid game with first person gunplay, tactical squad control/progression, gameplay centric choices that define my play style, non-linear mission progression, and management sim elements when not fighting it out with aliens.

Right, that's exactly my point. Not everyone wants their game to be an actioneer shooter either, but every game on the console seems to go that way.

Hold it, so what you're arguing against the possibility someone wants a game like this is simply going down to "Yeah, but I don't want it, blergh action games everywhere!" Go to Desura, to Steam, tell me there aren't armies worth of indie, AA, and AAA games that are wishing for audiences not into action games. If you can't get your preferred brand of deoderant at Weis, just go to Wal-Mart. No one is even demanding you play this game or any other game -- but there are those of us who do because it'd give us an experience we rarely get thanks to games like CoD. Some of us miss the day of games like FEAR and System Shock where it actually required some amount of mental input beyond quick scoping. Just like how people wanted Company of Heroes and similar RTS games where FPS mechanics like cover and squad based combat did the genre good -- it's the exact same thing here, only on the flipside. So, yeah, you don't want it? Okay, that's fine. Just don't act like -no one- wants it, because people like me do, and I'm about tired of this shit after Syndicate. I'm sorry it's not your ideal game -- it is for me, so therefore I'm gonna want it, and I shouldn't have to feel worried because I dared to suggest the FPS spin-off game might actually be good. Because apparently God forbade anyone make their opinions based on actually PLAYING a game rather than just observing trailers.

 

[MopBox]

They had a great tech demo and were looking to hybrid management sim with Bioshock, XCOM, and Mass Effect with a great art style and genuinely unique enemies... .

I give you the genuinely unique enemies, but everything else about the tech demo just kind of seemed like a retread of other titles. How many versions of Bioshock does a gamer actually need?

Bioshock is pretty much just used to mean "inventive and non-standard weaponry/abilities". Really, it was more like Mass Effect, XCOM, and Republic Commando, with a little of Fallout 3 with the AP style commands and squad controls. I seem to remember you even zoomed out to a view like in EU to command your squad, the game pausing like in Brothers in Arms.

Yeah, I mean you're probably right but it really just semantics. But my point remains the same, hell, mass effect two was the lazy mass effect and do you really want to buy a lazy version of mass effect two?

...not everyone wants their game to be D&D rulesets. If anything, Mass Effect 1 was probably one of the easiest and sloppiest RPG combat systems I ever saw. Mass Effect 2 pretty much made it a TPS, I'm not gonna argue that, but you keep suggesting it's just one game, when it's a crossroads of several. I -would- love a Republic Commando, Mass Effect, XCOM hybrid game with first person gunplay, tactical squad control/progression, gameplay centric choices that define my play style, non-linear mission progression, and management sim elements when not fighting it out with aliens.

Right, that's exactly my point. Not everyone wants their game to be an actioneer shooter either, but every game on the console seems to go that way.

Hold it, so what you're arguing against the possibility someone wants a game like this is simply going down to "Yeah, but I don't want it, blergh action games everywhere!" Go to Desura, to Steam, tell me there aren't armies worth of indie, AA, and AAA games that are wishing for audiences not into action games. If you can't get your preferred brand of deoderant at Weis, just go to Wal-Mart. No one is even demanding you play this game or any other game -- but there are those of us who do because it'd give us an experience we rarely get thanks to games like CoD. Some of us miss the day of games like FEAR and System Shock where it actually required some amount of mental input beyond quick scoping. Just like how people wanted Company of Heroes and similar RTS games where FPS mechanics like cover and squad based combat did the genre good -- it's the exact same thing here, only on the flipside. So, yeah, you don't want it? Okay, that's fine. Just don't act like -no one- wants it, because people like me do, and I'm about tired of this shit after Syndicate. I'm sorry it's not your ideal game -- it is for me, so therefore I'm gonna want it, and I shouldn't have to feel worried because I dared to suggest the FPS spin-off game might actually be good. Because apparently God forbade anyone make their opinions based on actually PLAYING a game rather than just observing trailers.

Oh, well. In that case I'm glad you enjoyed it. At any rate I feel like we are just making the same argument from different sides of the same coin.