XCOM = Bioshock?

[MrBrightside919]

I don't know if you've seen it yet, but a little trailer for 2K Marin's new shooter, XCOM, is out and about on the internet. Seeing as how XCOM is probably one of the best strategy games evar made on the PC, you can probably guess that i'm a pretty big fan. Well, I just got done watching the trailer and i'm a little shocked...and not in a good way...

Since when did XCOM have anything to do with the 50's? Why does this game look so much like Bioshock? Where did all my intense strategy/awesome base building go? Why are the aliens made of oily goo? When did the monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey ever appear in an XCOM game?

Who knows...maybe the trailer just features a prologue level before the real alien, laser blasting happens. I mean, don't get me wrong, I love bioshock (not so much number two though)...but XCOM isn't bioshock and should never be treated like such.

Maybe i'm just over analyzing things. I dunno...but I have a BAD feeling about this game...

 

[Weaver]

I wrote alot about the game in my blog before any trailers were out
( http://weaversgameblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-new-x-com-game-wont-work-out.html )

Looks like I was right!

 

[thiosk]

Please link the video to something in your post.

Basically, there was one good X-Com game. The first one. TFTD was buggy, and much more difficult to play. Apocalypse was a mess. The shooter and the interceptor game were just sadness. It was like watching post-stroke dick clark on new years-- just not right.

 

[geldonyetich]

Gamers didn't seem to have any trouble with Fallout (turn-based isometric 2D RPG) becoming Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (real time, 3D first person perspective, action RPG).

Considering this, don't hold your breath that anyone will care if it's faithful to the original as long as the new X-COM is fun.

Bottom line: Ten-year-old games (Apocalypse was released 13 years ago) don't have enough pretense with the average present-day gamer for anyone to notice the difference. When X-Com was around, gaming was niche, and now it's mainstream. Those of us who were around in the niche days are completely overruled.

Here's hoping the new X-COM has co-op.

 

[Weaver]

Here is the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNlC19Vcvrw&feature=channel

It literally looks like a Bioshock mod.
The fucking weapons look nearly identical, the plasmid hand/power whatever stuff is clearly present.

What a cop out.

 

[MrBrightside919]

Gamers didn't seem to have any trouble with Fallout (turn-based isometric 2D RPG) becoming Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (real time, 3D first person perspective, action RPG).

Considering this, don't hold your breath that anyone will care if it's faithful to the original as long as the new X-COM is fun.

Bottom line: Ten-year-old games (Apocalypse was released 13 years ago) don't have enough pretense with the average present-day gamer for anyone to notice the difference. When X-Com was around, gaming was niche, and now it's mainstream. Those of us who were around in the niche days are completely overruled.

Here's hoping the new X-COM has co-op.

This isn't as much about being faithful as it is about being a cash in on a known, popular formula brought to life by Bioshock (technically System Shock). But speaking for the faithful...Fallout 3 didn't change from it's role playing roots though. It's a role playing game more than it is a shooter. XCOM jumps from Strategy game to Shooter (A much radical change than fallout). Plus, Fallout 3 didn't change the setting of the original games to something radically different, you are still in the wasteland. Fallout 3 never abandoned the Fallout feel...unlike what XCOM is doing...

How many franchises need to be butchered in order to satisfy the mainstream (look what happened to Tomb Raider)? Why bring back such an old franchise like XCOM anyways? You could just as easily slap on a completely different name to this game and no one would know the difference.

 

[Ftaghn To You Too]

Gamers didn't seem to have any trouble with Fallout (turn-based isometric 2D RPG) becoming Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (real time, 3D first person perspective, action RPG).

Considering this, don't hold your breath that anyone will care if it's faithful to the original as long as the new X-COM is fun.

Bottom line: Ten-year-old games (Apocalypse was released 13 years ago) don't have enough pretense with the average present-day gamer for anyone to notice the difference. When X-Com was around, gaming was niche, and now it's mainstream. Those of us who were around in the niche days are completely overruled.

Here's hoping the new X-COM has co-op.

This isn't as much about being faithful as it is about being a cash in on a known, popular formula brought to life by Bioshock (technically System Shock). But speaking for the faithful...Fallout 3 didn't change from it's role playing roots though. It's a role playing game more than it is a shooter. XCOM jumps from Strategy game to Shooter (A much radical change than fallout). Plus, Fallout 3 didn't change the setting of the original games to something radically different, you are still in the wasteland. Fallout 3 never abandoned the Fallout feel...unlike what XCOM is doing...

How many franchises need to be butchered in order to satisfy the mainstream (look what happened to Tomb Raider)? Why bring back such an old franchise like XCOM anyways? You could just as easily slap on a completely different name to this game and no one would know the difference.

According to what I read, there will be strategy. Do I stay or do I continue and risk death? What do I investigate? Where will the Agency be best improved?

Besides, more 50's is ALWAYS good.

 

[Jandau]

Gamers didn't seem to have any trouble with Fallout (turn-based isometric 2D RPG) becoming Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (real time, 3D first person perspective, action RPG).

Considering this, don't hold your breath that anyone will care if it's faithful to the original as long as the new X-COM is fun.

Bottom line: Ten-year-old games (Apocalypse was released 13 years ago) don't have enough pretense with the average present-day gamer for anyone to notice the difference. When X-Com was around, gaming was niche, and now it's mainstream. Those of us who were around in the niche days are completely overruled.

Here's hoping the new X-COM has co-op.

Fallout HAD problems. Tons of people didn't like the idea. And let's face it, the changes weren't all that big. The underlying paradigm of the game stayed mostly the same - open world RPG with a loose main story that focuses more on exploring the wasteland and finding out how the post nuclear USA turned out. A lot of the weapons and enemies stayed the same and for the most part is simply shifted from 3rd person to 1st person, while you were still doing the same things you did in the first two games.

The new XCOM changes the underlying paradigm of the game. It's a first person shooter with pretty much no tactical elements and no real strategic planning. It would be pretty much the same as turning Total War into a side-scrolling platformer.

 

[SquirrelPants]

Please link the video to something in your post.

Basically, there was one good X-Com game. The first one. TFTD was buggy, and much more difficult to play. Apocalypse was a mess. The shooter and the interceptor game were just sadness. It was like watching post-stroke dick clark on new years-- just not right.

TFTD was amazingly difficult on purpose, as I hear it. Something about the skill levels being buggy in the first one, so they all ended up being just as hard as the "Beginner" level. People complained that it wasn't difficult enough, so the company went "Difficult? You want DIFFICULT? Okay, we'll give you difficult."

Dunno how true it is, but meh.

On the subject of the new game, I haven't seen any trailers, but I've had a bad feeling about it since it was first announced. Making a shooter out of a turn-based strategy is something that should never happen.

 

[snow]

Well, I just got done watching the trailer and i'm a little shocked...and not in a good way...

and i'm a little shocked... Bioshocked that is!

You SO should have went there... I'm a bit sad though, the new xcom should have stuck to it's roots. The world needs more strategy games.

 

[MrBrightside919]

Well, I just got done watching the trailer and i'm a little shocked...and not in a good way...

and i'm a little shocked... Bioshocked that is!

You SO should have went there... I'm a bit sad though, the new xcom should have stuck to it's roots. The world needs more strategy games.

I've reached my corny one liners quota for the month so I couldn't make that connection...

 

[AgentChunk]

My theory is 2K Marin are all a bunch trolls playing the strategy game crowd against the shooter crowd. What other reason do they have to use the X-com/Xcom name?

 

[The Madman]

Looks like a pretty neat premise and setting for a game...

I just wish they didn't call it X-Com, because it clearly has absolutely nothing to do with the original series save for 'omg aliens'. And even then in X-Com we faced UFO more akin to ET and Star Wars, whereas this looks like... erm... something not at all like what was in X-Com. They took a sci-fi tactical strategy game and turned it into an fps? Why? What's the point?

Just look in this topic, half the people replying have barely even heard of the series, nevermind played it, while those few who 'have' played it are largely dismayed. So what was the point in using the X-Com name? They'd have gotten better results taking the Bioshock rout and re-naming the series. Y-Com? X-Nom? Why not.

Bah, whatever. Could be a decent game, looks like it has promise. But it wont be the sequel I'd hope for the franchise.

 

[Sartan0]

The thing is... if they did not call it X-COM I would say this game looks like fun and the setting is refreshing. Frankly I am willing to give them a chance. I loved X-COM back in the day and even Terror from the Deep but I am willing to see a re-imagining of it.

I will keep an eye on this one.

 

[thiosk]

Please link the video to something in your post.

Basically, there was one good X-Com game. The first one. TFTD was buggy, and much more difficult to play. Apocalypse was a mess. The shooter and the interceptor game were just sadness. It was like watching post-stroke dick clark on new years-- just not right.

TFTD was amazingly difficult on purpose, as I hear it. Something about the skill levels being buggy in the first one, so they all ended up being just as hard as the "Beginner" level. People complained that it wasn't difficult enough, so the company went "Difficult? You want DIFFICULT? Okay, we'll give you difficult."

Dunno how true it is, but meh.

On the subject of the new game, I haven't seen any trailers, but I've had a bad feeling about it since it was first announced. Making a shooter out of a turn-based strategy is something that should never happen.

I didn't exactly mean difficult = hard, i mean difficult = buggy as all hell.

 

[Keava]

The trailer for that is the reason id prefer for companies to create their own IPs with original names instead of trying to jump the bandwagon of nostalgia.
The game has nothing to do with X-COM. Oh wait, sorry, there are supposedly aliens that look like swarm of flies covered in oil. Yeah thats about it.

It may even be a good game, but it wont be X-COM. X-COM is turn based squad command strategy. Just let it go and dont try to sell me a shooter that has nothing to do with it except name and very basic idea of theme.

 

[Sebenko]

On the subject of the new game, I haven't seen any trailers, but I've had a bad feeling about it since it was first announced. Making a shooter out of a turn-based strategy is something that should never happen.

I have a terrible feeling it's just going to be a shitty console shooter.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

The priorities of the people who are making this are all messed up in my opinion. They expect UFO fans to be impressed that we now have an amazing new real time "first person" game that we have never seen before in our sad little tactical strategy game playing lives? Pah. They expect us to be so impressed by their funky new black ink monster code or their stylised nineteen fifties graphics that we forget about the iconic aliens and 60s retro futurism look of the original? Double pah.

 

[SquirrelPants]

On the subject of the new game, I haven't seen any trailers, but I've had a bad feeling about it since it was first announced. Making a shooter out of a turn-based strategy is something that should never happen.

I have a terrible feeling it's just going to be a shitty console shooter.

So do I. And you know what? If they would have called it ANYTHING ELSE, and not bought up the XCOM license, I'd be okay with it. Hell, I'd probably buy and enjoy it. But as it stands, I just don't think I am going to be able to stand this game, just because of the name. Nice job, 2K.