XCom E3 Trailer Brings the Disappointment

[CD-R]

So I just looked up the original XCom - UFO defence

...

[HEADING=1]WHY HAS NOONE TOLD ME ABOUT THIS F*CKING AWESOME GAME BEFORE!?

GODDAMNIT I WANT IT![/HEADING]

You can get the entire collection off of Steam or Direct2Drive for about 10-15 bucks. I suggest the D2Drive version if you don't feel like installing Steam.

http://www.direct2drive.com/4/7614/product/Buy-X-Com-Complete-Bundle-Download

Warning. This game is veeeeeeeerrrrrrryyyyyy hard if you don't know what you're doing. Look up some strategies online seriously. The sequel is veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyy hard even if you do know what you're doing.

Anyway I read the excerpts from the print article and this paragraph at least looks somewhat promising.

So, is this XCOM really our beloved X-COM? "We're forging a new mythology, but what we're retaining is the core elements that made X-COM X-COM," says Pelling. "The strategy, the base, the research, agents, being in charge, and dealing with this problem as you see fit. You are the one that's driving the investigation ? those elements remain but we want to create a new world with a new set of enemies that's genuinely compelling for players to learn more about."

Although it doesn't look like we'll be getting any flying power armor any time soon.

Edit: Also the video isn't working.

 

[Andronicus]

GRAHH!!
Not angry because they're raping XCom, I'm angry because the video isn't working (I've never played XCom before though, so I wouldn't know if they were raping it or not). I jumped on Youtube, and 2K Marin seems to have rounded up all the XCom trailers there and deleted them. This sucks big time, especially seeing as I only seem to have missed them by an hour or so...

 

[Quesa]

"We're forging a new mythology" roughly translates to "We're doing our own thing and attaching a name that we hope will increase sales. See? X-Com!"

I was angry about Enforcer and Interceptor at the time, I've never played them. I'd certainly never play this.

 

[AceDiamond]

The thing is that I'm not willing to completely disown this game just yet since it seems to at least incorporate the research aspect and team experience. On the other hand it completely throws out the mythos and puts it in the 1950s, which I'm not too keen on.

 

[The Random One]

Looks like Something Awful was right. [http://www.somethingawful.com/d/video-game-article/xcom-2k-fallout.php]

I agree with everyone. It sucks, because it does look like a good game. It doesn't need to take on the name of a loved game to be succesful. I doubt that any fans of the old games will buy it on name recognition alone, so why bother with it at all?

I just hope they don't do that with the upcoming Syndicate reboot.

 

[Doug]

I think we will just have to wait and see... strange, Bioshock was a "spiritual sequel" to System Shock, now we have an XCOM sequel that is not... spiritual. It just takes the IP in a completely different (almost TF2 inspired art) direction.

I would disagree on this point - the IP is not being 'taken' anywhere. The name is the only overlap between the XCom tactical games and this, as far as I can see - the aliens are wholly different, the world is different, the characters you control are different, the gameplay is wholly different.

You can call a fish a bird, but it won't make it so.

 

[Treblaine]

I think we will just have to wait and see... strange, Bioshock was a "spiritual sequel" to System Shock, now we have an XCOM sequel that is not... spiritual. It just takes the IP in a completely different (almost TF2 inspired art) direction.

I would disagree on this point - the IP is not being 'taken' anywhere. The name is the only overlap between the XCom tactical games and this, as far as I can see - the aliens are wholly different, the world is different, the characters you control are different, the gameplay is wholly different.

You can call a fish a bird, but it won't make it so.

Flying fish?

No, seriously, I'm going by the legal definition of the IP, Intellectual Property, the names, trademarks and overall premise (aliens in suburbia Atompunk). Unfortunately that can mean making it "wholly different" but it's still XCOM by name if not by nature.

I mean James Bond and the films he has starred in have changed a heck of a lot since 1962 but it's still the same franchise, the same IP. Not the best example, I know there are more drastic ones over shorter periods of time but you get what I'm saying?

I know X-Com fans are pissed at this "XCOM" but no amount of anger can change the simple fact that an IP can be (and in this case has been) completely bastardised, at least take satisfaction in the distinct spelling, this is "XCOM", the good old game is "X-Com".

I know it sucks, I felt the same way about the Alien vs Predator movies, you just have to do your best to ignore the new crap and savour the good old stuff like Cameron's "Aliens" and the Arnie-tastic "Predator" GEEEHT TOOUUUU DAUUGHH CHOOOPPPPAAAA!! -GG-GGOOOOW! GOOOWWW NAAAOOOW!"

 

[Loonerinoes]

I see nothing even remotely relating to the older X-Com. Even the monsters might as well be just monsters rather than aliens.

Honestly...why did they even bother using that name? Why not just name it something else entirely? It's kind of similar to what was done with the Star Trek movie. Sheesh...why bother naming it as such and going "This isn't your daddy's favourite so fuck off if you're nostalgic pussies!" If it isn't like that at all, then why the hell use that brand name?!

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Er...... most of the BS trailers were not from the final game or at least misinterpreted as something other than the simple shooter it came out as.

FO3's trailer was disappointing and that was before we found it they made everything for the 8 hour main quest making it an unbalanced nightmare if you step out that...oh and vats is still broken.

So you know.............. its just more for the raod......

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I see nothing even remotely relating to the older X-Com. Even the monsters might as well be just monsters rather than aliens.

Honestly...why did they even bother using that name? Why not just name it something else entirely? It's kind of similar to what was done with the Star Trek movie. Sheesh...why bother naming it as such and going "This isn't your daddy's favourite so fuck off if you're nostalgic pussies!" If it isn't like that at all, then why the hell use that brand name?!

Meh the star trek reboot was great if you can ignore the plot.

 

[tkioz]

When I first heard about the new X-Com game being an FPS I was a little offput, but I wasn't that against it, it could of been like Ghost Recon and that would of been fine, a tactical FPS game...

But this shit has got to go. Setting it in the 50s is just plain fucking stupid. Screw that... just plain screw that... I wanted my Greys and I want it set in the not so distant future. Screw the 50s. just plain screw it. It's been done to death already piss off with this crap.

 

[Moromillas]

Re-imagined means completely inaccurate now?

The alien threat could never survive our atmosphere for more than a minute or so, and X-com was not started back in the 50s... Why go back to 50s...

Not X-com.

 

[bat_trapper]

It will still have elerium.

 

[Irridium]

Interest is piqued. I do think however that they shouldn't have labeled this an X-Com game, as the only people who knew X-Com are already complaining vividly about it.

Who knows, maybe it will turn out like Fallout 3, where the people who didn't play the previous Fallouts love it to death immediately, and the rest are slowly converted (with a few die-hard naysayers.)

Not true!

The rest think Fallout 3 is a good game, but its writing and story is nowhere near Fallout-level.

But yeah, still fun.

 

[geldonyetich]

What this doing in the news room? You're basically saying, "gee, I don't like the looks of the X-Com trailer, it's too early to say because too few details have been released, but I think I might not like it..." Film at 11?

I will go this far: 2K Games should probably consider showcasing the more X-Com like features, because this trailer is giving the wrong idea. It looks like it's going to be a linear FPS, but it's not. I've done a little reading on this (e.g. PC Gamer's article on it) and this new X-COM is actually a freeform game. Take the old X-Com model, and replace the squad-based combat with what you see in the trailer.

During these tactical portions, you and a few other 1950s G-Men are securing information related to the aliens in order to take it back to your base and research. Hang around too long, and those big nasty monoliths show up to disintegrate you all, so it's basically an exciting experience on every mission: go in, fight blobbies, get evidence, get out. It's not a bad formula, it does have a very X-COM like feel to it, even though it's not a turn-based squad combat game. I wonder if they'll add co-op mode, because I could see that as being a cool addition.

I've also read that, in X-Com tradition, the environments are fully destructible. The trailer doesn't show that off enough.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

GI has a 2 page spread on the new X-Com.

It is confirmed that the alien races will not be returning, 2K claims it wants it's players to be scared and not know what to expect.

No mention if there's strategic control, but there is definatly a mission/investigation architecture - it is not a linear FPS ala Bioshock. 2k emphasized there was an investigation element, and that researching new technoligies would return as well as trying to advance the plot with investigation. It was suggested players would have to make risk/reward choices devoted to how long they stay in a hot zone, as well as chose what incidents to investigate.

 

[Atmos Duality]

What part?

What does that trailer need to excuse? The visuals, the atmosphere? Or, more likely, the name?

Can't all the people getting pissed about it just pretend it's called "Alienshock" or something and get over it?

It's more of a personal matter for me, as I've already outlined in my previous posts in this topic.
They are literally taking the name X-COM and doing nothing with it that hasn't already been done, and done to death.

To me, it looks more like another generic FPS in market flooded with them.
The only thing right now that makes me even think about it is that curious X-COM license.
Realizing that, I finally saw through their scheme. It's just another franchise reboot. Another reboot...for reasons I cannot fathom at this time.

Same deal with the new Deus Ex. Squeenix is taking a game built on the premise of a good conspiracy story, excellent writing, and fun (if not simple) rpg elements and turning it into Bionic Commando (whose utter failure from last year is still fresh on my mind).

Perhaps I am being too harsh with 2K Games at this time, but I can justify my irritation and disappointment; how many old franchise reboots and remakes have there been in the last 3 years now? Movies? Shows? Is our entertainment industry (of which gaming is definitely a part of) so scared of failure that they won't fund anything remotely new?

Did 2K Games acquire the X-COM license with good intentions, only to have someone higher up say "Say, our studies show that First Person Shooters are cost effective profit machines. You don't really have to do anything with the source material or setting to be successful. So, just to be safe, you had better stick to the book when making that X-COM thingy because I want my money!"

Then they make their utterly bland, functional FPS set in the 1950s, with a seriously predictable plot twist. Crap out a trailer and away we go.

Now, I come across as an angry or jaded pessimist, but really. I want these games to be good!
It's just hard to keep genuine enthusiasm when the first thing you see looks like Unreal Tournament 3 (as seen through the eyes of Norman Rockwell)... with blobs.