XCom: Enemy Unknown Gets Screens and Details

[The_root_of_all_evil]

So many people are going to rage that this game uses hexes and not squares. They will also rage if this turns out to arrive on consoles as well (I doubt it'll be a console exclusive). Even if the PC version is absolutely STELLAR, people are still going to get mad because it's not a PC exclusive, the cunts. Oh, and not to mention the radar and what I can only assume is a "numbers of hostiles left" counter, people will get so mad because of those things as well. PC elitists really are the worst kind of people.

Has there been ANY evidence of this? Or is this just boozy-cheese fuelled ramblings?

Dev 1&2: "That... that's actually not a bad idea."

It's actually a brilliant idea, and I'm really happy to see they're tying the two together as I hoped they would - using the shooter as a prequel to set up the strategy game. There's no reason the two can't co-exist happily.

Indeed. And while I can't speak for all the fans of the old XCOM games who were pissed about the whole FPS thing, I know that I'm no longer pissed. I'm getting the remake I wanted and assuming it's any good, I'll be free to enjoy the FPS if I choose to do so. It's a win-win.

I'm still a little concerned. What happens if we're seeing the other end...

1: How do we make our new shooter loved?

2: Well, we're making this turn based strategy, how about you pick up from our guns and explain how they were made?

1: Doesn't X-Com already have a backstory?

2: Yeah, but we've already done that over.

And I still think the shooter looks like plop - just willing to let it go now.

 

[chstens]

Did you actually read my post? This is how I predict some people on the internet is going to react. I am personally really looking forward to this game, and I don't mind hexes, radars or counters, they're simply convenient.

I was referring to your predictions and insulting manner for the PC elitist... and I quote... "cunts". I never once thought you believed what you said yourself.

When I say "PC Elitists", I don't mean the people who say that an up-to-snuff PC is technically superior to consoles, I mean the whiny, snivelling assholes that condemn people for owning consoles, constantly whine about how PC gaming is being overlooked by the gaming press, and THEN say that people should just leave PCs to "people with the intelligence required to use one" when an article mentions it's a pain in the ass to faff about in an .ini file to get the settings you want. People who rightly deserve to be called cunts. And while on the topic of insults, may I direct your gaze to your very own words: "cry more noob".

 

[Terminal Blue]

Is this some kind of New Coke scam.

"Hey look guys.. we shat all over your beloved franchise, but now we're copying the games you liked and selling them back to you with marginally better graphics. Come on, it's better than that bland looking shooter we're making, right? Money please!"

I'm not really bothered about them changing the setting. Apocalypse tore up most things about the X-Com setting (although it is technically set in the same universe) and still managed to be the best X-Com game yet. What I'm kind of worried about is the lack of innovation. I can already play X-Com, all the games are available on Steam for practically nothing. Can't we expand a little on where Apocalypse left off.. you know, add more to it rather than just endlessly "streamlining". I don't know, it would just be nice to be sold a new X-Com game based on what awesome things you put in, not what you'd taken out.

It kind of bothers me that "innovatating on a concept" has been taken to mean "turning it into a shooter", while "doing justice to a well loved IP" has been taken to mean "remaking an old game and removing things". We already had an attempt to innovate on X-Com in the UFO series, and while it was hit and miss it was definitely getting good by Afterlight.

The screenshots look interesting though, so I'm not judging. Just not really thrilled by the language in this press release.

 

[ASnogarD]

I must admit I am a bit worried about what the devs call streamlining as well...

I enjoyed being able to shift through my inventory to outfit each soldier with a loadout I felt suited to thier strengths, the need to put sidearms and grenades in the belt and holsters for quick access and other stuff in the backpack that can be pulled out when needed but took more time units.
I liked how you needed to check each soldiers stats to get rid of the cowardly ones, pick up the ones with good accuracy for ranged weapons, the ones with high strength to carry the heavy weapons...the fast movers for medics and/or nade throwers/ stunners... etc. etc.
How the UI allowed you to save up time units for various shots, so you dont run to a spot hit crouch and find you cant shoot.

I didnt enjoy the manner a single alien could completely wreck a co ordinated assualt with one alien class grenade...and there was no way to counter it, the ones that just came from a corner and suicide nade explosioned the tiny entries to the space craft... boom half the assualt force down and half the spaceship blown up.
I wasnt too keen on the overly random nature of the shooting either, my highest skilled sniper using an aimed shot and misses an Alien in open at less than 20m, and the alien turns and pops the sniper one shot through the cover the sniper was using.
I also hope they avoid what happenes with the other UFO games that copied the XCom formulae did... missions with such a random difficulty curve you could go from one shotting a single alien to win to being besieged by high level alien life forms that could take a full barrage of fire from all your team and one shot half your guys before you hit the Quit Game option.

The game was about management, managing your resources and personel, managing your battles... taking out the management aspect would reduce it to a pretty looking tactics style game.

I dont care if its on the consoles and PC, as long as the streamlining is used with extreme care, no good saving the patiant if you surgically remove half of what makes up the patiant.

 

[zacman5001]

I see several problems with this.

1 - It's multiplatform, and I will pay 4 cookies to the first person to name me a good multi-platform RTS/TBS.

Tropico 4 seams pretty good, and it was multiplatform. It didn't innovate very much on tropico 3, but it still got solid reviews.

 

[Pat8u]

Kinda nice to see this getting made, but let's be realistic... This isn't going to be the second coming of XCOM any more than all the other sequels/spinoffs were. Because it's goddamn XCOM, that's why!

If this game somehow managed to be better than XCOM the universe would implode in on itself from too much awesome. It's just not gonna happen.

"streamlined" means "no longer have to buy a big stack of missiles every five minutes". A lot of the inventory management, which was monumentally dull, in the original could just be handled automatically with you presented with balance sheet at the end of the month saying "you fired 3760 bullets, this is what it cost".

As soon as you've got more general stores you can stock up on whatever you want. I can't think of a single example - off the top of my head - of a game with "streamlined" mechanics being superior to it's progenitor. Not one. That's both bizarre and depressing.

you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly

too badly

So he's reassuring everyone that the game's not wussified while simultaneously implying that the game is wussified? Huh, WTH?

skyrim is seen as a better sequel to oblivion

 

[kingmob]

Dev 1&2: "That... that's actually not a bad idea."

It's actually a brilliant idea, and I'm really happy to see they're tying the two together as I hoped they would - using the shooter as a prequel to set up the strategy game. There's no reason the two can't co-exist happily.

Indeed. And while I can't speak for all the fans of the old XCOM games who were pissed about the whole FPS thing, I know that I'm no longer pissed. I'm getting the remake I wanted and assuming it's any good, I'll be free to enjoy the FPS if I choose to do so. It's a win-win.

Same here. Tbh, the FPS was such an obvious big fuckup that I have to assume this was the plan all along somehow.

 

[kingmob]

2 - the phrase "getting rid of tedium and uninteresting mechanics" translates quite easily into "Getting rid of all the depth and choice which made Xcom great".

The thing is, people quite often mistake complexity for depth. A choice that has only one correct answer is generally not interesting for a strategy game. More often than not the game will be more enjoyable for most people by removing it. See Skyrim, they streamlined the stats into 3 and it makes complete sense to me, even though I am a big fan of Morrowind. But they where right to conclude that the old way mostly was just a way to increase health, mana and stamina. The side-effects they gave their own perks etc.

Of course the sentence is suspect, but X-com could profit a lot from the removal of several aspects and a better explanation of certain mechanics.

I also hope they include some sort of 'easy' mode, where you can easily load a game and make it so 'normal' means no saving. X-com is meant to be played like that and people should be introduced to it. Also, I find it hard to stop myself from loading

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Enemy Unknown is going to be a multiplatform title, that was mentioned in the original announcement. I think it would be best not to read too much into that.

What you can read into it is under the best case scenario it will have a clunky but functional console port interface (kotor is the only relatively recent one I can think of), worst case scenario is some abomination like Borderlands or Skyrim where the devs seem to actively hate gamers who use a keyboard and mouse.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

oh and also this game will be no good unless the strategy portion has a fully destructible environment like xcom 1, 2 and apocalypse

and since this is a modern game they need to add some physics to the environment destruction

 

[Meight08]

I see several problems with this.

1 - It's multiplatform, and I will pay 4 cookies to the first person to name me a good multi-platform RTS/TBS.

2 - the phrase "getting rid of tedium and uninteresting mechanics" translates quite easily into "Getting rid of all the depth and choice which made Xcom great".

3 - Nothing could be as awesome as Xcom, to the Xcom fans.

4 - "removing no small amount of micromanagement" is (usually) NOT a good thing. Remember what happened to a great series when they got rid of all that base related micromanagement? We got Command and Conquer 4.



ps.
Check out http://www.xenonauts.com/ for another, more indie, more hardcore view on a new xcom-like game.

1-full spectrum warrior was a mulitplatform release and is considered a bright example of strategy on consoles
3-take of the nostalgia goggles they are bad for you.
4-ummm what proof do you have that it will be forced?
maybe there are options if you want to do it yourself or have the computer do it.
like pre determining what loadout you want and the computer will make sure you always have the required equipment.
or the ability to start a game with a base that is already ready for use.
I dont want to need a spreadsheet or a to do list to play a game.
i want to be able to start it up select a loadout for my troops build a base and start playing
nothing else the option would be really nice but if it was forced i would not buy it.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

Wait- there's a new RTS X-com coming out?
... I may shed a tear.

 

[jedizero]

Honestly, guys?

I think this is an awesome thing. Yeah, it might bomb. It might bomb horribly.

But they're trying. They're willing to try giving us what we want, and not just say 'Lol if u wnt ur xcom buy our fps'

I think for that, they deserve a little benefit of the doubt.

Point is, they're trying something that is not particularly in 'vogue'. Nor is it being massively ripped off by something current. Turn Based Squad games are not common now-a-days, the only one I've seen in latest years is Frozen Synapse, and that was by an Indie company that didn't pour billions into development.

If this is for once a company listening to what the fans want, and giving the IP to someone who knows a few things about turn based strategies, I say we applaud them and give them a chance. If they fail, they fail, but if they succeed? From then on, Turn Based Squad games will be back. I think that's worth taking a risk.

 

[csoloist]

3 - Nothing could be as awesome as Xcom, to the Xcom fans.

3-take of the nostalgia goggles they are bad for you.

I replay Enemy Unknown (and TFTD, dunno why) every few years. What the original XCOM tries no game since has done better. Rather than improving on the formula they always try to mess with things - always works out for the worse. Same reason Master of Orion is still my go-to single player 4x (and bloody hell does MoO have some problems). GalCiv, Space Empires, SotS even the MoO sequels - devs never seem to learn from and improve on the 'gold standard', they always throw too much of their own shit into the mix.

This new game has zero chance of being better than the original. That's just how it goes. With a little luck it'll be decent - hopefully better at least than the more recent UFO titles - but that's about the most we can hope for.

 

[jedizero]

This new game has zero chance of being better than the original. That's just how it goes. With a little luck it'll be decent - hopefully better at least than the more recent UFO titles - but that's about the most we can hope for.

Wrong, its has zero chance of being better than our nostalgic memories of it. We already have the baseline set to 'perfect', in our head.

But to a new generation, it might be the game that is remembered in their nostalgic memories forever, like the original is for us.

 

[csoloist]

Wrong, its has zero chance of being better than our nostalgic memories of it. We already have the baseline set to 'perfect', in our head.

But to a new generation, it might be the game that is remembered in their nostalgic memories forever, like the original is for us.

"Nostalgic memories"? The hell are you talking about? I last replayed it two years ago. Also, the original XCOM had a crapton of issues, what is this "perfect" you're on about?


The new Enemy Unknown will not be as good as the old, end of. It's like predicting that the next Bayformers movie will be shit - it's not difficult.

 

[spacewalker]

Any word on destructible terrain or destructible walls? The rocket launcher was my favorie way of removing enemy cover. You could even use the plasma weapons to tunnel through hills if you wanted to.

 

[kingmob]

This new game has zero chance of being better than the original. That's just how it goes. With a little luck it'll be decent - hopefully better at least than the more recent UFO titles - but that's about the most we can hope for.

Wrong, its has zero chance of being better than our nostalgic memories of it. We already have the baseline set to 'perfect', in our head.

But to a new generation, it might be the game that is remembered in their nostalgic memories forever, like the original is for us.

You mistake this for a game people only have memories of. This is a game that is still played now and then by most enthusiasts. There are even mods out there...

 

[Alan Sigus]

I remain cautiously optimistic.

...and I'm a huge fan of the play type- originals, Extraterrestials, Altar's "UFO" series, I've played them all.

So, sadly, it will be really easy to piss me off if they don't get some aspects right
It will still be must buy, so they'll get my money, will I be happy later or not.

 

[Souplex]

Check that third screenshot, is that an Xbox 'Y' icon? Is this Console instead of PC?

Probably both, but it's good that they're making it console available so those of us who cut our strategy teeth on the games by Intelligent Systems and the like can play it without having to spend stupid amounts of money on a PC that can run it.
There hasn't been a real strategy game in quite a while (It's real time, or strategy; not both.) and I am very enthused.