Xcom Publisher: Strategy Games Are Not Contemporary
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Looks like the took the feel of Bioshock weird to the burbs and went back in time.
Which sounds better? The above or the original premise behind the XComs?
I really don't like what these guys did with their IP. And unfortunately it will only take a flop at release to tell them that. I wont be buying this.
Which sounds better? The above or the original premise behind the XComs?
I really don't like what these guys did with their IP. And unfortunately it will only take a flop at release to tell them that. I wont be buying this.
"... in line with what this generation of gamers want... "
No dumass. Newer generation of gamers don't care about an old IP like X-Com and the original fans don't want a fucking shooter. This thing is going to crash and burn because of lack of market research.
No dumass. Newer generation of gamers don't care about an old IP like X-Com and the original fans don't want a fucking shooter. This thing is going to crash and burn because of lack of market research.
Main reason why so many Developers/Publishers are making FPS these days:
Its easier.
Easier to make, and easier to market, and easier to sell.
Don't mean it works though... XD
Especially since they aren't being honest about it.
Betrayal indeed...
Its easier.
Easier to make, and easier to market, and easier to sell.
Don't mean it works though... XD
Especially since they aren't being honest about it.
Betrayal indeed...
Fixed in original post, forgot about that one.Raiyan 1.0 said:Add Frozen Synapses to that.Not G. Ivingname said:
And very soon, Subversion.
So, if everyone is singing like Justin Bieber, the best thing to do is to ALSO sing like Justin Bieber?
I smell profit-chasing, sir. I smell a game born of a series of money-focused decisions by a series of equally money-focused corporate suits, each chasing the lucrative $400,000,000 market created in the wake of Call of Duty.
But here's the thing, guys: No matter how much your marketing experts tell you that this time, you're going to be the next big thing - that you can claim the lion's share of that FPS pie if you strike while the iron's hot - the fact is that there are a hundred other smiths each striking at the same battered bit of iron, and behind your backs all the horses are being shod at the Smithing Megastore across the road.
That market you're chasing? It doesn't exist. You can't just make an FPS and expect to sell, any more than you could make an MMORPG post-2004 and expect to be the next big thing. The next big thing is here already, and you're just an also-ran trying to cash in on a market already milked to within an inch of its life. And so you fail.
And in doing so, you try to justify your decision to turn a beloved cult classic into a run-of-the-mill FPS. And you ignore the market that exists for the RTS and TBS, because it's not big enough for you. Never mind that Starcraft 2 has sold at least 4.5 million copies; that Civilization sells (I assume) millions of copies with each iteration; that even lesser-known brands like Sins of a Solar Empire are massively successful; and that the "nonexistent" strategy market is what keeps Paradox Interactive, a publisher far more interesting and passionate about its fanbase than you, alive and thriving.
There are five million rabid RTS fans out here, gentlemen - each and every one of them starved for new, interesting titles. By ignoring us, you do both us and yourselves a massive disservice, one that I hope to God comes back and bites you in the arse.
I smell profit-chasing, sir. I smell a game born of a series of money-focused decisions by a series of equally money-focused corporate suits, each chasing the lucrative $400,000,000 market created in the wake of Call of Duty.
But here's the thing, guys: No matter how much your marketing experts tell you that this time, you're going to be the next big thing - that you can claim the lion's share of that FPS pie if you strike while the iron's hot - the fact is that there are a hundred other smiths each striking at the same battered bit of iron, and behind your backs all the horses are being shod at the Smithing Megastore across the road.
That market you're chasing? It doesn't exist. You can't just make an FPS and expect to sell, any more than you could make an MMORPG post-2004 and expect to be the next big thing. The next big thing is here already, and you're just an also-ran trying to cash in on a market already milked to within an inch of its life. And so you fail.
And in doing so, you try to justify your decision to turn a beloved cult classic into a run-of-the-mill FPS. And you ignore the market that exists for the RTS and TBS, because it's not big enough for you. Never mind that Starcraft 2 has sold at least 4.5 million copies; that Civilization sells (I assume) millions of copies with each iteration; that even lesser-known brands like Sins of a Solar Empire are massively successful; and that the "nonexistent" strategy market is what keeps Paradox Interactive, a publisher far more interesting and passionate about its fanbase than you, alive and thriving.
There are five million rabid RTS fans out here, gentlemen - each and every one of them starved for new, interesting titles. By ignoring us, you do both us and yourselves a massive disservice, one that I hope to God comes back and bites you in the arse.
They could easily make the same game with a different name, that would be fine but to use the Xcom name for its' selling potential... jerks.
That being said, the name the game gets will decide how I truly feel about it. A franchise going with a different genre can be good, just give it away in the title.
Super Mario RPG and Final Fantasy Tactics did not try to fool it's audience into thinking they followed the same formula as the previous titles.
If they call it something like Xcom FPS, I'll hate the idea alot less.
That being said, the name the game gets will decide how I truly feel about it. A franchise going with a different genre can be good, just give it away in the title.
Super Mario RPG and Final Fantasy Tactics did not try to fool it's audience into thinking they followed the same formula as the previous titles.
If they call it something like Xcom FPS, I'll hate the idea alot less.
I am relatively new to the series, so my opinion probably doesn't have much backbone behind it. But, from hearing that its been a successful strategy series being turned into a shooter, because that's whats cool and popular right now, seems like a total bandwagon move.
What a ridiculous comment. I am sure many gamers, would rather see UFO rebooted as an original and much needed strategy game, than yet another FPS. Is it just me, or has COD created a pied piper movement, where every developer feel the need to make FPS games to be successful.
You know, people would probably expect me to be hurling insults at this point. I'd just have to say one thing.
Hit the road, Jack.
Hit the road, Jack.