Looks fun, though I dunno about fighting black sludge for a whole game. We'll just have too wait and see.
XCOM WTF?
- Thread starter EzraPound
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Anoctris has gotten his dev studios confused. Digital Anvil, the studio he co-founded after Origin ceased to exist, died because Chris Roberts couldn't keep his head in the game and became more and more obsessed with film making. The killing blow for DA was the endless budget and schedule blowouts for Chris Roberts' Freelancer project resulting in Microsoft, who'd invested heavily in the studio, to assert direct control of the company and kicking Chris Roberts out. Of course, the studio was already on shaky legs because of the luke warm market reception of Erin Roberts' Starlancer.EzraPound said:
According to the alpha builds of Van Buren (you know, Black Isle's codename for their Fallout 3 project), it was staying isometric view.Metalhandkerchief said:
Troika also went as far as pitching this prototype.RhombusHatesYou said:
Here is what the real succesor to UFO would have looked like as well.
Dreamland Chronicles: Freedom Ridge. A PS2 title that would have had gameplay similar in some ways to Valkyria Chronicles and was by the original creator of UFO.
A lot of people are comparing the X-COM games to what happened with Fallout... the main difference however is that perspective aside, Fallout 3 was still and rpg set in the same setting (If not the same specific location) using the same basic mechanics (S.P.E.C.I.A.L.) and boasting the same overall purpose: to construct a massive post-apocalyptic world in which players can explore. You can argue who did it better, I certainly have, but it's still the same basic Fallout.
That's not happening here. There are absolutely no similarities between Xcom and the new game at all beyond some vague cosmetic effects: Aka that aliens are invading and someone has to stop them. Oh wow, that premise is so original, no other game could ever do that, I can see the similarities already!
Sensing a little sarcasm? You should!
What made the original Xcom was most certainly not its premise, it was the execution. It was a small squad tactical game with an overarching management element in which not only did you control the individual squads being sent on missions, but also the organization sending groups out on those missions and how that organization is run. Battles were harsh, brutal, and painstakingly realistic in many ways, measuring everything from the ammunition count and accuracy of individual soldiers to the balistics and penetration of specific weapons against certain enemy and armour types, even under certain conditions. The morale and experience of certain soldiers was something to consider, and even destructible terrain and basic physics. We're talking about a game wayyyyy beyond its time here, most of the stuff I'm talking still isn't commonly found in games.
And that's only scratching the surface. I've been waiting years for another game to come along and do what Xcom did back then but with modern visuals and style. There have been many attempts, the UFO series both official and fan-made for example, but none have ever managed to capture the glory of the original game. It's been over ten years since I got into the Xcom games, which were already creaky when I first found out about em, and I'm still playing em. Just earlier today in fact via an awesome mod called 'The Two Sides' (Look it up!).
Meanwhile from what we've seen of the 'new' Xcom, it's a shooter with basic squad mechanics set in the mid-50's, retro men in black style American government agents fighting aliens with a cheesy almost Team Fortress style presentation.
Sounds... well actually it sounds damned cool. Don't even have an issue with the studio! But why oh why oh why did they name it X-COM? The game is nothing like the originals and they're ruining our chances of X-COM pulling a King's Bounty and being picked up by some small studio full of love and skill to be remade for a new generation.
I don't generally use smilies, but this seems appropriate. ;_;
That's not happening here. There are absolutely no similarities between Xcom and the new game at all beyond some vague cosmetic effects: Aka that aliens are invading and someone has to stop them. Oh wow, that premise is so original, no other game could ever do that, I can see the similarities already!
Sensing a little sarcasm? You should!
What made the original Xcom was most certainly not its premise, it was the execution. It was a small squad tactical game with an overarching management element in which not only did you control the individual squads being sent on missions, but also the organization sending groups out on those missions and how that organization is run. Battles were harsh, brutal, and painstakingly realistic in many ways, measuring everything from the ammunition count and accuracy of individual soldiers to the balistics and penetration of specific weapons against certain enemy and armour types, even under certain conditions. The morale and experience of certain soldiers was something to consider, and even destructible terrain and basic physics. We're talking about a game wayyyyy beyond its time here, most of the stuff I'm talking still isn't commonly found in games.
And that's only scratching the surface. I've been waiting years for another game to come along and do what Xcom did back then but with modern visuals and style. There have been many attempts, the UFO series both official and fan-made for example, but none have ever managed to capture the glory of the original game. It's been over ten years since I got into the Xcom games, which were already creaky when I first found out about em, and I'm still playing em. Just earlier today in fact via an awesome mod called 'The Two Sides' (Look it up!).
Meanwhile from what we've seen of the 'new' Xcom, it's a shooter with basic squad mechanics set in the mid-50's, retro men in black style American government agents fighting aliens with a cheesy almost Team Fortress style presentation.
Sounds... well actually it sounds damned cool. Don't even have an issue with the studio! But why oh why oh why did they name it X-COM? The game is nothing like the originals and they're ruining our chances of X-COM pulling a King's Bounty and being picked up by some small studio full of love and skill to be remade for a new generation.
I don't generally use smilies, but this seems appropriate. ;_;
Whether you think of computer games as art or entertainment, I consider this pretty much a dick-move on the part of the developers.
Lets consider computer games as art; The equivilant scenario would be someone buying the mona lisa and repainting it as a CG landscape - it might be great art but it retains no trace of its namesake. Futhermore, anyone that was at all familiar with the original will be downright offended.
If you consider computer games as entertainment then you probably don't care about the title or the connitations of using the original name and not the original content. But you still want to be entertained.
XCOM UFO is heralded as one of the all time great games. A winning formula was created, surely this is a good thing regardless of whether computer games are art or entertainment.
So why change everything but the name? No-one wants to be stuck playing the same game over and over, but it's not unreasonable to keep what works, giving it a modern overhaul. It could be argued that the reason behind X-COM's success is that it mixed the genres of TBS and RTS with a dab of RPG and, excluding the latter, did them better than the current examples that existed at the time. So here's an ORIGINAL idea for games developers, if they can stand to look at one without melting or becoming bankrupt; Why not mit it up a bit? Why do computer games have to be one specific genre? And if there HAS to be FPS, why not keep other aspects of the game that created the fanbase that the developers are exploiting.
For example you enter FPS mode when on missions. Hell, why not make the part of the game where you shoot down UFO's on a world map into a combat flight sim? I'm one guy, not even in the industry, and I can think of this, why can't a team of people who's job it is to do this? I don't know, maybe they did but didn't have the time or budget.
Which brings me to my final point: the problem with trying to turn art/entertainment into an industry is that it leaves no room for the creativity and TIME needed to create a true masterpeice - see the film industry. The only reason in my eyes why the developers have slapped this title onto this fairly uninventive FPS is to stand on the shoulders of giants in a desparate bid to tread water in the tide of essentially identical games that are being churned out.
And for everyone that says they don't care about this kind of stuff, wouldn't you rather play an excellent game than merely another one?
Lets consider computer games as art; The equivilant scenario would be someone buying the mona lisa and repainting it as a CG landscape - it might be great art but it retains no trace of its namesake. Futhermore, anyone that was at all familiar with the original will be downright offended.
If you consider computer games as entertainment then you probably don't care about the title or the connitations of using the original name and not the original content. But you still want to be entertained.
XCOM UFO is heralded as one of the all time great games. A winning formula was created, surely this is a good thing regardless of whether computer games are art or entertainment.
So why change everything but the name? No-one wants to be stuck playing the same game over and over, but it's not unreasonable to keep what works, giving it a modern overhaul. It could be argued that the reason behind X-COM's success is that it mixed the genres of TBS and RTS with a dab of RPG and, excluding the latter, did them better than the current examples that existed at the time. So here's an ORIGINAL idea for games developers, if they can stand to look at one without melting or becoming bankrupt; Why not mit it up a bit? Why do computer games have to be one specific genre? And if there HAS to be FPS, why not keep other aspects of the game that created the fanbase that the developers are exploiting.
For example you enter FPS mode when on missions. Hell, why not make the part of the game where you shoot down UFO's on a world map into a combat flight sim? I'm one guy, not even in the industry, and I can think of this, why can't a team of people who's job it is to do this? I don't know, maybe they did but didn't have the time or budget.
Which brings me to my final point: the problem with trying to turn art/entertainment into an industry is that it leaves no room for the creativity and TIME needed to create a true masterpeice - see the film industry. The only reason in my eyes why the developers have slapped this title onto this fairly uninventive FPS is to stand on the shoulders of giants in a desparate bid to tread water in the tide of essentially identical games that are being churned out.
And for everyone that says they don't care about this kind of stuff, wouldn't you rather play an excellent game than merely another one?
It wasn't almost finished. The company was in a bad way and diverted resources to Brotherhood of Steel on the consoles. That game was also isometric although it wasn't exactly something that an XCom fan would want.Metalhandkerchief said:
