It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)info on the new "Xcom" game(153 posts)(153 posts)
(153 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 11, 2010
I like the sound of this game so far and the trailer wasn't bad (no this is not sarcasm). Does it deserve to be called x-com? well no but if you forget the name for a second and look at it as a fresh game and new ip it does look like it could be intresting.
The setting is cool, the idea is to have non humaniod aliens(something I can get behind as there are far to many aliens in games that have startrek syndrome), which will take some working out of how they function and attack is a good idea. Its definatly a shooter but it looks more intresting then alot that have come out recently. I have to say I enjoyed Bioshock as well.
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Ralackk: I have to say I enjoyed Bioshock as well.

Then why didn't they call it Alienshock? Or even X-shock? That would have solved a lot of grief and heartache
Posted June 11, 2010
If you go in looking for problems, you'll find them.
Okay, let's start with the symbiote enemies. I do not like them. I suspect none of us do. That being said, was XCOM about the gameplay or the sprite set?
As far as the gameplay: Honestly, I DID get a vibe of playing the tactical portion from that. Enemies that pop up and ambush you. Seemingly overwhelming odds. Etc. Not a fan of how durable the team is, but that is something that is an arguable necessity for a modern game.
Yeah, it is an FPS. Get over it. If you want to play the 17 year old game, play the 17 year old game (or UFO: ET :p). If you want to play a remake, expect things to be remade.
Research/Strategic view: Where did we see this? Maybe I missed where they discussed this or showed footage.
Taking pictures: Pretty good way to do active research. I hope there is more to it, but it makes sense.
The 2001 obelisk and the stargate: Again, not huge on the design. But what they represent (the "time limit" on exploring) is something that I think the XCOM clones could benefit from. It is an interesting way to keep things fun the entire time, and not have the after-mission mop-up.
Do I think this will be fully faithful? Hell no.
Do I think this will be fun? Maybe. I am not huge on the gunplay in Bioshock.
Do I think people are still looking for excuses to hate this? Hell yes :p
Posted June 11, 2010
I hope to hell it'll be a good game and I'll sure try the demo when it comes out but my hopes aren't high. Bioshock was awesome but it was bioshock, not xcom
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Do I think people are still looking for excuses to hate this? Hell yes :p

Once again belittling peoples opinions. People are not looking for excuses they are providing valid reasons to hate this. This game could have been called ANYTHING other than XCOM and people might be interested, as it is 2K are insulting the fans by saying this is faithful to the spirit of X-Com when clearly it has as much in common with Halo.
May I remind you that there was just as much of an outcry when X-Com Enforcer was revealed? Were people looking for reasons to hate it or did they simply hate it because it was a lousy platform/shooter that used X-Comesque enemies? If this was simple nerdrage then you might have a point but it's also journalists and other game designers that are also hating this while 2K are doing a wonderful job of sticking their fingers in their ears and pretending everything is fine.
There is no strategy in that video. We were told it would have strategic elements.
We were told it was squad based. The squad of 1 look to exist for nothing but cannon fodder.
There will be research. Where are the autopsies? Where are the laboratories? A camera thats it is it?
Lets not forget faithful to the original. The Interceptor is now an Oldsmobile. The aliens are goo and the ship is straight out of 2001.
If you don't give a toss about X-Com then thats fine, i'm happy for you. However a lot of people do so don't expect them to start clapping like seals when they see videos like this one that simply prove the only connection XCOM has with X-Com is a similar name.
Post edited June 11, 2010 by Delixe
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Navagon: Couldn't be less XCOM if it was a pinball game.

Shh! Don't give them any ideas!
Posted June 11, 2010
What happened to my username? Quotes in usernames aren't allowed, I take it.
Posted June 11, 2010
Watched the trailer . It's disappointing.
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Flashdrive: Well, seeing as there's a trailer out now, I think this topic deserves a bump.
I don't have a clue how this is X-COM related.

WTF is this? BioShock+L4D+Postal 2 gameplay? I don't see any of the tactical or strategy elements on this game.
The story: the gulf's oil spill which happened in the 1960s turns against the humankind... That's what you get 50 year after, for putting a brick on top of the spill... yeah, sure.
I'm fine with aliens being non-humanoid. But this game looks just like a bad joke, with only a good element of 2001 on top of it.
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Delixe: There is no strategy in that video. We were told it would have strategic elements.
We were told it was squad based. The squad of 1 look to exist for nothing but cannon fodder.
There will be research. Where are the autopsies? Where are the laboratories? A camera thats it is it?
Lets not forget faithful to the original. The Interceptor is now an Oldsmobile. The aliens are goo and the ship is straight out of 2001.

First part of our post:
Apologies, you are looking for every opportunity to love this game.
Part I quoted:
No strategy, No Research: I can go boot up XCOM and take a screenshot of the tactical combat. Would that mean XCOM had no strategy or research?
Maybe, just maybe, those parts weren't in the trailer?
Complaints over faithfulness: Again, this is more of a prequel. And I kind of already commented on the symbiotey/2001 crap, but it was clearly ignored, so I doubt this part was read either :p
I will say this though: When reading an interview about Deus Ex 3, they made me realize something: the reason DX3 is so much more "high tech" is because the modern world is already more "high tech" than DX was (outside of nanites). Sometimes, the art style needs to be updated.
Same thing here. As much as I loved chrysalids, will they still be as imposing and interesting in full fancy pretty 3d? Or might it look somewhat goofy or awkward?
I am not saying that switching to symbiotes, Stargates, and 2001 is a good idea. That is too far on the other extreme. But worth a thought.
Last Bit:
Ah, yes. Because I am not frothing at the mouth and looking for excuses to firebomb 2k, I am not an XCOM fan.
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Ralackk: I have to say I enjoyed Bioshock as well.
avatar
Delixe: Then why didn't they call it Alienshock? Or even X-shock? That would have solved a lot of grief and heartache

You, sir, have just created and internet meme.
Posted June 11, 2010
Everyone has been calling it "World of Goo 2."
Not XCOM.
Post edited June 11, 2010 by Raneman25
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Ah, yes. Because I am not frothing at the mouth and looking for excuses to firebomb 2k, I am not an XCOM fan.

Who the hell is talking about conducting a terrorist attack on 2K HQ over this? My point is the thread is about talking about the game. Most of us don't like it one single bit and therefore we are more interested in picking our noses. How does that make us insane? Do we have to give every game a fair shout?
If Paul W.S. Anderson was to announce he is making a Deus Ex movie and it's actually set in modern day, will feature mostly action and there wont be anything about Cybernetics do we have to applaud him? So we have to praise the maker that someone is making a Deus Ex movie at last even though it has nothing to do with Deus Ex?
Also I will quote myself here:
If you don't give a toss about X-Com then thats fine, i'm happy for you.
The keyword there is IF. Stop dealing in absolutes and you might not start so many flames.
Post edited June 11, 2010 by Delixe
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Ah, yes. Because I am not frothing at the mouth and looking for excuses to firebomb 2k, I am not an XCOM fan.
avatar
Delixe: Who the hell is talking about conducting a terrorist attack on 2K HQ over this? My point is the thread is about talking about the game. Most of us don't like it one single bit and therefore we are more interested in picking our noses. How does that make us insane? Do we have to give every game a fair shout?
If Paul W.S. Anderson was to announce he is making a Deus Ex movie and it's actually set in modern day, will feature mostly action and there wont be anything about Cybernetics do we have to applaud him? So we have to praise the maker that someone is making a Deus Ex movie at last even though it has nothing to do with Deus Ex?
Also I will quote myself here:
If you don't give a toss about X-Com then thats fine, i'm happy for you.
The keyword there is IF. Stop dealing in absolutes and you might not start so many flames.

Yes, I will use you as my model for how to be polite and value everyone's opinions :p
Nobody is saying you should go out of your way to worship at their feet. But honestly, they could probably have actually put up a 100% faithful game (they didn't, so don't get your underoos in a twist) and people would still be looking for excuses to be full of hatred.
Seriously, they don't SHOW the research or strategic components, so those are not there and it is nothing but Bioshock?
And if you aren't interested in talking about the game, why are you in the thread? That actually DOES make you insane. Just saying :p
Posted June 11, 2010
avatar
Gundato: And if you aren't interested in talking about the game, why are you in the thread? That actually DOES make you insane. Just saying :p

I tip my hat to you sir, thats superb twisting of what I said. Unless you mean we can only talk in this thread if we are positive about it?
They don't show research or strategic components because there are none. That much is painfully obvious from the trailer. 2K have outright LIED about that. Hence people like me are rather annoyed. What we see in that trailer is a generic shooter with a camera and the Bioshock engine. Incedentally everything we were worried about when it was first announced. People give Obsidian a hard time about how short a time they have had to work on Fallout: NV. How long have 2K Marlin been working on this? 1 Year? 6 Months?
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)info on the new "Xcom" game(153 posts)(153 posts)
(153 posts)