Well said, my friend!

Fully agreed. Don't get me wrong, this really does annoy the crap out of me. But so did Fallout 3 until I read up on it.
And at least it isn't like we aren't used to the XCOM name getting raped. I'm looking at you Enforcer (and Interceptor) :p
And either way, there is a good chance that we might get a more traditional spin-off if this succeeds. And failing that, there is always UFO:ET.

Fuck, there goes my lunch.

Another "good" sign for X-COM's future:
Destructoid - Rumor: BioShock MMO in the works

Re-imagining a game out-of-genre, is okay and can have some fantastic results when done right: Might and Magic ---> Heroes of Might and Magic for example. Re-imagining a game with a different play type all together (i.e. Strategic Gaming --> Twitch Gaming) is what makes fans nervous because at least some of what is special about the original, simply cannot be carried over to the new style. This then makes us wonder "Why the association with the original in the first place?"
It'd be like taking the characters and setting of "M.A.S.H." and turning it into a "24" style action show. Could the show be excellent? Sure it can. but it'd miss the point of the original.
Personally, I'll take the approach I took with Fallout 3: hope they release a fun game worth playing... but knowing it won't be possible for them to recreate much of what I loved about Fallout 1+2 in the new playstyle, I had to view it as a new game and not a sequel to give it a fair shake and to judge it by what it is, and not by what it isn't.

The thing that is so irritating is that fans have been clamoring for a true X-Com sequel/remake for over a decade, and we're getting the middle finger yet again... I can tell you right now that, no matter the quality of the final product, this game is going to be a financial disaster.

Actually, Bioshock on hard difficulty was harder than SS1 on hard (well... hard enemies), not to mention second which was a breeze after acquiring certain weapons...

My opinions
Fallout 3 was fun (for a bit), but bland, it had a bit too much quantity and not enough quality. I had no choice in the outcome of missions, just the order in which I explored, no meaningful dialogue, none of the dark humour and character of the original other than a veneer which covered the surface.
However, I don't think it is a bad game, they did a okay job on it. Hopefully new Vegas will be more story and character driven.
@ gundato
I played C&C renegade, it wasn't as good as it could of been and I expected more, but it was quite fun. Though I would not of bought it except I got it as part of a package. The multi-player looked interesting but I could not find any active games : (
As for Xcom: I only played apocalypse and interceptor. I loved apocalypse and it is one of my top games. Interceptor was interesting at first but it felt like it had only been half developed then rushed out.
I really wish a reboot would be a tactical squad based game with base management, however it having a FPS section isn't necessarily a disaster if it is a squad based FPS, I don't even mind losing out on a bit of the base building as long as I get to improve my characters and kit out weapons etc (I.E. I can deal with losing the base and research if I get a really good fps squad based shooter with good RPG style character development that is loyal to the X-com atmosphere)
@Mystral I played Bioshock on the hardest difficulty, I did not consider it particularly easy, well, the end fight was ridiculously easy, what a bloody let down.

This will be total crap. However, there may be a silver lining. They might release the oringal as a free download to promote the game. This happened with Oblivion andThe new C&C.
Mostly this is just absurd. Worse it is part of a trend to make games dumber and simpler.

I always thought the FPS genre was tired after the glut of games that followed in DOOM's and Wolfenstein's wake back in the mid to late 90's. Now we are getting YET ANOTHER FPS and one that pulls a Shadowrun(remember Shadowrun and Microsoft?? Yeah,....).
I have to ask: is there no originality left in this damned business anymore?? Can we please get something that is not an FPS?
I managed to play me some X-COm a while back through dubious means. The game(s) frustrated the hell out of me because there was no definite tutorial in the game. The game just drops you into its world and you better scramble like hell to get up and running. (Yes, I did read the manual but it was still hard...). However, any challenge that I managed to overcome, every bit of completed research that I managed to get and deploy in the field made me proud of overcoming every obstacle that the game put in my way.
For someone to make an FPS out of something like that just screams greed and lack of any sort of creativity. I am thinking that there is a secret Ministry of Entertainment somewhere, like in 1984, just randomly cobbling, editing, and generally slapping together any concepts that will stick and releasing the finished "product" to the public. :tinfoilhat:

That only happened because EA were not selling the originals outside the First Decade pack. 2K are currently selling all the X-Com games through GamersGate, D2D and Steam.

If you think thats bad the first time I played it within an hour of playtime a Mothership attacked my base. Now thats pressure.

Gaming companies always try to talk about making better something they couldn't make anything as good as in the first place.
The gobbledygook talk they come out with is so weird. Are blueberries an improvement over halibut? They have nothing to do with each other. So many projects are sold the same way, as improvements when they're no improvement at all and don't even try to be. They're just something different.
I would respect promo talk a lot more if it was just halfway honest. "We were inspired by X-COM's great sense of tension and surprise to do a FPS that could bring out the very best of its wonderful gameworld. We're stepping the franchise up to the next level of sci-fi horror by pulling you out of the safe distance of an overhead view and tossing you right into the faces of the creepiest aliens you've ever seen! They're smarter than you and think you're delicious. Prepare to be enslaved and devoured in the summer of 2011!"
How hard is that, really? You can brag all you want without transparently bullsh*ing your customers or the people who loved the old game.

You've implied quite heavily that the game will somehow suck, "God damn fuckers..... It's all I could say when I read the post. Also, there was a space sim based on X-COM too, and that it sucked, was there not?"
"Good game or not, I'd rather play a thinking game anytime of the day, so fuck them."
"A first person X-COM though? Bollocks."
And the golden rule that states this is... where exactly? It's a reboot, a re-imagining, a redevelopment of the X-com name. It doesn't have to be completely true to the original, a 21st century update to a 20th century classic.
Why be so hostile toward a title that's being put together by a talented development team, a title you have next to no information on and is based on a game universe you're so obviously passionate about? Would you rather they just cancel it because it's too radical or something?
Did I argue it wasn't going to be a first person game, somewhere?
Ok, fair cop. I hold my hands up, a rubbish example indeed but inane and stupid? At least I was attempting to put a positive spin on why they'd chosen to go down the FP route, a little more constructive than, 'fuck them' atleast.

Just more evidence of the gaming industry's fetish with first person shooters.