XCOM FPS
Align
Remain Calm Join Date: 2002-11-02 Member: 5216Forum Moderators, Constellation
Remain Calm Join Date: 2002-11-02 Member: 5216Forum Moderators, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">by 2K studios, makers of BioShock</div><a href="http://kotaku.com/5516654/x+com-is-back" target="_blank">http://kotaku.com/5516654/x+com-is-back</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->X-Com, the classic 90's turn-based strategy game pitting mankind against alien invaders, is set to make a comeback as a first-person shooter, courtesy of the 2K studios behind BioShock 2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ugh.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><u>combining research and planning elements</u> not with overhead, turn-based strategy sections, but with first-person shooter action.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmm... well, it's a start.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->X-Com, the classic 90's turn-based strategy game pitting mankind against alien invaders, is set to make a comeback as a first-person shooter, courtesy of the 2K studios behind BioShock 2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ugh.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><u>combining research and planning elements</u> not with overhead, turn-based strategy sections, but with first-person shooter action.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmm... well, it's a start.
Comments
I like it so far.
Although, why drag xcom into it, if you could just do something new?
I like it so far.
Although, why drag xcom into it, if you could just do something new?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, basically. Sounds like it might be a fun game, but it's really not XCOM at all, and I'm not going to look at it like an XCOM game.
Ya, I guess that's the market they are aiming for. Just like Bethesda with Fallout. Sure it's a good game, but it's not as good as the original fallout games were.
Putting things in first person real time perspective doesn't immediately make things better.
I guess so..
but man.. if it would just happen to be the perfect X-COM: Enemy unknown FPS remake.. ! But it's not gonna happen.
Then again, I never played XCOM. So... yeah.
In 2K's defense, they had a solid run with Bioshock. Then they gave the IP to some other dev team and they screwed up Bioshock2....
Then again, I never played XCOM. So... yeah.
In 2K's defense, they had a solid run with Bioshock. Then they gave the IP to some other dev team and they screwed up Bioshock2....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even if off-topic, how do mean? Unless you refer to the Bioshock1 ingenious storytwist, but that's hardly fair to compare. It's not like you can pull something equally awesome off again that easily. I found the game varied, fun, interesting weapons/plasmids which rewarded planning and absolutely gorgeous.
Well, 2K is responsible for Bioshock. Many claim it's just a System Shock 2 rip-off and a poorly done one, and thus XCOM will equally stink in terms of a remake.
Frankly I thought Bioshock1 was excellent. It was pretty, had solid gameplay (except for those respawn thingies), and the twists were pretty excellent. Bioshock2.... didn't pan out too great.
So, 2K has a track record of 1 out of 2 in terms of making a good FPS/RPG that steals concepts from a previous work. Then again, what doesn't steal from previous works....
<a href="http://nerfnow.com/comic/283" target="_blank">http://nerfnow.com/comic/283</a>
~~Sickle~~
Bioshock MMO
<a href="http://kotaku.com/5517592/rumor-bioshock-the-mmo" target="_blank">http://kotaku.com/5517592/rumor-bioshock-the-mmo</a>
I have no positive experience with games going from classical sp/mp to MMO so while it's still a rumor, I hope it never happens.
<a href="http://nerfnow.com/comic/283" target="_blank">http://nerfnow.com/comic/283</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In the comments we find..
<a href="http://kotaku.com/5518361/another-new-x+com-game-and-its-not-a-shooter" target="_blank">http://kotaku.com/5518361/another-new-x+co...s-not-a-shooter</a>
2k's pretty good though, they make some good games, should be worth a look.
I hope by 'planning and research' they don't mean that stupid stuff they do at the beginning of ghost recon games because that's crap.
Man you've missed a lot about PC gaming buddy.. ;)
Btw, dunno what's the hype about bioshock, it's no where near being an extraordinary game.
What I'm expecting though, is a moderately decent tube shooter. Worth buying, sure, maybe, why not? But worth putting the Xcom name on? Hell no.
Btw, dunno what's the hype about bioshock, it's no where near being an extraordinary game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I started on an old amiga, but I stayed with that until I got my first PC around the time of age of empires 2. I know I had heroes of might and magic 2 when it was new out.
Generally though I dislike old games, most of them have glaring flaws which make them unplayable as I've become accustomed to the new, better desgined games.
Only old games I like are ones like zelda link to the past, mario 3 and mario world, sonic I guess isn't bad although I never played it much due to not having a sega. Age of empires 2 is still good and I would probably still enjoy heroes 2. Oh and maybe contra although i've never played that, it seems to have all the elements of a good platformer.
Turn based strategy though is usually annoying, in most cases it's a limitation because you could do it much better in real time, although with things like total war it works well because you need to scale it from one territory to half the world and TBS is a good way of doing that. It also works well in heroes 2 because heroes 2 is just like chess with more interesting pieces.
Starcraft looks like the old cnc games and I never liked those, I only started to like them around red alert 2 and I can't even stand to play that any more. Old RTS games are painfully primitive, in fact most old games are painfully primitive, they are only fun if you don't know better or if the concept has a lot of emergent depth or is constantly engaging, like a platformer.
Don't get me wrong, I love real time games too, but TBS is something special.
If you have to do very little some of the time and an awful lot other times then you need to be able to control the timeflow in order to prevent the game from being too slow or too fast, you can either do that with variable time controls in RTS, or you can make a TBS which simply involves clicking the commit button when you're done.
If you aren't going to do that then there's very little difference between TBS and RTS and you may as well make an RTS because they lend themselves more easily to graphical appeal.
It's almost universally bad in old games because old games tend to lack the complexity required to necessitate TBS controls.
Wut.....
Someone clearly doesn't understand the genres.
But I can think of MANY MANY examples where turn based gameplay makes the game better rather than worse. Most x3 games would be impossible in full real time.
While talking about Jagged Alliance 2 I'll point out that it's squad-based control system worked really, really well and felt basically like an ancestor of X-Com style squad gameplay.
RTS is only about making fast decisions if the interface is badly put together or the game is excessively complex, a good interface and well designed game will not strain the abilities of realtime games.
Hence, if you have an overly complex game, use TBS, if you don't, use RTS.
Hence, if you have an overly complex game, use TBS, if you don't, use RTS.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Uh...
I'm going to have to revoke your opinion badge.
RTS games require as much quick thinking and fine control as any other kind of game. Watch a reply of any pro-level RTS game and you'll see what I mean. You obviously haven't played ANY RTS at anywhere near even the mid-level playing tier.
--Scythe--