X-COMGate Reactions

[Jason]

<strong>[ Editorial ]</strong>

<p><a href="http://kotaku.com/5517548/whats-the-big-deal-about-a-new-xcom" target="_blank">Kotaku</a> </p><blockquote>Look, if that's you, it's OK to feel a little disappointed. As a life-long X-Com fan (hence this piece!), I can't help but feel a <em>slight</em>  twinge of it myself. But consider the following before getting too down:

- Turn-based strategy games are a complex genre. They are, Civilization's gentle, strategic beauty aside, for the hardcore! In case you've been asleep the past 2-3 years, games of this scale (big publisher, big developers) <a href="http://kotaku.com/5517302/game-changers-sequels-that-scared-the-true-fans?skyline=true&s=i" target="_blank">can't afford to appeal just to the hardcore anymore</a>. See games like Metroid, Fallout 3 and even the latest Splinter Cell for examples.</blockquote><p><a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/108/1083925p1.html" target="_blank">IGN</a> </p><blockquote><p>One thing I think the new X-COM can do that previous efforts couldn't is offer up some really destructible environments. When you think about the destructible nature of the world in games like Crysis, and then throw in the cover system of games like Gears of War or even the upcoming Mafia 2, it makes the notion of an X-COM FPS even sweeter. The original game allowed you to use grenades to blow the walls out of farmhouses, and even light up entire gas stations with a single rocket shot, so the idea of seeing all that in real time for a first-person perspective is enough to make me wet my pants a little bit. 
</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/04/14/why-x-com-matters-to-me/" target="_blank">Rock Paper Shotgun</a> </p><blockquote><p>Oof, <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/04/14/enemy-known-xcoms-baaaaaaaaaack/" target="_blank">tough day</a>. I totally get why people are upset, but once again it&rsquo;s worth waiting for a few more details before you decide the new XCOM is the end of all that is sacred. Maybe it will be, maybe it won&rsquo;t, but there&rsquo;s absolutely nothing wrong with a little honest hope. Today does, however, spell the end of a decade-long dream that someone would throw really serious money at resurrecting the fantastic hybrid genre 1994&rsquo;s X-COM created. There is a great sadness there &ndash; so many ideas left to die, never bettered in the long gap between then and now. So let&rsquo;s be hopeful, cautiously or otherwise, about XCOM, but let&rsquo;s also raise a glass to X-COM. We owe it so much, and we may never see its like again. <em>Sniff</em>. </p></blockquote><p><a href="http://rampantgames.com/blog/?p=265" target="_blank">Rampant Coyote</a> </p><blockquote><p>However, I do remember playing Rainbow Six and Rogue Spear back in the day and recognizing the same ol&rsquo; thrill I&rsquo;d had in the X-Com days. That whole next-step-could-be-your-last feeling as you approached a corner. Those were thinking-men&rsquo;s shooters, slower-paced, tactical, and very fun. Combine that with the flavor and thrill of X-Com? Plus strategic results from victory and moving along a storyline so that the tactical maps weren&rsquo;t just &hellip; random maps, but part of a bigger whole that was your responsibility and  &ndash; to a degree &ndash; your own doing?

THAT would be cool.

I don&rsquo;t think we&rsquo;ll get that, either. But I can hope, can&rsquo;t I?</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://thereticule.com/2010/04/the-kids-are-alright/" target="_blank">The Reticule</a> </p><blockquote><p>Within a medium that allows for so much scope and creativity, why are we so afraid of change and willing to nip the slightest sign of the possibility to create whole new fond memories of what could be exceptional games? Is it wrong to have the slightest hint of optimism early in a games development? Yes, it may turn out to be rubbish before release, as more information gets released and the press and indeed others actually get the chance to play with it. But there&rsquo;s a massive difference between punishing a game for being bad, and punishing a game because it&rsquo;s not something it never tried to be. Let&rsquo;s at least get to know a game before we cast it aside, after all &ndash; to use an admittedly flimsy analogy &ndash; if you named your child William after the playwright Shakespeare, would you punish him if he became an Astronaut?
</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/?p=451" target="_blank">Vic Davis</a> </p><blockquote><p>No.
</p></blockquote>

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Turn-based strategy games are a complex genre. They are, Civilization's gentle, strategic beauty aside, for the hardcore! In case you've been asleep the past 2-3 years, games of this scale (big publisher, big developers) can't afford to appeal just to the hardcore anymore. See games like Metroid, Fallout 3 and even the latest Splinter Cell for examples.

Except that we don't need big money, big developers a for good X-Com sequels. The genre is far from being dead. There are at least 4 big publishers of computer wargames that are publishing as much if not more computer wargames as in 90s.
The main problem with X-Com is that people who make spiritual successors tend to fuck stuff up in most moronic ways possible.
They fuck up the atmosphere by picking wrong music and sound sound styles, they fuck up some mechanics, they make 3D games despite that they can't do terrain deformation in 3D, etc. etc. etc. which has nothing to do with money and everything to do with them failing to grasp what made X-Com such a great game.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Gaming journalists... gaming journalists never change.

 

[Zomg]

Nnnnnng I feel compelled into apology for an international corporation that would grind me up into dog food if I fell into a coma on their property because enthusiasm is important

Edit - It's like you people don't understand, if I had unsanctioned thoughts about a game that would be almost the same thing as not having enthusiasm?

 

[entertainer]

http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/?p=451

 

[Yeesh]

Within a medium that allows for so much scope and creativity, why are we so afraid of change and willing to nip the slightest sign of the possibility to create whole new fond memories of what could be exceptional games? Is it wrong to have the slightest hint of optimism early in a games development? Yes, it may turn out to be rubbish before release, as more information gets released and the press and indeed others actually get the chance to play with it. But there’s a massive difference between punishing a game for being bad, and punishing a game because it’s not something it never tried to be. Let’s at least get to know a game before we cast it aside, after all – to use an admittedly flimsy analogy – if you named your child William after the playwright Shakespeare, would you punish him if he became an Astronaut

I'm having my oldest day in memory, and I agree with this hippy. Who fucking cares? Let's see what game they make first. You never know.

If there were any sort of market for X-Com style games, wouldn't someone be making the damned things? My all time favorite game is JA2. Don't you think it breaks my heart that tactical games went away? But whatever happened, it's probably everybody's fault. Maybe it's even mine. Stop blaming everyone else, and start with the man in the mirror y'all.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

If there were any sort of market for X-Com style games, wouldn't someone be making the damned things? My all time favorite game is JA2. Don't you think it breaks my heart that tactical games went away? But whatever happened, it's probably everybody's fault. Maybe it's even mine. Stop blaming everyone else, and start with the man in the mirror y'all.

It's not everybody's fault. It's fault of the people who try to replicate the X-Com's/JA2 successes but instead of replicating the stuff that made them successful and improving the stuff that failed in them, they end up fucking up the stuff that was good and adding new forms of fail, thus ending up with an inferior product.

One thing that people need to understand is that such tactical games aren't automatically good. X-Com and JA2 were the best of their genre. Most of tactical wargames on that level that were released were mediocre at the best. Some of them were really bad.
That's why we don't get another X-Com or JA2. Even Julian Gollop couldn't make a sequel to Laser Squad that would take the best aspects of the Laser Squad and X-Com combat.

 

[Big Nose George]

Nnnnnng I feel compelled into apology for an international corporation that would grind me up into dog food if I fell into a coma on their property because enthusiasm is important

Edit - It's like you people don't understand, if I had unsanctioned thoughts about a game that would be almost the same thing as not having enthusiasm?

I like your posts. They are like small puzzles.

 

[GarfunkeL]

I'm having my oldest day in memory, and I agree with this hippy. Who fucking cares? Let's see what game they make first. You never know.

No. Sure, if 2K Canberra was making FUTURESHOCK - it's Like Bioshock except in nearby future with aliens - we could maintain a positive outlook, hoping for a decent shooter.

But it's not.

And yes, it's not the makers of Bioshock 2 who are making this but a temp studio in Canberra who "helped around when 2K Games was making the sequel". So yeah, it will be bad.

 

[Fens]

http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/?p=451

indeed

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

http://www.crypticcomet.com/blog/?p=451

indeed

 

[Tails]

Turn-based strategy games are a complex genre. They are, Civilization's gentle, strategic beauty aside, for the hardcore!

for the hardcore!

for the hardcore!

Another proof that gaming is on the endless road of retardation, without any way to turn back.

 

[a budda]

so this is what it has come to...

playing TB = hardcore

i don't even...

:flaccid:

 

[Azael]

It's not everybody's fault. It's fault of the people who try to replicate the X-Com's/JA2 successes but instead of replicating the stuff that made them successful and improving the stuff that failed in them, they end up fucking up the stuff that was good and adding new forms of fail, thus ending up with an inferior product.

One thing that people need to understand is that such tactical games aren't automatically good. X-Com and JA2 were the best of their genre. Most of tactical wargames on that level that were released were mediocre at the best. Some of them were really bad.
That's why we don't get another X-Com or JA2. Even Julian Gollop couldn't make a sequel to Laser Squad that would take the best aspects of the Laser Squad and X-Com combat.

Silent Storm came pretty fucking close, but failed on a couple of points (not strategic layer, invisistealth, fucking Panzerkleins) so it hasn't been completely dead.

Strange though, some games that were so good have never been properly emulated. X-Com, JA 2 and Close Combat series for example.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I don't mind lack of strategic layer. Actually, sometimes I prefer wargames whose action happens on one level.
To me, the worst offenders (in various games) are:

-3D. Especially when they can't do terrain deformation.
-Bad kind of music - it needs to generate tension.
-Non-brutal combat system.
-Sounds that don't sound brutal. Both first UFOs had these brutal jagged sounds. Energy weapons fire, screams of dying soldiers, alien doors...
-Bad interface.
-Bad camera.
-Lack of rookie slaughter. IRL even combat against (roughly equal) humans often includes over 100% of losses in a small unit in a month. Combat against technologically superior aliens should be even worse.

Strange though, some games that were so good have never been properly emulated. X-Com, JA 2 and Close Combat series for example.

Close Combat isn't emulated because of the squad AI thingie. It's probably difficult to make and often fails epically, even in the original game.

X-Com - it is usually made by people who want to improve it but don't bother to analyse what made it so great.

JA2? I have no idea why. Probably because people are either still playing 1.13 or got put off by the setting and weird stuff like starting the game with pistols and never had chance to appreciate its mechanics. Making a TC requires a lot less effort than creating a new game.

 

[mondblut]

Wasn't there a bunch of shitty XCOM shooters already? There goes another piece of crap, so what.

 

[Mastermind]

If there were any sort of market for X-Com style games, wouldn't someone be making the damned things? My all time favorite game is JA2. Don't you think it breaks my heart that tactical games went away? But whatever happened, it's probably everybody's fault. Maybe it's even mine. Stop blaming everyone else, and start with the man in the mirror y'all.

It's not everybody's fault. It's fault of the people who try to replicate the X-Com's/JA2 successes but instead of replicating the stuff that made them successful and improving the stuff that failed in them, they end up fucking up the stuff that was good and adding new forms of fail, thus ending up with an inferior product.

One thing that people need to understand is that such tactical games aren't automatically good. X-Com and JA2 were the best of their genre. Most of tactical wargames on that level that were released were mediocre at the best. Some of them were really bad.
That's why we don't get another X-Com or JA2. Even Julian Gollop couldn't make a sequel to Laser Squad that would take the best aspects of the Laser Squad and X-Com combat.

There are assloads of crap FPSs and RTSs but people still keep making (and playing) games in those genres because they enjoy them. I know reality is difficult to grasp for most codexers, but the fact is that western style turn based games are not very popular, and developers who happen to be businesses and not santa claus can't afford to waste time on games that won't pull in much of a revenue.

It's not that I don't understand the feeling. I'd love to see a NetStorm sequel, but I also recognize that what essentially amounts to a real time game of chess is not most people's cup of tea, no matter how innovative and original it may be.

 

[Tails]

Wasn't there a bunch of shitty XCOM shooters already? There goes another piece of crap, so what.

There was an Interceptor game a space flight pseudo sim, Enfoncer which was TPP, and X-COM E-Mail game dumbed down so much, that it died quickly. Again, we get the same shit in FPP version.

There are assloads of crap FPSs and RTSs but people still keep making (and playing) games in those genres because they enjoy them. I know reality is difficult to grasp for most codexers, but the fact is that western style turn based games are not very popular, and developers who happen to be businesses and not santa claus can't afford to waste time on games that won't pull in much of a revenue.

You are right, but then they could fuck off from X-Com franchise and create a new one, simple as that. But no, it is easier to rip apart something that was already made.

 

[Gragt]

I don't know who that Vic Davis guy is but I like him.

 

[Jim Cojones]

I don't know who that Vic Davis guy is but I like him.

Creator of Armageddon Empires and Solium Infernum.

 

[Azrael the cat]

I'm having my oldest day in memory, and I agree with this hippy. Who fucking cares? Let's see what game they make first. You never know.

No. Sure, if 2K Canberra was making FUTURESHOCK - it's Like Bioshock except in nearby future with aliens - we could maintain a positive outlook, hoping for a decent shooter.

But it's not.

And yes, it's not the makers of Bioshock 2 who are making this but a temp studio in Canberra who "helped around when 2K Games was making the sequel". So yeah, it will be bad.

Wait...CANBERRA? As in....Canberra, Australia?

Out of all the places in the world, I would have thought Canberra would have been the place you'd find large numbers of nerdy folk with nothing better to do on a Saturday night than play x-com and argue about TBS gaming all night long (for those who don't know, it's Australia's capital, but it's a dedicated parliamentary city - there isn't much there but the federal parliament, the federal public service, and the town that has grown up around it. They don't even have the nerve to refer to their centre as a city, they call it 'the civic').

I mean,the fact they're in Canberra almost guarantees that their family or ancestors are/were federal public servants. I don't know how they managed to find and hire that many folk whose heartrate keeps up with FPS gaming in Canberra, but I'm pretty sure if someone firebombed the office and caused a few to quit, they'd have a hard time finding non-nerds to replace them.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Now there's an idea.

And oh look, we have a fresh-faced new troll! Welcome honey, let me get these pincers close to you...

 

[Fat Dragon]

Someone needs to ask Xcom's creator what he thinks of this game. As I recall, he was pretty pissed when he first lost Xcom series, wonder what he now thinks of this tragedy of a game.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

There are assloads of crap FPSs and RTSs but people still keep making (and playing) games in those genres because they enjoy them. I know reality is difficult to grasp for most codexers, but the fact is that western style turn based games are not very popular, and developers who happen to be businesses and not santa claus can't afford to waste time on games that won't pull in much of a revenue.

What? What about Matrix Games, Battlefront, HPS and Shrapnel Games? There are as much if not more western style turn based games being released as in 90s.
Western style turn based games are in completely different situation than cRPGs.
There are industry vets that started their careers in 80s that still produce crazy turn based strategic games that are unplayable without reading a 300 page manuals.

Actually, an unofficial X-com remake was released by Matrix Games a few years ago. More, there are people who are working on other X-com remakes FOR FREE (at least one of them - UFO:AI is already playable).
So, lack of people who try isn't the problem. The main problem is that both JA2 and X-com were good because they were made by the right people with right ideas.
Especially X-Com which was a continuation of a design that has evolved (and devolved) through several games made by Julian Gollop, starting with Rebelstar Raiders (1984).

If people start making an X-com style game with bad ideas, all their effort and enthusiasm - no matter if they want to earn money or just have an X-Com style game doesn't matter because they end up making an inferior game.

 

[Grunker]

IGN's comments make no sense.

Maybe... No. I don't get it.