Jump to content

New XCOM trailer


Gimli

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 171
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Forgive me if I've been inattentive, but I've been getting strong signals that this is in no way a prequel... From the beginning, it's been advertised as an attempt to rebuild the franchise from the ground up, with no promises as to what will and will not be kept from the original. :P

 

Yes, there's been indications that the game will start before the invasion is confirmed (unlike in X-COM, when you only come into play once it's certain), but I get the impression that situation will have long passed by the time you get to the "meat" of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to say whether or not it's a prequel based on the information given us so far... It disagrees with the X-Com timeline on every single level so I'd say it's not. But they tell us it's an origin story so in theory they must think it is... In my mind it's an origin story for XCOM, not X-Com and it's that simple :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What has been said in the interview is that its "An Origin story like Batman Begins" eg, their basically starting the story over again, starting from fresh from a previous point in the time line.

 

As many of you know, in the original game. You start with X-COM literally STARTING OUT and having to PROVE to the countries that you can defend earth against the alien threat.

 

Even in the X-COM 1 manual it states that UFO's have "RECENTLY" made an appearance (it is inferred from the manual to be at least within the previous 2 years) and that JAPAN made the start with a dedicated force in 1998, yet didn't find one UFO. Thus after 2 years they made it a global effort.

 

Now they are SEVERELY ret-conning that entire premise with AMERICA making a start and first battling DIFFERENT aliens in the 1950's/1960's.

 

Sorry, even I have to sometimes turn around and call BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pointless discussion, really, there can be all sorts of explanations for X-Com 1. For instance, this could be an US-only invasion (which is stupid, but I don't expect much from US developers), and information could have been kept secret. This X-Com could be (and most likely is) a different organisation than that of X-Com 1, a first incarnation.

 

Whatever the case, I prefer waiting to see the game than speculate and complain :P I'm still optimistic and eager to get the game; even if it's not in the same timeline and a reimagining, I'm ok with that.

 

Quite honestly, I am convinced no game would fulfill all fan's expectations after so many years, everyone would still be disappointed at some level. So I say whatever, it's just a game anyway, I'll either enjoy it or hate it regardless of whether it's X-Com or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*SNIP SNIP SNIP*

 

Quite honestly, I am convinced no game would fulfill all fan's expectations after so many years, everyone would still be disappointed at some level. So I say whatever, it's just a game anyway, I'll either enjoy it or hate it regardless of whether it's X-Com or not.

 

 

Sounds like everyone else that's played DNF. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, it's pointless. But it does serve a purpose as there's nothing wrong with a good rant. It's fun, it stimulate the mind (albeit in this instance a rather negative part of it). Complaining can be therapeutic when done in a controlled manner. :P

 

Regardless of what any of us think (and whether or not they choose to reinvent the wheel and decide that everyone wants one with four sides), let's hope that they actually complete it. That in itself would be history in the making.

 

- NKF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest_Shrike_*
Yay! prequel! :D I'm interested in seeing how they plan to tie this to XCom 1 :D

 

They've already said it's an entirely new continuity sadly. As well as basically trashed the older aliens saying they're not interesting anymore. Everything you know and love is gone. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is still just where we left it.

 

I love the fact that I'm not going to go "Oh, snakemen, I know those guys" on the first mission.

 

What does that even mean? Shrike is right, everything that made X-Com X-com is gone. And you can play Medal of Honour and not go "Oh, snakemen, I know those guys" on the first mission. The only difference between this game and that one is the alien setting while the differences between this game and X-Com could fill a short novel...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To look on the bright side, at least we won't have our expectations dashed. There'll be no "Oh, snakemen, I know those guys" one minute, and a few minutes later "Hey that's not how they behave. That's not a snakemen! Phooey!".

 

I did feel like that when I saw the Enforcer version of the Reaper (ye gods, I'd start using actual swear words to describe that) and the Chryssalid. Can't complain too much about some of the other 'traditional' aliens with the exception of the cyberdiscs, which are chaff in the wind compared to the real thing.

 

They just got to have Sectoids. Sectoids have been a part of every X-Com game so far in one shape or form. Mainly as enemies, distant cousins and as subdued allies in the very last one.

 

edit: Now that I've said that the answer just hit me. The obligatory Roswell alien can fit the bill, and just as easily throw it in the back story and forgotten. Maybe they'll have sectoids floating in tanks in the base as background scenery.

 

edit: edit: now I think I'm starting to sound like a broken record on the Sectoids - already mentioned that point ages ago. :P

 

- NKF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Atlas had turned out to be a "good guy"? That would've been a plot twist, given that they layed it on so thick you saw his betrayal coming from the moment you got off the boat.

 

Wouldn't be so bad if he wasn't just an expy of "Polito", from a certain game where the twist did come as a surprise.

 

That said, BioShock was entertaining enough. In a "I've played the game once now I'll never bother with it again" kind of way. Frankly I didn't mind the story, or even the railroading; but the fact that all the special abilities consisted of a "here's something new to shoot" effect, and at one point you're given access to all of them, removed all replay value for me.

 

(Have only played the first title in the series).

 

I'd started to let myself think that perhaps the XCOM game design would've started to lean away from the "two agents" system (which they'd announced right back when the game first started development). It's a shame that's not the case. We don't get to manage battles, we don't get to manage bases. Seems they want the game to manage us, then. Meh. Hate to say it, but that's not how X-COM works.

 

I don't mind the bulletin board system as it works great in level grinder RPGs where you have to soup up your characters before taking the next story event (on account of the deliberately amped enemy levels) to progress the plot. It's just doesn't seem right for X-Com.

Spot on. In each X-COM game, you start out with a simple task force, the aliens start out with a simple task force. You upgrade by slaughtering them (and/or the people you're supposed to protect, if playing Apocalypse), they upgrade in response to this. Repeat until the tech tree lets you find out where their source is and gives you the tools to get there. Feeding the tech tree to get to this point, is entirely your responsibility - that's you, the player, the one in front of the keyboard. The game has mechanisms for keeping you on track, but doesn't care if you win or lose individual battles.

 

In XCOM, it sounds like progress will be determined by which story mission you've completed. Odds are you'll be able to trash the aliens all day every day, but they won't attempt to adapt to you until you select mission X off the board.

 

That is to say, good luck bringing home a researchable giant sky-floating pulse cannon thing the first mission you encounter one (assuming it doesn't have scripted immortality, odds are it'll be outright immune to whatever guns you're allowed to bring anyway). And if you do down one, don't be surprised if the scientists refuse to touch it.

 

This is somewhat maddening, as Apocalypse had it down to such a fine art. You started out with a TON of equipment available, much of which was derived from the alien kit stolen throughout the first alien war. You could, if you messed with your funds enough, bring some serious hardware into the first mission if you wanted to.

 

The gear you requisitioned from the aliens seemed increasingly engineered to specifically deal with you. You get the impression that the aliens didn't even HAVE disruptor weaponry until they learned that they'd need guns to stand a chance against you.

 

Their tech tree, and hence yours, progressed steadily throughout the entire game. Odds are many players defeated the aliens long before researching everything - you really had to push the game in order to get to the point where the aliens would stop innovating. They even got their own equivalents to your toxins (Entropy Launchers), though the devs took mercy on us and made them blockable by shields...

 

But I digress.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot on. In each X-COM game, you start out with a simple task force, the aliens start out with a simple task force. You upgrade by slaughtering them (and/or the people you're supposed to protect, if playing Apocalypse), they upgrade in response to this. Repeat until the tech tree lets you find out where their source is and gives you the tools to get there. Feeding the tech tree to get to this point, is entirely your responsibility - that's you, the player, the one in front of the keyboard. The game has mechanisms for keeping you on track, but doesn't care if you win or lose individual battles.

 

If you find at least more than 50% of gamers that prefer to control the game rather than game controles them I'll send you a cookie. This days games become more and more no-brainers, and as Consoles as the main target of gameplays ( on a side note: I hate what consoles did to gaming) so every new game will be made for them. Many old titles were screwed by consoles, some were terrible, some are enough good to swallow.

 

Old type gaming is left for the oldies, that play those type of games made by other oldies.

 

We can rant, flame, ramble, etc. but It won't change how gaming industry looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno. The guys who made BioShock were, for a time, fairly reputable. This one game could change them to "those guys who stuffed up the X-COM remake". That'd be a fairly big loss, not only for them, but for their publishers - it affects the value of their following titles. People will buy stuff from those guys who made BioShock. Will they buy stuff from those guys who made XCOM?

 

If such a failure occurs - and I'm still not saying it will, even if a fair chunk of the web is, because what's said on the web doesn't always mesh with what's bought in stores - then you'd expect other companies to start reconsidering the "value" of their older franchises. In this case, I don't think it was expected that so many people would take this particular one so seriously. I certainly didn't see it coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Bethesda foobared Fallout 3 - but they won't suffer in the sales of TES V. Though on the PC market they might with their idiotic plan about porting.

 

Bioware foobared Dragon Age 2, yet many people are very anxious to get their hands on Mass Effect 3, although there is a large hatred for Bioware on the web. Casual players tend to forget bad products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On polish gaming stie an XCOM preview article has appeared. When I read it, it dosen't looks that bad.

Yeah I know that looks can be deceiving.

 

The preview is actually optimistic. I would give a link but google translate make actually no sens in text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
  • Create New...