New X-COM Announced

[Jman4117]

I don't really see this being a good X-com game if they take out the geoscape and the ability to control multiple soldiers. Non linear is a biggie with me and if it turns out to be just a string of levels with one guy, it's a deal breaker and I would have nothing to do with it Perhaps if it followed an X-com squad leader through one of the Alien Wars, and you could have some say over the how the missions progressed, and could issue commands on the FPS battlefield, it'd be awesome.

[Raion]

Why give this so-called X-COM new game any credit at all? Are you trying to fool yourself in what it will be? I know I missed UFO:Extratrerrestrials but then, about the only thing I will do is still play the X-COM games I have and they even make UFO:Aftermath sound better than whatever it is that they are trying to convince anyone of.

 

An FBI Agent in the '50's remake reimagined? Let me imagine!

 

NO!

 

Elvis Presely set with singing and shaking his knees singing "Hound Dog" would make a better agent than the little I am reading.

 

Whole lotta shaking going on!

Well, no!

 

Geeze! This gaming company has lost its mind in the fact that they are trying to pass this whatever it is off as an X-COM game.

 

Words can not describe the way that I feel about what I just read. Heard of Tea Parties Protesters today in Washington and other places. Heard of Sarah Palin!

 

That is what this game seems to be to me. Something from a "Bridge to Nowhere".

 

Please come down to Planet Earth Spacealiens and take over this Planet. I demand a non-human leader.

Except if you're really really bad.

[NKF]

Regardless of what genre they put out, it had better be good. Especially if they're aiming to reel in the new fans into the series.

 

Just hope there aren't too heavy on the platforming puzzles. I don't find them overly easy to do in FPS - since you often can't see where your feet are. 3d games often optimize performance by not rendering your character's feet. Maybe that's why I'm more comfortable with 3PS's these days. Odd how your tastes change.

 

I do find it hard to reconcile the fact they want X-Com to exit 40 to 50 years prior to its official formation. Unless it was a really super secret organization (Illuminati, MJ12, etc) that is later 'officially' formed by the council of funding nations. Could work. Would be easier if it was a group that eventually became part of X-COM. Probably not the Kiryu Kai - they were more recent.

 

In fact if they wanted to really cause controversy and take a much more unorthodox route. Say set it back even further. Maybe set it in the Carribean sea. Swashbuckling heroism, swordplay and cannonballs on the high seas against aliens, pirates... and alien pirates. Yes I jest, but you never know how it might turn out.

 

 

- NKF

[Jman4117]

The aliens are invading Vinland! MAN THE LONGBOATS!

[chiasaur11]

The aliens are invading Vinland! MAN THE LONGBOATS!

 

Okay. I want that. Bad.

[Bloodmoney]

Turn based is just the method for combat used back then, it was the only one appropriate for that time and age.

Are you trolling or just repeat what Kotaku and other smart & modern journalist say? Turn-Based mode allows much better tactical gameplay then any RTwP system. See how UFO: AfterSeries offer pretty low creativty & possibility comparing to X-COM: EU/TFTD. In RTwP it impossible to properly control whole squad without smashing space to freeze a game, and even them your & troops effectivnes is decreasing. In the end, you end up more time on smashing poor spacebar then giving orders in Turn-Based. For example, when three of your snipers are attacked in the same moment there is a large chance that something bad happens to one or two of them, because you are not just able to take care of all of them at once, without sweating your butt. In Turn-Based you have control at everything and most importantly, enough time to think what you would be best to do in some situation. If you fail you can either blame yourself for mistake or just have bad luck.

[StVier]

RTwP do have their merits and their place in strategy games and it's kinda unfair to compare it with Turn-based games... Besides, the main purpose of games is to be enjoyable and in whichever way the market trend determines, not just a specific group of fans. I mean, look at all the FPS on the market and it's not difficult to see why the next X-Com game is an FPS. It's not about X-Com, it's about the market and X-Com just happened to be a name that's been used for the purpose. Take away the name 'X-Com' and we have a 'FBI agent Vs Alien' game, which I'm sure most of us here would look at it differently instead of defending X-Com so aggressively.

 

Chill people... chill.

[Bomb Bloke]

Regardless of what genre they put out, it had better be good.

The problem with a genre switch is that, whatever they change it to, it'll stay as for the foreseeable future.

 

That is to say, if it's like a basic FPS (like eg BioShock), then the hope of ever seeing a "proper" X-COM sequel is gone. It'll be an entirely new franchise, and since it'll've stolen the name of the old, that'll be the end of the matter.

 

See how UFO: AfterSeries offer pretty low creativty & possibility comparing to X-COM: EU/TFTD. In RTwP it impossible to properly control whole squad without smashing space to freeze a game, and even them your & troops effectivnes is decreasing.

Huh? Granted I've only played Aftermath in regards to that particular series, but in that game you spend way more time hitting the button to unpause then anything else (it'd pause for you, while showing a note as to why it had done so). And you could define your own list of what was deemed "auto-pause-worthy", too (though the default lists consisted of pretty much everything except "your troops have sighted a kitchen sink", so most players found themselves turning off many of these alerts). Heck, when it came out, the boards were filled with threads asking how to get rid of all the many, many pauses it'd enforce on players...

 

But anyway, while paused, you could then set a queue of orders for every unit under your control, or create a new order queue if the situation demanded it. You couldn't stop a troop moving in mid-action, but you could at least get him to react as soon as he'd finished his current shot/step/reload/whatever.

 

Apocalypse's RT system was much the same, though that game engine had TB built into it as well (giving a great opportunity to compare RT to TB). This did indeed show the modes to be quite different - the most obvious example being how RT mode nerfed close-range units such as the Poppers and Brainsuckers (which were potentially devastating in TB, if you put aside the bug where 'suckers couldn't affect prone units...), but to this day people still argue as to which way was the best way to play that particular game.

 

TB is not inferior to RT, and vice versa. It's a case of apples and oranges. People will tend to prefer one system over another - but neither is outright "the best".

 

Of course, I'm only talking about RT in the context of games such as Aftermath and Apocalypse (RTwP style, as you put it - though I'm not sure it's an adequate description for how they handle it). In many other RTS games, the ability to give orders while the game is paused is frowned upon, and the option to have the game automatically pause for you is near unheard of.

[Thorondor]

 

::

 

[hot22shot]

OK guys I have some intel to share with you.

 

Yesterday CanardPC (a french newspaper, https://www.canardpc.com) published a first look about this news Xcom game.

 

I'm reading the article right now so this will be short :

 

- No world map : There's a USA map (with a 50s' style) for selecting the missions.

- Research & production : yes.

- Base management : yes.

- Team management : yes.

- Choice of the next missions : yes.

- No control of your teammate during the mission (in the demo, this may change)

 

It seems like you can goof around in your base between the mission (in first person view).

 

EDIT :

 

- The demo was running on an XBox360.

- You play as the chief of operation of the base between the mission.

- The choice of the played mission will impact the game.

- In the demo, lots of area of the base were off limits.

- During the missions you can take photos (research ?).

- The game is due for release in a little more than a year.

[chiasaur11]

OK guys I have some intel to share with you.

 

Yesterday CanardPC (a french newspaper, https://www.canardpc.com) published a first look about this news Xcom game.

 

I'm reading the article right now so this will be short :

 

- No world map : There's a USA map (with a 50s' style) for selecting the missions.

- Research & production : yes.

- Base management : yes.

- Team management : yes.

- Choice of the next missions : yes.

- No control of your teammate during the mission (in the demo, this may change)

 

It seems like you can goof around in your base between the mission (in first person view).

 

Alright. Vague optimism continuing.

 

But the link's a bit... dead. Any chance of a fix? Looks like news worth reading.

[hot22shot]

Here's the working link : https://canardpc.com/

 

There's no news on their website, all the intel are on their paper publication. But I think there's an english section on their forum where you might learn something.

[chiasaur11]

Here's the working link : https://canardpc.com/

 

There's no news on their website, all the intel are on their paper publication. But I think there's an english section on their forum where you might learn something.

 

EDIT : For those interested I've made some pics of the newspaper (it's readable, but you must be able to read french), just ask.

 

Thanks for the information. Passing it along as we type.

 

Mostly sounds like good news.

 

Except for the probable lack of flying suits.

[Gimli]

As much as it pains me to say this, please don't put any pictures of the article here. I think that infringes on copyright of CanardPC and we don't want to get in trouble. Still, thank you for posting this.

[hot22shot]

As much as it pains me to say this, please don't put any pictures of the article here. I think that infringes on copyright of CanardPC and we don't want to get in trouble. Still, thank you for posting this.

 

Thought so, I contacted them and I'm waiting for an answer.

[Gimli]

Please try to get confirmation in their English forum (needs to be someone who actually works for the magazine) or if that's not possible, the French forum. We'll figure out a way to translate and confirm.

[Bloodmoney]

RTwP do have their merits and their place in strategy games and it's kinda unfair to compare it with Turn-based games..

Why not? both of them are used in games that suppose to be tactical and not only, they even have some similarities. Heck, some people call RTwP an evolution of Turn-Based.

 

Huh? Granted I've only played Aftermath in regards to that particular series, but in that game you spend way more time hitting the button to unpause then anything else (it'd pause for you, while showing a note as to why it had done so). And you could define your own list of what was deemed "auto-pause-worthy", too (though the default lists consisted of pretty much everything except "your troops have sighted a kitchen sink", so most players found themselves turning off many of these alerts). Heck, when it came out, the boards were filled with threads asking how to get rid of all the many, many pauses it'd enforce on players...

I know, I disabled myself many pause events, because some of them were rather rare, and personally I find this system was overall poor implemented by Altar, like many other things in Aftermath. Still the Post-Apocalyptic atmosphere was done damn right. Anyway there are RTwP games that don't have many or at all pause settings and I was more referring to them in that case.

 

But anyway, while paused, you could then set a queue of orders for every unit under your control, or create a new order queue if the situation demanded it. You couldn't stop a troop moving in mid-action, but you could at least get him to react as soon as he'd finished his current shot/step/reload/whatever.

The problem is that such queue not always works, because there could be unexpected event that requires you focus on one unit, to save it somehow. Anyway it is impossible to co-ordinate effectively two snipers or whatever units under fire in RTwP, especially if they are in different locations. You take a look at one and oops, other is dead because suddenly rocket blow him up in to the pieces. Yes, if game allows to set up pause option for fire event then you could avoid it, but then the situation is like every fire bullet etc. towards your troops pause the game, which is not nice in case of having above 4 troops. In act you will waste more time to take care of everything then placing orders in Turn-Based game.

In Aftermath the RTwP problem start when Reticulans had their Rocket Launcher, and basically spam the player with rockets in open fields maps (the design of map is also faulty). The best way avoid them was sending a very fast trooper to trigger AI to launch rocket at him and run around in some area until snipers took Reticulans down or they run out from rockets. How silly such thing looks I don't have to say.

 

Apocalypse's RT system was much the same, though that game engine had TB built into it as well (giving a great opportunity to compare RT to TB). This did indeed show the modes to be quite different - the most obvious example being how RT mode nerfed close-range units such as the Poppers and Brainsuckers (which were potentially devastating in TB, if you put aside the bug where 'suckers couldn't affect prone units...), but to this day people still argue as to which way was the best way to play that particular game.

I was expecting that someone post that To be honest I don't recommend anyone to give Apocalypse as comparison of TB and RTwP, since both are giving the feeling of unfinished and not properly balanced, like the whole game. Which is a real shame, because Apocalypse could maybe be not better as the first X-COM game, but overall awesome tactical game with many details that previous games didn't have.

 

TB is not inferior to RT, and vice versa. It's a case of apples and oranges. People will tend to prefer one system over another - but neither is outright "the best".

Well in my case I don't mind RTwP, so far I didn't have occasion to play any game with a really impressing implementation of this system, that's why I find Turn-Based or Semi-Turn games much more better. If someone has recommendations of really good RTwP games, share them please

 

Of course, I'm only talking about RT in the context of games such as Aftermath and Apocalypse (RTwP style, as you put it - though I'm not sure it's an adequate description for how they handle it). In many other RTS games, the ability to give orders while the game is paused is frowned upon, and the option to have the game automatically pause for you is near unheard of.

Well my comment was more regarding more tactical games then RTS, it would be very flippant of me to compare them to X-COM/Tactical games.

[jverne]

Are you trolling or just repeat what Kotaku and other smart & modern journalist say? Turn-Based mode allows much better tactical gameplay then any RTwP system. See how UFO: AfterSeries offer pretty low creativty & possibility comparing to X-COM: EU/TFTD. In RTwP it impossible to properly control whole squad without smashing space to freeze a game, and even them your & troops effectivnes is decreasing. In the end, you end up more time on smashing poor spacebar then giving orders in Turn-Based. For example, when three of your snipers are attacked in the same moment there is a large chance that something bad happens to one or two of them, because you are not just able to take care of all of them at once, without sweating your butt. In Turn-Based you have control at everything and most importantly, enough time to think what you would be best to do in some situation. If you fail you can either blame yourself for mistake or just have bad luck.

 

Pardon me? No i'm not trolling.

 

 

As one already said...both methods have their good sides. I personally enjoy RT+pause, because in some fights it's nice to see the carnage and unexpected events that you have to use some reflexes. Make a plan and watch it all unfold. Truth be told i'd be even content with just slow time without pause. Part of being a tactician is to make good split second decisions. TB has it's pros, it's not really my intention to argue which is better.

 

I'd love to see a tactical FPS like swat, but not watered down with geoscape and all that. That's why i'm quite disappointed in the upcoming "XCOM", personally i think it's just milking the cow. I bet it will be watered down and i totally dislike the time setting it's in. 1950 for Christ sakes...they didn't even have plastics back then let alone the means to oppose a superior alien race.

 

A Swat 4 like Xcom was really my wet dream.

[Slaughter]

Thanks for the information hot22shot.

 

Personally I'm not even close to surprised it's an FPS. I had hoped it wouldn't, but I'll wait for a little more information before I make up my mind. If we're lucky Firaxis is working on a real new X-COM game in parallel.

 

Lastly, keep it civil guys. You're free to like or dislike this as much as you like, but stick to constructive.

[Matri]

You know what my main worry about this is? It's not a PC exclusive, it's being developed for consoles as well.

 

And judging from past cross-platform games, I'm just not able to feel optimistic at all. You guys remember the latest AvP game, right? And don't make me bring up C&C4, the so-called "strategy game" that's panned by PC gamers and loved by console gamers.

 

Seriously.

[jverne]

You know what my main worry about this is? It's not a PC exclusive, it's being developed for consoles as well.

 

And judging from past cross-platform games, I'm just not able to feel optimistic at all. You guys remember the latest AvP game, right? And don't make me bring up C&C4, the so-called "strategy game" that's panned by PC gamers and loved by console gamers.

 

Seriously.

 

I buried my hopes as soon as i saw the picture.

[Kabbage]

Oh **** yes

[chiasaur11]

Oh **** yes

 

Hey, I'm hopeful too, but let's reserve that one for a little later on.

 

Don't want to run out of terms of excitement now, and on the off-chance this whole thing goes sour, well...

 

(In other words, don't devalue "****". We'll need it in fighting shape when the 'lids show up.)

[Raion]

Listen I already have a UFO:Afterlight game going. And now because of this News, already while also having a XCOMA game going, I started up a UFO Defense game, because............................................

 

No Spacealien in this Universe is ever going to force me to ever think about playing a FPS-XCOM with a F Bee Eye-ey-ey Agent in it, just make me go berzerk and panic and just plain shoot me and get it over with.

 

Hoy-i-yoy-i-yoy!

 

If I miss this new game by the time it comes out, well, ExCuse Me!

 

Geeze!

[chiasaur11]

You know what my main worry about this is? It's not a PC exclusive, it's being developed for consoles as well.

 

And judging from past cross-platform games, I'm just not able to feel optimistic at all. You guys remember the latest AvP game, right? And don't make me bring up C&C4, the so-called "strategy game" that's panned by PC gamers and loved by console gamers.

 

Seriously.

 

Hey, X-Com and the first Deus Ex both came out on consoles unhindered.

 

Meanwhile, Enforcer was a PC exclusive.

 

Consoles can do good, if'n the developer is willing to toss in some depth. And if I remember right, CnC 4 particularly isn't beloved by console gamers. At all.