Why name it XCOM...?
I normally don't go through the hassle of registering on official forums, but curiosity got the best of me this time.
I have a very simple question I'd like to see answered - why use the XCOM franchise for a shooter...?
The original X-Com games where very barebones in pretty much every aspect. There wasn't much of a story in it. It's pretty much "aliens are invading, do something about it", and remains like that until the very end. The only snipets of information you get come from dissections and the encyclopedia.
There is no character development in the original games. You command a bunch "nameless" rank and file soldiers. They die, you replace them. You might develop some special attachment to your higher ranked officers (after all the trouble of leveling them it can be frustrating to lose them), but that's it.
The setting is also nothing special.
Basically, the only memorable aspect of the game were the extremely in depth and polished gameplay elements. Destructible objects and environment, randomly generated battle terrains, pretty good AI for it's time, the macromanagement aspect that was very well implemented... I don't need to describe the reasons why this game is widely regarded as the apex of turn based strategy. We all know that.
....and then, someone decides to simply THROW AWAY COMPLETELY all the recognizable elements of the franchise and turn it into a shooter.
Why even bother with the franchise at all...? You are not going to please the old fans with that. People who never played the game also will have no attachment at all to the franchise. You might as well call it "Alien Warfare" and the effect would be the same, minus the angry fans. Plus, you are not even using the staple aliens of the old game. So why bother, why not make a new IP for your alien shooter?
The way I see it, there could be only 2 reasons to go for the XCOM franchise:
1- To get free publicity taking advantage of the backlash. Dangerous marketing strategy.
2- There are plans to release a proper XCOM revival which will use the story elements of the shooter as a tie in to it. That way you remove the need for in depth story in the classic game (after all, every game should have an in depth story nowadays, apparently), while providing some background knowledge for those who care enough to check the other game. It also helps to sell the shooter to the fans of the XCOM revival who might be curious about the backstory, but otherwise would never touch the shooter game, and maybe entice the curiosity of shooter fans enough to make them check out and possibly buy the strategy game.
Number 2 is mostly wishful thinking on my part... I'm betting on number 1 right now.
So, 2K, care to solve this riddle for me?
I entirely agree with your arguments, but we are already having a really very similar discussion in this thread here. We've had about two billion of these threads by now and we don't really need another. Feel free to add your 2c to the other thread. Or alternatively you could choose this thread, which even has an incredibly handy poll for you to vote in as well.
Thank you, Aegeri.
Since we have a policy of not making duplicate threads, I'm going to close this one. As mentioned by Aegeri, please feel free to post in the other ones, Fenrir.