Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 145

Thread: First Screens and Details of XCOM: Enemy Unknown

  1. #1

    Arrow [UPDATE] First Screens & Details of XCOM: Enemy Unknown

    Update:

    Magazine details courtesy of zoner from Neogaf.

    I've got my digital copy. But I don't think there's any way to directly copy and quote the text.

    There's apparently a 'Heavy Armed Mobile Cover Platform that serves as a powerful rock on which to anchor any tactical advantage' and you can directly customize the heavy troops armor and weapons individually.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gameinformer
    THE VAST MAJORITY OF XCOM'S CONTENT COMES IN THE FORM OF PROCEDURUALLY GENERATED MISSIONS AND ENCOUNTERS, MEANING THAT EVERY PLAYTHROUGH UNFOLDS DIFFERENTLY
    Though they mention there's some story based missions that are not randomly generated and involve in-game cinematics of some kind

    What I've read is

    •randomly generated missions, terrain. Developer says you'll never play the exact same mission twice outside of a few story missions which feature in-game cinematics
    •fog of war is confirmed. area starts off with darkness everywhere, and the average soldier can't see ☺☺☺☺
    •enemy spawns are randomized
    •mobile platform called SHIV; customizable for new chasis
    •Sectoids and Mutons confirmed
    •The base's screenshot is accurate. It is now a side shot instead of top down. You can also upgrade your base, like the satellite, with alien technology
    •There was an example in one scenario where Japan had the laser rifle already developed before the invasion because they felt threatened, so that seems random.
    •You have 16 countries in the funding council you need to keep happy. Some provide more money, but others, like Africa, provide more raw resources
    •The sniper units have a grappling hook ability to get on top of buildings
    •Gunners have a suppressing fire
    •you can equip your xcom guys with all kinds of different guns. customization looks like a big deal
    •Apparently there's some sort of cinematic view when your guys get killed. They didn't cite VATS or anything, so I doubt it's too in depth
    •Unexperienced agents can panic, freak out, etc if something bad happens
    •Firaxis designer states that the PC version will have an enhanced interface. He cites Dragon Age: Origins on PC and console as a big inspiration

    This is like the first half of the article

    •Destructible environments
    •In the scenario they showed, one member died. Because of this the other squadmates didn't get an experience bonus
    •Without the bonus, the sniper leveled up still. He was able to choose from two abilities. Either Squad Sight(which means he can shoot anything a squadmate can see) and Snap Shot(which lets him shoot after moving. Something snipers aren't normally allowed to do)
    •You can't recruit specific classes. You can only recruit rookies and then level them up to become specific classes
    •The guys in suits in the screenshots are 'Thin Man' aliens. They're able to leap long distances
    •Challenge is stressed a lot
    •same quick save/load system though they are considering an iron man type mode where you can't load previous saves
    •Firaxis states that they're not rebooting it, they're re imagining it. Using the same core gameplay with modern technology, weapons, audiovisuals, etc.

    That's the stuff I saw that was worth noting
    1080p screens available here: http://www.gamersyde.com/news_xcom_e...-12339_en.html

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Game Informer has posted the first screens of the game, check it out:
    http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...y-unknown.aspx

    They also provide some details:

    Wasn't there another XCOM game?
    Yes, 2K Marin is developing a previously announced first-person shooter, simply called XCOM. That game was originally scheduled to come out last year, but has since been delayed out of 2011.

    How do those games relate to each other?
    The shooter takes place earlier in the fiction, chronicling the aliens' first attacks in the United States. The strategy game we're talking about here deals with the global response to the later full-blown alien invasion of Earth.

    So this is some kind of RTS?
    No, not in the way the term "RTS" typically applies to games like StarCraft. The real-time element of XCOM is confined to the global view, where the player keeps track of known UFOs and abductions going on around the world. Managing research and development at the XCOM organization's secret base can be done at the player's leisure, and all combat is completely turn-based.

    You switch between real-time and turn-based?
    Yes. When your aerial transport lands at an abduction site, the game switches to a tactical view and you command your squad of personalized soldiers in battle against an unknown alien threat.

    So what do you do in the real-time global view?
    On the strategic layer, players direct research into alien technology, give their engineers and foundries fabrication requests, interact with the nations of the world (who have to be mollified to secure funding for XCOM), intercept airborne UFOs with jet fighters, level up their soldiers and recruit new ones, and dispatch the Skyranger transport to engage alien incursions on the ground.

    Is this a remake of the original?
    Kind of. Re-imagining is probably a better term. Firaxis' XCOM: Enemy Unknown doesn't directly copy the underlying game systems – for instance, soldiers have different stats than they did in the 1994 original – but the concepts are still here. Players still have to manage multiple resources and threats on a global scale in a seemingly hopeless war against extraterrestrial forces with far better technology and capabilities.

    Is this going to be dumbed down for the "wider console audience"?
    Firaxis is undeniably streamlining aspects of the game and removing no small amount of micromanagement, but from what I've seen I wouldn't call it "dumbing down" the game so much as getting rid of tedium and uninteresting mechanics. Soldiers still die permanently, fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat, and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly.

    Does it look awesome?
    I came away from our visit to Firaxis' studio extremely impressed by XCOM: Enemy Unknown. The project is far from done, but I am personally thrilled at the prospect of playing the final game.
    Last edited by Rumble5; 01-10-2012 at 06:14 PM. Reason: Update

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    64
    Take my money! Take it now!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Only two things have me concerned:

    "Streamlining." Now, the interface could definitely use streamlining. But beyond that, I'm kinda having trouble seeing what to streamline, exactly. A lot of the other things that you *could* remove (eg aircraft equipment, soldier training, air patrols) have a huge effect on the game and give the player more options.

    I'd like to know what in particular is being cut vis a vis X-Com 1 to "streamline" the game, since I've been conditioned in an almost pavlovian manner to react negatively to the veyr usage of the word. I mean, removing armor facings would streamline the game, but it would make tactical positioning a lot less important (as well as making things like flanking that heavily armored muton/sectopod a lot less rewarding.)

    My other concern is how they're apparently including the XCOM shooter in the background, and that is very concerning for reasons I've already explained elsewhere.

  4. #4
    Is this going to be dumbed down for the "wider console audience"?
    Firaxis is undeniably streamlining aspects of the game and removing no small amount of micromanagement, but from what I've seen I wouldn't call it "dumbing down" the game so much as getting rid of tedium and uninteresting mechanics. Soldiers still die permanently, fog of war and line of sight are hugely important in combat, and you absolutely can lose the game if you screw up too badly.
    Huh!?

    "Removing no small amount of micromanagement" : I feared for that..

    There are no "tedious" stuff in the original EU, unless you mention managing storage space, manually transfering scientists, alien bodies and equipment from one base to another and the bloody Firestorm with no fuel. ALL the rest is of paramount importance. Capturing different ranks of aliens, sending ships out on patrol to spot alien bases, the SAVE TU buttons, medi-kits, motion scanners, electro-flares.. the list goes on.


    Also don't call it hating, but i'm glad that they mentioned it as "far from over" because the tactical combat screen looks dated, and the HUD looks ugly as hell hehehe. The HUD should be a dashboard like in the three original games.


    All the rest look promising.

    PS: Are those MiB's?!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Yeah, here's hoping they gloss over the shooter in the storyline.

    Also... "leveling up" your soldiers? I'm hoping they mostly grow organically.

    The base looks either multi-level, or it's managed and designed on an upright grid as opposed to a flat grid. If the latter is the case, I wonder what this says about base invasions? Also, is there more than one base? The language is ambiguous.

    Not too sure about the whole "removing micromanagement" thing...

    [EDIT]: Just noticed the base has both a wall map and a hovering globe... please don't tell us it's the same damn base from Marin's shooter...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    Huh!?

    "Removing no small amount of micromanagement" : I feared for that..

    There are no "tedious" stuff in the original EU, unless you mention managing storage space, manually transfering scientists, alien bodies and equipment from one base to another and the bloody Firestorm with no fuel. ALL the rest is of paramount importance. Capturing different ranks of aliens, sending ships out on patrol to spot alien bases, the SAVE TU buttons, medi-kits, motion scanners, electro-flares.. the list goes on.
    Hm. You know, I'd be okay with "streamlining" storage space into nothingness. Say each base has unlimited storage (since it's a huge underground base, you're telling me they can't find enough room for ten rifles?) but maintains its own inventory (so you can't just have everyone equipped with heavy plasma guns automatically.)

    Ditto transferring research items to your research base. That's just tedious micromanagement that I wouldn't necessarily miss.

    [EDIT]: Just noticed the base has both a wall map and a hovering globe... please don't tell us it's the same damn base from Marin's shooter...
    Wasn't that some kind of aircraft hangar or something? This base looks underground. And really, having a 2d map as well as the big 3d globe isn't enough to be concerning yet.

    I'd be way more worried about the potential story links to the shooter.

  7. #7
    I liked the look of the base, and its only logical that a secret base would be multi-level and underground, and not flat as the originals.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    This info kinda worries me. The base looks fairly static, and I'm not seeing any mention of base \ facility building mechanics. And, like everyone else, the phrase "removing no small amount of micromanagement" could mean all sorts of horrible scary things.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpl_Facehugger View Post
    Wasn't that some kind of aircraft hangar or something? This base looks underground. And really, having a 2d map as well as the big 3d globe isn't enough to be concerning yet.
    Blow the picture up and look to the upper right of the globe.

    I'd be way more worried about the potential story links to the shooter.
    It's a toss-up between those and the "streamlining".

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    I liked the look of the base, and its only logical that a secret base would be multi-level and underground, and not flat as the originals.
    While that may be the case technically, how's it gonna play during invasions?

  10. #10
    Likes: Hexes, vertical base-building.

    Dislikes: Interface, camera angle, streamlining.

    Worries: Line of sight? Fog-of-war? Minimap? Art-style? Console game?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    MightyUnderking: It does say that fog of war and line of sight are still important.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Blow the picture up and look to the upper right of the globe.
    Hmm. You mean on the multi-level base depiction? I see what you mean. But I'm still not too concerned yet. (I'd have that replace the graphs screen with a visual representation of alien activity as part of my streamlining initiative. )

    It's a toss-up between those and the "streamlining".
    If the links are really minor, I could maybe forgive it. Or if the shooter ends up defying my expectations and being really good and plausibly explaining how its story leads into this game, but there aren't exactly many plausible explanations to be had here.

    While that may be the case technically, how's it gonna play during invasions?
    It will be glorious. Chokepoint after chokepoint. Aliens have to come in through hangar or access lift, then get bogged down fighting room to room.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpl_Facehugger View Post
    Hmm. You mean on the multi-level base depiction? I see what you mean. But I'm still not too concerned yet. (I'd have that replace the graphs screen with a visual representation of alien activity as part of my streamlining initiative. )
    Hmmm... that suggests that the base screen is also your menu screen, which could be good, but it also suggests there might be only one base...

    If the links are really minor, I could maybe forgive it. Or if the shooter ends up defying my expectations and being really good and plausibly explaining how its story leads into this game, but there aren't exactly many plausible explanations to be had here.
    I dunno how they could be minor when half the US was xenoformed. We'll have to see.

    It will be glorious. Chokepoint after chokepoint. Aliens have to come in through hangar or access lift, then get bogged down fighting room to room.
    Yeah, I'm just worried that we won't have much side-to-side room, but then, the rooms do look reasonably large. I'd have to see how they handle multiple battlefield levels. One would hope they wouldn't just limit you to one room of the base.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    575
    I like that it is a multinational force. Did you notice the flags on the deploying soldier's collars?

    I like the mini-map on the battlescape.

    The interface looks clean. Lot's of information presented, although I can only guess right now what some of it means.

    Interesting how the crouching aliens (i assume) have their necks turned toward our soldiers. I wonder how that will work?

    Very hungry for more details.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Hmmm... that suggests that the base screen is also your menu screen, which could be good, but it also suggests there might be only one base...
    THIS RIGHT HERE. Good catch, that plus the conspicuous lack of any mention of base\facility building. I find this troubling.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    I do have to say that what little we can see of the Skyranger looks pretty familiar :P. And yeah, liking the flags.

    [EDIT]: Oh, I daresay there'll be facility building. The base map still looks designed for it. I just worry there's only one base...

    [EDIT2]: Okay, so does anyone want to go over the base pic with me and try to figure out what each facility is :P? I think I see, in order, left to right, top to bottom:

    Surface elevator, hangar, connecting corridor, war room, maps room with basement, some kind of staging area?, corridors.
    Machine shop/factory, some kind of computer room (UFOPaedia?), barracks?, rec room with more corridors.
    Techy-looking room, techy-looking room, elevator, triple-room with screens (radar?), some kind of meeting chamber with flags (funding council?).
    Techy room, elevator, techy room, powerplant?.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Looks like they might have removed soldier inventory, not seeing anything relating to it on the HUD...

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by OldManBrian View Post
    THIS RIGHT HERE. Good catch, that plus the conspicuous lack of any mention of base\facility building. I find this troubling.
    I can see the concern, but I'm not too worried myself. There's no way they can expect you to cover the entire planet with just one base. Even covering just the *US* with one base is a stretch. I'm not too worried about being able to build bases.

    My only concern is that they might go with the UFO:EX paradigm; basically you have a main base with your scientists, soldiers, etc... Then all your other bases are just airbases with planes. That would be very unfortunate.

    With the tactical view, I'm seeing a distinct lack of TU reserve buttons. I can't be the only one who had all his guys move with enough TU for an autofire burst as reaction fire... Can I?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by OldManBrian View Post
    Looks like they might have removed soldier inventory, not seeing anything relating to it on the HUD...
    Maybe that's what the right shoulder button or holding "X" does?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cpl_Facehugger View Post
    I can see the concern, but I'm not too worried myself. There's no way they can expect you to cover the entire planet with just one base. Even covering just the *US* with one base is a stretch. I'm not too worried about being able to build bases.

    My only concern is that they might go with the UFO:EX paradigm; basically you have a main base with your scientists, soldiers, etc... Then all your other bases are just airbases with planes. That would be very unfortunate.
    Well, let's hope they haven't gone with that, then.

    With the tactical view, I'm seeing a distinct lack of TU reserve buttons. I can't be the only one who had all his guys move with enough TU for an autofire burst as reaction fire... Can I?
    For that matter, I'm having difficulty seeing anything to do with TUs at all.

    [EDIT]: There's some definite uncanny valley going on there with the MIBs.

    [EDIT2]: Y'know, I think those hexes could be much smaller. They seem to be very spacious, which leads me to worry about the granularity of unit movement. I wonder if they've been left that large to handle HWPs (which, by the way, aren't mentioned anywhere that I can see)?

    [EDIT3]: Also, as pointed out on the site, there seems to be a couple of shotguns in that first screenshot .

    [EDIT4]: And, forgot to mention: Not everyone is bald :P. In fact, I can even see someone with... cornrows, I think they're called?

    [EDIT5]: Hmmm... looking at the shoulder pads, there's at least three different sorts of them. Does that mean three different sorts of armour that early in the game (assuming from the weaponry that it is early)?
    Last edited by Brian Damage; 01-09-2012 at 12:34 PM.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217

    Exclamation

    That terrain doesn't look random OR destructable.

    Look how the map was designed with the skyranger landing at the top and linearly funnelling your troops down the hill. Similarly, look at how the aliens are all bunched up together as if they were hand placed there around cover.

    That looks like a pre-designed static map. Uh oh.

    I'm EXTREMELY WORRIED now. The lack of randomized and fully destructable terrain is probably the single largest deathblow to any X-Com remake...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    They said there'd be destructable terrain, though, didn't they?

    As for the randomness: I'm going to need more screenshots before I decide. The placement of the trees and some of the rocks looks like it could be one-per hex, with some of the larger items being prebuilt multi-hex objects. We'll have to see.

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by OldManBrian View Post
    THIS RIGHT HERE. Good catch, that plus the conspicuous lack of any mention of base\facility building. I find this troubling.
    Base/facility building is tedious and undesired. =)

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Are you advocating a lack of it or satirising the usual industry mentality?

  24. #24
    OK, a lot of stuff there that has most old-time fans worried.. but whats with the marin shooter storyline? What's bad about the shooter showing the first alien incursions and the remake dealing with the 1999 (or 2012, hehe) full-blown invasion? As long as it ain't a terribly BAD storyline (UFO Aftershock/Afterlight, i'm looking at you two) i don't see the issue of having a slightly different storyline than that of the original.

    But really, i was expecting a game just as complex or more difficult than the original. This "streamlining" is just what kills every single classical remake thats ever been done. I'd like to think what Julian would have to say about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Are you advocating a lack of it or satirising the usual industry mentality?
    The latter. I have no desire for being impaled to death by angry mobs =)

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    The latter. I have no desire for being impaled to death by angry mobs =)
    *Puts down spear*

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    154
    Well some good news and maybe some bad news. I'm loving the base set up, but there was no mention of base building or multiple bases. If a person can build their base how they want to, they could either make it a well defended base or not. There was no hand holding, the choose was up to them, but they would most likely lose that base if it were attacked. X-Com was a learning experience and that should not be taking away. I hope they don't take that away from the game, but of course this is an early build and I'll have to wait to know for sure.

    I have to agree with some people I didn't like that UI. It doesn't look PC friendly at all, though that UI could strictly be just for consoles.

    I'm not sure what he means by streamlining, there wasn't much that was not important in the original that could be streamlined better. The biggest thing that I could tell needed adding on was the UI. Add quick keys, ability to scroll up and down on levels, show the arch of an item before its thrown, show the line of your shot before shooting, allow you to see pathfinding and how much stamina and TU it takes to move, how many TU it takes to move a item out of your backpack and so on and so forth.

    I hope that the tactical game play is nothing like that one game with the growing bio-mass that takes over the world. I would just send my sniper to every mission let him stand on his spawn spot, turn on rts max out the speed and watch all the aliens rush him and get killed before they could even see him, boring.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    OK, a lot of stuff there that has most old-time fans worried.. but whats with the marin shooter storyline? What's bad about the shooter showing the first alien incursions and the remake dealing with the 1999 (or 2012, hehe) full-blown invasion? As long as it ain't a terribly BAD storyline (UFO Aftershock/Afterlight, i'm looking at you two) i don't see the issue of having a slightly different storyline than that of the original.

    But really, i was expecting a game just as complex or more difficult than the original. This "streamlining" is just what kills every single classical remake thats ever been done. I'd like to think what Julian would have to say about it.

    The latter. I have no desire for being impaled to death by angry mobs =)
    Ah. Okay then.

    *Puts pickaxe handle away*

    Personally, I think most subtractions from the fomula we do find are probably going to be due to engine limitations rather than developer intent - IIRC, it's been suggested they're using the Unreal 3 engine, which, while advertised as highly capable, is definitely designed with shooters in mind.

    Tanki: I have this horrible suspicion that the six "ticks" each on the soldier readouts and the large hexes mean we'll be seeing a very limited time-unit system. One TU for getting something from your inventory, one TU to fire an aimed or auto shot, one TU to move a single hex...

  28. #28
    The RT is above a targeting reticule. I think it has been mentioned (not officially) that it may switch to a first person view when shooting. I could be mistaken. References were drawn to Valkyria Chronicles (haven't played it so can't comment on that).

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where d'you think? Sectoid Squishing!
    Posts
    3,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    Base/facility building is tedious and undesired. =)
    You think so?

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    They said there'd be destructable terrain, though, didn't they?
    They cited it as one of the key things that made X-Com what it was, but they didn't outright say it's in.

  31. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpl_Facehugger View Post
    They cited it as one of the key things that made X-Com what it was, but they didn't outright say it's in.
    I believe 'deformable' was used. Certain objects (ie buildings) may be destructible, but the terrain (ground, hills) may be deformable.

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Ah. Okay then.

    *Puts pickaxe handle away*

    Personally, I think most subtractions from the fomula we do find are probably going to be due to engine limitations rather than developer intent - IIRC, it's been suggested they're using the Unreal 3 engine, which, while advertised as highly capable, is definitely designed with shooters in mind.

    Tanki: I have this horrible suspicion that the six "ticks" each on the soldier readouts and the large hexes mean we'll be seeing a very limited time-unit system. One TU for getting something from your inventory, one TU to fire an aimed or auto shot, one TU to move a single hex...
    If that is the case, then i'd be hard-pressed not to think that they are only after a quick buck. If engine limitations get in the way of FIraxis making a faithfull remake, than don't do it at all. The way it looks is that they (2K) licensed the Unreal 3 engine to make the XCOM shooter and have no desire to spend more money either licensing a different engine for the X-COM: EU, or spend time and money developing a proper engine. The whole thing looks like someone in Firaxis had to convince a lot of people in 2K HQ that making a proper remake would be a good idea. Hoping that Firaxis would be given a proper budget for designing a proper enginge from the ground up is probably far too much.

    Also X-COM is first and foremost a PC game. Steamlining things such as the UI to make it "console friendly" would alienate (no pun intended) the game to us old-time fans. Make a proper PC version, then adapt it to consoles. Not the other way around.


    All in all there are still much more things to learn about this new game, and many more things to be decided by the dev team yet. However i already have the nagging feeling that they are either too limited by budget (being forced to use the Unreal engine instead of developing a proper engine) or/and have design philosophies already set that will cripple the game experience for us (such as the "streamlining" stuff and apparently wanting to make it Console first PC second). Probably both.. and that would make me a very sad panda =(

  33. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by SectoidSquisher View Post
    You think so?
    No i don't. I was being sarcastic. I mentioned it because it sounds like something they would think as being tedious/undesired and deserving of "streamlining".

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruivoml View Post
    If that is the case, then i'd be hard-pressed not to think that they are only after a quick buck. If engine limitations get in the way of FIraxis making a faithfull remake, than don't do it at all. The way it looks is that they (2K) licensed the Unreal 3 engine to make the XCOM shooter and have no desire to spend more money either licensing a different engine for the X-COM: EU, or spend time and money developing a proper engine. The whole thing looks like someone in Firaxis had to convince a lot of people in 2K HQ that making a proper remake would be a good idea. Hoping that Firaxis would be given a proper budget for designing a proper enginge from the ground up is probably far too much.

    Also X-COM is first and foremost a PC game. Steamlining things such as the UI to make it "console friendly" would alienate (no pun intended) the game to us old-time fans. Make a proper PC version, then adapt it to consoles. Not the other way around.


    All in all there are still much more things to learn about this new game, and many more things to be decided by the dev team yet. However i already have the nagging feeling that they are either too limited by budget (being forced to use the Unreal engine instead of developing a proper engine) or/and have design philosophies already set that will cripple the game experience for us (such as the "streamlining" stuff and apparently wanting to make it Console first PC second). Probably both.. and that would make me a very sad panda =(
    Well, there's always Xenonauts.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    154
    I don't think we will have base building option, because this is a continuation of the xcom fps's story line, aliens can just warp in where ever they want so defensive building is out of the question (unless you build bunkers in your base). They probably want you to go on the notion of keeping your base/bases hiding form the aliens forever or until the end of game.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanki View Post
    I don't think we will have base building option, because this is a continuation of the xcom fps's story line, aliens can just warp in where ever they want so defensive building is out of the question (unless you build bunkers in your base). They probably want you to go on the notion of keeping your base/bases hiding form the aliens forever or until the end of game.
    Interceptions are in. (Heck, look at the hangar!) Ergo aliens use spaceships. They don't teleport everywhere.

  37. #37
    Yeah.. xenonauts sure sounds good, but i was really really hoping for an Apocalypse remake. Part of me believes that if Firaxis EU is good enough, then they will be greenlit for further sequels (TFTD and Apoc) while staying true to the original mythos (no pun intended, again).

    But that sounds very unrealistic now...

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Melbourne.
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Cpl_Facehugger View Post
    Interceptions are in. (Heck, look at the hangar!) Ergo aliens use spaceships. They don't teleport everywhere.
    Which makes it even weirder that this is somehow tied to the teleporting aliens and invasion of the FPS.

  39. #39
    Well, obvioulsy we are not into everything thats going to develop during the FPS storyline. We don't know in what situation the aliens will be in once the FPS story is beaten. If the aliens in the EU remake were just as powerfull as the aliens in the FPS, then what's the point of "winning" in the FPS?!

    For all we know, the "victory" in the FPS comes by destroying the only way the aliens have to teleport around. And since the aliens on the FPS had no UFO's as a mean of transportation, they were essentially "defeated". Only to return on the EU remake in normal UFO's to kick humanity ass once more.

    Kind of like the Skyrim storyline, where the dragons weren't killed, only "banished" for the time being.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    860
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Damage View Post
    Which makes it even weirder that this is somehow tied to the teleporting aliens and invasion of the FPS.
    We don't know how yet though.

    I'm kind of envisioning a relationship between the outsiders and the sectoids being sorta like the Xen aliens and the Combine in HL2. Namely, the sectoids are this huge interstellar empire that's been ruthlessly hunting the outsiders forever. Earth defeats the outsiders, sectoids stand up and take notice and reinforce their tiny research mission that's been here forever to figure out how the primitive earthlings were able to do it.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •