XCOM creator calls FPS direction 'disappointing'
XCOM creator Julian Gollop talks about his disappointment with the shooter XCOM, and his hopes for XCOM: Enemy Unknown.
Julian Gollop, creator of the original X-COM game, hasn't had a hand in the XCOM first-person reboot from 2K Marin, nor the more recently announced strategy game, XCOM: Enemy Unknown from Firaxis. It's clear which one he prefers though, sharing his thoughts on the strategy game and calling the shooter direction "disappointing" for its departure from the series' roots.
"I thought it was a great shame because it was going down the same route as some of the previous X-COM sequels, like Interceptor and Enforcer - in other words, going completely against turn-based combat," Gollop said.
"It was a bit disappointing from my point of view and for many fans of X-COM. When from out of the blue we heard that Firaxis are doing a turn-based version, it's as if 2K are trying to cover all their bets," Gollop told Edge.
He laments that turn-based games are being perceived as a "completely niche market," after real-time strategy games boomed in the mid-90s. He says games like Advance Wars and Valkyria Chronicles impressed him as good examples of modern turn-based strategy. "There's room for innovation there, but I don't know what Firaxis are going to do," he said. "How faithful it is to the original game, I don't know."
He certainly isn't shy about chiming in on what Firaxis should do, though. He shares a broad range of ideas, from teaching the player about tools through the game interface, to developing better AI and terrain generation than the team could accomplish in the original game.
XCOM: Enemy Unknown is due in the fall, while the shooter XCOM is set to hit in fiscal 2013.
-
Steve Watts posted a new article, XCOM creator calls FPS direction 'disappointing'.
XCOM creator Julian Gollop talks about his disappointment with the shooter XCOM, and his hopes for XCOM: Enemy Unknown.-
-
-
It's 2012 and I think gamers need to put on their big boy pants and just realize that everyone is adult enough to recognize when a game is a direct sequel, remake, or simpley inspired from an original series. Anyone who follows industry news should know that the modern market for games prefers brand recognition over new ones.
So an FPS inspired by a previous brand of games that looks great isn't such a bad thing. They want it to sell, so what if they use the brand they own and where the game was inspired from? Why is it such a big deal if it isn't a direct remake but the game looks good?
I don't get why everyone on the internet has to climb some sanctimonious pedestal to perverse a video game brand, it's just weird to defend a name. Judge the content, not the brand, because that's the market we've been living in for the past 5 years in film and games.-
-
-
-
-
-
"Yeah, basically. Look, I never played XCOM, so I don't give a shit what it's called,"
Well Donny you're out of your league here then. Dunno what else to say. I guess you'll be looking forward to Call of Duty 7: Tactical Chess and Modern Warfare 6: Checkers Rearmed since brand IP doesn't mean anything.
-
-
And is there something wrong with preferring a new version that actually plays similarly to the old game versus something that has nothing to do with the old game except in name? Also, this isn't the first time as there was a mediocre game called X-Com Enforcer that no one remembers because it pretty well sucked. No one wants a repeat of that.
-
-
-
-
I'm apt to agree with you that people need to keep an open mind about brand extensions/changes, but damn if I'm not super happy they are making a new strategy game and not just an FPS.
The FPS might end up being good, but it just doesn't scratch the itch that xcom fans really want -- which is a squad-based tactical game with a strategic layer. -
I agree with the chimes of "it looks pretty bad", but I think the real bitterness here comes from the fact that many people desperately wanted to see a true sequel to the game, as there haven't been a lot of games in its style lately - same deal when Fallout 3 was announced as an oblivionlike by bethesda.
While brand recognition is good, brands come with expectations. Imagine if it was announced a that they were making a new Indiana Jones movie without spielberg, and then told people it's a motivational peice starring Indy's son, Flintery Jones, as we follow his dream to become a rock star in the 1970s. More than a few people would say "They're ruining a brand for the sake of a cash-grab", and that's what the XCOM "prequel" appeared to be to a lot of people.
Now, certainly minds will change if it turns out to be an awesome game, but the fact is that when you build expectations and then don't meet them, there's going to be disappointment - especially considering how rarely series jump across genres in this industry. -
You'd make a good point, if it wasn't built on a foundation of bullshit.
To the laymen, I.E. the person who they are trying to sell millions of games to, the name X-Com doesn't mean anything. It wasn't a smash-hit, it was a cult classic. Same goes for Syndicate. Neither have large swaths of brand recognition, yet both are being bought so that their names can be applied to mediocre FPS they have nothing to do with. They might as well have called this game "Bioshock: Oil-Men Attack!" if they really wanted -brand- recognition, and it would have about as much to do with that series as it does with X-com.-
-
It would if 2k paid for it to be, which they obviously did in the first place. If you think most mass-press has anything to do with actual fan hype, you're pretty naive.
However, X-Com: Enemy Unknown looks like it actually might be pretty great, and is trying to be a modern X-Com. I wonder why 2K insists on both releasing a real X-Com game, and then an idiotic FPS? -
-
-
-
The X-Com FPS is like making a Blade Runner movie about teenage angst in the future. It might share a few things with the original, but the link is so tenuous as to be ridiculous. That's the problem here. I've seen nothing in this FPS that evokes anything like X-Com at all. On top of that it looks like a pretty mediocre game so far as well.
-
-
-
Hitman was entertaining. They stuck pretty well to his character, especially his extreme discomfort with any sort of intimacy. Also Uwe Boll's Postal movie was pretty funny, and Rampage was entertaining in its own way.
I'll agree with you on Max Payne though. The only good part of that movie was the cgi demons.-
-
Hitman rescued an asian prostitute in Hitman 1. Totally within his character to rescue someone, regardless of them being important on a grand scale or not. CGI Demons were cool in and of themselves, Max Payne wasn't a good movie. And yes, I enjoyed two of Uwe's movies, but other ones i've seen snippets of were terrible.
-
I don't recall the rescue, but I can accept that it may have happened and I forgot it. I will never forgive Max Payne for showing each ESSENTIAL Max Payne-ism once each. And the straight bullet-time was JUST WALKING FORWARDS.
I tried to watch Dungeon Siege twice the other day. I wound up watching a Law & Order: CI I'd seen 3 times already.-
Yeah, the rescue is in the mission where you can infiltrate the brothel. You don't have to rescue her, but you can, and it led to one of the most memorable moments in the franchise for me. She kisses you on the cheek before she leaves and the camera does a close up on 47's face as he cringes and shivers. Great character moment imo, so when he tazed the girl in the movie for trying to seduce him that was an awesome touch.
Also, like I said, I agree with you about the vast majority of Boll's movies. I'm not going to stick up for tripe like House of the Dead, Bloodrayne, Dungeon Siege, etc. He deserves backlash for how terrible those are, but Postal and Rampage entertained me, even if they aren't for everyone. I know Dognose for example liked Rampage a lot (iirc anyway)-
The Hitman movie's portrayal of the character wasn't accurate at all. Firstly, 47 doesn't rescue anyone just for the sake of rescuing them. In Hitman 1 and 2, he rescues the Chinese prostitute because she can help him complete his mission, not because he actually cares about her. Also, 47 doesn't smile or make jokes, both of which he did in the movie. 47 showed signs of empathy in Hitman 2 but those were snuffed out pretty soundly in Contracts and Blood Money, where he shows a total lack of empathy for Diana and the fact that she's being hunted down. He even kills his pet bird without hesitation when it won't shut up.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ha, he mentioned Incubation in the last Q&A answer. I loved that game back in the day. I mentioned that to Mercfox during his xcom stream.
4 player multiplayer in a turn-based squad tactical game = A+. iirc it even had support for 2v2 and FFA.
I really wish a developer would have the guts to make a truly awesome and well designed real-time/pause squad tactics game like X-Com Apocalypse without the terrible UI and grinding (ie. Temple of Sirius runs x10000) aspects.-
(my last statement is in response to what I perceive as him lamenting RTS's dominance over TBS games.) Even JA3 from Sirtec was supposed to be real-time with pausing.
You can definitely have that kind of system without sacrificing any of the depth of a TBS game. In fact, there can be even more depth because you can do simultaneous coordinated movements among squad members. Also, you can avoid the core issues he talked about like levels having to be small and focused so as to avoid empty turns. All of this is proven by Apoc's real-time system. A hybrid that included DoW2's cover mechanic and firing arc setup for machineguns would be excellent imo. -
-
-
Not sure how you had to rely on them. I would do them to build up some initial cash earlier in the game, but once you star shooting down UFOs, all your money should come from selling researched alien tech. I've played through xcom:apoc a half dozen times I don't recall doing more than 50 raids on any single playthrough.
-
Maybe I just personally put too much emphasis on it to my own peril. Although the payoff seemed to scale over time. The best loot was the psionic loot that sold for a nice chunk of cash.
Don't get me wrong, I loved Apoc, especially how well done the real-time mode was. Maybe I'll give it another go and ignore Sirius more than I have in the past and see how it progresses.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It was very wonky, but you know the charm was that there was nothing else like it. It was possible to get proficient with the mouse-based sword, it just took practice...a lot of practice. Multiplayer was very fun too. I actually ran the only multiplayer ladder for it (~13 years ago 0_o). good times.
-
-
-
-
hmm that UFO online game he mentioned looks interesting http://ufo-online.gamigo.com/
-
-
-
-
-
you know that Firaxis is owned by 2K and didn't somehow decide to make this game based on an IP their parent company owns in a vacuum, right?
Firaxis: oh shit you guys are making an XCOM?
2K: uhh, yeah, it's an FPS being made by 2K Marin! why?
Firaxis: oh man, this is kind of awkward but, uhh, we... kind of made an XCOM game too...
2K: Jesus christ! okay, um, well... shit... okay nobody panic, we can figure this out
Firaxis: I mean, I just feel really bad... we can just scrap it and make Railroads 2 or something
2K: No, no, it's fine, we'll just release it I guess. Two XCOM games is better than one, right?
Firaxis: Man, I had no idea you guys were making an XCOM game. My bad, seriously.
2K: Nah, it's cool, I think everything will work out.
* They both start making out * -
-
-
-