Now I've been grazing these forums for the past weeks. Everyone has a game they want produced, some want this feature and other want that. I personally think people hold to the ideals that they want to play a revamped version of the game they loved. That if Fraxis doesn't deliver perfection, X-Com could plummet in terms of sales. This is just something I thought and wanted to see what others had to say about it?
Well anything is possible. It also depends on what your definition of failure is.
Will they attract the casual gamers in the numbers they expect? IMO, Probably not.
Will X-com vets buy the game? Most likely, cause not much else out there for us, although some may be driven away from the changes made.
It will not fail, day one purchase for me and so far I think the dev team has developed a great re-imagining. It is always possible they could screw it up, but from what I've seen there leaves little doubt it will do well.
It's a day-one purchase for me, and I'm going to tell every gamer friend I know about it.
Not that for me.
Pre-order, that's the ticket.
Yeah, I don't think this is going to fail. It's Faraxis. They're not only going to attract XCOM fans, they're going to attract Civilization fans, too. Also, I think they're also reaching out for new fans (which they should do). I don't think it'll fail. I think it's possible it won't be a blockbuster. I'm just hoping it gets people in the industry to look at strategy games on consoles more.
It will be a day one purchase for me and even though I have high expectations I think that the development team will deliver. There are a lot of us who have been waiting a long time to get this game upgraded to current state of the art production standards. I think the game will do well as long as they build suspense, depth of strategy, and replayability into it like the original game. Like a good friend would always tell me whenever I would shank one into the bush... "you gotta believe, you just gotta believe!"
I really hope it doesn't. I think from what I have read on the forums about 90% of us will be buying it first day. I know we are a very bias group of fans but I hope that once the game hits the public all those old school gamers pick it up too. I can only speak for the PC side but I think this will drag a bunch of those gamers back in. I hope for the console that it brings in the next gen of xcom fans
XCOM is also one of the few AAA turn-based titles that will be released in a long long time. Silent Storm fans, XCOM fans, even Age of Wonders fans will be taking a look at this game and if all goes well, buy a copy. I know I'm getting two copies (even three perhaps) at release. Firaxis has a good reputation at both creating good strategy games AND updating them regularly after release. So, I have big faith in Firaxis.
Will it fail ? Doubt it. I've been waiting a long time for this one. Practically all XCOM veterans have and that's a considerable number. Plus I'm pretty sure the game will attract new fans. A huge chunk of the RPG crowd would probably want to take a look. Even FPS fans have to be looking for something different by now.
I don't expect it to be a box-office mega hit like some of Blizzard or Biowares titles.
Firaxis is a smaller studio more focused on a smaller subsection of games (the "strategy geeks"), but this is the first game of theirs I see can appeal to a broader audience.
From what we have seen, it's quality all the way.
There is no such thing as 'perfection' - even the hallowed Xcom 1994 was flawed in places. Will it fail? No way. I'm preordering this one.
I'm ordering this, along with copies for friends, relatives and random passing strangers. It looks great and it seems the lead designer is apparently in touch with the original designer (hallowed be thine Gollop).
X-com is back, sing it from the rooftops and promote where possible!
Remember guys that word of mouth is a powerful force in the industry. I'd hazard a guess as to say it's still the biggest market strategy many studios and publishers use.
That and a good marketing (PR) strategy.Originally Posted by Inkidu
Now that you mention it, Faraxis's has been one of the best PR marketing campaigns I've seen in a long time. They're out there interacting with the gaming media, but they're smart enough to play coy with some things so as to keep people interested.That and a good marketing (PR) strategy.
there has been so much time and effort put in to this game its breathtaking - I literally feel like a child again - your mum would get the catolouge out and ask what you would want for xmas and you would spend days and hours pouring over those pictures deciding what you wanted and then when you finally did decide you would spend hours lovingly just looking at the picture of the thing you wanted.
Lol its pretty much the same thing all over again - when you consider the game has been in development for 4 years and we only just heard about this game at the begining of the year - thats an achievment in itself?
Then you look at the man thats in charge of the game - he loves the game more than anyone - he almost talks about it and treats it like its his baby - its something he has wanted to make for a very long time and now he is finally doing it living his dream - we all rarley in life get to to that ultimate goal we want to do in life - jake soloman is doing his - he knows the expectation that is on this game and he knows he will never live it down if he messes up.
WILL XCOM ENEMY UNKNOWN FAIL?
Not on your nelly - i still think it will be game of the year
I know, I've read the Game Informer article twenty times. I'm not joking. I think I've got it nearly memorized. I want to play this game, and I didn't even know XCOM existed until the beginning of this year.
Day one purchase for me. Waited way too long for an updated version to NOT get this as soon as it comes out.
Keep in mind, playing an old game is sort of like dating an old girlfriend. At first, you remember all the great things, but later you realize why you broke up in the first place. I'd give these changes a chance first. Who knows, game developers may have learned a thing or two since the original game came out.
This is copy and pasted from another thread that I just started. http://forums.2kgames.com/showthread...-Enemy-Unknown I thought it would be relevant to this discussion. Cheers.
Me, personally, do I think X-Com could fail? If people go in with expectations of the old game, yes, I think it could. But if people go into it with an open mind, I think it could do superbly. Me, I'm going to do my part. I'm buying it and will encourage my brothers and friends to buy it too.
At first, I wanted a featurette of an interview of Julian Gollop. (Tazong, I found your Jan 4, 2012 thread entitled "Julian Gollop." Perhaps you will appreciate what follows.) I hope for a longer, more detailed version of:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...-com-interview
I thought it would be great if Jake Solomon went on to interview Julian. But what I saw of JG's comments on the new X-Com was confusing to me.
On one hand, it seems like JS has talked to him, as of the Feb 3 RPS article (Tazong pointed this out already.)
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012...-3/#more-92049
(About halfway down.)
On the other hand, it sounds like JG doesn't have very good things to say about the new game. Look at these 2 links. Between this first link and the RPS interview, I'm guessing Firaxis didn't talk to JG until late in development.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/121/1216915p1.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I11RF1O-8d4
In this second link, the sections relevant to X-Com are 7:49 - 8:58, 9:26 - 11:18, and most painfully, 58:38 - 59:47. Brace yourself when you get to 59:10 and 59:40. It's pretty clear to me he's talking about the tactical-strategic X-com, not the FPS.
I got the impression that JG carries some bitterness towards Microprose. Did you pick it up in the Eurogamer article? I wonder if it carries over into Firaxis / 2K. I don't think an interview with JG for a Collector's Edition would ever happen unless this new X-Com sets stellar records. (Please dudes...if you want to respond to Mr. Gollop's comments on the current X-Com, I've re-posted these paragraphs and links in the thread "Do You Think X-Com Can Fail?" Go there. I think it's more relevant to that thread than this one.)
Last edited by Zxc; 05-13-2012 at 07:43 AM.
My own opinion about Firaxis' efforts aside, it looks to me like he's almost certainly talking about the FPS in that one, especially since it's from last year when the person asking the question would have only known about the FPS, and also because he's pretty much saying the same thing a lot of us are/were saying: "It's nothing like X-Com, so why call it that?". Also, what he says is pretty much the same as the stuff he was quoted as saying about the FPS, especially the whole "publishers run a mile from anything turn based" thing (which seems to be a direct reference to the FPS being an FPS), the pokemon comparison and his being able to understand their position but still not being happy with it. That and his other rather depressed-sounding comments on the FPS last year give me the impression that he was made aware of the Firaxis game (which he's a tad hesitant about as far as I can tell) around the same time as the rest of us.
I saw this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I11RF1O-8d4 quite recently and was quite intresting as he talks about his games and some mistakes he has made although i must admit i did not pick up on the 58 minutes plus.
My own feelings on this is that julian gollop had a gold mine sitting on his lap with xcom - instead of sticking with what he knew best - he would go off on tangents and do other stuff instead - i think he thought he got all he could out of xcom but the real truth is he did not use the xcom title to even half of its potential.
He is a great programmer and a bit of a genius when it comes to gaming(someone i respect very much) but when it comes to the business side of gaming - he is a poor old fruit and veg trader who is out of his depth and made some very poor decisions.
Is it sour grapes? - yes i think it is - someone has taken his old xcom licence and is going to make a fortune out of it - he has no one else to blame but himself - i can quite easily see the new xcom going in to three of four sequels and making masses of money for firaxis. julian even states there is no money in turn based games and its a mistake to do it - Julian is wrong one of the greatest games ever created is a turn based game called chess and thats been going for thousands of years - xcom is basically a electronic version of chess but with a lot more layers.
Sometimes the leaders of there own fields lose direction and focus of what they are trying to create - i think after seeing the 58 minutes plus - it was probably for the best juian lost the xcom license?
I think it is 50/50.
Faraxis are really pushing their luck with the proposed changes to the game, but if they have changed it in a way that gives us the same magic that we remember from the original, then it could become the new format for X-COM and a sure fire winner.
Other than that, and it will be a complete and utter fail, that only the hardiest and most dedicated of fanboys will support and buy.
I thought he was talking about the FPS game too, given the date reference that you mentioned above but right at 59:10, he said "turn based games do not sell." That could not be a reference to the FPS game, could it? I presume Firaxis spoke to him some time in 2011, before it's public announcement to the rest of the world.
Would you also mind indulging my ignorance and giving me references and links to Mr. Gollop's comments on the FPS game? I would appreciate having a starting point.
Chess...that's an insightful comment. I like it. I certainly hope you are right...3-4 sequels. I would love to see them integrate the "abduction of soldiers" idea...if they haven't already thought of it.
For the best that he lost the Xcom license? <Sigh> Even though I don't play lots of games any more and fully admit to being out of touch with the industry, I know enough to respect him. Unfortunately, I think you're right.
It's him explaining that he can see why 2K weren't, as far as anyone could see at the time, going with a turn based game, and why they were instead going with an FPS. Then he also points out that though he can understand it (aversion to risk), he doesn't agree with it (he thinks the risk is worth it).
As for the quotes, here's at least one set of them plus the link to Gamasutra where they were posted as commentary, again repeating the points from the lecture vid in the context of the FPS.
So yeah, I'm pretty certain he's talking about the FPS in the vid.
As for Gollop's opinion on EU, this is the main interview of interest here, I think. I don't know if there are any others.
Last edited by Brian Damage; 05-13-2012 at 08:45 AM.
Thanks for the links, Brian Damage. I completely agree with you now, that he was talking about the FPS in that lecture. Without having that context, his answer got me turned around a little bit.
You know, for the first time, I'm starting to really worry that this new X-Com just might not do so well. <sigh> I guess only time will tell.
So much for people not working themselves into a worry. *sigh* I think he's talking about the FPS, it's a little dated to be Enemy Unknown. The, "Turn-based games don't sell" comment could be to the FPS, it depends on the context, and I think he was talking about it in reference to the decision to make a shooter. In a more recent interview Mr. Gallop seems very optimistic about Faraxis's turned-based offering.
X-Com fail?!?!?!?! LoL yeah right....and next thing you know purple monkeys might start flying out of my backside.
New Muton infiltrator?
----------------------------------
I don't think XCOM will fail so much as not be a great seller as this entire thread suggests, sadly we live in an era where every game which isn't CoD or GoW or Halo (all horrible series) or at least an FPS of sorts from a known developer doesn't make much money without excessive dumbing down (or streamlining as it's known today). There are the occasional games that do well but they are mostly rare.
Oh, come on that's not true and very nihilistic in scope. In fact, this borders on baseless and trollish.
Why else do you think Halo 4 has been slotted for release in December, only?
Because *EVERYBODY* never really understood what X-Com truly meant with gameplay immersion long before the "design" adventures of RTS & FPS.
Not really, just being realistic, how many turn based games do you see still being made outside Japan? And besides titles like Civilization, Galactic Civilizations and such, you don't see many indie or real companies being very successful at promoting and selling them.
I really want XCOM to be a great success, I really do, and for it to have great expansions like the original (preferably more like the original) but we can't just ignore the present.
It's a niche market, but I'm talking about calling out three well-selling franchises and basically being a hipster-by-proxy. You may not like them, but they're not terrible. I don't even like to play Halo, or any one beyond the first of the other two, but you're just generalizing and criticizing streamlining. Heaven forbid people get rid of some annoying archaic mechanic but no, it dumbs down the experience. That's what I don't like.
I'm not sure XCOM: EU will actually deliver the old XCOM feeling due to the changes made which "free up the players mind". Basically that was perhaps what made it fun. Also all XCOM clones so far reduced the base management to one main base and some limited additional ones. Playing XCOM: TFTD currently i have lots off fun getting the stuff together for 8 manned bases and yes this adds tremendously to the fun and strategic element of the game.
So i'm not expecting XCOM: EU to be a game in the real XCOM tradition, its more something like the UFO: Afterhwatever games a game similar but not identical to the XCOM original and as such it might or might not fail.
This.
If you look at what happened with JA's new thing, I'd say anything is possible.
This is the type of game that appeals to a particular type of player. This is a beloved franchise with a particular type of gameplay.
The very few people redesigning and altering core gameplay believe they are making a better game despite it not being what most fans seem to want. I don't want an XCOM game in name, I want classic turn-based gameplay, for ex.
IMO, there's a bad trend in game design these days where designers feel the need to put their imprint on existing games and make design changes/additions/subtractions to games just to make it theirs, and results vary. The very fact that they are calling this a "re-imagining" is somewhat off putting since that has implications.
To me the glory of XCOM is a mix of setting and a particular type of gameplay and it seems like half of that equation is being heavily distorted.
So I guess we'll see.
The whole "trying to appeal to more casual gamers" thing irritates me because this is not the type of genre that has ever appealed to casual gamers, and this is a game franchise that was wildly popular in the heyday of PC gaming and considered by many to be one of the better games in PC gaming history. The game is like one of the foundations of early PC gaming. If it ain't broke, don't fix it - just freaking give us a modern version of it - is that so complicated or difficult?
I'll likely buy it on day one too, or pre-order/purchase, but I have to say, I felt the same way about D3 for 10 years or so, got into that beta, felt the game was dumbed down in a wow-like way, despise the fact that you have to be connected to do single player (had disconnects and progress loss several times playing beta due to this), and ultimately I didn't buy D3 yet (glad I didn't due to launch day fiasco), and may never buy D3 having now heard that people have finished the normal content in 10-14 hours along with the forced online single player. Torchlight 2 is more diablo than diablo 3 IMO and I can just keep waiting and pay 1/3 to a company that isn't utterly annoying (as bliz has become - see previous comment on designers wrecking popular games).
If you had asked me a year ago I would've said I would buy D3 no questions asked as soon as humanly possible. I'm sure D3 will be wildly popular and many will buy it and like it but to me D3 is diablo in name only - the spirit and core of the game have changed to be a wowified pseudo mmo. I think it's sad. When I was playing the beta (single player) and experiencing server lag I really couldn't believe it was happening. Worst design decision ever made. But there's Diablo, re-imagined, for ya.
If it's well-received by the critics I'm sure it will do reasonably well. If it gets 90%+ reviews then they might have a smash hit on their hands.
Have to admit I don't really understand everybody complaining about it being dumbed down. From everything we're reading it sounds considerably more sophisticated when it comes to tactics and options on the battlefield, which is surely the meat of the game.
It's still possible that they've screwed up, but I remain optimistic.
Is it possible for humans to screw something up just because they think they understand it while trying to put a different spin on it? Of course! This is what humans do best! SO the answer here should be YES. But we always hold out hope against human nature and hope a gem can be created instead. Nobody wants to see this go down in flames. I hope that it is the re-birth of the series. But possibilities are endless....
Hmm. I'm sure plenty of people won't be happy with it. I seriously doubt that I'll be one of those people. I'm happy with what I've seen, so, so far so good.
I love the 60's aesthetic so far and the vids from 2011 looked promising.
This don't need to be just another Fps, they can bring a real strategy, rpg feel to this game by enabling a real complete research aspect with the base and the dialogues trhoughout the course of the game. they can even input a strategic pause button to give orders, direct the comrades IA etc. Then limiting it geographically only to the USA's territory might make the game short, so they'd better come up with lots of ideas of different mission in a same state for instance. All in all I hope the project doesn't end up being dumped.
I'm pretty sure most people are talking about the Firaxis remake, not 2K's FPS. The FPS has been very much relegated to the back burner after the abysmal reception and massive fan backlash against it 7 or 8 months ago. It's gone back into development for the 2nd time now and we've stopped seeing much of anything about it. I think there is a reasonable chance that 2K's XCOM might never get to bask in the florescent glow of a store shelf.
Firaxis' remake though I suspect is going to do just fine. A lot of X-Com fans are going to pick it up, and I think Firaxis has done a pretty good job marketing it so I think a lot of the console players who might not have been around for the original, but do remember games like Valkaryia Chronicles and some of the TBS games for the DS and the like will probably pick it up.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote