Right. But why brazenly call it "XCOM(sic)" when it really has nothing similar to the original games other than the core characters? Are they implying "This is the new X-COM; FPS is now the focus, we might do some TBS spin-offs if you're lucky?" Is someone going to take Master Chief, put him in an Adventure game and call it "HALO" and claim "it retains the core spirit of Master Chief (because Master Chief is in it)"? Gordon Freeman the RTS is the same because it has a suit and aliens and the G-Man? Where then do we draw the line on were reinvention is 'acceptable' to the integrity of a franchise?
That's not to say a SWAT 4 or old Rainbow Six style game wouldn't be incredible.
I can see if failing with disastrous results if done improperly and I don't think the studio producing the game has the right staff and angle to pursue that; I doubt it was in their original blueprints as well.
It'd be the best thing to happen to the franchise since it came out.
That's because nobody's tried to make the base game better, they've tried to beat it at its own game.
The best thing to happen to the franchise since it came out would be for someone to not build a game better at being X-COM than X-COM, but to make X-COM surpass itself. They don't need to re-invent, they need to innovate. Everybody who has tried to 'one-up' X-COM has failed: that's because cloning the game and putting it in a different light with different gameplay doesn't work (UFO has thoroughly proved this and TFTD, despite being a great title in and of itself with some glaring flaws, was not an improvement over the original -- it was more of an expansion to the original).
Author
Topic: X-COM Reboot: Suicide Pact, anyone? (Read 33922 times)