X-Com 'Re-Imagined' as FPS by BioShock 2 Dev
-
pyrogen
replyOne day developers (and hopefully casual gamers) will realize that everything is not necessarily better from a first-person perspective.
Proof: Imagine goatse. Now imagine it from an overheard 3rd-person perspective. Much less vile, isn't it?-
-
-
Regardless. Sorry.
-
-
-
Irrelevant to strategy games, where the strategic overview of the battlefield is more important than "becoming the character". You're not controlling one guy. You're overseeing the movements of a full team.
This is akin to saying Starcraft II should be first-person, because it would be "more immersive".-
-
-
-
-
-
-
fine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_variant.
now see, X-Com Interceptor, X-Com Enforcer-
-
Yes. After the first two (or three) games, no self respecting X-Com fan considers the other even X-Com games. I think Interceptor may be the only one but only as a guilty pleasure. But Enforcer is the worst.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Probably around 10-20%.
-
-
-
-
They probably realize that if they attempt a full on re-vamp of an isometric strategy game, they'll fail miserably in comparison to the legendary game that the original was and thus incur much more rage from you people than by just making a really immersive FPS in the XCom universe.
-
All they have to do is modernize it (new engine, new graphics) and 95% of us will be happy. If they add additional stuff it would be icing on the cake... as long as it's good.
-
-
If I were to guess, I'd say that this has less to do with the game being "better" from a first person perspective, and more to do with this game also coming out on the 360. X-Com, being a real-time/turn-based strategy game is not exactly a formula for success on a console. Maybe that's the tinfoil hat talking.
I honestly wouldn't mind playing the combat portion of the game from a first person perspective, but that was only half of the game. I'm more curious about what they intend to do about the other half.
-
