Shackpets | Available on iOS and Google Play Store

X-Com 'Re-Imagined' as FPS by BioShock 2 Dev

123
BioShock 2 developer 2K Marin is to revive the classic turn-based tactical PC series X-COM as a first-person shooter, publisher 2K Games announced today.

"True to the roots of the franchise," according to 2K, the PC and Xbox 360 shooter named simply 'XCOM' will put players "in charge of overcoming high-stake odds through risky strategic gambits coupled with heart-stopping combat experiences that pit human ingenuity--and frailty--against a foe beyond comprehension" as an FBI agent.

"With BioShock 2, the team at 2K Marin proved themselves as masters of first-person, suspenseful storytelling, and with XCOM they will re-imagine and expand the rich lore of this revered franchise," said 2K president Christoph Hartmann in a press statement. "Players will explore the world of XCOM from an immersive new perspective and experience firsthand the fear and tension of this gripping narrative ride."

The X-COM series was begun in 1994 by Mythos with UFO: Enemy Unknown, blending base management, research and production with turn-based combat. The series was re-released on Steam and other outlets after 2K owner Take-Two picked up the rights.

Rumours had swirled since 2007 that BioShock creator Irrational Games would revive the franchise--which studio head Ken Levine has described as "sort of like my first love"--and resumes indicated that former Irrational studio 2K Australia was involved.

There's no word yet on when XCOM is scheduled to be released.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    April 14, 2010 5:46 AM

    One 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?

    • reply
      April 14, 2010 5:52 AM

      This is a bad analogy. Goatse is horrible irregardless of where it's viewed from.

      • reply
        April 14, 2010 5:55 AM

        I would imagine it would actually be somewhat less horrible if it was 1st person and not 3rd person rear view..

        • reply
          April 14, 2010 6:09 AM

          I really think it would be quite alot more horrible to experience it 1st person.

      • reply
        April 14, 2010 6:16 AM

        Regardless. Sorry.

    • reply
      April 14, 2010 6:01 AM

      First person, though, is much more immersive than other perspectives

      • reply
        April 14, 2010 6:06 AM

        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".

        • reply
          April 14, 2010 6:08 AM

          who says it has to be a strategy game?

          • reply
            April 14, 2010 6:09 AM

            Would chess be a better game in the first person perspective?

            • reply
              April 14, 2010 6:15 AM

              chess is a board game

              • reply
                April 14, 2010 6:18 AM

                Who says it has to be a board game?

                • reply
                  April 14, 2010 6:22 AM

                  chess is a specific game. x-com is a brand / franchise that is no longer limited to being a turn based squad strategy game.

                  • reply
                    April 14, 2010 6:30 AM

                    You're reasoning seems flawed and bias. You can't defend one game and not apply the same logic to another.

                    • reply
                      April 14, 2010 6:32 AM

                      fine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_variant.
                      now see, X-Com Interceptor, X-Com Enforcer

                      • reply
                        April 14, 2010 6:48 AM

                        X-COM Enforcer is exactly why this is kind of thing is regarded as bad. Interceptor is no good either.

                        • reply
                          April 14, 2010 7:20 AM

                          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.

          • reply
            April 14, 2010 6:11 AM

            Who says this game has to be x-com then?

      • reply
        April 14, 2010 6:10 AM

        Usually, but not always. You sound like you weren't there to play X-Com the year it was released.

        • reply
          April 14, 2010 6:17 AM

          no, I first played it in 1999. but of all the gamers in the market now, how many were there?

    • reply
      April 14, 2010 6:36 AM

      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.

      • reply
        April 14, 2010 7:22 AM

        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.

    • reply
      April 14, 2010 6:43 AM

      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.

Hello, Meet Lola