🚀 go-pugleaf

Joe Schulte wrote...

>Are we talking something based on the first X-com, or the (IMO) terrible
Apocalypse. Assuming we're talking about the classic, here....


We are indeed talking of the original two titles UFO & TFTD.  As you may be
aware, there is some debate as to whether this rumour has any foundation to
it.  MPS Europe has denied such a project, while contacting
sup...@microprose.com leads to some very strange replies from someone
called 'chazz'...  Both are turning up blanks so far.  However, the
following link http://home.sol.no/~stighw/X-COManiac/news.html takes you to
the XCOManiacs website.  As you will see, the author has an alleged response
from Dave Ellis, who makes mention of a next title _after_ Alliance.

If you search through dejanews, you should be able to find previous threads
we embarked upon, covering much of the same thoughts as your own for ideas
in the remake.

There is one word of caution though regarding a remake...

Westwood are getting some criticism for their attempt at Dune 2000.  If MPS
were to go ahead with a 'remake' I for one would like to be involved in the
game project from as early as possible, to avoid the mistakes made by
Westwood.
    Hopefully, involving the gamers at an early stage will weed out
potential problems from the start, instead of going through all the donkey
work, only to find it is not what was intended.
    Essentially, I think the term 'remake' is in danger of being
misinterpreted.  We have been using it in the context of a game which goes
back to XCOM roots, avoiding the bells and whistles of additional products,
but with the benefit of a) 4 years of technology,  b) a hard core of XCOM
fans and a proven track record for the game, and c) Hindsight - getting
gamers involved in the project early - not when an alpha has been thrown
together like a dogs dinner, and reflecting what a programmer alone wants
from the game.

    From what I gather, this is what happens alot in the industry - a game
designer has an idea for something he wants to play, and then offers it to
the public.  Not neccessarily a good way to go selling products, based on a
single individuals wants.  "The needs of the many, outweight the needs of
the few"


    As for idea's, how about if you could assign a medic to the squad, and
set him up in a secure area.  Then, if a trooper gets hit, he makes his own
way to the medic, while the medic tries to get to the injured naut?  Both
would need some serious path coding, to avoid walking through enemy
territory as well as dealing with multiple injured troops.  I think the idea
of injured troops heading back to say the transport would be a pretty cool
idea, as it would mean you have to re-organised and rethink your approach.
You could ultimately override the troopers desire to run back to the
transport.  Sometimes, critical wounds which leave the naut with only single
figures of health would need to get to the nearest buddy.  As for medi kits,
I've been unhappy with both the original and Apoc versions.  It would be
better, IMHO, if two versions were available - a field kit [one use, deals
with a critical wound and stops the loss of further health] as well as the
bloody huge things carted around in TFTD, which could deal with multiple
critical wounds.

Just a thought


Detonate