To be honest the Bureau was so painfully dull and unremarkable it might as well of not been released either. Pretty much nothing good resulted of the whole FPS spinoff intent.
I thought it was ight, nice little spinoff.
Think people were a little too mad at the concept that a game can exist in X-COM universe while not being traditional X-COM turn-based strategy.
[QUOTE=General J;48910555]I thought it was ight, nice little spinoff.
Think people were a little too mad at the concept that a game can exist in X-COM universe while not being traditional X-COM turn-based strategy.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't groundbreaking, it wasn't fantastic, it wasn't incredible. But it was fun and it was a neat spin-off. I enjoyed it for what it was. A squad based third person shooter with some minor RPG mechanics. You can throw around claims that it wasn't "worthy" of the X-COM name, but if you're going to put the series on a pedestal then you're never going to be happy with anything new.
I enjoyed The Bureau. Even played through it multiple times.
i too enjoyed mass effect
the movies were better
I'm sad the original concept didn't turn out. It looked like a better take on xcom as an fps.
[QUOTE=General J;48910555]I thought it was ight, nice little spinoff.
Think people were a little too mad at the concept that a game can exist in X-COM universe while not being traditional X-COM turn-based strategy.[/QUOTE]
yeah sure
The new Firaxis XCOM mechanically barely resembles the old X-COM games, so I'd hardly call it traditional X-COM turn-based strategy, and yet people love it despite how much it changes.
It's simplistic and really quite blatantly self-serving to just boil it down to "cranky gamers mad at change"
When the Bureau was first announced, it was the first time anyone had even seen anything of the X-COM IP in the decade since Enforcer, nobody knew that Firaxis's XCOM even existed, and the title was just "XCOM", no subtitle or anything--for all anybody knew, this wasn't some spinoff, it was a main line X-COM game, and it reeked of insincerity because it had all the hallmarks of CEO logic--take a beloved franchise like X-COM(brand recognition) and hammer it into a genre of game which doesn't resemble what the franchise is supposed to represent(a shooter, naturally, because as the CEO of a video game company, all i know about video games is that the shooty ones are basically a license to print money).
Even as an artistic endeavor, there's almost zero value in a non-TBS set in the X-COM universe because nobody really gives a shit about the X-COM universe, it has basically no lore, and all of the X-COM games have always had their narratives defined by their personal tone, rather than adherence to a central story. Even if it did, The Bureau still failed to be a non-TBS set in the X-COM universe [I]because it wasn't even set in the X-COM universe[/I], it was in its own dumb reboot universe.
[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;48914064]yeah sure
The new Firaxis XCOM mechanically barely resembles the old X-COM games, so I'd hardly call it traditional X-COM turn-based strategy, and yet people love it despite how much it changes.
[/QUOTE]
If you're talking about EU, it basically improved every single thing about the tactical gameplay. Now you get to actually use tactics instead of just throwing rookie cannon fodder at everything until you get a chance to roll the dice and take a shot with one of your veterans. The strategy layer was very simplistic and nowhere near as interesting as the original game, but the tactical gameplay was the most enjoyable part of the franchise anyway so I'm glad they prioritized that.
[editline]16th October 2015[/editline]
actually I'm completely mistaking what you're saying so nevermind
[QUOTE=General J;48910555]I thought it was ight, nice little spinoff.
Think people were a little too mad at the concept that a game can exist in X-COM universe while not being traditional X-COM turn-based strategy.[/QUOTE]
eh people are completely alright with that. Think xcom interceptor.
[QUOTE=Lijitsu;48910701]It wasn't groundbreaking, it wasn't fantastic, it wasn't incredible. But it was fun and it was a neat spin-off. I enjoyed it for what it was. A squad based third person shooter with some minor RPG mechanics. You can throw around claims that it wasn't "worthy" of the X-COM name, but if you're going to put the series on a pedestal then you're never going to be happy with anything new.[/QUOTE]
When you massively switch shit up there'll always be those people that aren't happy about it.
See: Fallout
[editline]18th October 2015[/editline]
My friend fucking loves 1/2/Tactics, doesn't like 3, enjoys NV because of all the 1/2 references and shit, and refuses to stop talking shit about 4.
[QUOTE=gk99;48930052]When you massively switch shit up there'll always be those people that aren't happy about it.
See: Fallout
[editline]18th October 2015[/editline]
My friend fucking loves 1/2/Tactics, doesn't like 3, enjoys NV because of all the 1/2 references and shit, and refuses to stop talking shit about 4.[/QUOTE]
Fanboys are the reason we can't have nice things.
I think the problem is that people try to compare things that aren't the same. You can't compare top down to first person because they aren't the same thing. Sadly there exist people who think that anything that isn't their very favorite thing is just garbage.
I didn't like The Bureau, but not on any fault of being an XCOM game, I just didn't have fun playing it.
What makes me sad about all the outrage over the 2010 XCOM FPS is...
Well, I mean...
The last big XCOM that people were hyped for before the previous owners killed the IP was supposed to be an FPS game with high tactical emphasis... Which after years of hype vanished into the nothing. Thanks Atari.
[QUOTE=gk99;48930052]When you massively switch shit up there'll always be those people that aren't happy about it.
See: Fallout
[editline]18th October 2015[/editline]
My friend fucking loves 1/2/Tactics, doesn't like 3, enjoys NV because of all the 1/2 references and shit, and refuses to stop talking shit about 4.[/QUOTE]
are you sure he just doesn't like three because it's poorly written
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48932684]The biggest problem was this was announced before Firaxis's game which basically told everyone "Hey guys we're making a bioshocky looking alien game with Xcom's name slapped on it enjoy!" which was pretty fucked up.[/QUOTE]
Who gives a shit? It's not like there was a mass clamour for a new xcom at the time. When people saw that a new xcom was coming out, the majority reaction was 'wait really?'.
who cares, its a fun game that explores a particular image of the xcom world, and that's totally fine with me
[QUOTE=gk99;48930052]When you massively switch shit up there'll always be those people that aren't happy about it.
See: Fallout
[editline]18th October 2015[/editline]
My friend fucking loves 1/2/Tactics, doesn't like 3, enjoys NV because of all the 1/2 references and shit, and refuses to stop talking shit about 4.[/QUOTE]
How do you talk shit about something they've barely showed :huh:
To be fair I kinda liked the original idea of the FPS, because the FPS looked pretty interesting with the obvious art designers from Bioshock 2 on board to create a 50s world that kinda makes it feel like a 1950s sci-fi movie where the investigators are slowly investigating while the wee woo music plays and shit.
Obviously not titled XCOM to please Gollop and the hardcore fans, but still the idea in it of itself would be awesome to me.
ughhh it had xcom in it, it had aliens attacking earth, and it had squad based gameplay so tbh it kinda shares a lot with xcom!
Psychonauts has a story and characters behind it that are required for it to work
Xcom is built literally off the theme of 'aliums invade, xcom has to send squads to stop them while reverse engineering their tech'
As much as you all enjoy moaning about the bureau, it very much is an xcom game. Alternate universe to the old games/firaxis arc? Oh absolutely. But its not about the universe, its about the gameplay idea.
Aside from the simple dullness, it sucked because:
1.) Wrong setting. Seriously, fuck off. You are an international mercenary organization in the main series. That is pretty badass. Having to manage your public image in order to maintain funding was an amusing mechanic.
2.) SWAT 4. That is how you would do X-COM in an FPS. There is nothing wrong with genre hopping, but if you genre hop and lose the atmosphere of the original, you generally have fucked up. SWAT 4 made it clear that you could maintain a high tension atmosphere with a squad based FPS, which is precisely the sort of atmosphere you had with the original X-com series.
Or 3.) Just keep the Sci-Fi/Horror FPS thing, but remove the XCOM title for something else.
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;48932861]are you sure he just doesn't like three because it's poorly written[/QUOTE]
Nah, he can stand bad writing.
Like, what I mean by "enjoys NV" is that he can deal with it being an FPS, but I've never seen him playing it. He's usually doing a replay of 1 or 2
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
