The X-Com Liscence?

[Mouse Nightshirt]

I just read that Take-Two bought out Firaxis. Now I'm not sure if Firaxis still owned the liscence, because I thought they sold it onto Atari, but I can never be sure.

 

So, could someone tell me who owns it so I can write them a pleading letter to make a new one, or I will be forced to... erm... do something bad... yes that'll do. And they'll have to do something about it. As X-Com owners! They'll want to... honest.

[Gimli]

Well, first of all, as far as I know, there is no official word that X-COM is indeed in the hands of Firaxis. It's not even sure they ever got it. It has never been explicitly mentioned anywhere, unlike some other games from Microprose. The last one who had it was Atari.

 

Unfortunately, whoever owns the right probably doesn't recognize what kind of a jewel X-COM is. Either that, or if it were made right now it wouldn't quite be whatever it is that the owner wants.

 

As Dave Ellis mentioned in that interview with cyke, X-COM was never a game for the masses. It is conceptionally brilliant however, some things weren't possible at the time or weren't thought of. i think the development cycle of X-COM: UFO was 9 months, which is pretty short by today's standards.

 

Also, objectively looking, the missions wre pretty monotone as far as objectives go, because the majority boiled down to killing all aliens. And if you're not a player that is very interested in the research part, it's a good chance you'll get bored. There's a number of other reasons. You must also take into account that the marketing wasn't very big back then, not as much as it would have been now.

 

Still, I see that there's quite a community still existing, and there's a lot more other people who are big fans of X-COM.

 

Aftershock is a great example of innovations, adding weapon modding is something I also thought should be in an X-COM game (that was before I knew anything about Aftershock), and they have more mission types which makes it more interesting. There's probably more, but I still only have the demo.

 

I have seen a lot of good ideas here, I personally have TONS of ideas, unfortunately, a few of them are pretty impossible to make, even if 3 Blizzards were making the game.

 

I also don't see any visionaries today, people who will make an original, quality product, so even if it was made by Sid Meier, I doubt it would be very good.

 

With a visionary, it could succeed, but it would need one last thing. Hype. Lots and lots of hype. A lot of people didn't play it because they didn't think it was good (based on previews and what they had already generated in their mind before even playing a demo), but let me tell you, that I saw a lot of kids whose only other interest were FPS games, play X-COM: UFO in the local library every day. And those were not average gamers, in fact some of them were bullies.

 

One last thing, about Firaxis. They are now under 2K Games which is part of Take 2. 2K is the publisher for a lot of games, Serious Sam 2, being one of them. And let me tell you, that they completely ruined that game. I'm an active member of the official forums for the game, and I've seen some total stupidity on their side. I'll just say that they were the ones who decided which level should be in the demo, and they picked the worst one possible, and people were furious. Also, they were supposed to be responsible for contact with the community (~12 000 members) and they did a horrible job. Unfortunately, for a number of reasons I can't go into more detail, but you can check around those forums, and see.

[Slaughter]

Pete and me checked up on the X-COM license a year or two ago. At that point Atari was the owner. I can't remember where we did this, but Pete can tell you. As further evidence of this still being the case, take a look at Atari's support section. Firaxis bought quite a few old Microprose titles from them as far as I know (I HOPE Colonization was one of them), but they didn't get X-COM as I understand it.

 

As for getting a new X-COM, I've been playing with that idea for a while. I've gotten the e-mail address of someone far up in the Atari system (don't ask me how), and called the project "X-COM: Resurrection". I've talked to the other staff here, and the staff at XCOMUFO.com. Sadly time haven't permitted us to start it properly, but if we do, it could be good. If you'd like to know more, do say so, and I'll fill you in.

 

As for lack of innovation, and who should make the next X-COM, this topic provides part of the answer in my book. Nival is the only proper turn-based developer we have these days. The Silent Storm games, the coming Heroes of Might and Magic 5 and so on are all evidence of that. In addition, the Silent Storm engine is the most advanced turn-based engine ever created. The physics engine is out of this world, and they HAVE to be part of the next X-COM. They would need help however, and the Gollops with their turn-based talent might be a good choice.

 

Regarding sales, that is our biggest problem. Silent Storm is the only high quality turn-based small squad tactical game to come in a LONG TIME, and it sold less than 20 000 copies in the US. It did much better in Russia and Europe, but still not good enough I fear. How can we convince a publisher like Atari that it's worth putting enough money into the development of a turn-based game to make the next X-COM good? And worse, how can we keep them from dumbing it down?

 

The excellent Silent Storm, and the fact that the dumbed down UFO: Aftermath was less liked by the community than the more advanced UFO: Aftershock. are some good arguments. They are too weak however, so we have to wake the X-COM community REAL GOOD.

 

Anyway, if you like I'll provide more detail on "X-COM: Resurrection". There's not much yet, but something.

[Bomb Bloke]

Come on, spit it out!

[Gimli]

Anyway, if you like I'll provide more detail on "X-COM: Resurrection". There's not much yet, but something.

 

I'm in. After reading your post a few times and checking your links, this is what I can say:

 

It is obvious that the biggest problem are the sales. If we want to get someone to make an X-COM game, we have to find a solution to that problem. I suggest that I open a new thread to try and see what can be done about X-COM, to open a discussion and see where we stand right now.

 

I'll start with the more general subjects, and if all goes well, we can go down into more detail. The only thing I don't know right now, is where to post it.

 

You mentioned a lack of time. If you can fill me in, and explain the whole thing, I volunteer to try and get the ball rolling, along with anybody else who's willing.

 

I'll start writing the thread in Word, I hope that in the meantime, someone will reply to this and tell me where to post it.

 

One last thing: does SC have it's own IRC channel? I didn't notice any links on the main page.

[Slaughter]

Sounds good Gimli, but please hold off posting it for a little.

 

As for IRC channels, we have several. There should be links to one in the StrategyCore section of the main page however (I'll add it soon). You can find the information here.

[Mouse Nightshirt]

I think poor sales in the past were as much down to poor publicity of the titles as due to the niche they occupied.

 

Sites like IGN (my favoured one), Gamespot etc all think X-Com is a classic series. IGN even had it (Enemy Unknown) as their top strategy game of all time.

 

Hype works among games. Whoever were to make the game needs to understand that, although a classic, few people have any recollection of the name "X-Com", and thus, don't associate classical status with it. Publicity would make any future X-Com work, and whoever publishes it in future needs to be aware of this.

[Bomb Bloke]

Well, what about that recent GBA game, RebelStar or whatever it was called?

 

How's that selling?

 

I can't find a copy down here in Tasmania.

[infael]

I think poor sales in the past were as much down to poor publicity of the titles as due to the niche they occupied.

 

Sites like IGN (my favoured one), Gamespot etc all think X-Com is a classic series. IGN even had it (Enemy Unknown) as their top strategy game of all time.

 

Hype works among games. Whoever were to make the game needs to understand that, although a classic, few people have any recollection of the name "X-Com", and thus, don't associate classical status with it. Publicity would make any future X-Com work, and whoever publishes it in future needs to be aware of this.

 

 

As Atari is the last-known license holder, I've emailed em a few times about X-com and never gotten a response back. I'd call but can't seem to find a phone number.