![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This guy from Something Awful both doubts the game will have a good story (because it's an FPS on the 360, ha, ha!), and says that part of the appeal of the original was that it didn't have an elaborate story.
Yes, that's right. While everyone is complaining about games being shallow, he thinks that the spirit of the original wouldn't be served best by having a deep story.
I love how gamers constantly complain that games are unoriginal, but whenever an update or reboot is announced, they demand it needs to be exactly the same as the original, just "updated", which is about as vague as it gets. Not to mention that the gaming public, which largely has no idea what X-Com is, would complain if they had to command more "faceless soldiers" without any real character. What's wrong with wanting characters to be more than just disposable rookies in jumpsuits?
Yes, that's right. While everyone is complaining about games being shallow, he thinks that the spirit of the original wouldn't be served best by having a deep story.
Even if they do come up with a great story, it seems like things would be heading in the wrong direction. A major part of the original game's eerie atmosphere can be attributed to the cold, detached point of view as you pitted the resources of a vast agency (and a handful of soldiers whose details came from your head) against the alien force. Giving the player a name and a storyline will narrow the scope.
I love how gamers constantly complain that games are unoriginal, but whenever an update or reboot is announced, they demand it needs to be exactly the same as the original, just "updated", which is about as vague as it gets. Not to mention that the gaming public, which largely has no idea what X-Com is, would complain if they had to command more "faceless soldiers" without any real character. What's wrong with wanting characters to be more than just disposable rookies in jumpsuits?
