charlequin said:
The issue is that literally the only reason to make X-Com an FPS in the first place -- i.e. to slap an old, familiar name onto a game in an overcrowded genre to make it stand out -- assures that the person making that call is fundamentally not interested in doing the game right. Sure, there's a way you could make an X-Com FPS that felt true to the series in some way, but there are like 27 different ways to do an X-Com game better (heck, you could even make it a real-time strategy game) that aren't turning it into an FPS, and someone who actually wanted to make a good X-Com game would inevitably explore those avenues instead.
You keep pretending that you're stating the obvious but there's nothing inherently wrong with the notion of turning X-Com into either a RTS or a FPS. Microprose already turned the series into an RTS with Apocalypse; it's a tiny jump for any half-capable and history-aware developer to see how you could morph X-Com into a Dungeon Keeper.
You have played Dungeon Keeper, right? Or Valkyria Chronicles (a different yet similar game)?
No, that really has nothing at all to do with what I was saying. :lol
You might not think it was but that's what happens when you use bad examples like Civ as a comparison to X-Com.
The issue isn't that every turn-based game can sell as well as Civ -- just like not every shooter can sell as well as MW2 and Halo, not every platformer can sell as well as Mario, etc. The issue is that people don't inherently mind turn-based gameplay at all. Civilization and turn-based Final Fantasy and other examples of games with turn-based gameplay sell millions here in the US. The idea that it is turn-based gameplay isn't itself a turn-off or an undesirable gameplay style in any way -- that's just a lingering falsehood that came into vogue when RTS games took off and has never quite been shed completely in the West.
And now you're lumping all turn-based gameplay into some sort of super-genre, which is just idiotic. By your methodology 2K should be releasing Falcon 5.0 because Ace Combat selling decently means that there must be a strong-enough market for to support a hyper-realistic flight-sim, or that Advance Wars selling really well globally means there's a market for for a medium/high-budget Steel Panthers 4.
I don't think anyone is saying that turn-based games are inherently unwanted, but there is a steep division in the kind of easy-going low-demand turn-based games like CivRev Final Fantasy and the detail-loaded (and detail critical because not paying attention to the details will ensure a bad experience) games like Jagged Alliance or X-Com.
I'm also really confused as to why you think you're some sort of torchbearer against those ignorant western publishers, particularly given that 2K games also published
a high-budget, well-reviewed TBS console game in 2008 and continues to port that same title to new platforms.