XCOM: Enemy Unknown Interview

There’s an article-style interview with XCOM: Enemy Unknown producer Garth DeAngelis up on VentureBeat today, during which they discuss the character progression available in the game, why it was scaled down from the original scope, how the team at Firaxis managed to make us care about our squad, and more.

Firaxis has built a new skill-progression system for the four predefined soldier classes, with each military rank bringing a new perk for you to play with. You choose between two different abilities for many of these promotions up the command chain. You can customize your squaddies’ physical appearances, too, which seems to be an effort to generate that personal attachment.

DeAngelis revealed that Firaxis (had larger skill trees) in their original plans for the game. (I remember various proposals and designs that were extremely detailed and immensely deep, which also meant, in practice, they could feel a bit cumbersome,) he told me. He professed that his designers, Jake Soloman and Ananda Gupta, had (wisely settled upon a clean system that offered tons of choice and class-building without overtaxing the player.)

According to DeAngelis, the skill system has (led to an endless discussion about what the ‘˜perfect squad’ consists of.) But X-Com is not about perfection. Our clandestine paramilitary organization is something of which even former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld could be proud, who once famously said, (You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.) Building your squad into the pinnacle of tactical combat takes away from the individual character of its members. Perfect soldiers are perfectly boring.

What would the Colonial Marines sent to LV-426 be without the panic attacks of Hudson? Or the steadfast bravery of Vasquez? What would the elite special forces team who battled an invisible foe in the jungles of Central America be without Mac’s vengeance or Billy’s honor or Dillon’s stubbornness? These (flaws) each led to their respective owner’s demise, yet they also influenced the personalities of characters that we’ve come to remember.

When I asked DeAngelis about the change between Enemy Unknown and its predecessors, he felt that the (wide variety of stats [in the original game] . always felt a bit distant to the player.) He was convinced of the player’s emotional investment hinging on (permadeath and aesthetic customization,) and so he and his team asked: (Why not make this connection even deeper by allowing the player to choose how each soldier’s gameplay progresses?)