vrok wrote on Sep 12, 2011, 20:58:

Alpha Geist wrote on Sep 12, 2011, 16:30:
WTF mate? Just another Bastardization of a once beloved classic churned out for "the masses."

Oh, and before someone mentions Fallout 3 (and/or NV), that was an exception to the rule. I don't see all the CORE elements that made Syndicate what it was under the guise of "a unique action shooter."

Fallout 3 would be an exception to that rule? LOL, no. Fallout 3 was most definitely a prime example of what you describe. The most horrible franchise bastardization ever, in fact.

Fallout 3 was different from its predecessors, but felt like a modern day take of an older franchise. The most memorable things about fallout for me (the humor, world, moral choices, and character advancement) were kept in some form in fallout 3. About the only thing missing was the really boring turn based combat vs rats at the start of fallout 1 that almost kept me from playing the game. If your most memorable elements of fallout don't match mine I can see how you would see fallout 3 in that way, but this is kind of the danger of upgrading any franchise. Everyone's idea of what made it work is not the same.

I really doubt the most memorable elements of syndicate could be kept for anybody with this approach. While the combat system in an rpg could be argued to be a means to an end, the combat system in a tactical strategy is basically the game. In a way though, it could be kind of like Swat 2 -> swat 3. Not really the same, but it worked well.

I do enjoy starbreeze games, so this may turn out good, misuse of ip or not. But I kind of hope it doesn't, cause I hate EA and don't want to reward this kind of behavior. Why do we have to make games that sell millions of copies? Why not make 3 or 4 really unique titles that sell 250k each for 1/4th the cost. Same amount of money, plus you can take more risks, and reach a more diverse audience to boot. There's a huge market for fps games, yes, but they are sated. There are other markets that are dying of starvation.