[ August 09, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
I have other ideas too, all of them outside the mold of conventional games. If anyone here is interested, I'd be happy to share the preliminary outlines. I've changed all the ideas considerably since writing the outlines, but they will at least give a general idea of what the game would be like.
quote:
My favorite idea is a MMORPG where the world is always changing. There is never a chance to get bored, because new world events are always changing the gameplay. One day it is most lucrative to be a fighting character, and the next it is most lucrative to be a farmer. The next day, something happens to make the soil infertile and it's up to the players to band together to fight the food shortage. I even started writing a long storyline for such a game, which would run itself once set in motion and would have a definite ending, but I sort of gave up on it when I found that nobody was going to code it.[/QB]
I suggest you learn to play a pen and paper RPG (like dungeons and dragons), and use that storyline idea... No coding, no fuss... and you can enjoy it.
[ August 13, 2007: Message edited by: Bien ]
Barring a holodeck, I'm actually working (albeit slowly) on making one of my dream games - a post-apocalyptic open-ended survival game incorporating psychology in both PCs and NPCs (influenced by childhood and present conditions), as well as the ability to influence them to follow you, work with you, etc.
Of course, I've had a lot of other ideas, but surprisingly, this one is the most feasible ;)
quote:
Originally posted by Haedrian:
<STRONG>I suggest you learn to play a pen and paper RPG (like dungeons and dragons), and use that storyline idea... No coding, no fuss... and you can enjoy it.</STRONG>
I was going to post the same thing. The only real limit is the extent of your creativity.
(One of) my perfect game(s) would be the type of game you could get going and then just sit back and watch. I like sim games, spore is probably the closest thing so far to what I want, and I'd love to see a game where the AI actually develop their own civilizations, languages, inventions, science, theology, works of art, and everything else all on their own. It'd be less of a game and more of a, well, universe sim. The player would be able to edit the basic physics, the game would generate the rest as needed. Players could share their config files so as to allow for more complicated universal-laws. I don't know, it would just be so AWESOME to see what comes up based on what happens/how you intervene. Think DF times a million.
The current game I've got going in my head is spawned off of Dwarf Fortress's world generation. It's a sim of a fantasy world.
The player would be able to set the starting races (all of the races that are there at the beginning) and can add any other race at any time and where they initially settle. This includes offshoots (such as Drow) or a player-spawned new kingdom of an older race. The player can even set some normal race as an offshoot of some other normal race (say gnomes and halfings are offshoots of dwarves or something) as well as set relations to other races and the 'parent' race.
Each race can build cities and create more cities if certain conditions are met. These new cities can then join the old one to form a kingdom or become independent. This is dependent on a the cohesiveness of the race and the reasons a new city was needed, as well as smaller things like distance from starting city with a bit of randomness for good measure. For example: a nearby fishing village is likely to stay in the kingdom where as a far-flung forest outpost might think twice about taxation without representation.
Each kingdom gets the chance to discover/upgrade/trade/steal technology pending on population and creativity of that race. Each technology has it's own levels of what it needs in both pop, creativity, and resources. If a kingdom meets these, then there is a chance that it will be discovered. Elves and their kin are likely to get things early, but they might need to rely on the humans for things after that.
Alliances and wars are made and fought based on many things, such as resourses, racial disposition, the races' history, and racial prejudices. The last one can be played around with by the player before the race is set, so Elves and Orcs need not hate one another instantly (If Fredrik K.T. Andersson can have Elf-Orc crossbreds, so can I, muwahaha...).
I've even envisioned some of the coding. When they send/expel an group to start a new city, they use a wandering function. When they see something they like, bee-line and set up camp. If they are a part of a kingdom, A* back to the starting city. Also, use ant AI to create roads (the more travelers use a path, the more 'pheromones' they drop, the more pheromones, the better the road.)
...
Wow. That's more than I though I knew about my own game. Sorry it got so long, I think I'll just plop this down into it's own Executive Document so it too can be one step closer to realization.
My dream game:
It would be split to some game modes, but you can move to the next mode only if you played all availble(I don;t know the grammar for this word :roll: )
First, you are the very first god in the whole multi werse, you create suns, planets, and the whole galactic evens you want!
Then after you created the very first life you must create succesors to watch out for every single planet(like creating an adventurer)
After that you must watch out for your race(you create creatures just like in spore)
there woudn't be any items, plants and such! Only reactions, like sharp rock attached to a stick makes a spear.
And when you are bored then you make a nice armageddon, and the score counts
(nice armageddon gives a lot of points)
heck...
PS Sorry for my bad english
PS 2 SPORE MUST COME OUT SOONER!!!
Links to the official site: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/Dom3/1.htm
and demo: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/Dom3/6.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Tormy:
Game concept: Turn based strategy game check
Setting: Fantasy check
Main features:
-Randomly generated worlds check, random map generator available-The player would control the ruler itself. If the ruler dies, the game is over if the ruler doesnt had any successors. Kind of; the player controls a being pretending to be a god. If the pretender dies, priests can recall him. If no one believes in his divinity, the game is over.
-Class system [The ruler, the soldiers etc. would be able to specialize themselves in many ways.]No. Single units/commanders only fill a spesific role, or at most few roles; however, all races have units/commanders/summons to fill almost all roles classes would. For commanders, some of the roles they are used in include army leaders, priests (morale buffs), battlecaster/buffers, battlecaster/destroyers, caster/summoners (out of battle), caster/destroyer (out of battle), thug (can kills dozens of units on his own), super-combatant (can kill armies on his own), scouts/spies/assassins (information, massed spies/assassin have special uses)
-Race system [There would be lot of different races available in the game: humans, orcs, goblins, elves, etc.]Check. No orcs, dwarves or elves, though. Human nations inspired by early romans, east/west romans, barbarians, arthurian legends, greek/persian, spanish/french inquisition, tales of transylvania, african culture, south-american bloodcults etc etc; elf-like beings shrouding themselves in illusions and appearing from nowhere to raid and kill and maim, in Irish (tuatha de danaan) and viking (Vanir, descendants of the Aesir i.e. Odin, Thor & co) flavour; Jotun, the frost giants, and their colossal Niefel ancestors/goblinoid Vaetti allies; Abysians whose very bodies are aflame; winged magocracy of Caelians; amphibious, frog-like Atlantians; aquatic aboleths of R'lyeh and the illithids whose falling star-city later destroyed the Aboleth culture... In each of the games three Ages, there are more races than most other games, and that's when the human nations are counted together. They're often just as different from each other than they are from the non-humans.
-Experience & abilities [dexterity, strength etc. for all creatures. Creatures can gain levels and raise their abilities]Check; all units have strength, attack, defence, precision, encumberance, etc etc; experience increases attack, defence and precision quickly, and high levels of experience offer small bonuses to strength, encumberance, even hp. However, the maximum is five starts (levels), and normal units above 3 stars are very rare indeed.
-Province system Check, maps consist of provinces of varying sizes.
-City system [More cities would be allowed to have in a province, depending on the size of the province]No. No city-building, population just is, and the most you can do is raise taxes and patrol, killing population for more money. You can build temples to spread dominion, and allow the recruitment of priests if they are available, or laboratories, to transfer magical items, recruit mages (again, only if available in the province) and research, but that's it. You can build castles, though.
-Castle system [Castles would be mainly military bases in a province]Check, castles allow recruitment of national units, must be besieged before province can be conquered and protect the defenders when the gate is breached. Without castles, you can only recruit the independents you conquered that province from, most often light/medium human infantries with slinger or archer support, but sometimes knights/longbowmen, or even mages. Hoburgs (halflings), the four amazon tribes, the various totemic tribes and druids are some examples of the independent mages.
-Resource system [food, minerals etc.]Check; units are bought with gold (training) and resources (equipment). "Resources" is the name of the resource. For magic, each path has its own resource, all collected automatically from sites that have to be searched for, except for blood slaves, which must be hunted from well-populated provinces. Supplies could be considered a resource, they keep armies from starving.
-Very detailed military system [The player would be allowed to equip EACH of the soldiers if he wants. The player would be allowed to design military units depending on the available equipment. This would mean that the combinations would be almost endless. It would all depend on, that what equipments are available. This would be linked to research mainly] Check. It's detailed, but there's no unit customization. All nations have several unit types, though, and if they're limited that's been done on purpose. The smallest army lineup in the game has light/medium/heavy inafntries, non-human medium infantry with heap of special abilities (strong, magic resistant, no supplies, siege bonus, amphibious but one-eyed, poor att/def, cold-blooded) and non-human, giant-sized infantry with the same special abilities. Their first goal is to recruit independent missile units and summon constructs/golems who get extra hp. Other nations can easily have dozen units.
-Research system [This would work like in the Civizliation series] Check, 7 schools of magic, for summoning, buffs, damage spells, magic items/golems, undead/golems/protection spells, save-or-die spells and finally, for blood sacrifice/demons/corruption; all with dozens of exceptions. Each school has 9 levels, from summoning undead scouts or throwing sparks (1) to calling forth elementals in battle or creating armies (25 and up per casting) of illusionary beings (5) to Wish, Flames from the Sky (which won't kill more than half the army in target province), or sending the Kindly Ones to hunt for enemy priests and blood mages wherever they might be (9). Once a global ritual, like the Kindly Ones, has been cast, it stays up until destroyed. So the Kindly Ones will kill, Eyes of the God will observe and Wrathful Skies will continue to blast until the spell is dispelled, the caster is dead, or the creatures (e.g. Wild Hunt) defeated.
-Border system [Players wouldnt simply control cities or provinces, but depending on the size of the cities/forts, the number of outposts etc, the players would control territories]None, unless you count the religion system.
-Very detailed diplomacy system [Something like the Civilization diplo system. Players would be able to make vassals, sign treaties, ask for military help, etc. and vice versa] No diplomacy system for single-player.
-2d or isometric tile based graphics. To be honest I dont like 3d. I always said that the best is the 2d or isometric graphics for a real strategy game.Check: 2d maps, 2d sprites fighting against pseudo-3d battlegrounds
-Turn based tactical combat. The players would be able to control each of their soldiers if the want, however there would be many options for this. [Control all soldiers/Control squads etc. The battles would be played on zoomed on maps -> something like the Age of Wonders battle system] No. You give your units orders BEFORE the battle. Once the battle start, they'll follow the orders (or sometimes not), and you can no longer affect the battle. All battles are fought between turns, so armies move simultaneously, so one army can't fight in multiple provinces in one turn.
-Magic system [There would be different magic schools. There would be specific units like mages, priests etc. to cast the spells, however the ruler itself would be able to use magic also, depending on his class] Check. 7 Schools of magic to research, 8 Paths of magic which control the type of spells available (four elements, Astral for mind, Death for necromancy, Nature, and Blood), about 700 spells IIRC, hundreds of magical items... Priests are limited to just few spells: banishing undead/demons, blessing sacred units, morale-increasing spells, and smiting/paralyzing the enemy for the really powerful ones. However, priest-mages are common. Your pretender will often be your most powerful mage. When fire-based nation might be able to recruit Fire 3 mage, who can get a random pick for further Fire 4, and have a very small chance for even Fire 5, and might be able to eventually forge an item for +1... Fire 5 is enough to summon a King of Elemental Fire (there are just 2, because the third one was corrupted) your pretender can start with Fire 9. It gives your priests sacred units attack bonuses and flaming weapons, and besides being able to cast all fire spells there are some very nice battlefield spells whose area of effect scales with power...
-Relations [This would be also a very important part of the game. The player's actions would have effect on many things in the game. - Relations with his own people in the empire, with the other empires etc. Linked to this, the player would be able to arrange marriages etc. Certain races wouldnt like eachother. This would be linked to the relations & diplomacy system] None, except for the dominion system.
-Religion system [There would be various gods in the game.] Faith in a spesific pretender is shown as dominion that spreads on the map. Troops in own dominion have better morale, and your pretender/prophet get hefty bonuses, and in your dominion the very land changes for your image (chosen in game creation, e.g. death, sloth and turmoil to afford fortune, research bonuses and flaming weapons for your sacred units). To afford more powerful pretender forms (Sphinx is immobile, so it is cheap; Phoenix is immortal, but physically weak, so its base form is cheap - but buying it magic is more expensive; a Sun Disc, who spreads heat in the province he is in and is rather tough, flies and master of Fire magic, is already quite expensive, you can either take negative scales (turmoil, sloth, death, misfortune, drain) or let your pretender be dormant or imprisoned in the beginning, only available after a year or several of game time (1 year = 12 turns).
-Leader/Generals system [In order to create an army it would be needed to have certains special units -generals for example. Depending on the skill of that special unit, various numbers of soldiers could consist that army. The leaders would also give various bonuses to the army what hes leading]Armies won't move unless a commander is there leading them. Some commanders keep units around them from routing, but most are just for moving the troops around. There are three types of leadership: mundane units, magical units, and undead/demons. Mages can lead either magical or undead/demons, depending on their type, but typically only few mundane units, and most mortal army leaders can't lead magical/undead units.
-Special sites system. Caves, ruins etc in all over the generated game world. Treaures, dangerous monsters, special encounters etc.The game has Sites. In every province, there may be up to four magical sites that have to be searched for. Sites are categorized by path and power. One Fire 1 site might generate one fire gem per turn. Fire 3 site ' Volcano' increases Heat scale and generate 3 fire gems per turn. A rare Water 2 site 'Mount Frost' increases Cold scale, produce 2 water gems and allow any Water mage to enter the site to summon 2 Winter Wolves per turn. Anyone searching the province will find some low-level sites, like Brigand Lairs that allow the recruitment of stealthy archers. There are few priestly sites, like Monastery of Light that decreases unrest and allows the recruitment of priests.
-Job system [for the peasants & civilians. There would be many different kind of jobs available from farmer to beast tamers]None whatsoever. No civilians are ever seen, unless you count the virgins captured as blood slaves.
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]
quote:
Originally posted by Janne Joensuu:
<STRONG>My first thought when I read through this post was "Hey, you're describing Dominions!" It's not a perfect match, but I'll detail the differences below.Links to the official site: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/Dom3/1.htm
and demo: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/Dom3/6.htm
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Janne Joensuu ]</STRONG>
Actually no. I have Dominions and it has some good ideas but whole game is just pretty average. The game what I described in my first post would be much more different. It was quite funny, many sites stated that dominions is a very complex game, but it is very far from the truth. It is a very simple game. [It is complex compared to the typical RTS games what we have in these years] Lot of spells and units means nothing when basically you wont use most of them...and yes Ive played multiplayer games also with Boron, QM and other "veteran" players. [the multiplayer community is quite dead in that game btw - side note]
Well obivously you cannot see that what game concept is hiding in my head, but it would be much more different/complex than Dominions 3 in almost everything.
[ September 18, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
quote:
Originally posted by Tormy:
<STRONG>Actually no. I have Dominions and it has some good ideas but whole game is just pretty average. The game what I described in my first post would be much more different. It was quite funny, many sites stated that dominions is a very complex game, but it is very far from the truth. It is a very simple game. [It is complex compared to the typical RTS games what we have in these years] Lot of spells and units means nothing when basically you wont use most of them...and yes Ive played multiplayer games also with Boron, QM and other "veteran" players. [the multiplayer community is quite dead in that game btw - side note]
Well obivously you cannot see that what game concept is hiding in my head, but it would be much more different/complex than Dominions 3 in almost everything.
[ September 18, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]</STRONG>
It's true that Dominions isn't as complex as the number of units alone would imply. I'd say that it's more complex than other multiplayer TBS games on market ATM, though.
I think that by "class sytem" and "experience & levels" you suggested, you meant something like the HoMM system in which heroes raise in various skills, or the ability to choose how a unit becomes better, like the Battle for Wesnoth system. These aren't bad in themselves, as long as the number of commanders/units is limited. However, if you're trying to control armies consisting of hundreds of units (like Dominions), or dozens of squads with varying amount of identical soldiers in them (like Total War games), upgrading the units would become a metagame in itself - and the more I've played, the more I want to play the big game and less the smaller games within it.
At worst, it could be like cities in Civilization games - cities are better if you irrigate all squares around them, and everything works better if you create roads between your cities, but you have to do this separately for each square, using settlers or engineers or what-have-you. I don't want to do that. I'd rather just find a city, and then set it to build "irrigation" inside the city menu. Similarly, I'd rather just recruit a soldier, and have him do what he's supposed to do. All options should be situational - as long as everything goes as it should, you shouldn't have to do anything. The experience in Dominions works like this. Wesnoth-style unit upgrades that change the unit's function (spearman to either swordman or pikeman or javelineer; elven warrior to either elven champion or elven hero), fore the player to make a decision, and slow the game down. I wouldn't want to play game where that was an option, because most often, using all options available to you is the best way to play, and that could easily make a game less fun to play.
City-building, on its own, isn't necessarily a bad thing either. It can be very fun. HoMM does it well, at least the older ones did. Building a building offers a benefit, like the recruitment of certain type of units. You have that benefit to the end of the game, and you only have about dozen choices. You might have to specialize (ONLY top-tier infantry OR top-tier archers), but you shouldn't have to keep going back to the old cities to add yet another new building (market, trading ship, bank, internet business). So no to Civilization-style, ever-growing list of buildings.
I'm not sure what's your thought on the multiplayer community. Did you play on IRC, or the slower e-mail/server games? The IRC was quite slow last I visited it, but it seemed there were still enough people to play with. The forum games seem to be a bit more popular, perhaps because the forum has more members now that the modding feature has gotten more following.
- recruit "regular - race specific" units. Units can gain xp via training or battles. Soldiers can advance levels like in an RPG game. When a unit is reaching a new level there would be many options to upgrade him. [something like a "feat" system. Example: ability to wear chainmail/platemail/enchanced armors/enchanced weapons, battle specific skills like cleave/backstab, magic related upgrades etc.] The base stats of the units would been raised
after level up. The player would be able to spend points to raise the str/dex/sta etc. of the specific unit.
- equip each and every units personally. Depending on what equipment is available, and that what weapons + armors a specific unit can use [linked to the upgrade system. The interface to upgrade units would be similar what you can see in RPG games.
- tame/breed warbeasts and monsters. Monsters and beasts must be captured, and taken to the beast tamer. The tamer would breed them. After breeding they must be tamed. Beasts can be carried in cages. If the creatures are not tamed, they couldnt wear armors/weapons and when they lvl up the player couldnt adjust their skills, however they can still be used in the battles. Just release them from the cages, and they will wander on the battlefield looking for targets. These untamed beasts can also attack the units of his master, so taming beasts would been much better in all aspects. [Of course it would require time] These entities would also level up. All creatures would have a specific upgrade path. Example: Ogres could be trained to use weapons or wear armors, but wardogs could only wear special armors.
- construct siege weaponry and other mechanical units like ballista etc.
- summon creatures on the battlefield [these would disappear after the battle] or summon creatures as a global spell. These units wouldnt disappear but they would requite specific resource to keep them alive. Some of these can also be equipped and can gain levels.
These are just few ideas for the military system. While some of them are in Dominions 3., this would be a much more complex system compared to that. I would say a much more deeper and polished system.
[ September 19, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
[ September 19, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
[ September 19, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
quote:
Originally posted by Grek:
<STRONG>A game with 100% realistic physics right down to the subatomic level, but you can change the laws of physics at will. You and watch the universe take shape, with occasional changes on your part. Sadly, you would need a planet sized computer to play it.</STRONG>
I have a planet-sized computer
I'm sure the hype and anticipation are going to be better than the end result (they always are). But right now, in my mind, what I IMAGINE it will be, It's the best. game. evar.
and ground battles
and you can explore cities, and even(if you want) sabotage your own stuff from 1st person.
quote:
Originally posted by Tormy:
<STRONG>- equip each and every units personally. Depending on what equipment is available, and that what weapons + armors a specific unit can use [linked to the upgrade system. The interface to upgrade units would be similar what you can see in RPG games.These are just few ideas for the military system. While some of them are in Dominions 3., this would be a much more complex system compared to that. I would say a much more deeper and polished system.</STRONG>
While I agree that this would be a much more complex system, and would probably offer many more options than the Dominions model, I don't think I'd like a game with such an emphasis on micromanagement. I'd like to discuss the whys further, but I won't have reliable internet access for almost two weeks, starting from tomorrow. Any way, it's basically what I wrote before - if I want to control units, I want to control units and little else (Total War etc); if I want to breed monsters, I breed monsters (Pokemon etc); if I want to level up my character, I'll play a crpg of some sort (like Dungeon Crawl, or some other roguelike). Trying to do all at once slows all parts of it down too much for my like. It could still be a good game, though - it just wouldn't be to my spesific tastes.
quote:
Originally posted by Janne Joensuu:
<STRONG>While I agree that this would be a much more complex system, and would probably offer many more options than the Dominions model, I don't think I'd like a game with such an emphasis on micromanagement. I'd like to discuss the whys further, but I won't have reliable internet access for almost two weeks, starting from tomorrow. Any way, it's basically what I wrote before - if I want to control units, I want to control units and little else (Total War etc); if I want to breed monsters, I breed monsters (Pokemon etc); if I want to level up my character, I'll play a crpg of some sort (like Dungeon Crawl, or some other roguelike). Trying to do all at once slows all parts of it down too much for my like. It could still be a good game, though - it just wouldn't be to my spesific tastes.</STRONG>
Actually it wouldnt be such hardcore as you think. In dominions you can control hundreds or thousands of units. In my dream game you would control much less. Each and every unit in the army would be important. Think about a game like Age of Wonders but with a much more complex military system. As for the number of units...well of course there wouldnt be limit regarding the numbers, however all units would have upkeep [gold/food/special resources/mana etc.] These would limit the size of the armies. Of course bigger empire -> bigger army.
Ive never considered Doms 3. a complex game ever. Regular strategy players might consider it a complex game at first look, but its very far from "complex". I dont say that its bad, however the market would need a real hardcore - complex strategy game. That is my dream game. :)
Why? Because lots of people are waiting for a game like that, but sadly there wont be any. If I would have a few millions to spend, I wouldnt hesitate to hire developers to make this game. :D
[ September 20, 2007: Message edited by: Tormy ]
Combat would take inspiration from the Games Workshop tabletop game Gorkamorka, in which you would control a gang of Orks as they rode around the desert on trucks and bikes collecting scrap and fighting, gaining experience as they raced around such. The exact implementation I would like to see would be more like the game X-Com's tactical combat, but having a "team" or "gang" of distinct recruited characters which ride around together and have adventures is an important aspect of the idea, and to fight scavenger wars in the wilderness with rival gangs or hostile locals fits the feel I'm going for.
Individual members of the gang have their own skill sets and abilities, no rigid character classes, just general specializations by the skills they practice -- doctor, mechanic, brute, things like that. Beyond that, they'd have personality and relationships with each other and outside the gang, similar to a household in The Sims. The television show Firefly has a group of diverse characters riding around in a beat up old ship having adventures, and gives an idea of the feel I'm going for here.
In addition to combat and personal dynamics, vehicles, a ship, or some other kind of mechanical "stuff" to manage and serve as a mobile home of sorts in your squad's adventures is important, complete with customizations, strap-on weapons, etc., and a home base of some sort, whether it be a cave or bunker or some kind of surface structure, even a building in a city. Regardless of what it is, to be customizable and designable relatively freely would be important, with inspirations here both from The Sims and Dwarf Fortress.
Ideally, I would like it to be such that fighting and acting like a gang or fighting unit rather than just a family or group of friends would be completely optional and unnecessary, with plenty of opportunities to either work on self-sufficiency by scratching out survival in the wilderness, similar to Dwarf Fortress, or to participate in civilization more directly by passing your trades as doctor, mechanic, and what have you, like the Sims.
Eventually, to be able to have a sort of permanent wilderness settlement grow into a small town like in Dwarf Fortress would be nice, whether because others are settling right nearby and working with your people as NPCs, or because your group grows bigger and bigger until you spend little time micromanaging them. The Sims would do all of this by simply letting you start a new family and having them move next to your old family and build a home next door. That kind of player-dominated development, with the computer maintaining your other characters in the same world when you aren't using them, is probably what I would settle on.
Essentially, it would have the world building of Dwarf Fortress, small scale and character interactions of The Sims, and the combat and squad management of X-Com, wrapped in a sort of space western or post-apocalyptic setting.