so i just found out about the development struggles of xcom 2, specifically with its procedural map generation. apparently, the team at firaxis wanted to include this feature in the first game, xcom: enemy unknown, but it just wasn't working out. they were experimenting with it, but the results were kinda laughable - like, who puts a trash can in the middle of a wheat field?



i can understand why they decided to ditch the idea back then, though. the team had a lot on their plate, and creating a bunch of handcrafted maps was a more feasible option. it's not like it was a bad decision or anything - those handcrafted maps were really high quality, and it's clear that the team put a lot of effort into making them. but, of course, the downside is that players would eventually see the same maps over and over again.



it's pretty cool that the team didn't give up on the idea of procedural generation, though. when they started working on xcom 2, they made it a top priority. garth deangelis, one of the developers, said he was really eager to "crack the code" and make procedural maps work. and it's not just about challenging themselves - they wanted to surprise players and give them a fresh experience every time they played.



i love that the team was able to learn from their mistakes and use that knowledge to improve xcom 2. they even had a small team working on prototyping procedural maps while the rest of the team was working on the enemy within expansion. it's awesome to see how much effort and dedication went into making xcom 2 the best game it could be. and, let's be real, procedural generation is a total game changer - it adds soRead more: Full article on www.rockpapershotgun.com

What do you think about this?