I'm on play through 4, though Halo 4 might slow me down some. Classic Iron Man is a brutal mistress.

 I beat it in my first playthrough on Classic, so I decided to do Impossible Ironman for my second game... after wiping in my first mission about 3 times, I decided to go Classic Ironman.  I had to restart probably about five or six times but finally got a game going that I can win.  It can be a really challenging game and losing is part of it.  Not many games out there (outside of sports games) where its expected that you can lose really REALLY SPECTACULARLY bad.  It is a great game though.

I want to get Halo 4, but I think I may wait until Christmas to have some time to play it.  It looks pretty good though.

Just FYI, Xcom's also on PC :D

This game was made for the console, not the PC like the original was...thus the details are missing.  No multiple bases, aliens don't attack your home base, etc.  Overall I like it but it's dumbed down for the console..and I'm not ripping consoles I love my xbox but PC games have always been superior to console games in the past.  As I've said in the past console games are where the money is so advanced games are not going to be made for the PC when they can sell 10 times as many for the console.  Sad but true

@Hobbs, I would disagree with you on exactly why things were changed from the original during this new game's development. It actually has nothing to do with dumbing it down for the consoles (though the action cameras during kills probably were added to bring in fps and tps kiddies). If you read about the development, the team began be completely recreating the original game from scratch in the new engine. From there, they worked very hard to tweek, add, and remove things that just didn't work for a number of reasons (balance mostly).

There are a large number of YouTube videos with Jake Solomon, from the Dev team. I encourage you to seek them out. I've been following this game's progress closely, and from everything I can gather, it totally was not "Dumbed down for the consoles".
(either way, great fraking game)

-Chuck

Chuck should know...biggest Xcom fan i Know!

Wasn't there an X-com game on the PC years ago like 15 years ago or more, maybe even 20 years ago

almost...yes as mentioned in my review this is basically a remake or reimagining of the original 1994 PC game.  There were also several sequels that came out over the years.

@Hobbs and  Cyanide Rush, Cyanide Rush had it right.  The game was developed for both consoles and the PC.  The choices that were made like your home base not being attacked, no multiple bases etc. had nothing to do with dumbing the game down for consoles.  Those were conscious design choices.  In some ways the new X-Com is harder than the original because you can't have multiple bases, because they hobble you to a starting squad of 4 in the beginning of the game, and because you can only have one ship to send your troops to in missions.

I have the new XCom for my PC through Steam & I love it.  I also feel like people have placed the original game on a pedestal and the passage of time has given the original game (which is one of the greatest games of all time) a sheen where people overlook it's flaws.  It wasn't perfect.  Neither is the new one.  It is buggy, and the linear nature of the game doesn't make it as fun in terms of replayability to me as the original was with it's sandbox take.

As far as how many copies of the game they sold, my guess is they actually sold more on PC through Steam than on the consoles because the biggest base for the games were old timers who probably played the original.  I can't prove that, its just my opinion and I admit I could be wrong, but it looked like it sold pretty well on Steam.