As you might imagine, the reveal of an XCOM breach-and-clear game caused me to raise an eyebrow, then another, then to construct a third synthetic eyebrow and raise it also. I think I just have to spew all my thoughts on this so apologies for the flood!

Firstly and primarily, of course: this looks great! This is what I want! I want this so much I am in the middle of making a game not too far from this!
.

The main overlaps I see are:

1. Splitting missions into isolated encounters - as @BreachWizards testers know, that's exactly how ours work.

2. Breaching, including redeploying to different entry points and breach abilities.

3. Fixed team of unique characters who mustn't die.

I don't imagine any of this came from our game, because a) we didn't invent any of it, b) they probably started before we showed anything, and c) most of @BreachWizards came from playing XCOM 2 a lot and thinking about the most logical ways to avoid some of its sticking points.

Also, for perspective, if I had to name the 3 defining features of @BreachWizards I'd say: wizards in tactical gear, free rewinds, and character-driven story - all outside the overlap.

We actually tried 'interleaved turns' in @BreachWizards. In the context of our game, it meant lots of vital information was only visible in the UI, and we were asking the player to model that in their head. It didn't create enough depth for us to pay for the awkwardness of that.

Not for the first time, I'm so glad we showed everything we could as early as we could. Having some overlap with a bigger name game is not generally a problem, but announcing a similar thing after theirs would make getting initial interest harder, I think.

And there'd be the extra frustration of "Argh, it looks like we're copying but we're not!" (In this particular way)

"Tactical Breach Lizards" - @MarshDavies