When Bit Reactor announced its formation in 2021, most people in gaming media didn’t quite know what to make of it. A new studio, founded by former Firaxis developers, focused entirely on turn-based tactics games, just as the rest of the industry was moving in the opposite direction. But to people who know the genre, it made perfect sense. Strategy fans don’t want faster. They want smarter. Bit Reactor is betting that there’s a much bigger audience for that than publishers give credit for.
Now they’re making Star Wars: Zero Company, a turn-based tactical campaign set during the Clone Wars. It’s a bold project for a new studio, especially one trying to modernise a genre that’s traditionally niche. But they’re not starting from scratch. Bit Reactor was built by the team that helped reboot XCOM. They know what they’re doing.
The studio was founded in Hunt Valley, Maryland by Greg Foertsch, who spent years at Firaxis as art director on games like XCOM: Enemy Unknown, XCOM 2, and Civilization IV. He’s joined by a small team of developers who’ve worked on strategy games that still hold up ten years later. Their mission is simple: take turn-based tactics seriously. Not as indie projects or nostalgic rehashes, but as full-production, high-quality, mainstream releases.
From day one, they made their intentions clear. Bit Reactor is focused on single-player campaigns built around strong visual design, mechanical depth, and high production values. In 2025, that’s not the direction most studios are taking.
The decision to go turn-based is about control, measured pacing, clear outcomes, and meaningful choices. Tactics games give developers more room to tune difficulty, introduce consequence, and build tension over time. According to Foertsch, one of Bit Reactor’s core goals is to give players the same emotional investment and storytelling pay-off found in RPGs, but through mechanics instead of dialogue trees. In other words: you care about your squad because you’ve fought to keep them alive, not because a cutscene told you to.
The team also wants to modernise how tactics games look and feel. Their background in art direction and animation shows through in early material for Zero Company. UI is clean, movement is sharp, and the camera work has a cinematic touch that most grid-based games don’t even attempt. It’s designed as a modern Star Wars game built around turn-based tactics.
Star Wars: Zero Company is Bit Reactor’s debut title, but the team behind it is anything but new. This is a studio made up of senior developers who helped define the modern tactics genre. Many of them worked together at Firaxis on XCOM: Enemy Unknown, XCOM 2, and multiple Civilization entries. These weren’t background credits either. Key roles in art direction, gameplay systems, UI, and technical direction carried over into the new studio.
So while this is the first release under the Bit Reactor name, the team itself has shipped some of the most influential strategy games of the last decade. They’ve already dealt with the pacing problems, the balancing issues, the readability and interface challenges that come with turn-based systems. They’re using that experience to approach this project with clear priorities and updated tools.
The team at Bit Reactor is led by people who’ve already helped define modern turn-based strategy.
Greg Foertsch is the studio’s founder and CEO. Before launching Bit Reactor, he spent nearly two decades at Firaxis Games, where he served as art director on XCOM: Enemy Unknown, XCOM 2, and several Civilization titles. His work goes beyond visuals, tying presentation and gameplay together to support the mechanics directly. Bit Reactor reflects that, with a focus on clarity, tone, and visual cohesion across its systems.
Mark Randel, Bit Reactor’s CTO, was the founder and former technical director of Terminal Reality, the studio behind BloodRayne, Ghostbusters: The Video Game, and 4×4 EVO. He brings decades of engineering experience and system-level design knowledge, now focused on building the tools and tech to support Bit Reactor’s tactical ambitions. LinkedIn
John Lester, the studio’s design director, was a lead designer on XCOM 2 and XCOM: Chimera Squad. His work has focused on combat pacing, enemy design, and squad management systems, core components of what Bit Reactor is now building into Zero Company. LinkedIn
Aaron Contreras is contributing narrative direction at Bit Reactor. He previously worked as narrative lead on Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order and Jedi: Survivor, bringing strong franchise experience and story structure knowledge to the team. His involvement suggests Zero Company won’t just focus on mechanics—it’s aiming to deliver grounded, character-driven storytelling within the tactics framework.
The leadership team is drawing on years of experience with strategy games that combined depth with accessibility.
The game itself, Star Wars: Zero Company, is a single-player, squad-based campaign set during the Clone Wars. You’ll manage a customisable team, take on branching missions, and make decisions that affect the outcome of the story. The combat is turn-based and grid-based, with systems built around cover, flanking, suppression, and unit synergy. Characters can die. The squad can change. There’s no co-op or PvP planned. This is built as a self-contained experience, not a multiplayer sandbox.
Respawn is overseeing the project, while Bit Reactor leads development. One studio is leading development, while the other provides oversight and handles coordination with EA and Lucasfilm. Based on Respawn’s past projects, that usually means Bit Reactor will have space to execute their own design vision, without micromanagement from above. That’s a best-case setup when dealing with a big IP.
Bit Reactor is still a relatively small studio. Around 30 to 40 people, many of whom have worked together for years. That shared experience helps. The team is experienced, with a clear focus and the backing to execute it properly. They have a clear design goal and the right support around them.
There’s still plenty we don’t know about Star Wars: Zero Company. We haven’t seen full gameplay breakdowns, mission structure, or how deep the customisation runs. Based on what’s confirmed and who’s involved, this doesn’t look like a gamble. It’s a targeted return to strategy by people who’ve done it before, with a licence that still has room to do something new.