Interview Jagged Alliance 3D posers and ponderings at GameZone

Tags: Jagged Alliance 3D

<a href="http://pc.gamezone.com/">GameZone</a> has an <a href="http://pc.gamezone.com/news/07_26_06_09_16AM.htm">interview</a> with <b>Max Tumin</b> about <A href="http://www.mistgames.ru/">MIST Land</a>'s big score, <a href="http://www.mistgames.ru/eng/projects.php?project_id=2">Jagged Alliance 3D</a>. The interview covers such topics as cancellation rumors, graphics, and this:
<br>
<blockquote><b>Q: Does this title take the gameplay of the franchise in a new direction or do you rely on the tried-and-true mechanics of the previous titles in the series?
<br>
<br>
Max:</b> We are using the original game mechanics from JA1-2 as it was planned by Strategy First and because we think that the original game’s mechanics and combat system is almost perfect (thanks to our predecessors). So we have tried to do our best to expand tactical opportunities without reworking the original stuff. </blockquote>
<br>
I wouldn't mind a better character system, but the mechanics were pretty good in the sequel.
<br>
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.shacknews.com">Shack News</A>

 

I hope that they see more of that Russian Mafia money to back up the production of this game than any of their previous ones did. They could use the budget.

 

There is also an interview on polish site gry.o2.pl

The three most important things that i haven't heard earlier:

*In conversations, you will use dialog trees (just like in RPGs).
*The story is not linear just like the gameplay.
*There are 30 mercenaries from JA2.

 

http://gry.o2.pl/publicystyka_special/?co=pokaz&id=34

 

Jagged Alliance 2 vs Fallout Tactics

I am planning on getting either Jagged Alliance 2 or Fallout Tactics.

Which one is the better game?

 

Jagged Alliance 2. It's open ended with world map travel. It has destructible terrain whereas Fallout Tactics allows your hardcore band of post nuclear boyos to be blocked by chain link fences.

I think one of the big let downs of Fallout Tactics was they billed it as JA2 in the Fallout universe, when they totally screwed up the Fallout universe and didn't come close to the depth of gameplay as JA2 had.

 

Doing this 3D thing just have a series of linear missions?

 

Fallout tactics is still worth it considering that JA2 is beggining to stretch my graphics tollerance a little too much now. And SPECIAL is just so damn good.

 

what the fuck is a 'graphics tolerance'?

And SPECIAL is horrible in FO:T.

 

SPECIAL is pointless is FO:T , most of the skills are redundant and a waste of skill points.

 

FOT should be good, technically I couldn't find any defects - but somehow it does not work.

Maybe it's that it's too like Fallout combat. You rely on a small number of people each with unique skills and 'personality'. But you're taking out fifty or more enemies every mission with a five man squad, so they have to make it difficult for you to die. It's not just unrealistic, also with a such a small squad you just can't have that deep tactics.

 

FO:T was trash because of the action points, for the most part. You can't turn a real time game into a turn-based one without screwing it up. Most games are developed the other way around, but not FO:T.

 

Err, my capacity to look at my screen while it tries to burn my eyes out ?
Well, maybe you guys still have 14" EGA monitors, but on mine most old games show pixelized images as if they were build with Legos.

And on SPECIAL, may I disagree ? And do you have a better system in mind for a tactical squad based game ? Maybe D20 (lol) ? Or "use use use" like in Silent Storm (aka "Bethesda system") ?

 

You may disagree, naturally. It's your privilege to be dumb.

 

I don't know about that. Those MIST Land guys are a bunch of tossers. Every single game they released so far been crap. JA3D is going to be crap as well. There's no chance of it ever being good.

 

yeah, bethesda sure did invent skill-raise-by-use.

JA2 also had 'use use use', incase you forgot. So yeah, i'd say 'use use use' is probably the best.

Also, concering SPECIAL in a tactical game like FO:T, mind telling me when the C and I ever did anything useful?

Strength - carrying
Perception - shooting
Endurance - not dying
Charisma - WORTHLESS
Intelligence - WORTHLESS
Agility - more shooting
Luck - more critical shooting

how about how well SPECIAL's associated skills did in FO:T? They were either too strong or useless.

Speech? Bartering?

SPECIAL is for single player RPGs.


The best for a tacical game is designing your guys base design for whatever role he's gonna be playing in your squad and then having his skills improve over usage.

 

Have you not played ToEE? Or any game of D&D? The d20 system is actually really good for small scale fantasy combat.

Given that Silent Storm was one of the best tactical combat games in recent memory, it must have been doing something right.

 

Now you say this, but on a scale of 1 to 20, what would you score Silent Storm, compared to the original Xcom?

 

The only thing you need for SPECIAL to suport teams is already there with sequencing, turns and action points. What else do you need? The fact is that idea of controling your companions just with verbal orders failed miserably in Fallout, Neverwinter Nights, and other games that tried to streamline teams.

FOT team turnbase worked very well. Action in FOT is just an option to dumbdown TB with the computer switching turns for the playeron short periods of time. The problem is that FOT is just a tactical combat game and not an rpg. That removed the biggest purpose for Fallout players to play it.

 

Don't make excuses for it. The biggest problem with FOT was that it was a shitty tactical game.

 

I tought the biggest problem is that it isn't a rpg. It's a shitty game compared to what? You will find few tactical combat games that match FOT.

 

The "use" system was one of the bad points of Silent Storm's system. Fallout Tactics is a pretty crappy game. I'm not sure what it's supposed to be but it fails either way.

 

http://archive.gamespy.com/reviews/marc ... ndex2.shtm

http://pc.ign.com/articles/164/164875p1.html

Yes what a shitty tactical combat game.

While i don't consider FT a better game than JA2 because of the effort wasted creating on a crappy linear story there isn't much in terms of tactical that both games are missing.

JA2 is a huge semless tactical combat scenario (it's strong point):

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/003/00355 ... 23992.html

Fallout tactics scenarios are big and complex enough to make you use multiple skills like stealth, heavy guns, vehicles, repair skill, disarm traps skill,medical, etc

The only donwside is the lack of use for speech that is used in JA2 for convincing people to join your cause and get you access to some cool stuff. Have fun playing both games.

 

Multiple skills? Don't make me laugh. Five guys with Browning M2s can basically destroy anything in a map. The sixth can take an energy weapon and "pilot."

 

Mm thats a good indication of not having played FT that long or having cheated . The Browning M2s need a minimum strength value to be used that is very big for most chars, plus it's ammo starts to become too scarse to be useful for 5 guys after the middle of the game. Even if you use such a team you could not complete the some maps like hostage situations that need a slent kill or it would be unnecessary hard or expensive to navigate without a scout to spot ambushing snipers or disarm mine fields so that you can pass with your vehicle. Turrets for example are a waste of ammo to destroy with snipper or rockets. Use armored vehicles for cover then repair them. If you just let yourself die instead of using a scout to know where the enemies are and then reload thats cheating. If you played the entire game using that team you would have gone very far. At the end levels you can really use a science skilled dude and the Browning is worthless for the ammo it wastes against the robots. The only ammo that has any effect are laser or plasma and magnesium shells.