RPGWatch Forums - JA: Back in Action - Preview @ Hooked Gamers

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)

- News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - JA: Back in Action - Preview @ Hooked Gamers (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15935)

JA: Back in Action - Preview @ Hooked Gamers

Hooked Gamers has penned a review for this game. A quote:

Quote:

Jagged Alliance: Back in Action is a remake of Jagged Alliance 2. Rather than making a sequel, it would seem that Kalypso and bitComposer are testing the waters, determining the viability of a full sequel. The series still has a very vocal and dedicated following, but how big? No one really knows but they sure have been modding the crap out of Jagged Alliance 2 for over a decade.
The remake also paves the way for a number of changes and improvements, not in the least in the graphics department. Despite those changes, Back in Action will feel very familiar to anyone who has played the original 1999 game. The player is contacted by Enrico Chivaldori, former ruler of a small tropical island called Arulco. Enrico tasks you to remove his oppressive ex wife from the throne she stole right out from under him through deceit. Queen Deidranna, of course, isn’t going to respond well to you pounding on her door telling her to scram. You will have to fight for each and every inch of Arulco’s jungle, swamp and desert areas. As you get closer to her seat of power, the enemies will get tougher and ever more determined. You have your work cut out for you.

More information.

Just to make sure no one here overlooked this [I read it in a different interview as well]: Back in Action is a blow-by-blow remake of JA2, meaning you start out with the same mercs taking the same airstrip in the same fictional country. Fans of JA2 who have played it half a dozen times, or more, are not going to be surprised by much, especially with no line-of-sight restrictions on enemies.

I can't see this as being a game for JA2 fans. They are trashing the TB combat and keeping the rest of the game. If they were aiming the game at the fans they would keep the awesome combat and make new maps and scenario.

Will be hard for it to be a good game, especially as it has to compete with 1.13 and not just the old JA2.

Thats not exactly new information but yes the old maps suck. I'm surprised they couldn't at least revamp the maps a little. I've still got the game on my radar but will either need to be cheap or reasonably good for me to pick it up. Unfortunately, tactical RPGs are few and far between so whatever is out there has to be supported where possible if we are to see anything else in the genre I guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by figment (Post 1061120186)

I agree with you 100%. Tactical RPG's are my favourite but they're to few and far between, especially the good ones. I have my hopes up both for this and the new X-com though, but maybe I'm just being naive…

Quote:

Originally Posted by screeg (Post 1061120077)

…especially with no line-of-sight restrictions on enemies.

I also read this a while back, but the gameplay videos I have seen and posted in another thread weeks ago show that line-of-sight restrictions are in, at least whenever those videos were made.

Also, Steam has a release date of Feb. 9 posted and is currently offering a pre-order sale price of $34US, or 15% off.

Well, any enthusiasm I had for this game is gone. Those videos I mentioned that had line of sight in them were definitely older than this preview from earlier this month:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012…ack-in-action/

I could live with real time with autopause options, but having no line of sight is a deal breaker for me, I think. Seems I'll be passing on this game after all.

Brand recognition means crap if you're not a big studio. Just look at how Syndicate reception was kinda bad at first, but the mainstream still gave it so much coverage because it's a big corp doing it.

While JA: Back in Action was completely ignored till release dates are near. Kinda pisses me off to be honest.