View Single Post

Default 

February 9th, 2013, 19:56
Not sure how you came to that conclusion. It seemed generally in-line with how I'd expect Fallout or Wasteland 1 to handle a similar situation. I mean, I'm not saying it's impossible, but I think you have to do an awful lot of assuming and reaching here, especially to call this a Jagged Alliance style game.
Well, what I saw there was too much strategy, too little interaction. Hence the comparison with Jagged Alliance. Fallout had tactital combat, but nevertheless it was a role playing game - and not just because it had RPG rules, skills and all that jazz. It was an RPG, with tactical combat.

Again, the mid-90's comparison seems absurd. I mean.. do you remember what games looked like in the mid-90's? If I really wanted to compare the graphics of Krater and WL2, I'd argue that, even at this early stage, Krater is found wanting.
You skipped over the part I wrote about looking like a graphic overhaul of a mid 90s game. But then I corrected that, mid 90s would be unfair, more like late 90s. Graphic overhaul, not really like 90s graphics.

In any case, Krater was pretty obviously going for Diablo-clone status right away. This is an RPG, at least as far as we all understand the term. You'd have to assume a lot in order to be convinced it's a straight strategy game.
I agree that Krater went for the skirmish thing… But I can't clearly see an RPG there, except for what is being said about the game. What is shown, looks like turn-based strategy. That's what I saw, maybe I'm prejudiced about it because I do not like tactical combat.
MigRib is offline

MigRib

Watchdog

#38

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Portugal
Posts: 160