THQ Nordic - Jagged Alliance leaked

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
RT party based products are not in.

MU modes are.

What are MU modes?

Originally Posted by Kordanor
That was more related to the timeframe wehen BiA was released and nobody could wait to finally get rid of their turn based systems. Starting with XCom in Apocalypse and Fallout with Tactics.

True for both of those for sure, RT was all the rage back then. I never did get into Apocalypse because of it, enjoyed Fallout Tactics though.

Originally Posted by TomRon
What are MU modes?

My guess is that he means Multi User modes.

Originally Posted by Kordanor
My guess is that he means Multi User modes.

Yeah, I thought about that as well, considering he likes to use obscure terminology. So basically MP then, which I agree seems to the THE feature to have right now. Because no one wants to play their games alone right?

Originally Posted by TomRon
Yeah, I thought about that as well, considering he likes to use obscure terminology. So basically MP then, which I agree seems to the THE feature to have right now. Because no one wants to play their games alone right?

Because multi-player games have exponentially more opportunity for microtransactions, DLC, and extended profit.

Originally Posted by screeg
Because multi-player games have exponentially more opportunity for microtransactions, DLC, and extended profit.

Exactly. And who doesn't want that in their games?

So will this be new game or face lift of old game?

So far it's just a leak. So we'll have to see I guess.

Originally Posted by screeg
Because multi-player games have exponentially more opportunity for microtransactions, DLC, and extended profit.

And don't forget lazy developers not wanting to tackle the difficult job of coding decent AI. It's so much easier to just make a map and let players duke it out with each other.

Originally Posted by Kordanor
That was more related to the timeframe wehen BiA was released and nobody could wait to finally get rid of their turn based systems. Starting with XCom in Apocalypse and Fallout with Tactics.

Don't forget Arcanum.

Also, how many of these games are real-time because it's what the devs wanted versus something dictated to the devs by publishers?

As for the new JA, I would rather have another JA2 expansion than an entirely new game (that will most likely not be very good).

I certainly hope it's not just a polished version of the first game, because that was utterly inferior to the sequel.

JA2 doesn't really need a remaster - as it still looks pretty good all things considered, and there are fan patches out there to make it easy to handle on modern hardware.

Maybe if they added cooperative multiplayer….. Now that would be something

I hope it is a new game and not just an other remaster. If they do something like the modern Xcom games, i'm happy.

Originally Posted by NewDArt
I certainly hope it's not just a polished version of the first game, because that was utterly inferior to the sequel.

I wouldn't even say so. When I played JA2 I was actually disappointed at first.
JA1 offers:
-You fight for each and every sector
-After each day, you see a cool replay on what you accomplished that day
-The management of people and guards harvesting the trees was more interesting than the mines
-You had levels which required you to be stealthy. Otherwise they'd trigger an alarm and make big parts of a level explode, including valuable items
-You had some devices which allowed you to "listen in" to conversations of enemies (though I have no idea if that had some actual value)

So I don't think like the second game is extremely inferior to the second. And if they redid the first one with the same features it had back then with newer graphics and mechanics of the second game I'd actually be happy.

Maybe if they added cooperative multiplayer….. Now that would be something

That was something I loved to do in Jagged Alliance Deadly games. Basically used the level editor to make all levels completable by two parties, added lots of own levels and then played with a friends hundreds of maps (over the point when the map counter display in the game broke).
Btw: They also announced in the early 2000s that Jagged Alliance 3 should have multiplayer modes where multiple groups (I think it was 3 or 4) could fight on one island. That was ofc before JA3D came up which was then also scrapped.

Originally Posted by Kordanor
I wouldn't even say so. When I played JA2 I was actually disappointed at first.
JA1 offers:
-You fight for each and every sector
-After each day, you see a cool replay on what you accomplished that day
-The management of people and guards harvesting the trees was more interesting than the mines
-You had levels which required you to be stealthy. Otherwise they'd trigger an alarm and make big parts of a level explode, including valuable items
-You had some devices which allowed you to "listen in" to conversations of enemies (though I have no idea if that had some actual value)

So I don't think like the second game is extremely inferior to the second. And if they redid the first one with the same features it had back then with newer graphics and mechanics of the second game I'd actually be happy.

Fair enough, to each his own.

I thought JA2 was vastly superior in almost every way - and especially in terms of the most important tactical combat/RPG aspects.

That said, it's been so long that I don't remember much from the first game. I just remember that it came after I played X-Com and considered it a joke in comparison. JA2, however, was actually better than X-Com in many ways - which is one reason I admired it so much.

Also, I seem to remember JA1 had no strategic layer to speak of? Damn, I'm getting old - but that would definitely have been another big reason for my dislike.

That was something I loved to do in Jagged Alliance Deadly games. Basically used the level editor to make all levels completable by two parties, added lots of own levels and then played with a friends hundreds of maps (over the point when the map counter display in the game broke).
Btw: They also announced in the early 2000s that Jagged Alliance 3 should have multiplayer modes where multiple groups (I think it was 3 or 4) could fight on one island. That was ofc before JA3D came up which was then also scrapped.

Never tried that. But the games, along with X-Com - are perfectly suited for cooperatively gameplay.

Also, I once dreamed of an X-Com sequel where one side of players would control the Aliens - and the other side would control X-Com - with two separate tech trees and so forth

Originally Posted by NewDArt
Also, I seem to remember JA1 had no strategic layer to speak of? Damn, I'm getting old - but that would definitely have been another big reason for my dislike.

I'd say that JA1 was far superior to XCom / Terror from the Deep as it already offered many more tactical options and more fine tuning.
It did not have any kind of research though (but JA2 did neither).

The strategic layer was about similar to that of JA2. You had sectors with these special trees you needed to harvest all around the map and you needed to station harvester (native people collecting the fruits) on these maps.
Furthermore you also positioned guards. Unlike in JA2 you where allowed to place them everywhere, not just in special sectors as in the second game, so you could basically make a big front line of guards.
The first game did not have any cities though and as far as I remember no friendly NPCs in general. I also don't think you were able to buy any items (which had it's first appearance in Deadly Games, where there was basically an auction between the human players for Mickeys wares)

Originally Posted by Kordanor
I'd say that JA1 was far superior to XCom / Terror from the Deep as it already offered many more tactical options and more fine tuning.
It did not have any kind of research though (but JA2 did neither).

Again, to each his own

To me, the research/interrogation and overall atmosphere in X-Com was far more interesting. It had a much more story-oriented feel and I loved the "Man vs Alien" concept as well as the horror in certain enemies. Also, TFtD holds a special place in my heart for being underwater

I really enjoyed the basebuilding, too. Did JA1 have that?

The strategic layer was about similar to that of JA2. You had sectors with these special trees you needed to harvest all around the map and you needed to station harvester (native people collecting the fruits) on these maps.
Furthermore you also positioned guards. Unlike in JA2 you where allowed to place them everywhere, not just in special sectors as in the second game, so you could basically make a big front line of guards.
The first game did not have any cities though and as far as I remember no friendly NPCs in general. I also don't think you were able to buy any items (which had it's first appearance in Deadly Games, where there was basically an auction between the human players for Mickeys wares)

It's been too long, clearly

Originally Posted by NewDArt
Again, to each his own

To me, the research/interrogation and overall atmosphere in X-Com was far more interesting. It had a much more story-oriented feel and I loved the "Man vs Alien" concept as well as the horror in certain enemies. Also, TFtD holds a special place in my heart for being underwater

I really enjoyed the basebuilding, too. Did JA1 have that?



It's been too long, clearly

I find it hard to compare these two games in terms of atmosphere. But I'd say that Terror from the Deep had the tenser atmosphere for sure (btw I never really played the first game, but as far as I understand TftD is basially a reskinned, harder and slightly improved version of the original XCom/UFO).

There is no basebuilding in the first JA1 game, but neither is there in any other part of the series. Unless you consider improving your outpost for better items and stuff in Jagged Alliance Online as "base building".

Originally Posted by Kordanor
I find it hard to compare these two games in terms of atmosphere. But I'd say that Terror from the Deep had the tenser atmosphere for sure (btw I never really played the first game, but as far as I understand TftD is basially a reskinned, harder and slightly improved version of the original XCom/UFO).

There is no basebuilding in the first JA1 game, but neither is there in any other part of the series. Unless you consider improving your outpost for better items and stuff in Jagged Alliance Online as "base building".

I know, and I do prefer X-Com vastly to both JA and JA2. I don't find "realistic" (I know it's not entirely contemporary) military settings very interesting at all.

For JA1 - I didn't even complete a single mission IIRC. I just dismissed it out of hand for not having whatever I wanted from it, back then.

I never completed JA2 or anything - but did play it quite a bit on release.

I loved the RPG elements and the detail related to weapons and the core mechanics. Also, having all companions voiced was highly unusual at the time - which was really cool.

But X-Com and the "grander" freeform approach - coupled with all the lore related to research and interrogation was much more in line with my preferences.

I'm a big sci-fi fan.

TFtD was just a reskin, definitely - and it was often too much of a good thing (hunting that lone alien left on huge multi-level ships was a nightmare) - but it was still much more my thing.

I'm with Dart on this one. I love JA2, but compared to UFO:Enemy unknown and Tftd all other games feel lacking. The new XCOM are fun, but I was never actually scared in them, and the simplification of the strategic layer hurt them in my opinion (the tactical is fun enough, although I dislike the engagement mechanics of the first, the second was better).

Well, you can play Xenonauts. You get some of the best of both series.