81 replies to this topic

[Tiesemans]

My favorite games magazine in Europe called Gameplay* has reviewed a Release Candidate version of Jagged Alliance back in action (*The magazine used to be called Pc Gameplay for many years)

And guess what > Conclusion: Every hardcore Jagged Alliance fan should not buy if hoping for anything like Jagged Alliance 1 or 2.
BUT if you are just a basic tactical games playing person who likes stories about a long time ago glorious game title go ahead, take a chance and buy a game that deserves receives a skinny 7 score.

+ Tactically enough challenge to be called a tactical game.
+ Reasonable graphics

- Sad making physics
- AI screws up regularly
- Clipping problems
- No AP system
- Replay value poor at best

(I personally feel sick to my stomach).

I think a group of hard working people should be very ashamed VERY ashamed having used the Jagged Alliance name !
7,62 or Brigade E5 or even Jagged edge, hired guns redux would have been a more appropriate name to (ab)use.

Well at least, dear fellow forum readers, we can comfort ourself with the thought that people hoping for good old Syndicate (Bullfrog) times will be crying out their eyes when they play the new Syndicate game !
Jagged Alliance fans are not the only ones screwed over by money hungry game developers and publishing companies abusing a golden title to attract possible buyers.
However thank the lord, Xcom: enemy unknown will bless our souls with some comforting good olé AP and untouched core gameplay bringing back good old days.

[LtChambers]

No video review?

[Sven]

from what date is the test? if i read it correct there was a AI update 2-3 weeks ago

[Gizzardpuke]

However thank the lord, Xcom: enemy unknown will bless our souls with some comforting good olé AP and untouched core gameplay bringing back good old days.

prolly gonna suck too

[bitComposer_Michael]

Hm. Okay. That is weird. There's an embargo for reviews up to 6. February. And this seems to be a print magazine (I don't really know). Which means the deadline for articles was back in January. Which would mean they wrote the review based upon the preview-code. Thanks for the information anyways.

[Mindless]

Firaxis is removing some elements from XCOM as well, no ammo for weapons, the TU's are removed (still turnbased at least, but "move" and "shoot" are seperated),some aliens have been changed (the way they look and/or act), base building has been changed (and you only have ONE base), soldiers now have perks... and so on.

Some of the changes sound good, other don't. Like your rocket launcher having to "recharge" for four turn before it can shoot again (as there's no ammo), that I don't like. XCOM will also have soldier classes (Heavy Weapons, Sniper and Assault has been confirmed so far), each class with it's own perks and bonuses. At least it remains a TBS game...

I expected nothing more from BiA... I will still try the demo when/if it's released and as a old JA fan I will try my best to get in to it, but I don't have much faith. I simply don't understand how bitComposer could have removed so much of what made Jagged Alliance so awesome... and think it would end well? They really should have just called the game something else...

And yes, X-COM FPS's and Syndicate as a FPS... Majesty was messed with few years back as well, I don't understand why Dev's can't just leave well enough alone!? Nival did a rather good job with their HOMM remake and the new Max Payne doesn't look to bad so far... and then there was Soldier of Fortune Payback as well! What where they thinking!? Activision Value... that was such an insult to the first 2 games!

[Bishie]

They really should have just called the game something else...

I couldn't agree more, because then I'd judge the game on it's own merits. But now I keep comparing it to Jagged Alliance 2, lowering the score substantionally.

[Peal]

And guess what > Conclusion: Every hardcore Jagged Alliance fan should not buy if hoping for anything like Jagged Alliance 1 or 2.
BUT if you are just a basic tactical games playing person who likes stories about a long time ago glorious game title go ahead, take a chance and buy a game that deserves receives a skinny 7 score.

Exactly my opinion, at best it is a 7 or a 70% and don't expect a Jagged Alliance game at all. See this as Hired Guns 2 if you wanna play it, but for me it does not deserve to be called Jagged Alliance. So not saying that it cannot be fun for a short while. I played Hired Guns and i had fun for a very short and limited time, the question is: Is it worth the money?

And i do think "Professional Gaming Magazines" will continue to rate BIA this way. And this is well deserved.

[Peal]

I couldn't agree more, because then I'd judge the game on it's own merits. But now I keep comparing it to Jagged Alliance 2, lowering the score substantionally.

Exactly

[bitComposer_Michael]

Peal as said before: The review is based on the preview build. Definitely.

[Bishie]

Peal as said before: The review is based on the preview build. Definitely.

So are you saying all these are fixed?


- Sad making physics
- AI screws up regularly
- Clipping problems
- No AP system
- Replay value poor at best

[Peal]

Peal as said before: The review is based on the preview build. Definitely.

What changed? A little bit bugfixing and a little better KI (what we have to proof), so it is 75% - doesn't change anything for me! And again if this was called Hired Guns 2 i would applaud for the improvements i really would!

[bitComposer_Michael]

Dunno what they mean with the physics tbh.
AI doesn't screw up anymore (that was a bug in the preview build which caused that)
clipping is correct (especially weapons do not always clip correctly)
ap system: Well, that's their opinion and that's okay
replay value poor at best? well, dunno how they feel about JA2. But guess it'd be the same.

to make it clear: The AI critic leads me to the conclusion that this review is based on the early version of the preview build since these screw ups do not show up anymore.

[BigFaTlaDy]

Well, that's their opinion and that's okay

Time for a hard wakeup call, but hey I'm guessing ...

Just try to ignore them like you ignore me ^^

have fun

[Bishie]

Fair enough...
About the replay value I'd have to actually play the game myself to make that judgement call (the full game and not the demo).
The physics part could be how soldiers die and/or move around, dunno but they found it as a minus. o.O

Anyway, I'm still very much convinced this game would go over better if it had nothing to do with JA2 from the start and stood on it's own two feet (ala Silent Storm that was fantastic on it's own, however would they have called it Jagged Alliance: Before Arulco I would have rated it lower due to critical elements missing from the game).

[Peal]

Yeah, sad making physics could be, that you are not allowed to destroy anything, so no fully destroy able environment !?

[Bishie]

Yeah, sad making physics could be, that you are not allowed to destroy anything, so no fully destroy able environment !?

I'm actually surprised by this since an older game such as silent storm did it without (or so it seems) problems and that was like what, 5 years ago. O.o
From a little studio in russia who probably didn't have the same budget as coreplay does.

[Peal]

bitComposer said that they aren't making a turnbased game, because the engine cannot handle square fields. Also the predefined bomb spots and climbing spots, all be cause the engine does not allow it otherwise.

So my theory is, it was too expensive to modify the engine from coreplay.

[Sven]

I'm actually surprised by this since an older game such as silent storm did it without (or so it seems) problems and that was like what, 5 years ago. O.o
From a little studio in russia who probably didn't have the same budget as coreplay does.

oh yes withot problems, in one mission you can destroy a ladder and not can't be sucessfull.

a full destroyable environment is not always good, in Silent Storm some times i only destroy with my Machinguns the buildings, and it wasn't realistic. The best was a shot with a gun through the massiv wall and "kill" the floor, enemy fall and die. If you have massiv buildings you need a big firepower to destroy it, unrealistic to fire with 9mm or 5,56mm on it and after a few rounds you had a big hole in the Wall, same with granades, many granades are for anti-person use, if they detonate on a "massiv" Wall it only take a few scratches. JA2 was a good example that only explosivs work good, all other is only effectiv with massiv fire and as Excemple in Germany the standard rifle G36 with 5,56mm is bad for building fights, so they want the G3 back.

[BigFaTlaDy]

oh yes withot problems, in one mission you can destroy a ladder and not can't be sucessfull.

a full destroyable environment is not always good, in Silent Storm some times i only destroy with my Machinguns the buildings, and it wasn't realistic. The best was a shot with a gun through the massiv wall and "kill" the floor, enemy fall and die. If you have massiv buildings you need a big firepower to destroy it, unrealistic to fire with 9mm or 5,56mm on it and after a few rounds you had a big hole in the Wall, same with granades, many granades are for anti-person use, if they detonate on a "massiv" Wall it only take a few scratches. JA2 was a good example that only explosivs work good, all other is only effectiv with massiv fire and as Excemple in Germany the standard rifle G36 with 5,56mm is bad for building fights, so they want the G3 back.

Fully destroyable enviroment does not mean, that you can destroy buildings with you MG ... I think we don't need to discuss that everybody wants an fully destructible environment in a game like Jagged Alliance.