Solaris_Wave

It seems that way on general appearance. I sincerely hope it doesn't have any intent to draw the Fortnite generation. It should be doing everything it can to draw the Jagged Alliance veterans instead. There are plenty of us. In the pursuit of trying to attract the current generation of gamers, many publishers forget that there are all the other generations of gamers that came before and are just as relevant. It is like with music, there is always this push to latch onto the next big thing, as if anything older is seen as stale.

I have always watched these films sober and aware (I don't drink alcohol anyway). There is a part of me that enjoys the films for their creativity and attempt to show an alternate world. Not only that but there are parts of my childhood that became instantly fascinated by post-apocalypse settings and cars with armour and guns. Some films actually seem to work better with a lesser budget when showing a dystopian setting. It is hard to explain because I don't mean films that are so cheap that the outfits and sets look like they were made from cardboard boxes. The best way to describe it would be to use films like Escape From New York as a reference. There is a certain budget restriction that works in its favour. It isn't too glossy. Its sound and atmosphere is muted, the music is important but not vigorous (its synth style helps a lot as well). There are periods of quietness and just showing a scene. There are films that came out between 1970 and the mid '80s that have captured a certain feel for me that often gets lost in today's glossy presentation. They can have scenes with very little music and just showing a slowly panning landscape, for instance. It can convey desolation. You have remoteness from population, normality and structure. I am not saying that a big budget dystopian film/TV show doesn't work but they have to be careful in how they colour it, its use of music score and the willingness to dwell on a shot without wanting to cut to the next scene. Having said that, when you see a supposedly futuristic gun with several fixed barrels, a Lewis-gun styled round magazine and a standard magazine for the main gun, a double-barrel shotgun where the sights should be, a large flashlight on top of that shotgun, and then two bayonets, a harpoon and rocket launcher underneath the gun…you do have to take the whole thing with several pinches of salt!

I agree, it is the same presentation. Whether it is the same artist(s) or a similar style, you can see that the two games have the same vibrant colours for the characters, even if the fashion is entirely different.

Armoured transport!

I wonder how Haemimont could have created the mercs any differently for JA3? Could they have handled them without criticism? When you look at their JA2 versions, the mercs haven't got that much personality in their portraits, except for a certain few. Shadow looks characteristic of a serious professional by way of his face camo, Ivan has his ushanka and stern look to define his Russian Ivan Danko inspiration, Fox has her long hair and choker. Many though are just faces (not that we had a problem with that). It is only really in JA3 that I can see that there is more flamboyance to each portrait. Each portrait now stands out more, for better and worse. Was there an alternative that could have been employed by the artists, that conveyed their individualism without making them all look like similar soldiers? This is not a criticism at anybody who has said anything against their look (because I'm one of them) but more of an observation and curiosity. By trying to bring them more to life, was criticism inevitable?

I wonder if there has been any written documentation, either by Ian Currie or someone else, for the changes in character for the mercs? What I am specifically pinpointing here is deliberate canonical changes to their personalities. Are they just a reimagining of each character or something more script led? Why does Barry look like his day at the hardware store turned into a bloody gunfight, while Funky Magic (his new, full and complete name) now gets his groove on at the Soul Train?

Every time I look at Barry's angry, sombre face for JA3, he looks nothing like his JA2 version. Not only that but he looks a lot like Mike from GTA V.

I didn't need JA3 to be a reworking of JA2 but I was hoping for more realism mixed in with the latest graphics capabilities. I'm not a graphics snob and will still happily play more graphically primitive games but having a full 3D engine is handy, as you can rotate and zoom the camera to get the perspective you want (if you want to change it at all). Realism-wise, I would prefer to see weapons relating to their real life counterparts, providing enough parameters are programmed into the game in the first place. The inventory system following logical and realistic design would have been another priority. There could definitely be something in between JA2 vanilla and v1.13, without having containers fitting inside containers, fitting inside more containers. Larger battlefields with fully destructible scenery would be the next desire. Games might be more flashy these days with more effects but in turn, the machines that run them are more powerful. Having a smaller battlefield sounds more like a design decision rather than hiding any technical limitations. Perks and traits I am fine with, as long as they sound sensible. If they sound like something a superhero character would have, then I feel like I am playing a 'silly, fun game' rather than a serious one.

Isn't something that is 'niche' something that is specialised and catering for particular tastes? If it becomes the norm, then it is no longer niche and something else then takes its place. Niche game titles or genres can still have a large user base but they continue to remain outside what is considered mainstream. It is difficult to say whether gamers have become more advanced in what they expect from games. You always hear how games have become dumbed down and that phrase has been used ever since consoles took hold (especially from the era of the Playstation and onwards). A lot of that is actually true because console gaming is more casual by the nature of how they are played. Then, when a game is made available on the PC as well, without any alteration (not including any hardware adjustments), people are quite right to say games have often been dumbed down. The desire is there though for complex games, just as much as the casual ones. The PC offers the best platform for complex games, due to using a more flexible mouse and keyboard, and the person sitting closer to a high definition monitor that will make it easier to see smaller icons, buttons, text and controllable units. That isn't to say that more complex games don't get made or sell on consoles. Many people don't have a PC and only have a console, but do want to play something more complex. You could definitely say however, that a game that could be considered mainstream on a PC, might have a console version that ends up being niche on that particular system. Most console games are not complex and when they are, they tend to be quite fiddly, thanks to being fit around a gamepad's setup.

I am curious about the statistics of the assault rifles. Obviously, the spreadsheets are incomplete at the moment but I was interested in the stats for the FAMAS vs. the AUG. Looking at the current form, the AUG has no penetration while the FAMAS is weaker in damage per bullet. The AUG has greater range as well. If these stats are genuine, it sounds as if Haemimont were not sure how to more accurately differentiate the two guns. It really is just made up with arbitrary game balancing. Are some guns going to have more/less recoil, or have a difference in damage depending on what is being hit? If not, I am hoping such things can be modded in. I made a point that all of the weapons could be realistically balanced as long as enough different characteristics were programmed into the game. I'd like to know how the developers have programmed in weapon rates of fire as well. The FAMAS on full auto fires much faster than an AKM/AK-47 (950 rpm vs. 600). It also has a 3-round burst mode as well.

I don't really understand where the benefit could be in changing the stock. If it is supposed to be an 'upgrade' to replace the adjustable stock with a fixed wooden one (that is also weaker), then it doesn't make sense. If it is supposed to be a cheaper or cut down version of the PSG1, then that doesn't make sense either. The PSG1 was/is a premium precision rifle and if you couldn't afford that but still wanted a H&K rifle, you could choose the MSG90 or the G3SG/1.

Yeah, it wouldn't just be civilians that would be affected or feel apathy to your presence (although they would most likely be the ones who could potentially dismiss your mercs as just another bad bunch of people, if they don't see positive results). Gangs would seek to exploit your presence to strengthen their own position, regardless of the grand scheme of things taking place in the country. They might ask you to help them but other than giving you short term gains, I can't see them really caring what you do unless it damages their own power and profit.

I am curious as to how the NPCs in Grand Chien perceive your mercs. Do they see your soldiers as a chance to change their lives for the better, changing the governing body of the country, or do they just see them as a bunch of opportunists, looking to exploit the war-torn country for their own personal gain? I am also wondering about how long those NPCs have experienced such misfortunes? Were they down on their luck before the previous government was overthrown or only after? That would have a hand in how they view you. They are less likely to care about your presence if life has always been poor for them. Restoring the old government might not make any difference at all to their fortunes. That would then play a factor into how much they would be willing to help you in any way.

That does seem to be the Heckler & Koch PSG1. However, with the screenshot being low resolution, I can't tell what that stock is on the rifle, other than it being something different. It looks wooden and almost like an early CETME rifle stock. Why that would replace the existing one on the PSG1, I don't know. It isn't even the cheaper MSG90 rifle.

That makes it sound as if something between options 2 and 3 would be best, to satisfy most people. Then, allow modding flexibility for something equivalent to JA2 v1.13.

Hopefully, they don't follow Fortnite too closely. Otherwise, the next merc will look like a banana with sunglasses. If that is where the smirking expressions come from (and it wouldn't surprise me, even though I purposely know nothing about Fortnite), that kind of thing is less likely to happen with older, seasoned veterans. Most mercs would probably just have a face looking straight ahead, maybe to the side, or if smiling, it was a photo taken during one of their previous tours. Barry looks as if he is regretting wearing that red tie with his other clothing.

I always saw JA2's crafting as a gimmick. Something you could take advantage of if you really wanted to do so. It was more of an optional feature. Would you really be able to upgrade your precision made firearms with left over bits and bobs? It seems as if, for JA3, they took that optional feature and made it front and centre.

Me too. It helps to detract from the realism. I can understand why they did it but it sounds as if they went too far in pursuit of making things less fiddly. Even if they copied JA2 exactly, was JA2 so complicated with its inventory that it became a negative? I didn't think it did.

So any ammo will total to 500 per slot? 9mm Parabellum cartridges are smaller than 12 gauge cartridges and 7.62x51mm cartridges, which are smaller than 40mm grenades, which are smaller than RPG warheads and 60mm mortar shells. Providing you can find or buy that many of the larger ammo, you could carry just as much as the cheaper and more common ammo.

This is very important and I don't know why Haemimont chose the method they did. Carrying 30 bandages isn't the same as trying to carry 30 M60 light machine guns (which is impossible anyway). Ok, so bandages are lighter in weight but they are so much smaller as well. If the number of slots is defined by strength, then that means that the weakest merc can only carry as many bandages as they can carry M60s, while the strongest will be able to carry more of either. I am pretty sure that anybody, no matter what their strength is, can carry a lot more bandages than a long, heavy firearm. Even if that analogy doesn't quite work, you could change it to bandages versus grenades.

I voted for option 3 but ideally, I would go with anything between options 2 and 3. I think that if an item is in your backpack, you can retrieve it but it takes a whole turn's worth of action points to do it. You are, after all, removing the backpack to retrieve something. Once you have performed that action of accessing your backpack, you can possibly take out as much as possible in that turn, without additional AP being spent. Once the turn ends, it counts as if the pack is once again on the mercenary's back. I would have liked to have seen bandoliers and ammo bags that would allow a greater amount of loose ammo to be carried (shotgun rounds, 40mm grenades). A medical kit would contain multiple bandages. I thought about holsters for handguns and sheathes for knives, going into detail in my Weapon Characteristics thread but as I continued to write it, I thought it could get fiddly. This is because, not everyone would have a holster in the same place. It could be on your thigh, on your hip, on your chest and so on. In the end, I thought it best to have that particular item as invisible and to just make it so that all handguns and knives that are not in the backpack can be put into the merc's hand(s) for less action points, to simulate quickly drawing from a holster, if the primary weapon jams or needs reloading. Making the holsters invisible in this sense would also make it more simple for the mercs that dual-wield pistols and machine pistols.

I really don't like that either. It seems funny that in their pursuit to appeal to everyone and to make their games as widely accessible to as many people as possible (more people, more profit), the publishers of these games have ironically driven away a percentage of people that like more serious games. I want my soldiers to look like soldiers, not some trendy, 'just left school' character with a loud hairstyle, cocky attitude and a social media persona.

That is probably my biggest criticism with the portraits, that they are tilting their heads and smirking. Almost as if they are saying, "You think you're good enough? Well, I'm here now." I have that thought too a little, especially when I see Hitman going to war in a pink salmon shirt and white yachting slacks. I am not getting that vibe of a serious war-torn country that has seen lots of bloodshed and shattered lives, with the deposed daughter of the leader desperately reaching out to you to hire professional soldiers that are dedicated to restoring order.

In some ways, you could say that they are now caricatures of caricatures. In JA2, I saw each merc as a professional, with some being more so than others. They might have quirks as a side thing. It might appear that now, those quirks are a main feature. I have likened the new characters to the toys I used to play with as a kid: Action Force (a.k.a. G.I. Joe) and Cobra. Distinct and colourful individuals; their features, clothes and personality made to separate them from the other members.

I have often said that in these forums. Unless faces are texture mapped onto a 3D rendered model, they are not likely to be animated. Hand drawn art is just that. Back in the days of JA2 and even before then (especially early 90s), from an artist's point of view, it was relatively easy to animate faces. The resolutions were lower, meaning bigger pixels. The available colours were lower too. You could lift the eyebrow pixels up and down, move the eyes and make them blink, move the mouth…all while keeping the rest of the image static, hence matching it up with the base image. Today, that is going to be harder, unless you deliberately simplify a face so you can make variations of it. Some people have suggested using the new AI to animate the hand drawn portraits.