Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

CatsPaw

Members
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by CatsPaw

  1. Agree. Without physical bullets, the game will be somewhat simplistic. I think the atmosphere in JA2 is closely related to the ballistic feel. This component gave a lot to the original.
  2. I do not have factual information on the development of the game, but in my opinion there must be an affirmative answer to all these questions. I have no idea how the developers will explain to JA fans the absence of all of the above. Something like ", we did JA3, but the output is SIMS, sorry, we don't know how it happened..." I would also like to get an answer to this question. This element is important in JA.
  3. In my opinion, there is a question for the publisher. Is there any estimate for the age groups of the JA 3 audience? Does the publisher consider the 35-45 age group significant? In this regard, does it take into account the importance of expanding the distribution channels of the game. After all, it is known that many players over 30 have a negative attitude towards STEAM. They don't really like the fact that they need to log in to STEAM to access the game. Do you plan to release the game on GOG or other distribution platforms?
  4. Hello Fabian! Do you have anything to do with the publisher "THQ Nordic"? May we ask you questions as a JA3 publisher?
  5. I think we need a separate section where there will be only these 3 topics. It's easy, but you need admin rights. But the most important thing about them is the answers from the developers. There is no point in creating these topics without the participation of the developer.
  6. I'll add to my post above: I think it would be advisable to create another topic "Discussion of developers' answers". 1. "Questions to developers" - only a question about the game, without the ability to comment or discuss the question of another participant. 2. "Answers from developers" - just the initial question and answer from the developer. 3. "Discussion of developers' answers" - here all community members discuss and comment on the question and answer.
  7. Hello Wigen! Please specify the following points: 1. If it's not a secret, where did they say it? 2. Who answered the question? Representative of THQ Nordic or Haemimont Games. 3. Who will answer the questions? Representative of THQ Nordic or Haemimont Games. I will add my opinion on this: This forum already has an administrator. What is the difficulty in creating a "Questions to the developer" theme? In this thread, conduct strict moderation on the subject of flooding, etc. Community members ask specific questions about the game in this thread for a week or so. After that, the developer's representative himself answers in this thread. And the administrator publishes in the first message of this topic links to the developer's answer. Or creates a separate topic "Developers' Answers". Where the previously asked question and the developer's answer are published. As a result: the developer does not need to run through all the branches of the forum and look for specific questions, and we will get answers to the questions that interest us.
  8. Oh sure. The same caliber can be both pistol and rifle. But the effect will be different. There are many nuances. If you load the magazine in a ratio of 1 to 3. Where 1 is a regular cartridge, and 3 is a tracer, then the suppression effect will increase significantly. Despite the lower stopping power due to weight loss in flight, they have a "psychological effect." People under fire have the impression that there are much more attackers than there really are (well, developers, will it be possible to charge the magazine in a ratio of 1 to 3? No bans, I'm kidding ๐Ÿ˜€. Just give the opportunity and the fans will add it themselves๐Ÿ˜). How do I feel about activating abilities? Depends on the implementation method. Will she have a cooldown etc. In most cases, this is a simplification and limitation. If so, then I am against it. I'll try to explain. Entering the sector, we see a tactical opportunity to take a position that will give us an advantage. She is at a distance from us. We understand that opponents are dispersed across the map and we have the opportunity to create a numerical superiority on the way to the cherished goal. But at this point, there are several opponents. They are in hiding. We can make a decision with the help of suppressive fire to get close to the point we need. Thus, on the way to the point, we will conduct suppressive fire constantly. Move by move. Either everyone fires, and then they move to the point, or three fighters conduct suppressive fire, the other three move to the point. With the subsequent change of roles. But in this case, I will have to think about the advisability of such an intense fire, will I still have ammunition after that (will the weapon overheat, just kidding, you understand me, right?๐Ÿ˜) to continue the battle. Or another case. The squad was ambushed (they will be, right the developers?๐Ÿ˜). You cannot save cartridges there and think what you will do tomorrow. There you need to answer with all the weapons that are. Here and now. But your "ability", sorry, will reload in two turns... Thanks... What can I say about poorly implemented ability mechanics, infinite ammo mechanics, rigidly assigned classes without the ability to change weapons? All this reduces variability and leads to uniformity. I am for having a choice, I am for diversity.
  9. Mod 1.13 is not complicated by its mechanics. Mod 1.13 is complex in that it is open and for the most part is available for independent modification by the user. If desired, most of these mechanics can be changed in any direction of complexity. Mod 1.13 is difficult in that it is difficult to stop yourself in terms of tuning and testing the result. But this is also part of the gameplay. And the people who are doing this are also the audience of this game. This cannot be neglected.
  10. Yes, I agree. That's why I wrote "JA2 is a game for those who just want to come home and relax". It does not require finding optimal paths. Artificial intelligence forgives most mistakes. You can always load the game from the previous moment. This is not chess, where one move can decide the outcome of a duel that lasted several hours. Agree. The genre as a whole doesn't have many fans. And by simplifying the mechanics, this audience will not grow. Yes, there will come a certain number of people who love simplification, but also a certain number of impatient simplifications will go away. I think that for this project, reaching the entire JA2 audience will be a success. There are not so few of them, they are devoted to the game, willing to pay for it a little more than it is worth. There are not many games to which there are so many discussion forums. And those who have the same number or more, as a rule, TOP projects with a huge budget. Where are the millions of new players at Phoenix Point? They are not here. The problem is that everyone no longer believes in the very fact of releasing a game similar to JA2. But that JA2 fan base is enough for JA3. Given the huge number of games coming out now.
  11. This is a trend. Each trend has a period, i.e. beginning, development and end. Humanity cannot simplify everything indefinitely. The next step will then be the rejection of reading, writing and the simplest arithmetic operations. It's difficult... In general, it's funny that we are discussing the very fact of the difficulty of the game "JA 2". She is primitive. Why simplify this game yet? The allocation of 20 or 100 action points is a daunting task for a modern person... Are you serious? I have already cited Starcraft 2 as an example, where even now people aged 14-18 calculate the opening of the game up to a second. When and on what will they spend each unit of minerals and gas. At what second will the required building be built when an improvement is ordered for your units. At a high level, this happens depending on the development of the opponent. People click 200 - 350 times a minute. There is complexity there. There really sometimes, after a tense fight, you get tired, which you feel physically. And the thought appears "in the next half hour, I'm not ready to repeat it." And "JA2" is a game for those who just want to come home and relax. Deepening the JA2 mechanic won't make JA3 difficult. Will make it more variable and realistic. Why should this scare players away? Let's take the Race genre as an example. At the dawn of their formation, they had primitive physics and mechanics. But gradually physics and mechanics became more realistic. There are many racing simulators now. Is it more difficult than before? Yes. Is the complexity of the players off-putting? No. Everything is exactly the opposite. People want more realism, they like it. It provides opportunities to experience emotions without endangering life. And the more realistic, the more emotions. Why is it wrong with JA 3? Well, for those who want absolute relaxation, there is always Angry Birds. This is what modern games should get rid of. This is exactly what is required of the developers. This is, in fact, the concept of "unnecessary complexity".
  12. THQ Nordic - Publisher Piranha Bytes - developer of ELEX II Haemimont Games - developer of JA3 Most likely there is no direct relationship between the JA3 release date and the ELEX II release date.
  13. So isn't this a great example? The product was developed by a team without special features and funds. But the game is successful. Despite the mechanics and the 2000 interface. The publisher did not give her a price tag for the indie project. The publisher appreciated it more expensive than many new games: XCOM 2: Chimera Squad, Gears Tactics, Wasteland 3, Phoenix Point (I think because they understood that the main audience is 35-45, and they are ready to pay). The main reason for negative reviews to it is the servers not working for 3 weeks. The game began to be sold, and the servers were not available half the time. But this is a purely technical problem. Blizzard themselves have stated that the success of Diablo II: Resurrected will force them to intensify the development of Diablo III.
  14. Perhaps this is due to the fact that you are a good person by nature. This is the only way to explain how this could be forgiven at all.๐Ÿ˜
  15. I would not like to reduce the discussion to an argument. But I really don't understand why you think the 35-45 generation of players is "insignificant". I agree that 20 years ago this could be so. People who reached this age stopped playing computer games. But now everything is different. People in their 40s continue to play actively, and are not much inferior in this regard to the younger ones. But at the same time they are the most solvent category. Why should developers ignore them? The problem is different. The tactical games genre has never been particularly popular. It is easy to verify this by going to STEAM and look at the number of players simultaneously playing at the moment. The number of CS players will be two hundred times that of XCOM2. At the same time, there will be more players playing XCOM2 than playing all similar games combined. But XCOM2 is not currently played by millions. And behind the success of XCOM2 is the huge amount of work, talent and money invested in the project, as well as the novelty of the mechanic at the time. She created the illusion of fresh air, which many people liked. But as time shows, not all players now agree with these mechanics. Many consider them simplified. Take Phoenix Point as an example. A fresh game based on XCOM2 mechanics. The average number of players at a time is from 600 to 900. This is not a lot. It is possible that now there are a little fewer people playing in JA2, and maybe the same. Another example is Diablo II: Resurrected (2021). The story of the game's development is similar to that of JA2 and Fallout 2. Fans have also been asking for a sequel. There were the same wishes: to leave everything as it was in the original, but taking into account the influence of time. The developers did not change anything at all, except for the graphics. The plot, locations, weapons and armor, dialogues and even the scale of the maps remained the same. Affected only the graphic component. And everyone is happy, the game with the mechanics of 2000 is successful. It took its own niche. Sold well by publishers. But when it comes to JA 2, for some reason, the argument "either as XCOM2 or failure" immediately appears. Why should this happen all of a sudden? XCOM2 took the mechanic as a novelty, now it's commonplace in a dozen games. If developers want success comparable to XCOM2, they also need to give something new. And if the JA2 mechanic update does not bring success comparable to XCOM2, then at least the game will occupy its own niche. And she won't be forced to share her audience with a dozen games with similar mechanics.
  16. It's strange to read it. If the developer says what makes the successor of Jะ 2, then who is meant by the target audience of the product? Football Manager fans? No, this means that the developer directly indicates the target audience. I'm not against Football Manager. Tell me that it will be him, and I'll just walk by. But when they are lured by one, and at the end they are given another, many will feel deceived. Which is what happened with the previous remakes. After all, in general, the games there were not bad, if you remove the name. But their grades are bad, largely because the fans of Jะ 2 gave 0 or 1, because considered themselves deceived. The problem is that all the fans want to exclaim this JA. But how many re-releases have there been? Result... XCOM is a great game. Great, high quality, with a huge budget, an order of magnitude more than the JA2. But JA2 fans didn't exclaim "THIS IS JA", precisely because it is different. But trying to repeat XCOM2 does not mean that the result will be close to XCOM2. So much money, work and professionalism has been invested in XCOM2 that it is extremely difficult to repeat.
  17. This is really weird. But there must be some explanation for this. It is hard to say. Perhaps they themselves have not yet fully decided on the concept of the game and are trying different options. It will be even stranger. I can't remember the exact source, but I had information that the developers themselves insisted on the JA2 remake, i.e. they came to a publisher with this idea. Therefore, I still have hope for a worthy continuation of the JA series. But if it is a clone of XCOM2.... We can speculate together. Here is a game that has a target audience. For 20 years, this audience has been asking developers to make a sequel to this game. The requirements are simple: everything is the same, but taking into account the passage of years (modern graphics, deepening mechanics, greater realism). The developers answer: approx. Then, in a narrow circle among themselves, they decide that they know better what the target audience wants. They release a product that is not at all similar to what the audience asked for. And then they are sincerely surprised by the low ratings of the product. And so it happens over and over again. If this time it will be so, then what can we say... Well, then call the product J-COM, and develop the product for a different audience. But if you chose the title "Jagged Alliance 3", maybe you should stick to the canons of the series?
  18. It is clear that the penalty should be dependent on the number of bullets flying over the character and the type of small arms from which they were fired. But this is already a balancing act.
  19. GODSPEED, As a small example. Let's say the mechanic assumes a penalty to the fighter's accuracy of 30 units. Minus 2 units from the penalty for each level of combat experience. We have two fighters. One of them is a beginner with "50" shooting skills and "1" combat experience. Another of them is the most experienced fighter with "90" shooting skills and "10" combat experience. Accordingly, after suppression by fire, a beginner will have a skill of shooting accuracy 22 (50-30+2). This will not restrict his freedom of movement, but will render him relatively useless as a shooter. Which, in principle, is what happens in reality. In the second case, experience will allow you to resist panic. And an experienced fighter will have a shooting accuracy skill of 80 (90-30+20). That will practically not affect its accuracy. But of course fighters with combat experience "10" should be "rare specimens"
  20. Hendrix,Thank you for your feedback. I like the photo on your profile. I agree that the developers need to find a middle ground in firing range and combat distance Here on the forum there is a topic with films on tactical themes. Of course, there are a lot of them. But I would really like the developers to get together and watch the movie "Black Hawk Down (2001)". So that they would be inspired by the atmosphere prevailing in the film, and would try to transfer it into the game. It was also unpleasant for me to see Ivan and Fidel slipping three meters to the stone in the trailer for the game, this is certainly not something that brings the atmosphere of the game closer to "realistic". I asked myself how this can be explained logically. Loss of time, breathlessness, loss of opponents from sight, and if they already spent their time on reducing the area of destruction and increasing the stability of the position, why did they stand up again? I couldn't find the answer. I would like to be able to disable this slide. Well, or so that the developers would bring it to a state so that at least visually, this sliding was organic.
  21. I thought about it, in the beginning I also thought that this should affect the action points. But I came to the conclusion that this is not always the case. Let's say a character is in an open area and came under intense fire from the enemy. He sees that there is a life-saving shelter 15 meters away from him. I think he will run there faster than he would have run without being under fire. But he will not be able to calmly aim. Moreover, the loss of action points in many cases will mean the loss of a character by the player, which will be toxic for him.
  22. In the combat distance topic, additional mechanics were discussed, as a result of which I thought about the need for one of the mechanics. In particular, this is the suppression of the character by shooting from automatic weapons. At the moment, I am convinced that this mechanic must, simply must be in the game from release. But in my opinion, this mechanic should not affect the character's action points, but relate to the accuracy of shooting. And not as a percentage of accuracy, but at a fixed rate, ideally depending on the character's combat experience. In my opinion, this is a must in a tactical game. What will it give us: 1. The tactical component immediately appears in the form of in-depth planning of the position. Determination of the position for specific characters, taking into account their specialization, shooting skills and combat experience. 2. There will be a need for a tactical regrouping if your soldiers are overwhelmed by the shooting, which is not so difficult to do because the action points are not affected. 3. Often there is a position on the map that the character occupies, which does not give the other side the opportunity to maneuver, with this mechanic, you can concentrate shooting at this point, which will make it possible for one of the team members to cross the dangerous area, which will increase the tactical component. 4. Will justify such a class as "machine gunners", they will really become needed and will represent strength. 5. The duration of the battle will slightly increase, because the characters under fire will be less accurate. Attached below is one of the awesome screenshots from the game. Try to imagine how this mechanic will specifically affect the tactics of the game. Where would you place your fighters, for what point of control would you fight, where would you retreat in case of superior enemy forces. Please write what you think about this.
  23. I agree with it. I think that you shouldn't demand all 1.13 mechanics from the developers when the game is released. I look at the screenshots and they please me at the moment. I feel in them the heir to JA2. It will be good if the game comes out imbued with the spirit of JA2, it will already be a success. On the other hand, if the developers release DLC with the mechanics of the 1.13 mod and conditionally give it the name "1.15 mod", then it will be very strong. Few games can boast of the world famous DLC title. How can fans of the legendary series force themselves not to buy DLC with that name? They will be obliged to do this.
ร—
ร—
  • Create New...