Forums > MobyGames > Request X-COM and Jagged Alliance Game Group
Indra was here (20756) on 8/22/2014 4:25 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Keep forgetting to ask these two: [1] X-Com variants (yes, X-COM, not XCOM - that's a later adaptation) and [2] Jagged Alliance variants (and yes, I'll create a description signifying the differences).
Not many in this group, a little bit more than half a dozen for each group if I remember correctly (or not). Is it alright to leave them empty first? If not, then UFO series for X-Com examples (just Aftermath, Afterlight, and Aftershock). For Jagged Alliance variants, use Hired Guns.
Official X-Com and Jagged Alliance games will be excluded from these game groups.
Much obliged.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/22/2014 6:35 AM · Permalink · Report
We're not talking about Breakout variants here. You'll need to supply a damn good description for those groups.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/22/2014 1:06 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]So does Jagged Alliance go into the X-Com variants group? [/Q --end vedder wrote--]Nope. Keep forgetting which series came first. Regardless, both feature wise are unique enough to warrant separation. Differences on the top of my head:
Jagged Alliance:
- Predominantly non sci-fi with a contemporary theme.
- Merc recruiting method. Prices may differ per merc.
- Unique mercs. At minimal unique facial portraits.
- Active campaigning. Can search and engage enemies.
- Multiple shopkeepers.
- No technology tree. Items are either purchased or found.
X-COM:
- Predominantly sci-fi usually with a futuristic theme.
- Military recruiting method. Prices are usually the same per soldier or profession.
- Standardized soldiers. Difference in facial portraits negligible.
- Passive campaigning. Usually must await enemy to reveal themselves before engaging.
- Usually include base upgrades/enhancements.
- Involves a technology tree, unlocking new items and other features.
The description will probably end up being three pages long after I'm done with it. :p
Indra was here (20756) on 8/22/2014 3:28 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]Those differences you mentioned sound superficial, especially the setting.
I'd say both games fit the "turn-based squad tactics with RPG-like stats" description. [/Q --end Rola wrote--] Superficial except to the fans of the series. X-Com has more strategic elements than Jagged Alliance, due to base management and the technology tree.
Jagged Alliance would qualify as just 'a turn-based squad tactics with RPG-like stats'. X-Com would not, primarily being a strategy game compared to Jagged Alliance.
Even more so as the variants distinctively copy one or the other.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/22/2014 6:13 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra is here wrote--] Jagged Alliance would qualify as just 'a turn-based squad tactics with RPG-like stats'. X-Com would not, primarily being a strategy game (…) [/Q --end Indra is here wrote--] You'd have to qualify that statement.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/22/2014 11:45 PM · Permalink · Report
I italicized the 'just'.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/23/2014 1:12 AM · Permalink · Report
I would say that the strategical elements of UFO take a backseat to the tactical side, not least if you look at where most of the player's time is spent.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/23/2014 9:11 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Игги Друге wrote--]I would say that the strategical elements of UFO take a backseat to the tactical side, not least if you look at where most of the player's time is spent. [/Q --end Игги Друге wrote--]It's debatable, but I can understand that perspective. However, as far as the X-COM variants I've tested out, it seems that the strategic elements, i.e. base upgrades and research via technology tree appears to be a mandatory requirement (plus the obvious alien nemesis). However, it also needs to be stressed that X-COM wouldn't be X-COM without those strategy features. A signature feature, if you will.
Didn't find much luck finding Syndicate variants (e.g. with upgradable bio enhancements for party members). Apparently not as popular to remake.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/22/2014 3:09 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra is here wrote--]
X-COM:
- Standardized soldiers. Difference in facial portraits negligible.
[/Q --end Indra is here wrote--] If you're talking about the original UFO: Enemy Unknown, it has very different soldiers.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/22/2014 3:23 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Игги Друге wrote--] If you're talking about the original UFO: Enemy Unknown, it has very different soldiers. [/Q --end Игги Друге wrote--] Compared to JA Alliance games, where each merc has a unique bio, voice overs, etc. Simply put, no two mercs alike. Unlike X-Com, whichever version.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/22/2014 6:15 PM · Permalink · Report
So the main difference is whether the roster is scripted or algorithmical?
Rola (8483) on 8/22/2014 8:19 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Indra, would you put Avalon Hill's Squad Leader in X-COM or Jagged Alliance group?
Because I'm confused. What I'm completely sure it's "turn-based squad tactics".
The problem with your groups (not just these - remember bestiary/encyclopedia?) is that you want to be too narrow in scope. It may appear that you're neatly specific, but the truth is that people end up confused as to what games fit in. So eventually the groups don't get populated. Groups sometimes need to be a little bit broader to be useful.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/23/2014 12:06 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]Indra, would you put Avalon Hill's Squad Leader in X-COM or Jagged Alliance group?
Because I'm confused. What I'm completely sure it's "turn-based squad tactics". [/Q --end Rola wrote--] It's neither. Looks like a Commandos variant for all I know.
I need to stress that I'm not proposing a 'turn-based squad tactics' game group (which would include this game, JA, and X-COM). Someone else can do that (which I'm not doing, since too broad game groups eventually get screwed later when a more specific feature becomes prominent...and I have trouble cleaning up the aftermath). No, prefer to just create game groups I'm pretty darn sure of.
I'm making specific games inspired by mentioned these two games, noticeable through specific features. Hence variants. Gawd, I faced the same amount of bureaucracy when creating the Diablo variant game group. -_-
I repeat. These are not intended as an umbrella group for turn-based squad tactics game groups.
Rola (8483) on 8/23/2014 12:36 AM · Permalink · Report
Well, if nobody else understands the purpose of your group, then perhaps... ahem (do I need to finish this sentence?) [Q --start Indra is here wrote--]Looks like a Commandos variant[/Q --end Indra is here wrote--] You didn't even bother to check it? Come on, it's turn-based, action points et all.
2004 Desperados would be Commandos variant.
[Q --start Indra is here wrote--]These are not intended as an umbrella group for turn-based squad tactics game groups.[/Q --end Indra is here wrote--] Then what games would you put into these groups if we already have JA and XCOM series (and its lookalike UFO series)? And why do you reject Avalon Hill's Squad Leader?
Indra was here (20756) on 8/23/2014 9:56 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--][1] Well, if nobody else understands the purpose of your group, then perhaps... ahem (do I need to finish this sentence?)
[2] You didn't even bother to check it? Come on, it's turn-based, action points et all.
[3] Then what games would you put into these groups if we already have JA and XCOM series (and its lookalike UFO series)?
[4] And why do you reject Avalon Hill's Squad Leader? [/Q --end Rola wrote--] [1] What's so difficult to understand about a game variant? A game where certain features within it, clearly identifies it was inspired by a specific game.
Hell, just read the Diablo thread. Some say it's too wide. Some say it's too narrow. Some say there isn't enough games. Some say there's too many games. And everyone claims to be an expert. Bloody hell. I ended up knowing more about Diablo games than Diablo fans only because I appear to be first on the net to put into gawd damn writing.
[2] Haven't played it. Those four screenshots don't help either.
[3] sigh Did I not make myself clear that there are a few games out there that qualify as an X-COM or Jagged Alliance variant that aren't official X-Com or Jagged Alliance games?
How exactly am I not making myself clear:
- I've played a few games that qualify as either an X-COM variant or Jagged Alliance variant.
- Hence, I'm proposing two separate game groups.
- Since people here always complain for years why we don't have a 'games like X game', a variant game group appears to be like a good idea.
- Apparently not.
- When people say 'games like X-COM', I don't read that and mean tactical squad RPGs. I read it that and mean 'games really, really like X-COM'. Or else I'd say tactical squad RPGs in the first place. -_- It's not really my fault some gamers don't know the difference between Diablo and an action-RPG.
6 Never said this is tactical squad game group. - Never said official X-COM and Jagged Alliance games will be part of this group.
- Are you high?
[4] Not really rejecting it. Just haven't played it. Could be a JA variant for all I know. I could research it, but it seems I have trouble getting these game groups through (as usual).
Nevermind. It's not really worth my time anymore. Too darn busy now. /abandon submission.
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/23/2014 1:05 PM · Permalink · Report
Make a group for tactical games.
vedder (70767) on 8/23/2014 1:29 PM · Permalink · Report
Not sure if this is what Iggi means, but I think a game-group that features all games similar to either X-Com or Jagged Alliance is much more useful to have. The two specific groups Indra propose are only going to create more questions when games feature elements from both X-COM and Jagged Alliance or lie vaguely in the middle.
I don't think anyone who wants to find more X-Com-like games will want to prevent accidentally stumbling on a game which is actually slightly more similar to Jagged Alliance.
Indra was here (20756) on 8/23/2014 12:11 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--]The problem with your groups (not just these - remember bestiary/encyclopedia?) is that you want to be too narrow in scope. [/Q --end Rola wrote--]It's not a problem. Some people just want to lump everything into one whole bundle and years later it gets screwed. It's happened here too many times. Theme vs. protagonist. Author vs. Book, and a whole lot of other categories. Don't even mention the role-playing game groups. -_-
And I have no idea how to clean that mess up. Actually I do. But no one listens to me, so I just fix 'em when no one's looking. *tried to fix Star Was but gave up.
Rola (8483) on 8/23/2014 4:08 PM · Permalink · Report
Have you ever wondered about the problems with ".... variant" groups? I like creating groups for broader genres (like "hidden object"), but as you already know, games like to be hybrids, so they're rarely pure clones (that was 1980s thing), but an evolved mix.
Take Hammer of the Gods. Is this Heroes of Might and Magic variant? Hey, it has similar battles, heroes, items, magic, strategic map... oh wait, but no resources and you can't upgrade cities...
That's why I fully support "Genre: turn-based squad tactics" (I love those games!), but I fail to see the need for your groups. Try to convince me with a list of titles you'd like to add and maybe I'll see the light?
Игги Друге (46653) on 8/24/2014 12:45 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Rola wrote--] That's why I fully support "Genre: turn-based squad tactics" (I love those games!) [/Q --end Rola wrote--]
Or "Feature: Movement points"?