well time only can say, well to be honest whats great about turn based is you have more time planning and posining i think if its real time i would screw up :)

Most of the hate is because while JA:BIA may be a good game, so far we haven't seen anything that makes it JA. Where's the merc personality, where's the tactical decisions, where the TBS that defined JA? This game so far looks like a (possibly) good real time with pause shooter, that had a brand name slapped on it for the additional sales it would give them. There have been some tries to make a successor to JA, some successful, some less so, but so far BitComposer seems to ignore what the fans were asking/suggesting/demanding, thus the hate. I think at one time there was a mass banning from their forums as well, when the fans started complaining about the the real time combat.
Still, only time will tell how good a game JA:BIA will be.

Real Time with Pause. That means that anytime you want (or a trigger like seeing a new enemy happens), the game will pause and allow you to issue orders again, if needed. The UFO series (Aftermath, Afterlight and Aftershock) are a good example of that gameplay, even though they do lack a lot in the tactical depth of it.

well lets hope ja:bia wont get the same problems then.

Think of it this way: Pretend you are a big fan of the old game "Donkey Kong". You really love the 2D running and jumping platformer arcade gameplay. Now you hear that some new company has gotten the rights to 'remake Donkey Kong' and the game will not only be a first person shooter, it will also be TURN BASED. You see the problem? Entirely different types of gameplay. And no...turn based is not something that older developers had to settle for because they couldn't do real time. That is a rather stupid assumption. Real time games may sell better than Turn Based but( just like in music) the best selling/most popular are not usually the best products. Backstreet Boys used to be #1 on top 40 charts in America but they were never considered a good musical act by anyone but juveniles. Jagged Alliance IS and HAS TO BE turn based. I am sure many of us would settle for real time with pause IF the rest of the game were absolutely brilliant(including the pathfinding) but that does not seem to be the case.

well the dev said that they stay true to the original but my expierence say dev like to say that for selling a lot of copies so we can only hope and wait.

Look at it this way: I am a massive fan of the old game Jagged Alliance 2 (it was one of the first games I bought on GOG, I thought it was amazing when it originally came out). I don't believe that it "HAS TO BE turn based", the reason for my "rather stupid assumption" that they would have gone real time if they could, is because they have the rest of the game real time, and the UFO series went that way once they could (though I admit this was done before the release of JA2, but not JA1, so they probably had legacy code hindering them).

You can (and clearly do) believe that turn based is better if you wish. I simply disagree, and don't think that the move to active pause will ruin the game. I always found turn based to look a bit silly, where a person runs out from cover, and then just stands there being shot at for the entire turn of the other player. The interrupt system attempted to address this, but that just seems to me to be another indication that they acknowledged the limitation of a turn based game.

well i havent played the newest ufo games, but that was the problem of turn based games that you can left open standing there without doing a thing but i do remember ufo apocalypse had a real time mode that you pushed play to let the soldiers do the moves i hope it would be like that.

Your "stupid assumption" was in thinking that the only reason JA2 was turn based was because they(for whatever reason) could not achieve real time gameplay. It is patently false and even YOU admit above that there were real time games preceding JA2(LOTS of them in facts...strat, RPG, etc.). If you prefer real time then that is your business and you are not hurting me by doing so. But when you come here posting absurd, poorly reasoned arguments/assertions that just belittle turn based gaming(we fans of TB have our reasons such as realism, fun, tactics(which RT cannot do well), etc. for p[referring TB over RT) you can expect someone will call you out on it.

BTW, your problems with turn based seem rather silly to me. You seem to be unable to imagine that the turn based aspect is an abstraction and not a depiction of how the battle would look in reality. You are imagining that some guy runs out 8 paces then freezes and waits for bullets to hit him.
But even if I found something of merit in this contention I would counter it by pointing out how unrealistic real time strategy gaming is in that one unit/merc/PC is ordered to run to spot 'A' and all the rest remain stanbdi8ng around waiting for you to click on them and give them orders. Sure the 'real time with pause' modes of more recent years try to deal with this but they just end up being turn based with bad pathfinding problems.

The thing about this though is I already have JA2 and like most JA2 hardcore fans I know that more than half of the appeal of JA2 in the first place is the turn based combat. So why would we want the same game but with ugly 3D graphics and problematic real time w/pause combat?! I can just play the game I like and not have to deal with the real time crap! Bit Composer's decision on this makes no sense at all from a business standpoint. For the most part JA fans do not care about real time and real time fans do not care about JA2. It is like having a heterosexual porn film called "Gay sex"!?

true but the problem is ja is from an old generation of gamers the devolepers want to create a new fan base, its like bethesda and infinity ward. For infinity ward there was call of duty 1 and 2,And for beteshda it was arena, daggerfall maybe morrowind as well. The devblepers made oblivion, and mw 1 easier acceble and interesting to pull a new generation of gamers who will play those games and love it and maybe try the older games so that they if it works go on the old classics again or continue with the reboot depends on how good it sells on the new generation.

I understand what you are saying and I know they want to make money by selling their game. But that has no bearing on the QUALITY of the game and we are still left to wonder about their decisions. You see with Jagged Alliance you have a very specific game that appeals to a niche crowd of hard core turn based fans who do not like real time(and I can argue for good reason!). And making a real time version of JA2 is, again like making a a super sugary chocolate cake for a diabetic or gay porn for straight people. They could have just made their own real time game of mercs WITHOUT the Jagged Alliance name attached and there would probably be no difference in sales. So why bother attaching the JA name to this crap?

that is called because they are arrogant it has already proven they know the hardcore fans will try itbecause its ja and because its ja people will bash it and thats how you get free publicity and before you know it it wil sell well. Its the perfecct way to sell a game, if you compare it too a singer its like justin bieber of games everybody will hate it so a lot will be curious and try it because its so hated.

I didnt mean it that way, i ment more like even if the franchise is old It's name is still kinda known, not everybody does research games before buying and maybe reconize the game name, if they use a diffrent name and start a whole new franchise it is a risk they will take because its unknown, most franchise that start dont sell always too well because its human nature to go for something thats safe and known.

There is intro cutscene / teaser video material over at

http://www.thelightworks.com/