Alpha Protocol! Another game that leave fans satisfied, yet wondering how it would have turned out had Bioware done it!
Sad but true. Hopefully the expanded version actually adds some sexy to the process. Funny that it was kind of this big deal, but it was the most throw-away part of the game (and nearly the only thing there was to criticize).
Where are the interview highlights D? Now I'll have to go read it myself. :(
Anyway, this does seem a bit interesting -- mostly because of the setting.
Jonric: Since RPG fans expect strong stories from Obsidian, what will this one be about? How linear or open-ended will it be? Will it be possible to reach different endings?
Chris Avellone: The game takes place in the modern day... no matter what time in the next few years you're playing. It consists of a series of mostly linear sub-missions and optional assignments you can pick and choose to best accomplish your objective depending on your character's skill set. Go speak to an informant to get information? Research dossiers on a locale? Intimidate some triad thugs, and maybe kill a few? Buy intel? Hack a CIA listening post? Infiltrate a detention camp?
Depending on these tasks, the objectives, your choices and the results, you then work your way to the heart of the operation. One of the game's goals is repercussions and consequences for your in-mission actions, so you'll frequently see outcomes sending ripple effects through other assignments, the hub and the global operations.
Yes, there will be different endings, but we'll let you play the game to uncover those. It's also extremely unlikely any operation will end the same way for two people - the repercussions and reactivity will see to that..
Chris Avellone: It is as big as planet Earth itself, and man, do you go all over it. You don't go to the moon, though... or Antarctica. However, we have about four or five hubs, each with its own goal and operation, as well as a number of other missions that take place outside of them. It's enough to whet the world traveler appetite, in our opinion.
Jonric: Is the Michael Thorton character fully pre-made, or will we have choices we can make before we begin play?
Ryan Rucinski: There are several different character types available when you create your new one. We allow the player to choose the archetype he or she wants to play; technically savvy, stealthy or "I'm going to loot your corpse after shooting you in the face".
The player can put points into any of the supporting stats for the one chosen, or into the polar opposite. We leave how they are allocated up to individual preference. The archetypes just allow some higher-level special abilities that help define the character. After the tutorial, we allow anyone who feels another class would provide a better game experience to reset these choices.
Jonric: To what degree will it be possible to customize his physical appearance? Will we be able to configure his facial and body parts?
Ryan Rucinski: We don't support full facial and body type configuration. We spent a lot of time going back and forth internally on whether we wanted Thorton to be anything the character wanted. Realizing that we would lose a lot of cinematic impact if the player decided to make a chinless Cro-Magnon who couldn't sweep a lady off her feet if he tripped her, we then just made our main character the person you play.
There are ways to customize your look as you gain access to disguises - at the time of writing, the Elvis glasses are not in the game, but mark my words and mark them well... they WILL be - and characters you talk to might even make comments like, "Uh, nice Mohawk there, Mike. When are you going to take this job seriously?"
Matt MacLean: Mike Thorton is a partially written slate. Tabula "kinda written but still with room for you to customizus", if my Latin serves me right. He can't be a sea elf, an escaped mental patient or a were-cabinet - he's an educated, multi-lingual clandestine operative, and that rules out being a chaotic neutral Urdlen-worshipping deep gnome bard / cleric. Sorry to break that bad news to you; I know you guys probably already made your cool forum signature image with a dwarf Thorton riding a cyber-unicorn with animated lens flare. That said, you can tweak his appearance and put your personalized mark on him during creation.
Within this broad definition, you do have the freedom to select Mike's specific background - how you got to the story's present day. Perhaps you started in the armed forces, or maybe you worked for a "legitimate" spy agency before dropping off the radar and into the realm of black ops. Backgrounds define your initial array of starting skills and gear. They also factor into how NPCs treat you early in the game, before you've thrown your personality around. And you aren't forced to play with a starting skill setup; there's a DIY option that lets you freely select your initial ones, so like in many RPGs, there are pre-configured selection for those new to the genre or not into the process, and a full control mode for... well, control freaks.
Jonric: What are the key character-related choices we have to make at the beginning of Alpha Protocol, and why did you decide to design the game in this way?
Matt MacLean: The key choice you have to make at the beginning of the game is which skills you would like to start on first. Your choice of background doesn't prevent you from learning any of them later on; it just gives you a head start. If you dive in and realize you like a certain ability more than you thought you would, you don't have to start from the beginning just to have access to it.
Jonric: How will the character advancement system function? What influenced its design? How much choice and what kinds will we have in how Thorton develops? To what degree can he differ at the end?
Matt MacLean: We based our character development system on live action role-playing systems: you rock-paper-scissors to shoot someone, and fold your arms in front of you to sneak. Also, Mike Thorton yells "Lightning Bolt" every time he shoots someone.
Sorry, I selected the Sarcastic stance for that last bit, I'll switch to Professional.
Our RPG system is (warning: broad generalization ahead) generally western-style; it has more in common with an Elder Scrolls game than a Final Fantasy installment. We throw you a challenge, and you handle it that way because that's how you made your character (or I suppose you could try the path of most resistance and not use your character's abilities... I guess some people like to play D&D wizards who endlessly get into fistfights). In contrast, Alpha Protocol isn't an eastern RPG or an adventure game wherein a situation usually has only one fixed or blatantly optimal solution.
The main influence for our system is necessity; a lot of RPG conventions (rolling to hit, casting spells, building a keep at level 12 and getting 3d6 bugbears to wander by and sign up to do your bidding, etc.) don't really apply to our game due to its action elements, the real world theme, and the allies-optional, lone wolf nature. So, we weren't inspired by any one pen and paper structure or video game out there, if that's what you were asking.
So, as for how much choice and what kind of choice... well, you can purchase ranks in 10 different skills, each unlocking a variety of passive and active bonuses and abilities. There are no classes, but there are certainly combinations of skills that work well together to create a sneaky spy, trigger happy marksman, crafty trap specialist, or just a guy that has a few bonuses at doing all of the above.
As for the "to what degree can Thorton differ at the end" question, you won't be able to purchase every skill in the game during one playthrough - so not every player is building toward the same maximized character who can do everything. Instead, you'll have to decide what appeals to you most, and either dabble in or outright ignore the others.
Jonric: How would you describe the combat system you're implementing? How will it function, and will it include any unusual or otherwise interesting elements?
Ryan Rucinski: The combat system is pretty straightforward most of the time. If you have skills in particular firearms, equipment and martial arts, you will clearly do more damage with them when they are being used. This does not preclude or hinder using those that the character is not specialized in.
For example, if Thorton has 10 points in a pistol, every shot he fires will deal significantly more damage than if he only has one in it. This doesn't mean missing more often though. I have played some other games where because I didn't have a high enough skill in a particular weapon, it decided I missed even if I had a reticule directly over the target's face. It really cheesed me off that some hidden dice roll overruled my aiming skill.
However, the higher you go in skill levels, the more neat special abilities you get to use. My favorite is still Bullet Storm because of the sheer amount of lead thrown around... and even more important (to me) is that Thorton cackles maniacally while using it.
Bullet Storm, ah... sweet, sweet Bullet Storm. It's an ability limited in use by dual wielding the submachine guns. After triggering the special skill, you have a certain amount of time with unlimited bullets to rain an unholy amount of lead at the bad guys. The muzzle flare from the weapons is expanded significantly, and any hits are noticeably higher in damage. Plus, as I mentioned, Thorton is pretty much insane while using it.
Jonric: Can we expect Alpha Protocol to have enemies that act like more than unthinking drones? What are some interesting or unusual ones we can look forward to facing?
Chris Avellone: Credit for the "named" adversaries in the game goes to Brian Mitsoda and Annie Carlson (Vampire: Bloodlines and Neverwinter Nights 2, respectively) for the conceptual design, Brian Menze (Knights of the Old Republic II, Aliens) for the visual design, and to Matt MacLean (Mask of the Betrayer) for making their AI behave in ways that make you want to murder these same people by horrible means.
For the bosses and the significant characters, we have a Kill Bill theme to most of them, with distinctive visual tags and personality quirks... from SIE, a German cougar ex-special forces mercenary (not a literal cougar, but an attractive older woman) with lipstick marks spray-painted on her shin pads, to Konstantin Brayko, a Russian mobster who looks like he just walked out of a Duran Duran video... and that's just scratching the surface. Alpha Protocol has a creative cast, and the player should have a lot of fun interacting with the characters.
Jonric: What would an espionage-themed game be without cool weapons and gadgets? How will these and other items factor into the game?
Matt MacLean: Mike Thorton can use a wide variety of weapons, gadgets, and armor, and how important these items are is mostly contingent on your play style. All of your items can be customized. Your guns have lots of room for upgrades and modifications, as does your armor, and you can even improve your gadgets... because stylish agents wouldn't be caught dead using last year's remotely detonated ordnance.
Just as the player won't ever have enough advancement points to max out every skill in one playthrough, your items will be a finite resource, and you'll usually want to customize your gear to best fit your skills.
Jonric: Will there be many friendly and NPCs around? What will their primary functions and overall level of importance be?
Chris Avellone: Yep. And they may cease being friendly or neutral based on your actions, and vice versa for the villains.
Importance ranking... pretty damn important. NPCs and factions are sources of information, as obstacles, as people you need to get to trust you, or those who you need to get to hate you. Also, your interactions with them will tell you a lot about yourself as a character, which is kind of neat in a metaphysical sense. If you just want to shoot them, well, even that says a lot about you as a person... and the NPCs do die in cinematic ways to appropriate mournful funeral music.
Jonric: Will any of them accompany Thorton on his missions? Will they assist him directly, or act more as support personnel?
Chris Avellone: Yep, sometimes as fire support (rarely). and more frequently as handlers on a mission basis, where your reputation with them, good or bad, has different effects on the abilities they can help give you. You can get a lot of a feel for various characters depending on how they speak to you during a mission and the special advice they offer if they trust you enough.
They are wild and uncontrolled, driven by their own passions and agendas.
Jonric: In terms of how we'll interact with the various NPCs, the game is touted as having a significant dialogue stance system. What is this feature?
Chris Avellone: The stance system is a one-way path through dialogues where you choose Thorton's mood and attitude when dealing with others to try and get information, to attempt to find out more about your objective, or else simply to romance the ladies of the world... or anger your enemies.
When speaking to others, you can choose to take a suave-style stance (cocky, confident, witty), aggressive (Jack Bauer style), or professional (if you're of the paladin persuasion or a patriotic fellow obsessed with duty). We also allow the player to perform "actions" that short-circuit dialogues, such as shooting people in the knees or the face, smashing bottles across the heads of smartasses, or anything else that can jump to the core of the conversation without wasting time negotiating with folks.
Jonric: Will there be dialogue choices that stand out because it's immediately obvious they're correct or superior?
Chris Avellone: No one path is better than another. They all have different consequences in the long run, and while some may initially seem superior, others can pay off much farther down the road... so please, play the game and speak to the NPCs the way you want to, not the way you think is going to be the "best" choice, because there isn't one.
Jonric: How does it function that will makes it different from what readers are used to from your other RPGs?
Chris Avellone: It's more action-oriented, with more tension in choosing the responses, and it removes the circular, interrogation aspect that's been used again and again in previous Black Isle and Obsidian RPGs. The conversation is more like a conversation, not an interrogation loop that always comes back to the same question node.
Jonric: Would we be correct to that there are other related systems that also impact the gameplay experience depending on the choices we make?
Chris Avellone: Similar to the influence system in Knights of the Old Republic II and the Neverwinter Nights 2 series, we have "reputation" in Alpha Protocol. Depending on how the hero treats an NPC or his faction / allies, you can dramatically change how they treat him, and shift their roles in the game... and at times, this will have huge ripple effects on how certain sub-missions and global assignments play out.
In addition, the amount of reputation you gain with someone affects the different game bonuses that will be applied through perks if he or she becomes your handler on a mission. If you treat SIE well (and I do mean "well"), then she has a chance to become ones, and to convey perks and bonuses to you as she helps you through your mission.
You are tracked on your behavior as well, and certain people will react to you depending on how you've been acting elsewhere in the game. If you've primarily been aggressive, enemies will have formed a dossier on you and have a pre-set judgment about you as soon as you meet them.
We also bring the "research" angle into the. When Thorton gains a contact in the game, this opens up a basic dossier on the subject, and the player can gather information on various characters. This can help when entering conversations by giving more facts about their backgrounds, previous missions and faction ties, that you can use as leverage in the conversation to get what you want. As an example, you learn what stances some NPCs respect, as well as which can be used to provoke a reaction that would be advantageous, such as how to piss someone off into doing something stupid, or an attitude that generates more trust for you than for someone's current employer.
Ryan Rucinski: To add to what Avellone mentioned, there are no wrong choices, and there's no going back to make a first impression. If you are openly a sociopath and decide to push an old lady in front of a bus because she was in your way, you might make a good impression on equally amoral characters you that you meet, but your other faction ratings would suffer. Later in the story, there might be folks that may be wary of talking to you... especially at a bus station.
Jonric: Just in case anyone isn't yet familiar with Obsidian, what would you like them to know about the team that's working on Alpha Protocol?
Ryan Rucinski: Know that we at Obsidian are working very diligently at delivering a great RPG in a setting that is relatively unused. As the ship date closes in, we are all excited at the possibility of seeing all our hard work and long hours come to fruition.
The number of people that working on Alpha Protocol has varied from a small core of two people to over 60. A vast majority of these fine folks have worked on other RPGs like Neverwinter Nights 2, Vampire: The Masquerade, Arcanum, Deus Ex, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Knights of the Old Republic 2, and many, many more... so many more that I feel that I'm not doing the others justice by even naming these few.
Clear influences for Alpha Protocol were some of the greatest games and movies ever made, including Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Fallout, The Bourne movies, Syriana, Ronin, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly... I would also like the readers to know that despite my mad ASCII art skillz (some folks might remember some IRC chats I did for NWN2), I am completely... er, mostly sane.
Retailers Point To Alpha Protocol Delay
By Michael McWhertor, 11:00 PM on Fri Sep 25 2009, 4,971 views (Edit, to draft, Slurp)
Obsidian Entertainment's Alpha Protocol—you know, the espionage RPG?—looks like it may not make its previously planned October release date. The Sega-published role-playing game looks like it will instead release next Summer.
Recently updated ship dates from GameStop and Amazon.ca list Alpha Protocol for June 1 and June 30, 2010, respectively. Most online retailers still show the game due the last week of October of this year, but if two independent retailers are showing a delay, don't be surprised if others follow suit.
If those retail listings are accurate, it wouldn't be the first time Alpha Protocol has been pushed back. The game was penciled in for a release as early as February 2009. Perhaps Sega took some of Sony Computer Entertainment America's rumored comments about the game to heart?
Whatever the reason may be, if Alpha Protocol has indeed slipped, it will join the recently delayed Blur as one of the many titles that will miss the typically heavy fall release schedule.
We've reached out to Sega of America to verify that change, but haven't heard back yet.
Sega On 'Alpha Protocol' Delay, What's Been Changed
Posted 2/5/10 4:32 pm ET by Russ Frushtick in Interviews, PC, PS3, Xbox 360 "Alpha Protocol," the action/RPG from Obsidian Entertainment and Sega, has seen a few big delays, but the last one was especially odd. Planned for release in October 2009, the game was never officially delayed until that release date came and went, leaving many to wonder just when it was going to see the light of day. Sega eventually stated that the game was pushed to Spring 2010 and the title went underground, unseen by press until earlier this week at a press event in New York.
Before this week's event I had seen the game demoed three times, and each time they were showing off the same level. Thankfully Sega trotted out a new level this time around, along with a new build. I asked Matthew Hickman, Assistant Producer at Sega, why the game was delayed and what Obsidian had done with the increased development time. Here's what he had to say:
"We had a few reasons for doing it. One: We wanted to position it better, give it a lot of time. The main reason: We really wanted to polish the game up, make it everything Obsidian planned it to be, and give the consumer a very polished game.
"We added a couple of other things. Tweaks in lighting here and there, added the inventory comparison screen so you can compare what you're buying to what you have equipped. Just bringing the whole quality level up."
I'd say the lighting tweaks are probably the most obvious improvement, as the game's graphics definitely lacked depth and definition before, and the new lighting gives the environments a more believable feel. The addition of the loot comparison screen is also crucial for anyone that's ever played a loot-heavy RPG (which "Alpha Protocol" most certainly is). So there's definitely work being done to improve the title.
I've always had a soft spot for "Alpha Protocol," as it really is trying to offer a deep RPG experience wrapped in a modern day combat setting, which is something you hardly ever see. There's still a lot of work to go, though, as the graphics remain pretty raw and there seem to be AI issues still to be worked out. It's definitely a good thing that Sega decided to push the game out even further, into summer 2010, as it'd be a shame to lose such a promising title to rushed development.
haha I saw this thread after a long time and thought that it was amazing that it has 25 replies, thinking that a lot of people at OW were interesting in the game. Little did I know it was mostly D. :)
famous?"infamous" :P O hohoho
It looks like absolutely crap, but I can easily get past that.
As long as the gameplay is great and it ain't Obsidian-buggy, I'm sure we'll be fine.
Graphics ain't everything - i.e. see original Deus Ex.
First Alpha Protocol review comes in
Posted by George in News on 17 May 2010 17:56 | Tags: 360, Alpha Protocol, PC, PS3, Review
The first review is in, from Spanish magazine PlayMania (issue 127). The review is that the game is great, scoring a 88 out of a hundred.
Graphics -> 80 - The exteriors are not so bad but the models and their animations are far from perfect.
Sound -> 90 – Appropriate soundtrack.
Diversity -> 89 - Even though it’s the same game, there are many possibilities when it comes to customizing your character and deciding how to play.
Duration -> 90 - The replayability factor is really high. You can play Alpha Protocol a lot of times without experiencing the same adventure.
Overall -> 88 - A spy role playing game that succeeds in blending action with stealth and gives players a high degree of freedom in choosing how they want to proceed.
Game comes out on June 1st in America, you can pre-order it on Amazon [360 - PS3 - PC] and save yourself a few bucks.
When I first heard about this game I was intrigued by the plot and the game's mechanics. However, watching the game in motion reveals a lot of flaws in its design.It sounds like this is another Obsidian game let out the box way too early for its own good.
Oh well.
Alpha Protocol utilizes the Unreal 3 graphics engine, though the only sign that this modern technology was used occurs with the engine's telltale texture pop-in. The pop-in is barely noticeable on the PC, but it's quite an eyesore in the console versions of the game. Sometimes, it takes up to 10 seconds or more for higher-resolution textures to appear, and at rare but noticeable times, they may never appear at all. The pop-in is a distraction, though it may have been more forgivable had the game compensated for it with great visuals. But Alpha Protocol is not a looker on any platform.
Environments are plain and textures lack detail, and you won't encounter the quality lighting and shadows you might expect to see in modern games. Animations are stiff and occasionally buggy and often appear to be missing multiple frames, which contributes to the game's overall inelegance. Alpha Protocol is not ugly, however; it's just behind the times and artistically uninspired. Nevertheless, the safe houses Mike operates from between missions have some nice views, and some of the outdoor missions throw in some welcome flashes of color. Similarly, the sound design gets the job done, though without much style. The voice acting is at least solid, and the generic action-movie soundtrack ramps up at the right moments but otherwise stays out of the way.
The shooting isn't great in Alpha Protocol, but you may have some fun with it, assuming you choose the game's most effective loadout. If you want to take the shoot-first, talk-later approach, you should almost certainly take an assault rifle with you. They are the game's most powerful weapons, and when used with the auto-targeting ability you unlock early on, they can make you almost unstoppable. Alpha Protocol is not a straight-up shooter, however. Under-the-hood calculations figure into your abilities in the field, so just because you aim directly at a bad guy's head and pull the trigger doesn't mean you're going to lodge a bullet in his skull. If you expect your shooting prowess to translate to battlefield superiority, you'll find that it's only part of the equation. It's too bad it isn't a bigger part of the equation where pistols are concerned. Pistols feel relatively weak, which is to be expected, though they would seem an attractive last-resort option if you pursue the stealth angle. But you are often put in situations that can only be solved with firearms and are clearly designed with long-range weaponry in mind. In these situations, a pistol/shotgun combo is often ineffective. If you focused on stealth and melee at the expense of ranged weapons, expect some frustrations in certain combat scenarios and boss encounters.
Alpha Protocol's astounding intricacies are tarnished by bugs, clumsy gameplay mechanics, and rough production values.
First of all, enemy AI is an astonishing shambles, almost to the point of being impressive. Opponents run around with seemingly no direction whatsoever, apart from the ones who will charge directly into your bullets because they want to punch you in the face. No joke, one in three enemies want to do nothing but punch you in the face. He won't fire his gun, he'll just sprint towards you, dodging from left to right like a headless chicken, then he'll punch you in the face -- once -- and slowly back away, shooting you. It makes absolutely no sense, and yet it seems to have been deliberately programmed into the game's AI because that's all the enemy soldiers ever want to do. That is, when they're not conjuring up endless grenades to spam with alarming regularity.
There is a cover system, but it doesn't work. Most of the time the enemies will just shoot through the cover and kill you, and it's also impossible to tell what works as cover and what doesn't. Some surfaces can't be hidden behind, but you won't know until you try, soaking up extra damage in the process. Once you do find cover, you then have to hope Thorton will actually stick to it, and later you'll hope that he unsticks when you want to move on. It's very much a "touch and go" situation as to whether or not Thorton will behave the way you want him to. In other words, Thorton will decide when he wants to pretend he's in a competent third-person-shooter, not you.
Sorry, MyD, I missed that post ;)
I was expecting AP to use a cover system very similar to SC: Conviction, which was practically automated and made it really easy to move cover-to-cover.So much for that thought...ugh...
Remember how much Obsidian modified/overhauled NWN2 with the Mask of the Betrayer expansion? I think most people are expecting at least that much of a transformation in a patch for Alpha Protocol. I won;t say I "expect" it but I am hopeful. Obsidian really need to do something radical if they hope to rectify some of these first impressions.Oh, yeah - it was like a total difference of night and day, once MOTB came out. It was a major and fantastic overhaul.
Well, I checked it out on X360. It's a damn shame the game is broken.Ouch...
The first thing that struck me about the visuals was how bland everything looks. Textures and artwork are all very generic; the game's visuals don't seem to help create a unique visual identity. It may as well be an elaborate UT3 mod.
As a stealth buff, the first things that struck me about the gameplay was the absolutely damaged stealth mechanic. Gamespot's review did say it was lacking but you have to try it for yourself to see how much of an understatement that is. Lighting and shadows are not a factor, and if you think you're in cover your enemies may magically see right through it. A "spy" game with no stealth doesn't make much sense to me.That's REALLY odd... :o
Now, the headshot thang! God damn is it infuriating. There is a possibility to score a deadly headshot but you have to keep the cursor pointed at the target's head for about 6 secs while the reticule tightens and turns red. Yet even that doesn't guarantee a kill-shot 100% of the time.Dice-rolls only really work in games w/ click-and-point games where there's no real actual aiming mechanic (think like SW:KOTOR, NWN, DAO, etc), not games w/ actual first-person acting aiming mechanic...
Basically the game is all about dicerolls. Tactical gameplay has little to do with success, except perhaps when you actually manage some stealth melee kills.
Ok, so what did I like about it? The conversation system is quite good. The consequences of my actions have clear effects in casual discussions as well as the plot. I like the intel gathering and the ability to actually use it in practical ways (reading a dossier may give you info that can hint on how to best deal with certain characters).Awesome. :)
The game is a pot of poorly cooked great ideas.It really sounds like they need to re-work the head-shot mechanics and AI, more so than anything else...
Also, nice little addition ;)Hehe, that's a cool nod to their publisher (Sega). I love in-game jokes and references subtlety snuck in there. Old school Fallout games were REALLY good at that...
(http://www.ukresistance.co.uk/pics7/saturn_alpha_protocol.jpg)
But not quite as depressing as the fact that Obsidian has done almost everything necessary to create a stone-sold classic, but falls short in the areas that so many lesser experiences get right: the sophistication of its AI, the variety in its character models, the visual fidelity, and yes, technical issues like texture pop-in, clipping, and stilted facial animations.
Some will never see past these problems, but for those that can Alpha Protocol is that rarest of things: a videogame that doesn‘t pander to its audience with a technicolour world of goblins and space marines, but actually demands that you pay attention, listen, and even conduct research to get the most out of the experience.
The menu interface feels designed for consoles rather than a PC's keyboard and mouse, which is the best reason to go for the 360 or PS3 version instead. Also, using the keyboard to quickly do many things at once is awkward with only five fingers on the left hand, although it was only a noticeable issue during very tough fights. In normal combat scenarios, the keyboard controls are fine.
The game regularly stuttered when loading in the middle of missions, complete with a camera jerk that left Thorton facing the wrong direction even when the mouse was held still, but it's impossible to know if this was related to the specific desktop used, only afflicts the PC version, or happens in all versions of the game. Although it occurred often, it was usually during slow moments and was more of a minor aggrevation than a serious flaw.
A major source of frustration is the game's overuse of boss characters as normal humans with absurd amounts of hit points and the ability to ignore bullets tearing into their bodies. This isn't the 90s anymore — make bosses that fit in a real world setting, not an old man in a business suit who can run though the fire of three incendiary grenades while taking an entire shotgun clip to the chest before unleashing a three punch old-geezer melee combo that removes all of Thorton's armor and most of his health.
Alpha Protocol is structurally flawed, but perhaps most damning -- considering the thing was apparently done six months ago -- it's a technical nightmare. Textures take forever to pop-in (and sometimes even pop back out!); enemies hover 10 feet above platforms; there are frequent, seemingly random load times that can range from 3 to 15 seconds, and even occur right in the middle of dialog. Trust me, I could go on.
As a reviewer, I can understand how a company can release a game with structural issues. Sometimes that stuff is just too deeply ingrained to fix, or maybe you really believe it's the right design choice. I'm going to call you out on that stuff, but there's a chance I'll be able to get past it. But to release a game that's just plain not finished and to expect people -- to expect your fans -- to pay the full $60 for it? That's where you lose me.
I found a stealth character (or at least, a cautious character that doesn't rush in) to be rewarding. Using cover (which could be better), watching guard movements and carefully choosing the best route meshes with the slow aiming for critical shots and using different abilities. While I enjoyed the stealth play, it could be better. The level design could offer more choices and there's no real use of light and shadow; anyone expecting something like Thief or Splinter Cell will be disappointed. Because stealth is more about watching guards and hiding behind objects than melding with the shadows, the advanced stealth skills are underwhelming.
Shadow Operative, for example, simply makes you invisible for a limited period. It works well enough but breaks the suspension of a real world setting to simply press a button and walk past guards unseen. In practice, it's probably not that different to other stealth games but it does stand out in the supposedly realistic setting.
It's a shame that boss encounters often throw all that stealthing out the window, with big, dramatic firefights, rocket launchers and all hell breaking loose. They can be quite memorable but it's disappointing a game that does such a good job with choices along the way forces at least a handful of big fights on the player. While I haven't played enough to say categorically, I find it hard to see how anyone could achieve a completely non-lethal game, as promised.
From a technical viewpoint, Alpha Protocol lacks polish but I didn't encounter any substantial issues. The graphics on PC are serviceable, although the animation is lacklustre.
The game ran very smoothly on my low-end rig and was essentially bug-free. I encountered one scripting error when I took an unexpected path through one area, but that was it.
The AI is mediocre; not as bad as reported but it does ignore some simple things, such as open doors and missing companions.
The PC version does have console conversion issues: checkpoint-only saves, no double-clicking and unreliable scroll-wheel use are annoying but not uncommon these days.
D the game is dead. No matter how hard you stick your tongue down its mouth, it won't come back to life. :P
If you decide to play Alpha Protocol, just know that your main enemies over the course of its 15-or-so hours will be its collection of misery-inducing technical issues and the clash between its action and role-playing elements. There are parts of Alpha Protocol that I feel are totally amazing and absolutely worth seeing, but you'll have to trudge through a lot of very disappointing stuff just to see it.
Apparently, no role-playing game would apparently be complete without a smattering of mini-games, and so you get a few in Alpha Protocol. They're all designed for a gamepad, though. Console players will likely find some enjoyment in the alphanumeric code matching of the hacking or the pressure sensitive lockpicking minigame, but PC users will be left feeling largely ignored because the systems were not tuned well for the mouse and keyboard. This tilt toward the console versions extends across the majority of Alpha Protocol's interface. The mouse-keyboard combo is functional, but the game definitely feels like it was designed for a gamepad. Those playing on PC might want to hook up an Xbox 360 controller for the best experience since making selections on menus, particularly the weapon mod customization, doesn't seem to want to consistently cooperate with mouse clicks.
Tom Chick's list of 11 Ways Alpha Protocol is better than Mass Effect 2. (http://fidgit.com/archives/2010/06/11_ways_alpha_protocol_is_bett.php)That's an obtuse assessment and "better" is a poorly chosen word because his entire argument is based his own opinion rather than any technical assessment of either game.
9) As a standalone game
Mass Effect 2 is full of fan service. It's one of those sequels that absolutely demands familiarity with the first game. This isn't necessarily a criticism if you're a fan of Mass Effect 1. But for everyone else, Alpha Protocol does a better job not expecting you to already care about who's who. Its characters need no introduction because this game is their introduction.
But, really - how the hell do you sum up a 20-40 hour game so no0bs who start w/ the sequel know what's going on from the previous game? Especially w/ the possibilities of different outcomes from the original game occurring?
No shit, Sherlock. ME2 is a sequel, which should be apparent by the "2" in its title. Alpha Protocol is a new property and frankly it does a poor job of making the player care about any of the characters at all, primarily from having a bland story.
I'd argue his points further but I'd basically have to quote the entire article, which would a waste of time considering it's completely asinine.You could argue quotes here and there in this thread, in-between my posts! :P
7) As a story narrated by a smoking manME2 is NOT about Cerberus and The Elusive Man. They're a huge component of the game b/c they are trying to help Shepard and humanity (in their radical way), sure...
Both Alpha Protocol and Mass Effect 2 use conversations with a mysterious smoker as a framework for telling their stories. By the time Alpha Protocol is over, you will know all you need to know about its smoking man. But I still have no idea what was up with that elusive man in Mass Effect 2, except that he sounds like President Bartlett.
It's the Illusive Man, not the elusive man.
And you don't like consoles, and you say you will never own one. Why constantly post links to console reviews? Especially for a game that is beyond help.The console versions are getting reviewed more than the PC version. Are you surprised, given that I live in country where the consoles seem to dominate the market and be where many believe the money is at?
Well, you don't have to organize all the back threads. That would be insane. But do start with any new ones, as it really is bothering people. Please keep any previews and reviews limited to the first posts. Any discussions you or we have can come after as normal.
If you are joking, then that's funny, but if you don't get the difference between what I did and what you've been doing, then it is a hopeless situation. ;)Yeah, it's a joke - hence the :P
Anyway, let's start with that -- start editing the first post to add news, reviews, and previews. You don't even have to make new threads for every piece of news on a single game. For example, you can create a thread called: THE OFFICIAL DIABLO 3 thread, which people would find a useful source of information, since not everyone has your ability to gather every piece of interesting news off of the net.You really think I'll need more than a first-post in a Thread block?
The problem comes when you make six or seven posts in succession with news etc.
To be honest, a few people have told me that they have wanted to discuss certain things in your threads, but have been unable to because the discussion bits have been lost between D news posts.
So yea, go ahead and create some official game dedicated threads. Please keep them organized, and you will see people will start giving your thoughts the respect they deserve.
To be honest many of us skip your posts because often they contain links rather than actual personal thoughts on the game. I am sure you don't want people to be ignoring your normal posts either, because you definitely have insight to offer.
For now, I feel organization would go a long way.
I realize you would rather create new posts every time you have some news or whatever because people tend to look at new posts more than anything.
Here is what you should keep in mind:
a) That works a few times until people realize your every new post is some news item they aren't interested in, which results in people ignoring any new post from D as they get to know you better. Obviously you don't want that, because that defeats the purpose of your posting.
b) Once people find all your news and links in the first post, they will get used to the idea.
c) If people aren't responding to your news item, it is because they just aren't interested. Sometimes you have to move on. If you create new posts rather than edit your first one to get attention, then it is counter productive in the long run for the reasons stated above.
Here are two more suggestions you should find fun:
a) I suggest you reserve the first three posts of every new official game thread you create. The reason is that each post has a word count, so this is in case you run out of space for your news stuff.
For example, if you create an 'Official Diablo 3' thread, you can do a triple post saying something like SPACE RESERVED, which you can edit later. Please only use your reserved space if the first post isn't enough. Also don't reserve more than two extra posts, which should be MORE than enough.
b) I know editing the first post won't create an alert that there is a news update, but you can always edit the thread title if you've edited your first post with news.
For example your official Diablo 3 thread could say something like, "OFFICIAL DIABLO 3 THREAD --- (UPDATE: TRANSVESTITE CLASS REVEALED!)
Nah, I don't think you will. Good stuff btw.
Like I said, you can start with the new threads you make, or the older ones that you think people will find interesting. :)
Alpha Protocol PC - The Unofficial Modding Thread (from Obsidian's boards). (http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=55422&st=0)Well, AA will only eliminate jaggies, which isn't really that much of an issue on high resolutions, and AF will primarily sharpen textures. They're not really enough to revamp the game's visuals.
Already, gamers are tinkering and modding the game, since it is UE3.0 based and we all know how moddable that engine is: VERY moddable.
I find THIS particular post VERY interesting in the thread. (http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?s=&showtopic=55422&view=findpost&p=1044236) The game has SM3.0 w/ all the AA and AF features turned-off by default - meanwhile, modders have already found a way to UNLOCK them through the APEngine.INI file.
Well, geez...no wonder the game's graphics got criticized. I bet it looks MUCH better w/ SM3.0 and AA and AF turned-up a bit. Interesting.
That's odd, X.No, with the 360 pad your character animates smoothly as you change directions. It's pretty odd.
Does that same animation skip happen when you use the 360 gamepad?
No, with the 360 pad your character animates smoothly as you change directions. It's pretty odd.
One of the mini-games works well with a keyboard but only because it's a simple "left/right SPACE" mechanic. The other two were very clearly made with a gamepad in mind.
Technically, the game is playable with a keyboard and mouse but it feels somewhat handicapped. Even with a mouse the game uses autoaim, taking manual aiming out of the equation and making the gamepad a valid choice for me.
I don't really see an issue with the 3rd-person camera. Especially when you're using a mouse, you're constantly moving it anyway. It works fairly well and I don't think I've ever needed a "center behind main character" option in any 3rd-person game when I'm using a mouse. I will note that with the X360 pad attached there is indeed a button to do just that (right-stick click I think).
Oh yeah, the weapons are so unbalanced. The gameplay in general is unbalanced.
Cover didn't work too well for me. Cover-to-cover doesn't always work either, it's very specific. Getting into cover is ok, but sometimes trying to get out of cover was a real bitch! Like the button was not responding or something.Odd. :(
Regarding the AI, I've come across a few dumb moments i.e. they seem to prefer trying to beat me rather than shoot me, amusing but stupid.Curious - what difficulty did you play on?
Haha I knew I recognized his voice!Man, Nolan North seems to be in so many games of late...hard to keep up. Dude sure did a heck of a job (pun-intended) as Steven Heck. :)
I was really let down that the stealth elements didn't work as I'd hoped. They're actually more closely related to the stealth elements in D&D games (stealth dice roll and invisibility spells).Stealth Elements here in Alpha Protocol remind me of another genre-bender game...
My friend is another country, can they install the game at the same time it is available to me?
Not necessarily. Steam games are tied to the region's release schedule. If another user has a later release date for their country, they will not be able to play their received gift until that time.
haha yea I just read that. Senseless. They are just losing sales.
* To resolve activation issues, PC copy protection has been removed.
* In Moscow during the assault of Brayko's Mansion, the player could get into a situation where a door would not be openable preventing progression through the rest of the level. This has been fixed.
* In Taipei, during the Stop the Assassination mission, the user can fall out of the world if they reload the "Exit Gardens" checkpoint. There was also a problem where if the player backtracked, part of the level might not load in properly. This has also been fixed.
* In the same mission, a problem with subtitles was corrected.
* In the museum in Rome, the game could crash when using Focused Aim to kill the NPC holding Madison in the elevator.
* Bosses could get stuck in an accelerated mode when Fury wears off.
* Chainshot was exploitable to slow time and get critical headshots without consuming its cooldown.
so is the game still shit and broken? if so, fuck you for making me read this again.The game STILL needs balancing.
Reading my posts up there are kind of funny. This game turned into one of my favorite gaming adventures, partially because of the game itself and partially because of my head lore of a veteran spy or spec-ops guy who just didn't give a shit anymore.