RPGWatch Feature: Worst RPG of 2010

[Dasale]

Well you certainly don't have to play the game if it doesn't appeal to you, but perhaps it's not really fair to say it's a bad game just because you "didn't like it." Just say "I personally didn't like it" and move on instead of calling it a bad game.

As far as commands go, I won't list the entire control scheme, but you hold down the RMB and press left or right with A or D to dodge. The key is timing. Use the Tab key to lock on first.

Thanks for the help, after to have made first fights without help (honestly first goblins you met very soon in G2+NOTR have just another dimension from combat point of view than the poor things I met in Severance and that seems sort of Goblins. After few fights like that I understood I had to select the enemy and then sudenly the keys for look right/left become strafe keys (no need keep press RMD thankfully).

For me this lock disqualify this game as the best sword fighting system in RPG. A RPG need fully support combats against multiple opponents and that sort of lock fails do it, always, or is it the exception to the rule?

So no more round needed G2+NOTR wins easily, first opponents design is just at another level of depth and quality, and ability to have smart fights up to against three enemies is better than a manual lock system.

…Is it literally realistic to be able to slaughter 50 men with a lance on horseback? No, but the combat feels realistic,

Well that's exactly my point if the combat can be more fun at prise of "realism" I choose the funnier version. Realism for video games is still quite fake and a lot in minds. There's an obsession for this pseudo realism in occident.

EDIT: I think there's something you didn't get in my feeling about G2+NOTR fights, I don't think the system is that brilliant but the oponents design is and makes the whole fighting brilliant, also details like the ranges are great to explore tactically, something lost in G3 among many other things lost in G3 fights.

EDIT2: So Severance lost pathetically against G2+NOTR in confrontation for the best fights in RPG first person and over the shoulder, so what's next future looser?

 

[Thrasher]

Pretty much every complaint people leveled against Alpha Protocol could be leveled against Deus Ex, a best-in-genre staple.

I'm sorry, but I find that an over statement. The timed dialogues, with no selection of text, only stance are nothing like DE. Yet the dialogue choices make huge impacts to the game, in both cases…

EDIT: And you guys are making me feel bad that Severance is sitting unplayed on my bookshelf...

 

[DoctorNarrative]

I'm sorry, but I find that an over statement. The timed dialogues, with no selection of text, only stance are nothing like DE. Yet the dialogue choices make huge impacts to the game, in both cases…

EDIT: And you guys are making me feel bad that Severance is sitting unplayed on my bookshelf…

That's a difference surely, but I don't remember that being something people complained about. I thought most people enjoyed the dialogue system in Alpha Protocol.

The things most reviewers complain about are the stat-based aiming, the stat-based stealth and the bugs. Deus Ex had all three.

 

[Thrasher]

REALLY!? There are many posts on this site alone about people complaining about the ME style dialogue wheel.... Just do a search.

 

[BillSeurer]

I thought the timed dialogs were brilliant given the genre. It actually added some tension to them. Now the system wasn't perfect as sometimes the brief description you choose didn't match what your character said very well.

The stat based complaints is just stupid. That is how RPGs work.

 

[DoctorNarrative]

REALLY!? There are many posts on this site alone about people complaining about the ME style dialogue wheel…. Just do a search.

Well I am new here man, all I can go off of is my own personal experience on forums and reading reviews. I don't remember the dialogue wheel being a major hangup with the game that I saw mentioned very often (if at all).

If it was on here then okay... that's cool. I thought it worked fine but opinions are different from everyone.

 

[DArtagnan]

I thought the timed dialogue was horrible.

Deus Ex - especially in terms of when it was released - is so superior to Alpha Protocol - that I lack the words to fully express it.

 

[Nerevarine]

The things most reviewers complain about are the stat-based aiming, the stat-based stealth and the bugs. Deus Ex had all three.

I personally never ran into any serious bugs in all of my time spent playing Deus Ex, and I also only ran into a couple of extremely minor bugs/glitches in three playthroughs of AP. Perhaps I'm just lucky...

As for comparisons between these two particular games, they are each rough around the edges at first glance, and they each have stat-based aiming that feels a little weird until you get used to it (I personally liked both stat-based systems). However, where the comparison falls short in my opinion is in the level design. Deus Ex's levels are simply amazing to me because of how open they are in terms of player-freedom for completing different objectives; AP's levels seem incredibly linear and small by comparison. AP let's you choose your own playstyle, but there is minimal exploration and a serious lack of multiple paths to take within levels in comparison to Deus Ex. The level design is one reason why, even though I certainly enjoyed AP, I don't think that it measures up to Deus Ex.

 

[DoctorNarrative]

I didn't mean to say at all that Alpha Protocol is on the same level as Deus Ex, or a similar game to Deus Ex. My main point was that both games have combat and stealth that seem to be skill-based but are actually stat-based. Deus Ex is loved for this, but Alpha Protocol got bashed for it in pretty much every review I read. Many of them said "if it seems like an action game it should work like one" and things of that nature... you could say the same thing about Deus Ex.

Similar thing happened with Mafia 2, critics and many forum posters bashed the game for having long driving sections and too many story moments without gameplay, and for being a linear game in an open world. The original Mafia was exactly the same in this regard though, and was praised for it with stellar reviews.

It's hypocritical to call one game a classic and then bash another game for doing the same stuff, I guess is the essence of my point.

 

[DArtagnan]

I didn't love Deus Ex for its stealth or combat implementations - as both were kinda clumsy. I loved it for making fantastic non-linear levels and giving the player the freedom to go about exploring them in the ways they wanted to, as well as dealing with challenges in a variety of ways. Not just that, but how they brought such concepts forward and made great strides in the subgenre.

It also had a very interesting story to boot, with a ton of flavor-text available in books or datapads.

Alpha Protocol is a quirky confused hybrid, and it didn't have a clear idea of what it was trying to be. Sometimes it was a clumsy action game with archaic boss fights, and sometimes it was a "serious" spy thriller with dreadfully stale and pretentious dialogue littered with pathetic humor. The timed wheel feature made matters even worse.

But, that's just my opinion.

 

[Nerevarine]

I didn't mean to say at all that Alpha Protocol is on the same level as Deus Ex, or a similar game to Deus Ex. My main point was that both games have combat and stealth that seem to be skill-based but are actually stat-based. Deus Ex is loved for this, but Alpha Protocol got bashed for it in pretty much every review I read. Many of them said "if it seems like an action game it should work like one" and things of that nature… you could say the same thing about Deus Ex.


It's hypocritical to call one game a classic and then bash another game for doing the same stuff, I guess is the essence of my point.

I understand what you are saying now. I agree with you that is unfair for one game to be crucified for having gameplay elements that other games have but are praised as classics. Perhaps part of the negative perception of AP is because Deus Ex was released 10 years ago; stat-based shooting and skills certainly wasn't a shocking concept to anyone at that time. However, in the age of Mass Effect, the RPG-shooter hybrid "gold standard" stat-based shooting/skills seem "unintuitive" or "archaic" to the mainstream media and mainstream gamers. I remember reading a review saying that AP's combat was broken because the reviewer's shots weren't hitting the target even though the reticule was aimed at an enemy. Obviously, the shooting was far from "broken," but this reviewer was completely clueless and didn't realize that the stats of the player and the stats of the weapon directly impact accuracy and overall combat effectiveness.

 

[Dasale]

...I remember reading a review saying that AP's combat was broken because the reviewer's shots weren't hitting the target even though the reticule was aimed at an enemy. Obviously, the shooting was far from "broken," but this reviewer was completely clueless and didn't realize that the stats of the player and the stats of the weapon directly impact accuracy and overall combat effectiveness.

Slash with a sword in action RPG and the engine: "oops no sorry bad luck I know you timed and aimed perfectly but nope your sword hit miss".

Implement an action RPG like that and you'll get ton of complain, for reason. What's strange is your surprise that people can't get it. Make damages levels vary reasonably but not try have them hit/not hit depending of some luck and some stats. Use stats to influence range, fire rate, a non random damage level, but not hit/miss from luck.

 

[DoctorNarrative]

Slash with a sword in action RPG and the engine: "oops no sorry bad luck I know you timed and aimed perfectly but nope your sword hit miss".

Morrowind did that, and was loved by most in the RPG community.

Implement an action RPG like that and you'll get ton of complain, for reason. What's strange is your surprise that people can't get it. Make damages levels vary reasonably but not try have them hit/not hit depending of some luck and some stats. Use stats to influence range, fire rate, a non random damage level, but not hit/miss from luck.

There is a real reason to have stats effect to-hit ratios and such though, it makes it so player skill cannot trump stats altogether. More importantly even recent hit games have had stat-based aiming like Fallout 3 and the original Mass Effect.

The only reason it is now being bashed and skill-based action RPGs are being praised is because reviewers and publishers are catering to a mainstream market that want everything to be a pure action game. Mike Laidlaw on the Bioware forums made a post about that, saying the RPG genre is in trouble and the only way to "save" it is to appeal to more mainstream customers. I personally don't feel like you can "save" the RPG through sales by making them all action games with stats, that's disingenuous. You don't save something by killing it.

 

[Dasale]

Morrowind did that

Morrowind, I don't remember you could slash something and not hit it at all. I remember more damage levels increased with character skills. Perhaps you mean there was a random damages level? That's quite different if the random part isn't so important.

When random is used on an event that occurs often, you don't see much the random because the repetition of the event ensure you most often get similar average values.

When random is used on a rare event, or with a high random effect like 30% chance to zero damages, that's hugely different. I always hated the D&D high random spell effect "full effect/no effect", and quite often just never used such spells to not lost an important move by doing a full attack for no effect.

There is a real reason to have stats effect to-hit ratios and such though, it makes it so player skill cannot trump stats altogether.

Sorry? Can you explain it differently? I don't understand what you mean. Hit ratio will bring random and an average lower than max. Random is supposed to bring a sort of simple simulation of reality hazard, for the lower average, just lower the number, no need of random.

More importantly even recent hit games have had stat-based aiming like Fallout 3 and the original Mass Effect.

Yeah FNV, ME, random shots, exactly a point I don't like in those games. Not sure why you consider that hardcore RPG players should enjoy have random hits.

Yes, F3 and M2, so in fact random hits in action games is popular? So I wonder why you are worry about this if it's already popular?

Yeah myself I'm worry about it because I feel it is gaining a sort of popularity and it's not something I wish for RPG action games.

The only reason it is now being bashed and skill-based action RPGs are being praised is because reviewers and publishers are catering to a mainstream market that want everything to be a pure action game.

Well I wonder where you want go, do you mean I don't like this because I want promote pure action games?

So no I don't hear nor care of the voices you quote, and no that's not why I don't want have random shots. For me the point of action RPG is to merge players skills and character skills, and there's plenty other way to implement character skills than frustrate him by making him fail a shot he in fact succeed by using a ton of concentration and sweat.

I don't see this a good way to implement skills for action games, but even in a turn based RPG strategy games like King's Bounty the Legend I didn't like at all the possible high effect of critical hits doubling the damages.

You don't save something by killing it.

Why Action RPG SHOULD have random hit full failure or an important random effect? It's a vision a bit extreme. Also not sure why but I don't remember for example that Ultima Underworld had such random in hitting effects, nor many more old action games, not even that Deus Ex let you head shot and miss because of random.

 

[DoctorNarrative]

Morrowind, I don't remember you could slash something and not hit it at all.

Trust me, you could. You actually miss more in that game than you hit usually, even with a high level character. That was something many mainstream reviewers complained about with Morrowind, that the weapon looked like it hit the enemy but you would miss based on stats.

Sorry? Can you explain it differently? I don't understand what you mean. Hit ratio will bring random and an average lower than max. Random is supposed to bring a sort of simple simulation of reality hazard, for the lower average, just lower the number, no need of random.

Think about it like D&D, your skills and abilities as a person has nothing to do with your character's success in the game world. For a lot of people that is true roleplaying. In Oblivion or Mass Effect 2 your ability to win and finish quests is almost entirely based on your abilities as a person playing the game, to shoot accurately or dodge. Damage might be higher with better equipment or stats but a good player can always dodge and shoot their way to victory. In a game like Fallout it is more about building the right character and THEIR skills winning the day.

Yeah FNV, ME, random shots, exactly a point I don't like in those games. Not sure why you consider that hardcore RPG players should enjoy have random hits.

It's not being somewhat "random" that makes it good, it's being stat-based. A better gun skill in Fallout means a better chance to hit the enemy, shooting the bad guy is about character skill. In Fallout 3 player skill has a lot to do with it but there is still the underlying gun stat that does effect accuracy, so with a poor gun stat even the most skilled player will miss a lot… that means the character is important. In a game like Mass Effect 2 the character build is barely important at all, winning is almost entire based on your skills as a player.

Yes, F3 and M2, so in fact random hits in action games is popular? So I wonder why you are worry about this if it's already popular?

I don't think ME2 is an example, they switched to direct skill-based aiming for that game. Yes, Fallout 3 is popular despite stat-based aiming in part because it's not AS stat-based as Alpha Protocol and in part because exploration is more the core of the experience.

 

[JDR13]

Yep, hitting your opponent in Morrowind was stat based, although I disagree with the notion that a high level character misses more than he hits. It could take a long time to build up a weapon skill in Morrowind though, especially if it's not tagged as one of your character's Major or Minor skills.

Also, weapon skills in Fallout 3 actually affect damage as well as accuracy.

 

[DoctorNarrative]

Yep, hitting your opponent in Morrowind was stat based, although I disagree with the notion that a high level character misses more than he hits. It could take a long time to build up a weapon skill in Morrowind, especially if it's not tagged as one of your character's major or minor skills.

Yeah, I am sure you don't miss THAT often at high levels, I suppose I was exaggerating. Definitely at the start of the game though you will miss a whooooole lot.

As for training I thought it worked much better in Morrowind than Oblivion. Morrowind's leveling up was basically all about using money to pay trainers. Needing money for training in turn inspired you to do quests to earn rewards, or explore caves and temples for loot. Oblivion capping training to 5 points per level basically removed it from being a serious mechanism for leveling skills themselves and a reason to build up money.

 

[JDR13]

The level of my weapon skill somewhat matched my hit percentage, minus the effect of my opponents weapons skill. At least that's how it seemed to me when I played Morrowind. A weapon skill of 100 hit close to 100% of the time for me.

It made for a frustrating experience in the early going, but became quite rewarding later in the game. I actually prefered combat in Morrowind over Oblivion.


How did this thread get so far off topic?

 

[DoctorNarrative]

I actually prefered combat in Morrowind over Oblivion.

I liked both, for different reasons. Oblivion was really good at physics-driven visceral combat. Morrowind was really good at... well, being an RPG.

As for the topic, after saying "Arcania... duh" there really wasn't anywhere else it could lead but off-topic!

 

[DArtagnan]

Yeah, Morrowind with its "always use best attack" combat was truly inspired

I don't think I can think of any first person CRPG with combat more dull than that.

Even Daggerfall was better.