My thoughts after completing Alpha Protocol

[Maylander]

Allright, time for another random rambling after finishing some new title.

First off, allow me to say that whether or not you enjoy Alpha Protocol will depend on your approach - if you're in it for the RPG you'll most likely enjoy it, but if you're in it for the action, you should look elsewhere (the action is decent, but it's not the reason anyone should pick this up). I believe this is why the reviews are so varied.

I'll make some general comments on the various aspects. As always - if there are any questions, feel free to ask.

Gameplay
It starts out rather slow, but once you get the hang of it, it's actually quite good. Roughly on par with Mass Effect. I played a fairly straight forward soldier that focused on martial arts, assault rifles and toughness (increase hitpoints, damage reduction, etc). I'm not sure how the other characters play, but I suspect they are considerably harder, based on the locations I've seen so far (quite a few heavy gunfights).

I intend to try a pistol/martial arts/stealth character soonish, so I'll see how that turns out. I played on normal, by the way.

Story
Fairly good, definetly above par. It's well written, didn't see any inconsistencies (unlike ME2 where there are a lot of them). Not a whole lot to say here without it being a major spoiler.

Characters
Very good. A ton of interesting characters that are involved in various intrigues. Also a lot of extra background information on most characters (can be found throughout the game, available in your "journal"). Trying to figure out the various characters and their motivations will help you gain influence with them, which makes dealing with them easier - a lot of bonuses can be gained this way. Overall, the writing is excellent, but that is no surprise.

World/atmosphere
The various places Mike visits are well made and interesting, though they sometimes feel a bit constrained. Luckily they are more varied than ME2, so the action parts aren't as obvious or linear. Still, I feel that it should've been possible to visit more landmarks to get a feeling of being somewhere specific instead of somewhere generic. I'm not saying the action should be placed near a landmark, as such things tend to be filled with tourists, but it would've been fun to have undercover assignements or informant meetings etc near landmarks.

Quests/missions
Not a lot to say about missions. Quite a lot of variation, though they are mainly along the lines of Jason Bourne, not James Bond. Could've had a few more infiltration quests. The dialogue system would work great in such missions. Other than that, it's all good.

Choices/consequences
Amazing. Period. It's as if Obsidian wanted to prove something - how many decisions can we throw at the player within a given timeframe? They're everywhere, popping up non-stop, either between missions or during them (they're not even obvious, you could get a call smack in the middle of a mission where you have to choose really fast and then live with the consequences). The consequences are huge, both in terms of how you play the game and how various sequences in the main quest play out. I don't think I've ever played a game where I've had to make decisions as often as in Alpha Protocol - in a way it was incredible, but also fairly intense, because there's no way to systematically replay the game to experience everything - there are just way, way too many options to keep track of.

Needless to say, this aspect is deeply impressive in Alpha Protocol.

Graphics
The graphics are below Mass Effect 2, so I assume most it will be subpar for most. However, in all honesty, it gets the job done. It's just not something you'll even notice once you're playing the game. For us RPG fans, this is pretty much as good as we can expect while still getting a complex RPG behind the graphics - the RPG elements in AP are far stronger than ME1 or 2, and the quest structure is also more advanced with a lot more options and outcomes.

Sound
Good music, good voice acting. I like it. I like the main character - he may not be as slick as James Bond , he's a lot closer to Jason Bourne no matter how you try to play him, but that's fine by me - I prefer Bourne over Bond anyway. Not a lot to say here; the music is good enough to create a decent atmosphere, but nothing exceptional like Gothic 3.

Technical
I've seen reports of bugs and technical issues on consoles, but I experienced no issues at all. None. I had a single reload because a named enemy I had to take out decided to never leave a cover I could not reach. Other than that, I had no crashes, no slowdowns, no bugs of any kind, despite playing the majority of the game in long gaming sessions. Without a doubt the most polished product from Obsidian.

Overall
I like it a lot, though it has its flaws, such as weapons being somewhat unbalanced (from my brief tests with all weapons, it seems the assault rifle is overall superior, with pistol being the weakest, but I need further testing before I can say anything final). Also, there could've been more James Bond, as I've mentioned before.

Beyond that, it's a great RPG with a very impressive amount of options and decisions. Anyone enjoying Mass Effect, but feeling it was a bit "light" as an RPG, should definetly try AP - the action is roughly on par with ME, and the RPG elements are significantly stronger. ME definetly has a more interesting setting though, but that goes without saying (sci-fi vs modern).

Unless your gaming budget is extremely tight, the 20 hours or so you'll get out of a single playthrough is definetly worth it. Of course, if you want to fully explore all options, you'll be stuck for weeks or months, but only the most dedicated gamers will do that. Personally, I'll do one more playthrough immediately, to try out a completely different approach - change the order of the locations I visit (yes, even that changes certain things), the way I fight, and the way I respond to people. Should be very interesting.

.. aaand that's about as much as I'm willing to write right about now. Like I said, feel free to ask me anything. :)

Edit:
A tip to everyone playing the game: Invest two points in sabotage to get the minigame improvement. Trust me. They'll get increasingly hard later on, so having a little extra time comes in handy.

[Remus]

Anyone enjoying Mass Effect, but feeling it was a bit "light" as an RPG, should definetly try AP - the action is roughly on par with ME, and the RPG elements are significantly stronger.

Sound good. ME is okay, it's like a half way game between rpg and action but satisfied neither pure rpg or action fans, unlike Deus Ex with deeper gameplay.

Would wait for more reviews on AP.

[JDR13]

I honestly think a lot of it boils down to whether or not you like the setting and characters. After watching a friend play it for about an hour today, I think I'm going to pass on this one, or at least wait until it hits the bargain bin.

[Anderson]

Thanks for the impressions, Maylander. I especially liked your thoughts on choice and consequences.

Choices/consequences
Amazing. Period. It's as if Obsidian wanted to prove something - how many decisions can we throw at the player within a given timeframe? They're everywhere, popping up non-stop, either between missions or during them (they're not even obvious, you could get a call smack in the middle of a mission where you have to choose really fast and then live with the consequences). The consequences are huge, both in terms of how you play the game and how various sequences in the main quest play out. I don't think I've ever played a game where I've had to make decisions as often as in Alpha Protocol - in a way it was incredible, but also fairly intense, because there's no way to systematically replay the game to experience everything - there are just way, way too many options to keep track of.

Needless to say, this aspect is deeply impressive in Alpha Protocol.

[Zloth]

It's getting to the point where I'm going to have to get this game just to check the reviewers!

Lots of fast decisions.... hmmm.... I wonder if that encourages you to "get into character" and try to think like the role you are playing, or if it reduces role playing because you don't have time to think "what would my character do?"

[HiddenX]

Thank you Maylander - after reading your impressions I will give Alpha Protocol a try.

[DArtagnan]

Interesting how different this game is received.

I completely disagree about the C&C and conversation system - which I think of as a nice idea executed abysmally and without much thought, and I think pistols are very overpowered once you get to a later stage. In fact, I don't see myself ever going for another weapon, because it feels so good in most ways - except for regular gunplay, which I don't think is a fun way of playing this kind of game.

Other than that, I feel much the same way - and I'd recommend it to everyone into the genre.

Lots of fast decisions…. hmmm…. I wonder if that encourages you to "get into character" and try to think like the role you are playing, or if it reduces role playing because you don't have time to think "what would my character do?"

Unfortunately, the latter is exactly what it does 90% of the time.

It doesn't help that I don't like the guy I'm playing, but you have very few opportunities to think about what you're doing, or what you're going to say. I think it's the most unnatural and frustrating conversation system I've ever tried, and I don't think there's ANYTHING realistic about it. Maybe in a FEW rushed situations, you'd have that kind of pressure - but you'd at least have some idea of what you wanted from a dialogue.

This game FORCES you to make unclear choices, even BEFORE you've heard the line you're going to respond to.

I really have NO idea why people like that - but it goes to show how different we all are.

[Maylander]

Playing a sneak game now, quite challenging, very rewarding. I've focused on stealth, martial arts and pistols (+2 points in Sabotage to make minigames easier). Pistols really are quite overpowered, especially when using the special skill. At least as long as you are able to avoid the biggest gun fights.

This is definetly a more fun way to play the game though.

Oh and about the choices - yes, I agree that it can feel a little rushed at times, especially when the choices are coming out of nowhere. I made the "wrong" choice several times due to this, but in a way I like it - I have to live with the consequences, which is what a real agent would have to do. It's supposed to be intense.

Of course, when replaying it, it won't feel as intense or rushed in any way, as it's possible to prepare for all the decisions.

Example of a wrong choice:
I had allied myself with Albatross, but I let him die because I wasn't paying attention for a second during the invasion of the mansion. Lost a valuable ally there.

[DArtagnan]

I just uninstalled in disgust due to the rockstar boss fight. I wasn't expecting that a single encounter could ruin all my goodwill towards the game, but it managed to do it anyway.

I don't think I've ever seen a more effective way of completely annihilating everything a game is supposed to be.

That's impressive in a tragic kind of way :(

[pibbur]

I'm impressed that people have finished it already. It was released just a couple of of days ago. I'm never able to finish games that fast.

*ponders*

[DArtagnan]

I'm impressed that people have finished it already. It was released just a couple of of days ago. I'm never able to finish games that fast.

*ponders*

Maylander and Jemy are kind of special in that way ;)

I must be getting old, but I rarely last more than 2-3 hours at a time, before I have to go do something else.

I really wanted to finish AP today, so I could get to all those other games. But the boss fight ruined everything ;(

[holeraw]

Maylander you might have just helped to convince me not to hurry to buy it yet. It's the amount of times you used the words "Mass Effect" in your post - although I enjoyed ME a lot it certainly wasn't because of its RPG part, and even when you point out the differences the fact that you still find it appropriate to compare the two games so extensively tells me that there's some obvious strong connection between them, which is not what I hoped to see in that game.

[Maylander]

@DArtagnan
That fight took me a few tries to figure out. The second time around (stealth/pistol/martial) it was very easy. Pistols can take him out in no time if you know when you shoot at him.

@holecraw
Well it's the natural comparison, as there is no other game I can compare it to. Like I said though, it's far stronger as an RPG, but significantly weaker as a cinematic movie experience.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Can someone inform me what's this game about at all, plot-wise ? Just a few hints. I have no idea / no clue at all.

[Dark Savant]

How much gaming time is there if you finish most of quests?

[DArtagnan]

@DArtagnan
That fight took me a few tries to figure out. The second time around (stealth/pistol/martial) it was very easy. Pistols can take him out in no time if you know when you shoot at him.

When I shoot?

I was making chain shots x6 to the head, and he was barely injured. I'm playing hard, by the way.

He's easy to get to the "knife" part - but I couldn't do anything to him except exploit the environment.

I'm sure there's some kind of puzzle element to the fight, and it's not really the difficulty I'm upset about.

It's how incredibly jarring that fight is, in the context of the game - and me being a Jason Bourne kind of dude. It's like they turned the game into Doom for that fight - just because they needed a traditional boss fight.

That in itself is enough to put me off the game completely, as it's simply too plain a demonstration of designer incompetence. I take it as proof that they had no coherent vision, and I can't enjoy a game like that - even though I had up until that point - because I could deal with the other oddities.

But that's me, and I can be difficult to please - I suppose :)

[Maylander]

Yes, exactly. He's practically immune to damage at that point. What you do is run away from him - after a little while, he'll get exhausted and stop. That's when you use the freeze time skill and shoot him - once should be enough to practically kill him, as he is very vulnerable then.

@Alrik
Mike is the main character, he works for Alpha Protocol, a secret organization. He's trying to hunt down terrorists, but gets betrayed by his own country. Then you have to figure out the plot behind the betrayel and how they are linked to the terrorists.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Ah, okay, thanks.

Does this take place like ... today, or rather Sci-Fi ?

[Anderson]

It's present day, I think.

[Acleacius]

Thanks Maylander, game sounds great. :)

As long as there is a good story, character and RPG development there of then I should be a happy secret agent. The rushed dialogs and lack of Quick Save (iirc) is very annoying. I looked and do see a Trainer that talks about Freezing Time and Save/Load positions. Since I don't have the game yet, I am not sure what they are referring too as Force or Pirate.
NUMPAD0 - FREEZE FORCE TIMER
NUMPAD. - FREEZE PIRATE TIMER
NUMPAD/ - SAVE POSITION
NUMPAD* - LOAD POSITION

My question is can we play as Michelle Thorton, last thing I really want to do is run around with some guy's ass on my screen for 30 hours? o_O

[WorstUsernameEver]

My question is can we play as Michelle Thorton, last thing I really want to do is run around with some guy's ass on my screen for 30 hours? o_O

Nope. You can't.

[Anderson]

The RPG elements in AP are far stronger than ME1 or 2, and the quest structure is also more advanced with a lot more options and outcomes.

That's good to hear.

[Ubereil]

From you guys who's finished it, how buggy is it? I've heard reports that it's about as buggy as all other Obsidian games released so far.

Übereil

[Maylander]

Like I already said in the original post, I have yet to encounter anything serious. This is as smooth as it gets from a technical point of view.

I'm playing on Win 7 64 bit, so I know little about the console versions.

[Corwin]

Haven't got the game, but I was talking with my son who's playing it on a 360 and he said he'd had no issues with bugs.

[Zloth]

Jeez, it's like some of the published batches are the release version and some are a beta test version.

[DArtagnan]

I had no serious issues either.

My complaints have more to do with design "oversights" - like the awful checkpoint save system. For instance, the very first real mission you go on - you'll be sitting in a crouched position behind cover, but the checkpoint save ignores your crouched position, so if you reload at that checkpoint, you'll be standing up and the guards will be immediately alerted - because zero progress is saved and all guards will be at their original locations.

Stuff like that, but it's rarely a big issue.

But, in an overall sense - it's very stable and playable, as long as you enjoy the game for what it is.

I'm sad that the boss fight I mentioned ruined the experience for me, but I suspect most people are so used to boss fights, they won't really mind how out of context with the game it is.

[Lemonhead]

Bought it last night. Was really pshyched. Ended up a little dissapointed because of a bug.

My first impression was that something with the camera was really wrong. There is a lot of lagging or stuttering as some people describe it. When i move the mouse the camera jumps and skips, making it impossible to play. I've tried a whole bunch of different graphical settings and an unofficial .ini-tweak that I found on Obsidians forums. That made it a little better but still really really annoying. Several other posters have reported this problem so I'm not an anomaly. I think I'll wait for a patch so that this little bug doesn't ruin the experience for me.

[Maylander]

Ouch, that sucks. My camera was fine once I turned up the sensitivity to about 3/4.

[Lemonhead]

Anyone else hating the hacking minigame?

[DArtagnan]

I think it's a very good system, and after some initial frustration - I feel it's just right in terms of difficulty and context. The mouse control for the right side was a mistake, but I think it's relatively minor.

[Maylander]

Once you put a few points in Sabotage, even the hacking minigame is not too bad, but the controls could've been better. I agree with Dhruin on this one - the left side (keyboard) feels somewhat slow, the right side (mouse) feels inaccurate.

Still, not a major problem - if you struggle with some very hard hacks, you can always use EMPs to get past them (if you have a single point in Sabotage).

[Lemonhead]

I'll go for sabotage then, the mouse controls just feel very awkward.

[Maylander]

I can't remember the exact number of points you need to get the various improvements, but I do know the basic one is already at 2 points, so 1 + 2 will give you the ability to EMP unlock minigames + make it easier to do most minigames. Later on you get more improvements, but I've never tried those, I just grab 2 points early on and then leave it at that.

[JDR13]

My first impression was that something with the camera was really wrong. There is a lot of lagging or stuttering as some people describe it. When i move the mouse the camera jumps and skips, making it impossible to play. I've tried a whole bunch of different graphical settings and an unofficial .ini-tweak that I found on Obsidians forums. That made it a little better but still really really annoying. Several other posters have reported this problem so I'm not an anomaly. I think I'll wait for a patch so that this little bug doesn't ruin the experience for me.


I've experienced it as well, and my system far exceeds the requirements for AP.

I also experienced the bug where there was no text next to the dialogue circles, preventing me from seeing the choices. It turned out to be a glitch with antialiasing and ATI cards.

To be perfectly honest though, the bugs don't really make a difference, this game just doesn't do it for me.

[DeepO]

Posted my thoughts on game in one of the news thread without noticing this one, so here´s the repost for posterity and such :).

"I just finished the game with a tech/stealth/pistol character (normal difficulty) with only 19 enemies killed - and all those were killed because I was sleepy and ran through one mission mistakenly using normal bullets instead of tranquilizers.

It´s not only possible to achieve a completely non-lethal game, the game also quite often rewards player for non-lethal approach.
I really enjoyed playing my merciful stealthy dude and felt the game supported this kind of playstyle more than enough.

I´ve to say, as a whole package Alpha Protocol left me very positively impressed.
It hasn´t level design of Deus Ex quality, stealth gameplay of Thief quality and production values of Mass Effect 2, sure, it´s actually mostly mediocre in these aspects.

On the other hand there is a very intriguing story, memorable and genre-wise very fitting characters, interesting dossier mechanics and most importantly, the game is a marvel of narrative design. Player faces choices and consequences (sometimes unforseeable, but c´est la vie) at every step and the resulting level of world reactivity makes imo this game worth a play alone.
Timed dialogues are a bit flawed because stances sometimes simply aren´t descriptive enough and in a lot of cases more benevolent time limit would be more sensible, but the system works really well at keeping player on his toes and making him really pay attention to what´s being said.
Another tension boosters are minigames and checkpoint-only save system. Save system definitely has its quirks, minigames I´ve found personally very well implemented.
All in all, the whole game is very effective at keeping player constantly on his toes.

After a weaker start (tutorial, Saudi Arabia), the game was progressively getting better and more exciting (my order was Moscow -> Rome -> Taipei) and the endgame was satisfying and suitably over the top.

Besides the occasional one-time stutter and one nonfunctional activator solved by reload, I encountered zero bugs and crashes which is quite impressive, especially given the amount of narrative variables.

Despite its many flaws (none being serious imo), Alpha Protocol is a game with heart in the right place and has more than enough virtues to be considered a creative success.
Especially when it comes to narrative design it´s quite a milestone.
A lot of reviewers seem to be blowing the flaws out of proportions while subduing the virtues, which is btw the exact opposite what they do when it comes to "true" AAA titles like Mass Effect and co.

I really hope Obsidian will be able to continue the franchise."

[Davion]

Finally picked it up earlier today and played it for a few hours. My main focus is on assault rifles and endurance, yet surprisingly my character is still adept in stealth and with pistols.

Sure, I get spotted very easy, but I can still stay hidden for a while and I can still be absolutely deadly with a pistol. I just need a little while longer to line up a shot. That especially came as a surprise to me, concidering I've heared a few reviewers complain that you can't hit anything in this game.

It's said time and time again during the training mission that pistols are not ment for long range engagements and while I use them at short/medium range and don't spam the fire button (so I don't destroy my accuracy) , they seem to kill just fine. Is it just with me or are there others who are also perfectly fine with their pistols or other weapons (trained or untrained)?

Further more, I'm lucky again it seems since I haven't encountered any problematic bugs yet. Game runs perfect for me, just like DA:Awakening did. Kind of scared now to upgrade my pc in a few months. :p

Anyone else hating the hacking minigame? I also hated it at the start, but after I stopped paying attention at each individual letter and started paying attention at the "picture" in its whole, it went ALOT smoother.

[Maylander]

@Davion
Pistols are actually quite overpowered if you max them, due to the exceptionally deadly freeze time skill (can't recall the name of the skill). People claiming they are weak simply haven't tried them enough (I considered them weak as well untill I decided to try them out more than just "click click click").

@DeepO
We agree then. :)

Oh, and about the whole not-killing-anything approach. Good idea, I think I'll make that my 3rd game - focusing on martial arts (with Fury, it is incredible later on) and tranquilizers. Where do you see how many you've killed?

Primarily I'll focus on MA and Toughness, and then just punch my way through the game, using the tranqs only to take out targets I can't reach with melee (i.e snipers).

Should be good fun. Oh, and I think I'll start as Recruit to see what it's like. Maybe do a Veteran game afterwards once it's unlocked (perhaps a game focusing on Shotguns where the goal is the opposite of the Recruit game - to kill as many as possible).

We'll see. Crazy replayvalue in any case.

[DeepO]

Where do you see how many you've killed?
It´s a part of summary you get after finishing each mission, accessible via tab in the upper right.
The overall status can be viewed from character screen (tab beside the one listing perks).

Speaking of perks in AP, that´s basically achievements done right :).
They give nice feedback on playstyle and progress, don´t carry across characters and function well as an additional reward system.

Oh, and I think I'll start as Recruit to see what it's like.
For the next play I´m planning one on hard. Probably a suicidal run with outcomes as bad as possible :). Hopefully I´ll choose a skillset effective enough to finish it.

[DArtagnan]

I played on hard, but it wasn't really hard ;)

Except for that Boss fight - which isn't hard per say, but rather completely out of the context of a stealth shooter.

[human_male]

Is it free roaming at all, or linear? How do you get missions? Is there any exploration?

Checkpoint saves? You can't save where you want?

[Dhruin]

If you read the impressions on the front page, all of those questions are answered.

[HiddenX]

Just finished the game and I like it lot. A good mix between Deus Ex & No One Lives Forever.

[Nithrakis]

I finished it tonight as well. My early impressions were a bit negative but the more I played it the more I liked it.

I'm hoping Obsidian has both the desire and the means to make a sequel.

[Twotricks]

Didnt finish the game yet.

I only have to say one thing : Dont believe the reviews !
This game is a true gem. And i can see it becoming a cult classic.

And for critic on stealth part. People just dont get it. Its not thief/splinter cell stealth. Its the stealth from Metal Gear Solid. Actually the whole game reminds me a lot of MGS1 - if it was rpg

[mute]

I was really surprised about the reviews and the experience i had with this game. It doesn't compute. Playing it on the XBOX360, don't know if that makes any difference.

I like this game alot. I think every part of it has been really good (except the boss fight mentioned here earlier). I am glad i saw the gametrailer review cause i knew this was for me. I do not see anything wrong with the gameplay. It feel like Deus Ex. Or any RPG shooter where you ad skills to do more/better with the weapon. But even though i do tend to play it like a shooter :) (I like to kill things) the combat is really fun.

My time is extremly limited nowadays and for me spending two days with a game, says something for me. I do see some stupid things and i wish that the scripted events from Modern Warfare 2 was added, just for the coolness. But i do not feel the AI are more stupid then any other AI. I do think the AI behave rather well comparing to other games. Is definitly not as bad as i was let to belive reading reviews and user comments on other forums.

I even liked the first mission you got. Saudi Arabia. And i really like the dialouge system. No more pondering over the lines, wich line is Sarcastic, Which line is Humorus. 2 + for making the conversation system fun. :)

Sadly the one boss fight described above put the grade down. Almost like playing the witcher for the first time. But now i know how i should tackle it.

[Maylander]

Glad to see I'm not the only one enjoying it. Slightly afraid for a while after all the bad press that it might end up a huge failure, which would be a shame - I'm hoping for an add-on or a sequel after all. In the impressions thread over at the news forum, there is a link to an article trying to explain the varied reviews of AP. Good read.

Completed my no-kill-game. Ended up with three kills unfortunately, but it's definetly possible to do it without any deaths (I just wasn't careful enough, could've avoided it).

Unlocked Veteran after playing Recruit. They start with loads of points, and some pretty cool dialogue options during the training.

[Davion]

This game is quite odd though. The stealth system is so much more rudimentary than in the Splinter Cell games, yet pulling it off feels so much more rewarding.

[human_male]

I'm on what I assume to be one of the last missions (to thwart the assassination) and I've enjoyed it too. It hasn't been one of those games where I wake up in the morning and can't wait to get into it, but it's been a fine pass time game.

I think the loot system is worth commenting on. If I may compare it to Mass Effect one and two, because it's sort of similar in a few ways and because the loot system in those games has been heavily debated. I think ME 1's loot system was horrible because you got sick of picking up all the crap and sorting through it. But ME 2s was worse because, well... there wasn't one.

I thought, and I got the impression that so did a few other people, that a happy medium could have been found rather than ripping the loot and inventory right out. I think AP's system would be a perfect compromise.

You still have the enjoyment of browsing for new weapons and equipment, and upgrading and customising them, something I always enjoy. But there isn't so much loot that you're constantly having to sort through it and unload it. There are a few mods that you will pick up that you don't need, but you can ignore them or sell them.

My only criticism is there aren't enough new weapons, and when new ones become available they don't seem to be appreciably better. I bought my rifle after my very first mission, and I've still got it. The same with armour. I used the same armour that you start with for most of the game, until I decided to buy some SWAT utility armour just for a change. I guess if the game was more challenging there would be a greater urgency in upgrading your armour, but as it's so easy on Normal (but overwhelming on Hard) there's really no need to fuss too much about that.

[tolknaz]

I just uninstalled in disgust due to the rockstar boss fight. I wasn't expecting that a single encounter could ruin all my goodwill towards the game, but it managed to do it anyway.

I don't think I've ever seen a more effective way of completely annihilating everything a game is supposed to be.

That's impressive in a tragic kind of way :(



Spoiler!



There are tricks to make that fight a pice of cake. First, when Brayko has snorted cocaine you should focus on getting away from him. Use sprinting from time to time or you will be caught and raped in no time. Don't try to fight back when he's psyched, you will not do much damage during this time. After a while his rage will cool down and he stops chasing you with his knives. Now you can shoot him. make sure to use chain shot if you have it. Also a good trick to get away from him is to run from him to the stage where he starts and then drop down from there. He will follow but he drops from the stage very slowly.

[DArtagnan]

Spoiler!



There are tricks to make that fight a pice of cake. First, when Brayko has snorted cocaine you should focus on getting away from him. Use sprinting from time to time or you will be caught and raped in no time. Don't try to fight back when he's psyched, you will not do much damage during this time. After a while his rage will cool down and he stops chasing you with his knives. Now you can shoot him. make sure to use chain shot if you have it. Also a good trick to get away from him is to run from him to the stage where he starts and then drop down from there. He will follow but he drops from the stage very slowly.

Yeah, I know there are tricks ;)

There shouldn't be tricks in a "realistic" spy shooter fight. I hate traditional boss fights (with "tricks") with a passion - even in plain shooters, and if there was one game I didn't expect to encounter them in, it was this one.

[tolknaz]

I'm not a fan of traditional boss fights in games myself. Still, i wouldn't call Brayko much of a hassle once you observe a bit and use your surroundings properly. Granted i was surprised and cut down first time when i met him, but i won on the second try once it was clear you need to get the fuck out of dodge when he comes with his knives. Beating Marburg and keeping Surkov alive for example were much harder tasks for me.
All in all there are much worse bossfights in some other RPG-s. I still remeber trying to beat the beast in The Witcher. Now that was an annoying mutt if i ever saw one. On my xth try i finally got lucky and incapacitated it with a sign. To add insult to injury you had to sit through a longass cutscene again if you didn't quite make it. Compared to that Brayko was nothing. Good times.

[DArtagnan]

I'm not a fan of traditional boss fights in games myself. Still, i wouldn't call Brayko much of a hassle once you observe a bit and use your surroundings properly. Granted i was surprised and cut down first time when i met him, but i won on the second try once it was clear you need to get the fuck out of dodge when he comes with his knives. Beating Marburg and keeping Surkov alive for example were much harder tasks for me.
All in all there are much worse bossfights in some other RPG-s. I still remeber trying to beat the beast in The Witcher. Now that was an annoying mutt if i ever saw one. On my xth try i finally got lucky and incapacitated it with a sign. To add insult to injury you had to sit through a longass cutscene again if you didn't quite make it. Compared to that Brayko was nothing. Good times.

It has nothing to do with the difficulty, and I love a challenge. I play on hard usually, and I did in AP.

But I care about immersion, and I care about consistency. When I develop my character in a certain way, I expect to be rewarded. So, when I can headshot people with great success throughout - even other bosses - and then encounter such a RIDICULOUS character, both in terms of type but also in terms of breaking immersion completely based on not going down even with a 100 headshots - the experience is nullified.

I simply don't want to bother with little puzzle-fights in that kind of environment, because it takes me out of the experience, and into meta-gaming arcade game territory.

The game's just not for me, but I'm glad others enjoyed it!

[booboo]

I also hate silly 'boss fights' - there should be some logical, game-consistent way of defeating the enemy. A head shot (as suggested above) for a mere mortal should do it - presumably he was not a construct and his head mattered to him ;-) My measure is: in real life, you would have ONE attempt - no reload. Why should game that strives for an immersive experience be any different? Make it a long, taxing fight - but leave enough evidence in the world (BEFORE THE FIGHT!) for the average reasonably observant character to determine what the enemy's strengths are, and how to defeat him/her/it. Almost no games do this - like there's some sadistic desire to piss people off and get their blood pressure up. The best boss fight I've experienced was in MAx Payne (1 or 2?), where the big female she-boss had a cadre of goons, and a bullet proof vest. But in the end, through sheer persistence you took her down. No fake coke-induced invulnerability - you smack her hard enough and she died. As it should be.

[DArtagnan]

Yup, pretty much.

It's about consistency, really.

The game is set in an environment that's supposed to reflect our own reality, or at least that's VERY much what I got from it.

I don't mind genre conventions, and obviously fantasy based CRPGs have traditions that we're conditioned to, and the setting is so far from our own, that realism doesn't matter to the same extent.

But, I don't even care about realism that much, and again, it's CONSISTENCY. If the game had signalled from the beginning, that bullets don't matter - really - and that you can't expect weapons to function like their real-life counterparts at all, then I'd be fine and accept that it was that kind of game.

You can't do a 180 turn all of a sudden, and present a boss that basically can't die unless you figure out some stupid little puzzle aspect.

The designers of that game were either split down the middle, or just plain incompetent. There's not a single grain of doubt in my mind about that.

[Malk]

I simply don't want to bother with little puzzle-fights in that kind of environment, because it takes me out of the experience, and into meta-gaming arcade game territory.

Alpha Protocol is definitely not an ultimate realistic game you make it out to be. Little arrows flying above opponents' heads, invisibility, flashing lights appearing from cameras, etc. Boss fights fit in pretty nicely. :)
Make it a long, taxing fight - but leave enough evidence in the world (BEFORE THE FIGHT!) for the average reasonably observant character to determine what the enemy's strengths are, and how to defeat him/her/it. Almost no games do this - like there's some sadistic desire to piss people off and get their blood pressure up.
It's because most people find figuring out boss's weak spots a fun thing to do.

[DArtagnan]

Alpha Protocol is definitely not an ultimate realistic game you make it out to be. Little arrows flying above opponents' heads, invisibility, flashing lights appearing from cameras, etc. Boss fights fit in pretty nicely. :)

Ultimate realistic game?

Forcing words into my mouth won't change how split the design of the game is.

[Malk]

I was exaggerating (obviously). You're saying boss fights are bad because they're not as realistic as the rest of the game. I'm saying that's not true - the majority of the game is not realistic. Simple as that.

[DArtagnan]

I was exaggerating (obviously). You're saying boss fights are bad because they're not as realistic as the rest of the game. I'm saying that's not true - the majority of the game is not realistic. Simple as that.

No, I was talking about consistency.

The boss fight mentioned, in particular, was HIGHLY inconsistent with the rest of the game up until that point.

[booboo]

Alpha Protocol is definitely not an ultimate realistic game you make it out to be. Little arrows flying above opponents' heads, invisibility, flashing lights appearing from cameras, etc. Boss fights fit in pretty nicely. :)

It's because most people find figuring out boss's weak spots a fun thing to do.

"most people" is rather a sweeping generalization ;-) If I wanted to play a puzzle game, there are genre's for that. Each to their own of course. The problem is it takes skill and cleverness to design a challenging end-game fight without simply making the boss ridiculously powerful. Few studios will make the effort. Having to reload/die several times to find a boss's weak point - as seems to be the expectation - absolutely shatters (for me) any sense of in-game realism or immersion.

[Malk]

I was talking about most gamers in general, not just most rpg fans. I'd say you're in a minority, reloading to find a weak spot is fun for me, and I don't see a lot of people complaining. :) I was just responding to your "there's some sadistic desire to piss people off and get their blood pressure up" remark. No, most gamers like that and it doesn't pisses them off.

The boss fight mentioned, in particular, was HIGHLY inconsistent with the rest of the game up until that point.
Why is it inconsistent?

[Maylander]

Because you couldn't kill him by using the same tactics as most enemies (i.e stealth is useless).

Then again, I seem to recall Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and so on with fairly crazy boss fights, so it's hardly anything new.

I don't care either way; I'm in it for the characters, story and so on.

[DArtagnan]

Why is it inconsistent?

A few of us have been saying why more than once in this thread alone, so if you still don't agree - chances are you never will.

You apparently don't think the game was trying to come off as a semi-realistic spy game - and you apparently didn't find the fight in question any different from the rest.

I've been trying to figure out how that's possible, and I just can't.

So, I have to conclude we're from different planets ;)

[DeepO]

I´d say buffed up bosses in AP are ok, at least as long as one takes it as a nod to cheesier side of spy flicks.
Besides, the fact that to kill them one or two headshots are not enough can be credited to the certain level of abstraction involved in AP´s gameplay.

However, Brayko is still a glaring exception to this. That invulnerability stage simply doesn ´t make any sense at all. I wouldn´t be surprised if it gets patched out, really. Still, it´s just one and only case where designers truly dropped the ball on boss-fight consistency, in my book.

I guess some players just have problems accepting the rpg-abstraction part because the game has a "real world" setting, not sci-fi/fantasy.

That said, boss fights in AP aren´t particularly well thought out and I´d still prefer more headshot-resilient bosses to have helmets for example and the game would probably also benefited from having more anti-vehicular and such confrontations, as opposed to mano-a-mano ones.

Pretty much revolutionary narrative concepts, interdependent game systems, solid story and characters is where AP´s at. A lot of things introduced in the game deserves to be explored (and refined) further so I really hope Obsidian will get a chance to continue with the franchise, though it unfortunately seems rather unlikely at the moment. These guys will just never fully take off, will they?

It still pisses me off to no end seeing 6.3/10 for AP on a site that´s given Mass Effect 2 9.6/10.

[human_male]

The only thing I found annoying about that particular boss battle was due to the fact that the game (on Normal) was so easy, I'd stopped wearing armour in the hopes it might offer some tiny challenge. It did, until I got to that boss and I couldn't defeat him unarmoured. I had to go back and replay the mission with my armour then it was a cake walk.

[Malk]

You apparently don't think the game was trying to come off as a semi-realistic spy game - and you apparently didn't find the fight in question any different from the rest.

I've been trying to figure out how that's possible, and I just can't.

So, I have to conclude we're from different planets ;)
I gave you some examples earlier. The entire game is unrealistic.

On the side note, why did you wrote:
No, I was talking about consistency.
after I wrote:
You're saying boss fights are bad because they're not as realistic as the rest of the game.
If boss fights are bad because they're not as realistic as the rest of the game, then that has very much to do with consistency. :) You got me confused there a bit.

[DArtagnan]

I gave you some examples earlier. The entire game is unrealistic.

On the side note, why did you wrote:

after I wrote:

If boss fights are bad because they're not as realistic as the rest of the game, then that has very much to do with consistency. :) You got me confused there a bit.

I'm sorry you're confused, but it's pretty simple.

The consistency in itself is the issue, not the WAY in which it is inconsistent.

The problem is that the game plays one way for the most part, and then "turns around" and becomes something else during the fight in question.

I don't give two shits about realism, really. I just want a game to be consistent - and if 99% of the fights in the game work a certain way, I don't want a mid-game boss fight to completely change the rules around.

I don't like that - and it's not immersive.

The game isn't a simulation of real life - we can agree on that. But it establishes a few rules along the way - like headshots being lethal. I realise the other boss fights aren't "one shot to the head = dead" - but they're "reasonable" all the same.

Now, I prefer no boss fights whatsoever in the traditional sense, because I think it's an archaic design crutch based on a flawed perception of what people want. You can have a very satisfying conclusion without such a fight, but designers have yet to figure that out.

But, it SEEMED to me, that Obsidian would have known not to include such a stupid fight - and I was frankly shocked to encounter it in this game.

[Malk]

Well of course a boss fight doesn't work the same way as the rest of the fights. If it did it wouldn't be a boss fight. Again, if you and booboo don't like them, that doesn't mean that developers are dumb for implementing them - there are plenty of other people who do like them.

I only get immersed in open (or semi-open) world rpgs, so I won't comment on that.

[JDR13]

well of course a boss fight doesn't work the same way as the rest of the fights. If it did it wouldn't be a boss fight.

qft …… :)

[DArtagnan]

Well of course a boss fight doesn't work the same way as the rest of the fights. If it did it wouldn't be a boss fight. Again, if you and booboo don't like them, that doesn't mean that developers are dumb for implementing them - there are plenty of other people who do like them.

I only get immersed in open (or semi-open) world rpgs, so I won't comment on that.

I said INCLUDING the other boss fights.

I realise the other boss fights aren't "one shot to the head = dead" - but they're "reasonable" all the same.

Whether or not the developers are dumb, I can't really say. I can say they fucked up royally if they were trying to create a hit - which is pretty evident when you read the general mainstream response.

Now, you can dance around trying to dismiss what I'm saying, but the sooner you accept that it's just an opinion and that the fight in question is COMPLETELY different from the rest - the sooner we can stop wasting our time.

You didn't mind - great, but I did. That's all there is to it.

[Davion]

I wouldn't call it completely differant from the rest. Other fights, like Darcy's, are quite similar in many aspects.

[DArtagnan]

I wouldn't call it completely differant from the rest. Other fights, like Darcy's, are quite similar.

Example?

What other boss requires you to evade him until he's exhausted or a similar puzzle-element, and can't be put down even with 100 headshots?

Must have been during the last stage that I didn't get to, then :)

[Malk]

Now, you can dance around trying to dismiss what I'm saying, but the sooner you accept that it's just an opinion and that the fight in question is COMPLETELY different from the rest - the sooner we can stop wasting our time.

You're saying that like it's a fact, not just an opinion. COMPLETELY different from the rest? No way, bunch of other bosses need figuring out - vehicle fight in Saudi (you have to pick up rocket launchers in order to destroy it… at least if you play a stealthy character), Sean Darcy (you can't get to him, so you have to find a sniper post and shoot him from there), Parker (disabling the security before you can engage him)…

[DArtagnan]

You're saying that like it's a fact, not just an opinion. COMPLETELY different from the rest? No way, bunch of other bosses need figuring out - vehicle fight in Saudi (you have to pick up rocket launchers in order to destroy it… at least if you play a stealthy character), Sean Darcy (you can't get to him, so you have to find a sniper post and shoot him from there), Parker (disabling the security before you can engage him)…

Needing figuring out isn't the issue.

Damage immunity at point blank range, is the issue.

[Malk]

Err…
Example?

What other boss requires you to evade him until he's exhausted or a similar puzzle-element

;)

[DArtagnan]

Err…

;)

Ehm, why did you leave out the last vital part of the sentence?

and can't be put down even with 100 headshots?

I wonder if you're really interested in understanding my point of view, or if you're the sort of person who simply must be right - even if you can't be.

If so, I must advise you to find a different kind of person with which to have such a "debate" ;)

[Alrik Fassbauer]

100 headshots ? The skull just wouldn't survive that, even less the flesh. The tissue would be rather some kind of mush.

[DArtagnan]

100 headshots ? The skull just wouldn't survive that, even less the flesh. The tissue would be rather some kind of mush.

That's the kind thing I was hoping for ;)

The other bosses (read, not vehicles) - took a few shots to the head before going down, but I could live with that.

But, when the entire game otherwise presents human beings as being VERY vulnerable to a bullet in the brain, it doesn't bode well for consistency when a coked-up rockstar can somehow survive endless salvos fired directly into the head :)

It's not good for my immersion, I tell you ;)

[Malk]

Ehm, why did you leave out the last vital part of the sentence?

Because I thought it's not relevant. You asked for examples of boss fights which have some sort of a puzzle element, I gave you those examples, and then you go: "puzzle elements (needing figuring) are not important". I guess I misunderstood your "and" for an "or" when it was strictly "and".

It's really strange to me that you quit playing because of a (in my mind) such a small designer error. You had some other major problem with the game, or…?

[DArtagnan]

Because I thought it's not relevant. You asked for examples of boss fights which have some sort of a puzzle element, I gave you those examples, and then you go: "puzzle elements (needing figuring) are not important". I guess I misunderstood your "and" for an "or" when it was strictly "and".

It's really strange to me that you quit playing because of a (in my mind) such a small designer error. You had some other major problem with the game, or…?

It's relevant ;)

No, I asked for examples of boss fights which have puzzle elements AND the immunity mentioned.

At least you admit it was a design error ;)

[LuckyCarbon]

The boss fights were one of the things I was worried about before release, thankfully they're few and far between. I'm with everyone who thinks it's ridiculous any character can take multiple rounds to an unarmored head. If the boss fights were interesting challenges to figure out instead of "this guy moves 10x faster and is immune to bullets to the head" I'd be a lot more interested. Off the top of my head here's a better idea, a boss fight were you have to snipe/flank someone out of a charging bulldozer, interesting, plausible and wouldn't require a suspension of the game rules.

Maybe I'm being an Obsidian apologist (mostly to myself) but there are elements that just don't gel with the rest of the game and I wonder if Sega didn't have their hands where they didn't belong. Then I ask, is there a leadership problem at Obsidian or are they stuck in that limbo developer phase, big enough to make AAA titles but don't have the mega-hit to force creative control away from their publishers?

[Dasale]

It's a little strange to wake up old thread but I'm not sure it was worthing opening a new one.

So my thoughts after playing 2*15mn of Alpha Protocol is very weird. I makes me wonder what's so good in this game? The only bet I could do is it's because of the decision points and consequences, something not really concrete when you just try the game. Other than that I see only bad points. :biggrin:

There's two points that really hurt me:

The dialog system requiring decisions done in 2/3s when you are listening some other NPC to talk. I feel it targeted to very young players that don't want put more than 2 seconds in thinking. It's in fact even worse because at same time you have to listen someone speak.
The game flow is totally linear and let very few options to the players and constantly guide the player to the next target. it's like the Oblivion hand guiding pushed at the extreme.


But I have quite much more complain about this game… after to have played it 2*15mn:

I put resolution at quite low, all video setup at lowest, and despite that i had some very weird cam behavior, with a cause I couldn't understand, until i finally got it. Despite all video setup to lowest the game had huge drop down of performance involving huge camera jumps, hence the feeling that sometimes something is going very wrong with the cam.
I haven't yet seen much mini games, but those I have seen are poor gameplay, nothing really interesting.
The close combat is probably the most basic close combat system I have ever seen. And that's quite a huge problem when recent games made huge progress with this area, like Torchlight, Dragon Knight Saga and DAO, all providing many more close combat actions that pure hit or series of hit.
The shoot system is also quite bad, it makes no sense and force you zoom to gives it a sense. It's so pointless and just increase commands complexity by forcing zooming and the result is to make controls more weird.


I can understand that a complex decision web plus a deep consequences system and a deeper than usual narrative system can be fascinating. But build on such bad basics it's for me a huge waste. I doubt I'll ever played this game because of all the bad basics, too bad, yeah I mean too bad for me, because I'll never been able to appreciate the decisions/consequences system plus the complex narrative.

[Benedict]

The dialog system requiring decisions done in 2/3s when you are listening some other NPC to talk. I feel it targeted to very young players that don't want put more than 2 seconds in thinking. It's in fact even worse because at same time you have to listen someone speak..

I thought that was one of the best features of the game. Personally I've never thought that most RPGs require any thinking in conversations - repeat all options until you've said every potential line in the conversation tree and go for the options with skill checks in brackets whenever they come up. Maybe sometimes one can pick whether to be obsequious / greedy / insane / insulting but it never makes much difference.

The time pressure and inability to go back were a huge step forward for me, much more realistic.

[Dasale]

I thought that was one of the best features of the game. Personally I've never thought that most RPGs require any thinking in conversations - repeat all options until you've said every potential line in the conversation tree and go for the options with skill checks in brackets whenever they come up. Maybe sometimes one can pick whether to be obsequious / greedy / insane / insulting but it never makes much difference.

The time pressure and inability to go back were a huge step forward for me, much more realistic.
Well that's a point of view. Perhaps I'm a bit slow and years cumulating that doesn't help, but I don't see how you can put reflexion in so short time it's more reflex and mechanism for me.

The arguments, repeat all options, dialog options with no consequences, dialog options showing skill check, ability to get back, all has no link with having 2s to choose or as much time than you want. My complain is just about the time issue, I have been unable to enjoy any other possible qualities because I don't have the time.

[Benedict]

Well that's a point of view. Perhaps I'm a bit slow and years cumulating that doesn't help, but I don't see how you can put reflexion in so short time it's more reflex and mechanism for me.

The arguments, repeat all options, dialog options with no consequences, dialog options showing skill check, ability to get back, all has no link with having 2s to choose or as much time than you want. My complain is just about the time issue, I have been unable to enjoy any other possible qualities because I don't have the time.

The time pressure is a large part of the value for me . . . real life conversations (particularly in high pressure situations) you don't have time for long, considered reflection on what to say, you have to go with your instincts. Putting the time pressure on made it actually feel kind of like a real conversation for the first time in any computer game I've played.

[Starwars]

I think the dialogue system was also one of the best parts of the game. Now, if we're just speaking in very general terms, then I think I will always prefer the voice-less main character, where you get your full dialogue options to choose from and as much time as you like to choose. But, for the game-design that AP was pushing for (action-RPG with a cinematic, espionage flavour) then I think the timed dialogues worked very, very well. I also enjoyed that it was almost 100% conversations, so no going back to a dialogue node and exhausting options. It's always moving forward.

That was one of my pet-peeves about Mass Effect, because there I found the keyword system just wasn't warranted. A lot of the convos still worked like classic RPG dialogues, no timers and the classic "Investigate" nodes but you still had to accept the keyword system. I don't think the pay-off worth it at all but in AP I thought it was.

[Dasale]

Again I didn't questioned the other points of the dialogs but its "real time approach". I prefer much more turn based dialogs, and the whole AP dialog system could be implemented with a turn based approach.

For the simulation point of view well I'm not used to take important decisions in few second, for sure my job isn't spies. :) And anyway I don't want simulation I want fun.

[DeepO]

For the simulation point of view well I'm not used to take important decisions in few second, for sure my job isn't spies. :)
But that´s sorta the point - being a spy is your job in Alpha Protocol.

Granted, the system should be more lenient in some of the less pressing situations, few times player was forced to take a stance before being able to hear everything he was supposed to respond to and "suave" responses weren´t always particularly adequate, so it´s not like there wasn´t a room for improvement, but overall the feature was very fitting for the genre imo.
It´s an action RPG and spy-themed on top of it, so why not extent the action to dialogues? Makes perfect sense, even more so due to the fact that AP is a very to-the-point game - you rarely have an opportunity for idle chatting, majority of dialogues are "business".
Also, not all decisions had to be made on the fly - sometimes you could prepare in advance via dossiers.

Anyway, I´ve found AP´s dialogue system an exciting and entirely new gameplay experience and it´s actually one of the main reasons why I think it´s a really good game in a serious need of sequel.

[Dasale]

Mmm so this dialog system is good because it is "real time" and require decisions in 2s and at same time you are listening the dialog.

Well, I probably get teleported in a parallel universe. I also wonder how there's so many fans of the extreme hand guiding in this game. Ha well, it doesn't matter, it won't be the first game popular or with fame that I don't like at all.

[Benedict]

Anyway, I´ve found AP´s dialogue system an exciting and entirely new gameplay experience and it´s actually one of the main reasons why I think it´s a really good game in a serious need of sequel.

Definitely, first new gameplay mechanic I've really liked in a while, particularly in rpgs. Good on them for trying new stuff and IMO it worked pretty well.


Mmm so this dialog system is good because it is "real time" and require decisions in 2s and at same time you are listening the dialog.

Well, I probably get teleported in a parallel universe. I also wonder how there's so many fans of the extreme hand guiding in this game. Ha well, it doesn't matter, it won't be the first game popular or with fame that I don't like at all.

You don't ever find that a bit of pressure makes games more immersive or enjoyable?

[BillSeurer]

I liked the system too. In real life sometimes people flub up in conversation, too.

The "game flow is totally linear" is not really true. Or at least no more so than almost every other RPG and action game out there.

[Dasale]

You don't ever find that a bit of pressure makes games more immersive or enjoyable?
For action perhaps, not for story decision, I'm quite surprised you put this at same level. I'm probably too old and too slow now, still I'm quite surprised there's no difference for so many players..

[Dhruin]

I think - like many players - you're too focused on getting the "right" choice. That's the beauty of Alpha Protocol - sometimes it goes in unexpected directions but you're never truly penalised for any of the decisions.

I wouldn't want every game to use this method but in the context of a spy action/RPG, it works pretty well. Just let go and run with it - make the choices based on your first reaction. You might be surprised at the outcome.

I didn't understand your criticism of the shooting and I didn't play a CQC character, so I can't respond to that. I found the combat as competent as - say - Mass Effect, which was widely praised. The mini-games have some issues - bypass them or just accept it; it's not that big a deal.

[Dasale]

I think - like many players - you're too focused on getting the "right" choice. That's the beauty of Alpha Protocol - sometimes it goes in unexpected directions but you're never truly penalised for any of the decisions.

I do agree it's a good design to not put any challenge through dialogs and give any choices fairly equal results in any term.

But that's not at all what I felt from the few I quote from first dialogs through three attempt of replay.

I felt some of the first dialogs make you choose among different method, this being closely linked to the character choice you are making, more sneaker, more …. I don't feel then the choices are that neutral and if they are it's not at well what let think the choices offered.


I wouldn't want every game to use this method but in the context of a spy action/RPG, it works pretty well. Just let go and run with it - make the choices based on your first reaction. You might be surprised at the outcome.

The point is that I don't make any choice I don't have the time. I could make random choice but that's frustrating.

For replaying it, well better put some time between the disastrous short game sessions I did and anyway I uninstalled it, because I felt it was more a nuisance too me to be tempted try again, and again get frustrated.


I didn't understand your criticism of the shooting and I didn't play a CQC character, so I can't respond to that. I found the combat as competent as - say - Mass Effect, which was widely praised. The mini-games have some issues - bypass them or just accept it; it's not that big a deal.

I consider Mass Effect as a bad shooter, well I consider most modern shooter I tried as bad. But anyway it wasn't my point, it was about close combat fighting, too basic that's a very old and simplistic approach. That time is over I won't be able enjoy anymore such simplistic approach without some well design special attack or special defense.

For the mini games well ok I do agree that it's just basic but quickly done so not a too important bad effect on the game.

I'll try it again, a day, but I doubt I'll be able to enjoy the dialog system. But I pinpoint I played only 2*15mn the game, now it's about 3*15mn, so in no way my comments are anything close to a review, it's just feeling from a very bad experience from trying quickly and shortly 3 times the game.

[Dhruin]

The dialogue is designed to make you go with your gut reaction; that's still a choice - just not one you get to mull over for several minutes. As I said, if you let go, it actually works pretty well. If you can't - don't play it.

I wanted to quickly comment on the linearity - the game is actually marvelously non-linear in some respects but you need to get past Saudi Arabia to see it. In fact, you need to get past Saudi Arabia to see anything... It's hard to recommend to someone to keep playing something they don't like but that's just the way it is - it's better after Saudi Arabia.

Lastly, on the shooter thing...I don't see too many shooters with cutting edge dialogue, so I don't see why an RPG should have cutting edge shooting. You're asking too much. It's fine if that's how you feel but you won't find many (any?) games that can fulfill both.

[DArtagnan]

My primary issue with AP dialogue wasn't so much the timer itself, though I think it's silly and gimmicky, but the fact that what my character said - VERY often had little or nothing to do with what I wanted to say. I don't know if it's due to my way of thinking versus the dialogue guy working at Obsidian - but it just didn't click.

I don't pretend to understand the life of a superspy, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't feel much pressure during most of the dialogues even as myself. I mean, you're often just casually flirting/talking with people without pressure - and yet you have to time your choices and make a guess as to what will actually exit your mouth. It's just a misunderstanding to simulate pressure with a simple timer, if you ask me. It doesn't "feel" realistic to me.

It didn't help that I found much of the writing bland, and much of the humor very weak.

Then we have the atrociously bad boss fights, with the "boat guy" being the worst offender. Never have I experienced a more immersion-breaking encounter. Truly.

I was actually enjoying myself - building my character and becoming comfortable with the quirky combat. Then along comes that fight and ruins everything…. I uninstalled and have never looked back.

Baaaaad Obsidian…. Baaaad Obsidian…..

[Maylander]

I'm simply amazed this topic is still alive. Which reminds me: I should probably replay AP again in not too long.

[Benedict]

For action perhaps, not for story decision, I'm quite surprised you put this at same level. I'm probably too old and too slow now, still I'm quite surprised there's no difference for so many players..

Given the story's the most important bit to me it would seem odd to prefer that bit to be devoid of all tension while the time filler was full of it, but each to their own.

[Benedict]

I was actually enjoying myself - building my character and becoming comfortable with the quirky combat. Then along comes that fight and ruins everything…. I uninstalled and have never looked back.



Do you think you'll ever learn to love again?

[Dasale]

My primary issue with AP dialogue wasn't so much the timer itself…..

That's so strange, I wonder if the game is in full English or in my native language. I don't remember at all but that could possibly be the point, every players here very fluent in English and me not enough, and enough not fluent to break the whole dialog system... in ashes and making it a total failure.

I don't know I'm slow nor have no capacity to make multiple tasks at same time, so that would be strange suddenly this game put me far behind the crowd. :biggrin: