Alpha Protocol - Editorial about Consequences @ Bitmob

DArtagnan said:

To understand what makes choices an appealing gameplay mechanic, you don't need to look further than your average strategy game, like Civ.

An interesting choice, is one where you give up something - KNOWINGLY - because you believe it's worth the sacrifice. That's how you develop your strategy, and refine your development.

Obviously, Obsidian failed utterly to understand this when designing the C&C in Alpha Protocol.

I find it incredible that such an experienced team, has so little understanding of the basics. Especially sad, when they put SO MUCH effort into making all those consequences.

Click to expand...

Dasale said:

For me you are mixing tomatoes and apples. Your quotes are engine implementing strategy games, if you go there, take a chess simulator and you get your best consequence game, quite more deep than any strategy game you quote.

That's hugely different with stories and dialogs consequences, it's been debate already, but let repeat it, sentences, dialogs, stories, can't be computer generated and have to be planned carefully, each branch designed exactly. That's why you can't compare with strategy games. And also that's why, for me, it's a very poor design to base player challenges on dialogs.

Click to expand...

Dasale said:

If you don't see the difference with sentences plus stories and strategical elements then… I wonder how explain this to you. In short try program something that build a story with words, sentence and dialogs that the computer write for you.

Click to expand...