Alpha Protocol - Is the great RPG of the last Gen @ Kotaku

RogueCat said:

Is Ultima Underworld your favorite isometric crpg?

Click to expand...

There's huge opportunity for impossible pedantry with such a discussion, with people finding all kinds of odd games which break any one theory, but the difference between a classic First-Person party RPG and a classic isometric party RPG is stark. The difference between First-Person and 6-Feet single character RPG is neither here nor there and is exactly why in the Elder Scrolls you can choose either viewpoint - because it doesn't matter, they're both virtually the same thing with very little impact on how the game plays out, particularly in a genre sense.

In the real world with real gamers, there's a gigantic difference between first person perspective and third person perspective, no matter where you place the camera.

Maybe lackblogger wouldn't mind walking around in the real world looking at himself from 6 feet, instead of looking at the world through his own eyes - but I'm pretty sure most people would object.

The concept of first person perspective is to emulate real life as closely as possible, and though I'm sure there are people so out of touch with reality that such a thing would seem unimportant, but I give you my personal guarantee that QUITE a few of us really do appreciate first person perspective in games, and we wouldn't want it to be replaced by a 6 feet third person alternative.

So, no, it's not a trivial distinction.

I liked AP too. Overused phrase "flawed jewel" describes this game perfectly.

Jewelled flaw would be a better fit

I'll give you one example why first person is different from third person:
In third person, you have much broader field of view and you can even see behind your character. That makes stealth elements (which I assume this game has, I haven't played it) much easier. You can see around the corners without your character peeking and risking getting caught by simply rotating your camera.
That makes a huge difference in game mechanics, at least for me.

Ivanwah said:

I'll give you one example why first person is different from third person:
In third person, you have much broader field of view and you can even see behind your character. That makes stealth elements (which I assume this game has, I haven't played it) much easier. You can see around the corners without your character peeking and risking getting caught by simply rotating your camera.
That makes a huge difference in game mechanics, at least for me.

Click to expand...

Oh, I quite agree, there will be differences by having a slightly different viewpoint. I was primarily talking about genre and the content of the game and what the game requires you do. We're only talking about First-Person versus 6-feet because someone wanted to pedant my use of the term "FPS genre", which is classic avoidance, but what can you do...

I've been a huge and vocal fan of AP on this site since it came out. I love it. You really have to play through several times to appreciate how great the C&C impacts the game. So many different possible routes and endings.

Yes, the mini-games are a bit of a pain but properly gearing for them can get around them or make them easy for the most part. Yes, there are a couple of boss fights that are a pain and just don't seem to fit with the rest of the game ( eerily similar to DX:HR in many respects ).

I'm also a huge fan of the implementation of the setting. I can't think of another game that does such a great job of implementing RPG mechanics into a modern real world setting. It's one of the few games I've never uninstalled, I'm always tempted to go back for yet another playthrough.

I played Alpha Protocol a year ago. It was neither as bad as I feared or as good as I hoped. I played all the way through and enjoyed it (for the most part), but I wouldn't bother replaying it.

lackblogger said:

Oh, I quite agree, there will be differences by having a slightly different viewpoint. I was primarily talking about genre and the content of the game and what the game requires you do. We're only talking about First-Person versus 6-feet because someone wanted to pedant my use of the term "FPS genre", which is classic avoidance, but what can you do…

Click to expand...

Yeah, that was pedantic, but you did make an error by trying to bracket every shooter into FPS genre. You could have simply said shooter.
From my experience, FPS and TPS have quite different mechanics. TPS tend to focus on stealth, cover and platforming at the expense of immersion you get from first person, while FPS are down to the ground, shoot it until it dies, rarely incorporating aforementioned mechanics due to their clunkiness in first person. Difference go deeper than the position of the camera.

I loved Alpha Protocol. It is one of the most replayed games I have, especially for RPG's, probably only beaten by Freedom Force and Icewind Dale.

I'm not a Splinter Cell nor Call of Duty gamer, so whenever people talk about "how bad" the gameplay is, I can only assume it is in comparison to games that do that kind of gameplay as their main focus. I liked the stealth and combat in AP.

*shrug*

Granted, I don't LOVE the game for the combat and other such mechanics, it's for the C&C. But there's not really anything in the game I didn't like.

And I strongly dislike FP POV.

Well, it wouldn't play for me on release and I needed to wait for a patch.

Well, "The Great Rpg of last Gen" sounds a bit of a stretch, but it definitely grows on you after a while. Classical example of Obs trying to do too much with too little…animations and AI were the biggest problem…God, that shuffling around in stealth.
I'd still put it above first Mass Effect. Of course, I've said that just to rile up a few people here.

BoboTheMighty said:

I'd still put it above first Mass Effect.

Click to expand...

Mass Effect contains save anywhere outside of fights savegame system.
Just that point places it above usual console garbage.

AP was wonderful fun for me, but disappointing at times (checkpoint systems totally suck).

Check this thread for our impressions. No need for me to repeat them again.

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28580

lackblogger said:

What separates this game from all the other FPSes? (if this is an old debate, maybe someone can summarise the last 10 years of arguments?)

Click to expand...

That it's 3rd person.
But if you want to know what's different to 3rd person shooters:
AP is an RPG with a massive amount of C&C. It only hides behind the shooter.

Ivanwah said:

Yeah, that was pedantic, but you did make an error by trying to bracket every shooter into FPS genre. You could have simply said shooter.
From my experience, FPS and TPS have quite different mechanics. TPS tend to focus on stealth, cover and platforming at the expense of immersion you get from first person, while FPS are down to the ground, shoot it until it dies, rarely incorporating aforementioned mechanics due to their clunkiness in first person. Difference go deeper than the position of the camera.

Click to expand...

There you have it. I have such little interest in FPSes that I didn't even know that FPS and TPS were considered separate entities and, yes, I really wish I had just used the word Shooter, it would have saved so much bandwidth...

Gorath said:

That it's 3rd person.
But if you want to know what's different to 3rd person shooters:
AP is an RPG with a massive amount of C&C. It only hides behind the shooter.

Click to expand...

A bit late to the party there Gorath, everything in your post has already been addressed previously. So far it's the Dice Rolls and C&C which make this game an RPG. I've watched some videos of the game but all I can see is a shooter like any other shooter I've watched people play. I guess some people hold C&C so dear to the RPG concept that any grain of it in any game makes them hail it the RPG God of Gods.

I've never been a massive fan of C&C and I don't get what all the fuss is about personally, I've always associated C&C with Choose Your Own Adventure rather than classical RPG, but there's no challenging some people on this, for some it's their holy grail. No idea why.

Well it's more in the interaction with main characters, and how thorough you are in doing your investigations, that causes some of them to switch alliance, or show up, as well as reveal mysteries. It's all rather clever, I thought.

This sort of RPG gameplay is very difficult to properly show in an idiot's youtube video, so of course they don't bother, and just show the mediocre shooting and sneaking.

lackblogger said:

There's huge opportunity for impossible pedantry with such a discussion, with people finding all kinds of odd games which break any one theory, but the difference between a classic First-Person party RPG and a classic isometric party RPG is stark. The difference between First-Person and 6-Feet single character RPG is neither here nor there and is exactly why in the Elder Scrolls you can choose either viewpoint - because it doesn't matter, they're both virtually the same thing with very little impact on how the game plays out, particularly in a genre sense.

Click to expand...

I get your point about shooters. The Ultima Underworld comment was just a poor attempt at a joke.

Don't get me wrong, some C&C in an RPG is great and shows some effort and imagination has gone into the game, just like having a few nice puzzles does the same thing, but if the entire RPG was just about puzzles? Not so much.

You're right, the Youtube vids can't express the C&C very well. But that's the thing about C&C, it's only relevant if you replay the game, it has no (real) meaning for a single play-through other than the usual illusion of choice. Only by replaying the game can you get any sense of how interesting or deep the C&C is.

So judging the quality of a C&C heavy RPG would need to, firstly, be judged on whether you actually wanted to replay it and then only secondly on whether the C&C was any good or not. I get a common impression that the game is quite off-putting on the first run and the amount of people who can bare the initial run and then go back for more is quite small (but, obviously, very vocal).

As has been said, the game is quite short, especially when you cut-out the intro stuff, and this is, again, a restriction of the C&C heavy genre, in that in order to create replayability you can't really be burning people out on 60-100 hour epics, which is more what RPGs are traditionally about. Having a short game with tuns of C&C is verging on the roguelike from that perspective.

I'm not trying to diss the game for the sake of it, I genuinely find it concerning that this mag seems to think AP is the right thing to point the industry towards with it's "BESTEST BEST" approach, rather than just a regular "it's not so bad" retrospective. If AP is what RPG makers are supposed to aspire to, I'm out-o-here...

RogueCat said:

I get your point about shooters. The Ultima Underworld comment was just a poor attempt at a joke.

Click to expand...

No probs, I did see the joke, I just couldn't think of anything witty to respond with, so I went with boring droning instead

I always enjoyed AP, right from the start, and again on replay. It's not a top-rank game for me, but enjoyable.

It suffers, though, from a comparison with Deus Ex Human Revolution which was released not long afterwards, as they have similarities but DXHR is a much better game (a top-rank game for me).