RPGWatch Forums - View Single Post - Alpha Protocol - Preview @ Eurogamer, Games Radar
View Single Post


March 23rd, 2010, 10:09
Originally Posted by guenthar View Post
The position I am coming from is that this is an rpg and you are saying the protagonist is already an expert so in rpg terms should already have maximum stats in everything right from the beginning which would make this not an rpg. To make this an rpg you can't be the best in what you do right from the beginning so that you can progress in your skills and abilities. Sometimes you miss even if you are an expert which translates to a critical miss from rolling to low in an rpg.
That's your hang up right there, mate, I'm not saying that Thornton "is already an expert" at all, I'm saying that Thornton should possess some proficiency with every type of weapon.
Furthermore, I'm also stating that no amount of skill or proficiency, nor any other attribute should play a part in the damage that is done by a shotgun blast to the stomach. Ideally, that would be left to a physics engine and damage calculation system alone. As we don't yet have computers sophisticated enough to model the physics of hard-to-soft-body impact, the various types of energy involved and the penetration affect of all such things in real-time, I'd settle for the standard "stagger" animation (or the ridiculous "thrown off their feet and blown away" ragdoll one) coupled with the NPCs death.

Originally Posted by guenthar View Post
Here I am going by the game and the situations presented so far and the enemies that have been presented are well armed and trained so if you run up to them in real life you would get your head blown off.
Yet another point in favor of the "overpowered nature of stealth" as it were, but also another assumption on your part. I quote (as before): "…you can rush up to a boss and unload a shotgun into his stomach, and it will do practically no damage…" Sure, "boss" characters are traditionally tough, but who can say with this one? The article reveals nothing whatsoever about him/her/it. We don't know the circumstances, we don't know if they have some sort of body-armor on or are buck-naked in the shower.
Of course (again) my qualm has never been with the approach, but with the illogicality of a shotgun blast having no effect.

Originally Posted by guenthar View Post
They could make it like real life where one or two shots could kill you and then you wouldn't get into point blank range to shoot but then it wouldn't be as much fun and would severely reduce stats and skills effect on the game. If you can absorb the damage and not get killed in one or two shots you could go and use stealth to sneak up to an enemy and shoot them point blank and absorb any shots that come your way. (instead of dying like in real life)
Good grief…I'm just going to quote what I already wrote:
"I'm okay with some representations of real-world concepts, such as health bars and the like. That is game-design over reality, a concession that (generally) must be made in order to preserve the all-important "fun factor" (however you define it). Others, though, I just find bothersome."
"…if you're aware, as a player, that the shotgun you chance across will allow you to level the next few baddies with little to no effort, yet bring the rest of the compound forces down on your head, set off alarms like mad and generally turn your stealth approach from a master stroke into an utter waste, why do it? Stealth kills would be such players natural forte…"

Originally Posted by guenthar View Post
Sorry maybe I should have said shooter/stealth hybrid with rpg elements or action adventure/stealth with rpg elements instead of fps. I was basing what I said on the game we are talking about (Alpha Protocol) which is a rpg with stealth and shooting elements. If you want realism of the kind you are speaking about you would be precluding the roleplay aspect of an rpg. Using your own skills instead of the skills of the the character your are playing to generate the outcome is playing yourself within the body of the character instead of playing the character.
You're missing my point completely, mate, no offense intended.
For instance, I define Mass Effect, The Witcher, Arx Fatalis, Baldur's Gate and countless other games all as RPGs. I do so in spite of their mechanical differences, that is, the "twitch factor" that exists with such disparity between them. My point in "stopping you there" once you brought up "but it's an RPG!" was this: it does not matter. The meta-aspect of your own skill playing a part in the character's actions is inherently necessary, indeed, it must be present or you are not playing a game, you're taking part in a quasi-cinematic experience. Frankly, you'd be better off with a choose-your-own-adventure book.
Besides, I already addressed that: "this insertion of a "random dice roll" determining and/or simulating something that need not be portrayed via such." Why continue inserting dice rolls in lieu of simply allowing the act to occur? When it's a question of accuracy, dice need not enter the equation. Why? Because you have a little reticule, iron sights or whatnot that already simulate it.
It's a ridiculous redundancy, rather like inserting a random dice-roll after every dialog selection. You know, just to see if your intent was clearly expressed, if your body language played a part, if they understood you or if that gum you're chewing somehow messed with your pronunciation…there's simply no need for it. You pick a line: the line is delivered. You aim at something and click, that something is hit.
themadhatter is offline


Philosopher Emeritus


Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)