Interview Alpha Protocol Video Footage

[Data4]

Unless there's Coast to Coast AM style tinfoil hattery involved in the conspiracies in AP, you can't compare it to DX. One of the great things about DX was how they crammed every major secret society conspiracy theory in it without giving an ounce of fuck about it.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Unless there's Coast to Coast AM style tinfoil hattery involved in the conspiracies in AP, you can't compare it to DX. One of the great things about DX was how they crammed every major secret society conspiracy theory in it without giving an ounce of fuck about it.

That, and combining great deadpan comic sendup of political conspiracies without losing some genuine underlying political themes. It's the Illuminati conspiracies and 'something's in the water' stuff on one hand and the Chinese 'wait - you think your media is independent...you DO know what a think-tank is, don't you?' comments on the other. The deadpan 'my vision is augmented' to explain the permanent sunglasses at night, and the great 'I don't read books' comments whenever any of the myriad of novels, political tracts and philosophers the game referenaces are mentioned to the main character.

I remember reading a rather retarded review before getting the game, complaining about how the main character's voicework was so emotionless. On playing it, I was amazed how the reviewer could so badly miss the point - I thought the 'emotionless voice' was one of the best design decisions in the narrative/atmosphere/character aspect of the game. It meant that you were never quite sure whether JC was telling the truth, or what his intentions were. Part of that meant the player could impose his own views on JC, especially leading to the factional choices at the end. But it also meant they could pull things like the constant 'I don't read books' line, and then later have JC fire off a (very bookish) sophisticated dialogue response about political philosophy - it just adds a nice touch of ambiguity about the character.

 

[FeelTheRads]

He said that there should be other path that can be used with different skills so that no skill is strictly necessary to complete a mission.

Now that I re-read his post I see that I may misunderstood it.

but as Gareth (aka Naked Ninja) posted a time ago, even combat can be considered a mini-game

Gareth also has a big case of the stupids.
I have something better: All games are mini-games in this game called life. And by completing them you get kool kredits which allow you to compete with other characters. However, in the end nobody wins because apparently the boss is invincible.
There, reductio ad Garethum.

I think I can approve mini-games

I do not approve of them at all, especially if they are considered alternative paths. And I still have the feeling that this is how they will be used in AP. But I guess we will see.

And just to be clear, I do not advocate alternative paths in every situation. In fact, the sidequests shouldn't be all doable in a playthrough. It's cool if they have alternative paths, but they shouldn't be doable by every possible character. That's Oblivitard bullshit.

 

[Data4]

Unless there's Coast to Coast AM style tinfoil hattery involved in the conspiracies in AP, you can't compare it to DX. One of the great things about DX was how they crammed every major secret society conspiracy theory in it without giving an ounce of fuck about it.

That, and combining great deadpan comic sendup of political conspiracies without losing some genuine underlying political themes. It's the Illuminati conspiracies and 'something's in the water' stuff on one hand and the Chinese 'wait - you think your media is independent...you DO know what a think-tank is, don't you?' comments on the other. The deadpan 'my vision is augmented' to explain the permanent sunglasses at night, and the great 'I don't read books' comments whenever any of the myriad of novels, political tracts and philosophers the game referenaces are mentioned to the main character.

I remember reading a rather retarded review before getting the game, complaining about how the main character's voicework was so emotionless. On playing it, I was amazed how the reviewer could so badly miss the point - I thought the 'emotionless voice' was one of the best design decisions in the narrative/atmosphere/character aspect of the game. It meant that you were never quite sure whether JC was telling the truth, or what his intentions were. Part of that meant the player could impose his own views on JC, especially leading to the factional choices at the end. But it also meant they could pull things like the constant 'I don't read books' line, and then later have JC fire off a (very bookish) sophisticated dialogue response about political philosophy - it just adds a nice touch of ambiguity about the character.

Too true. That's why DX is the only game I've replayed at least 5 times. Each time, I picked up on something I didn't notice before. There was a subtlety to it that DX:IW completely missed, and I'm sure the new one will too.

On topic: Will Alpha Protocol feature the same? Yes, it's a different style of game, but I'm curious as to where the comparisons are coming from. Tossing the word "conspiracy" around isn't enough.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

I SPEEEEEELLLL MY DRRRRINNK!!!!

 

[MetalCraze]

First of all you cannot go without investing in any skill, you'll have to take points at least in the weapons skills

I don't think they matter in a game where hiding behind a specially placed box makes you nearly invulnerable and does something to an enemy precision. We also seen several times that AI doesn't seem to react even to a gun blazing Thorton adequately at all. In videos player was just killing enemies one after another while other enemies standing just 10 meters away showed no reaction at all.

Second, even if you don't spend a single point in the other skills (like technical aptitude) I think it would be very stupid if you cannot complete the game because of skill selection, just think about it: I've this door locked in front of me, but I didn't spend a single point on lockpicking so I cannot pass, mission over man. It doesn't make sense, if you're not good at lockpicking then try to find a workaround, getting the key from a guard, for example, but forbidding you from completing the game simply because you did not take any points on other skills than those you selected would be very stupid indeed.

No forbidding you from extracontent, locking stuff from you, making alternative endings to quests unavailable. As we know by now the only non-linearity in the game comes through you picking which cutscene you want to watch (there are no dialogues in the game) and it's purely cosmetic (more enemies in the same level, soldiers of Sie fighting on your side instead of against you etc). Levels themselves are very linear (as videos prove it - some even showed two different characters going through the same level and it still looked like killing everyone in the exactly same corridors but using different means like melee instead of guns) and full of triggers that you can't avoid. Not mentioning absolutely consolish boss fights (that fight against Sie which also shows all shittiness of writing and design in the game where after getting a few hundreds of bullets through her skirt she just jumps on a chopper and "muahaha I'll be back" escapes). Even with all of its bizzare conspiracy theories DX was way more consistent and had better quality. Kinda another proof that Avellone can't do anything as a lead designer on his own at all (especially work with a setting unless it was fully written before him by someone else)

 

[Soulforged]

I don't think they matter in a game where hiding behind a specially placed box makes you nearly invulnerable and does something to an enemy precision. We also seen several times that AI doesn't seem to react even to a gun blazing Thorton adequately at all. In videos player was just killing enemies one after another while other enemies standing just 10 meters away showed no reaction at all.

Agreed, the AI has not been a strength lately on video games. However you must consider the fact that these are just staged previews, as in scripted events and cheats applied.

No forbidding you from extracontent, locking stuff from you, making alternative endings to quests unavailable. As we know by now the only non-linearity in the game comes through you picking which cutscene you want to watch (there are no dialogues in the game) and it's purely cosmetic (more enemies in the same level, soldiers of Sie fighting on your side instead of against you etc).

Are you sure they are only cutscenes? And why are you saying that there are no dialogues in the game? So having soldiers switch sides is "purely cosmetic", good to know.

Levels themselves are very linear (as videos prove it - some even showed two different characters going through the same level and it still looked like killing everyone in the exactly same corridors but using different means like melee instead of guns) and full of triggers that you can't avoid.

Yes, there's something that we both agree, linear levels are boring as hell and it seems like they'll keep the modern trend.

Not mentioning absolutely consolish boss fights (that fight against Sie which also shows all shittiness of writing and design in the game where after getting a few hundreds of bullets through her skirt she just jumps on a chopper and "muahaha I'll be back" escapes).

It's a console game after all, but that particular design is not exclusive to console games and I don't see any reason to link it to console games as a genre.

Even with all of its bizzare conspiracy theories DX was way more consistent and had better quality. Kinda another proof that Avellone can't do anything as a lead designer on his own at all (especially work with a setting unless it was fully written before him by someone else)

When did any of the Alpha Protocol previews showed anything inconsistent? And, to be sincere, Deus Ex wasn't exactly outstanding in the same departments in which Alpha Protocol apparently fails, and not least of them is the case of the AI.