Alpha Protocol vs Fallout: New Vegas (Avellone vs Sawyer)

[Explorerbc]

I don't understand why people consider AP to be that good in the C&C department. It all felt like pseudo-c&c to me though I did play it long ago and in my popamole days so I might be wrong.

For example, I remember choosing to help G22 (the sci-fi dudes with the goggles) wondering what their mysterious agenda was, and hoping I didn't make a mistake. Turns out you never get to know and you just get different AI pals in the latest missions.

Or, there was one part where I decided to infiltrate one of their secret bases, killed like 10 of their dudes, blew shit up, and their leader calls and basically says "I know it's you, but if you promise to not read our secrets we can still be best friends". No penalty whatsoever if you didn't want it.

In other parts I tried different options with the same result. It felt like little changes with your actions. Yeah a different dude will come and save you in the end but that's it.

Am I right or should I do a new playthrough to freshen my memory?

 

[Drakron]

Having played three times, I can confirm that spending points in sabotage does make it easier compared to spending no points.

Not the point.

You can have several versions of the minigame depending on how hard is to break the system, maxing out the skill should always make it trivial since that is the cost of maxing the tree.

It simply a incredible poorly implemented system that should not even be there, either you do or you dont as DeusEx handled it as it should ... its a minigame that never changes but putting points unlocks options or you just have the password and access it.

Even Bethsoft lockpicking minigame does it right, having higher skill means the minigame is easier ... ALWAYS easier, maxing Hacking on AP makes it "easier" except that without any fucking reason the game becomes harder because you are 1/3 into the game, NOT because the security is better its JUST because you are 1/3 into the game PERIOD.

Defending THIS bullshit makes you a faggot.

 

[Stelcio]

You compare a game that consists of a number of separate fragments that you can handle in different order every playthrough to games that are much more linear (Deus Ex) or much more open (Oblivion? Skyrim? not sure which one you mean). You cannot criticize a system designed for a specific game with specific structure saying that in other games with different structure different things worked better. "PERIOD"

 

[Ovplain]

Well, Alpha Protocol didn't have dogs with their eyes floating outside their damn heads so... :S

 

[Roguey]

I don't understand why people consider AP to be that good in the C&C department. It all felt like pseudo-c&c to me though I did play it long ago and in my popamole days so I might be wrong.

You're correct, AP's C&C is largely narrative (derogatorily referred to as "cosmetic") and the gameplay-changing stuff is barely significant. This was brought up way-back-when.

You can have several versions of the minigame depending on how hard is to break the system, maxing out the skill should always make it trivial since that is the cost of maxing the tree.

Sabotage affects more than just minigame-difficulty. Computer hacking was the only real obnoxious one, the others were okay-for-what-they-were, especially with a mouse.

Even Bethsoft lockpicking minigame does it right, having higher skill means the minigame is easier ... ALWAYS easier,

Skyrim has tiered locks though. Even with maxed out lockpicking, a top tier lock's going to snap your picks quicker than a low-tier one. And as that other poster said, DX, AP, and Bethgames are all structured differently.

 

[Mexi]

Fallout: New Vegas

I'm surprised people hated Dead Money. I thought it was the best DLC of the bunch. Great voice acting, and since I play on very hard/hardcore mode, I was actually counting throwing spears and everything. My guy was a melee character, and at times, it was actually pretty rough. I also gimp the hell out of my player to make the game more interesting, and I didn't level to some crazy amount before going.

 

[Lord Andre]

In absolutely all RPGs the C&C is always cosmetic. There can be no objective way of making it meaningful. Let's examine the possibilities:

- wrong choice make's you dead via plot kill. ex: see Planescape Torment gameovers, Lady of Pain, Lothar, sit on throne in Dead Nations
- wrong choice take something from you. ex: Banner Saga, lose companion via plot kill
- good choice gives loot or companion ex: most rpgs
- good choice skips fight, makes fight easier ex: Fallout(s)
- choice means you get content A or content B ex: Wasteland 2
- choice means narrative description, wording in dialogues or npc attitude changes but not in a gameplay way, just the wording, ex: Shadowrun DMS

All of the above can be considered meaningful or cosmetic depending on the player's engagement level with the game, which is subjective. If the game makes me give a fuck then all c&c counts, if it doesn't they're all cosmetic because no matter what, I will finish / win the game anyway.

That's the "role playing" part, if the game is captivating enough to turn me into a larping fagot while I play it, then the c&c will be good for me, if not it will be cosmetic.

Having said that, while playing AP I was fagging it up a bit, all secret agent style, while playing NV I was fagging it up all cowboy style (all the radio songs help) but after the mid game the spell kind of broke, I was straight again and I still had a lot of play hours left to the ending. AP kept the spell going all up to the end.

Now, it would be stupid to claim that NV isn't the better game. It is. But I would claim that content wise it's not as tight as the hype makes it seem, while AP is tighter content wise than the haters would have you believe.

 

[Drowed]

All of the above can be considered meaningful or cosmetic depending on the player's engagement level with the game, which is subjective. If the game makes me give a fuck then all c&c counts, if it doesn't they're all cosmetic because no matter what, I will finish / win the game anyway.

That's stupid - by this "definition", even real life doesn't have C&C.

If the content changed, AKA, the story isn't the same (you can't do this or that quest anymore, they're mutually exclusive and different), or the gameplay changed (you can now only do certain thins in specific ways depending in how you choose before), then it isn't "cosmetic". If you call it that, then give me a example of something that happens in real life that isn't a "cosmetic" choice and how it can't be put on that list of yours.

 

[Lord Andre]

That's stupid - by this "definition", even real life doesn't have C&C.

If the content changed, AKA, the story isn't the same (you can't do this or that quest anymore, they're mutually exclusive and different), or the gameplay changed (you can now only do certain thins in specific ways depending in how you choose before), then it isn't "cosmetic". If you call it that, then give me a example of something that happens in real life that isn't a "cosmetic" choice and how it can't be put on that list of yours.

The point was that the meaning you assign to a C&C, is what makes it relevant or cosmetic. The relevance of a C&C is in the eye of the beholder.

All people die, so all decisions up to that point are objectively meaningless. Subjectively they are important because they reflect who you are, what you stand for etc. There's nothing wrong with assigning meaning to something that has none. That's what being human is like. The best a game can do, is trick you into assigning meaning to it's C&C. It's called immersion. This implies that the actual mechanics of the C&C are less important than the mechanics that trick you into caring in the first place.

So, my point was that AP does a good job of creating immersion for me, and so does NV, but in the latter I stop being invested half-way through the game.
I do admit though that comparing a 12 hour game to NV is a bit of apples to oranges.

 

[Broseph]

I will defend AP to the death, I've done 3 complete playthroughs of it and had a distinctly different experience each time. Ultimately though, FNV does a much better job of offering that "full RPG experience" and doesn't suffer from horrible balance issues and shit mechanics the same way AP does.

Not a fair comparison to begin with as FNV was totally a

Alpha Protocol 2 will beat both games down to the ground, and you know it!

I want Sega to finance and publish this game far more than I want them back in the hardware business. And Sega consoles were/are *the shit*.

 

[MoonlitKnight]

and pretentious plots with false C&C.

What

 

[AngryKobold]

Alpha Protocol. The ultimate torture device for a storyfag.

 

[Spockrock]

the biggest mistake AP made was trying to appeal to the MGS crowd. shit level design, shit stealth. and boss battles in my shooter?

 

[Xathrodox86]

Alpha Protocol was cool bu NV made me love Fallout again...

Damn, so many hard choices.

 

[Yoshiyyahu]

Apart from all of the other reasons people have cited for Dead Money being great, I found Elijah to be a very interesting character, one I enjoyed following over the other DLCs and even in the main game. Unfortunately, the game bugged the fuck out near the vault and I had to console my way to completion.

 

[GreyViper]

Alpha Protocol and as Cassidy pointed out AP is more similar to ME. But, still have to go with Alpha Protocol.

 

[CyberP]

the biggest mistake AP made was trying to appeal to the MGS crowd. shit level design, shit stealth. and boss battles in my shooter?

MGS has better level design, stealth and boss battles than AP.
AP to me is overall a slightly better game than Mass Effect, a game series that I find to be absolutely abysmal.

 

[CyberP]

"boss battles in my shooter?"

Eh? Most shooters, or games with guns, have boss battles. From Doom and System Shock to Fallout: New Vegas and Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines.

I'm guessing you meant boss battles in my sneaker, but even then AP isn't strictly a stealth game just as it isn't strictly a shooter.

Also, for all those voting AP: you have exceedingly shit taste in games.

 

[Spockrock]

I meant boss battles in a spy thriller set in the modern world with modern weapons and body armor. but I see your point.

MGS is a parody (at least I always considered it such).

 

[Lhynn]

false C&C.

AP had next to no false C&C. What are you talking about?

 

[Backstabber]

If I recall correctly, many of Alpha Protocol's choices only have consequences in cutscenes, rather than in the gameplay. They don't really have much of a consequence in gameplay terms.

 

[Lhynn]

If I recall correctly, many of Alpha Protocol's choices only have consequences in cutscenes, rather than in the gameplay. They don't really have much of a consequence in gameplay terms.

But they do have consequence in gameplay. and most importantly, they have consequence in the narrative from beginning to end.

 

[Stelcio]

Narrative is THE gameplay in Alpha Protocol. It's pretty much CYOA.

 

[pippin]

I have never played Alpha Protocol. From what I've read, it's broken Deus Ex plus rape scene. Am I right in this appreciation?
On the other hand, I do love New Vegas, and given the previous information, I don't really know if AP is good enough to "dethrone" NV.

 

[Tigranes]

I have never played Alpha Protocol. From what I've read, it's broken Deus Ex plus rape scene. Am I right in this appreciation?
On the other hand, I do love New Vegas, and given the previous information, I don't really know if AP is good enough to "dethrone" NV.

Nope. Try it yourself if you're curious. It's the definition of a flawed gem.