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

[Cadmus]

I've just bought AP and was wondering how well does it manage combat encounters? From what I've read here it seems to be lacking, but I've heard that otherwise it's a very good RPG.

O_o Just play the game and see for yourself, man

I plan to very soon.

it's a goddamn piece of shit, gameplay-wise. Play on easy just to get through the broken gameplay sections so that you can reap the rewards for the dialogue choices.

 

[Athelas]

Sounds very much like the #1 Codex RPG.

 

[Curious_Tongue]

The thing that makes me prefer AP is it's more scripted nature and the lack of filler content (a thing i despise in games and the reason i don't like exploration in games most of the time)

What's wrong with filer content? It's not always a bad thing to flesh something out.

 

[Curious_Tongue]

This, and I hate whole Legion vs NCR story arc. I just cannot take machete rape squads being viable vs regular army armed with m16 supported by rangers.

Maybe you should have kept playing until the end. There's explanations as to why the Legion isn't all that advanced or well equipped yet can still kick ass.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

There's explanations as to why the Legion isn't all that advanced or well equipped yet can still kick ass.

Balance?

 

[AngryKobold]

There's explanations as to why the Legion isn't all that advanced or well equipped yet can still kick ass.

Balance?

Level scaling.

 

[Lemming42]

But but...I had no idea I wasn't supposed to actually play the game=/ That would have saved me a lot of trouble.

Well, it's not like it's abysmal and unplayable, there's a little bit of room to play around with different combat builds. Stealth + unarmed build is kind of fun even though the stealth is broken.

 

[Tigranes]

I've just bought AP and was wondering how well does it manage combat encounters? From what I've read here it seems to be lacking, but I've heard that otherwise it's a very good RPG.

Jick Magger is all wrong.

(1) If you want the most 'powerful' build then pistols' Chain Shot is OP, but this isn't a hard game and you'll mow through everything no matter what build you make. You'll get to try every weapon type in the tutorial so choose what you'd have most fun with. Assault Rifles are the next best after pistols, Shotguns are weak but can be fun in their own 'boom boom' way, SMGs are just bleh.
(2) Stealth is a viable build in that you can 'mostly-ghost' almost every level, I've had playthroughs where I just choke everybody from behind. If you level it up all the way you get some crazy stealth powers. There are some fights where stealth isn't very useful, but again, unless you totally suck at FPS-style games, you won't be stuck wishing you oculd respec or anything.
(3) To me this isn't a FPS and it's also not a difficult game, so personally the way to have fun is to mix it up and use a lot of different things (trap mines, fire grenades to set multiple people on fire, sneak up on one dude then martial arts the guy next to him, etc), and/or to set house rules challenges for yourself. But the first time you play, just take a look at the tutorial, read the options, then just pick what you want to pick.

I won't pretend that it's a well balanced game in any way, but I've had a huge amount of fun modding the inis to make the enemies better (basically make your footsteps, shots, etc. noisier, and there's some other settings), using Rookie to not get a lot of skill points, play on Hard, and then do things like try and not kill anybody in that level, use a limited number of shots, etc. Of course you can do that with any game, but I've found that AP really benefits from this because when you make resources / skills scarce and make the basics a challenge, you get to maximise the cool stuff the combat does have. Nothing like waiting in the shadows watching the guards patrol knowing you've only got one fire grenade left and you want to get them all.

 

[Maschtervoz]

Alpha Protocol is painful to play outside of conversations, this can be helped by maxing stealth and pistols and playing on easy, but it never becomes enjoyable. NV does tend to slip into the same problem too, especially as time passes and repetition sets in, but its open world nature helps making the crap seem more diluted.

Both have absolutely abominable combat and make me feel that sometimes it's better to just give up and try to make a decent first/third person shooter rather than force RPG mechanics into the system and end up with gameplay that fails at both. As a FPS, NV fails to find a fitting niche for its playstyle, ending up too dumb to be a tactical post-apocalypse scavenger gunporn simulator and too slow and clunky to be anything else. The alternative is using VATS and letting the game play itself for you. AP takes the worst idea in action game history, sticky cover shooting, and makes it even more tedious with clusterfuck skill based mechanics that only serve to make boring encounters last longer until you max chain shot and it's an instant win button. Good thing most time you can just stealth kill entire levels of deaf and mostly blind enemies.

AP also has the worst minigames ever, especially with the retarded way they scale and the controls actively working against you most of the time. And shit level design with magically sealing doors triggered by invisible lines. And dumbfuck AI. And several other issues, the main idea being that NV is less of a chore to actually play through, even if it also has its own share of glaring flaws, most of them derived from Bethesda's crap walking simulator template.

 

[Tigranes]

If you find combat abominable in either game yeah, you should just move on to games with better combat.

 

[Grathanich]

I got the shivers when Marcus told me about his adventures with my Fallout 2 guy and that is alone enough for FNV to earn my vote.

 

[Alex]

Alpha Protocol is painful to play outside of conversations,(snip...)

That gives the impression that the conversations aren't painful...

 

[Maschtervoz]

If you find combat abominable in either game yeah, you should just move on to games with better combat.

Probably the wisest decision, but I can't resist the temptation of checking out the stuff that resides beyond the shit combat sections. Such is the life of the storyfag.

 

[Azarkon]

AP had memorable characters and encounters. The game itself was pretty meh.

But how do you disentangle what Avellone did vs. what Mitsoda did vs. what Parker did? That's the issue I have with judging a game that changed its lead designer mid-way through development and had to scratch/redo its vision.

The fairer contest for Avellone vs. Sawyer is KOTOR2 vs. NV.

Both were working off of existing assets and IPs, both had the same lead designer throughout, and both were slotted to be slamdunks.

Another contest, when it comes out, is PoE vs. PST. Sawyer's IE game vs. Avellone's IE game.

 

[Rake]

AP had memorable characters and encounters. The game itself was pretty meh.

But how do you disentangle what Avellone did vs. what Mitsoda did vs. what Parker did? That's the issue I have with judging a game that changed its lead designer mid-way through development and had to scratch/redo its vision.

The fairer contest for Avellone vs. Sawyer is KOTOR2 vs. NV.

Both were working off of existing assets and IPs, both had the same lead designer throughout, and both were slotted to be slamdunks.

Another contest, when it comes out, is PoE vs. PST. Sawyer's IE game vs. Avellone's IE game.

Avellone > Sawyer in all three comparisons.

 

[Bleed the Man]

AP had memorable characters and encounters. The game itself was pretty meh.

But how do you disentangle what Avellone did vs. what Mitsoda did vs. what Parker did? That's the issue I have with judging a game that changed its lead designer mid-way through development and had to scratch/redo its vision.

The fairer contest for Avellone vs. Sawyer is KOTOR2 vs. NV.

Both were working off of existing assets and IPs, both had the same lead designer throughout, and both were slotted to be slamdunks.

Another contest, when it comes out, is PoE vs. PST. Sawyer's IE game vs. Avellone's IE game.

Avellone > Sawyer in all three comparisons.

In terms of writing? Yes, definetly. In terms of game design? Absolutely not.

New Vegas is arguably the best RPG made by Obsidian, and the only one able to make the "arguably" punctuation necessary is Mask of the Betrayer.

I love both KOTOR 2 and Alpha Protocol with a passion, but outside their storyfaggotry, they have major issues, not only combat related, but quest design related, something that both MotB and New Vegas exceed at.

 

[Rake]

AP had memorable characters and encounters. The game itself was pretty meh.

But how do you disentangle what Avellone did vs. what Mitsoda did vs. what Parker did? That's the issue I have with judging a game that changed its lead designer mid-way through development and had to scratch/redo its vision.

The fairer contest for Avellone vs. Sawyer is KOTOR2 vs. NV.

Both were working off of existing assets and IPs, both had the same lead designer throughout, and both were slotted to be slamdunks.

Another contest, when it comes out, is PoE vs. PST. Sawyer's IE game vs. Avellone's IE game.

Avellone > Sawyer in all three comparisons.

In terms of writing? Yes, definetly. In terms of game design? Absolutely not.

New Vegas is arguably the best RPG made by Obsidian, and the only one able to make the "arguably" punctuation necessary is Mask of the Betrayer.

I love both KOTOR 2 and Alpha Protocol with a passion, but outside their storyfaggotry, they have major issues, not only combat related, but quest design related, something that both MotB and New Vegas exceed at.

I meant as a whole, not piece by piece. But if you want to talk about Quest design then yes, KOTOR 2 loses points. Still MotB was miles better than NV, with AP being at the same level as NV.
As for NV being the "best RPG" made by Obsidian

 

[Bleed the Man]

I meant as a whole, not piece by piece. But if you want to talk about Quest design then yes, KOTOR 2 loses points. Still MotB was miles better than NV, with AP being at the same level as NV.
As for NV being the "best RPG" made by Obsidian

I have the KKK on my side on this, you can't fight the hivemind

Resistance is futile, Rake.

 

[Jools]

I'm all for FNV. I found AP quite banal, railroaded, short, popamole, unrefined. Haters gonna hate. FNV provided much more atmosphere, "freedom", and was way less cinematic in favour of a desolation-imbued pretend-realism.

 

[Sceptic]

I've just bought AP and was wondering how well does it manage combat encounters? From what I've read here it seems to be lacking, but I've heard that otherwise it's a very good RPG.

A lot of the more extreme complaints come from people who tried to make pure builds. The game's design doesn't really support this due to trying to do everything (stealth, bosses, big fights against many opponents) with a system not really suited for it. It's a major design problem to be sure, but the workaround is actually very easy: don't try to make a munchkin pure build. As long as you mix and match a bit between the stealth, pistols, gadgets, martials arts and one of the heavier weapons (you don't have to put points in ALL of the fields obivously; just don't super specialize) the game is very easy and you can deal with any situtation. I always play non-party games this way anyway (my Fallout character was a super-intelligent gun-wielding diplomat), but in AP it's important to do so just so you don't pull your hair out because your supersneaky agent suddenly has to take down a helicopter in open firefight. Mixing and matching allows you to approach any situation in whatever was is more fun: good stealth will let you skip one of the bosses entirely, uzis and shotguns will let you melt down any boss that favours close contact, Chain Shot is hilarious when you have an army coming down on you, and so on.

 

[Tommy Wiseau]

Fallout: New Vegas was pretty great and also well-balanced.

 

[Modron]

...

No stealth build should be pulling out hair over any boss/encounter in game, stealth + pistols = easy mode chain shot+invisibility->move->rinse repeat once or twice and most bosses are dead without knowing where you are. Chain shot, invisibility ability, or some combination of the two can clear any non-boss encounter. Assault rifles were good as well and could be paired with stealth builds and non-stealth ones alike. Smgs had terrible damage/accuracy/plus their special ability was nothing special and shotguns while better were inferior to pistols or ARs. That helicopter encounter was laden with rpgs so your stealth or martial arts person could pass it.

In regards to your opinion that pure builds had issues with game content, what? The game was designed around specialization what with you only being able to max 2 skills. Granted numerous builds could beat the game but investing in 3 combat skills seems far more likely to cause frustration when you could spend those ap elsewhere in supportive skills eg toughness, stealth, sabotage, technical aptitude to backup your weapon skill. Not to mention multiple combat skills is silly because they cost more ap than said supportive skills, 5 vs 3 respectively.

P.S.
Been said before, but bears repeating: everyone's Fallout character was a super-intelligent gun-wielding diplomat.

 

[Sykar]

Fallout: New Vegas was pretty great and also well-balanced.