Alpha Protocol

[villain of the story]

It's Mass Effect in a modern setting and suddenly made awesomer by the usual suspects because Obsidian did it instead of Bioware.

The really sad thing is, Mass Effect was actually fun to play as a female asshole Shepard. They did the cinematics for it right.

The only good thing about AP is that it is relatively short and easy to play through a couple of times and be done with it forever.

 

[janjetina]

Percentage of the game spent in popamoling and minigames: >99%
Percentage of the game spent making "choices" (in a dialogue wheel / QTE minigame): <1%

Given that most of the game time is spent in popamoling through linear levels and minigaming till eyes pur out of the sockets, the game is fecal matter. Just like Mass Effect, only worse. I want the hours I wasted in trying to play this back. At least it taught me to trust my instincts and not to waste my bandwidth and time pirating games that are clearly bad, though they may be made by the same guy who made Torment.

 

[Sceptic]

You know, I used to think the AP haters were lulzy a year ago, but you guys seem to get even funnier with time

 

[DraQ]

Percentage of the game spent in popamoling and minigames: >99%
Percentage of the game spent making "choices" (in a dialogue wheel / QTE minigame): <1%

So it's like Fallout?
O_O

 

[Alex]

You know, I used to think the AP haters were lulzy a year ago, but you guys seem to get even funnier with time

I guess you aren't referring to me, but for what it is worth, I was (well, still am, for that matter) really interested in discussing something I perceived as the source of my dislike of the game, not in bashing it.

Percentage of the game spent in popamoling and minigames: >99%
Percentage of the game spent making "choices" (in a dialogue wheel / QTE minigame): <1%

So it's like Fallout?
O_O

Well, even if fallout's combat wasn't the definition of fun, it served as a mean to test your character. They were a way to gauge whether your character could go through some area or not and at what cost, and so worked to make the bigger picture more interesting. AP's boss battles on the other hand were just boring and served no purpose.

 

[DraQ]

Well, I haven't even played AP, because I'm just not that much into bond rip-offs spy thrillers, but to praise one game for being travel map and simplistic combat for 99% of typical gameplay and CYOA (albeit well made CYOA) rail network for 1%, while bashing another for being simplistic combat and derpy minigames in 99% and CYOA (from what I've heard also well executed) rail network for the remaining 1% (when you actually get to make decisions) is hypocritical.

 

[Sceptic]

I guess you aren't referring to me

Nope. You, Edward and Sillelak actually have well thought out reasons for disliking the game and I wouldn't call any of you "haters". I don't necessarily agree with your positions, or I can recognize you're right but still like the game, but I respect your arguments

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

4) World: The interactable world is divided into two sets: your safehouse(s) and the missions. You interact with the world mostly through dialogue in missions or emails. The bad thing about this is that the world i not OPEN like in Deus Ex where you had comparatively more freedom to interact with NPCs that were plot irrelevant. I don't know about you guys, but this game could have had a lot more immershun if
there were fun characters that trigger small side quests (again like in Deus Ex).

This was what I was referring to. Please be advised that the OP was written when I had just joined RPG codex and had not given serious thought to gaming.

This is actually not true. In Deus Ex you had freedomg of MOVEMENT (which the game's best trait, it's level design, built on), not when it came to dealing with NPCs. Often you had no choice, a shallow 1/0 choice (Paul alive/dead doesn't make any difference in the long run, killing/saving Lebedev has *no* effect on the rest of the game outside of Navarre in the metro station), or a choice that only influenced your rewards (ie, dealing with the UNATCO doctor, only difference is that choosing correctly gives you an Aug Upgrade, pissing off the armory keeper only changes what he gives you). Deus Ex was about the fact you could approach mission objectives in creative ways, not the mission objectives themselves.

Deus Ex had illusion of choice. Alpha Protocol had actual choice (with actual consequences).

 

[Captain Shrek]

you had comparatively more freedom to interact with NPCs that were plot irrelevant

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Freedom to kill/not kill NPCs is itself an irrelevant aspect. Especially if it has absolutely no consequences (vendor access does not count).

 

[Captain Shrek]

Vaarna.

I know. In fact this discussion of Choice and consequences needs a critical outlook. I will do that when I have more free time. For the time being drop that issue. I promise we will get to discuss it more later.

 

[Roguey]

Well, I haven't even played AP, because I'm just not that much into bond rip-offs spy thrillers, but to praise one game for being travel map and simplistic combat for 99% of typical gameplay and CYOA (albeit well made CYOA) rail network for 1%, while bashing another for being simplistic combat and derpy minigames in 99% and CYOA (from what I've heard also well executed) rail network for the remaining 1% (when you actually get to make decisions) is hypocritical.

This is an utterly stupid thing to say you haven't even played Alpha Protocol.

Fallout is fun because of the amount of freedom it gives you and the flexibility of its character system. Alpha Protocol keeps you on a tight rail and its character system sucks. It also forces you to kill/beat up a bunch of guys whereas you can just skip all that in Fallout and just focus on walking and talking to people if you wish (and there's a lot of walking and talking to be had there, unlike AP).

 

[Surf Solar]

Percentage of the game spent in popamoling and minigames: >99%
Percentage of the game spent making "choices" (in a dialogue wheel / QTE minigame): <1%

So it's like Fallout?
O_O

Fallout had minigames? I can only think of the electrocuted tiles in the Oil Rig (Fallout 2)

 

[Xor]

That was more of a puzzle than a minigame.

 

[Radisshu]

That was more of a puzzle than a minigame.

Please explain why minigames can't be puzzles.

 

[Infinitron]

A minigame is usually

1) Separated by a degree of abstraction from what's going on in the main game. Like you're killing splicers in Bioshock and suddenly LOL LET'S PLAY PIPE DREAM
2) Used in more than one place, possibly even annoyingly repetitive

 

[Surf Solar]

That was more of a puzzle than a minigame.

It was horrible and annoying nonetheless.

 

[Radisshu]

A minigame is usually

1) Separated by a degree of abstraction from what's going on in the main game. Like you're killing splicers in Bioshock and suddenly LOL LET'S PLAY PIPE DREAM
2) Used in more than one place, possibly even annoyingly repetitive

Hm, yeah, I agree.

 

[RRRrrr]

Hey villain of the story
Tell me that Mass Effect is better than this

 

[Zombra]

OK, so I wanted to replay this to see about recommending it to a friend. Started a playthrough last night and was surprised that in the first 2 minutes of the game, the player character (in his underwear) is shot by two men with submachine guns. He is able to punch them out and move on with no ill effects after this happens. Not a drop of blood in sight.

Am I a bad person for thinking this is weird? I remembered a lot of sneaking around and not getting shot in this game; am I way off base? Obviously I am. I guess this whole post is rhetorical. I suppose it's a testament to modern gaming that I've become used to titles in which being shot is bad. Horrible that AP breaks so resoundingly from realism so immediately. Will keep playing it I guess and see how I feel as things progress.

 

[Coma White]

Hey villain of the story
Tell me that Mass Effect is better than this

"No, because I KILLED all my therapists."

 

[Roguey]

OK, so I wanted to replay this to see about recommending it to a friend. Started a playthrough last night and was surprised that in the first 2 minutes of the game, the player character (in his underwear) is shot by two men with submachine guns. He is able to punch them out and move on with no ill effects after this happens. Not a drop of blood in sight.

Am I a bad person for thinking this is weird? I remembered a lot of sneaking around and not getting shot in this game; am I way off base? Obviously I am. I guess this whole post is rhetorical. I suppose it's a testament to modern gaming that I've become used to titles in which being shot is bad. Horrible that AP breaks so resoundingly from realism so immediately. Will keep playing it I guess and see how I feel as things progress.

You're in a training exercise, just assume they're using rubber bullets.

 

[Zombra]

Haha. Nice one. I love rationalizing shit that makes no sense. Gonna have to think ahead because I'm sure the same thing will happen on live missions. For now that works though!

 

[Roguey]

Haha. Nice one. I love rationalizing shit that makes no sense. Gonna have to think ahead because I'm sure the same thing will happen on live missions. For now that works though!

Eh, well when you're on missions proper you'll have (regenerating) armor so slight sponginess will be justified.

Additionally, that was a tutorial. Tutorials (in AAA games) are supposed to be relatively safe, extremely forgiving areas where you learn the mechanics without any actual pressure.

 

[Zombra]

Additionally, that was a tutorial. Tutorials (in AAA games) are supposed to be relatively safe, extremely forgiving areas where you learn the mechanics without any actual pressure.

Exactly - that's why I was pretty surprised when those guys burst in and started mowing away with their uzis.

Also, the player isn't supposed to know it's an exercise, so even if we handwave it in our heads as rubber bullets, that's no help to my friend who's playing it for the first time. They could at least have had nightsticks or something instead.