It seems funny now, but I think there are no games like Alpha Protocol.
Tim Cain would argue that he did in fact do this with the leadership build and flaw system.
Flaw system more or less comes straight out of GURPS, on which the first Fallout is based on. That's some advancement.
Unfortunately, I don't have a "meh" button.
Attaining decent world building and immersion in an RPG are already difficult enough without being burdened by a fundamentally unserious tone. It's a daunting prospect before adding a sophomoric writing crew infected with the Californian mind virus into the mix.
RPG designers must be stopped.
They fucked up by going epic exclusive for a year.
Its not a spiritual successor by any means, but I consider Deus Ex: MD to be at least a thematic successor.
Yeah, this is important. The use of AI will not make games fundamentally more robust or full of content, because the form of a game is finite, and that's due to the human 'audience' part of the equation. AI can write stuff that is then curated by a human, and then probably by AI itself. Its pointless to say insert a chatbot into the game, make the game possibly have infinite content and infinite depth, ultimately a human will only uncover a fraction of this, and if that's the case you may as well curate it and make each conversation and scene meaningful. Its like attempting to make an infinite novel or a 25 hour long movie. It is not the optimal form for a story.
Umm, no? The gameplay is also quite trash. I wish it were the same thing from before. Let's use New Vegas as a point of reference, since the gameplay style is the same and it's the same dev studio; It's missing over half of the gameplay content! Simplified RPG systems, less quests, smaller world, less guns, no perks, less general systems such as the survival, condition management and health ones in NV (radiation, localized health, weapon repair), less enemy types, there is almost nothing different in its place too. A dodge button, explosive barrels and sprinting is about it.
I think that's actually what contributed to its success. Normies do believe this is just as good as new vegas, and similarly, many reviewers were fooled(SkillUp thinks this for example). Sure, for someone who actively distinguishes quality this is a flop compared to NV, but how many people are like that, out in the world? Without that label it would definitely do worse.
Is that for real? Because I thought about giving it a try, mostly because I like Firefly, but everyone was saying its shit, and honestly its quite believable given the parts I've seen. Is it really salvageable?
Yes, but also theme park design too. All the best RPGs have a theme park base, with effort to tie it all together coherently/illusion of an organic place sprinkled on top.
This was my rating too. Not the worst thing in the world, it has a framework of a functional game, effort was put in and it's absolutely playable, even has some good aspects, but ultimately it is simply not worthy. 7/10 = decent. 8/10 = good. 9/10 = stunning 10/10 = hypothetical perfection. Anything less than 7 is unworthy.
Thanks. I knew it was not like Firefly writing wise, but Firefly is a miracle in terms of the variety of themes and overall style(not the dialogue itself), considering it was made by Whedon. It gives religion a sympathetic treatment, it portrays heroism, secessionist freedom ethos, it has a protagonist that's tragically loyal to his principles, a nice supporting cast. The way it treats idealism in general is a breath of fresh air, I mean the Janestown episode in particular, its kind of in touch with matters distinctively human(contrast this with what the fake priest from OW thinks about turning human corpses into fertilizer). Even the things that I usually dont like are presented in a way that makes them likeable. That's an achievement considering that supposedly, Whedon himself did not sympathize with the themes he portrayed, on a personal level.
