Alpha Protocol sucks massive Multi-Headed Dick

[toro]

Quantity has a quality of its own.

Like a massive pile of shit used as fertilizer. This is deep man.

 

[Correct_Carlo]

AP is crazy flawed but I think it's worth playing solely for the dialogue system. It has the best dialogue system of any game I've ever played. I think the worst thing about the game being such a financial failure is that it probably means no one will use its timed dialogue system (and its myriad of awards, penalties, and other factors depending on your responses) again. Of course, I can see where it'd be a bitch if you are dyslexic or something (I know a few people who complained about the time limits as they felt like they didn't have time to process everything), but as someone who usually saves before every pertinent dialogue instance in RPGs I found the fact that you had to make snap judgement and live with the consequences to be incredibly liberating and awesome. It made the dialogue portions of the game 100 times more exciting than the game's rather tepid combat segments, as strangely, when you were in a room surrounded by dudes with guns it never really seemed like anything was at stake, yet once you started talking to people suddenly everything becomes life or death.

Plus, the writing is pretty good too. And by writing I don't necessarily mean "plot" (which is pretty standard, silly, Bond/Bourne rip off), but rather just the bare essentials of writing dialogue, which I think AP does fairly well. It's so rare for video games to get something as simple and mundane as people talking right that I actually do think AP is a bit "revolutionary" in that regard--it's dialogue was not only compelling, but more importantly, it sounded natural coming off the actors tongues. In fact, there are dozens of otherwise good games that have absolutely shit dialogue (Deus Ex: HR is a good recent example. It's an OK game, but the dialogue is terrible--especially when it comes to characters giving out quests, at which point they all immediately stop talking like human beings and instead start talking like they are automated video game quest dispensers. It had a huge problem with exposition as well---although that's something most games suffer from).

I won't defend any other portion of the game too strongly, although I do think it's underrated. The combat is uninspired (if, really, not too much worse than your average console, 3rd person, shooter), the stats are somewhat unbalanced (some are worthless, others are overpowered), and there is very limited room for customization---but I actually think the game is worth playing despite all this. Maybe I'm just more forgiving because the shell of the game is so awesome---the basic structure of an incredibly good game is there (e.g. the way the story and plot branches, the characters, the dialogue system, etc, etc). If only Obsidian had just been content with only handling the writing and high level design aspects of the game, leaving the nitty gritty of combat and level design to someone else, I think it would be a classic.

 

[jagged-jimmy]

Got it for 2 euros on steam. Payed too much. The only good thing is writing and maybe boss fights, if you don't chain shot end them in 1 second.
I see how they stole the gameplay from Ass Effect 2, where you also had 1 corridor to follow and 1 or 2 crates/rooms to get more "loot" after playing a minigame. But MA2 managed to deceive you through detailed graphics and let you forget it. Brotocol does it in your face, looks ugly, level design is straight from some tech alpha demo and the gameplay overall is pretty laughable. Story is mediocre and hubs kill any atmosphere. It feels like you are playing a sequnce of maps and not a real game.

All in all the title of this thread is a pretty good description, if we are honest with ourselves.

 

[Oriebam]

I see how they stole the gameplay from Ass Effect 2, where you also had 1 corridor to follow and 1 or 2 crates/rooms to get more "loot" after playing a minigame. But MA2 managed to deceive you through detailed graphics and let you forget it.

Didn't deceive me. Though the mini-games in Mass Effect 2 were rarer, rarely mandatory and a lot less shitty

It feels like you are playing a sequnce of maps and not a real game.

 

[circ]

AP is crazy flawed but I think it's worth playing solely for the dialogue system.

Only time I enjoyed myself in AP was the chinese hotel mission and to a lesser extent, breaking into CIA safehouse something. I didn't play it for Dialogue System: The Game.

 

[Spockrock]

people complaining about AP's "gun play mechanics" or whatever don't play enough shooters. it's the same in almost every game. only in shooters it's not your character's skill that affects spread but the gun's "accuracy". you still can't hit a barn door, because your gun is "shitty" and no matter where you aim bullets seem to fly around your target.

to be completely honest I don't remember having any trouble with shooting in AP. so, like any sensible person, I'm going to reinstall it and refresh my memory

 

[Roguey]

people complaining about AP's "gun play mechanics" or whatever don't play enough shooters. it's the same in almost every game. only in shooters it's not your character's skill that affects spread but the gun's "accuracy". you still can't hit a barn door, because your gun is "shitty" and no matter where you aim bullets seem to fly around your target.

to be completely honest I don't remember having any trouble with shooting in AP. so, like any sensible person, I'm going to reinstall it and refresh my memory

Bullet-hose shooters aren't good either. No one praises Kane and Lynch 2.

 

[Spockrock]

there are 3 kinds of shooters: shooters, where your accuracy is based on the gun you're using; shooters, where your accuracy is perfect no matter what you do; and shooters where your accuracy is only affected by recoil. the third kind is the best, because it gives an illusion of "player skill". but it doesn't work in RPGs.

AP's biggest problem is that it tries too hard to be an RPG, while also targeting the action crowd. if the combat in it was TB, Codex would be all over it.

 

[Gord]

As the Steam summer sale was still a while away and I was in the mood for some secret agent action, I did follow Stinger 's advice and replayed it on easy.
And what can I say, the game's indeed better for it.

The action parts are over so fast, that I made it through SA, Taipeih and Rome in a matter of days, although I could only play a few hours in the evening.
So I do agree fully - if you want to play the game, play it on easy, because anything else will only introduce tedium, nothing more.

 

[Roguey]

If you think AP is tedious at all on normal difficulty then lol at your bad build and skills. Why I can't have nice things.

 

[Gord]

Hey bro, nobody's keeping you from playing it on hard if your 1337 skillz demand it.

To me, the shooting parts felt far too boring and repetitive (and not because they are hard, simply because they are boring and repetitive)on my first walkthrough to offer any incentive of playing them again.
Playing on easy means that you spend less times with them and that made them more fun in my book.

 

[Grunker]

If you think AP is tedious at all on normal difficulty then lol at your bad build and skills. Why I can't have nice things.

Game is easy on all difficulty levels, it just takes more time to get through the bullshit gameplay.

 

[Roguey]

Game is easy on all difficulty levels, it just takes more time to get through the bullshit gameplay.

Really, because I've heard that hard mode is full of bullshit difficulty spikes so I've stayed away. And I don't think it takes a significant amount of time to get through normal at all, I was popping those moles pretty quickly. The only thing holding me back was the input-lag-by-design which would still be there on easy mode.

 

[Spockrock]

To me, the shooting parts felt far too boring and repetitive

name one single-player shooter where this doesn't apply (hint: there aren't any) EDIT: 'cept for that one indie game where you have to manually put rounds in the magazine, then load one into the barrel, cock the pistol, and only then fire - pretty much the act of shooting is a game in itself

the input-lag-by-design.

played through the first couple of missions, and this is the only problem with AP's combat I have so far. it *is* frustrating, but once I got used to it, the game actually became enjoyable

 

[Gord]

To me, the shooting parts felt far too boring and repetitive

name one single-player shooter where this doesn't apply (hint: there aren't any)

If by repetitive you mean that all you are doing in a shooter is point the crosshairs at the enemy and click the mouse button, yes.
But strangely enough, a lot of games manage to provide gameplay that still feels varied enough to mask it, be it because different enemies provide noticeably different strategy, the level design is good, the weapons are fun or the game just keeps your adrenaline levels high enough for you not to notice it.

Whatever it is, some games nail it, some don't. AP belongs to the latter, as far as the shooting parts are concerned.
They would have been good enough had you encountered, say, half as many. Unfortunately you have to go through quite lot of them and they will get boring relatively fast. Much faster than in other games. Had they really pulled the C&C thing through - by opening or closing different sections/missions based on your previous decisions - so that you wouldn't encounter all of them in one playthrough, the game, imho, would have been better for it.

 

[Infinitron]

Obsidian aren't a shooter company. Surprise surprise, they released a crappy shooter.

(same is true to a lesser extent for Bioware and Mass Effect)

 

[Spockrock]

the "lesser extent" part is debatable. that's my main concern when reading comments like "shooting in ME/ME2 was OK", it wasn't, it wasn't any different from AP, and the fact that you had 2 lobotomites follow you around and act as distractions only made things worse. and don't even get me going on encounter design...

 

[Raghar]

and don't even get me going on encounter design...

And what about encounter design? What could you say about bad stuff in ME/ME2/ME3?

 

[J1M]

If you don't like the shooting, try playing the game not using any guns. That's what I did when I played it the first time. My build focussed on stealth and brawling skills. The only time I needed to use a weapon was the rocket launcher for the tank and the knife for stealth kill variety.

 

[Gragt]

Shooting in ME was boring. Quite fun in ME2 though.

 

[Infinitron]

try playing the game not using any guns... My build focussed on stealth

Dear god, no.

Shooting in ME was boring. Quite fun in ME2 though.

Spoken like someone who never experimented with weapon mods.

 

[Roguey]

Obsidian aren't a shooter company. Surprise surprise, they released a crappy shooter.

(same is true to a lesser extent for Bioware and Mass Effect)

Josh Sawyer literally bought guns so he could understand how to implement better gunplay in his games. Shame they just put him on martial arts for AP.

 

[Raghar]

Shooting in ME was: Use regeneration and poisoned ammo, and stay close to cover. Weapon mods were massively better in AP.

 

[Gragt]

Poison ammo? Why make it even more boring?

 

[J1M]

try playing the game not using any guns... My build focussed on stealth

Dear god, no.

Shooting in ME was boring. Quite fun in ME2 though.

Spoken like someone who never experimented with weapon mods.

It sounds like you haven't tried it.

I don't generally like games like splinter cell, but a number of abilities in alpha protocol that work together made the stealth/melee combo quite enjoyable. In particular, the on-demand and automatic hide-in-plain-sight cooldowns and the silent running kept the pace moving quickly. With martial arts you can punch out all of the bosses except the tank.