Tell me about Alpha Protocol

[Vendetta]

No one is going completely bash a game for being a little glitchy. I've played good games with some glitches (and other MINOR issues) and bad games with a lot of glitches (and other MAJOR issues).

Fuck off. This is obviously wrong, and in context of 'wah reviews are useful' it's absurd to say a reviewer won't bag out a game for being glitchy. Indeed, technical problems of that nature are almost the only thing reviews ARE useful for.

Not even that, really. I mean the reviews I've seen/read of Alpha Protocol mention it's glitches in passing, but none mentioned the far more hilarious and prevalent ones in Red Dead Redemption.

[Tolya]

That is because most game reviewers are lazy idiots who get paid by the word.

[Stark]

Not even that, really. I mean the reviews I've seen/read of Alpha Protocol mention it's glitches in passing, but none mentioned the far more hilarious and prevalent ones in Red Dead Redemption.

Chards was telling me it's even impossible to get 100% in RDR due to a save glitch. Quality.

[Tolya]

EDIT: repeat of the previous post due to firefox acting weird. Sorry, deleted.

[Aaron]

Anyone else run into the issue of the terrorists shooting each other after you throw a grenade?

[Tolya]

As for the reviews, I just read what Gamespot had to offer. And to be quite honest, I wouldn't be as moved by it if hadn't given SCC a FUCKING 8.0. All the revs that praised the game never mentioned one little important thing: that SCC is boring and contrived.

Sure, AP isn't perfect. But I really prefer a mutt who knows 100 tricks and occasionally trips his tail, rather than a german shepherd who only knows how to sit down, but gets it perfectly every time.

The reason why I like AP more than SCC is that it made an effort. Sure, it failed here-and-there. And a quality-driven reviewer could even give it a 6.0 and I wouldn't argue with it, because people may have different expectations and priorities. Its the same with Armed Assault 2 - I stopped playing it because Im waiting for the game to be patched enough to be playable, but I will damn sure get back to it. It's "SCC like" competition is OFP: Dragon Rising. I've borrowed it from a friend, spent three days toying with it and gave it back never to think about it anymore.

As it turns out, both SCC and AP were reviewed by the same person: some guy called Kevin VanOrd. He is the guy who signed his name under the review of SCC with a rating of 8.0 and concluded that the game will leave a mark on your memory. Well, it did. It's a scar that says that you can still make money by making sequels worse and actually LESS developed than the original.

What is VanOrd saying in his two reviews is that he values a railroad linear shooter with no innovative qualities AT ALL (I mean, mark and execute isn't anything new, really, its just that its implemented differently this time) more than a game which at least tries to have an open and interesting plot.

[Stark]

This is the industry that complains there's no innovation.

[Tolya]

Well, after completing the game, I conclude that this is an another run-of-the-mill railroad stealth shooter, a buggy Splinter Cell game with less dynamic combat with a mildly interesting story, some irritating bugs on the PC and general feel like the game mechanics came from 1894 and are steam-powered.

Story isn't bad, but we have been over the theme of bad PMC's and agencies-betraying-players so many times that Im starting to feel nauseaus. It wasn't good enough for me to give it a second go, so I probably won't appreciate how you can influence the story by choosing different dialogues. I uphold my view that the dialogue system is excellent though and the conversations are probably the best part of the game.

And the decision system boils down to this: you find an enemy, defeat him and either decide to kill him or make him your bottom-bitch. If you get enough of those bottom-bitches you can see some different dialogues.

Oh, and the reviewers who complained that there are no romance options didn't play the game right. There are lots of them, as you can drag almost any woman you meet in-game to the bed if you play your cards right. Im not treating SIE and Sis as women because one is a California governor after a sex change and the second one is a teenager.

[Stark]

That really isn't how the 'decision system' works, but making sweeping statements about flexibility when admitting you have no idea is pretty bold.

[chitoryu12]

I don't even want to RENT this game. I've watched about 45 minutes worth of gameplay, mostly combat, and it doesn't look even half as interesting as most of the games I'm playing now.

[Stark]

Thanks for that informative post.

Next time someone shunted about Deus Ex 3 sucking based on a trailer I'll refer them to you. Lol!

[CaptHawkeye]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6268271.ht ... Btitle%3B5

No chance of Alpha Protocol sequel.

S'ok though. In a year i'm sure nerds all across the internet will start complaining "games don't innovate" again.

Just let this be a lesson for any asshole that thinks video game journalism isn't bad for the fucking industry.

[Stark]

That fucking sucks. Crap reviews full of lies just killed an interesting franchise.

Guess we all go back to playing KotoR 9 then.

[Losonti Tokash]

The comments are fantastic. An endless hell of "lol missing at point blank" and "brayko was hard" interspersed with "Seriously the game was good!" which is completely ignored.

[Stark]

The missing at point blank stuff is particularly galling, because if you shoot unironed in gears the cone is much wider.

UH OH FACTS. Not in reviews!

[Norade]

That and Fallout: New Vegas will be OMG terrible now, the writing and story for Fallout 3 were teh awesomest...

[Losonti Tokash]

That and Fallout: New Vegas will be OMG terrible now, the writing and story for Fallout 3 were teh awesomest...

This too. I love how they haven't upgraded the game's engine AT ALL. And apparently you're STILL fighting the Enclave. Jesus fuck

[Stofsk]

Sorry for resurrecting this thread, but can anyone point out any particularly egregious reviews for me? I've looked up the pretty damning Destructoid.com review, which gave it 2 stars, and the review itself was completely balls hopeless. I'm interested in bad reviews that actually give verifiably false information (like 'lol you miss at point blank range' which is bullshit) and lame criticisms like 'you can only carry two guns - CRAP GAME NO STARS'.

[adam_grif]

Sorry for resurrecting this thread, but can anyone point out any particularly egregious reviews for me? I've looked up the pretty damning Destructoid.com review, which gave it 2 stars, and the review itself was completely balls hopeless. I'm interested in bad reviews that actually give verifiably false information (like 'lol you miss at point blank range' which is bullshit) and lame criticisms like 'you can only carry two guns - CRAP GAME NO STARS'.

Iirc those are exaggerations, but the Gametrailers video review mentions the dice rolls in the combat as an issue. They don't complain that point blank shots miss though, just that they think it's bad design.

[Vendetta]

Although for added hilarity Gametrailers apparently reccomend avoiding the pistol at all costs, advice which was set to a video of someone completely using it wrong. Never in the whole video do you see them line up a solid fully charged critical, and he claims the pistol is hopeless when he's emptying it wildly at a running target, a situation where an SMG or shotgun would be the thing to use.

(The pistol is almost game breakingly powerful if you use it properly).

It's a pretty clear case of five year old child syndrome. When something doesn't appear to be working, blame the game rather than considering for a second that ur doin it rong.

[Ghost Rider]

Sorry for resurrecting this thread, but can anyone point out any particularly egregious reviews for me? I've looked up the pretty damning Destructoid.com review, which gave it 2 stars, and the review itself was completely balls hopeless. I'm interested in bad reviews that actually give verifiably false information (like 'lol you miss at point blank range' which is bullshit) and lame criticisms like 'you can only carry two guns - CRAP GAME NO STARS'.

Gamespot's review is particularly hilarious in contradictions and needs for a good game.

[ShadowDragon8685]

Although for added hilarity Gametrailers apparently reccomend avoiding the pistol at all costs, advice which was set to a video of someone completely using it wrong. Never in the whole video do you see them line up a solid fully charged critical, and he claims the pistol is hopeless when he's emptying it wildly at a running target, a situation where an SMG or shotgun would be the thing to use.

I've never had much luck with the SMGs doing anything good, and the shotgun wasn't worth the loss of the stealth range ability of the AR, which is also capable (albiet not perfect) at that kind of thing, too.

(The pistol is game breakingly powerful if you use it properly).

There's no "almost" about it. Chain shot + Brilliance + Chain Shot = boss dead inside of one and a half seconds of him getting to act.


Also, I've never seen anything that made me think that the shots hitting or missing was based on dice rolls ala KotOR. It's always looked and felt exactly like Counter-Strike: That is, shots have a random direction they go in within the size of the reticule, and if the shot goes into someone's hitbox, they take hurt.

It's not a game made for playing like Unreal or even Halo. Even at master skill, running around and stuff will make aimed shots more or less - more than less - impossible. Hitting becomes a matter of spray and pray, which is bad since the only weapon which is good at spray and pray does so crap damage you'll never kill anyone with it; I've literally jammed SMGs right up into a guy's chest, unloaded on full-auto, and I ran out of ammo before he ran out of endurance and health. Not even a boss, either, just an endurance'd mook. (OTOH, it's great for getting the SMG perks that require you to hit the full SMG bonus count.)

You play Alpha Protocol by taking a silenced pistol and always keeping the maximum amount of subsonic rifle ammo you can. You save the non-silenced rifle ammo for emergencies, save the silenced rifle ammo for guys too far away to creep up and get them with a pistol. The name of the game is "kill them before they even know you're fucking there." Or, at least, "don't let them know what's going on so they can't start looking for you, even if they did just see their pal explode in a ball of fire."

Needless to say, Stealth is absolutely critical, and if you don't favor Stealth, you're a moron. Alpha Protocol's weapons are a backdrop to the fact that with high stealth, Micheal Thorton becomes a walking Klingon Bird of Prey. At the highest stealth level, you can literally run invisibly into a group of goons, start throat-ripping with the knife, and they don't see you. You'll only get 12 seconds or so, but you can drop them all in that time.

[Stark]

Iirc those are exaggerations, but the Gametrailers video review mentions the dice rolls in the combat as an issue. They don't complain that point blank shots miss though, just that they think it's bad design.

This is the best quote ever. Not only are there no 'die rolls' involved, EVERY RPG USES DIE ROLLS, like... Fallout3. Nobody complains about physically impossible bullet emergence from guns in Fallout3. Most modern 'tactical' games have massive conefire on unironed weapons, so stuff like Vendetta shows of people running around like a maniac missing is not an AP-specific problem (if it was a problem at all).

Shadowdragon, stealth is NOT 'absolutely critical'. My most amusing playthrough was complete gung-ho; the game supports both types of play. Shadow Ops also turns off when you attack. If you go toughness you can just get back up when you die, and knockdowns with every shot on the shotgun is mega-cheese. Using stealth properly (ie finishing a level without ever been seen) is still a challenge.

But combat not like Splinter Cell = reviews hate it, so everyone who actually played it can laugh.

[Aaron]

Oh yeah you can play through guns blazing if you want, gets pretty damn hard on the highest difficulty but if you start as a Vet and max out toughness and fit your armour with stuff that reduces damage or maxs endurance...well you become Arnie.

[Stark]

The last few areas are ridiculous on hard, though; everyone is resistant to basically everything but headshots, so chain shot is the only way to go.

Man, I never even used brilliance, because with the cooldown bonuses you can get chain shot cools down in like 5s anyway.