Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Alpha Protocol:The **** offspring of Ronald Reagan and an **** American Ninja !!!

1565758596062»

Posts

  • SilpheedSilpheed Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    Yeah, the saddest thing about these kinds of games is when you realize you can count all the really good CRPGs on your fingers.
    It's even sadder when you've already played them all several times and you know that there won't be anything that surpasses, or even reach the same quality, in the near future or at all. :cry:

  • l337CrappyJackl337CrappyJack Registered User
    edited August 2010
    Silpheed wrote: »
    Yeah, the saddest thing about these kinds of games is when you realize you can count all the really good CRPGs on your fingers.
    It's even sadder when you've already played them all several times and you know that there won't be anything that surpasses, or even reach the same quality, in the near future or at all. :cry:

    And yet we keep asking, as though there's some completely unheard of mindblowing game that we've never heard of before.

    Although Fallout: New Vegas is coming out next month; A new Fallout, with Avellone back in the saddle? It just might be the next great one.

  • SilpheedSilpheed Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    Silpheed wrote: »
    Yeah, the saddest thing about these kinds of games is when you realize you can count all the really good CRPGs on your fingers.
    It's even sadder when you've already played them all several times and you know that there won't be anything that surpasses, or even reach the same quality, in the near future or at all. :cry:

    And yet we keep asking, as though there's some completely unheard of mindblowing game that we've never heard of before.

    Although Fallout: New Vegas is coming out next month; A new Fallout, with Avellone back in the saddle? It just might be the next great one.
    I have high hopes for that particular game as long as Bethesdas "writers" haven't been meddling with the script and plot. Obsidian seems to be working at their best when they have a completed game engine to work with since Q&A and programming aren't really their strong suit (R.I.P Troika).

  • l337CrappyJackl337CrappyJack Registered User
    edited August 2010
    Silpheed wrote: »
    Silpheed wrote: »
    Yeah, the saddest thing about these kinds of games is when you realize you can count all the really good CRPGs on your fingers.
    It's even sadder when you've already played them all several times and you know that there won't be anything that surpasses, or even reach the same quality, in the near future or at all. :cry:

    And yet we keep asking, as though there's some completely unheard of mindblowing game that we've never heard of before.

    Although Fallout: New Vegas is coming out next month; A new Fallout, with Avellone back in the saddle? It just might be the next great one.
    I have high hopes for that particular game as long as Bethesdas "writers" haven't been meddling with the script and plot. Obsidian seems to be working at their best when they have a completed game engine to work with since Q&A and programming aren't really their strong suit (R.I.P Troika).

    I've already read that NV has a much longer script than Fallout 3, more voice actors, and more accountability in dialog, meaning people will actually react to things like gender or past actions.

    It's almost like they're actually making it an RPG. Who'd've thunk it?

  • NartwakNartwak Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    55 Metacritic

    Spoiler:
  • l337CrappyJackl337CrappyJack Registered User
    edited August 2010
    Nartwak wrote: »
    5.5 Metacritic

    Uuuuugh. I haaaate this industry.

  • amnesiasoftamnesiasoft Thick Creamy Furry Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    more voice actors
    Is that really an achievement though? The only games with fewer voice actors than a Bethesda game are ones with no voice acting at all.

    steam_sig.png
  • initiatefailureinitiatefailure Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    Nartwak wrote: »
    55 Metacritic

    Well guess it's terrible... I mean it makes sense though. It's not street fighter

    steam_sig.png
    Behance Portfolio I PSN- Subtle_Ties | 3DS: 3840-5210-2008 (Subtle) | FFXIV: Phyla Zuul
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    I still need to get a few more screenshots for the next OP, please try not to kill the thread till tomorrow, please?

    camo_sig2.png
  • LewishamLewisham Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    Nartwak wrote: »
    55 Metacritic

    Well guess it's terrible... I mean it makes sense though. It's not street fighter

    Yeah, I just finished this game, and the terrible reviews are the very definition of bullshit.

    The only problem this game has is that it's Mass Effect 1 after Mass Effect 2; if they simply changed the shooting so it fires where it says it will, I guarantee this game would have got straight 80s.

    The assholes who gave it 2/10 (like Destructoid) are just that: assholes. They have played much, much shittier games than this, and its insulting to the people who spent 3 years of their lives creating a rather good game to do such an awful, Comic Book Guy style, job at reviewing.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    OK, Just googled the images rather than replaying a couple hours to take them. New thread is up:
    http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?p=16143424#post16143424

    camo_sig2.png
  • AlectharAlecthar Alan Shore We're not territorial about that sort of thing, are we?Registered User regular
    edited August 2010
    Lewisham wrote: »
    Nartwak wrote: »
    55 Metacritic

    Well guess it's terrible... I mean it makes sense though. It's not street fighter

    Yeah, I just finished this game, and the terrible reviews are the very definition of bullshit.

    The only problem this game has is that it's Mass Effect 1 after Mass Effect 2; if they simply changed the shooting so it fires where it says it will, I guarantee this game would have got straight 80s.

    The assholes who gave it 2/10 (like Destructoid) are just that: assholes. They have played much, much shittier games than this, and its insulting to the people who spent 3 years of their lives creating a rather good game to do such an awful, Comic Book Guy style, job at reviewing.

    I think the problem is that Alpha Protocol is a really great storytelling game wedded to a relatively bad shooting game. If you play the storytelling game and manipulate the shooter elements to feed into that, you've just played a great game with a sometimes frustrating combat system. If you play the shooter and enjoy the storytelling elements, you've just played a relatively bad shooter with good storytelling.

    What I mean is that, instead of being an all around "70ish" experience, the storytelling elements of the game hit 90ish levels, while the shooter elements hit poor, 55ish levels. It averages out to "pretty good" but if you don't take both parts equally, your view of how the game should be regarded will differ.

    With that said, I think the addition of a more manageable, consistent, just all around better cover system would have helped the game tremendously. Many of my most frustrating combat related moments are due to the cover system. Hell, I actually kinda liked the way they handled shooting, overall.

    steam_sig.png
  • l337CrappyJackl337CrappyJack Registered User
    edited August 2010
    Alecthar wrote: »
    Lewisham wrote: »
    Nartwak wrote: »
    55 Metacritic

    Well guess it's terrible... I mean it makes sense though. It's not street fighter

    Yeah, I just finished this game, and the terrible reviews are the very definition of bullshit.

    The only problem this game has is that it's Mass Effect 1 after Mass Effect 2; if they simply changed the shooting so it fires where it says it will, I guarantee this game would have got straight 80s.

    The assholes who gave it 2/10 (like Destructoid) are just that: assholes. They have played much, much shittier games than this, and its insulting to the people who spent 3 years of their lives creating a rather good game to do such an awful, Comic Book Guy style, job at reviewing.

    I think the problem is that Alpha Protocol is a really great storytelling game wedded to a relatively bad shooting game. If you play the storytelling game and manipulate the shooter elements to feed into that, you've just played a great game with a sometimes frustrating combat system. If you play the shooter and enjoy the storytelling elements, you've just played a relatively bad shooter with good storytelling.

    What I mean is that, instead of being an all around "70ish" experience, the storytelling elements of the game hit 90ish levels, while the shooter elements hit poor, 55ish levels. It averages out to "pretty good" but if you don't take both parts equally, your view of how the game should be regarded will differ.

    With that said, I think the addition of a more manageable, consistent, just all around better cover system would have helped the game tremendously. Many of my most frustrating combat related moments are due to the cover system. Hell, I actually kinda liked the way they handled shooting, overall.

    You know, that kinda makes sense to me. If Alpha Protocol were just a shooter with no plot elements, it'd earn every bit of its 55 rating. So I have to assume that reviewers were playing it just for the gameplay, not realizing that the plot and story were the whole reason to be playing in the first place.

This discussion has been closed.