Achilles

Ok, then why are you here? Drew Karpyshyn is formulaic and predictable. I don't need to play ME2 to know this because I figured it out playing his last 3 games. So if you want to have the "ME2 has a better story than AP" discussion we can have it and I'll wager you're lose. And if you want to have the "ME2 is a better shooter than AP" discussion, I'll let you win because AP never marketed itself as a shooter, so there is no discussion to have. And if there some other overlap between the two games that you think is missing, you're welcome to point it out. V certainly hasn't and you seems to have taken up his mantle. ME and ME2 (please tell me I'm wrong) are shooters with RPG elements (skill trees, customizable PC, dialog options, etc). AP is not a shooter with RPG elements. It is an RPG that has guns in it. Therefore aside from the two basis of comparison that I've outlined repeatedly, the comparison does not stand.

You must have me confused with another forum member. For the 5th or 6th time (4th or 5th was the last post), my position is that there is no basis for a AP vs ME2 discussion. I hope this is clear now. I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said Obviously you're welcome to join or depart, but the depart part kinda seems a little silly if no one forced you join in the first place. Please make some attempt to read my posts before asking me to repeat them. I think I've make my point repeatedly. I'll invite for a third time to consider the point I made earlier about not having a leg to stand on if you can't critique one without running to the other. You seem to be inviting me to compare the games even though I'm arguing that they aren't comparable. I don't know why you expect to get much traction from this tactic. Let's try this. Let's pretend we live in a universe where ME and ME2 never existed. Got it? K, now let's talk about AP and base that conversation entirely upon what it did right vs where it fails.

k, so you're done here then? Love how you're inviting yourself out of a conversation that you invited yourself to and acting as though I should take notice in the first place. At some point did I argue that AP was flawless? If not, then I'm not sure what your point is. Did you read the part in my previous post where I stated that if someone can't critique AP without invoking ME, then they don't have much of an argument? Since you felt that the above had be stated (again), I'm guessing that the answer is probably "no". The ridiculousness is that I'm pointing out for the 4th or 5th time that I'm not comparing them at all and am actually arguing that no one should. Thanks for paying attention while you were here.

One of them pretends to be an RPG, yes. "Dialog, stats, and everything" does not an RPG make. GTA:SA had dialog and stats. Does that make it an RPG? One of the games is space-fantasy/sci-fi with very little reactivity from the game world. The other is set in the real world with no fantasy or sci-fi elements and has a very high degree of reactivity. So where do these circles overlap on your venn diagram? They both have guns? They both have stats? If you're going to compare them, then do so on the merits of where they overlap. Writing? Yes, please. Let's have that conversation. Shooting mechanics? We can have that conversation too. If you can't make your argument against one game without having to rely on comparison to another, then I would argue that you don't have much of an argument at all. Don't like it? Fine. But if you don't like it because it's not enough like ME(2), then I'm not sure I have much sympathy for you. Okay. I'm sure they aren't. However after 7 years of exposure to Karpyshyn's work, I know where to set my level of expectation. He met that expectation with ME (which is why I consider it a guilty pleasure rather than a great game). I can't imagine why that expectation should change for the sequel. EDIT: Just so we're clear, I'll repeat: I own (but have not played) ME2. If DK all of a sudden learned how to write between ME and ME2 I'll happily stand corrected.

LMAO! Well done

You seem to have missed the thrust of my last several messages: Why? The two games aren't comparable. My argument has been "Why are you (general usage) invoking ME(2) when ME(2) isn't even the same genre of game". If V wants to insist on doing so, then he's either proceeding on story (in which case he'll lose) or he'll do so on shooting mechanics (in which I'll concede...because AP isn't a shooter). And if you want beleaguer the point, I've played (and finished...multiple times) ME. He cannot same the same of AP.

hehe, glad I read this before I responded to the above EDIT: @V - I think we should just acknowledge that you aren't part of the target audience. This is a story-driven RPG for people that like story-driven RPGs. You didn't like the mechanics. That's fine. To each their own - really. But if you want to lambaste the game based on the story, it would really help your case to be able to say that you actually finished it.

And when the comparison doesn't even work

I applaud Chaste for making an honest effort to provide an objective review. It is unfortunate that the PC version seems to suffer from so many bugs. Luckily I purchased the 360 version of the game and have encountered almost none of them (there are two areas where the enemies are missing from the current surroundings upon reload). I still fail to grasp the comparison to ME. It's not even the same ballpark. In all fairness, I haven't played ME2 but the writing in ME was atrocious. Comparing the two games on story is an unfair fight that ME will lose every time. I will admit that despite its flaws ME is one of my guilty pleasures because let's face it, it's a fun game. But it's not a serious RPG. So far as RPG mechanics go, AP knocks one ball out of park after another. Is it as "pretty" as ME2? No, but the environments are gorgeous and the characters expressive. With very few exceptions, the VO work is spot-on. Reactivity is far better than anything I've seen from Bioware. As an action game, I'm sure that AP falls short. But I didn't purchase AP because I was expecting and action game. I bought an RPG. I really wish we could reframe this dialog in terms of merits of AP as an RPG, because that what is it was and always has been billed as. EDIT: "Volourn the master critic who didn't even finish the initial hub." Fixed

Cogar66 wins.

I love that a "real world" RPG is "shallow and soul-less" because the story draws references from...wait for it..."real world" companies and situations. Careful, V. Your troll is showing.

And my point is that people that don't know about Haliburton/KBR (and their role in the Middle-East) aren't going to get the references/significance. Obviously the game can be played without this knowledge. My point was that there is a lot of this and people who don't know about it are going to miss it. So, again, it doesn't surprise me that someone without this background might find it boring while someone who does is going to be impressed by the amount of research that went into the story. I get to experience the game on a level that others might not. I love that they went the direction that they did with it. Someone with politics that differ from mine (or without any politics to speak of) isn't going to play the same game I did.

Really, so you're going to get the Valeria Plame references, the allusions to Haliburton/KBR, and the historical tie-in to Operation Northwoods without knowing who/what any of those things are? Without looking, can you tell me what the Military Industrial Complex is? You're right. I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, no title is going to please everyone. With that said, it seems to me that anyone that doesn't follow politics is going to miss much of the story. I can't help but feel that the target audience is not the plurality of the gaming public. As such, it doesn't surprise me that some people really don't like it. The reasons for not liking it seem to miss the mark quite a bit, IMO. It's like giving a screwdriver a bad butter knife score because you saw someone using butter knife as a screwdriver once. I don't think we have to look any further than the positive reviews from the people that "get it" (and vice versa) to see that this is probably the case.

Okay, new favorite: Field Agent/Operative Stealth: 12 Pistol: 14 Sabotage: 2 Technical Aptitude: 15 Toughness: 3 Martial Arts: 10 This is 231 AP (standard) + 14 AP from Testing the Waters, Variable Approach, Agent of Change, plus the email and dossier perks. Mike forgoes armor entirely, but picks up quite a bit of endurance from the two Armor Customization bumps in Technical Aptitude and a ton more from perks (I had 150/150 Heath/Endurance respectively during End Game on my last play through). The only money I spent was on intel, one pistol (Hamilton Duelist), a couple of weapon upgrades (Customized Pistol Clip & Customized Pistol Grip. Silencers are free and I opted not to go with a sight upgrade this time), and various gadgets (mostly EMP grenades). I ended the game with >$300k. Master Brilliance probably breaks the game, but in my opinion, less so than Master Shadow Operative.

Tranquilizer rounds are fine. You can take down/tranq everything on the map, so long as you don't *kill* more than 5. If an alarm sounds or if anyone changes from yellow to red, then start over.

After much trial and error, I think I've settled on a Field Agent/Spy build. Stealth: 11 Pistol: 11 Sabotage: 2 Technical Aptitude: 10 Toughness: 3 Martial Arts: 9 The 12th points in stealth and pistol are just overkill and break the game (imo). Not spending those AP there frees up other opportunities, such as 10 points in TA (which unlocks Brilliance so you can use Evasion and Shadow Operative more frequently and allows you to gather the data and save your ally during the assault on Brayko's mansion). It also unlocks Armor Customization, which provides an Endurance boost to Mike's clothing (which is nice because I rarely wear armor). 2 points in Sabotage makes minigames easier. 3 points in Toughness will boost Mike's health to 150 and improve Endurance recovery. I was hesitant to shave so much off of Martial Arts, but honestly, because I try to use stealth take-downs as much as possible, I felt like I was spending points that never got used. This build does require 238 AP. Normal game-play will account for 231 of those. You can pick up the other 7 via the email and intel perks, as well as Testing the Waters (should be able to get this with Mina before the Bug Al-Samad Airfield mission rather easily). Mike only wears armor for boss fights (Stop Omen Deng, Assault on Brayko's Mansion, Intercept Marburg, etc). Generally, I try to equip his armor with Adrenaline Optimizer (reduced cool-down by 15%), Integrated Circuitry, and Reinforced Arm Guards (Weighted Arm Guards, if I can find them, since they are random loot only). As for weapons, Hamilton pistols with Silencer (Mk 3 can be found for free in the Bug CIA Listening Post mission), Composite Pistol Grip, Featherweight Pistol Reflex Sight, and Customized Pistol Clip. I only use Tranquilizer darts (I like completing the game without killing anyone). Lastly, I equip Mike with EMPs, Shock Mines, Flashbangs, First Aid Kits, and Epinephrine Spikes.

My rule of thumb for tech play: Explosive grenades are for trapping and Incendiary bombs are for throwing. Boss fights aren't that bad. The good news is that bosses tend to want to run around a lot. Easy to run up to a pillar, set a trap, run away again. The exceptions here are Darcy and Yancy at the end. Can't get in range for Darcy and Yancy will dodge the hell out of anything you throw at him. Ended up resorting to my tertiary weapon (pistol with chain shot).

I did the recruit run on normal without purchasing any armor. Of course that was a stealth build so... It actually wasn't too bad (in fact it was kinda awesome), but I will tell you that I died A LOT during End Game. Made it though.

I was right on the precipice of agreeing with you until a little voice reminded me that the perks are little rewards you get for playing the way that you want, not a meta-game unto themselves. I wholeheartedly agree that dropping $6,250 on grenades (or $25k on EMPs) just so that you can carry 6 instead of 5 (3 instead of 2) is a little ridiculous, except that the point of the game is not to collect as many perks as possible. As someone with perfectionist tendencies, I know how difficult it is not to get sucked in by the temptation to meta-game, but resist we must As for the class, after reading Tigranes' posts, I'm convinced I'm doing it wrong. I'll finish this build out in the hopes that I'll get it at some point, but the reality is I think I just prefer playing as Jason Bourne.

I haven't monkeyed around too much with Overclock. Maybe that's part of my problem. I generally try to avoid trouble too. The problem with flashbangs is that I follow that up with take downs and since my stealth plays relied on take downs and the occasional non-lethal gadget, I'm right back in that place where I feel like I'm not playing the class correctly. Unless of course the correct way to play the class is "just like stealth but you have to suck at it this time".

This seems to be the exact rut I've fallen into (also, booby trap door to kill bad guy #1, kick door in on bad guy #2 to knock him down, stomp, repeat). Which is fine I suppose. I guess I'm just seeing how this is terribly different than, say, going the aggressive/jack bauer route. I guess I was expecting some experience that would showcase the advantages of the class. I got that in spades playing stealth so I think that level of expectation carried over. If my expectations are too high, so be it. Just thought I would check to make sure that I'm not missing something. @Fallen: I'm assuming this is a reference to cheat codes or something? I'm not worried about how I'm going to manage my money. I'm worried that there's some trick to playing this class that I'm missing. Thanks though. P.S. playing the xbox 360 version, so I don't have access to cheat codes.

My first three playthroughs were stealth (Field Agent/Spy, Recruit/Spy, and Veteran/Spy) respectively. For my forth time through, I decided that I wanted to change it up a little and go the Tech Specialist/Engineer route. I don't know whether it's a function of having conditioned myself to play a certain way via the first few games or what, but I'm having a heck of time figuring out exactly what the benefits to this build are supposed to be. Gadgets have a very limited inventory (up to 6 with perks, or 3 in some cases) and are expensive to upgrade (~$35k each to get to tier 3 and even then about $250 each to replace). They work great as traps, but my success rate with them as thrown objects just sucks. I can't tell you how many times I've tried throwing an incendiary bomb at someone while they stood there shooting me only to find that it went 3 feet behind them, so I get dead while throwing my money away (never mind that it seems that Mike can't really throw gadgets behind cover). Even non-lethal gadgets (such as shock traps) tend to alert everyone in the area, forcing me to resort to my shotgun. So...am I doing it wrong? I've sunk points into stealth so that I sneak up and set traps, but since cover is blown the moment one of them is triggered, what's the point?

AP does seem to have a rank system though. I noticed that in some of the dev diaries Mike has "spy" and other assorted titles.

Here's what I came up with. I think I like 213374U's better.