Wrath of Dagon

I don't see how a 20 hr game is going to be more ambitious than DX. Most likely dialog will be a lot more extensive, but for everything else I'm not holding my breath. Having different factions shoot at you or not shoot at you isn't all that ambitious IMO, although certainly a good thing. Edit: It's just like on Onderon, you either fight the Royalists or Vaklu troopers, except sometimes they mislabeled Vaklu troopers as Royalists. I didn't think it was that big a deal, didn't change the game much.

Depends what you're used to, certainly. Anything you become proficient enough in will feel like second nature. Btw, you can't just plug in the 360 controller into the PC as was said, since most PC games don't support it. I have software which lets you do that, but it has its own set of issues, chief among them that the aiming support in the game is for a mouse, not controller, so you can't aim very well.

A good shooter requires complex movement. Using the analog stick it feels like I myself am moving instead of typing on a keyboard. Aiming response for controllers is programmed differently than for mice, so that's not an issue either as I've said.

It does for me.

Don't suppose it'll help with my camera lag?

Real gun is harder to aim than a mouse. Thus a real gun is inferior to the mouse. I have no problems aiming with the controller, and I enjoy using it more. The fact that pointing with the mouse is easier is irrelevant.

Holding a wireless keyboard and mouse on your lap while irradiating your nuts is not my idea of a good time. Also I disagree K/B is better for shooters, to me the controller gives a more realistic feeling of aiming and I can aim just fine, not to mention analog movement control and no WASD, yuch. The only one I agree with is strategy games, I do play those on the PC.

Big screen TV, reclining couch, gamepad designed for games, knowing that every game should run properly.

Right, so the character was too over the top to fit into the story, it turned the game into a comedy and undermined it. The performance itself was fine though, usual John Cleese cheese.

ME characters are badly written and boring, why would it be the king of anything?

Yes, apparently that's what Obsidian has been saying. I guess it's supposed to play more like an action game than an expansive RPG.

http://www.gamecyte.com/2008/07/24/e3-2008.../2378#more-2378 (through Gamebanshee) Looks like a pretty intelligent preview, and goes into some details I haven't seen before. And the guy never even mentions textures, what's wrong with him?

I think that means the NPC responses depend on the reputation you have with that NPC.

I doubt this game will be as infantile as the Witcher in this regard. This is a Western game and thus is more likely to be politically correct. Anyway, they said you have a choice how to play your character, he can be a womanizer or an ascetic from what I understand. I'm personally planning to try to avoid involvement, unless the characters/dialog is really interesting and I wouldn't want to miss out. I'm not too thrilled about sexualization of games either, but if it helps them to make the game financially successful, and it probably will, I grudgingly accept it.

I think unfortunately Obsidian needs to emphasize the sex aspect in their marketing. To us it looks like this game will be something special, but I'm afraid for the general public it'll just get lost in the shuffle. Perhaps you guys can get Fox to start hyperventilating early.

What was there to explore? The big mall called the Citadel? The same boring cut and paste planet repeated 35 times called the Uncharted Worlds?

OK, I guess I better consult you on my exact phrasing next time before I post. Edit: Here's my first post in this thread btw: Name one. It's true, AP does look similar to ME both in concept and graphics. I'm hoping Obsidian knows how to do it right though.

It's useless to argue how long a particular game takes someone, everyone plays at different speeds. That's why I try to use standard reviewer hours, or compare well known games to each other. Also when talking about game length, it's more useful to compare normal first time playthroughs, including all sidequests.

MotB still seems to have a lot of dungeons, dungeons you can't fricking see anything because it's dark!

It's hard to say exactly, but in standard reviewer hours, Jade was about 20 hrs long, KOTOR's were about 40, NWN2 may be a bit longer, it was just so slow because of inventory and crafting, argh. ME was about the length of Jade if you don't do the Uncharted World tedium.

NWN2 was plenty long enough, I wonder what the direct comparison to AP would be.

Huh, when did I say or do any of that? I assumed from the aggressive stance you have towards ME that something like that is what seems to be your problem with it, is my assumption wrong? You assumption is not wrong about ME, but when did I say I expect AP to have the faults of ME? The only thing I said was I hope AP will be ME done right. We already know it will have a faction and reputation system, so right there it's different. Edit: If I thought what you claim, I wouldn't even bother. No, I said Bioware did it wrong, I didn't say anything about Obsidian doing things wrong.

20 hrs sounds pretty short for an RPG, where are those DX comparisons now?

Not to be argumentative, but in what game does the character make choices on his own without player input? I mean, choices are available for character action or dialogue... but in the end, who decides what exactly the charaction will do or say if not the players themselves? My only point is that in any game where the player controls a main character, that character will throughout the course of the game have choices of action and dialogue. Thief certainly did, and it was no RPG. No One Lives Forever certainly did, and it was no RPG. Gothic did as well, and I didn't consider it an RPG... just one man's journey, which is what Deus Ex was and many other excellent action games. I suspect that in my view Alpha Protocol will be the same. Now clearly I'm a big fan of some of these non-RPG genre games, like Deus Ex, so if Alpha Protocol is along those lines I very well might love it. However, if it's more the spiritual successor to, say, Hitman, I'm fairly certain I won't be buying. In Thief 3 (I assume others are the same), you make decisions how to approach a situation, but you don't make any dialog or story related choices, so it's an adventure game, not an RPG. If it did have dialog choices as you appear to claim, then I'd say it was an RPG. Although choosing to side with Hammerites or Pagans (?) does come pretty close to making it an RPG in that one aspect. Anyway, it appears your definition of RPG is different from mine, and I'm not sure anything is acomplished in arguing over definitions.

Huh, when did I say or do any of that?