Cl_Flushentityhero

Can you elaborate on the "stunned" state?

Thanks for the comments Sawyer, I particularly like the scalability argument (although I could think of other ways to approach it). If nothing else, it's good to better understand the thinking that went into the decision.

Is anybody else actually bothered by the presence of a blonde German in AP?

Thanks.

Similar, yet without the ridiculous part.

If I had to guess, maybe they merged infiltration with sabotage and stealth, though I'm not sure what it did in the first place.

So, it's been shown in recent videos that perks are acquired through what you do in-game rather than by choosing them at level-up. Do they convey in-game benefits (outside of the ones gained directly through the action)? Or are they more like achievements that mark what your character has done?

Good finds.

It's obviously early to tell, though personally I think Conviction looks like a Splinter Cell game for people who don't like Splinter Cell games.

I think so.

Just for the sake of argument: Is anybody wowed by repeatedly clicking the mouse button to see a muzzle flash and a hit effect? Depends on the muzzle flash and the hit effect. Killing floor, IMO, has some pretty satisfying shooting. You get the iron sights, recoil, blood, etc. I'm not a ZOMG first person r leet gamer, but I do like weapons to feel like they are affecting enemies (just like with CQC).

Well, there are two factors here for me. The first is that, whatever criticisms we may come up with, the critics will probably come up with more. Most people who are regulars on the AP forums are at least somewhat invested in actually liking the game. A critic who has only a few days to rush through a review has no practical obligation to "see past a game's faults" to the parts that are worthwhile. From a professional standpoint they should, but IME this is seldom the case with games that lack superficial polish. Who cares about the critics? Well, my opinion is that when it comes to buy/no buy a lot of gamers will be looking to reviews for Alpha Protocol due to a modest marketing campaign and status as a new IP. If AP is commercially successful, Obsidian will get to make sequels or at least similar types of games in the future. I hope that happens. The second point is related to the CQC specifically. It's something I've been harping on literally since my first post on the Obsidian boards. Basically, I suggested that they employ authentic defensive tactics for the martial arts used in the game, or at least make it fun to watch. The line from Obsidian was: All sounds good, right? I was suspicious when that much of a caveat was necessary to agree with my suggestion of using realistic martial arts, but at that point I had to pretty much take them at their word. I mean, okay, I can accept sacrificing realism for aesthetics. Now that the screenshots and footage starts rolling in, the mocapped pummeling hardly even looks mocapped because of the jerky transitions between moves and poor enemy reaction. We also got from "very satisfying and also practical" to tournament sparring or at best fist fight moves like the spinning backfist and uppercuts that reach the stratosphere regardless of impacting a target. Second, consider the philosophy behind the pummeling mechanic, not as a martial artist, but just as a thinking person. Somebody is pointing a gun at you, so you're going to drive him backwards with a flurry of strikes? Where do you think he *wants* to be so that he can shoot you? It seems to me like they sacrificed realism for aesthetics but failed to deliver on the aesthetics. People can and have fielded similar arguments on things like AI, gunplay, dual SMGs, and whatnot. I think it's a valid point that if a game wants to deliver style over substance in combat, it should at least deliver style. I also think that the intent of making the game stylish will be lost on reviewers if the visuals and mechanics aren't polished and fluid. As has been the case with Bethesda games in general, because they capitalize on open-world completionist fetish (and yes, I find it enjoyable, but I actually like VATS). A lot of the game consists of simply exploring, and the exploration is not bad. AP has a lot of other mechanics, but they all seem to feed primarily into the basic fighting/sneaking gameplay. If you spend most of the game doing something, then it pays to make that thing work really well. Just because *I* can choose to look past a flaw doesn't mean reviewers will be so accepting. With something like how authentic the CQC is, most reviewers couldn't care less, but they *will* notice it if the gameplay looks jerky and glitchy. There are games that I think play fine that have been blasted as incredibly awkward and clunky to play,

It's kind of a mystery. I think it originally had to do with limited storage space on consoles, then just became an accepted convention for all console/multiplat action games.

To each their own. Personally, I'm kind of getting bored with L4D, and so far the sequel doesn't seem to offer much to revitalize the franchise for me. More of the same is, pretty much by definition, good for those who still love the original and meh for those who are growing tired of it. Though I still might get pressured into getting it by friends, so I suppose it's a good marketing move either way.

I said that implementing an unrealistic fight strategy just to "look cool" was a slippery slope, and now they've released enough footage that perhaps people who were on the fence are starting to agree. I mean, Is anybody honestly wowed by the pummeling animations? Do people really think that having to button mash to pummel people adds significant depth to the gameplay?

Er, I didn't know the movie Syriana was a joking matter. Are you referring to something else?

You *bought* the Enhanced Edition? Why? Also, as far as I'm concerned, no patch that removes DRM is a waste of time.

It would instead be better to use another stereotype? Because, let's be honest, that's where the writers of the SC franchise are at.

Isn't the CGI trailer they released a few days ago intended to address exactly this issue? It focuses quite clearly on the opportunities the game presents to make interesting choices. Maybe, but it tells rather than showing.

Yeah, pretty much.

Eh, I think they're mostly turning a map pack into a cash cow. And they will be rewarded for it.

the ASIMOV melee mod is pretty good. Makes guns less effective at point blank, ergo there's a reason to have melee skill if you are a gun character. The Ultimate perk packs adds some cool and relatively balanced perks.

Well, in a sense it's for "casual" players. The idea is that most of us, instead of being able to headshot two different targets in under a second, would mess it up and trigger the alarm 9 out of 10 times. Quicksave/quickload + that drags pacing down. It's kind of an unusual choice, but it makes sense to me. Also, it is pretty much verbatim the same mechanic you use to control your teammates in Rainbow 6 Vegas, just done without a team.

Is this really true for everyone? Personally, I feel I get a very good impression of how most games handle by watching gameplay videos. Again, I'm critical because I care

They posted some narrated gameplay footage at E3 which I was pretty impressed by. They've definitely made significant changes to the franchise, though the level on display was pretty classic SC after the intro. This might've been a deliberate choice to reassure the established fanbase, though I for one am hoping for lots of crowds and cops.