Cl_Flushentityhero

Sorry, Action Half-Life; one of my favorite mods back in the day.

Soo, I noticed that one of the Obs peeps worked on AHL. Will there be a dive, roll, or other type of evasive movement beyond the cover system?

Spy vs. Spy was the shizzle. Regarding gameplay, I think the Hitman-style multiple solutions (through physically small areas usually) approach is good for creating a spy feel. Bourne Conspiracy was basically all about the fighting and the running away; I could count the spy moments on one hand. On the other hand, being able to mix & match various forms of combat and non-combat (in hitman for example) creates a theoretically infinite number of ways to complete a mission; and in practice at least warrants a few replays. It also creates more of the illusion that the player is solving problems for him/herself rather than searching for the one "correct" way predetermined by the developer.

IMO, there have been some good spy games: 3rd Courier, Everything or Nothing, Mission: Impossible (both versions), Splinter Cell, Syphon Filter. The last two are doing pretty well right now. You might argue that they aren't true "spy games," or that they aren't fun, but they're definitely successful. That said, I have no evidence on "the main gaming demographic." It seems to me that mission-based gameplay lends itself very well to a spy theme. You know, since spies tend to go on missions. Maybe there are hours of prep before Bourne goes into the embassy, but the movie handles it in quick abstracted segments rather than real-time. What they really want to show you is him busting out of the embassy. It also allows the developer to compartmentalize without the added bulk of a "living" world (which more often than not in free roaming games turns out to be a dead world). Okay, so maybe there won't be any 4 hour treks through the jungle or car chases, but it works well for certain spy things.

There's also the matter of anything that has a visible or hidden fuel surcharge. In the end, more expensive is more expensive, and significantly so.

You could always check out Metal Gear Solid 2-4 in the meantime )

Games are really the only "cheap" thing left in the U.S. Everything else is pretty much tanking with the dollar.

I'm pretty sure outfit affects your viable paths through a mission. How detailed it is, I'm not sure.

Hitman did that and it was pretty cool. I agree that it doesn't scream "awesome," but theoretically will give the impression that you're playing in a world and not just a series of missions (even if you are).

So, basically, you're saying we need a desk that reacts to the player's own deeply-seated psychological problems brought to the surface through the cathartic social construct of roleplaying? I love it! Kidding. Mostly.

I don't think you know what that word means. A sociopath is someone with heavily restricted (or no) feelings of emotions or empathy. On the contrary: http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

Of course it is. I'm sure Mike's desk will be suitably cluttered (should he have one). He manipulates, shoots, and beats people up. You have a pretty forgiving definition of sociopath if that doesn't qualify MT.

I know some scary people who practice Kenpo. The trapping component also lends itself well to disarms, though I haven't seen them formally practiced. I'm not going to badmouth the decision. I agree that Bourne Conspiracy's actual fighting gameplay was rather contrived. I half-expect to hear a japanese-accented voice yell "Ready? Fight!" every time I get close to an enemy. I guess their thought was to make the hand-to-hand fighting actual gameplay, but IMO it would've been better to just have insta-takedowns without relying on the adrenaline meter. The fighting didn't even resemble the Bourne films/books so much as a Muay Thai match.

Also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao0r_CWHOik...feature=related Human Weapon does MCMA.

I seriously hope that's inaccurate. Teaching ground fighting to people who will very likely have handguns or knives and will be fighting people armed the same way is a horrible idea. You're totally right, if they were teaching ground fighting as something to use in combat. IME with the Army program, it's mostly a form of physical training/confidence building that paves the way for the good stuff. Also, I'd wager that the average grunt is more likely to have to subdue a rowdy comrade/civilian (which BJJ is good for) than to encounter a close-quarters fight to the death. My understanding is that most soldiers do not progress to the point in the system where they start learning the real deal with guns and knives and Improvised Bludgeoning Devices (the feared IBD). Statistically, they don't really need to. That said, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the entire program just because it includes a ground component. The beginning of this video gives a brief glimpse into the more realistic training (if you blink, you'll miss it) and also into the Army's intent behind teaching what they do. Predictably, death metal is involved. I'm not saying the Army way is the best way, but I wouldn't call the program horrible either. They do have some good stuff, even if the program is back-loaded in combat effectiveness.

The Marine system looks similar to the Army program.

Unless there are scantily-clad ladies licking controllers, I won't even bother to watch the AP trailer.

Come on, and I gave you the perfect venue in which to boast about the super-secret commando training you all received during your early days with "the company" (and by The Company, I mean Obsidian). It's certainly physically possible to use any number of common non-weapon objects either offensively or defensively (I read an account of somebody who admitted to getting his ass kicked with a hairbrush), but I don't know if there are any good systems out there that will formally train people in it (other than Krav with their keychain fetish). Sturdy pens are popular with the self-defense crowd, though I think this is as much based on theory as practice. Re: government MA training, I know that at least the US Army has a pretty comprehensive combatives program. The progression is roughly BJJ -> MT -> MMA -> FMA -> RBSD, each component tweaked to suit the military mindset better (and concessions to reality). I don't know what the other branches that might feed into the CIA teach. Law Enforcement tends to be pretty aggressive about adopting newfangled MA (in theory), though that usually amounts to outsourcing to Martial Art X as interpreted by a current/former LEO (Like that Tony Blauer crossfit stuff; though Blauer is ironically neither LEO nor military). So, I guess there's no real wrong answer if the CIA doesn't have a strong program or a particular parent MA they subscribe to; whatever they teach would probably be overridden by more extensive previous training. And yes, I realize that's basically the conclusion you (Obs) arrived at long ago, and that I was in effect being a tard. Still an interesting topic, no?

Oh yeah, and because the horse isn't quite dead yet, can we also initiate hand to hand from dialogue? Previews have mentioned the "draw gun" dialogue option, and I'd think that mid-conversation is about as believable a situation for close combat as you're going to get. It's quite the spy movie cliche to boot.

There is a serious shortage of modern RPGs.

Isn't it pretty rare for a developer to publish their own stuff?

I'm guessing it's something along the lines of button press -> two-person mocap animation. With shooters, there is seldom a combat system so much as pre-mocapped sequences that are triggered when the player initiates close combat. This eliminates the problems of hit detection because characters are animated to interact in a pre-determined fashion. It would be cool if they had area-specific animations like slamming somebody into a wall/desk though. With different styles, I'm guessing it's somewhat beyond the already-ambitious scope of AP; at least in the first installment.

Eh, caught me in mid post. Thanks for the info, Sawyer, and I agree with pretty much everything said (though IMO nothing wrong with subtlety). Still looking forward to that HTH trailer, though )

Now, suppose we were to create an anti-gun version of the previous move. The knee alone wouldn't be enough to keep Thornton safe. Getting close enough is in the hands of the player, so I'll ignore that part. Use cover, sneak up on him, whatever. Either way, you'd have to have running momentum going into it obviously. The knee itself would have to be executed in such a way as to either clear the gun out of the way (let's say a two-handed weapon, since that could potentially block a knee) or avoid it. So, the move needs to be altered so that Thornton isn't at risk of being shot and so that he doesn't hit the rifle/shotgun instead of the person. Realistically, the person might counter or defend anyway, but for game purposes perhaps they're too surprised to react. Still, not waltzing in front of a muzzle during the move is a pretty worthy accommodation to make. After the knee, the guy does a sort of spinning pull takedown, which would be great. He's behind the guy at that point, so probably not going to get shot as long as he nabs the shotgun on the way down. Once the guy hits the ground (preferably head-first, which could be fatal on a hard surface), he's in a perfect position to have his weapon levered out of his hands and used against him (shot or hit with it). Odds of him drawing a sidearm before he gets knocked out for good are pretty slim. Theoretically, there's no real point in there where the enemy could just pull the trigger and Thornton would be a goner (once he closes the distance, anyway). Likewise, the enemy wouldn't just get up after a minute or two and go after him again. Simply delivering the knee and expecting that to end things, however, would be pretty questionable. I suppose we all have our own standards for believability, so maybe I'm agonizing over details that don't matter to most people. Also, all this is based on a previewer offhandedly mentioning "flying knee," so there's really no telling how it's handled in game.

For reference, here's a great flying knee "knockout." Now, I'm not badmouthing it, this is one of the smoothest moves I've seen in MMA. He hit the guy then spins off him, landing on his feet easily. Notice, however, that a "knockout," as typically seen in sports, leaves the guy still conscious. Disoriented and hurting, yes, but conscious. He even tries to get up until he recieves a follow-up hit; at which point he is not out, but "playing dead" because he knows he's lost the fight and doesn't want to take unnecessary punishment.