Oblarg

What do you mean by this? Take hiding in shadows in both Thief or Splinter Cell for example, would you classify this as a "stealth mode" or is it stealth that is integrated into the gameplay? How about being hidden in plain sight depending on what you're doing, in the Hitman series? I don't really get "pretending" to sneak. Anything where you press a certain button and you get an effect that tells you you are "in stealth" is bad. Think KotOR.

I dislike the idea of "stealth modes" in general. Stealth should be integrated into the gameplay.

Not much has been revealed about the stealth system thus far, but please, please, PLEASE make it better than most RPG stealth systems. I don't want to turn invisible and walk around having to pretend that I'm sneaking, I want to actually have to sneak. This is an espionage game, after all.

Chainshot sounds pretty damn awesome if pulled off properly. There should *really* be two abilities per gun skill tree. And just for the record, infinite ammo and SMG's always being dual-wielded, while badass if you're going for a shoot em up game, don't fit in well with the subtle espionage genre. Just saying.

Sounds great, from the interview.

I think it has the potential to be great, and that this gives Obsidian a chance to make a truly great RPG without LucasArts forcing them to release it before it's finished. Which brings me to what could go wrong: Please, whatever you do, do not rush this game. Something of this scale takes time, and I don't want to see this suffer a similar fate to KotOR2.

You still don't know why the reapers exist. You don't know what exactly they are. You don't know what made them. There's a lot of room for expansion in there - that's what makes a good plot. I loved the Mass Effect universe and story, they're in-depth and well thought out. But that's not my point, and I fear we've gone off on a bit of a tangent here. My point is that deep characters are created through dialogue and interactions with the player. You cannot have a deep character with simplistic dialogue: Mass Effect and KotOR1 are proof enough of that fact (in fact, the only character in KotOR1 that I found to have any depth at all was Jolee Bindo).

Ambiguity adds depth, to an extent. I'm sure the reason will be revealed later on. It's not simply because it gives us an excuse to shoot them.

Now I truly hate BioWare. Good going, BioWare, you just shat all over two games of solid plot building and one of the best cliffhangers in video game history. Thanks.

Not really. Paragon = follows protocol and directions. Renegade = whatever needed to get the job done. But, like Jade Empire, it was poorly implemented. Which reminds me, any type of personality meter in the game? Dove vs Hawk, Obedient vs Maverick, Isolated vs Friendly? Not exactly, at least not based at all on what was seen in game. Following protocol and directions is waaay to simplified to have an entire extreme of your personality based on it. And it's not just protocol, saving the colonists on Feros wasn't "protocol," in fact, there is no protocol for Spectres. Paragon is nice, Renegade is mean. It's as simple as that, and that's why Mass Effect has shallow characters. It's a great game, with a plot that is anything but shallow, however the characters are lacking. The characters in KotOR1 were slightly better, but they, too, were a bit lackluster until KotOR2 came along and expanded on them. Revan was no longer "all good" or "all evil," and his "fall" fell into question. A character cannot have absolutes to be deep, there have to be questions and ambiguity. This is true in all forms of storytelling, in literature, in movies, and also in video games. This is why I'm glad it's Obsidian making this game, as they have the ability to pull it off.

Considering immersion in the game world is pretty necessary for what Obsidian seems to be trying to do, especially in a modern spy setting, I strongly suspect that you will be able to walk around with an assault rifle without people noticing. That doesn't fit into the genre.

From what I've experienced, the thing that adds that kind of depth to a game is dialogue. That's not to say that kind of depth is the only thing that makes a game great - I love Mass Effect, even with it's somewhat lacking dialogue, because the story is amazing. But if you want to truly feel attached to characters in a game, they have to have well written lines that really create a personality. Mass Effect was lacking in this in that the personalities were all somewhat shallow. This is why I'm glad it's obsidian making Alpha Protocol, because KotOR2 simply has the most brilliant dialogue I've seen in a game. Kreia is an example of one of the best developed characters in any RPG to date.

I like this approach, and it's one of the things I admire about Obsidian and am hoping Alpha Protocol really focuses on. Personally, I liked approach KotOR2 took to dialogue, with every major character having a different opinion of the Exile based on dialogue and actions. It's unfortunate KotOR2 wasn't really finished, as that had a lot of potential, but I'm truly hoping that Alpha Protocol can do great things with dialogue, something that's lacking from most other RPG's I've played. Mass Effect dialogue seemed overly wordy and I didn't like the extremes of "paragon" and "renegade," simply because what is paragon in the eyes of one may be renegade in the eyes of another. I find any game that has all characters react too similarly to your choices to be a bit watered down, and Mass Effect was no exception. Don't get me wrong, I loved ME, but the dialogue is not where it shined. KotOR2, on the other hand, has the best pieces of dialogue in any game I've played thus far.

I love the graphical style, really looks like what an espionage game should look like. And the scene with the helicopter was great. If only it was longer. And yeah, that can't be Mike's voice, way too deep.

Oooh, shiny new video for me to admire. Anyway, graphics look great, especially for this far before release. Can't wait for the game.