Thorton_AP

Cool beans I'll check it out some time after the break. As much as WW2 is overdone, it still tends to be my favourite setting for games like these. Though I'll still give the modern warfare one a looksee.

Was that post on the main board an alt of you?

That's fair, but on the hardest difficulties for CoD I pretty much needed to use prior knowledge of where guys were, even solo guys, in order to make sure I wasn't instagibbed. Though CoD4 masks some of it by having a platoon of guys with you as well. Pripyat is an exception, but I can't think of any others (probably because they aren't as notably fun as Pripyat was for me )

You are wrong. When I am talking about intersection, I mean a full on cross with no hole whatsoever between them. By default the tightest they get still has a small hole in the dead center of the reticle. Your shot is not precisely accurate at this point. They are VERY close to intersecting, but not entirely. @enterix Guns blazing is a very valid playstyle, but it is harder at the start of the game when playing on Realistic. All headshots are lethal with any weapon in CoD 4 on the highest difficulty as well.

Hmmm, is the campaign flexible at least? I don't necessarily need to control the operational map (A Bridge Too Far didn't let you do that), but it at least had little skirmishes throughout where the results of one operation could affect a different one.

Combat mission is a lot of fun too, though at the time there didn't seem to be any global type of campaign. For some reason the game just didn't catch me, even though I did have fun playing it.

Nevermind the fact that according to Mr. Spector, guns-a-blazing is a valid playstyle for Deus Ex.

Unfortunately with your career predator example on the previous page Wals, is that with a death penalty you get stagnation as people argue over whether or not he should be executed or just imprisoned. This is what guard dog described in Florida.

/facepalm Stereotypes ftw.

Euthanasia is suicide. I would say it's pretty damn relevant to what you mentioned but whatever. Euthanasia is not suicide.

What a shame!

What really impressed me is how appropriate things like suppression and morale were modeled in those games. I liked the Russian Front a lot too. It's only failing is that the campaign wasn't as interesting as A Bridge Too Far's (which is a super intense MP experience). They did have a ton of mechanics improvements. I played Battle of the Bulge too, but it didn't quite enamor me like the 2nd and 3rd.

I love the game, but it's not without its faults haha.

The original close combat games are exceptional WW2 RTS games too. I love A Bridge Too Far!

No, you're right. If you could get your gun's accuracy up to 95%+ then the crosshairs would fully intersect giving you a precise shot. The start of the game does not have this. 5 feet is probably a bit closer than you needed to be, but yeah you weren't precisely accurate. I usually made up for it with gun mods than more skill though As for DX (probably my fav game of all time), there's gems like this:

I would say that the biggest gripe about the game was it's combat mechanics and apparent inaccuracy with the weapons. More so than bugs.

Purchased. With 4 other games XD

Touche

Isn't that only an issue if your spell has the same range as your LOS?

Harsher than being brutally tortured and beheaded? Because that's what has happened to our captured male soldiers, and that seems pretty damned harsh to me. Probably because you can also add rape to the table. Though you can probably make an argument to toss that under being brutally tortured.

Or have to aim, period.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't. Clearly you and I see QTE as very different things.

Then you just fail to understand the words I used to describe a quick time event. Go play Resident Evil 4 and you'll see some quicktime events. The words you quoted for what you think of regarding AP's conversation system are explicitly NOT what AP's conversation system entails. You have to reload the game if you're not satisfied with the results of the conversation even if there was no timer. The differences are so amazingly obvious that I am starting to question if I'm just being trolled or not. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I think it's safe to say you're definition of quick time events does not coincide with mine. In any case this conversation is over from my perspective.

Then you've heard the wrong thing about Alpha Protocol's conversation system. Typically the "rewards/penalties" only attributed to approval ratings, which can be considered a benefit going one way or another. If you wish to boil down quick time Events to stuff that must be done within an appreciable time, then anything where a level of passivity results in some sort of consequence of any sort is a quick time events.

If you want to abstract that to a quicktime event then you can probably go crazy. Quicktime events were more typically of the "You're walking along and then suddenly something bad comes at you. A marker pops up on the screen for how you're supposed to respond and you have limited time to respond to it. If you push the button you get a tangible reward (not dying, avoiding bad guys, phat lewt). If you miss it, then something bad happens (death, an extra wave of bad guys, and so forth)." Alpha Protocol did not really have a reward/penalty system for responding (aside from perhaps not saying the line you meant to say). Each choice was relatively equal.