Gameplay

[pcrk2]

Is the gameplay going to be as good as in rainbow six vegas 2? i mean challenging difficulty, good cover system, powerful weapons, etc.

and another question: desert eagle is present in the game?

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

We can hope . . . .

 

In my experience, the tendency for RPG shooters is to deflate damage values to create a perceived progression among guns and skills. The problem with this is that no matter how tactically you play the enemy will still have a pretty good chance of returning fire before you can cause them to die from lead poisoning.

 

Actually, this happens a lot with normal shooters as well. Far Cry 2 is a good example.

[Calax]

Is the gameplay going to be as good as in rainbow six vegas 2? i mean challenging difficulty, good cover system, powerful weapons, etc.

and another question: desert eagle is present in the game?

I highly doubt that this game is going to be about a gun toting man doing spy work. It'd be stupid for him to zip around and slaughter everyone that's going to give him information... of course James Bond did it in Quantum of Solace.

[Morgoth]

I hope AP's gameplay will be anything BUT Vegas' gameplay.

[pcrk2]

something wrong with it?

[Nightshape]

I hope AP's gameplay will be anything BUT Vegas' gameplay.

 

Why?

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Is the gameplay going to be as good as in rainbow six vegas 2? i mean challenging difficulty, good cover system, powerful weapons, etc.

and another question: desert eagle is present in the game?

I highly doubt that this game is going to be about a gun toting man doing spy work. It'd be stupid for him to zip around and slaughter everyone that's going to give him information... of course James Bond did it in Quantum of Solace.

 

Obs has already said somewhere that the primary activity was shooting people in the head.

[Morgoth]

Is the gameplay going to be as good as in rainbow six vegas 2? i mean challenging difficulty, good cover system, powerful weapons, etc.

and another question: desert eagle is present in the game?

I highly doubt that this game is going to be about a gun toting man doing spy work. It'd be stupid for him to zip around and slaughter everyone that's going to give him information... of course James Bond did it in Quantum of Solace.

 

Obs has already said somewhere that the primary activity was shooting people in the head.

No. It's about "taking cover and shooting people in the face". That reminds me more of Gears or Mass Effect.

 

Vegas, from what I remember, was a FPS. One of the lame ones. We don't want AP to be lame, right?

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Vegas, from what I remember, was a FPS. One of the lame ones. We don't want AP to be lame, right?

 

Then you sir are in the minority, because the critics and fans raved about R6 Vegas. It is a FPS with a third-person cover system, btw.

 

It's already common knowledge that AP has a cover system, my point (which apparently was unclear) is that combat is likely to be a key if not the major focus of gameplay.

[Morgoth]

Perhaps it's the vegas 2 demo that I played. Do Vegas1 vs. Vegas 2 differ much?

[Llyranor]

The core gameplay was fairly similar.

 

Though, Vegas was all about taking cover and shooting people in the face. You basically have no idea what you're talking about and were playing the demo wrong.

 

Regardless of Vegas' quality, it walks all over Mass Effect in terms of gunplay and cover system, so Alpha Protocol taking after it wouldn't be a bad thing, no. It probably won't, though.

[Pidesco]

Though, Vegas was all about taking cover and shooting people in the face.

 

 

Rainbow Six used to be awesome when it had a brain.

[GeneralLee]

RS3: Raven Shield, 4-life.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Rainbow Six may have been smart, but the friendly AI was not.

 

I do miss logistics and detailed team member stats. I don't miss having to manually button-hook my squads through every damn door or having them die while waiting for the perfect headshot on a terrorist standing in front of them. One thing I appreciate about Vegas is that when you tell your squad to clear a room, they do it without preposterous amounts of hand-holding and tunnel vision. They are also able to competently shoot the enemy, oddly enough. One thing I don't like is the abundance of scripted encounters in the campaign. Rather than taking on a clear objective with adequate intel, it feels more like you're on an episode of 24 winging it the whole time. That has its charms too, I admit.

[GeneralLee]

Who needs a squad when you can run through terrorist hunt mode on elite with an AP Army silenced?

 

Good times...

[Pop]

In the Play 2.0 preview linked on the main Obsidz page there's a tidbit or two about gameplay.

 

The action in Alpha Protocol is very similar to typical third-person shooters. For example, shooting behind cover is the best viable option in a firefight, as it gives you a chance to survey your surroundings and perhaps pick off opponents from a safe distance. But gunning down foes isn

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

If my reading is correct, the "dozens of skills" they refer to are abilities that you unlock as you rank up in skills.

[mkreku]

Hmm.. I'm not so fond of the cover systems that seems to be the in-thing to do in every game right now. It disturbs me when I try to move close to something and my character is sucked up against it and sticks to it like glue when all I wanted was walk past it.

 

Are gamers really too unskilled to actually take cover behind stuff (you know, just crouch and hide!) that they need for the game to artificially glue them to every surface? But there's one thing I like about the cover system: a button that makes my character peek up from behind the cover. It's so annoying when (in some third person games) you have your sights on the enemy, but your character sits and fires retardedly at the edge inch of a table because your sights and your character aren't perfectly synced. Or when you have to manoeuvre your character pixel by pixel until he decides he can shoot above that last inch of said table..

[Zoma]

Implement a cover system at the very least, GoW style where tapping once puts you in cover mode. Vegas's cover execution is the best thus far IMO where you have to hold the button to remain in cover mode since I feel it grants the player the best amount of control over cover actions.

 

Please, do not EVER use ME's cover implementation. That one is terrible. Horrible.

Edited February 28, 2009 by Zoma

[Morgoth]

ME's cover system was non-existent, while GoW's was a bit too intrusive. It felt like your ass was sucked towards the wall. I hope Obsidian can find a middle thing.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Hmm.. I'm not so fond of the cover systems that seems to be the in-thing to do in every game right now. It disturbs me when I try to move close to something and my character is sucked up against it and sticks to it like glue when all I wanted was walk past it.

 

Are gamers really too unskilled to actually take cover behind stuff (you know, just crouch and hide!) that they need for the game to artificially glue them to every surface? But there's one thing I like about the cover system: a button that makes my character peek up from behind the cover. It's so annoying when (in some third person games) you have your sights on the enemy, but your character sits and fires retardedly at the edge inch of a table because your sights and your character aren't perfectly synced. Or when you have to manoeuvre your character pixel by pixel until he decides he can shoot above that last inch of said table..

 

A cover system allows you to minimize your character's exposure around the edge of said cover, as you suggest, without fumbling with the interface for so long that you get yourself killed. The way (some) cover systems are animated lets you be less exposed to fire than would be possible in free movement due to the rigid nature of games' animations these days.

 

As for being "forced" into cover you just want to walk past, I don't really see how that's possible in Gears since you actively have to press a button. The only game I've played that sucked the player into cover automatically was Kane & Lynch.

[alanschu]

Heh I thought ME's cover was neat.

[Hell Kitty]

As for being "forced" into cover you just want to walk past, I don't really see how that's possible in Gears since you actively have to press a button. The only game I've played that sucked the player into cover automatically was Kane & Lynch.

 

I'd like to know what games mkreku is referring too, because besides Kane & Lynch everything I've played with a cover system requires a button being held down.

 

I like cover systems, and I really like the system in R6:V. Anything automatic is horrible.

[Wrath of Dagon]

As has been mentioned, ME put you into cover automatically, and often had a problem with not going into cover properly or not being able to deploy a weapon while in cover. Personally I preferred the old fashioned analog movement behind cover in FPS, but I guess for a 3rd person RPG a cover mechanic would be OK if implemented properly (probably one button to go into cover, different button to leave) or R6:V would probably work, although I haven't played it enough to get proficient.

[remi92]

Is the gameplay going to be as good as in rainbow six vegas 2? i mean challenging difficulty, good cover system, powerful weapons, etc.

and another question: desert eagle is present in the game?

 

i have a felling this will be more like mass effect in gameplay than rainbow six vegas. which isn't a bad thing cos mass effect is sooo good