J.E. Sawyer Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Wouldn't it be easy to include the unarmed navigation animations in the PC version, while excluding them in the console versions? Loading the assets would probably be easy, but you'd have to modify the interface to allow you to switch to an unarmed stance and/or intentionally put away whatever weapon you have equipped. Personally, I don't see the point. When you go on missions, you're in environments full of hostiles. Walking around unarmed doesn't really gain you anything. Personally, I'm more disappointed by the absence of "social stealth" than the visuals; I can't speak for others. That has more to do with the general design of the game than unequipping weapons. twitter tyme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I thought a melee/unarmed build would be a viable option. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sannom Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Try to take Sie with your fists when there is a big hole between you and her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaPro Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Walking around unarmed doesn't really gain you anything. Exactly the point I was trying to make. build a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, but set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cl_Flushentityhero Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I think Sawyer answered your question Oner, but just in case . . . Basically, it's just that Thornton is placed in an environment full of hostiles. There's no ambiguity as to who he is or what he's doing, he just pretty much gets attacked whenever he gets spotted except with scripted dialogues. Contrast that with the hitman games, where your behavior tends to determine who is hostile towards you. IMO, the latter offers a lot more playstyle flexibility and is very "spy," which is what bugged me most about finding out it didn't exist via this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I think Sawyer answered your question Oner, but just in case . . . Basically, it's just that Thornton is placed in an environment full of hostiles. There's no ambiguity as to who he is or what he's doing, he just pretty much gets attacked whenever he gets spotted except with scripted dialogues. Contrast that with the hitman games, where your behavior tends to determine who is hostile towards you. IMO, the latter offers a lot more playstyle flexibility and is very "spy," which is what bugged me most about finding out it didn't exist via this thread. Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed to discover this, too. I figured it'd be something more like Deus Ex where there are plenty of neutrals around for you to interact with, talk to, receive quests from, and, if you want, fight. You know, like an RPG. I thought it was a really nice touch in Deus Ex when people ran from you if you waved a gun in their face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oner Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I think Sawyer answered your question Oner, but just in case . . . Basically, it's just that Thornton is placed in an environment full of hostiles. There's no ambiguity as to who he is or what he's doing, he just pretty much gets attacked whenever he gets spotted except with scripted dialogues. Contrast that with the hitman games, where your behavior tends to determine who is hostile towards you. IMO, the latter offers a lot more playstyle flexibility and is very "spy," which is what bugged me most about finding out it didn't exist via this thread. Ich verstehe. I don't really mind it's absence, since the trade off is (as others already said in older threads), greater reactivity from your surroundings. And the depth of this "feature" that AP promises is frankly something I didn't think except anyone to pull off before Warren Spector. So I'm pleased indeed. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bos_hybrid Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Maybe it's like Mass Effect, and you can't not have a weapon. It's a shame - I guess it means that NPCs won't react to the fact that you have a gun in your hand in inappropriate situations - or will they? But you could holster them. Basically, it's just that Thornton is placed in an environment full of hostiles. There's no ambiguity as to who he is or what he's doing, he just pretty much gets attacked whenever he gets spotted except with scripted dialogues. Contrast that with the hitman games, where your behavior tends to determine who is hostile towards you. IMO, the latter offers a lot more playstyle flexibility and is very "spy," which is what bugged me most about finding out it didn't exist via this thread. This is a joke right? So you've made a spy game, where blending in with your surroundings isn't a feature? What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Oh lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepenthe Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Oh lord. Or, you guys could just wait and see the end result, instead of going ballistic over partial info... You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Oh lord. Or, you guys could just wait and see the end result, instead of going ballistic over partial info... It's nice to see people defend the devs but in this matter there's nothing left to find out - your weapon is always out. They've said that. That bars any NPC reactions to the fact that you're waving a gun in the faces of civilians, guards, diplomats, etc. Quite ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sannom Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Something is telling me you don't need weapons outside the embassy, so that's why in the video they were not drawn out. But as soon as you enter, and the action begins, then you will probably get the weapons out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Or are you telling us that PC gamers get screwed by console limitations? Do really care about this? I think it's pretty minor. Not in the slightest. I was reacting to Mr Rorie's way of explaining the problem. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepenthe Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 What about that Embassy level where you can talk the guard into letting you in, you do that with your M16 out? Something is telling me you don't need weapons outside the embassy, so that's why in the video they were not drawn out. But as soon as you enter, and the action begins, then you will probably get the weapons out. This is what I was pointing to. It's nice to see people defend the devs but in this matter there's nothing left to find out - your weapon is always out. They've said that. That bars any NPC reactions to the fact that you're waving a gun in the faces of civilians, guards, diplomats, etc. Quite ridiculous. I'm not 'defending the devs', I'm saying you still don't have the complete picture of the game they do. It's absolutely useless to second guess their decisions when you really don't know what the end result is - at least when we are talking about relatively minor cosmetic choices, such as these. If the end result is that I'll walk around in bars with two SMGs and nobody notices it, sure, I'll think less of the game, but until I actually see that somewhere, I'm seeing no point in bitching and moaning about it. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nartwak Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) Hrm, yes, guns... Do we have to wear clothes? I want to put a bunch of points into stealth and be known by reputation as 'the streaking spy'. Edited August 22, 2009 by Nartwak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sannom Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I really think that there is two things that need to be made perfectly clear because they go against some of the most common rules of RPG, even the ones made by Obsidian, andI'm still surprised to see people think that Alpha Protocol has them : --- no free roaming and taking quests from standing NPC : people contacts Mike for the quests. He is a secret agent, not an adventurer. --- no conversation skills. That would completely destroys the dialogue system they put up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bos_hybrid Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) I'm not 'defending the devs', I'm saying you still don't have the complete picture of the game they do. It's absolutely useless to second guess their decisions when you really don't know what the end result is - at least when we are talking about relatively minor cosmetic choices, such as these. If the end result is that I'll walk around in bars with two SMGs and nobody notices it, sure, I'll think less of the game, but until I actually see that somewhere, I'm seeing no point in bitching and moaning about it. Pfft, I'm not jumping to any conclusions, it's been said guns out all the time. So if I think that is a bad thing, I'm going to say it's bad. Is it going to stop me from purchasing the game, hell no, but do I think the game is poorer if said occurrence happens, yes. Edited August 22, 2009 by Bos_hybrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepenthe Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I'm not 'defending the devs', I'm saying you still don't have the complete picture of the game they do. It's absolutely useless to second guess their decisions when you really don't know what the end result is - at least when we are talking about relatively minor cosmetic choices, such as these. If the end result is that I'll walk around in bars with two SMGs and nobody notices it, sure, I'll think less of the game, but until I actually see that somewhere, I'm seeing no point in bitching and moaning about it. Pfft, I'm not jumping to any conclusions, it's been said guns out all the time. So if I think that is a bad thing, I'm going to say it's bad. Is it going to stop me from purchasing the game, hell no, but do I think the game is poorer if said occurrence happens, yes. It's a good thing this is the internet. People who say 'pfft' to my face generally need to be carried out. As for the rest of your opinion, it was invalidated by the way you chose to express it. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bos_hybrid Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 It's a good thing this is the internet. People who say 'pfft' to my face generally need to be carried out. Internet tough guy act never works. As for the rest of your opinion, it was invalidated by the way you chose to express it. A far better point, should of just said that. Because the first part really invalidated your post too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humodour Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 It's a good thing this is the internet. People who say 'pfft' to my face generally need to be carried out. Somehow I can't see that, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Bos_hybrid is correct though. Read Sawyer and Rorie's comments. The only way said bar could be a holster zone is if it were a no combat zone. Either way the RP aspect of toting a gun or to holstering it is removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepenthe Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Somehow I can't see that, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Cultural differences. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cycloneman Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) Look, there has been footage of social interaction where Michael isn't running around, waving his gun at everybody. Clearly, during conversation Michael will put away his gun, or even hide it! Edited August 22, 2009 by Cycloneman I don't post if I don't have anything to say, which I guess makes me better than the rest of your so-called "community." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsquid Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Couldn't you mod it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILL THE ALMIGHTY Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 Thing is, how do you hide a shotgun, sniper rifle and 16 grenades in a simple shirt and jeans? "Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade - make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons, what am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! With the lemons. I'm going to to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsquid Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 (edited) It's a freakingg videoo gamme, maaan? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlogixcircutesdamagedhowdyysa Edited August 23, 2009 by kingofsquid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now