We need a sequel!

[Hassat Hunter]

Improve the plot branching at the end of the game. The branching in the middle is superb, but the end is fairly one-track.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehhhhh...

 

What?

(Or wait, you don't mean changes based on actions in the past?)

Edited June 8, 2010 by Hassat Hunter

[WorstUsernameEver]

They've closed the other topic, so I guess I'm going to post this here...

 

According to this quick research by a member of RPGWatch, Alpha Protocol's sales in Europe have been abysmal : http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=10

 

I can confirm that I pre-order Alpha Protocol on play.com BEFORE reviews and it was already discounted.

 

I guess that puts the hopes for a sequel in a.. new light.

[Oblarg]

Improve the plot branching at the end of the game. The branching in the middle is superb, but the end is fairly one-track.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehhhhh...

 

What?

(Or wait, you don't mean changes based on actions in the past?)

 

I do mean changes changes based on actions in the past. The middle branches fairly well, but the end is basically the same thing, with only one or two major branches. I don't count having a different handler as a branch.

[unskilled-]

The problem with a sequel like this is two things

 

1. It can go completely wrong and end up like DX: Invisible War

 

2. Or it can improve things but take away a lot of RPG elements like Mass Effect 2

 

The problem is I liked being universally combat capable in Mass Effect 2, since as a Soldier I could be just as proficient with a sniper rifle as I could with an AR, shotgun, or pistol, etc. etc.

 

As it is here, you have to dump points into weapon skills in order to not suck with them. So you trade universal combat over stat RPG based combat, etc. etc.

 

Honestly I'm on the fence both ways. Regardless, I'd like greater customization of Thorton, preferably full face and armor look customs, and better visual weapon upgrades.

 

Ironically I hated how every other weapon I got in Mass Effect 1 was a reskin with the same look. The designers did the same here yet when ME2 came out there was a vastly diminished amount of weapons available and I suddenly missed all the guns from ME1. So as far as I'm concerned, keep the weapon reskins in, but perhaps put in more new looks rather than a new paint job for every single one.

 

I played ME1 after playing ME2 (after playing ME1!) and yeah, the weapons in ME2 are vastly superior. In ME1 you essentially had 8 different core weapons (for each type of weapon) thats went from level 1 to 9 throughout the game. The only variety aside from minor skin and model changes were the stat upgrades. They all fired the same too, so it never really felt like you've upgrade your gun aside from watching your enemy's healthbar drop more quickly.

 

You goto ME2 and each gun is essentially unique. The 3 assault rifles all handle differently, with your standard balanced worldbeater, a AP-esque 3-shot rifle that is deadly for headshots and the best one you get aboard the reaper ship, the closest thing you'll ever get to a gat. Lots of recoil but a huge clip and awesome power. Same with the shotguns, sniperrifles and everything else associated with combat.

 

Regarding AP, putting points into your weapon skills is more or less making you more deadly with them. As someone already said, you have basic proficiency with them, as well as all the other skills.. so leveling them up works in a manner as simple specalization in your given field (thus the focusing on 3 skills).

 

When talking about action RPGs having to sacrifice alot of the things we love about RPGs to achieve the things we love about action games, well.. I don't really see why that has to be true. To me its a matter of establishing a solid game engine which lets you have a visceral combat experience (like ME2 or MW2) then establishing your skills and character statistics and traits around that. In terms of a real time 3rd person combat game like this, your basic RPG stuff would either limit you or enable you to do more within the gameworld.

 

For example: There's a locked door. A character with high strength could kick it open, someone with high dexterity could pick the lock. If the locked door has someone behind it, a person with high charisma and/or intelligence can fool the guard into opening it for you. In terms of combat stuff like a lack of agility would hinder your ability to do your best John Woo impersonation, while a high strength will make you look like rambo dual wielding those two heavy machineguns.

 

Skills with individual weapons would essentially be ability to aim faster (reticule gets smaller faster), better recoil control, faster reloading and some weapon specific skills (like being able to use your gun in CQC or shotgun or assault rifle if it has a bayonette).

 

Going even further, traits and individual experience levels, level of training and numerous other factors would determine a person's individual skill and talent within the gameworld. Example: SAS people would be virtually unambushable due to their training, previous experience, natural abilities like strength, agility.. etc. AP has done this to some extent (Marburg's men vs Terrorists or CIA). In terms of combat it would determine line of sight/hearing and overall behavior in combat; such as using cover extensively to flank or hide like a coward. In out of combat situations (but still within a mission) it would determine patrol habits; such as thoroughness (checking all corners) and idle time before moving onto the next point in his route.

 

When you do things, you do them well, or at least you plan it out well and try your best to follow it. Sadly with the need of publishers to rush developers into pushing out games before they are done, sadly it will not happen. Either that or it'll end up like *chokes back some tears* Duke Nukem Forever. *sniffle*

[FlintlockJazz]

They've closed the other topic, so I guess I'm going to post this here...

 

According to this quick research by a member of RPGWatch, Alpha Protocol's sales in Europe have been abysmal : http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=10

 

I can confirm that I pre-order Alpha Protocol on play.com BEFORE reviews and it was already discounted.

 

I guess that puts the hopes for a sequel in a.. new light.

I'm sorry but that user is just theorycrafting there. He does not have access to any more sales information than the rest of us, and discounts have been offered for games that have sold well before, hell my collector's edition of ME2 was heavily discounted before release from what I recall.

 

The user admits that the PC version was number 3 in the best sellers list for Play, and tries to wrangle it to indicate that it only did so because it was marked down while the console versions were not given the discount and did not sell so well. I could argue that it was given a discount because Play managed to get more sales on it than it thought and so could afford to give it a discount while the console versions didn't and so they kept them at the high price. We also don't know how many people didn't preorder it but bought it after release, from what I have seen many people held off on it as they were unsure and then bought it later, possibly driving the price down due to lack of confidence only to then find it selling after release, that is still a sale whichever way you spin it. Remember, the publisher still gets the same amount of money per sale regardless what the stores sell them at, so even if all the stores discount the game as long as they sell Sega still makes money.

 

I have not deluded myself into thinking AP will become a blockbuster or even sell that well, but until I see actual sales numbers and profits I will not believe that anyone really has any idea how well it has done (or not done).

[mothra]

yes, marburg, sis, albatross, heck, all of them have still "secrets" and oc there is scarlet - depending how you finished the game - or westridge or .... and I need a tuxedo of course.

[C2B]

They've closed the other topic, so I guess I'm going to post this here...

 

According to this quick research by a member of RPGWatch, Alpha Protocol's sales in Europe have been abysmal : http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=10

 

I can confirm that I pre-order Alpha Protocol on play.com BEFORE reviews and it was already discounted.

 

I guess that puts the hopes for a sequel in a.. new light.

I'm sorry but that user is just theorycrafting there. He does not have access to any more sales information than the rest of us, and discounts have been offered for games that have sold well before, hell my collector's edition of ME2 was heavily discounted before release from what I recall.

 

The user admits that the PC version was number 3 in the best sellers list for Play, and tries to wrangle it to indicate that it only did so because it was marked down while the console versions were not given the discount and did not sell so well. I could argue that it was given a discount because Play managed to get more sales on it than it thought and so could afford to give it a discount while the console versions didn't and so they kept them at the high price. We also don't know how many people didn't preorder it but bought it after release, from what I have seen many people held off on it as they were unsure and then bought it later, possibly driving the price down due to lack of confidence only to then find it selling after release, that is still a sale whichever way you spin it. Remember, the publisher still gets the same amount of money per sale regardless what the stores sell them at, so even if all the stores discount the game as long as they sell Sega still makes money.

 

I have not deluded myself into thinking AP will become a blockbuster or even sell that well, but until I see actual sales numbers and profits I will not believe that anyone really has any idea how well it has done (or not done).

 

^This

 

Furthermore, not to mention that play.com is not represantive for a large chunk of the european market. Also his last sentences are fairly biased against the game. So I call a "I see what I want to see"

 

As far as I can see checking several online-houses sales have been rather mediocre to good. Not anywhere near Red Dead Redemption but that was expectable.

[Thorton_AP]

They've closed the other topic, so I guess I'm going to post this here...

 

According to this quick research by a member of RPGWatch, Alpha Protocol's sales in Europe have been abysmal : http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=10

 

I can confirm that I pre-order Alpha Protocol on play.com BEFORE reviews and it was already discounted.

 

I guess that puts the hopes for a sequel in a.. new light.

 

 

Isn't it irrelevant to you? You didn't buy the game if I'm not mistaken.

[WorstUsernameEver]

They've closed the other topic, so I guess I'm going to post this here...

 

According to this quick research by a member of RPGWatch, Alpha Protocol's sales in Europe have been abysmal : http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showpost.ph...mp;postcount=10

 

I can confirm that I pre-order Alpha Protocol on play.com BEFORE reviews and it was already discounted.

 

I guess that puts the hopes for a sequel in a.. new light.

 

 

Isn't it irrelevant to you? You didn't buy the game if I'm not mistaken.

 

I did actually, playing it right now and enjoying it.

[Thorton_AP]

I'm up for a sequel. Here's what could use improvement:

 

Remove the visible reputation meter.

Reduce the skill curve for weapons - they're too weak at low skill levels.

Increase the impact of the various weapon stats, and clearly define what each one does.

Improve the plot branching at the end of the game. The branching in the middle is superb, but the end is fairly one-track.

More reactivity based on skills. The few times I had options available to me based on my skills felt *really* awesome, and I'd love to see more of it.

Remove the post-mission evaluation, I like uncovering people's reactions to my actions through dialogue, having it spoonfed to me after each mission is annoying.

Add alternate ways to beat bosses, bullet-sponge bosses don't mesh very well with stealth characters.

 

The reason why I don't have a problem with stuff like this is that, in the majority of the circumstances, these are things that Mike will likely conclude. Especially while in a face to face conversation. So the reputation meters are actually a wash for me, because as an RPG it's whether or not my character recognizes it, as opposed to myself.

 

I like the post-mission evaluation. They're far enough past your decisions that you can't go "oh, well I didn't like that" without replaying a whole level, while at the same time give you tangible feedback for your decisions which I just find rather cool. Of course, NOT having the post-mission evaluation means that bugs related to the system are more easily hidden, since you won't have any expectations over what is different.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Some suggestion for a sequel, gathered from first impressions:

 

- remove the timer for the more trivial dialogue.. sometimes it felt incredibly short for no reason (first conversation with Mina, on the PDA);

 

- make the structure of the game feel less arcade-y.. I don't think the structure is bad, but sometime the transition can be a bit jarring, especially considering your usual rpgs.. that's part of why I think people took this game for a third person shooter/stealth;

 

- you could possibly try to rework how damage and accuracy work.. if you tie weapon skills to reloading time, recoil etc. without affecting accuracy (still keep the 'super powers' they may not be realistic, but they are fun ) it could probably end up to a ultimately more elegant and less misleading system, while keeping the same effects to the gameplay (a stealthy character could also benefit from not having to put points in guns);

 

- make all bosses optional and make their battles feel more realistic.. ok, I technically never encountered a boss, but I already know what some people's gripes with them are;

 

- visual presentation.. that's a given, for a sequel, I know, but for a game that bills itself as a cinematic experience is important.. I don't particularly care for the subpar visuals and animation but most do.

 

That's about all I have to say.

For all the negativity I may had, I'm very much hoping Obsidian gets to do a sequel, because the game has been fun until now (even if I suck at stealth).

[Thorton_AP]

I still like the timer. If you're playing in a different language for subtitles, then it sounds like its a definite issue as the subtitles are broken up (likely to prevent people from circumventing the timer).

 

I do agree they could find ways to rework the skill system to keep it, while still allowing Mike to be somewhat accurate with his weapons at close range without waiting for the critical hit.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I still like the timer. If you're playing in a different language for subtitles, then it sounds like its a definite issue as the subtitles are broken up (likely to prevent people from circumventing the timer).

 

The timer works VERY WELL when you're taking critical decisions.. I felt pressured a lot of times, during conversations, and I felt that was good for the feel of the game.

But sometimes the duration felt pretty small, especially when you're having a relaxed conversation (my first conversation with Parker).

 

Also, they could expand on it, by not always having the 'play last stance' and actually picking Michael by surprise if he doesn't make a choice.

e.g. Michael must decide if executing a boss or not. If you don't choose one of the two stances in time (kill or don't kill) the boss takes advantage from your indecision and steals your gun or.. something like that, yeah.

Then again, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would hate situations like this.

[Thorton_AP]

I think that that would be pretty cool actually! A "hidden" hesitation response which is typically bad haha.

 

Sounds like for you, all they need are a little bit longer of a timer for some of the shorter/less urgent ones.

[Alpha]

Some suggestion for a sequel, gathered from first impressions:

 

- remove the timer for the more trivial dialogue.. sometimes it felt incredibly short for no reason (first conversation with Mina, on the PDA);

Remove no; make it more slower in large convos yes. That's what make the game interesting and different from others C&C games.

 

-------------

 

i'd vote for make the char jump.

 

------------------

 

I would like they balance well the weapons skills , the only good weapon to upgrade is the pistol. I upgraded shotgun almost to max and still do the same damage that when don't have skill invested.

 

the critical hit perk in AR don't work .

Edited June 8, 2010 by Alpha

[WorstUsernameEver]

Some suggestion for a sequel, gathered from first impressions:

 

- remove the timer for the more trivial dialogue.. sometimes it felt incredibly short for no reason (first conversation with Mina, on the PDA);

Remove no; make it more slower in large convos yes. That's what make the game interesting and different from others C&C games.

 

-------------

 

i'd vote for make the char jump.

 

Mind you, I was talking just about the really trivial and relaxed dialogue (like some in the graybox), the timer itself should remain, since it makes the decision making feel tense, and I like that tension.

[VastShadowz41]

[

I would like they balance well the weapons skills , the only good weapon to upgrade is the pistol. I upgraded shotgun almost to max and still do the same damage that when don't have skill invested.

 

I just noticed this. Sometimes I feel like I'm shooting BB pellets at guards. It should be killing them from medium range by now with the amount I have invested into it and I'm only getting kills if they're at a quarter health from death and nearly point blank with all pellets hitting from the shotgun.

 

Shotgun damage definintly needs to be buffed. Incidieary rounds are working better than regular shotgun rounds, and I honestly don't see much of a need for the flechette rounds. I haven't used them once.

[Hassat Hunter]

the critical hit perk in AR don't work.

Eleborate please.

 

The only choice where I *really* felt the timer was waaay too short is

after being done talking to President Sung

.

[FlintlockJazz]

Also, they could expand on it, by not always having the 'play last stance' and actually picking Michael by surprise if he doesn't make a choice.

e.g. Michael must decide if executing a boss or not. If you don't choose one of the two stances in time (kill or don't kill) the boss takes advantage from your indecision and steals your gun or.. something like that, yeah.

Then again, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would hate situations like this.

I like the sound of that, having the player's lack of choice have an affect would definitely add to the pressure!

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Gotta be honest, I don't think Obsidian should bother making a sequel to this game. It had enough closure and really wasn't all that great.

[Oner]

Gotta be honest, I don't think Obsidian should bother making a sequel to this game. It had enough closure and really wasn't all that great.

Says the guy who missed half the details.

[BEES]

I'd love a sequel set in the "AP universe", but I wouldn't necessarily want Thorton as the protagonist. Instead, what if Thorton becomes the handler of the new PC? That way it's still sort of "Thorton's story", but without having to deal with the level issues (ie. if you carried over Thorton from AP1, he starts off at a high level).

 

I'd prefer if Thorton weren't the protagonist either. Maybe the antagonist/HUB character of interest for one area but I'd definitely like to see a new protagonist with a new story unrelated to Halbech. We don't need a James Bond SPECTRE bit here.

 

- make all bosses optional and make their battles feel more realistic.. ok, I technically never encountered a boss, but I already know what some people's gripes with them are;

 

I actually found the boss battles to be the highlight of the game (at least, gameplay wise). I'd rather not see them become "realistic" as that would diminish the 'cinematic' vibe that many people want in the visuals and gameplay anyway. Besides, I'd prefer a single boss that takes lots of hits over a guy who falls just as fast as a regular minion but you have to fight through waves of endlessly respawning enemies to get to him.

 

I would like to see greater flexibility in your handlers, say completely replacing one halfway through the game. Also, it would be nice if there were characters that traveled between safehouses with you... where appropriate of course. More reactivity would be great too.

[edgarcuk]

I would like to suggest a more charming Thorton, not as good as Connery's Bond or Brosnan's Bond... but at level of Craig's Bond... even Jason Bourne has got more charm...

[FlintlockJazz]

I actually liked Mr Thorton. I know alot of people apparently don't like how effeminate he looks, but in this age of steroid-enhanced rugged Space Marine looks we get with every other character in games I liked Thorton's look (plus I don't really see how he is effeminate to be honest, and considering how they buffed up the male avatars in WoW to Arnie level even when you're playing a mage or blood elf because the players claimed they looked too effeminate I'm not convinced it's me with the skewed perspective, though I am screwy). Sure, he came across as a **** sometimes, especially when he was trying to be suave, but I consider that part of his charm, he is after all meant to be a manipulative person and I love the "Is this guy for real" look you get off Scarlett if you do the suave route.

Edited June 9, 2010 by FlintlockJazz

[Alpha]

the critical hit perk in AR don't work.

Eleborate please.

 

The only choice where I *really* felt the timer was waaay too short is

after being done talking to President Sung

.

Don't work like the critical hit perk of the pistol. Is succeful if you are lucky but with the pistol is always a guaranteed kill.