Espionage RPG?

[player1]

^True. What I think AP is missing is some mission like Kasumi DLC from ME2. Lots of interaction, little action.

[Oblarg]

^True. What I think AP is missing is some mission like Kasumi DLC from ME2. Lots of interaction, little action.

 

You mean like most of the Rome hub?

 

Things like this make me wonder if people actually played the entire game before coming here to complain about it.

 

Oh, and Obsidian mentioned multiple times that they were going for "action movie espionage," not realistic espionage. That doesn't automatically make the game a failure.

Edited June 19, 2010 by Oblarg

[unskilled-]

^True. What I think AP is missing is some mission like Kasumi DLC from ME2. Lots of interaction, little action.

 

You mean like most of the Rome hub?

 

Things like this make me wonder if people actually played the entire game before coming here to complain about it.

 

Oh, and Obsidian mentioned multiple times that they were going for "action movie espionage," not realistic espionage. That doesn't automatically make the game a failure.

 

If we didn't play the game we certainly wouldn't be discussing what we feel are disappointments.

 

The mission where you assassinate Al-Bara would have made perfect sense from an action movie standpoint. Think about it, your inside his heavily guarded mansion and you have to identify him and then assassinate him. Whether you do it or not your cover will probably be blown at some point leading to a tense shootout, cause as Mina keeps telling you.. people around here are well connected.. you take them out and you'll have their friends looking to take you out. What would make this situation even more tense would be if Marbug decided to go all out and storm the place, thus placing you in a situation of either: GTFO or stop the assault and save innocent lives.

 

But instead you just look at 8 people for roughly 10 minutes while Mina talks about how they have nothing to do with the story, and thus are essentially a waste of time.

[player1]

^True. What I think AP is missing is some mission like Kasumi DLC from ME2. Lots of interaction, little action.

 

You mean like most of the Rome hub?

 

Not really. CIA listening post is pure stealth action sequence, several others like warehouse/ruins are standard mission, a few are dialog challenges and one is unique sniping mission.

 

What I mean is something akin to proper spying mission. You are at location, you mingle, explore, etc... And maybe at the end do some action (just like Kasmui DLC).

 

Things like this make me wonder if people actually played the entire game before coming here to complain about it.

 

Played it 4 times.

[C2B]

What I mean is something akin to proper spying mission. You are at location, you mingle, explore, etc... And maybe at the end do some action (just like Kasmui DLC).

 

I just have to know what exactlythese two things have to do with any espionage, I would be glad.

Edited June 19, 2010 by C2B

[player1]

I though it was obvious. In that DLC you case the place, searching for weaknesses, and pretend to be somebody else. Pretty similar to espionage work.

Edited June 19, 2010 by player1

[zooligist]

If you play on Recruit and Hard, why are you complaining it's too difficult?

 

Anyway, I've done it on those settings, AP is one of thoes games where once you work out a strategy any challenge becomes doable.

 

It's not a question of shame, it's a principle. If a game is so poorly balanced from unfinished work or bugs so that Hard difficulty is almost impossible to finish, then something needs fixing.

 

Yes, the dozens of us on the forums who have finished Hard quite easily must be gaming Gods. That must be the only explanation?

 

You finding a particular challenge excruciating has more to do with getting used to the game and finding the right strategy. It's always the people's extinct to blame the game first, though.

 

you are a moderator? you sound like a troll man.....

[unskilled-]

If you play on Recruit and Hard, why are you complaining it's too difficult?

 

Anyway, I've done it on those settings, AP is one of thoes games where once you work out a strategy any challenge becomes doable.

 

It's not a question of shame, it's a principle. If a game is so poorly balanced from unfinished work or bugs so that Hard difficulty is almost impossible to finish, then something needs fixing.

 

Yes, the dozens of us on the forums who have finished Hard quite easily must be gaming Gods. That must be the only explanation?

 

You finding a particular challenge excruciating has more to do with getting used to the game and finding the right strategy. It's always the people's extinct to blame the game first, though.

 

you are a moderator? you sound like a troll man.....

 

WARNING: THESE POSTS MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN HEAVY DOSES OF SARCASM: DO NOT: I REPEAT: DO NOT ASSUME EVERYBODY IS A **** TOWARDS YOU: IT WILL ONLY ENGENDER HATRED TOWARDS YOU AND TOWARDS OTHERS. EVERYTHING IS COOL MAN: MOVE ALONG: NOTHING TO SEE HERE.

 

On a serious note: I've never played on hard mode.. I figured after I beat Crysis on Delta Mode I didn't need to even bother with these sissy "hard" modes...

 

Seriously tho, the fact that hard mode seems to require a specific set of skills and attributes to pass (confirmation please!), means that hard mode is only for those who want to play a certain way and not a challenge for those who want to play their own way (stealth/h2h build or what have you). But, if I am wrong about this.. don't flog me too hard

[Spiked]

Hard more is really difficult, equipments is more expensive, you die after a couple of bullets, enemies have more health, but the only real problem are mini games. They are twice as hard from the start, so even if you specialize in sabotage, they will still be frikin' difficult, and darn right impossible without maxed out sabotage skill. And since this is an espionage game, you'd want all information you can get from safes and computers, is hard to just pass by them, so I only play on hard if I chose sabotage to be one of my 3 man skills.

[Serrano]

EMP's are only around $1000 a peice. That seems like a lot but you'll almost always get more than what you paid for by unlocking a few safes and downloading intel from mission to mission. No doubt it eats away at your savings but it's doable.

[Spiked]

Yes, I know(I did finish the game 6 times...so far :D) but I still find it really annoying to play that way. There are at least 5 or 6 safes, locks, computers in every mission, and with 2 EMPs per inventory slot, you could barely carry any other gadget in missions if you stock up on EMPs.

 

But, now that I think about it...you could put 6 points in sabotage, that could allow you to hack and bypass in Saudi and two other hubs(difficult, but doable I think). Then in the last hub and in Alpha Protocol, you stock up on EMPs. Hm, I think I will do exactly this on my next playthrough.

Edited June 20, 2010 by Spiked

[Zoraptor]

The two armour mods that improve hacking are just about essential when playing on hard, and pay for themselves quickly by avoiding EMP use, though swapping them in/out is annoying.

 

Having just finished a second hard playthrough I'd say that criticism of the minigames being too hard with it are probably justified, you really do need an investment in sabotage after a certain point. And it is a bit inconsistent to have somewhere like Brayko's which is supposed to have fairly useless security have 5 pin locks, 5 letter codes and 12 clips bypasses while the endgame has (generally) 5-6 clip bypasses, 3 pin locks and 8 letter codes.

[Tigranes]

The thing is, in any given mission, there is always a variety in difficulty - so you should only encounter a few that are so difficult as to need EMPs.

 

I don't know. I think, on Hard, unless you have really clunky controls or really don't work well with the minigames, you shouldn't need too much investment - not so much to make it ridiculous. If you have Spy's Luck and more in Sabotage, you don't really need armour mods OR EMPs most of the time. If you have the latter two, you can probably get away with only 2 points or even none in Sabotage.

 

Or, if you're not doing a stealth playthrough, and an alarm is sounding, you can freely bash doors... then turn off the alarm.

[213374U]

you are a moderator? you sound like a troll man.....

Because he has opinions and expresses them? O-kay.

 

I can understand where some of the complaints come from, at any rate. Hitman: Blood Money one-ups AP with regards to stealth, infiltration and AI without compromising gunplay should the player want (or need to) shoot his way through a mission, and without pulling stupid **** like invisibility magicks. And, um, it's a 2006 game. Once again, the gameplay of an Obsid game just isn't up to par.

[C2B]

you are a moderator? you sound like a troll man.....

Because he has opinions and expresses them? O-kay.

 

I can understand where some of the complaints come from, at any rate. Hitman: Blood Money one-ups AP with regards to stealth, infiltration and AI without compromising gunplay should the player want (or need to) shoot his way through a mission, and without pulling stupid **** like invisibility magicks. And, um, it's a 2006 game. Once again, the gameplay of an Obsid game just isn't up to par.

 

Which could also lead to the argument that both games are in different gernes but whatever.

 

I'm not gonna complain in Diablo that there are way too few RTS options.

 

Still, the system could be strongly improved you're right. But especially because of the gerne I can forgive much.

Edited June 20, 2010 by C2B

[Orogun01]

you are a moderator? you sound like a troll man.....

Because he has opinions and expresses them? O-kay.

 

I can understand where some of the complaints come from, at any rate. Hitman: Blood Money one-ups AP with regards to stealth, infiltration and AI without compromising gunplay should the player want (or need to) shoot his way through a mission, and without pulling stupid **** like invisibility magicks. And, um, it's a 2006 game. Once again, the gameplay of an Obsid game just isn't up to par.

I beg to differ greatly, Hitman has always had it's share of faulty A.I. mechanics. One of the biggest problems with the game is the need to constantly do "crowd control" or the enemies lining up in your sights on every fight. AP's enemy's AI does exactly what the dossier says that the faction will do.

[213374U]

Which could also lead to the argument that both games are in different gernes but whatever.

 

I'm not gonna complain in Diablo that there are way too few RTS options.

 

Still, the system could be strongly improved you're right. But especially because of the gerne I can forgive much.

Oh yeah, and the argument that the game is an RPG could in turn lead to a discussion on ontological categories... awesome!

 

But seriously, putting an arbitrary label on the box does not excuse bad gameplay. If anything, games define genres, not the other way around. There's no law that RPGs must have crap AI or clunky cover mechanics.

 

 

I beg to differ greatly, Hitman has always had it's share of faulty A.I. mechanics. One of the biggest problems with the game is the need to constantly do "crowd control" or the enemies lining up in your sights on every fight. AP's enemy's AI does exactly what the dossier says that the faction will do.

Yeah, compare Blood Money's AI search/awareness routines with AP's, where a helicopter circling the area will alert everyone to your presence, despite the fact that you're behind cover. Compare the suspicion-o-meter with AP's "guard finds a corpse, gets mildly suspicious, forgets about the whole thing ten seconds later" system. Oh, and hey, I guess moving corpses out of sight and ****ing closing doors is way too much to ask in a game where stealth is supposed to be a valid way of beating most scenarios. Who cares about that anyway? You have The One Ring!

 

But yeah, in AP enemies flank you and have unlimited grenades to drag you out of cover. I guess in that respect, AP is better. Dialogues and characterization are better too. A shame that all of that is irrelevant wrt the points I was discussing, don't you think?

Edited June 21, 2010 by 213374U

[Orogun01]

I beg to differ greatly, Hitman has always had it's share of faulty A.I. mechanics. One of the biggest problems with the game is the need to constantly do "crowd control" or the enemies lining up in your sights on every fight. AP's enemy's AI does exactly what the dossier says that the faction will do.

Yeah, compare Blood Money's AI search/awareness routines with AP's, where a helicopter circling the area will alert everyone to your presence, despite the fact that you're behind cover. Compare the suspicion-o-meter with AP's "guard finds a corpse, gets mildly suspicious, forgets about the whole thing ten seconds later" system. Oh, and hey, I guess moving corpses out of sight and ****ing closing doors is way too much to ask in a game where stealth is supposed to be a valid way of beating most scenarios. Who cares about that anyway? You have The One Ring!

 

But yeah, in AP enemies flank you and have unlimited grenades to drag you out of cover. I guess in that respect, AP is better. Dialogues and characterization are better too. A shame that all of that is irrelevant wrt the points I was discussing, don't you think?

So I guess you don't remember Hitman's AI is suspicious of you so it shoots you down. The suspicion level meant that if you ran or went the wrong way the shooting began. Or all the other erratic AI behavior, I think there are better examples out there than Hitman.

PS. my guards never got mildly suspicious, they did a sweep of the area or called the alarm.

[Thorton_AP]

I remember Hitman: Blood Money being very well done (while at the same time a bit less ridiculously hard as earlier games).

 

I'd have to play it again, but from what I remember it would succeed better in a lot of ways where AP is less than stellar.

[Scarvet]

It is my understanding that Espionage includes sabotage .....which isn't spying nor stealth.

 

Although as much as I would like the game to be like 5 GTA plus MGS for one epic length story, the current game mechanics makes sure the game have a constant pace forward and allow the players to go back just experience different play style.

 

The AI isn't too bad, they just behave differently compare to other games; in fact, the guards are sharper in alert state compare to Metal Gear Solid. The other thing that make you find they random is because of the "critical aim" mechanics of the game makes it hard for the AI to deal with Mike effectively without grenades; and if you did invested in Stealth skills and upgrades, don't ask why the AI have a hard time trying to locate Mike: they should.

Edited June 22, 2010 by Scarvet

[thufirhawat333]

Spy game =/= stealth game. Spying is more about intelligence work than stealth work.

...

That's it.

Alpha Protocol is a Field Agent game, with the possibility to play it out as a stealth game, a straight shooter, or a gadget focused tech'n'slash.

 

It's not an Espionage RPG. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, But I too was waiting for an espionage rpg.

Mostly the intelligence gathering, going undercover type of game.

(Like the original Casino Royale or the move The Agency, something like that)

 

Instead we got a Jason Bourne, Quantum of Solace, 24 season 5 like game, which plays out well, but not, in any chance an Espionage RPG.

But I can live with that

[WorstUsernameEver]

They made that clear from the very beginning and in almost every preview.

The game didn't even have a subtitle until SEGA decided to add it.

[Spiked]

but the only real problem are mini games. They are twice as hard from the start, so even if you specialize in sabotage, they will still be frikin' difficult, and darn right impossible without maxed out sabotage skill. And since this is an espionage game, you'd want all information you can get from safes and computers, is hard to just pass by them, so I only play on hard if I chose sabotage to be one of my 3 man skills.

 

Ok, so it seams the reason why mini games were difficult for me the last time I played on hard is because I didn't use integrated security. I probably thought I didn't need it since I specialized in sabotage. I just finished another playthrough on hard and mini games with first level of breaking and entering and integrated security weren't much more difficult then on medium . I didn't even need emps.

 

Actually, this was my paragon playthrough, I didn't kill any of the mercenaries or agents, and I spared those minor characters, but I did kill Marburg and Leland, as they orchestrated the whole thing. All this on hard, with stealth, pistol, martial arts, little bit of toughness in the end and upgraded shock traps, with a spy background. So I guess I could say that hard difficulty isn't really that big of a deal as long as you know what your doing.

Edited June 22, 2010 by Spiked

[Spiked]

I totally forgot, I was playing with veteran background the last time, so its extra AP is that made the mini games so difficult probably. Silly me.

[razgriz_1400]

I have a habit of playing unfamiliar games on easy on my first run so I can get used to the controls, mechanics, etc. As for this being an espionage RPG; RL espionage is akin to digging through a steaming bucket of **** and trying to find a diamond and I'm sure there are people who would find such a game boring, hence the action movie feel of AP.