C&VG: Sega rules out Alpha Protocol sequel

[Thorton_AP]

The unfortunate thing is that metacritic uses the destructoid review.

[Kid SixXx]

PPS: Why do we even need a sequel again? Sequels are way too common in the industry these days.

 

No one expects an addition to the spy genre to die after the first installation thanks to Bond, Bourne, and perhaps even George Smiley, despite entries in espionage literature (Cold War and otherwise) that establish the contrary.

 

Michael Thorton being a one and done spy is sort of a let down as far as the espionage genre in general goes and I find the "sequels are overrated!" line of logic used in defense of AP to be an exercise in "those grapes were sour anyway" apologism.

 

No one would be saying "the AP story can stand on its own!" and reject a sequel if AP had survived to see a second title.

 

As for the topic itself, I am sad that there won't be a sequel as I am always happy to see RPG and RPG-lite titles taking place in the real world as opposed to far flung galaxies far away or some fantasy realm with dragons and damsels.

Edited July 22, 2010 by Kid SixXx

[GhostofAnakin]

Yes, because the story ended on a cliffhanger. Alpha Protocol, on the other hand was wrapped up rather nicely.

 

Not if you sided with Leland at the end.

[Wrath of Dagon]

IMO they stretched the idea as far as it would go, nothing would really be gained by a sequel, unless they made a completely different game.

[qaz123]

No one expects an addition to the spy genre to die after the first installation thanks to Bond, Bourne, and perhaps even George Smiley, despite entries in espionage literature (Cold War and otherwise) that establish the contrary.

 

It wouldn't have to be a direct sequel. Bring back Thorton and Mina(maybe?) with all new chraracters/plot/storylines etc. That's how most Bond movies are handled right?

 

It sucks that AP is one and done, but at least we got a game that wraps up nicely on it's first entry. Don't understand the hate towards this game. I almost didn't buy AP because of the reviews, but I'm glad I didn't listen because I've enjoyed AP just as much as ME2 and Red Dead this year. It has flaws, but it is not near the horrible game some make it out to be.

 

It'll be interesting to see if FO:NV gets knocked for outdated graphics or poor AI.

[Guest]

You'd almost have to do a character import (ala ME/ME2) due to all the variables. Trying to catch up via dialog, like TSL, just wouldn't be practical.

[Kid SixXx]

It wouldn't have to be a direct sequel. Bring back Thorton and Mina(maybe?) with all new chraracters/plot/storylines etc. That's how most Bond movies are handled right?

 

Precisely. Different Threat / Same Spy.

[Purkake]

Thornton is barely a character, he is mostly just an extension of the player.

[Orchomene]

It may be sad that AP wasn't very successful at selling, but I'm not very fond of sequels in general.

I'd rather see another genre being orinaly developed with specific gameplay than a rehash of a game with a new story. Even a spy game in 19th century would bring a very interesting setting and show the differences in the spying methods.

[FlintlockJazz]

This is a shame. I'd have liked some answers to some of the things in AP answered in AP2, or even with dlc. Oh well, usual case of unique game dying thanks to incompetent reviewers.

 

EDIT: Difference in tastes I can understand, but the reviewers didn't seem to take that into account is what I mean.

Edited July 24, 2010 by FlintlockJazz

[Overlord Bob]

A sequel would have be nice, but I agree that AP is fairly self-containing. What I do hope to see is a new IP somewhere in the future that takes the good aspects (mainly the dialogue system and C&C) and does something different and original with it.

 

And on the topic of F:NV, I imagine it will get goods reviews since it's part of an established franchise, and it doesn't seem to do all too much different from Fallout 3. Here's to hoping that Obsidian improved the dialogue and characters, though.

[C2B]

Well, a sequel could still work in the universe.

 

Make it a prequel and star Marburg and explore why exactly he has so given up on his land.

 

He's a complete narcisst though, so handeling the rp part would prove rather difficult.

Edited July 24, 2010 by C2B

[Klimy]

Neh, game was ok. Dont think its demografics that is the problem (change in the video-game industry thingy).

 

It had bugs, lets face it, due to this and some mystical force game recieved horrible reviews (I really dont know why) plus it was delayed many times (many people I know were planing to buy it but after delays they forgot that it existed) and lastly it had very wrong timing, becuase it came right after plenty of triple A titles.

 

It just as if it was cursed by someoone :/

 

Do you know if they will at least release a patch?

[GhostofAnakin]

I really don't get the whole "it had a lot of bugs" thing. Did I just luck out or something? I can't even think of one bug I encountered through 2 and a half play throughs.

 

Are people including bad enemy AI as a bug? Sub-par graphics? Some graphical issues? Because unless those are what constitute "bugs", then I'm at a loss as to this supposed plethora of bugs that it had.

[Oner]

Game crashes at start up (seems to be rare), Assassinatite Jezebel Alhambra mission has a gamebreaker where you can't ID a mandatory guy, actors not spawning when you load a checkpoint (common), to name a few.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I really don't get the whole "it had a lot of bugs" thing. Did I just luck out or something?

 

You did. I did too (mostly experienced just minor things), but it doesn't really change that the game indeed does have a lot of bugs.

 

P.S. : Technically, while the AI isn't top-notch, it's also bugged to hell (enemies standing without doing anything, shooting through cover, just to say a few), which yes, technically count as the game being buggy, not as AI being not that good.

[Volourn]

"P.S. : Technically, while the AI isn't top-notch, it's also bugged to hell (enemies standing without doing anything, shooting through cover, just to say a few), which yes, technically count as the game being buggy, not as AI being not that good."

 

How do you know? Maybe them standing there is intentional.

 

P.S. Out of all my AP complaints, being 'too buggy' isn't one of them.

[WorstUsernameEver]

"P.S. : Technically, while the AI isn't top-notch, it's also bugged to hell (enemies standing without doing anything, shooting through cover, just to say a few), which yes, technically count as the game being buggy, not as AI being not that good."

 

How do you know? Maybe them standing there is intentional.

 

Nah Volourn. Not even the most moronic developer on earth would intentionally write an AI routine that makes an enemy stand right in front of you without doing ANYTHING at all.

Granted, it happened once or twice in two playthroughs, but it was quite clearly a bug.

[Sannom]

The funniest thing the AI did in my playthrough was suddenly turning around and shooting in the direction opposed to mine because he heard a grenade (I'm really bad at aiming those things) go off behind him

[Guest]

Who the hell is Jezebel Alhambra?

 

Re: "actor not spawning" - IIRC that happens in two areas and is clearly a (bad) design choice.

 

Re: AI - I'm starting to think that perhaps I'm the only one that reads dossiers. Yes, some of the goons act like goons. According to the dossiers, it's because they are goons. The highly trained former/current para-military types tend to have better AI (some parts of Graybox are clearly an exception here).

 

Therefore, I must be with GhostofAnakin in that the version I bought must be one of the remarkably few copies that shipped without the plethora of horrible, gamebreaking bugs. Yeah, there are one or two, but I'm almost certain that every game I've ever played has contained a few.

[Oner]

Who the hell is Jezebel Alhambra?

Jibril Al-Bara.

[Estelindis]

Incidentally, I did not encounter any bugs, though I did find a few aspects of game annoying (controls, camera, etc).

 

But the plot, pacing, and characters were more than enough to make up for those frustrations. I'm sorry we won't be getting a second installment of AP.

[Libertarian]

"P.S. : Technically, while the AI isn't top-notch, it's also bugged to hell (enemies standing without doing anything, shooting through cover, just to say a few), which yes, technically count as the game being buggy, not as AI being not that good."

 

How do you know? Maybe them standing there is intentional.

 

Nah Volourn. Not even the most moronic developer on earth would intentionally write an AI routine that makes an enemy stand right in front of you without doing ANYTHING at all.

Granted, it happened once or twice in two playthroughs, but it was quite clearly a bug.

 

Two words: Spark Unlimited.

 

Not even the most uneducated, wannabe, indie developer could program A.I. as piss poor as Spark Unlimited without knowing it.

[Darth InSidious]

Therefore, I must be with GhostofAnakin in that the version I bought must be one of the remarkably few copies that shipped without the plethora of horrible, gamebreaking bugs. Yeah, there are one or two, but I'm almost certain that every game I've ever played has contained a few.

Likewise. My copy has run fine since I installed it in June. It's performance doesn't seem to be any worse than ME1, and I've actually had fewer bugs in AP than I have in ME2.

[Guest]

Likewise. My copy has run fine since I installed it in June. It's performance doesn't seem to be any worse than ME1, and I've actually had fewer bugs in AP than I have in ME2.

Yep.

 

ME2 is an improvement over ME1 in many ways, yet somehow it's a lot more buggy too. Not sure how one could turn a blind eye to ME2's bugs but lambast AP.