Do you want Alpha Protocol 2?

[GhostofAnakin]

if they do make a sequal at least put in multi player

 

This kind of goes against everything that was good about Alpha Protocol. I'm not sure how multiplayer would work with a story where the player's decision has a massive impact on how the story plays out.

[Troller]

You kidding me right? this game kicks ass, but from all the bad thing people say about it, I find it hard that it will get a sequel

[FlintlockJazz]

I would love a sequel. We'll never get one but I would love it if we could get one...

[Merin]

Absolutely.

[melkathi]

My current plan is: get filthy rich. Buy the rights to Alpha Protocol from Sega. Get Obsidian to make Alpha Protocol 2 on a stupidly large budget.

The getting filthy rich part I am having some serious trouble with though...

[Chr1s]

Sure do, i would pre order it as soon as i could but that's just wishful thinking atm.

[Zap Rowsdower]

While an Alpha Protocol 2 is pretty unlikely I would totally love it if Obsidian made a spiritual successor to AP, mainly one that uses the dialogue system and the focus on player choice.

Edited October 3, 2012 by Zap Rowsdower

[Nanoloque]

As Zap Rowsdower said, a spiritual successor would be great. The subtle link between the gameplay and the effects on the story was brilliant, you almost forget the game system and the mechanics. This discretion, this attachment to the role play, video games developers should take care of and improve this.

 

But there is no need of Alpha Protocol 2, I think. Too many endings, that are a perfect conclusion. And sometimes, you just have to imagine : the mysterious and secret atmosphere of the game is important.

 

I rather prefer a new edition of Alpha Protocol with gameplay mechanics improved and menu glitches fixed. ^^

[TheLurkingWriter]

I've got the game on Xbox 360 and recently got it in a Steam sale (because I like to have multi-platform games on PC) but haven't finished it yet. Even so, I'd love another game either set in the AP universe, a "remake", or a spiritual successor - Obsidian are obscenely talented when it comes to writing engaging storylines for games which explains why I own every single one released so far, and why I'm backing Project Eternity.

[TheMaskedFerret]

I would like some follow up. I really enjoyed Alpha Protocol.

[RosesandAshes]

I just beat the game for the first time last night. I'd love another Alpha Protocol!

[GT409]

Maybe Obisidan could make a spiritual successor to AP using the new name of the orgainisaton as the title. It would never be stated as a direct sequel, but hinted at by most characters.

 

Or maybe there could be a Cold War themed spiritual succesor, with a Soviet agent as the protagionist.

[melkathi]

If we can't have an alpha protocol 2, can we at least get a movie trilogy or even better a proper series preset (HBO or something) ?

[dropko]

I would love AP2 as much as Homeworld 3.

They're just as likely to come out

[Keyrock]

Wait, there are people that voted "no"?

[marelooke]

Wait, there are people that voted "no"?

 

I would probably vote "no" if I were to vote, but I won't as it's no for me to decide what people should like (or what Obsidian should make), though "Would you buy AP2?" would be a definite "no". The AP concept was nice, the story and characters no doubt were (it is Obsidian after all). But the gameplay was seriously broken as far as I'm concerned.

 

I've tried getting into AP numerous times but I just couldn't get past the gameplay issues (and some, imho of course, bad design decisions). In fact, I've never given up on a game this early in (that I can remember anyway) and certainly not one that I KNEW had a good story. But between the clunky controls, the savepoint system, the terrible minigames (I hate them in general and the AP ones were especially bad, though I can't right now recall why. Color based maybe?) and the timed dialogues (this pretty much was a total dealbreaker, unfortunately I didn't know before purchase) it was really hard to find a reason to keep playing.

 

Maybe I ought to give the game another try but judging by the general reception I doubt much has been fixed since the original release so I dunno.

[Raithe]

and the timed dialogues (this pretty much was a total dealbreaker, unfortunately I didn't know before purchase) it was really hard to find a reason to keep playing.

 

Maybe I ought to give the game another try but judging by the general reception I doubt much has been fixed since the original release so I dunno.

 

The timed dialogue was a major point. It was setup to instil that tension and remind the player that in those situations, you don't get half an hour to consider your options. I thought it added nicely to the whole ambience of the game.

 

Besides, it never actually takes that long to make a decision on conversation choice. Especially if you've got a feel for the characters you're talking to and what sort of Michael you were playing. The timing never gave me grief.

[melkathi]

΅ηaτ Ρaιτηε σaιδ

 

oops,

sorry, keyboard set to wrong language...

"What Raithe said"

[marelooke]

and the timed dialogues (this pretty much was a total dealbreaker, unfortunately I didn't know before purchase) it was really hard to find a reason to keep playing.

 

Maybe I ought to give the game another try but judging by the general reception I doubt much has been fixed since the original release so I dunno.

 

The timed dialogue was a major point. It was setup to instil that tension and remind the player that in those situations, you don't get half an hour to consider your options. I thought it added nicely to the whole ambience of the game.

 

Besides, it never actually takes that long to make a decision on conversation choice.

 

For me it does, I often spend minutes to tens of minutes pondering a dialogue reply. I'm also one of those weird people that will "rehearse" a conversation I'm about to have with strangers in my head irl as well and will prefer discussing things in text over "by voice" because text allows me to research my answers better and make my point clearer.

 

Especially if you've got a feel for the characters you're talking to and what sort of Michael you were playing. The timing never gave me grief.

 

You don't when you just start out. If they wouldn't have used a savepoint system I'd just have (ab)used the save system to get around this limitation, alas, I can't so I canned the game. For me it just adds too much stress to the dialogues, I already have enough of that dealing with people irl, I don't need it also in a game.

 

I guess I just have an odd personality but for me timed dialogues just don't work, at all. But to each their own.

Edited November 30, 2012 by marelooke

[Hassat Hunter]

That's kind of the point though... :/

Spy, not really getting the time.

[marelooke]

That's kind of the point though... :/

Spy, not really getting the time.

 

I can fully accept that you enjoy this aspect of the game but bringing up "it's a spy game" as a reason for the timed dialogues makes no sense at all to me. Or is it somehow acceptable for NPCs to stare at you blankly for minutes while you ponder a response (or go to the restroom, or whatever) in, say Mass Effect, but not in AP because it is a spy game?

 

If you think all dialogues in all games should be timed then that would make sense and arguably be more realistic. I would, of course, still disagree because I don't need that kind of realism to invade something I do to enjoy myself. Which brings us back to my original point: I find the timed dialogues stressful and as such unenjoyable.

Edited November 30, 2012 by marelooke

[Hassat Hunter]

Not saying that... just saying it really fits the theme of AP.

ME doesn't really have the same, conversations there are generally more shallow too.

[DeathQuaker]

Now, first and foremost, one person's fun is not another. Such is the way of things. So bummer, marelooke, that you didn't enjoy it. I can certainly see how if you didn't enjoy it/get used to it, it would make enjoying the story much much more difficult, if not impossible.

 

For my own two cents, just speaking of my experience, I thought I would hate the timed dialogues, and I ended up loving them. I normally in dialogue heavy RPs do sit and agonize over my choices, trying to pick the "Best answer" whether from a mechanical perspective (what will earn me the most influence/get me the most XP, etc.) or a roleplaying perspective. I like usually to read and read and think about my options. At first the timed dialogues seemed like a horror--how could I know what to say, what if it was wrong, what if I wasn't roleplaying.

 

Then I realized -- there really was no wrong answer. Yes, certain answers might gain or lose influence with someone, or otherwise take a new path down the plot I didn't want/expect. But then I realized that losing influence had its own advantages as gaining it and simply opened different avenues; the avenues themselves were different ways of playing, but they didn't make me bigger/better/faster/stronger, they didn't make me lose out on something --- or if I seemed to lose out on something immediately, I still gained in the long run. (Often pissing off one person pleased another and vice versa, and so on.) Or at the very least, the story that resulted that was very interesting.

 

Also, once I realized Mike was going to be more or less a jerk no matter what you said (or to quote Yahtzee Croshaw, the "ponciest ponce who ever ponced past a poncing parlor"), I didn't worry too much about making the wrong roleplaying choice. Mike has a distinct personality of his own, it's just about what sides you bring out in him.

 

I also find that the moments you did need to stop and think a minute, they did give you a little more time. And I did find that once I got used to the system, I got better and better at making snap decisions and getting the result I desired most anyway.

 

That the game also tends to default your answer based on past choices -- i.e., if your last answer was professional, the selected option to the next question will default to professional -- makes it easier. You can be guaranteed consistency at least (which has its own perks) -- if you're not sure what to pick, going with the "personality" you've been picking for the most part is always a fine defaul.

 

Now there are rare moments you could feel like you screwed up -- usually in a few yes/no or arrest/kill scenarios where you accidentally pick one rather than the other. I noticed most of those they give you a little more time to decide, however. There was only one time when the choice was "go/stay" where it was really nebulous as to which answer matched the thing I wanted to say because of the way the dialogue was worded and I picked the "wrong" thing--but I just went with it and I still accomplished everything I wanted to.

 

Even with the system's occasional flaws, I still ultimately felt freed by the situation rather than constrained, which is what I thought I would. It shifted me to a different way of thinking that does indeed mesh with the fast paced feel of the game that helps immeasurably with immersion. So I am very glad that I personally gave it a chance, and I'd like to see a similar system show up again in games with a similar feel. If anything, I'd want any obvious mechanics further removed from the player's view -- don't tell me if I gain/lose influence, just note it in the software silently and let me keep playing. Anything that keeps me from feeling there's a right or wrong answer improves my feeling like I can truly play as I want. Maybe show me when I've earned a perk for a certain kind of behavior, but that's it.

 

I wonder if there'd be a way to make timed dialogues optional, but I don't know if that would really truly help to please both sides.

[melkathi]

I think the acceptance of Mike being Mike, with his own personality, is the major factor that liberates you during dialogues. In Mass Effect, Dragon Age or other games, Shepard, or whatever the character is called, appears to be given personality by you (even though this is impossible, as the dialogue has to be pre-written and de facto includes personality - that is another discussion, I guess, about why some games are doomed to anger players ) while Mike's character stays the same, it is only the way he judges a situation and decides to handle it that changes. Something the dialogue tutorial with Westridge tries to explain even.

From there on, the "right" approaches are pretty much intuitive and, since there are only labels for the approach and nothing to actually read, should not take time. You see a man in a dingy bar enjoying a quit drink. What are you going to do? Wave a badge at him? Of course he wont like that. Sit down, order a drink... you have the time to spare for that after all. But it will be Mike who does the actual sitting down.

[Dawn_]

I really want another AP unfortunately I think it'll never happen.