Obsidian fanboys are so retarded they want Alpha Popamole 2

[1eyedking]

Even GTA San Andreas is more RPG & hardcore than AP.

Damn, I need to replay that game.

 

[Crooked Bee]

I'd rather have Neverwinter Nights 3 for example

+1
Even though I kinda liked AP, it is a mixed bag really, and I'd prefer Obsidian didn't spend their time on ARPGs.

 

[Wulfstand]

I'm all for a sequel to AP. It was a good game.

 

[AlaCarcuss]

Donkey balls is rather castrated mouse balls. I'm all for Alpha Protocol 2! Go back to your pleysteyshun or xbawks and get some headshotz donkey brain.

Drog, are you abusing yourself with an alt? Like you don't have enough haters or somthing and you gotta make more imaginary ones?

 

[Admiral jimbob]

Would it surprise you?

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

hey skyway...have you played AP yet? just curious.

 

[themadhatter114]

There are huge consequences in the game for some of the choices. Just because one of the choices is just "Fight these guys instead of those guys" doesn't constitute proof that the game lacks meaningful consequences and other small changes that show a little attention to detail.

As for the middle:

You can turn Parker against Halbech. You can kill Marburg if you piss him off enough, or you can turn him if you gather info about him.

You can allow both Nasri and Shaheed to live.

Spoiler

Letting them live will allow terrorist activity to continue to escalate in the region. Shaheed will possibly feed you intel throughout the game if he lives, and will even ask you to betray the United States in an end-game conversation if you choose to meet with him.

You can allow Sung to die or you can stop the riots.

Spoiler

In the end, if he lives, tensions with China are further exacerbated. While if you let him die and stop the riots, a less reactionary leader will take over and tensions with China will lessen.

You can allow a bomb to go off in Rome or you can save Madison.

Spoiler

If you save Madison but allow the bombs to go off, Madison will become a crusader against ineffective anti-terror legislation that just creates more tension and lines the pockets of government contractors. If she dies, Senator Darcy will exploit her death to push for new sweeping anti-terror legislation that would put the PATRIOT Act to shame.

Unlike in, for instance, Mass Effect, there are civilians that you're supposed to avoid killing even if they are shooting at you. Killing them will make Mina hate you, and will affect your ability to reconcile with Alpha Protocol (which I've not figured out how to do...there's an achievement for it though, so it has to be possible.

Also, if you decide to kill certain people that probably deserve to die, before talking to them, you could miss out on valuable intel, and will go through the game having inaccurate information about whom to blame for certain things.

Another neat thing you can do if you have a high sabotage skill is that you can bluff Albatross into thinking you removed the bugs when you didn't. A high sabotage skill also changes the cutscene after finding the assassination plans on a flash drive. Typically Mina would be decrypting the flash drive, but Thorton does it himself if you've invested significantly into the sabotage skill.

The ONLY choice where it's "fight these guys or those guys" that I can think of is the Embassy mission. It sort of makes sense in context, but it's absurd to use that one situation to characterize the entire game.

 

[Dny]

Skyway, it has a decent plot, good C&C, not all that bad gameplay, and the conversation system isn't that bad.

Talk about damning with faint praise. Is that really what the Christ was aiming for ? "not so bad" ? the only thing positive I can take from that sentence is the good C&C and I don't care all that much about C&C if the gameplay sucks.

 

[Achilles]

I get the feeling that roll-a-die used these words on purpose. It seems that saying "x thing in x game is good" ticks off a lot of people and they start spamming the thread with lols and retard emoticons. If you use phrases like "it's not that bad", you are less likely to attract the attention of the hate hordes and more likely to have a normal discussion.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Also helps people understand there's a middle ground between "great" and "shit"

 

[Donkey Balls]

In before "it's good for what it is" apologist bullshit.

 

[Azrael the cat]

The most important thing for an Alpha Protocol sequel to succeed is ditching the fucking consolitis.

That is:

- Bigger, open levels, like in Thief
- Some fucking basic jumping and other stuff, so you're not stopped by chest-high walls.

This. It's the same with every third person viewpoint shooter/rpg/whatever. Yes, I understand the theoretical reasoning behing having TP view where you might be using stealth. But frankly I've never felt impoverished using stealth in FP so long as there's a decent lean ability (and it provides the ability to use gadgets or hand-mirrors to give yourself the 'see-around-corners' of 3rdP view without the fakeness of the camera).

There's no REASON why every TPS has to have linear maps, arbitrary boundaries and non-interactive environments (i.e. you can press space to go into cover or jump at specific moments, but you can't just stack a bunch of boxes or jump the random crap that's in your way). But they all do. It just seems like a developer mindset.

 

[anus_pounder]

I want to nail Sis. That is all.

 

[Black]

I want to nail Sis. That is all.

So you're basically like one of the fags that wanted to nail Tali in ME1 and finally got it in ME2?

 

[SuicideBunny]

I'd rather have Neverwinter Nights 3 for example

+1
Even though I kinda liked AP, it is a mixed bag really, and I'd prefer Obsidian didn't spend their time on ARPGs.

while the oc in nwn2 was miles above nwn1, it still was shit.
i'd support nwn3 rather than ap2 only if it had an oc of motb level. and wasn't named nwn. and stopped using that useless piece of shit dnd derivate of a system.

 

[racofer]

i'd support nwn3 if it wasn't named nwn.

hmm...

and stopped using that useless piece of shit dnd derivate of a system.

HHHMMMMM.... sort of a new proprietary ruleset nya


How about you throw some mystical creatures in it, like Phoenixes. It takes place in a original fantasy setting without orcs or gnomes, instead replace them for something else. Also have elves but they're inferior to the other races for some reason. What if it were called Phoenixes: The Origins? No that sucks hmmm... what about Origin of the Phoenixes? Nah.... oh I know!

Phoenixes Age: Origins

 

[SuicideBunny]

Phoenixes Age: Origins

http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=39127

 

[Garm]

BAWWWW!

 

[Jaime Lannister]

I want to nail Sis. That is all.

post/username combo of the year

 

[Vibalist]

I wanna bang SIE. Damnit.

 

[MetalCraze]

There are huge consequences in the game for some of the choices.

Care to post them?
Because everything you posted is

You can allow both Nasri and Shaheed to live.

Letting them live will allow terrorist activity to continue to escalate in the region.

But where are consequences?

Shaheed will possibly feed you intel throughout the game if he lives, and will even ask you to betray the United States in an end-game conversation if you choose to meet with him.

But where are consequences?

If you save Madison but allow the bombs to go off, Madison will become a crusader against ineffective anti-terror legislation that just creates more tension and lines the pockets of government contractors. If she dies, Senator Darcy will exploit her death to push for new sweeping anti-terror legislation that would put the PATRIOT Act to shame.

But where are consequences?

You just prove that the game has nothing but flavour text.


Here is an example of C&C from Fallout 2. You choose to join one of the families in New Reno instead of just remaining an associate - that means that whenever you'll go into areas controlled by other families they will try to kill you and you will never be able to get any jobs from them. However this also opens additional stuff to do with your family.

Now compare this to AP with its "oh you will get 2 lines of flavour text in the end"

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

I wanna bang SIE. Damnit.

Always choose aggressive responses and she'll get wetter and wetter and choose her as your handler for the final dungeon and then when you're tied up she'll come in and rape you.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Here is an example of C&C from Fallout 2. You choose to join one of the families in New Reno instead of just remaining an associate - that means that whenever you'll go into areas controlled by other families they will try to kill you and you will never be able to get any jobs from them. However this also opens additional stuff to do with your family.

So you're fighting red guys instead of green guys, yeah great C&C there buddy Fallout 2 is shit Chris Avellone is a shit in a shitty company.

 

[MetalCraze]

Different quest lines being locked/opened for you is totally like fighting green or red guys in the exactly same corridors in AP

Why people registered past Failout 3 release date are so stupid?

 

[Mangoose]

Here is an example of C&C from Fallout 2. You choose to join one of the families in New Reno instead of just remaining an associate - that means that whenever you'll go into areas controlled by other families they will try to kill you and you will never be able to get any jobs from them. However this also opens additional stuff to do with your family.

So you're fighting red guys instead of green guys, yeah great C&C there buddy Fallout 2 is shit Chris Avellone is a shit in a shitty company.

The point is that you don't have to join a family.

I like AP, but I have to agree with skyway here. C&C is mostly flavor text. AP is very high on the Choice but quite mediocre on the Consequence. It's "good enough" to present the illusion that you are playing a unique story, so it's better than say, a Bioware flavor dialogue, but I was very unsatisfied with AP's dealing with repercussions outside of the personal storyline. I like AP for reasons besides C&C (I like how your character skills and stats do affect your gameplay, letting me try different builds - and yes, this is in spite of the bugs and skill imbalance).

It isn't exactly just a difference of red and green guys though. Usually the consequence is that you get support from allies, or no support, or different kinds of support.

For example, attacking the Embassy, when I sided with G22, they helped me out against the VCI. When I sided with SIE, G22 replaced VCI as the enemy, but nobody replaced G22 as support.

Another example, attacking Brayko's mansion. When I sided with G22, they snuck me past the gate and then gave me fire support. When I sided with SIE, they rammed the gate with a tank and I manned its turret, killing all the guards outside.

Yes, the consequences are not very significant compared to FO 1/2 and the classics, but they are more than just red/green enemies.