|
That's pretty much what I did. I was only able to carry 2 emps for pretty much the entire ( I wasn't aware of the perk that give you the ability to carry more). I had no trouble with the hacking mini-games but I used the emps exclusively with the lock pick and bypass minigame. It honestly doesn't cost me that much money since I never upgrade my weapons I used the money only on intel and one stealth suit.
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:56 |
|
|
LordZoric posted:So, I'm just now starting to see that playing this game on Hard was a very, very bad idea. These hacking minigames... This cannot be said enough. Do not ever play on hard unless you really really want the trophy/achievement. And if you do play on hard, be a soldier type who doesn't worry about setting off alarms and loving up minigames, because you will be doing it all the goddamn time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
LordZoric posted:So, I'm just now starting to see that playing this game on Hard was a very, very bad idea. These hacking minigames... I don't think I played the hacking minigame once after Saudi Arabia, and pretty soon stopped playing any of them. EMP supremacy!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:This cannot be said enough. Do not ever play on hard unless you really really want the trophy/achievement. And if you do play on hard, be a soldier type who doesn't worry about setting off alarms and loving up minigames, because you will be doing it all the goddamn time. I'm very glad then that I've gone full stealth/tech.  Okay then, all my subsequent runs will be on easy. I almost always pick Hard in games, and I expect a nice challenge, not "Here have 12 seconds to pick this super complicated lock! Oops! Gotta reload your checkpoint now and go through a lengthy segment all over again!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
LordZoric posted:I'm very glad then that I've gone full stealth/tech. There's no need to go on easy. Normal is a good balance between the two. If you want an easier or harder play experience, the best way to do that is just to play a Recruit (harder) or Veteran (easier) character, plus that unlocks new content in the game itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
I want to thank you all for motivating me to buy this game because I absolutely fuckin love it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:08
|
|
|
T posted:I want to thank you all for motivating me to buy this game because I absolutely fuckin love it. I echo these sentiments. I bought into the ludicrous negative reaction the gaming press had for it when it first came out, but seeing all the praise here convinced me to check it out. And I've since learned that gaming journalism is mainly just saying nice things about people who pay you the most to say nice things about them. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
LordZoric posted:I echo these sentiments. I bought into the ludicrous negative reaction the gaming press had for it when it first came out, but seeing all the praise here convinced me to check it out. And I've since learned that gaming journalism is mainly just saying nice things about people who pay you the most to say nice things about them. I hate to be all  here, but AP's press reception was a horrifying example of how review scores are so based on how much money a publisher gives the reviewer, I think.Alpha Protocol isn't without it's flaws and downsides, but it really beats the poo poo out of Mass Effect's illusion of choice. The worst thing about AP is that it obviously isn't as finished or as polished as it should be. Here is to hoping Obsidian will make a second one at some point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:I hate to be all Compare/contrast with the near orgasmic reception Dragon Age 2 received. I had to interview an (admittedly disgruntled) ex game journalist in college and he confirmed that pressure by publishers to review a game favorably is A Very Big Thing. But even though I am loving this game, it's not an easy game to recommend to everyone. I've only told my die-hard Obsidian fans, or people who appreciate a good RP experience about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:30
|
|
|
Mr Dog posted:One last question about the ending. Bear with because I'm a little bit dense, but I don't really understand how Mina betrayed you, exactly. She and every other AP handler knew exactly where you were in Saudi while intercepting Shaheed, so she can't tell the agency anything it doesn't know already, and who else would she tell? She exfiltrates you from Saudi and then is instrumental in foiling AP and Halbech at every turn, so if she was actually helping AP hunt you down then she wasn't doing a particularly good job. Then when you give yourself up to AP at the end of the game it's your call to do so. So uh, what, instead of hiding out she goes back to AP and tells them you're actually executing some cunning plan? gee... ya think, Mina? Seriously, how exactly did she screw me over here. I don't remember the specifics of the conversation, I think she says something about the Saudi operation and just says "I sold you out, I'm sorry" and I'm just like "uhh.... wtf are you talking about" MrL_JaKiri posted:Endgame spoilers that you should probably find out for yourself on another playthough Hank Morgan posted:My interpretation was Mina put out a burn notice on you so you would have to go on rogue and look for revenge but it was Halbech and Alpha Protocol who launched the missile strike because they just wanted you dead. It's why you were on the mission rather than Darcy. You were expendable and he wasn't due to his family connections. My take on the whole Mina thing: If you end up fighting Yancy at the end, he kind of goes on about you having been expendable in Saudi, and that the whole thing was basically a suicide mission. This makes me think that Yancy was the one who fired missiles at you, although I'm not sure he says that outright. Now, after you get all blowed up, Mina calls you and when you tell her you're coming in, she says you can't, because you're considered rogue. Let's examine that statement. Why are you rogue? Because you survived a suicide mission? Surely that's a feather in your cap, if anything. Because you knew about the Halbech stuff? Halbech was ready to offer you a job at the end when it was abundantly clear that you knew way more about Halbech than you did back in Saudi. And they were the ones in charge behind the scenes back at Alpha Protocol! The only reason to assume that you're actually rogue when you're talking to Mina and she says you're rogue is because later on you go back to Alpha Protocol and everyone there says you're rogue. They don't give an exact timeline of your rogueship(?), though. Personally I think Mina accomplished making you rogue with the simple act of lying to you about you being rogue, and then you went rogue and made her statement come true by believing it was true, which is kind of funny when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
Tunahead posted:My take on the whole Mina thing: You get a scene before the final mission where Mina confesses that she burnt you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
LordZoric posted:I echo these sentiments. I bought into the ludicrous negative reaction the gaming press had for it when it first came out, but seeing all the praise here convinced me to check it out. It was pretty much the same with me, except less "Praise convinced me to buy it" and more "People saying playing on the hardest difficulty is the shittiest idea". Either way I love this game now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:Here is to hoping Obsidian will make a second one at some point. The thing that bugs me the most about AP is the fact that Sega owns the rights to AP, not Obsidian. So if we ever do get an AP 2, it's pretty much certain that it will be a spiritual successor, not a direct sequel, since Sega thinks this property is a steaming pile of poo poo. Not that it's likely we'll ever see a spiritual sequel either, but hey, who knows what will happen if we keep spreading the good word.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 18:23
|
|
|
Yeah that really sucks. Companies will sit on the rights because they think it's a waste of time to do a product with it, but they won't release or sell the rights because they're deathly afraid someone else will come along and make a pile of cash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
I just want the files released to the world and every "your choice matters!!" rpg game has to implement similar systems or they're all fired.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:Yeah that really sucks. Companies will sit on the rights because they think it's a waste of time to do a product with it, but they won't release or sell the rights because they're deathly afraid someone else will come along and make a pile of cash. The thing is, I don't really need a direct sequel to Alpha Protocol. A spiritual successor with a whole new story and all new characters (since I killed them all the first time) and a new protagonist would be just fine by me. The fact that AP is about spy poo poo is cool, but it's the way it handles choices and story that I want other games to adopt. That has nothing to do with AP specifically.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 20:35
|
|
|
Mistikman posted:The thing is, I don't really need a direct sequel to Alpha Protocol. A spiritual successor with a whole new story and all new characters (since I killed them all the first time) and a new protagonist would be just fine by me. All this, with the addition that the game still needs Stephen Heck, regardless of setting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 20:38
|
|
|
The other issue with a direct sequel to AP is that there's so much player agency in the story and ending that finding a starting place for a sequel would be next to impossible. It would either a) ignore everything the player did, i.e. pick one possible resolution and roll with it (say, everyone is alive because Thorton was a pacifist, rather than 'psycho Thorton killed literally everyone'); b) be a completely separate game with only very loose ties, i.e. be about Thorton but have an entirely new cast of characters since there's no way to tell how everyone thought about Thorton at the end, or keep track of every minute choice you made and tailor a new game to that; or c) be huge and extremely difficult to make, since the story would have to work and be functional, and all the conversations written 100 different times, to account for every possible option in the first game as well as accounting for any new options in the new game. I think a spiritual successor may be better anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
Mistikman posted:Oh and of course on the topic of Heck: (seriously don't read this unless you have beaten the game a few times with different approaches) I am still amazed that if you really boil down everything you learn out of all your different playthroughs, it turns out that you aren't the best spy in the game. You aren't even in Heck's loving league. You are out there playing tee-ball while heck is smashing out grand slams in the big leagues. It's one of the few facts in the game that is never specifically laid out in front of you, but way earlier in the thread some enterprising goons did some looking at everything, and Heck pretty much knows everything all the time, he works for basically everyone, and manages to get no one to take him particularly seriously because he acts like a goddamned crazy person. I was the guy who put that theory together and while I love it to death, I'm pretty sure it's more "headcanon" than anything. Avellone wouldn't give a yes or no when I asked him about it on Twitter but he said "it's totally like Heck to do that." I guess you could take that as a confirmation but I read it as "we didn't really go that deep on it, but I like the idea." That said, as stupid as the concept of "headcanon" normally is, I think that idea makes the story a lot cooler. So I roll with it. edit: gently caress it. Asking him again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 21:08
|
|
|
Yeah he's drunk and on a Project Eternity livestream right now, see if he'll answer: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/project-eternity-live-stream
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
Mistikman posted:The thing is, I don't really need a direct sequel to Alpha Protocol. A spiritual successor with a whole new story and all new characters (since I killed them all the first time) and a new protagonist would be just fine by me. vyelkin posted:The other issue with a direct sequel to AP is that there's so much player agency in the story and ending that finding a starting place for a sequel would be next to impossible. It would either a) ignore everything the player did, i.e. pick one possible resolution and roll with it (say, everyone is alive because Thorton was a pacifist, rather than 'psycho Thorton killed literally everyone'); b) be a completely separate game with only very loose ties, i.e. be about Thorton but have an entirely new cast of characters since there's no way to tell how everyone thought about Thorton at the end, or keep track of every minute choice you made and tailor a new game to that; or c) be huge and extremely difficult to make, since the story would have to work and be functional, and all the conversations written 100 different times, to account for every possible option in the first game as well as accounting for any new options in the new game. I get what you guys are saying, and to an extent I agree, but then again I really did like AP's setting. It was campy and extreme, yet just grounded enough for me to get really into it. That's a pretty delicate balance to strike, and I would love another game in the same setting, even if the reactivity of AP means that the events of the original game could only be obliquely referred to in the sequel. I would be afraid of any spiritual successor failing to strike the same delicate balance in the setting, but I admit that it probably wouldn't be a big deal if any spiritual sequel did get made. I would fully trust Obsidian to strike that balance again, even if they had to remake the setting from scratch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 04:44
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I was the guy who put that theory together and while I love it to death, I'm pretty sure it's more "headcanon" than anything. Avellone wouldn't give a yes or no when I asked him about it on Twitter but he said "it's totally like Heck to do that." Any answer?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 05:32
|
|
|
I made this for the Steam gifts thread but I think you fine folks here will enjoy it: Yes, I know I screwed up and switched the Aggressive and Professional colors 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 05:36
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:Any answer? I'll post if I get anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 06:56
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:I was the guy who put that theory together and while I love it to death, I'm pretty sure it's more "headcanon" than anything. Avellone wouldn't give a yes or no when I asked him about it on Twitter but he said "it's totally like Heck to do that." All these vague allusions to this Heck theory are pissing me off. I even glanced through every one of your old posts and couldn't find it. What's the loving theory? So mad right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 13:56
|
|
|
It was a long while back. It might have even been in the earlier thread. I'll put it in spoilers because it touches on a lot of plot stuff including things that not everyone would know after beating the game just once. 1) Someone in Taiwan was responsible for getting phony information to both you and Omen Deng to play you against one another while Scarlet takes the shot on Sung. 2) As far as we know, Hong Shi has no reason to have deliberately fed you bogus intel. Someone else probably fed him that info. 3) Since Hong Shi and the Triads seem to have no political affiliation, we can surmise whoever supplied them wants to keep their name off it. In exchange, the Triads get some upstart rivals wiped out. 4) You'd need someone pretty connected to pull that off. The difficulty in arranging something like that would also help explain why Heck gets so angry if you start working in Taiwan before checking in with him. 5) To have an incentive to turn you and Omen Deng against each other, you'd need someone who wants Sung dead, and the only people who want that are with Halbech. In the Graybox, you learn that Leland does, in fact, know who Heck is. This comes despite his knowledge on intelligence operatives coming through Marburg and Alpha Protocol. We already know AP has no record of Heck working for any kind of intelligence firm anywhere, so how could Leland have known about him? It makes sense if Heck is working for Leland. 6) We also know from a news report that an NSB agent has gone missing. Stephen Heck has an unexplained Chinese or Taiwanese hostage and seems to know about how deep the NSB's files on him are. 7) Stephen Heck knew who the assassin was. There aren't really satisfying explanations for that unless you return to the "working for Leland" theory. I think there's a really strong case Heck has been playing this game at a level Mike didn't even realize, manipulating all the players in Taiwan, all while pretending to be a lunatic with no respect for subtlety or tradecraft because it deflects suspicion. And once it becomes clear the Halbech operation is doomed and probably can't continue to pay him anyway, Heck switches sides, helping Mike tie up all the loose ends that would point back to him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 14:22
|
|
|
Possibly unneeded spoilers, but it covers the same ground as the previous post: Couldn't you easily change that theory so Scarlet is behind it all instead of Heck? If you're correct, Heck's helping you during your time in Taiwan doesn't make any sense - the moment you meet him, he should just turn you over to Leland and he certainly shouldn't help you stop an assassination he planned. In fact, once you've got all the information, a lot of stuff in the Taiwan story doesn't make much sense, which makes me think the writer just went for dramatic revelations without considering the implications.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 14:52
|
|
|
BurningStone posted:Possibly unneeded spoilers, but it covers the same ground as the previous post: Couldn't you easily change that theory so Scarlet is behind it all instead of Heck? If you're correct, Heck's helping you during your time in Taiwan doesn't make any sense - the moment you meet him, he should just turn you over to Leland and he certainly shouldn't help you stop an assassination he planned. It's possible, but then Heck would have to stop Deng and his sleeper cell in the CSP himself. It also wouldn't explain why Heck has the hostage, how he knows Scarlet is the assassin or why Leland knows who he is. I don't think it's like a slam dunk answer like "Yes it's definitely Stephen Heck," but that angle answers more questions than most.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 15:10
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:It was a long while back. It might have even been in the earlier thread. For whatever it's worth, I love this theory. I declare it canon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 15:39
|
|
|
pnumoman posted:The thing that bugs me the most about AP is the fact that Sega owns the rights to AP, not Obsidian. So if we ever do get an AP 2, it's pretty much certain that it will be a spiritual successor, not a direct sequel, since Sega thinks this property is a steaming pile of poo poo. Not that it's likely we'll ever see a spiritual sequel either, but hey, who knows what will happen if we keep spreading the good word. I care much less about having a sequel to Alpha Protocol than I do about having another game that takes the same approach to conversations and C&C that AP did. If anything, I'd actually prefer an "AP-style" in a different, more interesting (to me) setting. Give us WW1 espionage, or political upheaval in the asteroid mining colonies, or Dabus Protocol. Going full Alpha Protocol means everything needs to be modeled, animated, choreographed, and voice acted, though, and that is brutal on both planning and budget. It's definitely way out of the range of what would be practical for Kickstarter. Also, Doctor Reynolds posted:I just want the files released to the world and every "your choice matters!!" rpg game has to implement similar systems or they're all fired. this a thousand times over. I am so loving sick of "choices" that are either completely meaningless, cartoonish evil vs. saintly good, or "well, you could do A, B, or C, but the game really obviously wants you to do D and will punish you if you do anything else".
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
ToxicFrog posted:I care much less about having a sequel to Alpha Protocol than I do about having another game that takes the same approach to conversations and C&C that AP did. If anything, I'd actually prefer an "AP-style" in a different, more interesting (to me) setting... Archer Protocol
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 16:25
|
|
|
SymfonyMan posted:Archer Protocol Seriously, when they announced that Obsidian was working on an RPG based on an animated show, I was PRAYING it would be Archer Protocol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
I actually wouldn't mind a spiritual successor in a fantasy setting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 16:55
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Seriously, when they announced that Obsidian was working on an RPG based on an animated show, I was PRAYING it would be Archer Protocol. They (Avellone) even said on the stream last night that they would love one based on Archer
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 17:13
|
|
|
Suave and Aggressive would work, but I think they'd have to change "Professional" to "Burt Reynolds reference".
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
Doctor Reynolds posted:Suave and Aggressive would work, but I think they'd have to change "Professional" to "Burt Reynolds reference". Add drunk pick-up lines for Suave: "You have a certain thickness about you that I find very appealing." Also, replace Aggressive with Rampage! Otherwise, I think we're golden.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:
There's also that the thesis of Heck's crazy book idea , is identical to Parker's legitimate policy paper
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
Something got posted in the Project Eternity thread that you Alpha Protocol guys might be interested in: http://blip.tv/panels-from-pax/pax-east-2010-obsidian-entertainment-but-thou-must-choice-in-games-3510743 It's a 2010 panel with Chris Avellone and three other developers and programmers who worked on the game. They give an hour-long presentation on the making of Alpha Protocol, the consequences of and reasons for choice in games, and also drink a lot of alcohol and get tipsy, because they made a drinking game where everyone drinks whenever the person currently presenting says the word 'choice'. In case you're not convinced, here's a screen grab including one of their slides, which shows how reactive and varied the game's cutscenes are:  (White is choices, which are the conversation prompts, while red are reactivity checks that look back at previous choices you've made or not made through the game and have characters react to those)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:In case you're not convinced, here's a screen grab including one of their slides, which shows how reactive and varied the game's cutscenes are: I love seeing slides of the guts of the game.  I wonder, if you had a printout of the complete choice-graph for Alpha Protocol, how large a surface would you need to print it on for it to be at all legible?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:56 |
|
|
BrandorKP posted:There's also that the thesis of Heck's crazy book idea , is identical to Parker's legitimate policy paper I don't remember this. Tell me about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 23:44
|
|