140 réponses à ce sujet

[Ecael]

I was anticipating Alpha Protocol before (because its comparisons to the original Mass Effect very early on), but it's missing a few key components that everyone takes for granted in BioWare games:

• Customization - Facial features consist of "light to dark-skinned" male. That's it. Can't even play a female Thornton (targeting the male market only?)
  
  
  
• Dialogue - Female main character adds thousands more lines of dialogue just for the PC alone. In terms of voices, Alpha Protocol used 21 voice actors, while Mass Effect 1 used 74 voice actors. The resulting amount of dialogue in Alpha Protocol is likely to be less than half as well - don't quote me on this, though.
  
• Squadmates/Companions - If the character threads are any indication, people love having their favorite characters around them at all times. You don't even get this option in Alpha Protocol (since Thornton is a lone agent).

Thus, Alpha Protocol would have been innovative and successful had it been marketed and released before Mass Effect 1, but not after the market has been saturated with action RPGs, MMORPGs, action-adventure games and action shooters with multiplayer.

The real decisions that people want in "role-playing" games are:
1. Male or Female?
2. This squadmate, this romance, or this companion?
3. Which extremely insigificant NPC can I talk to first, and how should I treat him as I learn about his/her history?

Modifié par Ecael, 10 juillet 2010 - 04:09 .

[Grand_Commander13]

Yeah, facial customization and gender choice are non-issues as far as I'm concerned (especially facial customization! I always just take the default Shepard face; it's better than any of the dreck I could make).

All three of your "real" decisions are exceedingly unimportant and uninteresting. The squad mates are the only things that come close, but tend to be chosen exclusively for combat ability.

[Ecael]

Grand_Commander13 wrote...

Yeah, facial customization and gender choice are non-issues as far as I'm concerned (especially facial customization! I always just take the default Shepard face; it's better than any of the dreck I could make).
All three of your "real" decisions are exceedingly unimportant and uninteresting. The squad mates are the only things that come close, but tend to be chosen exclusively for combat ability.

They are unimportant.

However, the people in the character support threads, the people asking for more romances (and more same-sex romances), and the people demanding that a female protagonist be shown on the cover would disagree with you.

...And that's most of the forum, and even many professional critics.

[Leinadi]

But the Bioware forums are still rather special in their wants. There was definitely some hub-bub over Thorton being Male only, but I can't recall reading much (if anything) about people disliking the rogue agent thing for example. Nor have I seen any complaints about lack of same sex romances.

But, it's quite a unique game. I still think the Mass Effect comparisons are way off as the games play very differently and have very different strengths but a lot of people can't see beyond the visual resemblance.

I don't think AP is a perfect game by any stretch, but the lack of depth and and any meaningful analysis beyond "hurr durr this has bugs and looks aged" in reviews (the US ones at least, the EU ones were much better on the whole) really bothered me. The game has some marvellous writing, wonderful replayability for a game that is so story-driven and a fair amount of options both in combat and in convos.

Modifié par Leinadi, 10 juillet 2010 - 06:12 .

[Malsumis]

virumor wrote...

In AP, a person liking or disliking Thorton could make a world of difference to how the game panned out.

Exaggerate much?

[Ecael]

Leinadi wrote...

But the Bioware forums are still rather special in their wants. There was definitely some hub-bub over Thorton being Male only, but I can't recall reading much (if anything) about people disliking the rogue agent thing for example.

Now imagine the hub-bub if BioWare didn't tell everyone that there would be a female Hawke as well.

http://social.biowar...1/index/3061453
http://social.biowar...1/index/3053819
http://social.biowar...1/index/3052363
http://social.biowar...1/index/3057703
http://social.biowar...1/index/3052255

Nor have I seen any complaints about lack of same sex romances.

http://social.biowar...index/2883314/1
http://social.biowar...index/1100184/1
http://social.biowar...index/1233061/1

Also:
http://social.biowar...1/index/3055459

But, it's quite a unique game. I still think the Mass Effect comparisons are way off as the games play very differently and have very different strengths but a lot of people can't see beyond the visual resemblance.

I don't think AP is a perfect game by any stretch, but the lack of depth and and any meaningful analysis beyond "hurr durr this has bugs and looks aged" in reviews (the US ones at least, the EU ones were much better on the whole) really bothered me. The game has some marvellous writing, wonderful replayability for a game that is so story-driven and a fair amount of options both in combat and in convos.

At the same time, Alpha Protocol is already on its death bed after one month of sales and massive job losses for SEGA before that. Even the Sonic Chronicles RPG sold better in the first few weeks.

[Grand_Commander13]

Alpha Protocol never got a chance at a fair shake. It's a good bet that if Bioware had released the exact same game it would be getting praise all over the place. If nothing else nobody would be mentioning the bugs, which are hardly (if at all) worse than Mass Effect 2's.

[Ecael]

Grand_Commander13 wrote...

Alpha Protocol never got a chance at a fair shake. It's a good bet that if Bioware had released the exact same game it would be getting praise all over the place. If nothing else nobody would be mentioning the bugs, which are hardly (if at all) worse than Mass Effect 2's.

Except BioWare DLC gets hammered in the reviews because of its lack of content:

http://www.metacriti...3&button=search
http://www.metacriti...ns&ty=3&x=0&y=0

Dragon Age: Awakening also has mixed reaction as well, partly due to the expansion pack's glitches (which many people on the forum have pointed out already).

At one point you have to realize that favoritism doesn't only occur when you want it to occur.

[LPPrince]

Alpha Protocol was bad, in my opinion.



I only played a bit of it at a friend's place, and I just couldn't continue.



No wonder the creators said they aren't making a sequel.

[Leinadi]

Now imagine the hub-bub if BioWare didn't tell everyone that there would be a female Hawke as well.



http://social.biowar...1/index/3061453

http://social.biowar...1/index/3053819

http://social.biowar...1/index/3052363

http://social.biowar...1/index/3057703

http://social.biowar...1/index/3052255



Nor have I seen any complaints about lack of same sex romances.



http://social.biowar...index/2883314/1

http://social.biowar...index/1100184/1

http://social.biowar...index/1233061/1



Also:

http://social.biowar...1/index/3055459

Yes, but all those examples are pulled from the Bioware fanbase which was my point. It's a fanbase which has rather specific demands regarding some things and doesn't really reflect other communities wants.

At the same time, Alpha Protocol is already on its death bed after one month of sales and massive job losses for SEGA before that. Even the Sonic Chronicles RPG sold better in the first few weeks.

Sure, but I don't feel that financial success have much to do with whether a game is good or not. Some of the best games in my library are games that have underperformed financially and gotten so-so reviews.



And, what Grand_Commander13 said.

[Malsumis]

Grand_Commander13 wrote...

Alpha Protocol never got a chance at a fair shake. It's a good bet that if Bioware had released the exact same game it would be getting praise all over the place.

No it wouldn't. Alpha Protocol got average reviews because it was average.

If nothing else nobody would be mentioning the bugs, which are hardly
(if at all) worse than Mass Effect 2's.

No they are worse.

Modifié par Malsumis, 10 juillet 2010 - 06:53 .

[Ecael]

Leinadi wrote...

And, what Grand_Commander13 said.

It's not just the BioWare fanbase that likes good characterization and customization, however. Any random gamer who starts playing Mass Effect or Dragon Age would be amazed by the character creators - and for Mass Effect, amazed by the fact that BioWare bothered to fully voice your custom character, regardless of the technical issues that may arise.

They would also be amazed at how much you can learn from every squadmate and companion you've talked to as well as how much information you can glean from NPCs and the codexes.

Lack of financial success, as LPPrince said, killed the chances of a sequel for Alpha Protocol, which was originally planned to be a trilogy.

http://www.gamespot....ws/6268271.html

"Let's speak very commercially; the game hasn't sold what we've expected, therefore we won't be doing a sequel," Hayes said. Hayes did not offer a specific sales figure for Alpha Protocol.

Further, Alpha Protocol gathered mixed reviews across the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC versions of the game, averaging between a 63 and 73 on GameSpot sister site Metacritic. Hayes said the game simply did not stack high enough (within the role-playing game genre) to warrant a sequel.

"You know this whole thing with Metacritic where you have to be in the high 70s to mid-80s minimum [to have any success]…well, with RPGs you have got to be in the late 80s."

80's is a so-so game, especially with everyone's conspiracies that big publishers like EA/Activision/SEGA/Ubisoft/Nintendo are paying reviewers.

A game in the 60's or low 70's is not even mediocre.

[Walsh06]

well I would think that the fact the game is set over 10 years may allow for the world to actually change. Nothing stays the same in a place for a year and definitely not 10. So I presume with this 10 years thing we will see the world changing and developing.



(sorry if this was said, I could be bothered reading all posts)

[Leinadi]

It's not just the BioWare fanbase that likes good characterization and customization, however. Any random gamer who starts playing Mass Effect or Dragon Age would be amazed by the character creators - and for Mass Effect, amazed by the fact that BioWare bothered to fully voice your custom character, regardless of the technical issues that may arise.

They would also be amazed at how much you can learn from every squadmate and companion you've talked to as well as how much information you can glean from NPCs and the codexes.

Lack of financial success, as LPPrince said, killed the chances of a sequel for Alpha Protocol, which was originally planned to be a trilogy.

Uh, no. It was most definitely never meant to be a trilogy. They were looking at concepts for a sequel before the game was released but that was definitely not something that was set in stone.

I have no idea what you're arguing even. Are you saying that the game should have had squadmates and same-sex romances? I will fully agree that it would've been better received if it had more facial customization and a female option. But I also realize that the amount of reactivity in the game already is quite huge and if they were to include a female version as well (and not do it half-assed) it would've been an insane effort. Would it have been interesting if they pulled it off? Sure. Would it have compromised the reactivity that is currently in the game? You bet! Would it have made for a more financially successful game? Most likely. Would've it have made for a *better* game. Not necessarily.

I'm not arguing that the game was a financial let-down at all or that it received lass than stellar reviews. But again, I've been gaming since the 80s and am fully aware that review scores are flimsy things and very dependant on which way the wind is blowing and not really indicative of a game's quality. AP fails in that it's a rough game despite being fairly high-profile which would make reviewers pick out the things that are easy to pick out. This doesn't make it a bad game at all. In fact, many people who *do* value the things the game does good raves about it (and mark my words, in a few years you'll start getting retrospective articles on the game similar to what we're seeing with Bloodlines today). There are many things which I don't like about AP, but there is a distinct lack of recognition of the things that the game *does* better than any other games. Just as there is nice lack of recognition in reviews of how incredibly buggy a game like Fallout 3 was for example. Or the complete lack of sense in much of the plot for ME2.

The list can go on, but the point is that reviews will be a mirror of much of a games sales, but not necessarily its qualities.

Modifié par Leinadi, 10 juillet 2010 - 07:22 .

[In Exile]

DrunkDeadman wrote...

You know what guys? I WANT wrong choices. I want a game to really let me think about making the right decision.

Example: You left your love interest or BFF at the camp and are on your way to a town in need of defense from the darkspawn. Then one of the town people runs up to you screaming his lungs out about the darkspawn attacking the town and telling you that a fraction of them split away from the main group and are heading towards your camp.
Now you got a choice. Save the town and it's population and get some exclusive weapons/armor/etc along BUT your LI/BFF will die at the camp. Or, choose to leave the town to the darkspawn so you can save your LI/BFF but the town will be decimated, population slaughtered, and you'll get no exclusive weapons/armors/etc, plus people might consider you to be a coward or selfish.

Options like that are EXACTLY what we need. For every action, there should be an appropriate reaction.

This becomes contrived very fast. Alpha Protocol always had an end mission one of two choices, and it always had to be one of two. It stops being a hard choice and starts being a pain if you repeat the same thing over and over again for every single situation.

Sometimes, you need more than two options. Sometimes, you should be able to win, and get the best case scenario. Sometimes you should lose no matter what you do. Like in real life, if you want meaningful choice.

[Catsith]

Grand_Commander13 wrote...Alpha Protocol never got a chance at a fair shake. It's a good bet that if Bioware had released the exact same game it would be getting praise all over the place.  

Uh, yeah, it did. It was Obsidian's first original IP. It went through multiple iterations throughout the three or so years they had to develop it, but they were given the chance. They delayed it so that it would be released when no other RPGs were in sight, and they had, in the first time in the company's history, been given the time to squash all bugs. So yes, they were given a fair chance. The game bombed for a number of reasons, and if BioWare had released the exact same game, it would have had the same reception. Probably even worse, because of higher expectations. I'm sure it would have sold more because of the BioWare brand, but it still would have failed.

I enjoyed AP, and I'm glad to see BioWare take inspiration from its flashback storyline, and hopefully its brilliant C&C and reputation system.

[soteria]

Completely agreed with the thread title but I'd actually expand it a bit more. Unless their promises are fullfilled exactly like they said, in a really meaningful way, I'll just forget this sequel as it would be a sacrifice of some of my favorite features of the original game (origins, different races and all that) for nothing.

What promises, exactly, did Bioware make that you expect to be fulfilled in a meaningful way?

[Ecael]

Leinadi wrote...

It's not just the BioWare fanbase that likes good characterization and customization, however. Any random gamer who starts playing Mass Effect or Dragon Age would be amazed by the character creators - and for Mass Effect, amazed by the fact that BioWare bothered to fully voice your custom character, regardless of the technical issues that may arise.

They would also be amazed at how much you can learn from every squadmate and companion you've talked to as well as how much information you can glean from NPCs and the codexes.

Lack of financial success, as LPPrince said, killed the chances of a sequel for Alpha Protocol, which was originally planned to be a trilogy.

Uh, no. It was most definitely never meant to be a trilogy. They were looking at concepts for a sequel before the game was released but that was definitely not something that was set in stone.

I have no idea what you're arguing even. Are you saying that the game should have had squadmates and same-sex romances? I will fully agree that it would've been better received if it had more facial customization and a female option. But I also realize that the amount of reactivity in the game already is quite huge and if they were to include a female version as well (and not do it half-assed) it would've been an insane effort. Would it have been interesting if they pulled it off? Sure. Would it have compromised the reactivity that is currently in the game? You bet! Would it have made for a more financially successful game? Most likely. Would've it have made for a *better* game. Not necessarily.

I'm not arguing that the game was a financial let-down at all or that it received lass than stellar reviews. But again, I've been gaming since the 80s and am fully aware that review scores are flimsy things and very dependant on which way the wind is blowing and not really indicative of a game's quality. AP fails in that it's a rough game despite being fairly high-profile which would make reviewers pick out the things that are easy to pick out. This doesn't make it a bad game at all. In fact, many people who *do* value the things the game does good raves about it (and mark my words, in a few years you'll start getting retrospective articles on the game similar to what we're seeing with Bloodlines today). There are many things which I don't like about AP, but there is a distinct lack of recognition of the things that the game *does* better than any other games. Just as there is nice lack of recognition in reviews of how incredibly buggy a game like Fallout 3 was for example. Or the complete lack of sense in much of the plot for ME2.

The list can go on, but the point is that reviews will be a mirror of much of a games sales, but not necessarily its qualities.

That's exactly what I mean, though - it's an insane effort to even include a fully voiced "optional" female character in the first place. You're looking at thousands of recorded lines that a person who plays only male characters will never see, yet BioWare makes it look like second nature to include it.

A game like Alpha Protocol would be better received if it were released during a time where people didn't expect so much (and then some) out of a single video game.

"It looks like Sega are exceptionally happy with the prospects of the first game, and a second Michael Thorton adventure is almost inevitable."
http://www.thesixtha...pha-protocol-2/

Modifié par Ecael, 10 juillet 2010 - 07:31 .

[LPPrince]

Hmm. Guess they ARE making a second.



I was saying they weren't because I remember Mike Hayes(A Sega Employee) saying there wasn't going to be a sequel even though it was a good concept.

[Ecael]

LPPrince wrote...

Hmm. Guess they ARE making a second.

I was saying they weren't because I remember Mike Hayes(A Sega Employee) saying there wasn't going to be a sequel even though it was a good concept.

That link was from January 2010, before Mass Effect 2 and before Alpha Protocol was released.

[LPPrince]

Ecael wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Hmm. Guess they ARE making a second.

I was saying they weren't because I remember Mike Hayes(A Sega Employee) saying there wasn't going to be a sequel even though it was a good concept.

That link was from January 2010, before Mass Effect 2 and before Alpha Protocol was released.

I didn't know that they finally decided to make a second. So thanks for that link, E.

Not that I'll get it. Still, good to know for knowledge's sake.

[Leinadi]

That's exactly what I mean, though - it's an insane effort to even include a fully voiced "optional" female character in the first place. You're looking at thousands of recorded lines that a person who plays only male characters will never see, yet BioWare makes it look like second nature to include it.

A game like Alpha Protocol would be better received if it were released during a time where people didn't expect so much (and then some) out of a single video game.

*sigh* Except that no Bioware game matches the choice + reactivity in AP (even with its male-only character). And even if they did, noone is arguing that Bioware has greater resources at hand (especially being owned by EA) and more clout than OEI.
But again, directly comparing these games is hard because AP is a very different game than ME or any other Bioware game for that matter.

And you know what's funny? I think people have high standards for their games in areas that matter very little, while they have incredibly low standards for things that actually do matter. For example, none of the recent Bioware games except Dragon Age has come close to my personal standards, while AP (mostly) did.

"It looks like Sega are exceptionally happy with the prospects of the first game, and a second Michael Thorton adventure is almost inevitable."

Yees... That's what I said in my post? Coming up with concepts doesn't mean that it's a trilogy or that a sequel is in production.

Modifié par Leinadi, 10 juillet 2010 - 07:42 .

[Drasill]

BioWare + Obsidian + CD Projekt RED



Imagine the possibilities...

[Leinadi]

Drasill wrote...

BioWare + Obsidian + CD Projekt RED

Imagine the possibilities...

Nah, better to keep them separate and receive different types of games. And besides, too many cooks...

[Leafs43]

Alpha protocol sacrificed game play for all that intermingling dialog crap.





I'd much rather have Bioware make a great game with a lot of dialog options then a terrible game with a million dialog options.