Aller au contenu

Photo

Biowares Take on on deeper RPG mechanics. "Forget about stats and loot. More combat.


3223 réponses à ce sujet

#776
Bnol

Bnol
  • Members
  • 239 messages

sbvera13 wrote...

I think Gatt9's right, and the current batch of mega-developers are gonna drop soon.  They are all losing their loyal fanbase- to use BW as an example, the RPG market may not be huge, but it's constant.  By budgeting and marketing to that market they could easily sustain through an industry downturn.  Instead they are busy alienating their established base while trying to gain sales from the fickle "what's hot this week?" crowd.  What BW aand EA are doing is simply history repeating itself.  As the Cylon said, "All this has happened before. All this will happen again."


But Bioware/EA is still going after the RPG market with Star Wars:The Old Republic.  Why would they put additional more traditional RPG games out right now to compete with their own cash cow the MMORPG?  I mean the MMORPG is all about loot and stats, has no real twitch based combat, and they are trying to now introduce quality story into the genre.  Makes perfect sense for them not to compete.

#777
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

Terror_K wrote...

One of the most common overall complaints with ME2 before it even came out came down to what basically amounted to, "I wanted you to make it better, not get rid of it entirely!"

It would also help a lot when someone is disapointed with some feature, they would not express they feelings so extreme ways that it gives totally wrong picture for developers as how serious the issue is. How developers gonna get correct picture, when everyting just sucks or is totally useless and so on..

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 juillet 2011 - 08:32 .


#778
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 784 messages
It's actually all my fault. I did say that I wanted exploration, loot, and kill XP gone. Maybe they picked my handle out of a hat and followed only my suggestions?

#779
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages

Lumikki wrote...

People are afraid that Bioware is in general going direction of wider audience. Could happen or not, isn't really our choise. How ever, it doesn't give anyone rights to bash Biowares game, just because they are not anymore the target audience. I'm not saying that you are doing, but as general comment what some people are doing here. It's understable be afraid and express consern. How ever, basking they games because of it, is just bad behavior, nothing else. This how ever, if off topic here..

How ever, ME serie is design to reach wider audience from start. When they desided to go more hybrid game design and make RPG elements lighter than classic RPG has.


I was never trying to bash ME2, it has certain qualities it has improved on from better dialogue, side quests, character back grounds, etc.  But I found other aspects lacking which I've already stated.

I would prefer it to stick to a medium target audience, but seems not the case.  But I still will overall enjoy the game.  Its a hard game to wait for.

#780
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

Lumikki wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

One of the most common overall complaints with ME2 before it even came out came down to what basically amounted to, "I wanted you to make it better, not get rid of it entirely!"

It would also help a lot when someone is disapointed with some feature, they would not express they feelings so extreme ways that it gives totally wrong picture for developers as how serious the issue is. How developers gonna get correct picture, when everyting just sucks or is totally useless and so on..


But people did. In fact, even before we knew much about ME2 at all beyond the fact that, "it was coming" etc.

There were plenty of great ideas for improving the gameplay and polishing the original game. One of the devs once even posted a topic specifically asking for suggestions for improvements to the inventory system, and there were a lot of good ideas there. But in the end they just decided to scrap it pretty much entirely, for whatever reason. People came up with loads of ideas for improving exploration, sidequests, The Mako, elevators, loot issues, etc. but almost all of them were ignored in favourite of Christina Norman's "simpler = better" approach, and instead of getting fixed the problems were just thrown away.

Every issue I've had with ME2 I've at least stated as some point what the issue was, why I personally didn't like it and then offered alternative ways. I created a whole topic quite a while ago about trying to strengthen the RPG mechanics for ME3 and for bringing back much of what was lost from ME1, but through alternative means and new solutions rather than falling back too much on old tropes.

Ironically, some of these early ideas have since appeared in either ME2 DLC or what we've seen of ME3. The weapon modding and customisation stuff they've shown bears a resemblance to several fan ideas I've seen posted. Overlord's main hub area also resembles much of what many fans were suggesting as a better way of doing exploration and UNC worlds shortly after ME1's release. It's like they're learning, but later than they should have.

Both ME2 and DA2 have parallels in the fact that it seems some fans get concerned during the game's production, but the devs keep going, "it's still a strong RPG, and you're going to love the changes. Trust us, they're better and it's all still rich and deep" only for the game to come out and those fans to be, "we were right in the first place" and then the devs don't actually start admitting to their failed approach and needing to bring back some RPG depth for the third entry (ME3 has done this to a degree as we've seen, and Laidlaw and co. have been apologising profusely on the DA2 side of things and promising to richen the RPG factors for DA3 and learn from DA2's mistakes. That's not enough for me personally considering what they did in the first place, but who knows).

#781
Praetor Knight

Praetor Knight
  • Members
  • 5 772 messages
And this happened, but I'm not sure how great an influence it was on ME2:

“Mass Effect 2 was really a triumph of game development,” says Hudson. “On time, on budget, and exceeding quality goals. And we did this despite some major challenges that couldn’t have been foreseen. The recession that rocked the world economy hit the game industry pretty hard. Like other studios, we had to take a hard look at our costs and find ways to get through it without impacting our ambitious goals for the game. We also were hit hard by H1N1. Just as we were pushing to finish the game, much of the team went down with illness and we lost over a man-year of time over the span of a couple months. It’s a huge credit to the team that we were able to release a very high quality game on time, even though they had to push through some tough times.”


http://www.gamesrada...14473989090/p-3

#782
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages
[quote]Terror_K wrote...

Every issue I've had with ME2 I've at least stated as some point what the issue was, why I personally didn't like it and then offered alternative ways. I created a whole topic quite a while ago about trying to strengthen the RPG mechanics for ME3 and for bringing back much of what was lost from ME1, but through alternative means and new solutions rather than falling back too much on old tropes.

Ironically, some of these early ideas have since appeared in either ME2 DLC or what we've seen of ME3. The weapon modding and customisation stuff they've shown bears a resemblance to several fan ideas I've seen posted. Overlord's main hub area also resembles much of what many fans were suggesting as a better way of doing exploration and UNC worlds shortly after ME1's release. It's like they're learning, but later than they should have.

[quote]

Do you have a link to said thread?  I would like to see your ideas.  Also the hub by Overlord if possible?

Modifié par mumatil, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:00 .


#783
Cainne Chapel

Cainne Chapel
  • Members
  • 2 301 messages
I get what you're saying TK.

I just feel there will never be any game thats all things to everyone. I could probably pick apart every single game I love and have kept for years if i wanted to, and i'd probably do it very well. I just choose not too.

That said, ME1 had flaws, ME2 has flaws and ME3 most certainly will have flaws. No matter what system is put in place SOMEONE is not going to like it. No matter how praised ont he forums, in media, in general or whatever. Someone will have an issue with the game compared to their preconceived notion of it and we're right back to where we are now.

Arguing what makes this better and why this method is best and why didn't the devs do this, or learn from this. Everything is 20/20 when you're looking back at it.

But as far as your post goes I do hope the Devs take some of the better ideas from other Action/RPGs and incorporate them into ME3 (as long as they serve a purpose) and make it the best dang game in the series.

More RPG elements, More shooter elements, more choice in customization/powers, i'm all for everything being improved and made better.

I know it wont be perfect... but then to me, it doesnt have to be for me to enjoy the heck out of it.

#784
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages

mumatil wrote...

Do you have a link to said thread?  I would like to see your ideas.  Also the hub by Overlord if possible?


For the former, here's the link:- social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/5152644

For the latter you'd need to search through the old BioWare forums and scan for topics related to improving exploration, The Mako, UNC worlds, etc. The basic jist of it is that fans suggested fairly quickly that there be more detailed places to land with more unique natural architecture, multiple points of interest, flora and fauna, etc. for some of the planets.

#785
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages

Terror_K wrote...


For the former, here's the link:- social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/5152644

For the latter you'd need to search through the old BioWare forums and scan for topics related to improving exploration, The Mako, UNC worlds, etc. The basic jist of it is that fans suggested fairly quickly that there be more detailed places to land with more unique natural architecture, multiple points of interest, flora and fauna, etc. for some of the planets.

I'll check it out, thx.

#786
Lumikki

Lumikki
  • Members
  • 4 239 messages

Terror_K wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

One of the most common overall complaints with ME2 before it even came out came down to what basically amounted to, "I wanted you to make it better, not get rid of it entirely!"

It would also help a lot when someone is disapointed with some feature, they would not express they feelings so extreme ways that it gives totally wrong picture for developers as how serious the issue is. How developers gonna get correct picture, when everyting just sucks or is totally useless and so on..


But people did. In fact, even before we knew much about ME2 at all beyond the fact that, "it was coming" etc.

Like you do with ME2?

My point is, people tryed to shape ME1->ME2 better. People tryed to shape ME2->ME3 better. Question allways is, to who?


Example your link: http://social.biowar...5/index/5152644

There is a lot of what I would agree, but also some I don't agree. Like you sayed in that thread "YOUR" ideas what makes ME3 better. Actually better sentense would have been your vision of what makes ME3 better as many of those "ideas" was generally talked in discussion forum.

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:54 .


#787
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages

Terror_K wrote...


For the former, here's the link:- social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/105/index/5152644

For the latter you'd need to search through the old BioWare forums and scan for topics related to improving exploration, The Mako, UNC worlds, etc. The basic jist of it is that fans suggested fairly quickly that there be more detailed places to land with more unique natural architecture, multiple points of interest, flora and fauna, etc. for some of the planets.

Read your thread,  I agree with many of these ideas.
I also like the reference to the Fallout slide shows(More along the lines of 1 and 2) if that it what you meant by it.
I agree strongly with more squad mate to squad mate dilogue.  I wish to know how they react more with each other.  Also most with the mission debriefings and opinions.
I however would like a more complex look at the cooldown system.  If your an adept I believe you should if leveled out right in a certain skill tree be able to use 2 powers before "overheating" their use. Much with the tech class aswell.
Overall I would like a more detailed series of skill and power trees.
:)

I would have PMed this to you but the private messenger on here is acting funny.  Sorry for derailing the topic for anyone.

#788
Terror_K

Terror_K
  • Members
  • 4 362 messages
To be honest, some of those concepts I since feel could to with work and/or replacing, and some are things I feel would "be nice" but not necessary. There's a lot I'd change based on what we've seen of ME3 thus far too, as well as just new concepts that have come to me since in general. For instance, I never even considered the concept of tweaking the stats within powers that ME3 is introducing. I rather like that concept, and that in itself would probably mean reevaluating some of the concepts in that thread again.

mumatil wrote...

I however would like a more complex look at the cooldown system.  If your an adept I believe you should if leveled out right in a certain skill tree be able to use 2 powers before "overheating" their use. Much with the tech class aswell.


I personally don't like the global cooldowns of ME2, and it's disappointing to hear they're coming back for ME3 (although from what I've read this could still change, and some abilities powers will have exceptions and differences).

I personally thought that cooldown types should be global, but not overall. It makes no sense to me that using an ammo power would stop you using other abilities for instance (though ammo powers just never made sense to me in the first place outside of Warp Ammo). I think biotic abilities should tie to biotic cooldowns, tech ones to a seperate tech cooldown, etc. Or merely bring back individual cooldowns, but adjust them according to the type of power more. As it stands a combat drone or overload switching off pull or shockwave, etc. makes no sense.

The silly thing is, they apparently did this because the individual cooldowns made some players spam their powers all at once at the start of an encounter in ME1, but ME2's cooldowns are so damn short that now you can just spam the same power repeatedly and succeed as a one-trick pony. Spamming is still an issue, but in a different way now. In ME1 I personally didn't spam my powers, but tended to just use them in the moment where it made the most sense to. In ME2 I do just pretty much spam the same attack repeatedly for the most part, because its effective and I can. In their attempt to fix a gameplay problem I didn't succumb to in ME1 they've made me succumb to the same type of issue in ME2. ME2 is, if nothing else, a game of irony in many cases, IMO: so many times I've read that the devs made choice A to be more B, but I've personally found it resulted in less B.

In either case, cooldowns definitely need work. Neither ME1 or ME2's methods worked that well. I think the issue they need to sort out for ME3 is that they need to treat the powers more individually and look at them each seperately rather than just slapping the same values and mechanics on all of them across the board. What works with Power 1 doesn't necessarily work with Power 2, and both prior games have proven that seperate cooldowns treated the same and global cooldowns treated the same don't work. They've created all powers as equal when they aren't essentially.

Modifié par Terror_K, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:07 .


#789
Confused-Shepard

Confused-Shepard
  • Members
  • 1 414 messages
edit wrong thread

Modifié par Confused-Shepard, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:02 .


#790
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Good lord, why are the human male charecters always a bunch of gorilla's with no personality. Completely humorless, angsty and seemingly frustrated at all times. Can we have a fun, cheerful guy for once? A guy that high fives us with a big smile and goes, "Aye Shepard! How's it going?"

This Vega guy looks boring. Make him like his namesake from Pulp Fiction instead.

Joker?

#791
Confused-Shepard

Confused-Shepard
  • Members
  • 1 414 messages

mumatil wrote...

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Good lord, why are the human male charecters always a bunch of gorilla's with no personality. Completely humorless, angsty and seemingly frustrated at all times. Can we have a fun, cheerful guy for once? A guy that high fives us with a big smile and goes, "Aye Shepard! How's it going?"

This Vega guy looks boring. Make him like his namesake from Pulp Fiction instead.

Joker?


Ok I'll give you Joker. But then he's not a squaddie and doesn't have all that many convo's
Still that doesnt mean that ME 1 Kaidan, Jacob and Vega had/have to be so bland complete with gruff voice

#792
mumatil

mumatil
  • Members
  • 38 messages

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Ok I'll give you Joker. But then he's not a squaddie and doesn't have all that many convo's
Still that doesnt mean that ME 1 Kaidan, Jacob and Vega had/have to be so bland complete with gruff voice

Yes we need a few chipper blokes to keep morale up in the Normandy.

I promote a bumbly Volus Quarter Master!

#793
Candidate 88766

Candidate 88766
  • Members
  • 3 422 messages

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Ok I'll give you Joker. But then he's not a squaddie and doesn't have all that many convo's
Still that doesnt mean that ME 1 Kaidan, Jacob and Vega had/have to be so bland complete with gruff voice

I dunno, I think we need some 'normal' people on the Normandy. They may be boring, but then some people are boring. And ME2 had 11 other squaddies all with great development, so I can forgive Jacob.

#794
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

this isnt my name wrote...

Yes they played it wron, you wont even have to look far into this vid
www.youtube.com/watch


Urgh. I could only stomach watching 1½ minute before stopping that video. If he's gonna showcase a video from the game he reviews, he shouldn't show how much he doesn't understand how the game plays. Didn't he do the tutorial missions at the start or something before plowing headlong into the first theater?

If anything, that video showed me just how much some reviewers like Joe will try and skew things instead of giving honest objective judgements and showcasings.

#795
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...



I played the entire game using stealth (multiple times). You do need combat skills for a couple of the bosses, but that's kind of the point of a "boss." And, you don't for the final boss. I thought it had the potential to be so much more; so much bugginess and twitchy controls for some of the mini-games. It did a lot of things well that ME could learn from, if not totally copy, like replying to emails or timed response in conversations. I would recommend that game to any and everyone, if only to see what it could have been.


Obsidian was outright misleading then. What's the point of hyping up something like "Choice is your weapon" when in actuality it's "Use very specific builds, or you're ****ed?"


No they weren't. I completed the game 3 times now with vastly different setups. One was an AR specialist that dabbled in stealth, another was the stealther that used his pistol like a marksman and the 3rd was the shotgun-ho dude that ran in and blasted stuff to kingdom come. Just because different areas favour specific aproaches doesn't mean you are forced into that aproach. And seriously, from the sounds of it, it sounds like you are asking for a wishy-washy 'no impact' solution, where your choices doesn't matter at all, cause things will be just as easy in every situation irregardless of which choices you make.

In my eyes, AP was an unpolished gem. It had flaws and bugs galore, sure. And I was even close to abandoning the whole game at the start becuase of the crappy hacking minigame. But learning the game and getting into it actually rewarded the player, as opposed to most games now a days where everything is aimed at the 'quick fix' from the publisher to the consumer till they can throw out the next product.

#796
Tony Gunslinger

Tony Gunslinger
  • Members
  • 544 messages

Terror_K wrote...
I think biotic abilities should tie to biotic cooldowns, tech ones to a seperate tech cooldown, etc. Or merely bring back individual cooldowns, but adjust them according to the type of power more. As it stands a combat drone or overload switching off pull or shockwave, etc. makes no sense.

The silly thing is, they apparently did this because the individual cooldowns made some players spam their powers all at once at the start of an encounter in ME1, but ME2's cooldowns are so damn short that now you can just spam the same power repeatedly and succeed as a one-trick pony. Spamming is still an issue, but in a different way now. In ME1 I personally didn't spam my powers, but tended to just use them in the moment where it made the most sense to. In ME2 I do just pretty much spam the same attack repeatedly for the most part, because its effective and I can. In their attempt to fix a gameplay problem I didn't succumb to in ME1 they've made me succumb to the same type of issue in ME2. ME2 is, if nothing else, a game of irony in many cases, IMO: so many times I've read that the devs made choice A to be more B, but I've personally found it resulted in less B.

In either case, cooldowns definitely need work. Neither ME1 or ME2's methods worked that well. I think the issue they need to sort out for ME3 is that they need to treat the powers more individually and look at them each seperately rather than just slapping the same values and mechanics on all of them across the board. What works with Power 1 doesn't necessarily work with Power 2, and both prior games have proven that seperate cooldowns treated the same and global cooldowns treated the same don't work. They've created all powers as equal when they aren't essentially.


I assume that you read the boards regularly, so by raising this issue, you're feigning ignorance as to why global cooldowns are needed, just like you're feigning ignorance to any response that contradicts your opinion and keep on spewing the same thing again and again, hoping to drive the conversation in your direction by burying older posts. You're not the only one that's doing it, which is why this thread is growing into 30+ pages of you and the same 3-4 people repeating the same things over and over.

In short, GCD makes powers (RPG elements) more relevant and meaningful by using a power in conjunction with guns/melee/storm (action elements) as opposed to using one side of your attacks. Cloak + storm/melee/guns. ARush + storm/melee/guns. Charge + melee/guns. Singularity + storm/melee/guns. Overload + storm/melee/guns. Incinerate + storm/melee/guns. GCD also makes working with squadmates more important, which is the whole point of Mass Effect.

And generally speaking TK, you and others haven't explained why ME2 was dumbed down, you haven't explained why ME2 has bad gameplay, you haven't explained how ME1 had that certain je ne sais quoi that ME2 lacked, and now all you have left is the "BW is a corporate skank" angle in a thread discussing what RPG means.

Modifié par Tony Gunslinger, 04 juillet 2011 - 11:29 .


#797
Lunatic LK47

Lunatic LK47
  • Members
  • 2 024 messages

SalsaDMA wrote...
No they weren't. I completed the game 3 times now with vastly different setups. One was an AR specialist that dabbled in stealth, another was the stealther that used his pistol like a marksman and the 3rd was the shotgun-ho dude that ran in and blasted stuff to kingdom come. Just because different areas favour specific aproaches doesn't mean you are forced into that aproach. And seriously, from the sounds of it, it sounds like you are asking for a wishy-washy 'no impact' solution, where your choices doesn't matter at all, cause things will be just as easy in every situation irregardless of which choices you make.


Beaten the game five times already (using all three approaches for 3 of those playhrough), and I still stand by my stance that the level designs are bull**** on every level.

"Oh, what's that? You didn't level up Martial Arts? You're ****ed in Marburg's Villa when the plot dictates it, and playing it on Hard will add insult to injury." 

"What's that? You didn't level up any weapons skills to fight SIE in Moscow if you want to fight her because you wanted to go into a fist-fight? You're ****ed." 

"Oh, what's that? You didn't approach Steven Heck and didn't invest in Chain Shot? You're ****ed."

"What's that? Bosses are immune to your grenades/Proximity Mines? You're ****ed."

"What's that? You only invested in Stealth and have a hard time fighting a boss? **** you!" Last time I checked, some jack-ass of a developer said "We could talk our way out of a boss fight." Apparently, that only applied to SIE while everyone else is mandatory/.

"Oh, sorry, despite the fact you maxed out Martial Arts, you can't legitimately beat Omen Deng even if you use Advanced Fury."

"Oh, training in assault rifles gives you a **** auto-aim skill."

I expected something like "Each level design can do all three approaches equally" instead of "There's only one viable approach for certain levels , if not, **** you."

Seriously, is your head that far up your ass to not see how badly designed Alpha Protocol was? Apparently from your post, it is.

Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 04 juillet 2011 - 11:46 .


#798
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

In short, GCD makes powers (RPG elements) more relevant and meaningful by using a power in conjunction with guns/melee/storm (action elements) as opposed to using one side of your attacks. Cloak + storm/melee/guns. ARush + storm/melee/guns. Charge + melee/guns. Singularity + storm/melee/guns. Overload + storm/melee/guns. Incinerate + storm/melee/guns. GCD also makes working with squadmates more important, which is the whole point of Mass Effect.


Wrong.

To give an example: In ME2 the GCD just made several of my fights turn into me using the engineer by just spamming incenerate. Using the weapon or any other action was less than incenerate for large amounts of combat for my engineer, and rather than using different powers, the shared cooldown locked me into using only a single power.

In ME1 I used the entire arsenal of powers with my engineer, in ME2 I spammed the same power all the time.

The fact that your own example only combo with melee/weapon/storm (seriously.. storm? running is tied to using powers in your world??? ) Just goes to show that the gcd impairs real comboing. There's no "combo power A with power B for a nice effect" You can try and setup this kind of effects with your squadmates, but the implementation is way too cumbersome for the effect compared to just unripping with powers on an individual basis whenever the GCD is off.

If directing your teammates proper in tactical situations really is a core concern for the series, they should develop a proper interface for it and a proper AI for teammates. What we got in the series certainly isn't anyway near that. What the series got is as crude an interface for handling teammates as you can get, so claiming ME is about actually using them makes a mockery of real interfaces designed for such utility.

#799
SalsaDMA

SalsaDMA
  • Members
  • 2 512 messages

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
No they weren't. I completed the game 3 times now with vastly different setups. One was an AR specialist that dabbled in stealth, another was the stealther that used his pistol like a marksman and the 3rd was the shotgun-ho dude that ran in and blasted stuff to kingdom come. Just because different areas favour specific aproaches doesn't mean you are forced into that aproach. And seriously, from the sounds of it, it sounds like you are asking for a wishy-washy 'no impact' solution, where your choices doesn't matter at all, cause things will be just as easy in every situation irregardless of which choices you make.


Beaten the game five times already (using all three approaches for 3 of those playhrough), and I still stand by my stance that the level designs are bull**** on every level.

"Oh, what's that? You didn't level up Martial Arts? You're ****ed in Marburg's Villa when the plot dictates it, and playing it on Hard will add insult to injury." 

"What's that? You didn't level up any weapons skills to fight SIE in Moscow if you want to fight her because you wanted to go into a fist-fight? You're ****ed." 

"Oh, what's that? You didn't approach Steven Heck and didn't invest in Chain Shot? You're ****ed."

"What's that? Bosses are immune to your grenades/Proximity Mines? You're ****ed."

"What's that? You only invested in Stealth and have a hard time fighting a boss? **** you!" Last time I checked, some jack-ass of a developer said "We could talk our way out of a boss fight." Apparently, that only applied to SIE while everyone else is mandatory/.

"Oh, sorry, despite the fact you maxed out Martial Arts, you can't legitimately beat Omen Deng even if you use Advanced Fury."

"Oh, training in assault rifles gives you a **** auto-aim skill."

I expected something like "Each level design can do all three approaches equally" instead of "There's only one viable approach for certain levels , if not, **** you."

Seriously, is your head that far up your ass to not see how badly designed Alpha Protocol was? Apparently from your post, it is.


Cut out the insults that just show more about you than anything else.

And yes, I had no issues playing and completing the game with different builds/choices.

And you are just re-iterating that you want choices to be meaningless.

And for the Record, I took down Deng in a heavy martial arts build primarily using martial arts, so what's your point? That you somehow couldn't? So your inability makes for an objective point of view in claiming that it couldn't be done? If anything, I even didn't think it was harder for my martial arts guy than the other builds I tried, hell even the olympic boxer and russian uziwielding drug dealer went down to my fists and kicks on that build. I would actually rate the russian as harder than Deng as I had to make use of gadgets in that fight.

#800
Weiser_Cain

Weiser_Cain
  • Members
  • 1 945 messages
I like stats.