Alpha Protocol - A review (kind of)

WHAT I THINK (This review has two parts. Go to the end of this entry to jump straight to what players think)

This is not just a review. This is a defense.



Alpha Protocol is a great game. Professional troll Jim Sterling from Destructoid has decided to wage a war against it to see if the internet follows his lead. But he is wrong.

Let's be serious for a minute. Sterling claims that AP is a 2/10 game. Really?

If you read from an alleged former Obsidian worker that the game was mismanaged by Chris Parker, even if that happened to be true, it wouldn't mean that AP is a waste of your time. It may be just the opposite, depending on your tastes. This is not an AAA game that you have to like. This is a game that may interest you if your favourite games are Deus Ex and Vampire: Bloodlines.

What is wrong with this game, then? A lot of people say that AP doesn't offer great shooting and a great cover system. But, you know, GTA IV didn't either. It didn't matter because the game was cool. AP is not a shooting game. It's an RPG game with shooting.

Other people say that it's crippled with bugs (if "I don't like what they did here" or "sometimes the menu takes too long to appear" can be considered game-killing bugs). Well, in my two playthroughs I didn't find a single bug. My game never crashed, and I didn't find any weird stuff like the things that players around the world are finding in Red Dead Redemption (I'm sorry if I'm picking too much on Rockstar's stuff). I think they are prejudiced against Obsidian because of their previous games, and now "Obsidian = buggy games" is another internet meme.

About the mini-games? During the first hacking mini-game I was completely lost. But it was my fault. After that, the mini-games were fair enough. But, of course, you need to spend some points in your tech skill so they don't become a nightmare later. Same with the shooting: some reviewers/players automatically assumed the shooting was abysmal because it felt so imprecise at first. (Have you played Deus Ex lately? You couldn't hit anyone at first)

Maybe my positive opinion comes from the fact that I chose to play first the game without shooting anyone. Yes, it's possible to play this in that way. If you do that, it plays basically like Splinter Cell (why nobody hasn't declared this game a "Splinter Cell rip-off" yet?), . A couple of weeks ago I decided to try the "big" version of Splinter Cell: Double Agent (I had played the alternate "small" version using my Wii), and the whole thing is almost unplayable, either on PC or on PS3 (I own both versions). This isn't mentioned in most reviews (maybe because they played it on Xbox 360 and it didn't suck there?), but that was a mess. AP is alright.

(A brief aside (mild spoilers): It's possible to finish the game without killing anyone, with two exceptions: you throw somebody off a bridge in a cutscene and he's ran over -this is listed as "death by collateral damage" in your statistics-, and there's a boss battle against a main character who is placed in a tower that you can't reach to subdue him with martial arts. This is intended by design, because if you follow the story closely you will hear about his father, a senator, who is probably intended as a future villain if a sequel is made.)

Before you say "oh, but I want to shoot people!" I'll say that after finishing the game I started another playthrough allowing myself to shoot just everybody, and it still feels OK. The shooting in all the Splinter Cell games previous to SC Conviction was worse! I can only assume that in 2010 players are now expecting Call of Duty production values in every single game.

The music is OK but nothing special. The main theme is a blatant "James Bond Theme" rip-off, so bad that it makes you wonder how it got approved (maybe Chris Parker really liked it). Shockingly enough, there are no themes by Alexander Brandon (main composer from Deus Ex) listed in the credits, though he allegedly contributed music and audio. He left Obsidian after working in this project, like Allen Kerry, the lead character artist. (Was Parker as unreasonable as that anonymous guy said?).

Now, for the good stuff. Despite all the criticism directed at the graphics because they could look much better, the character design is actually great (every main character is instantly identifiable), and unusually for a game made with the Unreal Engine, here people don't look like action figures.

And then, the story. Well, even Jeff Gertsmann, not a forgiving reviewer, admits that the story is so good that it makes up for the less-than-stellar shooting: "There are parts of Alpha Protocol that I feel are totally amazing and absolutely worth seeing, but you'll have to trudge through a lot of very disappointing stuff just to see it."

While it's true that Mike Thorton is a bit on the bland side and not a classic character (even the name -or alias- doesn't have a ring to it), other characters are. Mina Tang is very likeable as your main 'handler', and Nolan North, usually overused as a Nathan Drake sound-alike, breathes life in the likeably psycho Steven "Don't call me Steve" Heck.

And the freedom. Oh, the freedom. There's no other game like this. When you play it a second game, you see how every decision changes everything. Other games make the script ambiguous to avoid facing the consequences of what you did, but here it's taken to its full extent, with voice over recorded for any possibility. And the game is not linear! You can visit any of the three main locations in any order, so if you go to China after you go to the two previous locations your character complains because the two previous safehouses were really nice and now you are supposed to live in a dirty apartment. In my second playthrough, I went to China first, so he just said "This place is a dump!".

You really feel like you can shape what happens around you. It will not be the same at all if you try to say something flirty to a girl when she likes you and when she hates you. Your reputation is not just a statistic: it really changes how other people treat you. This is just amazing, and you wonder why other games don't do it.

And then you realize why: because people will tear you apart if you use up your resources trying to let you be free instead of having great shooting.


If what I said make it sound at least interesting, go play this game. If you still aren't convinced, keep reading and listen to what other players thought.


WHAT PLAYERS THINK


I recommend to go to this post in Rock, Paper, Shotgun and read the comments left by users. Many of them acknowledge that the game grows on you and that it's a great experience. Here's a sample of what some players think:


"The Sombrero Kid": "if this had come out before Dragon Age and Heavy Rain it'd've been universally praised and a masterpiece of non-linearity despite it's lack of polish."

"Ihzr": "Alpha Protocol is amazing. If you'd put it next to Mass Effect, it would be the same sort of comparison like between Stalker and Crysis: big budget polished shiny sparkly mainstream mediocrity versus... something else. A pretty amazing something else."

"Mitza": "It's a strange game, but it's really enjoyable. All the extremely negative reviews I've read are an absolute shame. This is the kind of game that deserves a sequel, because they could fix the major flaws and refine&improve the rest of the game."


"jaheira": "Just played AP for another three hours and it's getting better and better. Stealth works great. Amazing silenced pistol action. Some of the best dialogues I've experienced. Might be game of the year so far for me."

"Javier-de-Ass": "loved this game. (...) I've read some impressions from across the net, especially Americans seem to despise this game, and I simply can't relate to any of the criticisms. Not to the shotting [sic] complaints, not to AI complaints, not to general jank complaints (...). I didn't come across any big bugs in the game."

"Mercurial": "By modern standards to a modern audience this game is flawed.

However, look past all that and it's a real gem. The comparisons to Deus Ex and Bloodlines (sans bugs for me at least) aren't blowing smoke, the more I play it the more I see the similarities."

"BL": "Probably the best in any action-RPG ever made, in the history of videogames, so that should get some recognition I think. But as a shooter, it's below average."


About bugs and control:

"jaheira" again: "It's not buggy. One incident of getting stuck on the scenery is the only problem I've had in 11 hours."





"jti": "I'm playing the game with keyboard+mouse and am having no trouble at all. Nothing to complane [sic] about them."


And as a summary, a guy called Wulf summarizes my opinion about the general reception for this game. Just go and read it.

Alpha Protocol is a cool game

Jim Sterling from Destructoid is an idiot. He gives a 2/10 to Alpha Protocol, so you would assume the game is broken and unplayable.

You would be wrong.

I'm playing it right now. It's a compelling game, with decent stealth gameplay and a great dialogue system. For me, it feels like a decent Splinter Cell-like game (I've decided I'm not killing anybody and the game lets me do just that, just stalking everybody and knocking them out) in which I can make a lot of choices, developing further the black-and-white "kill this guy or let him live" mechanics from Splinter Cell: Double Agent. There are no other games like this right now.

The game accomplishes what it tries to do. So what if there's a texture-loading problem (Is that something you never see in a game? Have you played any game made with the Unreal engine lately?), if Mike Thornton seems to be a bit unlikeable (well, he is not, if you choose the right dialogue options.) and if the shooting is not as good as in other games? I don't remember Vampire: Bloodlines for it's great shooting or Deus Ex for its compelling, superbly voice-acted protagonist, and they are both classics. There's something else at stake.

Alpha Protocol is a good RPG, but of course it won't look good if you compare it (from a technical standpoint) with the big boys. I'm sure Sega, being as cheap as it is this days, didn't give them a huge budget for this, but the results are still decent. So don't believe what Destructoid and Joystiq say, and give this game a chance. I'll let you know what I think after I play it longer, but it's not a terrible game.

-------

But I'm not going to stop reading Destructoid yet! They are still a cool site. And thanks to them, I learn that Ubisoft has probably cancelled Beyond Good and Evil 2. If that is true, well... That's it, I'm done with Ubisoft. It was one of my favourite developers ever, but they've made huge mistakes one after another, ruining the Prince of Persia franchise with each new game, forcing the worst DRM possible on players and just being cheap for the sake of it. Where's the innovation, the support for different games? Beyond Good and Evil is a classic, and Michel Ancel is one of the best game designers around. Is he really gone from your company now, or is it just a nasty rumour?

Ubi, don't disappoint me.

They thought nobody would notice

Have you heard about the Max Payne 2 launch file fiasco? It's funny how Rockstar, a company that really, really hates piracy (just listen to the radio in GTA IV... They hate pirates as much as republicans!) finds it much easier to use the cracked files from pirates than to create their own no-cd files.

Well, I don't know if there's any relation, but last week I decided to install Manhunt. I want to get to the end of that game! (I've tried twice, but I got bored every time...) After that, I didn't try to play for a few days, and when I did, I was surprised to find that Steam re-downloaded the launch file for this already old (and probably no longer updated) game.

So... what do you think about this? Are they replacing the .exe files for their other games because they are also cracked by pirates, just in case they are, or what? I don't know what to think.

UPDATE: The plot thickens! More Rockstar games are having autoupdate issues!

To be frank, I didn't mind about the Myth launch file, but I do mind about my games not working properly. What is happening now is for me the PR disaster, not the original "problem".

WHAT THE...?! UBIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!!

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!!

What in god's name is this!?!

Ubisoft is retroactively ruining the box art for probably their best game, just to trick unsuspecting customers into thinking that this is the PS2 version of their new (and not that interesting) Prince of Persia game.

Screw it, I'm done buying Ubisoft games. I just can't believe they are so short-sighted, and after watching them build up a great franchise and then demolish it. I don't want any part in that.

But I have to calm down, relax... Is there a good part about this? Well, yes... At least some buyers will buy this release thinking it's a tie-in for the movie, or the new game, and they will be surprised to see it's much, much better.

Still, this shows that Ubisoft is doing despicable things again. I'm disturbed to see how one of my favourite companies has become a worthy competitor for Activision's "King of Evil" title.

How my enemies are doing

Rebellion seems to be in trouble.

Splinter Cell: Conviction is fighting hard to ensure that nobody will ever buy any PC Ubisoft title again. This is not going to end well.

This won't last. They are going to pay for what they've done. So it looks like there's justice in this world after all. Right?

My "gaming enemies" are just not those evil game companies! I also hate bad design and games that treat the players like cattle, and I totally agree with this opinion about what I enjoy (or hate) about videogames. I play games to be entertained, not to prove I'm "the best" at it. I like decent writing, nice graphics and getting from the start to the end with as little frustration as possible. I don't like competitive multiplayer, tough challenges and grinding.

The Saboteur is a very good game

Well, sometimes you have to bit the bullet and admit that you are wrong.

I tend to be nasty, really nasty about things that I don't care about. Last year I was very mean to Pandemic because I really hated the Mercenaries 2 demo and I expected The Saboteur to be "not very good", after reading Ryan Davis' review of it.

Well, I still bought it new because I was very curious about it, and unlike Mercenaries 2, it seemed playable. Well, I have to take back all that I said about it because I think The Saboteur is really good. Not in a "for what it is" way, like Legendary (review coming soon? hint: it's not as bad as everybody says) but with a heartfelt recommendation. This game is silly and certainly over the top, but also a lot of fun.

First, the game is really pretty. If like me you take the time to play in short succession this game and the already stale GTA IV (probably the worst looking game in my whole experience with the PS3, and I'm not kidding), The Saboteur just kills. The German-dominated areas are black-and-white, with isolate colour elements very well placed (fire and explosions, certain items), and then when the colour comes back, it really shows. It's not the usual bland current-gen colour, but intense primary colours. Think Uncharted.

The gameplay is just great, and not broken in any way (on PS3 I didn't find any game-breaking bugs in my 30-hours-for-the-story/45-hours-to-get-all-the-trophies playtime). The alarm triggering and evading system is quite good: when you create a disturbance (shooting guns on the street, or detonating a bomb), someone will come to investigate. If they see you, you have a moment to shoot the soldier(s) who see you before they blow a whistle for reinforcements. Then you'll see how the enemies physically arrive in cars, which is reasonable. It's definitely an improvement over the Just Cause or Mercenaries 2 method of "suddenly, dozens of enemy soldiers spawn from thin air and shoot at you from everywhere". This change deserves big points.

So the game is great about style and execution. What about substance? Well, here's possibly the "low" point about the game: it has not much to do with reality. For some people, it will feel "dumb", but it's clear that it's not out of stupidity, but because the developers realized that it would be more fun this way. Anachronisms abound, the most conspicuous of them being outdated zeppelins which fly through the skies and offer a setting for several story missions. But they are clearly intentional, and if Roger Ebert is right and games just can't be art, why shouldn't they do anything they can to be more fun? So the story isn't afraid to go crazy in places (nothing supernatural, though), and the shocking climax in the Eiffel tower is impressive.

It has also been said that there are some baffling similarities to Assassin's Creed. Yes, it's true, and it's a bit odd at times, but I think it's coherent with the "anything goes if it's fun" approach of the game. Also, the climbing is a bit more realistic (in AC the constructions seem to be a bit too square-ish at times). The developers don't even try to hide it, and they even offer you a car named "Altair". I think this approach fair, and it's more honest to incorporate those elements shamelessly than just creating a clone of another game while trying to pass it as an original. Anyway, I still think they should have gone all the way and put some soothing music when you reach a viewpoint...

Not everything is derivative, though. The stealth and bombing mechanisms are interesting innovations, and I wouldn't mind using them in other games. You can dress as a German soldier to do things not allowed for civilians and enter restricted areas. This is not a free pass, though: you can't move quickly and attract attention while you are wearing a disguise, and you can't stay too long close to other soldiers. It's a balanced and fair system. Also, the use of anachronistic songs (including compositions from the 60's and 80's) that sounds like 40's music works really well in the game.

What I liked the less about it was that there are just too many optional missions around, if you are a completist or an achievement/trophy hunter. These "freeplay events" are still fun, and they are thankfully varied, but there are still too many of them. At least they are all marked on the map, unlike the banners and feathers in Assassin's Creed, and you know you just can complete everything if you are willing to spend some time without the need of checking the internet for maps and clues. I don't like to spend too much time with that, but at least it's easy. I hate when it's just impossible to get 100% completion if you aren't a god with the controller.

So if you don't mind about some occasional stupidity, a cliché story and the obvious fakeness of it all (including French accents by American actors, and an English actor playing the Irish lead), this is just a great sandbox game. It's just sad how EA lost faith in it before it was even released, and now I'm actually sad that Pandemic is now closed. The irony!

NOTE: Yes, this game has some nudity! I thought it only happened during the first 30 seconds of the game. While trying to find some videos for this review, I found about this secret area. Damn! (Now I'll have to reinstall the game to visit it...) Too bad the busty and naughty Skylar keeps her clothes on all the time, even if your character gets to hump her (offscreen) several times. Bummer!

Lost Planet 2 sucks?

Lost Planet 2 is a multiplayer co-op experience, disguised as a regular game. But even if you play it with other people, it's still mediocre. That's the word on the street. And a few reviewers are also aware of that. Other reviews just hop on the "big game, big scores!" chain that allows bad stuff like Rebellion's latest Aliens vs Predator to be considered a 70% or even 85% game by some people (even when those reviews still use expressions like "dated" or even "mediocre").

And I believe it! I couldn't even finish the Lost Planet 2 demo, because it was just... tough on me. Just consider this:

-No real story. It really feels like a regular multiplayer-only game.
-Brain-dead squad AI. If you aren't playing with friends, you are still supposed to do the work of four players, but the bots filling the other positions won't do anything.
-Unfair one-hit kills. Like, prepare to die. A lot.
-Awkward, slow controls.
-Infuriating design choices. You can't even pause the game, even during the single-player campaign. Wait, WHAT?! Also, just plain bad execution. Brad Shoemaker's review makes it quite clear:

At one point in the back end of the campaign, I was playing an online-enabled game, on the off chance that someone might randomly jump into the action. My Internet connection dropped out for a second and disconnected me from Xbox Live, at which point the game abruptly cut to a black screen with a "Disconnected from host" error message. In a single-player game. That set me back at least 30 minutes of progress and incidentally made me never, ever want to play Lost Planet 2's campaign again.

That is not admissible in 2010.

UPDATE: Destructoid is even more unmerciful, describing the game as "downright frustrating" and "a shell of a potentially great game, brought down by bizarre, dated and counterintuitive design decisions". Jun Takeuchi offered a good co-op experience with Resident Evil 5 (though many gamers who loved RE4 found it lacking) mostly by not changing anything, but in this case, he took what was good of the first Lost Planet and he has turned it into a pathetic mess.