Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Alpha Protocol

Since I know at least one of you wants to know my thoughts on this game (orly?)...

There's been a lot of complains about Alpha Protocol, but I think they're pretty unfounded. People were expecting "Mass Effect: the Spy version", and that's just not what it is. True, the game has conversation options similar to Mass Effect (better, in fact, since your dialogue choices can change the entire conversation), but it's very different in terms of gameplay.

The game's kinda like Deus Ex in that you have a number of options for getting through each level: stealth, traps and gadgets, full assault, etc. But you only get so many skill points, so you have to decide what you want to excel in. Or you can just boost all the skills and be mediocre in everything. I'm playing through as a stealth/martial arts expert, so some of this information might be skewed, but here's what I got:

The stealth element works fine, though pretty basic. You don't really have to worry about lighting or noise as long as you stay ducking. Just don't wear heavy armor and stay out of enemies' direct line of sight and you'll be fine. There's also a number of abilities that can help you out (or downright make it easy).

Martial arts also works fine. As you level your MA skill up, you get longer combos, more damage per hit, more melee defense and additional techniques. It's much more in depth than Shepard's rapid-strike elbow jab, for sure.

I don't really use gadgets, so no real comments there, but in the tutorial you get to use proximity mines and remote bombs, which is kinda cool. Maybe I'll be a gadgeteer next play through.

And finally, the guns. This is where the biggest complaints tend to originate, and again, I think it's because people had Mass Effect expectations. I have my own complaints, but I'll get to that.

You can take two of the four weapon types with you per mission: pistol, sub-machine guns, shotgun or assault rifle. The great thing about this game is you can use any of these weapons fairly well even if you don't have any skill points in them. But they may not be what you expect.

The pistol is what people complain about the most. It's a short range weapon. If you're trying to shoot a guy at the other side of a large room, you probably won't hit. It's meant for shooting people 15 feet away from you. If you actually use it like this, it works fine.

The SMGs are designed for fighting multiple opponents. Again, they're short range, and meant to spray bullets inaccurately and cover a large area. I'm willing to bet you could combine these with martial arts to give yourself cover while running up to opponents, but I haven't actually tried that.

The shotgun is another short range weapon, which works like you'd expect a shotgun to: a powerful blast that becomes useless when the enemy isn't right in front of you.

Finally, there's the assault rifle, my other favored weapon. It can shoot mid range, does a bit of damage and can be fairly accurate if you wait in between shots before firing.

So the weapons work fine. The real problem is the assault rifle is the only thing effective beyond the range of a few feet, meaning you almost have to take one. There's no long range weapon. Why not? Why no sniper rifle? In some missions you can buy one, but it functions as a stationary turret you can zoom in with. It really feels like they dropped the ball here. I'd love to have a sniper rifle... :(

Anyhow, the game's pretty good despite the sniper rifle complaint :X I'm enjoying it, and if you don't go in expecting more Mass Effect, you might too.

Edit: I should also add that I'm playing with the PC version. I'm told that the 360 version has some horrendous load times.

1 comment:

J-AWS said...

Thanks for the review Kau, much more informative than most of the big reviewers have been. I think a lot of reviewers just got done with Splinter Cell: Conviction (great game if you like the genre, incidentally) where Sam Fisher can shoot the eye out of a man at 100 yards with an M9 pistol... so the more inaccurate approach is probably a bit more of a shocker to them than it would have been if the game had come out at a different point. I can understand where they're coming from, but it does seem a bit overblown... I'll of course reserve full judgement until I've actually gotten my hands on it though, of course.

I'm actually pretty psyched to give it a try -- Obsidian has always had a good eye for story, which is my primary interest anyway. Given the reviews I don't think I'll have to wait too long to find it at a discounted rate (the "good" side to having negative reviews, I suppose).