By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Barozi on 13 December 2010
Edit Thread
Scoobes said:
Barozi said:
Scoobes said:
twesterm said:


There's a HUGE difference between publishing and developing.  FFXIV was a massive mess, should I expect FFXV to be an unfinished mess when it's released?

As for Bethesda, every game has bugs.  Some games have more bugs than others, what's important is that those bugs don't completely break the experience and there aren't a lot of them.  I found my faire share of bugs in Oblivion and a few in Fallout 3, but they were either incredibly minor or incredibly rare so I wasn't really upset.  Like I said, every game has bugs.  If you wanted the thread to be about games Bethesda made, you should have stopped at Fallout 3.

Obsidian, the developers of New Vegas, on the other hand, they're games have lots of bugs and bad bugs.  I haven't played New Vegas but I have played NWN2 and KotoR 2 and, well, I'm not surprised about New Vegas.  I had to stop playing both of those games because I encountered game breaking bugs that I could do nothing to get around.

Oh, and lol, Alpha Protocol

I agree that Obsidian seem to have a habit of releasing buggy games, but I honestly think Alpha Protocol is one of the most underrated games of the gen. I got it for £5 on the Steam sale yet I kept thinking to myself, "I'd have paid full price for this!". Plus, I rarely encountered bugs (although their were a few, particularly near the end).

I paid 20€ for it and it was 18€ too much.

incredibly mediocre game.

Stealth system is bad, third person shooting is horrible, skills are boring, levels are uninspiring, extreme texture loading problems (even for an UE3 game), it's short

On the plus side, story is relatively good and so are the conversations.

That's actually more what appealed to me. I didn't think the shooting and stealth mechanics were that bad. I went back and played Mass Effect 1 and I find the mechanics for shooting in AP to be superior in nearly every way, yet Mass Effect 1 seems to get a free ride in that respect. In fact, nearly all of your complaints could also be applied to ME1, yet it reviewed fairly well.

Btw, did you play on PC or 360?

I have no idea how good or bad it played on console so maybe the problems were more apparent on the console version. 

At least you know you can shoot something in ME when it's in the middle of your crosshair, totally not possible in AP. The shot always goes to the very edge of the reticle, which is also far bigger than in ME. Making the pistol totally useless. The special shot where you need to aim for several seconds is also pretty useless since it takes so much time and usually the target moves, which makes it much harder as well.
Thing is it's a stealth game. If you miss something you're fucked (well not in AP since you can basically run through the level and kill everyone like Rambo with ease)
I already know that Mass Effect wasn't that good as a third person shooter (still easily beats AP), but in return it was a much better RPG.

I gave up early on the stealth mechanics since they're not working in 75% of all cases and played the whole game with an Assault Rifle since it's the only effective weapon and it's relatively easy to hit someone (still a pain).

Skills in Mass Effect are far superior and actually useful
http://rorshock520.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/mass_pt1_stats.jpg
At least 9/13 of them make sense, but in Alpha Protocol only Toughness and Martial Arts are decent. The rest aren't even worth it to upgrade, since you almost don't notice them anyway.

Also the shop in AP is horrible. In the whole game I found 2 guns worth buying and 1 suit and even those had only minor differences in stats.