Monday, December 1, 2014

[GAMES] Retro-Review: "Alpha Protocol" (PC)

Obsidian Entertainment have a bit of an odd reputation. They're a development studio with a lot of great ideas that always manage to somehow bust the execution. They usually source their work to high-end publishers and work on big IPs after the original developer has moved on to other projects.

Some of their most high-profile work includes Neverwinter Nights 2 (i.e. the one that's not unbelievably dull), Fallout: New Vegas (i.e. the one with even less immersing atmosphere but far better RPG mechanics) and Knights of the Old Republic 2 (i.e. the one the one that nobody remembers).

Another common theme in almost all Obsidian games is that they ship with a boat-load of bugs, more often than not utterly broken and nigh-unplayable on launch. For a company that has picked up after a Bethesda title, that's quite the notoriety for a developer to have.

In 2006 they partnered up with the publisher responsible for Cream the Rabbit and the inspiration for the Internet's cesspool of creepypastas: SEGA. Four years later, they dropped Alpha Protocol on the market, a sci-fi, spy, action-RPG that was supposed to kick off a prominent, multi-platform, action series for the 7th Generation.



Alpha Protocol chronicles the adventure of agent Michael Thorton, who was recruited by the titular special ops (and obviously top-secret) organization to investigate the missile attack on a civilian flight by a Middle-Eastern terrorist cell. Not too long into the story, Thorton is abandoned by the US government and left for dead. Angry and confused, with the help of a few remaining friends from Alpha Protocol, he starts tracking down leads to uncover the conspiracy that places a major weapons manufacturer (and likely also Private Military Company) behind events that would shape global politics and likely ignite World War III.

The story isn't exactly good, but there is undoubtedly some thought put into it. The dialogue isn't what one would call of literary value and quality, but manages to carry that (and excuse the term) "cinematic" flow that is important for a story like this one.

The plot goes through the checklist for such dramas in post-9/11 entertainment and while it never becomes Metal Gear Solid, it's not exactly Modern Warfare either. It strikes a nice balance and while it can occasionally become convoluted and confusing, in its core it's a basic high-octane spy drama with all the necessary one-liners, political intrigue and back-stabbings.

One of the things that does greatly boost the concept, even if it occasionally confuses the narrative, is that Alpha Protocol's unique gameplay mechanic relies on player choice. Once the prologue with the terrorist cell concludes, the game spreads out into three different chapters that can be played in any order. In almost every conversation and level, Thorton will have to choose how to proceed with the mission, react to situations and engage with plot-essential NPCs.

Player choice was far from a new concept even in 2010 and it's no wonder that a lot of Alpha Protocol feels like a fusion of Mass Effect and Deus Ex. Games like Deus Ex and the more recent The Witcher 2 can change the play-through fundamentally based on player choice, while others like Bioware's RPGs (the aforementioned space epic or Dragon Age) do so in subtle ways.

Alpha Protocol can deservedly tout its player choice system. The three chapters reflect one another regardless of the order they're played in, with events changing within them and characters specifically mentioning both events from the chapters that preceded them, but also the choices the player made in them.

There are some issues with how the game registers options at times. In at least two situations I had the mission debriefing informing me of taking a generally "undesired" path during play, even though I very clearly didn't, which then might reflect on the rest of the campaign. Even if it didn't, it can be extremely frustrating going out of one's way to ensure non-lethal take-downs and a stealthy approach, only to have the game register that the approach was instead offensive and bloody. 

The most impressive part of the choice system is the Bioware-like "notoriety" system that spends affinity points on plot-important characters based on the player's interaction with them. This system in Alpha Protocol has the biggest impact on the flow of the story than any other game I've personally played. Conversations with NPCs are done via dialogue trees. They usually offer the standard 3-emotion-response (professional/upstanding, angry/jerk, suave/smartass) and the only real downside is that response descriptors on the interface can be unclear at times.

The correct option will not only decide the NPC's disposition toward Thorton, but can also lead to alliances or quick shoot-outs that more-often-than-not can change the entire flow of the game. The final mission requires specific options to have been made to ensure the "best ending" (so to speak), but the game never warns beforehand. At first this may seem frustrating, but upon reflection, it adds to the weight of the player's choices throughout the campaign.

There are also a few interesting moments when Thorton's handling of a conversation can lead to avoiding a firefight entirely. Disposition with characters unlocks perks (particularly with mission handlers) that aid the player, but the interesting aspect of this is that there is no requirement for high disposition. In fact, the worst relationship Thorton can have with a NPC is a neutral one. Either very high or a very low disposition will unlock different kinds of perks and will lead to different dialogue options and more choices. It adds to the depth of the dialogue system, as it removes the burden of trying to please everyone for best results and just allows the player to respond however they wish and adjust to the results afterwards.

It's good to see a game where interaction with NPCs feels organic and founded in at least some level of reality in regards to human interaction instead of an arbitrary "paragon/renegade" binary system. It turns out, people that talk with other people form opinions of them and behave according to those. It also turns out not all people are the same and sometimes, in this kind of story in particular, being feared and respected by the right person is a better perk than being liked. Alpha Protocol gets that and when it works, it's glorious.

Sadly, bad design does exist, specifically when it comes to the bare-bones action mechanics. Touting itself as an "action-RPG", the game really does try to approach its missions like Deus Ex ("Human Revolution" wasn't out yet), while implementing a far more simplistic (Mass Effect-like) upgrade system.

The game can be played in a multitude of ways-- in theory. In practice, the major difference is between stealth and standard 3rd person shooter. There are sub-categories to those: Thorton can specialize in Stealth, Pistols, SMGs, Assault Rifles, Shotguns, Sabotage (gadgets/tech), Toughness (constitution and armor), Technical Aptitude (survival/inventory customization) and even Martial Arts.

Oddities all around, especially when it comes to the types of weaponry and mostly because they're all designed for specific use. Pistols are good for sneaking, but otherwise useless as range is short and precision aiming takes one second too many even when maxed out. Shotguns, however, are a 'situational' weapon and specialization in them doesn't much make sense. It's even worse with the assault rifle, as it is the only weapon with decent range that will come in handy during one of the many firefights in relatively large areas that neither the pistol nor the shotgun can provide the necessary firepower for.

In theory, again, Alpha Protocol is designed so that every single situation in the game can be handled by every possible build. Mission loadouts allow carrying up to two different weapons, a number of gadgets and customization of both weapons and armour. The in-game store provides an insane variety of gear to purchase with funds acquired during missions, though despite the higher stats of the new gear, there may be far too many interchangeable pieces of equipment to justify spending a lot of hard-earned cash on.

In practice, despite the wealth of gear to choose from and customize for each mission and build, gameplay isn't really as balanced between them as it may had been intended.

For the most part, at every turn, the game seems to encourage stealth. This was my build too (stealth + pistols + sabotage, while carrying an assault rifle with no skill points spent on it), but the mechanics are off. If not utterly broken, they are insufficient. Much like Deus Ex, before leveling up significantly, practically every skill tree is extremely hard to play. Stealth poses extra problems, because the enemies lack consistency in regards to their field of vision, their keen hearing and how they treat alerts and evasions.

Early on, for example, the game makes it clear that if an enemy guard is alerted to Thorton's presence, they will sound an alarm (which can then be deactivated). That much is true, but the game is divided into areas (not very unlike Metal Gear Solid). The purpose of the alarm seems to be some reinforcements and guards in later areas being alerted if the alarm isn't switched off.

The idea is good, but at no point will the player much care what happens beyond the room they are in, particularly because there will be no reason to not deactivate the alarm after the room has been cleared. In the meantime, an alerted guard will almost always scream for help, alerting every other guard in the same room, defeating the purpose of evasion and quick intervention almost in its entirety. It becomes frustrating not getting the chance to correct the tiny mistake that might have blown the perfect sneaking strategy the player had been attempting. For a game that seems to be suggesting the player at least attempts stealth every mission, it misses one of the cornerstones of stealth gameplay: evasion.

Another major issue are the boss fights. They can also be tackled regardless the build, but it may take repeated play-throughs and a lot of trial-and-error for anyone not skilled in high-powered rifles and shotguns. All of them involve blazing firefights and multiple enemies and no player in their right mind will attempt sticking their necks out to score a few stealth hits to the boss' health bar or set-up traps. The safest course of action will be staying behind cover and sniping everyone off.

Which, ironically, is an extremely unsafe course of action if stealth is one's specialization, because health and armor are likely to be low, while waiting for the rifle scope to lock in and not spread most of the ammo on the nearby wall is an exercise in patience. Adding insult to injury, some of those bosses enjoy some extremely powerful melee attacks too and Thorton better have spent some points in hand-to-hand, if the player wishes to see the end of the fight.

Which in itself is still a bad idea, because melee reduces endurance (let's call it armor), but doesn't do much to a boss' health. Then, there is also the issue of a few bosses being out of reach and requiring a ranged attack. Enemies love their grenades and have surprisingly good aim, while a particularly annoying boss would lob three of them from a tower, all of them landing right behind Thorton and blowing him sky-high every time without fault.

The entire idea of using stealth and gadgets to take down enemies in the middle of firefights is sadly antithetical to this game's enemy tactics, as leaving cover to dodge grenades exposes the player to enemy fire and combined with low level constitution and armor, the move can prove lethal.

This is a testament to how the execution of the game entirely botched the ambitious and very interesting ideas the developers had on paper. There is nothing in the aforementioned that's contradictory by nature and there is no reason this shouldn't have worked, if not for the lackluster execution. Further evidence of that is the "Sabotage" skill tree, which focuses on hacking, picking locks and using one of many, many gadgets to deceive enemies and take them down by cleverly setting up traps (or throwing grenades). There is just too much happening for the player to be encouraged into trying a build like this one.

A pleasant, though unexpected surprise, were the hacking and lock-picking mini-games.Often developers shun such mini-games as a necessary evil, when in fact they should be making them fun and engaging and not a chore for the player. Especially in a game that encourages stealth, the player needs better incentive than random chest drops to leave cover and lock-pick a vault or hack a computer within the five seconds it takes the enemy guard to complete his patrol. It's good to see that these developers understand this and have put some effort into these mini-games.

From a technical standpoint, the game fairs well enough. Controls are standard action game controls, though its console roots show and directing Thorton from one terrorist-infested room to another becomes significantly more engaging when playing with the gamepad rather than the keyboard and mouse. For an Obsidian game I can't complain about much in terms of bugs and glitches. With the exception of a small glitch that was both hilarious and terrifying at the same time, upon which enemies would inexplicably fly and land in front of me, nothing else disrupted the game or broke immersion in my play-through.

Visually it holds up. Models are detailed, especially the ones used in the cutscenes and facial animations are rich, as are the textures. Body animation and particularly that of enemy troops does leave a bit to be desired and while never particularly clunky, the way enemies move, coordinate and drop dead is on the basic side. Art direction is fair, but doesn't impress or offer much new or deeply involving. Level design ranges from bad to satisfactory and programming errors, like spawning enemies upon reaching a checkpoint right in front of the player, make the simplistic and sometimes impractical maps annoying. Still, though, the story moving to different countries and locations on the planet adds variety and some nice backdrops for missions, while authenticity is achieved just enough to convince the player of the change of setting in each chapter.

If anything, while the setting of the final mission makes sense in regards to the narrative, it's so visually dull it's probably the lowest point of the game in that department.

Sound is good too. The music does its job, both managing to increase tension with its slow beats during sneaking and hyping up the action when things get serious. Voice acting is generally strong too. Josh Gilman, who voices Thorton, provides both a fitting voice and a strong performance. The downside to his portrayal comes from the fact that he seems to be using the "suave/sarcastic/funny" response in the dialogue tree as the default for his character, which creates a bit of a disconnect when playing the character with a less insufferable personality. The rest of the cast is very strong as well, for the most part anyway.

Sadly, in the technical department, the game is a straight-up port of the console versions. While I did not experience any compatibility, stability or performance issues (the game ran smoothly and never crashed), PC-essential features such as gamepad customization, FOV and quick save/quick load are almost entirely absent. Advanced video options are available, but severely lacking.

As mentioned earlier, replayability is a key component of Alpha Protocol. There is no expansion I'm aware of or any content besides the campaign. There are some missions within the campaign that can be skipped and as such could potentially count as "side quests", but they're few and they do reflect on the conclusion of the campaign.

However, the choices in the game are so refined that the progression of the first play will undoubtedly raise some interest in revisiting the title sooner or later. Thorton doesn't change much based on his various responses, but there is just enough of an RPG element to keep players interested in a different set of responses and paths taken within the game. Even the complexity of the gameplay, as mechanically problematic as it may be, can offer plenty of variety for another approach to the campaign-- assuming the player has been armed with the necessary patience to tackle some inevitable frustration.

Alpha Protocol is a bundle of fantastic ideas, some that even pushing the boundaries of each respective sub-genre that the game includes. Sadly, the experience is marred by shoddy execution and there may be disappointment, as the IP is dead in the water without the chance for improvement. The good ideas, however, do stand out and while the title may turn people off with its myriad of issues, for a 2010 game found on the occasional sale (or a bargain bin, for you console weirdos), it's an experience worth engaging in even for just a little while-- even if only to witness the well of creativity that still exists somewhere buried within this bloated industry.

Notes:
The game was purchased by the reviewer for Steam, via Humble Bundle. Approximately 15 hours were logged into the main campaign. No customization options or extra content available. The game offers dialogue subtitles, but no closed captions for players with hearing disabilities. FOV is missing, but it is adjustable on the PC version by manually editing configuration files. Parents should be advised that the title includes blood, graphic violence, use of drugs/alcohol, strong language and mild sexual innuendo. The game is rated "18" on the PEGI rating system and has an ESBR "M" (Mature) rating. 

System specs the game was played on: AMD FX6300, 6GB RAM, AMD R7 260X. The PS3 Sixaxis was used via the Motionjoy DS3 tool, instead of the standard keyboard+mouse configuration. The game requires an XBOX controller or variant xinput-supported device for the gamepad feature. 

"Alpha Protocol" was developed by Obsidian Entertainment and published by SEGA.



IMAGE GALLERY









No comments:

Post a Comment