Video Games Industry on RDR and AP
Something must be wrong when Red Dead Redemption gets a 9.7 out of 10, and Alpha Protocol scores around the 6 mark.
Sorry, but RDR was just a shitter version of GTA4, which in itself was a massive let down. Buggy experiences with missions and general world physics, shit control methods that make the user nervous that the player character isn’t going to randomly run off the side of a ledge to their death via one stab of the stick, linear missions in a sandbox world that bare absolutely fuck all relation to the consequences of what you’ve done before or in between…
Sure it killed some time but it wasn’t ground breaking, often it was predictable and boring and it most certainly was not incredible by any stretch of the imagination. Now I’ve done the main story line, I find a complete and utter lack of interest to go back and finish the “challenges” or completing the “outfits”, or anything else that contributed absolutely nothing at all to the main story line. So I haven’t.
Now, I went out on a limb with Alpha Protocol because I resented the way all the shops thrust it to the “top of the charts” into the #1 selling position, merely because they ran out of copies of RDR. I thought the price drop was just because of the fact RDR came out at the same time and potentially overshadowed the game out of existence and into the budget bins.
So when I saw it on offer for 20 quid, or whatever it was, I thought hrm worth a stab. It mentions action and it mentions its an RPG, both of which when done properly can be quite splendid. Although a splendid game these days is fucking rocking horse shit at the best of times. I started playing, I can’t claim to have been hooked or captivated, but you know what, I was having fun. I took the time to learn about the characters through the dossiers you can activate by collecting intel, I paid attention to the conversations, I took in all the aspects of customising the character and the weapons and I appreciated the ability to veer conversations off in different directions which actually had an impact on what happens next.
The combat itself is difficult at times, but you don’t always have to engage, stealth can play a large part. The mini games you partake on missions to disable alarms, open door locks, crack safes, hack computers etc are all actually well thought out and varied. At first some of them are ridiculously hard (hacking a computer) but points can be added early on to the character skill set to ease this and make things easier… as in training the character. I appreciated the way that the player character couldn’t fire weapons in a masterful fashion from the outset and you can actually miss shots and be forced to upgrade talents to provide noticeable benefits.
Alpha Protocol dares to have a fucking health bar, A FUCKING MEN TO THAT I SAY. I can not stand these pathetic excuses for games that save at every possible corner turn, that bring you back to full health after being shot 5 times in the face simply by taking cover and sitting still. How is that possibly a challenge? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a sadist. For example Demon’s souls took the concept of punishment FAR in excess and as a result the difficulty gradient is so large it makes the game quite an unjoyable. Almost inaccessible to the average user and harking back to the oldschool days of say, Ghouls and Ghosts where 2 hits kills you and there are no save points through an entire level. AP punishes you for fucking up but doesn’t dump you back to the absolute start of the level so a bit of work is needed to catch back up, but not loads.
I read a few reviews after I played it to see what other people thought, opinion seems to be split, most noticably from the game reviewers and the public though. I am a bit miffed. I do not see how something like RDR which was a more boring version of GTA4, that offered nothing new at all and put linear, buggy missions into a sandbox world in a wild west setting was ever deserving of “incredible” status. I found the whole thing a test of my patience and actually quite boring. Its difficult to die, unless some random bug kills you outright such as your horse falling off a 1 foot tall rock and instakilling you, and the aiming system in default mode will auto lock on to anyone moving in front of you.
Most people remark on the graphics for AP and to be honest, so fucking what? The game is fun, it has multiple ways of being played, it offers the chance for people to actually think about what they’re doing and make an informed choice on how the story will play out. What does it matter if the graphics aren’t massively up to par?
One thing I will say is the combat could use improvement and is sometimes a bit annoying, as is the AI of someone you’re trying to protect who has no issues with standing on live grenades, or running directly infront of your own assault rifle fire… but hey, these small matters can be forgiven because the rest of the game plays so well and entertains in an intelligent way for once.
If you come from the background of playing games where you want to earn an achievement, if you like the action crossed with RPG elements and you aren’t that worried about the flashiest graphics around, give the damn thing a go. If you come from the Modern Warfare generation and just like games that hold your hand, provoke very little in the way of rational or intelligent thought, and simply do not allow you to fail if you own an IQ of more than 60, then I wouldn’t bother.
I suspect the game reviewers from most places fall into this sub par 60 IQ territory, as all of them have seemed to condemn a really involving and generally “good” game to the levels of dirt… and marked up a bland, linear, repetitive, uninvolved time sink to levels of “incredible”. It sucks, get a fucking brain.
Posted in Rage Posts | No Comments »