It's not pretty but it delivers on RPG terms, says developer
yes the engine delivers bugs/glitches
Idtech 5 is made for open world I believe, there is no excuse for not using it for the next game since Bethesda own it.
TES V is being developed on Id Tech 5. Oh god I think I just broke an embargo . . .
you really don't think that Bethesda would give a rival developer (even one that they are working with) IdTech 5 would you? Beth wants that one for itself for TES V. If the engine is as good as it looks and can do half the things we've seen.. I can see Beth using this engine for many many years to come.
But Beth is using an updated Gamebryo for their next game. This was revealed back at QuakeCon. If they had waited until after the iD deal, we'd probably be waiting another 4 years for TESV, so quit complaining. Even with the same engine, I expect we'll see significant improvements.
*Face Palm* they can defend sh!t all they want.
lol obsidian sucks. they need to hire new programmers dude
Obsidian don't have the talent to work on their own IPs. Look how Alpha Protocol turned out.
I don't blame the coders on that one but the producers who continually changed their minds and never followed through on many of the gaming concepts implemented. Fallout New Vegas is definitely a low-point for Obsidian, but more so for Bethesda.
as you said, it was a developer thing. that said, the new vegas engine is showing age, still fun game =D (no bugs on my side so loving it)
Amazing someone disagreed with you. What sort of mentality thinks Alpha Protocol was anything but a trash game. And I blame the designers on AP and specifically one producer as well. What sort of idiocy has a game mechanic where you negotiating skills make your weapons more accurate. Maybe they were emo bullets.
Defending the Undefendable
Did anybody bother to read the article? He said exactly what I would say, "It delivers from an RPG perspective." He even admitted that it looked like shit. @ joydestroy You haven't played their games, have you? @ kaveti6616 Did you even RENT Alpha Protocol? No, you didn't, but you'd realize that the game's pretty good if you did. Once again, that just wasn't a pretty game to look at. They have plenty of talent from the gameplay perspective, it's just the presentation and glitches that they always fuck up on.
Dude, when it comes to spending money on games, whether it be renting or purchasing, I tend to read a lot of reviews about a game. And after reading numerous reviews about Alpha Protocol, I have learned that the game has a really cheesy story, really archetypal characters, clipped animations, slowdowns, cheap combat physics, a dialog tree ripped straight out of Mass Effect, and the most boring environments I've ever seen (yes, I watch walkthoughs on youtube). I wouldn't spend 8 dollars to rent a crappy piece of shit like Alpha Protocol when there are games like Fallout 3 and Mass Effect 2, and even Demon's Souls (which was worthy of a purchase even though I don't like it) to think about. Whenever I hear of Obsidian's latest game in production, I immediately know that it's going to be a mediocre title. And I'm never proven wrong. At the very least, if the game is even great, it's never due to Obsidian's personal talent, but rather the fact that the game they're making is a sequel to an existing IP and uses the same engine and same assets. Examples are New Vegas and Kotor. Other than that, Obsidian can't make a great game to save their lives. They suck.
Some games are more than the sum of their parts, and if you are watching them being played, or reviewed then you aren't truly immersed and you aren't getting the full experience. Therefore you cannot judge the game as if you did play the game.
1. Great job on reading MAINSTREAM reviews. Okay, now that right there is where you should've just ended the comment so I can revel in your stupidity. 2. Back to the actual point: Cheesy story? The story is actually quite complex and much more detailed than the one in New Vegas. The characters aren't quite archetypal. When's the last time you saw a mute, pink-haired 17 year-old chick that always having her guns pointed at while she's protecting a boss of a secret agency that hies ties to the American government? Yes on clipped animations, yes on OCCASIONAL slowdowns, NO on cheap combat physics. The reviewers must've been thinking the game's an action/adventure game. No, it's an RPG. No on dialog tree ripped from Mass Effect. The dialog system in Mass Effect has an unlimited amount of time for you to answer and often will summarize the situation in a brief sentence. Alpha Protocol gives you a timed bar to make a decision based on general stance you want to take, like, "Aggressive, Suave, or Professional", among others. No, NOT the same. Yeah on boring environments, but when has the team ever been good in terms of presentation? 3. Fallout: New Vegas isn't a sequel to Bethesda's IP. It's a sequel to the team's IP, one that they made well over a decade ago when they were known as Black Isle. Did you ever play Fallout or research the team who created it? PM me, because I wanna know.
Basically you are denying A protocol the few one things everyone , even the reviewers who disliked the game , gave a nod to : the plot and dialogues ... but then again oh yeah you saw youtube clips so you know the game through and through /s
Yes, I know the game up to the story and the dialog. I don't have to physically be the one pressing the buttons to hear what's going on. The story stucks. The game is glitchy. Alpha Protocol is not a good game. You guys criticize the mainstream review sites. Why? They're people just like you? Why is your opinion of the game any more credible than theirs? They play the games as well. If they have a negative opinion of it, and the few people here have a positive opinion of it, then who shall I trust? I'm not going to spend any amount of money in the hopes that the reviewers were wrong about this game. Who goes out of their way to buy a negatively reviewed game when their are so many critically acclaimed titles to get through?
It had a great concept for a story and fun gameplay(boss battles suck). If Obsidian fixed the bugs problem and made a better story, I would buy a sequel to Alpha Protocol. @kaveti Doesn't matter how many reviews you read or how many walkthroughs you watch if you don't at least try the game or a game with similiar gameplay then your opinion is worthless on that game.
not even a game with similar gameplay IF YOU DON'T AT LEAST TRY THE GAME, your opinion is worthless and a waste of typing P.S @ Kevetti - FONV is NOT mediocre, its at least as enriching and entertaining as FO3 was with the exception that its a bit late/ not as new but Obsidian have done a great job with New Vegas (for PC at least). No bugs on my side because I know to disable auto-save) FONV (for PC, consoles might be different) is a quality game, and I'm enjoying the hell out of it =)
Alpha protocol for what it was a glitch fest. But i did enjoy it and even recommend it to a friend with a huge warning "game is so glitched and if you have any type of eplicaptic issues then stay away if you dont then i thought it was fun for what it was. Sorry for the spelling
The engine can impress him as much as he wants but the game released with gamesave / autosave bugs amongst others. Why doesn't he impress everyone with testing that's followed through with fixing - then release the game or at the very least have a day one patch ready. To me a game that doesn't save reliably is still in beta & should never be released until that's fixed.
I have not found anything mind blowing about the engine at all? Kinda disappointed with graphics i guess i expected a little to much. Physics are ok but i think could be better. Its a shame such a high profiled game released with so many bugs.
Because they have to be on the defensive at all, tells the true story. Interesting that the response completely avoids the real issue people are complaining about, which is the bugs. They only defended the poor graphics on the old game engine.
I think the problem in F:NV in terms of glitches is just the engine. That would be entirely Bethesda's fault and this is why I think that (don't get me wrong, they're a great developer, but keep on reading): BethSoft gave them the engine and said, "you have two years to make a successor to Fallout 3". Now, Bethesda took 4 years while created Fallout 3 with that engine and they have more experience with it than anybody. When it released, the game was buggy. They had taken approximately 2 years to frustratingly iron out bugs, yet the release was still filled with them. Obsidian had 2 years and no prior experience with that engine, so they had no idea how they were supposed to learn the engine perfectly, and deal the the removal of bugs withing two years. It makes sense, doesn't it?
Honestly, anyone that enjoys the more recent elder scrolls games and fallout 3 will feel right at home with new vegas. The engine although buggy is familiar and charming to me and many people I know. Keep in mind I havent experienced one game breaking glitch so far. Anyone that was expecting a game engine overhaul shouldve known what to expect from the day this was announced. Its a fallout 3 spin off, made by another dev team in a short time span with the same game engine that was basically lent to them. Wait until the next cycle of consoles and I'll bet we'll see an engine overhaul, but as of right now this engine is apparently filling their needs and suiting their vision.
I never had problems with fallout 3, but new vegas has given me some problems. None have been game breaking yet, but one almost was where my character would not stop attacking after a load. I had to turn off my game and reload for it to stop attacking. I only rented the game and would like to buy it, but Im going to hope for a patch before I consider buying it. Its more fallout so I like it, but it could have used some extra dev. time to squash some bugs.
I agree that extra dev time wouldve been practical and preferred. Nobody expected a fallout sequel so fast but we got one in less than 2 years which is entirely not enough time to iron out a game this big. Hopefully we'll get patches galore, I have a feeling we will. I just dont want people to think the game is a complete flop because of bugs we've seen in this engine for years and years.
and your argument in total. also, haven+t had ONE crash with almost 10 hours of play, nor a game breaking glitch...not even slowdown (and im in an old MBP) so...yeah, its not perfect, but I expected that from the start. I just expected a perfected Fallout 3, and did I get it =D (so many guns! and stuff! and skills and crafting and quests and locations and enemies and WHAOAOA!) seriously this game is PACKED with stuff 10 hours in and I'm still discovering new ammo types and weapon types...o.O I can understand if people have problems with the game if it DOES crash on them, I'd hate it too (happened iwth fallout 3 and it made it almost unplayable) but this game has been more stable for me than FO3 ever was, so I'm loving it =)
it seems fine but im still in the same place after getting the patch, I'll have to see.
Obsidian has their own engine now!! They are using it for Dungeon Siege III!! They won't have to rely on other peoples old crappy game engines anymore!! Their next game will be their best ever!! You heard it here first!! In a random comment on N4G!! I like exclamation points!!
Honestly I was disappointed with the graphics in New Vegas when I got it because I was expecting it to at least have some more polish or some new shaders or SOMETHING. It's got nothing. It's exactly the same as far as I can tell. I was at least hoping for a close-up over the shoulder view camera. I guess I should get the PC version and wait for mods (I have the PS3 ver). Personally I seem to recall finding the DC area in Fallout 3 to be more breathtaking than New Vegas.. which doesn't seem right. The skies/sunsets should be a lot more dramatic in New Vegas. How about just some heat waves? Nothing though? Weak...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.