Alpha Protocol

 

The 7th generation of gaming was packed with role-playing Games. Franchises like Fallout, The Elder Scrolls and Fable grew in popularity and status with some of their new installments becoming household names. At the same time new gaming staples emerged like Mass Effect, BioShock, Dragon Age and Borderlands who earned their own places in the industry and are sure to have more sequels down the line. Some games though aren’t fortunate enough to capture the support needed to be rewarded with a sequel. Kingdoms of Amalur and Dragon’s Dogma could be guilty of this but both have had remasters or ports on recent consoles so their audience is bound to increase. Alpha Protocol is one of these unique games though. It is a one-off cast into obscurity and that is so interesting to me. Spy games have really been tackled in the medium with the James Bond titles being the only successful ones that come to mind. So, an espionage RPG that offers players the chance to become a spy would surely have a target market. Alpha Protocol released four years after Daniel Craig reinvented James Bond in Casino Royale so the genre was arguably as loved as it had ever been. Unfortunately, Alpha Protocol did not become an all-time classic like that Bond film, and after playing it, I think I understand why.

Combat in Alpha Protocol is easily some of the worst third person shooting I have ever experienced. Weapons lack impact with enemies barely reacting to being shot in the head which makes every gun feel like it fires pellets. Assault rifles are the only weapons with even a shred of accuracy meaning you are more than likely going to stick to those types of guns. Even then though the aiming reticule is so large that bullets spray everywhere. SMGs are ridiculously inaccurate, pistols have ridiculously low damage and shotguns have ridiculously low range making them all useless. The shooting overall feels unpolished and clearly Obsidian didn’t know how to make a third person stealth action game properly. Now that isn’t me damning the developer entirely as I actually think they are very good at writing dialogue and characters but this seemed to be a genre they hadn’t tackled before and I can easily say it was an unsuccessful attempt. Melee combat is also in the game and to be honest, it makes you feel more like Bruce Lee than James Bond. Thornton (the protagonist) can throw loads of kicks which don’t really mesh with the James Bond tone and the laughably bad animations embarressing reach that make them completly ineffective. The last stumbling block of Alpha Protocol’s gameplay is the over reliance on mini-games. In order to open any container, unlock any door or hack any server, Thornton must endure a tedious mini-game. This did anything but incentivise me and I found myself avoiding some containers because I didn’t want to risk raising an alarm. 

 

 

Most open-world RPGs ship with bugs that's just a fact. Yet Alpha Protocol is not open-world. It has mostly linear corridor levels that offer few alternate paths. So why is the game so glitchy? During my time with the game I encountered so many instances of the AI acting odd. They would shoot walls, glitch through walls or start attacking each other. It’s funny for sure but an unfair challenge to put up with. Fortunately I never experienced any glitches during conversations but I can imagine others have. The game’s technical quality is severely lacking making it feel wholly unfinished. Even the way the game is presented feels lazy and weak. Camera angles mostly use shot reverse shots and rarely offer any varied angles. Mass Effect 2 (a game released a  few months earlier) uses multiple camera shots to capture the tone and show who is in control during dialogue, exhibiting one of Alpha Protocol’s biggest issues. You wouldn’t know Sega funded this game because it looks so drab and has no style. Character models are plain, geometry is simple and although all four hubs are different aesthetically, most of the missions within them tend to blend together. Levels are also surprisingly small again adding to the feeling the game shipped incomplete. The short levels also highlight a problem with the skills system and leveling up Thorton. Most skills acquired have a cool down timer with some being longer than a level’s length meaning they are essentially only used once per mission. Luckily, there are a lot of choices when levelling up Thorton so you can avoid these fairly pointless abilities if you want to.

Most of the spy stories I have come in contact with tend to be simple and easy to follow. Even my favourite Bond films tend to give Bond one goal and don’t try to over complicate things. Alpha Protocol clearly wanted to go deeper. The Depth of this game’s plot will definitely surprise you but it does mean you need to be kept up to date with what’s going on and who is who. This can thankfully be accomplished through the dossiers which chronicle any important information about every character and faction in the game. These dossiers became compulsory reading during my experience and they actually offer gameplay incentives if you dig deep enough. Michael can engage in unique dialogue and even whole scenes if you engage in the dossiers enough making it easily the best implementation of a codex system I have ever seen. Michael Thorton’s story is also more reactive than most RPGs. Every small decision (even the clothes Michael wears) can change how Thorton is treated by other characters. On top of that, all the main choices Michael can make after important missions are morally grey and have consequences. No choice feels as though it has an arbitrarily good or bad response meaning most player’s initial playthroughs will be different. Each of the three main hubs can also be tackled in any order, with the consequences all carrying over between them. The game’s music regrettably doesn’t do much to amplify the tension of scenes though and feels rather generic overall (I am a fan of the track Retrieve Alpha Protocol though).   

The aspect of role-playing games that most entices me is the cast and Alpha Protocol has one of the most underrated casts in gaming. Every character has their own secrets and it is likely that the player will not understand all of them in a single playthrough. Even the most loyal characters like Mina Tang withhold something from Thorton meaning it’s up to you to figure out who he needs to trust. And that is something you can do. If you don’t like those characters, you can ignore them, be rude to them or kill them and this level of freedom is unheard of even today. The cast is admittedly smaller than most RPG casts but all that means is that its quality over quantity and there isn’t a single character I interacted with that I would cut from the game. All four love interests feel natural for Thorton to pursue (although Mina feels like the canonical choice) and they all show elements of weakness that will make the player second guess their decision. The villains also hold up their end of the bargain with each hub villain being some of my highlights. I have seen enough Bind films to understand what a Bond villain should be and Conrad Marburg and Constantine Brayko optimise this. And finally there is Michael Thorton himself. I have said in the past that preset characters in RPGs aren’t really my thing because I believe they tend to pigeonhole how you develop the character. Michael Thorton is the antithesis of this. He is defined by you and the dialogue options best demonstrate this. Michael can speak in dialogue using three tones, professional, aggressive or suave. Professional feels like Craig Bond, suave like Connery Bond, and aggressive makes you feel like a veteran Jason Bourne. The way characters react to you depends on how you treat them and everyone will appreciate a different tone giving you the opportunity to mix and match , allowing Michael Thorton to become an avatar for the player.

 Conclusion

Obsidian clearly wanted to make something special with Alpha Protocol and their strengths are mostly on show. Their steller writing and characters shine as much as they do in Fallout: New Vegas and perhaps even more. Sadly, the game is frustrating to play and that is the most important factor in a game’s enjoyment. It’s a shame too because if Alpha Protocol had been outsourced to another developer or if Obsidian asked for help with the gameplay, the game could have been far more memorable. Instead, it exists as a forgotten relic that is only appreciated by those who invest time in it. There are so many creative blunders in the game’s design and due to this, the game is remembered mostly as a mess. There is s silver-lining though. Very few games offer the reactivity of Alpha Protocol and this is its biggest strength. Alpha Protocol isn’t a good game but it is a fascinating one and for now I don’t see any other RPG being as interesting or complex. 

 

Final rating: Pre-Alpha Protocol 

6/10