Libertarian

I disagree. Alpha Protocol certainly has its fair share of faults, no doubt. However, it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. The gameplay isn't its highlight. It has a certain degree of jank to it. But it's still very playable and even a bit fun. And even though the A.I. is lacking in a few brain cells, it's still a challenging game at times, especially since many of the bad guys just rush you and grenade spam. Sure, this could be bad game design overall, but at least it provides a bit of challenge. Also, I don't think the visuals are as bad as they're made out to be. Here's what sucks about the overall presentation: 1. A good amount of screen tear. 2. Texture pop-in (although I've gotten used to this in games using the Unreal Engine 3...) 3. Some environments seem to be missing a few textures. 4. Some framerate dips. With that said, I think there's some well done character models. I think some levels have some very nice lighting. And I also think many parts of the game, visually speaking, get the job done. It could've been a much more polished product with all the extra time they had, but still, even with its warts, I find Alpha Protocol to be an enjoyable Action/RPG. I look at it the same way I looked at Mass Effect 1 on Xbox 360. That game had bad texture pop-in, a lot of slowdown, and a high degree of jank to it. That was put out in 2007, so yes, it's nearly 3 years after that game came out, but most of us still love it despite its faults -- and they were in the many. Bioware certainly fixed the technical shortcomings with the sequel. I think Obsidian could do the same with Alpha Protocol since the groundwork is laid. However, I sincerely doubt we'll ever see that and it's sad. This is a solid first attempt for this style of RPG. It has issues that should've been polished up before release, but it's still not a bad game. And btw, I'm a Bioware fanboy.