mkreku Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/alpha-pr...-august-preview Not very positive (they mainly describe it as bland) but Eurogamer are known for being harsh. Sometimes. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!
Oner Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) They're also good at misreading/hearing a 3 letter long name. : x Edited August 5, 2009 by Oner Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
Sannom Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 I must not be good at reading, but is seems to me that they describe their experience in a positive way, no? Unless this article is only sarcarsm all the way of course... I kinda liked the comparaison with Mass Effect They seem to worry about the Hub system... well, they're right, less freedom on that point, I hope they won't be too harsh though. Art they're not fond of... well, it was bound to dislike to some. But I really want to see the Mafia Boos, this guy is gonna be epic (not too much of a fan of Sie for the moment).
Nepenthe Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 I must not be good at reading, but is seems to me that they describe their experience in a positive way, no? Unless this article is only sarcarsm all the way of course... I kinda liked the comparaison with Mass Effect I think the article just displays a different attitude towards previewing games, one that leaves judging until the actual review. They're obviously pointing out what they see as the good/interesting/different from norm bits as well as those that might be negatives. If I hadn't heard of alpha protocol before, this would have piqued my interest for sure. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
mrmud Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 Alec Meer (who wrote the preview for Eurogamer) is known for not doing what the rest of the gaming press is guilty of, namely having never mentioning a bad thing in a preview. From what I understand RPS (whom Alec is part of) are known to be supporters of Obsidian so it is not the case of someone writing a preview of a game the don't understand. Personally I think most of the article is positive and I do agree with the negatives. The game doesn't look good, it just doesn't. Now graphics in an RPG aren't very important to me, but this is the generally accepted truth.
Pidesco Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 From what I understand RPS (whom Alec is part of) are known to be supporters of Obsidian Not really, actually. Not that they don't like Obsidian, just that they don't give Obsidian all that much support. They seem to be big Oblivion and Mass Effect fans. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend.
Sannom Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 Now graphics in an RPG aren't very important to me, but this is the generally accepted truth. Sometimes I wonder what's Chris Avelone opinion on the graphiscs... for me, Planescape : Torment is his masterpiece. And that game, as good as it was, still suffered from big limitations in combat options, class options and equipment options. Even though some of these were due to a choice of design (no sword for example), a lot were limited because the team put such an emphasis on dialogues, story and graphics (namely : armor, ranged weapons of any sort, AoE spells, etc). Even the GUI suffered from that focus on graphics along with story.
blankers Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 Adaptation to your play-style, not punishment. In fact, Alpha Protocol could even be said to be rewarding you for playing however you like. While clearly this is only one example, if Obsidian can stretch this philosophy across all 30-odd hours of the game (which sounds short for an RPG, but the 120 hours of dialogue hint at huge scope for replay) it could achieve something role-playing developers have been chasing in vain for years: a game that's truly shaped by you, not one that simply tumbles into arbitrary good, bad, and somewhere-in-the-middle. I don't know what you guys are complaining about, that right there tickles me in all the right spots and some I'd forgotten I even had.
Pidesco Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 I'm not complaining about RPS,by the way. As far as game journalists go their on the good side of the spectrum, and I enjoy their writing. It's just that their interests in RPGs seem to lean towards accessible and mainstream. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend.
blankers Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 Too many MMO posts for me, I kicked them off my RSS reader a while ago.
Freezerr Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 Very nice review. Pretty much confirms exactly what I've been seeing about the game so far - there's potential for this to be a really phenomenal title.
kreese12 Posted August 5, 2009 Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) I must not be good at reading, but is seems to me that they describe their experience in a positive way, no? Unless this article is only sarcarsm all the way of course... I kinda liked the comparaison with Mass Effect They compare AP to Mass Effect! What ! No Way! Who would do such a crazy thing Everybody knows there are no similarities ESPECIALLY the skill screens. "While superficially the action and the levelling up/abilities system is reminiscent of Mass Effect..." hrmm I really remember someone saying something like that before. Who was it... Edited August 5, 2009 by kreese12
Wrath of Dagon Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 Seems unusually insightful. On the other, it could severely limit the sense of world and place, in favour of a series of arenas with cut-scenes in between.That's exactly my concern. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
J.E. Sawyer Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 Seems like a totally fair and reasonable preview. It's unfortunate that this sort of measured reporting is considered out of line. twitter tyme
Sannom Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 That's exactly my concern. I think it all comes down at what you expect from Alpha Protocol. I think the guy who made the preview is concerned too, and should be, but I think he sees that it is a choice of design in order to bring what is really important in Alpha Protocol. I never saw that game as having massive "spatial" freedom : you choose the mission from the Hub, and then you get there and complete the mission whatever way you like. The freedom in Alpha Protocol is really focused on Michael's way of doing things and his relationship with the different factions.
Sid Nitzerglobin Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 Seems pretty even handed for a preview. As mentioned, if I was an RPG fan who hadn't heard of AP or Obsidian some how, this would certainly have me interested.
RPGmasterBoo Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 Its an okay preview. He just wasn't paid to drool all over the game as they usually are, that's why it doesn't come with the orgasmic thrill of Half Life 7 and Crysis 5. Eurogamer sucks anyway. I found their reviewers uninformed on the topic of gaming history on several occasions. Imperium Thought for the Day: Even a man who has nothing can still offer his life
Bos_hybrid Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 (edited) Its an okay preview. He just wasn't paid to drool all over the game as they usually are, that's why it doesn't come with the orgasmic thrill of Half Life 7 and Crysis 5. Eurogamer sucks anyway. I found their reviewers uninformed on the topic of gaming history on several occasions. So because they don't say AP is the second coming and don't agree with your opinions they suck. Seems pretty even handed for a preview. I agree. Edited August 7, 2009 by Bos_hybrid
coomber Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Its an okay preview. He just wasn't paid to drool all over the game as they usually are, that's why it doesn't come with the orgasmic thrill of Half Life 7 and Crysis 5. Eurogamer sucks anyway. I found their reviewers uninformed on the topic of gaming history on several occasions. I do wish people would stop coming out with this crap that journalists are paid to write positive reviews. I'm a journalist, and trust me - we aren't. Eurogamer is very hit and miss with its reviews. I'm not familiar with the guy who wrote this article. Their RPG reviews are normally done by Kristan Reed who, like the site, is unpredictable but generally there or thereabouts with his scoring.
RPGmasterBoo Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 So because they don't say AP is the second coming and don't agree with your opinions they suck. No I was just poinitng out that the article didnt drool over the game because it doesn't have the backing of one Crysis say. That's why the preview is so frank and devoid of hype. Imperium Thought for the Day: Even a man who has nothing can still offer his life
RPGmasterBoo Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 I do wish people would stop coming out with this crap that journalists are paid to write positive reviews. I'm a journalist, and trust me - we aren't. Eurogamer is very hit and miss with its reviews. I'm not familiar with the guy who wrote this article. Their RPG reviews are normally done by Kristan Reed who, like the site, is unpredictable but generally there or thereabouts with his scoring. So you give absurdly high grades to crap games, for nothing?? Eg. Oblivion, Crysis, Fallout 3... That's just... illogical. You might not be paid, but its obvious to anyone who has eyes and a brain that there is a large number of games that are bound to have high grades even before they are released, and on the other hand that there are games that don't have that kind of advertising power and are thus sentenced to making a name for themselves on their own. No one who knows anything about cRPG's would say that Oblivion is a better game than the Witcher, yet the former was graded in general above 90 and the latter between 80-90. There is obvious favoritism at work, and no other way to explain it besides money. The honest reviewer in the Kane & Lynch case on Gamespot proves this. Imperium Thought for the Day: Even a man who has nothing can still offer his life
Nepenthe Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 I do wish people would stop coming out with this crap that journalists are paid to write positive reviews. I'm a journalist, and trust me - we aren't. Having read more than a few British hifi mags, I'd say that in some cases, at least the publisher is getting paid for it, even if the writer isn't. You're a cheery wee bugger, Nep. Have I ever said that? Reapercussions
Humodour Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 "While superficially the action and the levelling up/abilities system is reminiscent of Mass Effect..." hrmm I really remember someone saying something like that before. Who was it... I had to bold a word for you because you clearly missed it.
Slowtrain Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 I do wish people would stop coming out with this crap that journalists are paid to write positive reviews. I'm a journalist, and trust me - we aren't. Eurogamer is very hit and miss with its reviews. I'm not familiar with the guy who wrote this article. Their RPG reviews are normally done by Kristan Reed who, like the site, is unpredictable but generally there or thereabouts with his scoring. So you give absurdly high grades to crap games, for nothing?? Eg. Oblivion, Crysis, Fallout 3... That's just... illogical. You might not be paid, but its obvious to anyone who has eyes and a brain that there is a large number of games that are bound to have high grades even before they are released, and on the other hand that there are games that don't have that kind of advertising power and are thus sentenced to making a name for themselves on their own. No one who knows anything about cRPG's would say that Oblivion is a better game than the Witcher, yet the former was graded in general above 90 and the latter between 80-90. There is obvious favoritism at work, and no other way to explain it besides money. The honest reviewer in the Kane & Lynch case on Gamespot proves this. The other possibility is that a lot of game reviewers don't know what they are talking about or they are not playing the games with a critical eye. I mean, how else can you explain a absolutely horrible game like Oblivion getting such insanely high scores. But yeah, game reviews are highly suspect, I think. Generally speaking of course. There will always be exceptions. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Bos_hybrid Posted August 8, 2009 Posted August 8, 2009 So you give absurdly high grades to crap games, for nothing?? Eg. Oblivion, Crysis, Fallout 3... That's just... illogical. You might not be paid, but its obvious to anyone who has eyes and a brain that there is a large number of games that are bound to have high grades even before they are released, and on the other hand that there are games that don't have that kind of advertising power and are thus sentenced to making a name for themselves on their own. No one who knows anything about cRPG's would say that Oblivion is a better game than the Witcher, yet the former was graded in general above 90 and the latter between 80-90. Well the Witcher didn't deserve anywhere near 80-90, so all those reviewers must of been paid too. The other possibility is that a lot of game reviewers don't know what they are talking about or they are not playing the games with a critical eye. I mean, how else can you explain a absolutely horrible game like Oblivion getting such insanely high scores. But yeah, game reviews are highly suspect, I think. Generally speaking of course. There will always be exceptions. Or perhaps, just maybe, they have a different opinion to you.
Recommended Posts