The Reviews

[funcroc]

Gamespot - 6.0/10

1UP - B+ (a well-written review by Scott Sharky)

Edited May 28, 2010 by funcroc

[AKofC]

Based on the reviews, the game seems to be somewhat lacking in the looks department but has gone back to the deeper gameplay of yesteryears. Which is perfectly fine by me. Others have said decisions here are actually meaningful unlike say, Mass Effect where it's the same thing, the only choice is how nice you say it, which is nice. Of course, I'm still in a state of perpetual pre-load on Steam so I wouldn't really know. Still, with Obsidian's track record, I doubt I'll be disappointed.

[Wrath of Dagon]

It all amounts to quality of writing and characters being very subjective. Also different reviewers prioritizing different things, as Josh said.

 

Edit: For example I thought Mass Effect story was horrendously stupid and juvenile. Yet most people loved it.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[juncaj8]

that gamespot review touched on alot of valid point. They gave it a score of solid 6 but the way they talked about it was a 7-7.5

[Deus Ex Machina]

The "professional" corporate reviews mean nothing to me.

 

Dragon Age: Origins was bashed by many corporate reviewers, yet I loved the game.

 

I'm sure I'll enjoy AP.

[WorstUsernameEver]

The "professional" corporate reviews mean nothing to me.

 

Dragon Age: Origins was bashed by many corporate reviewers, yet I loved the game.

 

I'm sure I'll enjoy AP.

 

To be honest I don't remember any DA:O bashing at all.

[Oblarg]

Gamespot - 6.0/10

1UP - B+ (a well-written review by Scott Sharky)

 

For a B-, that 1up reviewer really seemed to like it a lot. It's probably one of the better reviews I've read, actually.

 

As for the gamespot review, I wasn't expecting amazing combat, and that's what most of the criticism was aimed at - clunky shooter mechanics.

[Deus Ex Machina]

The "professional" corporate reviews mean nothing to me.

 

Dragon Age: Origins was bashed by many corporate reviewers, yet I loved the game.

 

I'm sure I'll enjoy AP.

 

To be honest I don't remember any DA:O bashing at all.

 

Here's one example.

[Arthx]

IMO, this time most of the reviews are dead wrong about this one. Most of the people I know are really enjoying this, yes, the pc version has some problems, but they aren't nowhere near game-breaking and I'm sure they'll be fixed in time. There is a small percentage of people that completely abandon this gem because of the average graphics and the not very smooth animations, but they probably aren't the target audience in the first place.

[Alpha]

The only thing that i saw in the reviews is the obsession that gamers and reviewers have to compare AP with ME. As soon as i read a comparison , i know what will be the conclusion. AP should be reviewed as the unique RPG that it is...without any kind of developers shadow. Give the game the credit it deserve. The only thing the majority of reviewers are doing is praising other Devs instead of Obsidian.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Alpha

[Hathur]

Dunno if it's been mentioned..

 

G4tv gave it's review http://g4tv.com/games/xbox-360/62110/alpha-protocol/review/

 

Pretty harsh, 2/5.

 

Not that I usually put much weight in G4's reviews to be honest... but just posting it there incase anyone cares.

[WorstUsernameEver]

The "professional" corporate reviews mean nothing to me.

 

Dragon Age: Origins was bashed by many corporate reviewers, yet I loved the game.

 

I'm sure I'll enjoy AP.

 

To be honest I don't remember any DA:O bashing at all.

 

Here's one example.

 

Oh yeah, I remember it. They still give it an 8 in the end for some reason though, and that's one thing that stuck with a lot of people.

They don't seem so afraid of giving Alpha Protocol bad scores.

[Alpha]

For a B-, that 1up reviewer really seemed to like it a lot. It's probably one of the better reviews I've read, actually.

 

 

Seems fair and i know will be an A for me.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Alpha

[Oblarg]

I'm still really baffled at the huge gap between the people who liked it and the people who thought it was terrible. I don't think I've ever seen reviews this polarized before.

[zkylon]

I think i can say now that the negativity is real. I get the feeling it's got the unnecessary harshness for not being a big brand. Like Kane & Lynch. My problem with it is that big brand games are far from perfect (MW2's SP was absurde, if ME2's "streamlining" isn't dumbing down i don't know what that is, Fallout 3 was a mess all around). But yeah, the negativity unfortunately is real. I sure hope it doesn't go down like Troika.

[HoonDing]

At least one can be sure Fallout: New Vegas will be an overwhelming success. Bethesda's backing & name on the box guarantees it.

 

Heck, even a total train-wreck like Rogue Warrior somehow became a cult game (courtesy of F-bombs every 5 seconds).

[Shinaju]

I've been playing for a couple of hours now, and here are what I think is good and bad.

Pro

 

The dialogs are great, the timer makes it feel real, and once in a while the important gives you pressure about what to choose, which is good.

 

The story so far is good, although I feel like they could have explain more important things through dialogs, instead of having to read the notes.

 

Con

 

graphics are bad, its horrible when you look at screenshots, and its a bit better when playing. Some animations are great and smooth, some is just weird. Like when you turn yourself, there are pretty much no animation in between, makes you look like turning in an instant.

 

combat is a hit and miss. there are no hotkeys for skills, meaning you have to switch skills by going to the skill menu (although its fairly quick), and click with your mouse. This makes me wonder why not make it like a wheel? Also shooting is a pain, its really inaccurate when shooting without aiming down long enough, and the aiming takes really long without upgrading your stats. Cover system is broken. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

 

bugs, its a bug fest in this game. Although I have yet to see the game crash during playing (it crashes when exiting ), the mouse prolem is there for a good deal of people, and its game breaking for us. I have already encountered a few bugs when I was just playing the first 5 mins. Bodies still moving when dead (seems to be a unreal engine problem, lots of Unreal games have that problem). AI keep running into the wall. multiple voices speak at once when some of time have already been triggered a while ago (but this only happened once).

 

AI is also a hit and miss. Sometimes they take cover the right way, sometimes they are sitting ducks. When you try to stealth thru the level, if they spot you, everyone knows your EXACT location, even after you hide somewhere else. So until that alarm is reset, your not going to be leaving cover unless you want to get shoot a few times.

 

But even with all those cons, I am having a blast every time when the mouse is smooth. The game is very fun for me, I was surprised by a few details that I wasn't expecting, and it feels good. If I were to give it a score, it would have been 8.5 without the bugs, mainly the mouse problem, with that in consideration would be 5, because I was only been playing smoothly half the time.

[WorstUsernameEver]

^ http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=54971

 

There appears to be a solution to the mouse problem (look in the last posts, Alvin Nelson's reply). Hope it helps.

[funcroc]

RPGamer - 4/5

Game Informer - 6.50/10.00

[juncaj8]

^^

Wth is rogue warrior?

[MoldyCheese]

I think it's boiling down to a broken and disfunctional game at it's core. The only positive that has been mentioned is that your choices affect the story throughout. Yet, the story is being called bland. The basic gameplay is horrid or broken on almost all accounts. 1/3 minigames are tolerable to most of the reviewers. Oh, and the visuals are subpar.

 

I've read every review posted in this thread, and this game is lucky to be getting 5+/10. This is simply due to the fact that most sites will never have review below a 5. Anything below a 7.5 is typically a crap game.

 

I mean, have you guys(the ones saying the reviews aren't bad...) even READ the reviews? Or, are you just going by the score at the end? Cause, there is very little praise going AP's way.

 

I was really hoping that this would hold me over for a couple of months...but I can't justify spending $60 on a sub-par game.

 

*Edit: Just read the RPGamer review which for some reason ignores all of the issues presented by the other sites...It stands as one of the few actually positive written rewviews that have been released thus far.

Edited May 28, 2010 by MoldyCheese

[Wrath of Dagon]

RPG's usually have sub-par combat, and if the game wasn't buggy it wouldn't be the Obsidian we all know and love.

[Morgoth]

I wouldn't call AP buggy. More like a bit glitchy. Nothing gamebreaking.

[Oblarg]

I think it's boiling down to a broken and disfunctional game at it's core. The only positive that has been mentioned is that your choices affect the story throughout. Yet, the story is being called bland. The basic gameplay is horrid or broken on almost all accounts. 1/3 minigames are tolerable to most of the reviewers. Oh, and the visuals are subpar.

 

I've read every review posted in this thread, and this game is lucky to be getting 5+/10. This is simply due to the fact that most sites will never have review below a 5. Anything below a 7.5 is typically a crap game.

 

I mean, have you guys(the ones saying the reviews aren't bad...) even READ the reviews? Or, are you just going by the score at the end? Cause, there is very little praise going AP's way.

 

I was really hoping that this would hold me over for a couple of months...but I can't justify spending $60 on a sub-par game.

 

Never mind the fact that the majority of the reviews we've seen (the European ones) have all given it around an 85.

[Alpha]

7.5 is typically a crap game.

 

 

super wrong...your knowledge is really wrong.

Edited May 28, 2010 by SteveThaiBinh
To remove a direct insult to another community member.