The Reviews

[Paraclete]

I think the reason why people were telling you to be careful about IGN reviews is that IGN, gamespot etc. are notorious for being very forgiving of the flaws of "hype machine" titles, while being unreasonably harsh at the flaws of lesser known ones.

 

Alpha Protocol doesn't fall into the modern warfare 2, fallout 3, dragon age hype machine so its far more susceptible to getting a review that would emphasize the flaws.

 

 

Aside from the accusations of being paid off which might be true, those big name review websites have a ve$ted intere$t in giving good scores to big sellers like modern warfare 2 even though the game had some serious flaws for the PC.

How was Dragon Age or F3 flawed hype machine?

[WorstUsernameEver]

I think the reason why people were telling you to be careful about IGN reviews is that IGN, gamespot etc. are notorious for being very forgiving of the flaws of "hype machine" titles, while being unreasonably harsh at the flaws of lesser known ones.

 

Alpha Protocol doesn't fall into the modern warfare 2, fallout 3, dragon age hype machine so its far more susceptible to getting a review that would emphasize the flaws.

 

 

Aside from the accusations of being paid off which might be true, those big name review websites have a ve$ted intere$t in giving good scores to big sellers like modern warfare 2 even though the game had some serious flaws for the PC.

How was Dragon Age or F3 flawed hype machine?

 

I assume he means that reviews tended to emphasize the good and sweep the flaws under the rug.

Granted, I actually think that both games are good and they would have had good reviews regardless of the hype of the publisher. Funny thing is, I prefer Dragon Age, but I think it's the game that has less mainstream appeal and that probably suffered a bit more in the reviews compared to Fallout 3.

 

As for Alpha Protocol, there's nearly not all that hype, in part because the graphics are dated, in part because SEGA & Obsidian don't have the same prestige as EA & Bioware and Bethesda, and in part also probably because of the reduced mainstream appeal.

 

I, however, am against the 'ooooh, reviewers are corrupted, so let's not take into account when a reviewer brings up a flaw'.

If a reviewer points out something he considers a flaw, it's fair, as long as the review is informative and gives people who read a good idea of what game they're going to play (or not).

I also think more feedback is always good for the devs, even when they screw up a game badly (which from what I've seen isn't the case, though the bit-tech reviewer seems to think otherwise).

[Toe Tagger Joe]

I am not sure where but i think ive read that review before...somewhere else.

 

It'd be kind of funny if he stole that horrible review from someone else. Just shows how intelligent and lazy some people are.

[WorstUsernameEver]

That review is indeed pretty bad and sounds a lot like '13 years-old douche' but the fact that the first 3 reviews get the game an average of 5.0, doesn't help the game nor Obsidian.

Or maybe I'm just overtly negative today.

[Oner]

The first 3 reviews gave it 87-88.

[Pidesco]

@worst: It's not that reviewers are corrupt, but rather that they are incompetent.

[fuZZ]

games master gave it a stellar 84% stating the game is "gripping, innovative and deserving of both success and a sequel"

 

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=248658

[funcroc]

GamesMaster (UK mag?) - 84% Edited May 27, 2010 by funcroc

[WorstUsernameEver]

The first 3 reviews gave it 87-88.

 

I was talking of the IGN user reviews you silly.

 

@The moderator with the amusing cat avatar - I very much know, but I still think that some points deserve to be analyzed, even if they derive from horrible misinterpretations of the designers' intent. For example it's quite clear that Alpha Protocol didn't manage to get its design philosophy across with some even after putting the subtitle, and it's quite clear that otherwise, some people will feel that it's too light as an rpg.

[fuZZ]

GamesMaster (UK mag?) - 84%

 

too late see above your post...

[Toe Tagger Joe]

That review is indeed pretty bad and sounds a lot like '13 years-old douche' but the fact that the first 3 reviews get the game an average of 5.0, doesn't help the game nor Obsidian.

 

True, but there's still quite a few people waiting to play the game... So who knows how it'll turn out? June 1st can't get here soon enough.

[WorstUsernameEver]

That review is indeed pretty bad and sounds a lot like '13 years-old douche' but the fact that the first 3 reviews get the game an average of 5.0, doesn't help the game nor Obsidian.

 

True, but there's still quite a few people waiting to play the game... So who knows how it'll turn out? June 1st can't get here soon enough.

 

Yeah, as I've already said, it's probably me being overtly negative, especially since some games with rather mixed reviews on Metacritic still manage to achieve a respectable success. It also appears like I generally enjoy less polished/well-received games compare to the mainstream (not because of their lack of polish, but because imho they're better in other departments ).

[Tel Aviv]

I can't vouch for GamesMaster's integrity but another 80+ is always welcome!

[WorstUsernameEver]

I can't vouch for GamesMaster's integrity but another 80+ is always welcome!

 

Meaning that you don't like the mag, or that you haven't read it?

[Jokerman89]

GamesMaster is fair...well it was like 3 years ago when i last read it

[Toe Tagger Joe]

Yeah, as I've already said, it's probably me being overtly negative, especially since some games with rather mixed reviews on Metacritic still manage to achieve a respectable success. It also appears like I generally enjoy less polished/well-received games compare to the mainstream (not because of their lack of polish, but because imho they're better in other departments ).

 

As long as Alpha Protocol gets an 85 or higher on average (read: metacritic), it should do fine in sales. At least, according to Activision:

 

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/21...ore-metacritic/

 

As for liking less-polished/well-received games, I'm right there with you.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Toe Tagger Joe

[Tel Aviv]

I can't vouch for GamesMaster's integrity but another 80+ is always welcome!

 

Meaning that you don't like the mag, or that you haven't read it?

Oh, I haven't read enough to judge. But if they gave AP an 80+ they must be good!

[Malcador]

I'm waiting for the Eurogamer review as well. A bit apprehensive at the outcome of that though

[Alpha]

Here's a pretty entertaining review off of gamespot. It was sent to me via xbox live by someone who knows I pre-ordered Alpha Protocol.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/rpg/alphap...%3Bcontinue%3B1

 

 

EDIT: It also manages to be even less informative than the one mentioned above this post.

Those reviews are from "reviewer wannabe" that i am sure enjoyed the game and later bash it. The game maybe isn't a perfect 10 but neither deserve a mediocre score , much less 1.

Edited May 27, 2010 by Alpha

[Toe Tagger Joe]

Here's a pretty entertaining review off of gamespot. It was sent to me via xbox live by someone who knows I pre-ordered Alpha Protocol.

 

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/rpg/alphap...%3Bcontinue%3B1

 

 

EDIT: It also manages to be even less informative than the one mentioned above this post.

Those reviews are from "reviewer wannabe" that i am sure enjoyed the game and later bash it. The game maybe isn't a perfect 10 but neither deserve a mediocre score , much less 1.

 

I couldn't agree more about the reviewer. I don't think he even the genre of the game judging by this sentence (even though it says "RPG" on the box):

 

The shooting is also problematic as it presents itself as a shooter, but its more like an rpg where you slowly take down a health bar.

 

As for the quality of the game itself, I imagine it's better than he says it is. I'll have to wait until June 1st to see though.

[fastpunk]

The shooting is also problematic as it presents itself as a shooter, but its more like an rpg where you slowly take down a health bar.

 

As opposed to shooters, where you also take down a health bar. It's just not visible as a HUD element. Oh, these RPG thingies!

[kreese12]

Whew that Bit-Tech review was pretty damning.

[Oblarg]

The only review I'm looking forward to is the Zero Punctuation review...if there even is one.

[WorstUsernameEver]

The only review I'm looking forward to is the Zero Punctuation review...if there even is one.

 

Yatzee is usually fun but rarely insightful.

[Oblarg]

The only review I'm looking forward to is the Zero Punctuation review...if there even is one.

 

Yatzee is usually fun but rarely insightful.

 

When is the last time any video game review was insightful?