Gaming Alpha Protocol Review

I'm aware of that too sometimes, which is why I try to actively take a step back with some articles *cough*starcraft2*cough*. Still, all that's required for ignorance to thrive is for the learned to say nothing etc.

 

Did you give this game a rating of 5 or is it an S for s**t?

 

http://www.bit-tech.net/scores/

There's our score guide for you. Others might consider a "7" or "8" to mean the same thing: no two sites score the same way.

 

I would like to point out that all comparisons so far are to ME2.

Thats just a little unfair isn't it? If I remember, ME1 was plagued with most of the faults from this game.
Bioware didn't nail mixing shooting with RPG the first time either. In fact they didn't the second time either, they improved the action at the expense of some of the RPG elements.

 

Oh well...

*scrubs game off list*

 

To me this really underscores the differences between Bioware and Obsidian.

I am still pretty interested in this game and I will continue to read other reviews. Though a 5 sounds pretty harsh.

 

Comparing this and ME2 in the same sentence is like comparing a can of Tesco Value beans with some ninja texan BBQ chilli. Sure they share a few traits at the base of things, but the latter is infinity more developed, enjoyable and tasty.

 

I will try the game for my self before I take any anyone's opinion.
Each to their own!!

 

ME1 was still good, though, in spite of its flaws, which is apparently more than can be said for AP. ME1 has a great story with superb acting, an interesting and well-developed world, and although the hacking / mining minigame was repetitive is was thankfully quick and merciful. The shooting was fine in ME1, so long as you invested skill points in a chosen discipline; I think the problem was that you still had access to the weapons that you weren't trained to use - fortunately Bioware corrected that in the sequel.

 

Not really a lot of point in you reading reviews then, is there?

 

But it has a headslam option!

Never mind, headslamming is only cool for so long. I'll give it a miss.

 

This review was obviously written by a person who is terrible at games and has no love for action RPG's. The game looks, feels and plays like Mass Effect set in a modern world, with deeper RPG elements. Does it do anything perfectly? NO. But it does do most things better than most games do one thing. I am halfway through AP and so far, so good. I spend a ton of time in the safehouse reading/replying to e-mails, reading intel, customizing Thorton's weapons and armor, then heading out to wreak havoc on missions in a ton of different ways. The timed conversation system will keep you on your toes the entire time and due to the fact that this game has more endings than Chrono Trigger, there is a ton of replay value. I can't count how many times I skipped through conversations in Mass Effect 1 & 2, but in AP, I paid attention to every word The minigames are more fun and challenging than in most games, and anyone who says they are impossibly hard and frustrating is simply bad at videogames. Is Alpha Protocol a perfect game? NO. But is it a damn good game? YES.

 

It sure as hell does!!

 

Oh well, look at you acting all high and mighty. As a matter of fact, this is a genre which I have a whole lot of experience with myself. Playing all of Obsidians games hardly qualifies you as an expert on the subject.

As for the rest, you didn't give a single reason as to why a simplified skill system in one game qualifies as worse than in another given your criteria for RPGs.

"it pretends to give you hacking, stealth, action options, but they all amount to the same"

Examples please? How do they all amount to the same? I think you are lying through your teeth here.

As far as the targeting goes, I guess you've never Played Deus Ex. The targeting is pretty much a complete rip from DE, and that is how an action RPG should be done. You claim to have a lot of experience with the RPG genre, but for some reason you fail to mention that the targeting in AP is that way because it's based on stat based gameplay, like RPGs traditionally are. How is that a bad thing for an RPG? Oh wait, you like your RPGs to have skillbased gameplay and play like a shooter, like in ME2.

"only rarely worth the effort"

You seem to like this phrase a lot. Again, examples. And how is the skill system in ME2 any better and more worth the effort.

Lastly, you seem to have ignored the probably one biggest part of the modern RPG, Choices and Consequenses, which this game apparently has in abundance. Some RPG fan you are.

 

Never wanted to buy this game any way and now just in case I get sued I can blame Bit-Tech for persuading and influencing me not to buy this CRAPtacular game.

Thanks Bit-Tech for the honest review.

 

Not really no. But its unfair to others that will not buy the game because of the reviews and yet to other people it may be an excellent game to them.

Heres my example.

I read reviews of a game that I really enjoyed 'Prey' reviews were slagging the game off.
Yet I found the game to be fascinating and I really enjoyed the game right to the end.

So, I would rather buy the game and have my own opinion of it.
Its not like I'm forking out £45 for a game now.

Simon.

 

I'm not sure about this review -

First we're told that the enemy AI is so bad you can walk right beside them, and they won't notice you.

Then, later, we're told that the enemy AI is so sensitive that it's impossible to sneak buy them.

I think I'll check around before I write this one off.

 

True_Gamer has a point, after all if everyone simply followed the review no-one would buy low-rated games. If you were determined to play a game, you would regardless of the score.

For example, I pre-ordered+played AvP, which I think only got a 6/10 on here, but thoroughly enjoyed it (not as much as SC:Conviction though), and both games were cheap for new games (especially compared to consoles).

Also, Alpha Protocol is quite cheap already (18 squid on base.com).

 

I had a lot of hope for this game. I'll still probably pick it up when it drops (significantly) in price though. Some of the other reviews aren't so bad and I'm sure I can have fun with it as long as it's decent.

 

Wait wait, he has a point? The point being people have different opinions? Wow, insightful use of common sense there.

I don't know why people give reviews such crap for using numbers. Just because a game gets 5 doesn't mean no one will like it. I simply see scores as a rough probability I will like a game. This gets a 5? 50%/50% chance that I will like it is the way I see it.

The only reason you should read a review is to find out if there are any issues with a game that might bother you. If a reviewer has an issue with a game, and you see that issue as nothing to worry about, then you have learned something and the review has achieved what it is meant to. The score just reflects the reviewers opinion, and is largely only useful in mass samples (gamerankings or metacritic etc) as a rough guide. Anyone who gives a **** what score a game gets after reading a review is seriously missing the point.

To be honest, I watched a few gameplay trailers, and while it sounded great when I read about it, in action the game looks boring, unpolished and a little mediocre. Granted, some people will disagree, and some people will agree but still enjoy the game.

And finally;

You might think he has ignored probably the biggest part of the modern RPG, but I think the are missing the most important part of any game, ever; having fun. And from the looks and sounds of it, AP is just not fun. Sure, talk about choice all you want, but if I don't care enough or I'm not enjoying the game, all the choice in the world isn't going to stop me from dropping the game there and then.