Why such bad reviews of Alpha Protocol

I must say I didnt expect much of AP. Following its development, looking gameplay videos (that strange sneak animation) , having game delayed suddenly for so long, and last but not least knowing Obsidian's knack for releasing unpolished games.

But I got the game.

And to my surprise - It is truly a good game!

I am way past 2/3 of the game right now. Going full stealth option.

Let me touch on some of criticism reviews branded the game with:

1.Stealth is not up to par with Splinter Cell / Thief
- Its different mechanic, stealth in this game is Metal Gear Solid stealth

2.Shooting gameplay is not that good.
-Its way better than Mass Effect 2. And that one got raving reviews

3.Dialogue is not good.
- What ? Trust me - its OBSIDIAN game.

4.Bugs
- Ok, I played 18+ hours and so far didnt see one bug. Am I so lucky ?

5.Bad animations & graphics
- I am professional animator and am very critical of that stuff. Its simply not true.
Even the dreaded sneak animation actually works great when you play. Graphics is very good ( its not Mass Effect 2 , but shall we now give bad reviews to anything that has not have 100 million dollar production budget ? )

And by the way levels design is far far far better and more varied than ME2.

Last but not least the gameplay is fun and engaging, there is never a dull moment. And game has crazy replayability.



So why such bad reviews ? Care to explain this to me ?

Why don't you ask the reviewers or read the reviews?

I think the actual shooting mechanics are mainly turning quite a few people off. You really need to line up all your shots, which is a big contrast to most other modern games.

About the animations - I think the sneak animation is still tollerable. Regardless though, I can't shake away the thought of all the backpain that Mike mustn't be having from sneaking arround like that. So I'd rather call it a bad choice of posture rather than bad animating.

Then ofcourse, there is also the moonwalking. I'm not putting the blame on bad animation, but rather poor communication? In both this game and NwN2 it just feels that the animators and programmers each had a differant idea about the movement speed. I'd blame actual game-designers for that in both games, they're supposed to coordinate this.

It's like when the US and the EU would work together on something involving math, without a consencus about weither to use a , or . as the decimal separator.

Why so bad reviws ? Read here ... http://free-pc-guides.com/games/dif...vs-us-reviews-whos-right-and-whos-wrong-01928

Sure I can explain... like many of us, they didn't like it.

What's the purpose of this thread? This has already been talked about ad nauseum. It's a game that most people either love or hate. I think it's very mediocre personally, but I'm glad you're enjoying it.

My personal theory is that the US reviewers don't cut slack for technical messes, and EU reviewers sympathise with Obsidian based on past experiences.

As always, the truth is somewhere in-between.

That's my perception, anyway. Objectively speaking, anyone claiming it's a masterpiece, or even a flawed masterpiece are doing drugs. Those who claim it's abysmal or downright awful are drinking heavily.

Question about the Sneaking. In the PC version using Keyboard is the default animation of him "hurring fast forward" standard or is it sneaking he does?

I am with the XBOX and using the controller you can truly sneak, and i have no problem with that animation. The animation gets a little funny when you "hurry" - move the controller full tilt. Just asking.

And points regarding 5. I feel it too. I can't help myself for feeling if another "big" company made it it would have been rated almost perfect. Or perhaps i played to many bad games lately that i lost track of how a good game should be!

JDR13 said:

Sure I can explain… like many of us, they didn't like it.

What's the purpose of this thread? This has already been talked about ad nauseum. It's a game that most people either love or hate. I think it's very mediocre personally, but I'm glad you're enjoying it.

Click to expand...

Purpose of this thread ?

1. Bad reviews could mean bad sales for AP. Which could lead to closure of Obsidian.

And this is bad because: first AP is really not that bad or deserving that bad review. Second:I fear Obsidian may go way of Troika. Top RPG studio closed just because reviewers could not go past lack of polish (and perhaps complexity > casuality) and enjoy true masterpieces of RPG genre

2. Because lately to many real good RPGs are slanted by reviewers ( Witcher , Risen ) while in same time simplified over and produced games are getting unreasonably high marks ( Mass Effect 2 , Fallout 3) (and i know here some might not agree , but both Risen and Witcher did not deserve such low marks, while ME2 , FO3 didnt deserve such high ones )


In fact I am just concerned that lately reviews praise highly produced expensive games , while lower budget ones are simply dragged trough dirt.

And god forbid that such games are also RPGs with inventory and complex skill systems. Or differ from the NORM.

And reviews do influence sales and future of game companies

I'm pretty sure a few honest reviews aren't going to lead to the closure of Obsidian.

Twotricks said:

1. Bad reviews could mean bad sales for AP. Which could lead to closure of Obsidian.

Click to expand...

I can only speak for Germany/Europe but as far as I can tell bad reviews have nothing to little to do with the poor sales performance of AP in our part of the world.

The game has been heavily discounted even before any reviews were even available. You could buy the PC version of AP for GBP 17.99 from Amazon.co.uk or EUR 23.49 from Play.com before even a single review for the game was released.

For some reason the demand (i.e. pre-orders) for this game must have been abysmal regardless of reviews. Same for the console versions. The latter can be had for GBP 29.99 (instead of the usual full price GBP 49.99 for new games) from Amazon.co.uk.

Sure, Play.com is selling the game for full price on X360 and PS3 (~EUR 50) but let's check its sales performance, shall we?
Well, the PS3 version is at #45 in their best selling games charts and the X360 version ranks at #84 at the time of this post. For a new game that's simply beyond poor.

OK, granted, the PC version is the #3 best selling PC game on Play.com but let us remember that the game is only selling for EUR 23.49 (the usual retail price for new games on Play.com is between EUR 32.49 and 49.95). On Amazon.co.uk it's even crazier. Despite the fact that the PC game is only GBP 17.99 it only ranks at #180 in the PC sales charts.

As far as Amazon.de is concerned (as a quick reminder: the PC is still doing pretty well compared to other territories over here), the game is #10 in the PC charts at a noticeably reduced sales price of EUR 34.83. The X360 version is #43 and the PS3 version is #39 (both also slightly reduced compared to other console full price titles).

In the latest UK charts (all formats) AP only ranks at #17 (look at the games that are ahead of AP that you have never even heard about). Again that's really poor for a new game, especially for a heavily discounted one.

Conclusion: Whatever the reason may be, the game just isn't selling in Europe. I doubt that reviews have that much of an influence in that short amount of time that the game has been available so far. Besides, as I pointed out above, the discounts already happened even before a single review for AP was published in print or on the net.
The game just doesn't sell and the little it does sell is at a very sucky ASP for Sega due to the discounts. They may be moving some volume on the PC (#3 best selling PC game on Play.com) but at a price of only EUR 23.49 for a new release it seems highly questionable whether the volume (the volume itself being a questionable matter in fact) will suffice to turn AP into a success for Sega.

I sorta hate to use this overwrought expression but as far as I can tell AP is sales-wise an "epic fail" already and that is regardless of the mostly poor reviews.

2. Because lately to many real good RPGs are slanted by reviewers ( Witcher , Risen )

Click to expand...

Well, according to Metacritic, The Witcher (original) scored 81% and the enhanced edition even got 86%. Risen (PC) received 77%.
That's not what I'd call "slanted by reviewers" though YMMV, of course.

I agree that some of the games by Bethesda, BioWare or Blizzard may have received unproportional scores but Dhruin has delivered a pretty good explanation for why this may be in this post.
Ironically, I'd say that Obsidian is in the same boat in a way since there are many apologists who will find all sorts of obscure excuses for why Obsidian games are "flawed gems" or "diamonds in the rough" when in reality their game just plain sucks (just like BioWare/Blizzard/Bethesda don't always deliver the level of polish or quality storytelling that people like to attribute to them).

Poor marketing from Sega seems the most likely explanation for low sales, apparently their better console titles have sold very poorly too (Yakuza 3, Valkyria Chronicles). Take the delay - retailers publicised this weeks before the original release date, but Sega didn't even acknowledge it until after the date had passed. It looks to me that Sega never gave it much of a chance.

Regarding the shooting - GameTrailers specifically said they hated it because they would line up a shot right on an enemy's head, shoot, and miss completely. From what I've seen, that's pretty much the same system that Deus Ex uses. Basically, GT was saying that it looked like a shooter so they wanted it to act like a shooter.

That's the kind of thinking that really scares me. Genres are supposed to be used to help classify games. Now the genres are dictating the games! If you make a shooter then you will have a cover system, your health will regenerate after about 5 seconds, and you will never leave the player ammo starved. Fail on any of those and you did it WRONG - not different, WRONG.

Such is the price of popularity, I guess. Want to be a country music star? You better have a country accent. Want to make a sit-com? OK, here's the forumla for when you have jokes and when you're serious - and get yourself a good laugh track. Slasher movie? Jeez, there are movies laughing at the predictability of those movies.

Alpha Protocol breaks the mold. Even if the mold is only a few years old, a lot of people are going to hate the game simply because they saw the video, thought it would be a shooter, then found out it wasn't. It's really their own fault for thinking they knew all about how a game worked just from watching 30 seconds of video but they are going to blame the game anyway.

(And, of course, you'll have plenty of people who don't like a game simply because it isn't to their taste.)

P.S. Remember that the Witcher was released with some pretty horrific loading time problems.

Moriendor said:

Conclusion: Whatever the reason may be, the game just isn't selling in Europe. I doubt that reviews have that much of an influence in that short amount of time that the game has been available so far. Besides, as I pointed out above, the discounts already happened even before a single review for AP was published in print or on the net.
The game just doesn't sell and the little it does sell is at a very sucky ASP for Sega due to the discounts. They may be moving some volume on the PC (#3 best selling PC game on Play.com) but at a price of only EUR 23.49 for a new release it seems highly questionable whether the volume (the volume itself being a questionable matter in fact) will suffice to turn AP into a success for Sega.

I sorta hate to use this overwrought expression but as far as I can tell AP is sales-wise an "epic fail" already and that is regardless of the mostly poor reviews.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Most of this hints at a terrible sales performance in Europe.

AP is #3 in the German Media Control charts for PC Games >28€. Okayish, but not really good - for full price. Weak for a new, discounted AAA production.

Great, just what we need: another big warning sign to developers not to invest in C&C, unusual settings, or anything remotely out of the ordinary. And Obsidian will remain the developer of sequels other studios can't be arsed to develop themselves.

GhanBuriGhan said:

Great, just what we need: another big warning sign to developers not to invest in C&C, unusual settings, or anything remotely out of the ordinary.

Click to expand...

You know, everything I heard about this game before release didn't entice me in the slightest. Realistic spy thrillers don't interest me, and I don't buy the game just because I like the publisher. The only way to entice me would have been to make it much more humorous, like a completely over-the-top Bond movie, great soundtrack included. I'm not sure whether the game has any aspects of this, but it sure doesn't sound so.

I don't feel guilty because of this. If there are too many people like me, I can only say that the game developer didn't do his homework.

Turjan said:

You know, everything I heard about this game before release didn't entice me in the slightest. Realistic spy thrillers don't interest me, and I don't buy the game just because I like the publisher. The only way to entice me would have been to make it much more humorous, like a completely over-the-top Bond movie, great soundtrack included. I'm not sure whether the game has any aspects of this, but it sure doesn't sound so.

I don't feel guilty because of this. If there are too many people like me, I can only say that the game developer didn't do his homework.

Click to expand...

That's fine, I really should only speak for myself as well. It's not that I am a big fan of the spy genre myself, but I was intrigued by the level and implementation of choice in this game, and definitely plan to buy it specifically for that aspect. And while I still like classic fantasy and space Opera and post-apocalypse, I'd really like to see more variety in settings and tone and topics implemented in games, in particular in my favorite genre. And seeing how risk-averse the industry already is today... I was reacting to that, mainly.

GhanBuriGhan said:

That's fine, I really should only speak for myself as well. It's not that I am a big fan of the spy genre myself, but I was intrigued by the level and implementation of choice in this game, and definitely plan to buy it specifically for that aspect. And while I still like classic fantasy and space Opera and post-apocalypse, I'd really like to see more variety in settings and tone and topics implemented in games, in particular in my favorite genre. And seeing how risk-averse the industry already is today… I was reacting to that, mainly.

Click to expand...

I can understand that. I should have restricted what I said to my own opinion in my last post, too, because I doubt that I'm the measure of all things. I'm extremely picky with games. I see this more of a negative thing, as I really wish I would be interested in a broader spectrum of products. I'm not interested in post-apocalypse, either, so no Fallout 1/2/3 for me. Even everything I see of Dragon Age turns me off with its grim&gritty™ atmosphere (darkspawn )*, so I'm a bit grumpy at the moment. I see all these AAA titles and am sorely disappointed. I just hope I will see something more fantastic and thought-provoking like Morrowind or at least something more light-hearted that isn't completely stupid again in the near future.

*I like gritty like in the Witcher, though. It fortunately didn't need all that bombast.

Allow me to address your points as best I can…

Twotricks said:

1.Stealth is not up to par with Splinter Cell / Thief
- Its different mechanic, stealth in this game is Metal Gear Solid stealth

Click to expand...

The truth is, it's not "up to par" with the SC or Thief stealth systems, nor is it on par with that of MGS4, as you contend. Enemies possess that most-annoying of all traits, the "global awareness" or "god-eye" or what-have-you ability to instantly discern your location should a single one spot you.

Twotricks said:

2.Shooting gameplay is not that good.

Click to expand...

Quite right. The insistence on tying damage to character-skill/stats leads to some bizarre circumstances, such as shooting a man at point-blank range with scant effect. Given the glut of "good" shooting games on the market, AP fails to live up to the expectations of a modern shooter.

Twotricks said:

-Its way better than Mass Effect 2. And that one got raving reviews

Click to expand...

No, no it is not. ME2 is polished, smooth, responsive and functions as though it were a shooter, hence the myriad remarks (here and elsewhere) about it being a "shooter with RPG-elements." Alpha Protocol functions more like an RPG with shooter-elements.

Twotricks said:

3.Dialogue is not good.
- What ? Trust me - its OBSIDIAN game.

Click to expand...

And Hemingway, a Nobel-prize winning novelist, wrote True at First Light, what's your point? Obsidian has been responsible for some decent writing in the past, yet what we are discussing is the present: Alpha Protocol. Perhaps you admire the writing, even found some to be superb, but for my part I was appalled. The jokes consistently fell flat ('lezbo sex!" ha-ha-ha-ha…kill me), the "suave" lines were apparently written with either a complete buffoon or jerk in mind and what remained was neither gritty nor particularly thought-provoking, hence the inconsistent appeal of the dialogue.

Twotricks said:

4.Bugs
- Ok, I played 18+ hours and so far didnt see one bug. Am I so lucky?

Click to expand...

Either that or you simply overlooked them. Not all "bugs" are of the glaring, show-stopping kind. Personally, I encountered two CTD-errors, numerous clipping issues, enemies spawning in absurd locations (two directly behind me, in a closed room), bullets passing through walls (both mine and theirs), stuttering and/or freezing dialogue/scenes and a whole slew of loading issues, one of which led to a memory fault. Given that my machine is presently running a 1GB GPU and has 8GB of RAM, that is unacceptable.

Twotricks said:

5.Bad animations & graphics

Click to expand...

That is largely a personal issue, I believe, given that they are passable where I'm concerned. Of course, graphical "whoreism" is hardly something I could be accused of: I still enjoy playing Age of Empires, Arx Fatalis and No One Lives Forever in all their glorious, clunky-3D glory. Sprite based games also maintain a prominent place in my collection.
Having said as much, when comparing Alpha Protcol to other modern AAA-titles, the contrast is stark. Consider that both ME2 and AP utilize the same engine and then look over some side-by-side shots: sad, is it not? Neither the modeling nor texture maps are as detailed or of the same quality, whereas the smooth animations of, say, Ezio in Assassin's Creed 2, Shepherd in ME2 or Fisher in the latest Splinter Cell bring gales of laughter when looking at those of Thorton. His movements are jerky and awkward, while the transitions from, for instance, leaning against a wall to running are stiff and unnatural. Finally, the less said about his "sneaking" animation the better.

Twotricks said:

I am professional animator and am very critical of that stuff. Its simply not true.

Click to expand...

I fail to see what bearing your choice of career has on such things. Any professional, irregardless of their field, will readily admit that there exists a wide spectrum of quality within such. One doctor is not the same as another, one sports car does not perform like another and the animators in one studio may not possess the same skill as at another. Deal with it.

Twotricks said:

Last but not least the gameplay is fun and engaging, there is never a dull moment. And game has crazy replayability.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I'd say a certain degree of masochism is necessary (at this point, at least, who knows what they can patch away) to complete the game multiple times. Personally, AP has garnered the rare attribute of being one of the few…actually, only game I can recall that I have ever quit prior to completing. Given the ridiculous "boss" battles, with enemies soaking tremendous amounts of bullets, various bugs, strange AI combat-and-pathing behaviors, not to count the story I simply did not find all that intriguing, I found myself so disinterested as to no longer care about its resolution.
If that does not answer your question of "why are there bad reviews" then I'd say, with no disrespect intended, that your obvious fanboyism is standing in your way. Love a studio, if you will, admire the developers and their games, but never cease to level criticism where it is deserved. Alpha Protocol is a game that needed more work and, regardless of where the blame for that may lie, it remains an inherently inferior product.

Though madhatter seems less enthused about the game than I've been, I'm going to have to agree with most of his very solid points.

I hope it's good, I just bought it. I was initally put off by the reviews, but it's a single player RPG, and so I'm prepared to take the risk and try it for myself.