Kyuu said:
Eyenixon said:
Now if they could only do the same for AAA titles but unfortunately the fight for "exclusives" and advertising is too much an influence.
But the problem here is that they don't, so you have AP which receives these incredibly low scores and a game like Fallout 3 which receives incredibly high scores. AP may need a *lot* of polish and some work on the gameplay mechanics, but Fallout 3 was pretty light on the polish as well, needed a *lot* of work on the gameplay mechanics, and the content (dialogue, story, character-building mechanics, world, etc.) are piss-poor in comparison to a game like AP. In what world does a game like Fallout 3 deserve scores of 10/10 while AP deserves 5/10 or even 2/10?
So, while you may be right that the reviewers are really just doing their job in this instance, it's still not right if they don't explicitly state, "Hey, this time we're being honest in our review so you can't compare the scores we give this game to the scores of other games where we've been heavily influenced by developer advertising, gifts, hype, and the threat of losing access to early previews and review copies of titles from major development studios."
One is better than nothing, the game isn't a victim, it's a piece of shit DVD stuck inside of a box waiting for some poor guy who just wants his 60$ to give him a reasonably well-made experience. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people are going to have that same expectation.
As for what I said about the superfluous details, you people are acting like I said they shouldn't be considered at all. Do you think I'm an idiot? Honestly, it's a great deal a part of the experience but it's not important as getting the mechanics right, it's not as important as balancing the game, it's not as important as creating something easily playable and accessible to the gamer, it's not as important as fluidity and pacing, it's not as important as making a good game and then making a good story within that game.
The point here is that Alpha Protocol's problems are numerous, and they aren't simply slight niggles, the game is buggy, anyone can make that observation, the gunplay doesn't even approach acceptable standards, and as I've said multiple times, the sneaking is more elementary and retarded than the original Metal Gear Solid.
The point here is that Alpha Protocol is gameplay-wise an absolute travesty, when you tell me that I should ignore its flaws to see it's greatness, you're telling me I have to suffer for the large part of the entire time I'll be playing the game, just so I can enjoy some slightly above standard writing and NPC interactions? The choices you can make are a large part of the game, that is true, but they're also a part of the game's mechanics, that's one of the few things they managed to get right. Beyond that all the arguments about art style are irrelevant since Alpha Protocol is generic and to put it lightly, quite hideous. I don't think it deserves a 2/10, but it's still abominable in the slightest sense, I'd give it a 4/10, simply because it's not even average, it's mediocre.
Besides, if I want a long winded RPG with mediocre gameplay I'll go play PS:T again. At least that one had unique art-style.
kyle said:
Whats the deal with trolling PS:T and Arcanum?
Either way, id much rather play a game that has something to it, even if i have to crawl through sewers to avoid game hanging.
I'm not "trolling" anything, I'm making observations that are entirely clear to people that have played those two games, both of them have mediocre combat, both of them are unbalanced, both of them are extraordinarily buggy, and both of them focus on quality narrative with exploration elements while totally trashing out on the rest of the simple mechanics.
I could use Fallout 1 and 2 as examples as well you know, RPGs are almost always buggy, but I don't think that counts as an excuse.
Seriously, as I grow older, I've become much more intolerant of games that are hard to pick up & play, while I've played some games earlier where you had to figure out your way in the controls.
