The reception area of this page is very biased as to present that the game received reviews either praising the game or calling it mediocre. Where the facts are that the game has received mostly poor reviews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- The fact is the game is barely available, so it is too soon to tell how well or bad it is received.MarkHavel (talk) 11:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Mention should be made that the pc version has recieved considerably more favorable reviews than the xbox 360 or PS3 version, as the pc version has a metacritic rating of 74/100. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- The funny part is how they manage to be better then those games that ship 100% complete.
- -Grand Commander13 (talk) 22:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't have much of an interest in Alpha Protocol but I couldn't help but notice the reference of the Australian show Good Game. Their two presenters are essentially everyday gamers pulled off the street. To refer to them as legitimate reviewers and their opinions as notable is a bit much and for me, just outlines how absurb it is how WP relies on the opinions of anyone with a fancy title above their name to define a game's reception. Stuntaneous (talk) 20:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm Australian and I fully agree with this comment. I really don't think they're notable enough as reviewers to even be mentioned. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Started going through and rewriting/citing some of the citations based on the GamesRadar first look, which I added to the references section. I also added a preview from CVG. I'm still pretty new to editing Wikipedia (hoping to learn some of the language by editing this page), so if anyone wishes to clean up my edits, feel free to do so; I'll learn from your edits. Mellisan (talk) 03:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The hub city of...winsted CT?
We know the names of several characters in the game. Isn't it time someone updated that section? I'd do it myself but I'm working two jobs right now and am pretty busy. Skyrocket (talk) 22:10, 8 August 30 2009 (UTC)
- I've already set up a wiki for all AP in-universe information; I think that should be the standard editing grounds for now. PastramiX (talk) 13:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
The release date is wrong. I've seen it quoted a lot of places, but Word o' God says it's going on November Second.
I'm a lazy twat though so I don't feel like updating the article.
- The problem is no source can seem to argee. Some announced spring, the official website still says october. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- There is a new pack front image for this game. Can someone please update the image on the page? It's located at . Sigmaration (talk) 20:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Mentioned under the customization section is "A large list of guns is shown in some demos as well, mostly under fictional names. Some exceptions to this are the FN Five-seven, FN P90, the FN F2000 and the M4A1.". However, none of these weapons actually show up in game. Does that warrant removal? HaikenEdge (talk) 05:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)