I think polish and presentation is actually very important. Especially for games which want to attract a mainstream audience, and is trying to mimic elements of much more successful games (which happen to be much more polished and have better graphics).
If a game like AP has lots of great ideas but fails in the polish and presentation, then it is a big problem for it. If the game was designed only for gamers like us, it should have been turn based to begin with, and play to the strengths of a smaller budget and what the developer knows how to polish best. We should not excuse that it has very real problems that will make it ignored or sidelined by the masses.
Now, I'm a HUGE fan of AP, especially after learning about all the systems and how they work, and working around the bugs, sequencing errors, bad animation, general total lack of polish, etc. But honestly, I think most of us are a minority in gaming. We take gaming as a hobby pretty seriously, and want to take the time to explore all the good things a game might have to offer if it is interesting to us, despite all the bad stuff.
That's not true for a lot of people who got into gaming because of the increased marketing and higher production values in presentation. When we talk about "casual gamers" it is not just soccer moms, or old businessmen, and grandmothers, who only play puzzle games and family minigames.
There are lots of kids and teenagers, even young adults, who are interested in gaming like they are interested in movies. They want a good interactive experience, but they might not have the extended interest to read up all about a game, or keep trying over and over until all the unexplained mechanics are understood. They just want to put a game in and have fun, and I don't blame them. They have that right, after all. If a game looks like it is marketed towards them, and it does not meet their expectations, then it is the game's fault. There are many games not targeting this crowd at all. Stuff like Civilization for example, makes it clear that it is a complicated game which requires a long attention span to appreciate. So it gets good reviews because it communicates what it is properly, and people can judge it on those merits.
What is Alpha Protocol? It is being marketed as "The Espionage RPG". The interface looks like Mass Effect. The trailers and gameplay videos show explosions and "cool" stuff like in the movies. So who is to blame when people have expectations of the game based on what they have experienced in Mass Effect 2, Metal Gear Solid, Splinter Cell, or even James Bond games? When they play the game and it looks worse, controls worse, and systems don't seem to make a lot of sense compared to other games they have played, and hence hinders their fun, who is to blame?
In the end, not every game is made for everyone, and if the scope of the game demands a production budget that would require the game to appeal to the mainstream, but the developer fails to capitalize on that because they lack the technical and management skills to deliver a polished and great looking product, who is to blame? You certainly can't blame the consumers. Obsidian just has to ask themselves if this is all worth it in the end.
