A review score of 60 to 70 is too low? It's about time publishers stopped caring about review scores and concentrated on the more important thing; units sold.
I'll stop there before I end up ranting about why the entire idea of reviews is one of the worst things to befall the gaming industry.

There were a few weapons that didn't calculate damage properly in VATS such as the Gauss Rifle. Hardly what I would call broken and there are mods that fix it.

The problem is that publishers consider review scores to be representative of potential sales, not actual sales. While you could point out that Alpha Protocol still managed to sell x units, in their eyes a project that had the same budget but scored in the 80s or high 70s would have sold x + y units. This leads to publishers only wanting to give big budgets to projects that are predicted to get equally big review scores. Games with an IP or developer that has scored highly in the past are especially popular choices here because they are all but guaranteed to get a score of 90+ from all the major sites regardless of any flaws the game may have.
The importance of high review scores to publishers has caused the bottom fall out of the scoring system, with many sites with a scale out of 10 or 100% tending to treat 5/10 or 50% as their actual lowest score. Because of this a 60 is "mediocre" and a 70 "good" or "average", with the new "sweet spot" being 80+. This is made even worse by aggregate sites such as Metacritic, which convert fraction scores into percentages and give more weight to certain sites, which then influences the meaningless "Metascore" value.

While I hated the game, Sega is in no place to cancel any sequel because of how popular it is. If they played by those rules, we would not be seeing a new Sonic game every two years, with Sega blindly hoping that maybe this time they got it right.

I played the game with an xbox controller, and got the feeling that was as the designers had intended, with your standard PC controls as an afterthought.

and why haven't you posted on:
http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/games_you_fnished_in_2010/_/1
anyhow
Like i said on RPS
I at least hope for some DLC. Would pay few bucks for more faces, more weapons and few extra quests
and a tenner or two for one xtra city.

NOOOOO
I loved it. I really really really really loved it, played it twice on PC, I got a PS3 copy from Sega and I'm playing it on that (it's HORRIBLE, try picking a lock with the L and R trigger/bumper thing and it will annoy you to no end), and the end kind off set the scene for a sequel. Will we at least get some DLC love?

On topic:I liked Alpha Protocol as well. Only finished it once though, but I will be going through it again. The Saudi Arabia mission, where you have to go to the tower (and take out the elite guards), I saw a stream of that before I bought it. The guy literally attracted attention from loads of enemies in that small enclosed building area, before you go up to the tower. Alarms kept going off as well, so he naturally kept dying. He promptly proceeded to take the disc out of the machine and scratch it.
Now as a comparison, I never experienced the same thing with the game. Even with a non-stealthy character (granted, playing on normal) and a noise reduction stat of one I think, I had no problems getting stealth kills. I had no silencer either. However, there were times when enemies hear me a second or two before I reached them because I ran a bit too fast.
So I have to question how people have really been playing this game. I.e., did they just go on the hard difficulty straight away with a recruit? I haven't played hard, so I have no idea what it's like. Same with the recruit starting class or whatever you want to call it. Anyway, I'm glad I never cancelled my order for the game based on that stream. It did make me tempted though.
Off-topic: If people would like to try a good Sega game, try downloading the Valkyria Chronicles demo from the PSN store. It's not representative of the entire product with it being a strategy/tactical RPG, but it shows you what the combat is like. I picked it up a while ago for 15 pound off Shopto and it's a good game if you like the genre, though it's sort of like a blend of several. Presentation etc. is also unique as well as the combat system, as the game's story and such is presented in a story book format. Graphics are really quite nice as well having a water-colour painting feel to them. There's a reason the install (optional) screen starts blank and you gradually see the picture filled in.

My Reaction
Seriously, I really liked Alpha Protocol, and wanted to see more done with it, but no Sequel or DLC?
Makes me sad.

Its much the same as Splinter Cell, you get out what you put in. If you try and play it like a gears of war 3rd person shooter then you're not going to have much fun because thats simply not what the game is, it'd be like playing Hitman as a beat em up and complaining when you fail missions because you're detected too many times.
Splinter Cell Conviction suffered from the same image issues, everyone bitched that it wasn't real splinter cell because all of the videos showed it being played by someone treating it as a 3rd person shooter rather than as a sneaky neck snappy puzzle game

Oh that? I came across that. Some people call that broken? That's a bug.