Support NeoGAF

[keyrat]

Hey guys do you know if it's possible to have sex with hookers and murder them afterwards to get my money back? It's very important to my purchasing decision.

This would be adding a feature. The fact is, you drive a car and there's peds. They'd have to purposely go out of their way to not let you hit them.

And you guys defending this design decision as if it's better than letting you do your thing; what the hell is that? I understand if it's not GTA: San Andreas but I don't quite understand why they would restrict the game. The player is too stupid to follow the narrative if he decides to mess around?

Is there a source for any of this?

 

[Radogol]

This would be adding a feature. The fact is, you drive a car and there's peds. They'd have to purposely go out of their way to not let you hit them.

Have you played Driver?

 

[JaseC]

Because it is not within the spirit of the game. It doesn't add anything to what L.A. Noire is about, which is the narrative, characters and detective elements.

I understand, but that doesn't make the option inherently bad, which is why I suggested enabling it via cheats. It makes perfect sense to restrict what a player can do when they're playing within the walls you've laid out for them, but that doesn't necessarily mean there needs to be nothing beyond that.

 

[Vinterbird]

And you guys defending this design decision as if it's better than letting you do your thing; what the hell is that? I understand if it's not GTA: San Andreas but I don't quite understand why they would restrict the game. The player is too stupid to follow the narrative if he decides to mess around?

I would prefer Team Bondi to focus on what they want - to create a narrative experience. It might sound stupid, but it is for the art of the game, to not have you kill everyone and go rampage. It would be pointless in the theme of the game, and I would much rather have them restrict me, if it gives me a more immersive experience in the end.

I understand, but that doesn't make the option inherently bad, which is why I suggested enabling it via cheats. It makes perfect sense to restrict what a player can do when they're playing within the walls you've laid out for them, but that doesn't necessarily mean there needs to be nothing beyond that.

I think thats very much a personal matter of preference. For me, I would rather just experience what the developer intended, and nothing more or less.

 

[CAW]

They should have added the option to allow you to go on a killing spree, but the punishment after being arrested or killed would be to start a new game by erasing any save files you had as punishment.

 

[PooBone]

This is NOT a Rockstar game. Can't people read?

Also read the OP on side missions, there's not much.

This is going to be a linear story based game, not really a game like GTA where you'll have bunch of stuff to do outside of the main story.

Really? That's funny because Rockstar's name is on the f*cking box.
Rockstar as a publisher has many internal development studios and they all turn out games with the same problems. Why would another developer with a spotty track record and a studio name that doesn't have the word "rockstar" in it fare any better? I don't think it's unfair to assume that Rockstar as a publisher expects certain characteristics from open world games that they are publishing.

Like I said, I'm cautiously optimistic, and no raging defense force douche on a forum is gonna make me any more or less excited for the game. Only reviews will achieve that.

 

[JaseC]

Yeah, and you get desynced...aka: you can't.

EDIT: I read it wrong. It's still the same thing. I'd rather not have to worry about killing civilians and losing. I hated it in AC when I accidentally assassinated civilians while chasing a target then raging because it set me all the way across the map.

EDIT 2: I thought we could kill pedestrians. I thought it just lowered your rank/score/whatever unless you kill too many.

You get punished for that in AC as well.

Yes, but there's a difference between "You can't do that", as with LA Noire, and "You can do that, but you'll be punished", as with Assassin's Creed.

 

[JAVK]

.

 

[fastford58]

I'm kind of excited about a game where pulling a gun and using it is actually a decision making process. It should add weight and gravity to the choices being made.

 

[JaseC]

I think thats very much a personal matter of preference. For me, I would rather just experience what the developer intended, and nothing more or less.

Yeah, that's true. Personally, I'm not partial to either side. If I can only do what the developer has intended, that's great. If I can go beyond that invisible wall and screw around, that's great, too.

Am I right in thinking that most of the footage R* is showing is from the PS3 build?

They've only shown the PS3 version.

 

[Kintaro]

Like I said, I'm cautiously optimistic, and no raging defense force douche on a forum is gonna make me any more or less excited for the game. Only reviews will achieve that.

Hahaha. I can't be the only one finding this kind of funny given how Rockstar's history is with reviewers.

 

[CAW]

I'm sticking to my system that hasn't let me down yet, when deciding which version to buy.

• If it's not exclusive across all platforms: PC version.
• If it's not console exclusive: Xbox 360.

 

[Radogol]

I'm kind of excited about a game where pulling a gun and using it is actually a decision making process. It should add weight and gravity to the choices being made.

I think Phelps pulls out his gun automatically when the plot calls for it.

 

[PooBone]

The faces look so weird in this game. It's like I'm watching film of a person's face projected on a 3D model.

Uncanny valley to the max.

Granted, it looks better than most. Only Team Ninja's games have been able to overcome that for me.

 

[keyrat]

Have you played Driver?

Only the first one for PSX. No peds.

I would prefer Team Bondi to focus on what they want - to create a narrative experience. It might sound stupid, but it is for the art of the game, to not have you kill everyone and go rampage. It would be pointless in the theme of the game, and I would much rather have them restrict me, if it gives me a more immersive experience in the end.

So you're saying you don't trust yourself to not go on killing sprees constantly?

I mean, I played RDR all the way through being honorable at every occasion, but every once in a while it was nice to mess around.

 

[JetBlackPanda]

holy shit people aren't there enough open world games where you can mow down civilians and bang hookers?

let me be a law enforcement agent for ONCE and let him be a good guy, I need a good hard boiled detective story driven game.

 

[Vinterbird]

So you're saying you don't trust yourself to not go on killing sprees constantly?

I mean, I played RDR all the way through being honorable at every occasion, but every once in a while it was nice to mess around.

No. But I fully believe that developers have the right to dictate a vision, and force the player down that vision, and not give them an out to go crazy.

 

[Radogol]

Only the first one for PSX. No peds.

That's the one. There WERE peds and they were all very skilled at dodging psychopathic drivers

 

[timmy01]

I mean, I played RDR all the way through being honorable at every occasion, but every once in a while it was nice to mess around.

the question is, if you couldn't mess around in RDR, would it haev mattered to you? I admit on a couple of occasions in RDR to just going on a rampage..... and then I hit Start and reload my game. it's novel.. it has some amount of fun to it.. and had I not been able to do it I really wouldn't have cared.

As for adding the option there... you guys are making it too cut and dried. To add the option there, they have to add consequence (especially given the tone of the game they are trying to create). Adding consequence means adding an entirely extra aspect of the game with rules, punishments, possibly accolades, etc. It's not just a "kill everyone in site" switch that they flip. So if the option included a bad thing? No, but if it takes away development from other aspects that ARE in the game.. then no way.

I think that's what everyone means when they say "play the game the way Team Bondi intended". Sure they could have added in all sorts of fluff to garner scores. Multiplayer, sandbox elements, etc.. but if that's not the game they wanted and all of that stuff just ended up being tacked on at the cost of development time in other areas.. no thank you.

 

[SpartanDL]

Can't wait for this game to come out. Finally a rockstar game where you play the as a cop.

 

[PooBone]

Hahaha. I can't be the only one finding this kind of funny given how Rockstar's history is with reviewers.

Nothing to do with the score but the content being written by someone who has played the entire game. And also who is reviewing it. I can go ahead and tell you IGN's review will carry zero weight with me. Why is that funny?

 

[MMaRsu]

It adds a tremendous amount of replay value to be able to deviate and do your own thing in a sandbox game. What's the point of a sandbox if it's heavily restricted?

What's next, maybe you can't crash your car either?

SIGH

That's why it's not a fucking sandbox game. It's a freeroam game.

This is not a game where you go around and do whatever you want. It's a lineair story based game in an open world. Just like Mafia II was.

 

[keyrat]

That's the one. There WERE peds and they were all very skilled at dodging psychopathic drivers

Hmm, don't even remember. There's a difference, though: In Driver, they'd have to go out of their way to make the peds killable, as the whole game was car based. In LA Noire, the peds will presumably have the same procedural death animations as the enemies, and they have to consciously take away your ability to kill them.

Either way, if it works like AssCreed I'll be happy enough. If there's cheats to make the game absurd I will consider it a plus.

Just yesterday I was playing Jet Moto for PSX. After completing a season, I went back to one of the courses just to do stunts. Stunts were never an integral part of Jet Moto; they didn't count for anything. They did add a lot of replay value, though.

 

[Plasmid]

Can anyone turn the second one going towards the right into an avatar for me?

.

 

[Vinterbird]

Hmm, don't even remember. There's a difference, though: In Driver, they'd have to go out of their way to make the peds killable, as the whole game was car based. In LA Noire, the peds will presumably have the same procedural death animations as the enemies, and they have to consciously take away your ability to kill them.

Either way, if it works like AssCreed I'll be happy enough. If there's cheats to make the game absurd I will consider it a plus.

Just yesterday I was playing Jet Moto for PSX. After completing a season, I went back to one of the courses just to do stunts. Stunts were never an integral part of Jet Moto; they didn't count for anything. They did add a lot of replay value, though.

It also kinda depends on what you define as replay value. To me it would mean different ways to finish a case. Not kill pedestrians or go on a killing spree.

 

[Radogol]

In LA Noire, the peds will presumably have the same procedural death animations as the enemies, and they have to consciously take away your ability to kill them.

More bad news. The death animations aren't procedural.

 

[MMaRsu]

Can't wait for this game to come out. Finally a rockstar game where you play the as a cop.

R* didn't develop this.

I hate to see R* get so much credit for this game lol.

 

[CAW]

Can anyone turn the second one going towards the right into an avatar for me?

Try here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=390648

I hate to see R* get so much credit for this game lol.

I think the game's concept is also misunderstood since it's Rockstar doing all the heavy publishing. I think a lot of people are just thinking "1940s GTA, cool!".

 

[speculawyer]

Holy crap at the OP. Well done.

I finally placed an order for this @ Amazon.

I love film Noire movies like the Maltese Falcon, so I'm looking forward to this.

 

[keyrat]

More bad news. The death animations aren't procedural.

Yea that's what they been saying with the lack of RAGE or whatever the technology was. Somehow it would seem to me like more work to have to do all the animations by hand.

It also kinda depends on what you define as replay value. To me it would mean different ways to finish a case. Not kill pedestrians or go on a killing spree.

Or both?

R* didn't develop this.

I hate to see R* get so much credit for this game lol.

Can someone put it in the OP that Rockstar did have a big hand in development? This same thing is repeated on every page, when in fact they get development credit and even that McNamara interview reaffirms Rockstar's heavy hand.

 

[speculawyer]

R* didn't develop this.

I hate to see R* get so much credit for this game lol.

Wrong. The OP has it right . . . it is developed by R* and Team Bondi. There is a lot of interaction with R* NYC which Team Bondi probably loved and hated.

 

[MMaRsu]

Try here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=390648

I think the game's concept is also misunderstood since it's Rockstar doing all the heavy publishing. I think a lot of people are just thinking "1940s GTA, cool!".

I was talking with a friend of mine, and he said I just hope it's better than that other mafia game set in the 40's.

I was like..wut.

 

[Vinterbird]

Or both?

Again - it's totally down to a personal definition of what "replay value" would consist of. I would not put "ability to go on a killing spree" as a replay value thing, since it doesn't add anything to the experience in any way possible.

But to you it is replay value, and what replay value is to Team Bondi is probably entirely different.

 

[JaseC]

Can someone put it in the OP that Rockstar did have a big hand in development? This same thing is repeated on every page, when in fact they get development credit and even that McNamara interview reaffirms Rockstar's heavy hand.

R* assisted with development, but as far as the actual game design is concerned, that's all Team Bondi's vision. It's not as though R* came on board and started taking over.

 

[geebee]

People are seriously complaining that you cant do GTA-like things such as running over or killing peds? Really? This isn't a GTA game for fucks sake. Hell, it is not a Rockstar-developed game.

You are playing a straight-laced cop. Being allowed to kill peds for no reason would be pointless for a game of this type. Now, unless theres a twist in the story and Cole goes insane, which then allows the player to go on a rampage... stop calling the design decision to not kill peds a "restriction". Its ridiculous.

I'm afraid that a lot of people including reviewers wont understand this and I'm afraid that sales will suffer from it. No wonder R* hasnt shown much gameplay in videos.

 

[Solo]

I think this will be 2011's Alan Wake.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Yes, but there's a difference between "You can't do that", as with LA Noire, and "You can do that, but you'll be punished", as with Assassin's Creed.

Well, you "can" do it in LA Noire, but you get punished for it as well, with lower after-case marks and

Spoiler

GAME OVER, BITCHES, hahaha

 

[Radogol]

I think this will be 2011's Alan Wake.

A bomba, a critical success or both?

 

[kaskade]

Hilary Goldstein tweeted:
"L.A. Noire review is Monday morning, for those who didn't already commit to the pre-order."

Perhaps then? Or maybe IGN first?

http://twitter.com/#!/hilarygoldstein

I think RDR was a day before review as well.

 

[keyrat]

R* assisted with development, but as far as the actual game design is concerned, that's all Team Bondi's vision. It's not as though R* came on board and started taking over.

How sure are you on this? The producer for the game is a Rockstar employee, Jeronimo Barrera, not a Team Bondi employee.

http://www.ifc.com/news/2011/02/interview-team-bondis-brendan-2.php

And when we first got that working, we showed that to all the people at Rockstar in New York. The producer, Jeronimo Barrera, he asked us to put a camera in so you could move the camera around the scene in 3D, so you could see that it was actually the game's real graphics engine and that you weren't just actually looking at a video.

Just that already seems like a pretty big design decision.

 

[Solo]

A bomba, a critical success or both?

Both. And like Alan Wake, I will love it.

 

[Makoto]

R* didn't develop this.

I hate to see R* get so much credit for this game lol.

B-b-but it's got their NAME on the BOX. A-a-and publishers = did part of the development so that means they MADE THE GAME.

 

[Vinterbird]

How sure are you on this? The producer for the game is a Rockstar employee, Jeronimo Barrera, not a Team Bondi employee.

http://www.ifc.com/news/2011/02/interview-team-bondis-brendan-2.php



Just that already seems like a pretty big design decision.

I think that quote refers to the pitch demo they showed Rockstar, not actual in the current product gameplay.

Also, the role of a producer varies vastly from studio to studio. In this case he could be in a supervising position, just making sure communication between Bondi and Rockstar is well, making sure that everything is on track, that they are using SCRUM or what their project development method was. Depending on the studio, the producer doesn't have a creative input.

 

[JaseC]

Just that already seems like a pretty big design decision.

But it hardly impacts the creative vision of the game. When McNamara was asked if LA Noire changed at all when they moved from Sony to R*, he said, "Actually, I don't think that the game changed at all."

When R* came on board, it seems all they wanted to do was help Team Bondi get the game out the door and not interfere with developer's creative vision and direction of the game itself.

Edit: Also, I think what Vinter said about the 3D camera being specifically for the pitch may be true, too.

 

[VistraNorrez]

R* assisted with development, but as far as the actual game design is concerned, that's all Team Bondi's vision. It's not as though R* came on board and started taking over.

I don't really see the point of differentiating between R* and Bondi for LA Noire. It's not like R* games have to be developed the same way every time. And they did assist in the development of the game. Bondi will probably be taken over by them anyway. Most will think Bondi is a R* studio as the game has a lot of their hallmarks of gaming.

 

[JaseC]

I don't really see the point of differentiating between R* and Bondi for LA Noire. It's not like R* games have to be developed the same way every time. And they did assist in the development of the game. Bondi will probably be taken over by them anyway. Most will think Bondi is a R* studio as the game has a lot of their hallmarks of gaming.

It's simply that many feel that Team Bondi should be recognised more widely for their role as the developer; the creative force behind the project. These same people are a little miffed with R* seemingly taking as much credit as possible.

 

[Grisby]

Both. And like Alan Wake, I will love it.

They've been pushing it hard. I don't see it as a bomb.

 

[MMaRsu]

But it hardly impacts the creative vision of the game. When McNamara was asked if LA Noire changed at all when they moved from Sony to R*, he said, "Actually, I don't think that the game changed at all."

When R* came on board, it seems all they wanted to do was help Team Bondi get the game out the door and not interfere with developer's creative vision and direction of the game itself.

Edit: Also, I think what Vinter said about it being specifically for the pitch may be true, too.

Exactly, I'm pretty sure that even though I'm sure R* had a hand in helping Team Bondi, this is still a Team Bondi developed game. This isn't a R* game like RDR/GTA are at all, and I think many people think this is the case.

 

[thecheese]

@ 1:10

Is it just me or does that scream look bizarre?

Hmm, seems ok to me. I did slow it down a bit...

Thanks for the kind words guys.

 

[Solo]

They've been pushing it hard. I don't see it as a bomb.

Alan Wake had a lot of marketing too, if memory serves.