It is interesting to watch the Rock Star honeymoon period end so you can judge a game more accurately. Their games tend to cast a spell with atmosphere that makes people (particularly reviewers) ignore game mechanics and repetition. I saw the recent "is anyone else not enjoying Red Dead Redemption" thread and obviously GTA IV progressed out of the "Oscar-quality story" honeymoon pretty quickly.
I've learned that with every release of theirs to weather the early storm of "OMG I have never seen anything like this!" from the midnight release enthusiasts and people with two hours into the game, and wait for the real impressions from people with 12 to 15 hours ("It's the same thing every time! And driving takes forever! I can't skip cutscenes! My character controls like a turtle!")
It seems like they've perfected the art of the game that overwhelms you with a first impression so that by the time you realize how shallow the gameplay is, you've already told your friends to buy it. Not a bad business model.
You are making it sound as if people who invested more than two hours into the game automatically hate it, that the people who do have harsher criticisms with it are only the ones worth discussing the game with because those who genuinely enjoy it are deluded on some "Rockstar high" and there can't possibly be a middle ground between the two.
Personally I think waiting for a backlash to get a game is one of the easiest ways to spoil your experience with the it. Instead of taking the game for what it is, sprinkled with the release hype around it, you'll be nitpicking it every step of the way.
I'd rather enjoy a game for what it is with an open mind, than play it after people have dissected the game for what it isn't.
I think the annoying thing about getting the questions wrong is that its such a break from how evidence gathering is handled. In the latter, you are immediately supplied with tactile and audio queues that guide you toward success, whereas in the former you're utterly on your own and must rely on your own abilities.
But I think Hocking might have a change of opinion further in, since the first hour of LA Noire is simply telling you how to play the game and doing it a little awkwardly. As the story is coming out more and more, I find the experience more interesting. He's big on player agency from what I've read on his blog, and that comes out more later on.
LA Noire handles it on about the same level Far Cry 2 does, except in a serial TV form instead of something more ... I dunno, long-form and literary? Far Cry 2's approach to storytelling is hard to describe, since you have to sort of analyze the abstractions as much as the realistic elements. Though it doesn't do most of its ideas perfectly, and in many cases not even well, Far Cry 2 does have a lot of novel ones. Or at least implementations.
I think people tend to get upset when things aren't exactly what they want them to be or think they will be. Lots of people seem to desperately want this game to be something other then what it is and that's just a endless hole of frustration.
edit: I think Far Cry 2 is quite derivative. Noire can be much more so because it's trying so hard to connect to an existing genre, but FC2 felt like it was constantly trying to invoke existing imagery for people to connect to.
and if you're using the driving complaint as one directed at LA Noire... then it's not a matter of opinion, it's flat out wrong. driving from location to location is completely optional.
While I see what you're saying, this is a bit silly. This seems to be a popular justification for the majority of advocates here: it's optional, so it doesn't matter. To me, that's simply flawed logic; it's like saying, "Hey, this album has quite a few of horrible tracks, but you don't have to listen to them, so it's okay". You can't just excuse the lack of effort/polish evident in a number of facets of the game. It really diminishes the overall presentation and leaves a sour taste in my gaming mouth.
I think people tend to get upset when things aren't exactly what they want them to be or think they will be. Lots of people seem to desperately want this game to be something other then what it is and that's just a endless hole of frustration.
Enjoying this game immensely so far. Only a few hours in but it is such a refreshing change of pace from my regular lot of games. The acting and animation is astonishing.
How do people not like the driving in this game? The cars are a blast to drive, some good weight to them and challenging to go balls to the wall to locations. I had one of the most satisfying wrecks in a driving game in a while last night. There was so much crunch and weight to it.
I finally started LA Noire last night, and like others have said it seems like the first part is meant to be a tutorial type of experience, but I've started the game now and I really like how it's played and where it's going. Enjoyable stuff, and I was hesitant to buy the game.
I think Far Cry 2 is quite derivative. Noire can be much more so because it's trying so hard to connect to an existing genre, but FC2 felt like it was constantly trying to invoke existing imagery for people to connect to.
I mean, if you're calling Far Cry 2 derivative, what is that judgment relative to? At a certain point the term loses meaning in a discussion. Far Cry 2 is probably the most unique high-budget FPS released this hardware cycle, and there isn't another game that plays like it. If you feel an itch to play Far Cry 2, there isn't really another game that approximates it well enough to scratch that.
LA Noire is like that too, I suppose. Although, I get the feeling that once I beat LA Noire I'll end up playing Mafia 2 when that itch comes since its more replayable and digestible.
I mean, if you're calling Far Cry 2 derivative, what is that judgment relative to? At a certain point the term loses meaning in a discussion. Far Cry 2 is probably the most unique high-budget FPS released this hardware cycle, and there isn't another game that plays like it. If you feel an itch to play Far Cry 2, there isn't really another game that approximates it well enough to scratch that.
This is funny, I remember when he was working on Fc2, GTA4 came out and he went all out on it writing a long review where he blasted every aspect of the game, and he only played it 4 hours.
fair enough, but It's not like I mentioned you or called you out.
People wanting the game to be different isn't just disliking a feature of aspect. I don't think R* did themselves any favors by having the trailers of the game cut like an action movie. I think there are just a bunch of people upset that the game isn't what they thought it would be in their heads and I think that's on them.
I failed to prove either goy did it and they both walked free, as the husband was leaving the station the janitor from the school was coming in and identifyed him, he makes a run for it and i captured after a chase.
The boss was pretty pissed about us making him like a fool and said we were back to patrolling until we proved ourselves again.
Of course that didn't happen and we were asigned another case anyway but it was still pretty funny how bad i did.
It is interesting to watch the Rock Star honeymoon period end so you can judge a game more accurately. Their games tend to cast a spell with atmosphere that makes people (particularly reviewers) ignore game mechanics and repetition. I saw the recent "is anyone else not enjoying Red Dead Redemption" thread and obviously GTA IV progressed out of the "Oscar-quality story" honeymoon pretty quickly.
I've learned that with every release of theirs to weather the early storm of "OMG I have never seen anything like this!" from the midnight release enthusiasts and people with two hours into the game, and wait for the real impressions from people with 12 to 15 hours ("It's the same thing every time! And driving takes forever! I can't skip cutscenes! My character controls like a turtle!")
It seems like they've perfected the art of the game that overwhelms you with a first impression so that by the time you realize how shallow the gameplay is, you've already told your friends to buy it. Not a bad business model.
I don't think it is just a honeymoon period. Spectacular stories/cutscenes are much easier to appreciate than mechanics, especially mechanics designed to challenge. Over time they've become just about the most important feature in all of the most popular games(as long as the developers don't screw the pooch on mechanics). You see from the everyman to the videogame reviewer. If not this, then sheer novelty.
BobsRevenge said:
I mean, if you're calling Far Cry 2 derivative, what is that judgment relative to? At a certain point the term loses meaning in a discussion. Far Cry 2 is probably the most unique high-budget FPS released this hardware cycle, and there isn't another game that plays like it. If you feel an itch to play Far Cry 2, there isn't really another game that approximates it well enough to scratch that.
There is an obsession in "ART" to not be derivative(basically, to be counter-art). It is hogwash. L.A. Noire resembles well known themes found in other mediums, especially to movie guys. That is not even considering the mechanics.
fair enough, but It's not like I mentioned you or called you out.
People wanting the game to be different isn't just disliking a feature of aspect. I don't think R* did themselves any favors by having the trailers of the game cut like an action movie. I think there are just a bunch of people upset that the game isn't what they thought it would be in their heads and I think that's on them.
This is funny, I remember when he was working on Fc2, GTA4 came out and he went all out on it writing a long review where he blasted every aspect of the game, and he only played it 4 hours.
I failed to prove either goy did it and they both walked free, as the husband was leaving the station the janitor from the school was coming in and identifyed him, he makes a run for it and i captured after a chase.
The boss was pretty pissed about us making him like a fool and said we were back to patrolling until we proved ourselves again.
Of course that didn't happen and we were asigned another case anyway but it was still pretty funny how bad i did.
At least you got the right guy. Hopefully getting the wrong turns out to be a good thing later in the game for me. :lol
with the kids talk I started to get a little frightened that if I put away the right guy the pedo would rape and kill one of my kids or something later on
God damn if the first half hour of this game doesnt make a terrible impression. First of all, what the he'll is with the slowdown in the very first 10 seconds of the opening? How the hell could they not optimise this? Performance has been fine otherwise.
Also the first 2 cases
just kind of peter out. Oh ok, I'm gonna call this one in, now I'm gonna shoot 3 people in the bank. Woohoo, 2 cases done! No feedback, no nothing.
Apart from that though, I'm loving it. I really dislike the way the game controls but it's not really the crux of the game so I can deal with it.
Well, for the most part, I want this game to be exactly what it is. Investigation > interrogation > a nice action set-piece to punctuate the case... Gaming nirvana. Unfortunately, that "nice" action set-piece is always going to detract from everything that preceded due purely to how shoddy the game's controls are in that area.
I'm completely happy not Niko Bellic-ing around town, blowing shit up; I quite like it, actually, but a well-placed shoot-out can do wonders for pacing, variation and satisfaction; it pains me that I can't look forward to that in L.A. Noire.
so can someone help me with lie and doubt? usually when i think someones hiding something, go with doubt, that would be the lighter of the options. but the dude lashes out most of the time and fucks it up. and lie is just bringing up the evidence
it almost feels like someone at rockstar switched up the lie/doubt buttons by mistake
so can someone help me with lie and doubt? usually when i think someones hiding something, go with doubt, that would be the lighter of the options. but the dude lashes out most of the time and fucks it up. and lie is just bringing up the evidence
it almost feels like someone at rockstar switched up the lie/doubt buttons by mistake
so can someone help me with lie and doubt? usually when i think someones hiding something, go with doubt, that would be the lighter of the options. but the dude lashes out most of the time and fucks it up. and lie is just bringing up the evidence
it almost feels like someone at rockstar switched up the lie/doubt buttons by mistake
so can someone help me with lie and doubt? usually when i think someones hiding something, go with doubt, that would be the lighter of the options. but the dude lashes out most of the time and fucks it up. and lie is just bringing up the evidence
it almost feels like someone at rockstar switched up the lie/doubt buttons by mistake
so can someone help me with lie and doubt? usually when i think someones hiding something, go with doubt, that would be the lighter of the options. but the dude lashes out most of the time and fucks it up. and lie is just bringing up the evidence
it almost feels like someone at rockstar switched up the lie/doubt buttons by mistake
Basically only use Lie when you have something substantial to prove they're being dishonest and use Doubt when their body language or whatever indicates that they are. You'll probably end up using Doubt more often than Lie. And yeah, Cole does come off strong with it, especially in the beginning but when you think about it he's straight up accusing them of something with no evidence to back it up so you would expect it to be kind of harsh. "Doubt" is probably a light term for what it really is.
Ah, I haven't been following the thread, so I don't know which version is the "bad" one. I'm on PS3 and it's stuttering like a bastard. Oh well, I'll get used to it. More importantly, I hope I can figure out how the fuck interogations work. I don't know what's going on in those.
While I see what you're saying, this is a bit silly. This seems to be a popular justification for the majority of advocates here: it's optional, so it doesn't matter. To me, that's simply flawed logic; it's like saying, "Hey, this album has quite a few of horrible tracks, but you don't have to listen to them, so it's okay". You can't just excuse the lack of effort/polish evident in a number of facets of the game. It really diminishes the overall presentation and leaves a sour taste in my gaming mouth.
i'm not saying that you can't criticise the driving mechanics, i'm saying that your criticism can't be 'this thing which i don't have to do takes too long if i choose to do it'. i hope that makes sense.
i don't think your music comparison really works. when we talk about listening to an album, rather than listening to a song, we generally mean listening to the whole album. when we talk about playing a game, we don't mean playing the game, start to finish, and completing every single facet of the game.
something optional in a game, isn't the same as a music track on an album. you can play a game from start to finish without doing any of the optional things. i doubt anyone would argue that you haven't really finished a game if you didn't find all the secrets, for example, but you can't play an album from start to finish if you're skipping tracks.
It is interesting to watch the Rock Star honeymoon period end so you can judge a game more accurately. Their games tend to cast a spell with atmosphere that makes people (particularly reviewers) ignore game mechanics and repetition. I saw the recent "is anyone else not enjoying Red Dead Redemption" thread and obviously GTA IV progressed out of the "Oscar-quality story" honeymoon pretty quickly.
I've learned that with every release of theirs to weather the early storm of "OMG I have never seen anything like this!" from the midnight release enthusiasts and people with two hours into the game, and wait for the real impressions from people with 12 to 15 hours ("It's the same thing every time! And driving takes forever! I can't skip cutscenes! My character controls like a turtle!")
It seems like they've perfected the art of the game that overwhelms you with a first impression so that by the time you realize how shallow the gameplay is, you've already told your friends to buy it. Not a bad business model.
Also, it may or may not mean much, but pre-orders for this were pretty low across the board for a Rockstar game. Guess we'll find out come NPDs. Or not. I don't know. Will be trading mine in next week.
While I see what you're saying, this is a bit silly. This seems to be a popular justification for the majority of advocates here: it's optional, so it doesn't matter. To me, that's simply flawed logic; it's like saying, "Hey, this album has quite a few of horrible tracks, but you don't have to listen to them, so it's okay". You can't just excuse the lack of effort/polish evident in a number of facets of the game. It really diminishes the overall presentation and leaves a sour taste in my gaming mouth.
the issue here is with your statement "quite a few" in regards to an album. If "quite a few" on an album meant 7 out of 9 tracks are awful, of course it's not a good album. if "quite a few" meant like 3 out of 9 tracks, I'm still going to call the album really great (IMHO).
Same thing here. While the driving and shooting segments might show a lack of effort or polish (btw, much more agreeable than "terrible" or "broken"), they are a very small part of the game when it comes down to it. Heck, skip all of the side missions and the amount of shooting so far would drop down to maybe a handful of sequences and forced driving even fewer than that.
I mean really, I'm not disputing your overall criticisms of either.. just the emphasis that they really have on gameplay. if it was a game where you were forced to spend the majority of your time shooting or driving... yeah, big problem. but the majority of your time in this game is forced as investigation and interrogation. that is the real meat of the game, and it's pulled off incredibly well while not being negatively affected by rather run of the mill shooting/driving sequences. Clearly it seems you were going into this game with an expectation that there would be a large emphasis on those activities and have come away disappointed with the fact that that's not the case.. I can certainly empathize with that.
mickcenary said:
I'm completely happy not Niko Bellic-ing around town, blowing shit up; I quite like it, actually, but a well-placed shoot-out can do wonders for pacing, variation and satisfaction; it pains me that I can't look forward to that in L.A. Noire.
I really appreciate you explaining your position more thoroughly.. yeah, I was already getting this is where you were going with it.... simply put, this is not an action game, and at times tries to pretend to be one. I can live with that assessment. For me, that's a great way to explain the original Police Quest (pre-SWAT) titles also, which is what I was most hoping for. Would more solid of driving and shooting sequences have made this game even better? Of course.. but obviously Team Bondi had to place their priorities, and it seems that those aspects of the game ranked rather low to instead focus on the other three major areas (performances, investigation and interrogation)
maybe we'll see those two areas drastically beefed up in a sequel..
fwiw the action portion at the end of the fallen idol
I found VERY enjoyable. the shooting was fun enough and the chase on foot was pretty great. though I already view it as just mindless thriller, to the point that I will usually grab the first rifle or tommy gun I find and just breeze through the shootout at hand with that.
charged the father. The captain chewed me out, but the evidence is more than circumstantial. The murder weapon is from the husband's car, and he actively chose to destroy evidence that would implicate him. Not only that, no one knows where he was at the time of the murder. The Pedo had no motive nor was it his MO. Come the start of the next case, Phelps is having breakfast with the Cap and the partner. Captain mentions that the DA was pleased with the evidence presented and thanks you for your good work. The captain doesn't seem too pleased about it, but justice was served. I hope.
Didn't start the next case, but how many stars did you get on 'The Golden Butterfly'? I got
chewed out as well AND I only got 2 stars. Missed a few questions can't recall the exact amount and maybe one clue but I've done that before and haven't even come close to a 2.
This case really pissed me off and makes me wonder if it wasn't supposed to happen this way to set up the narrative. If that's the case then I no longer care about my ratings on any of these future cases.
hmm, I guess I'm the weird one since I really like the driving. I never let my partner drive, and probably never will. I feel like I learned how to control the cars pretty quickly too.
that said the city is great and all but there's not much going on in it besides driving, walking, crime, and people talking about you.
where's my family? I thought I would be playing as Cole the detective/man. my wife should be bitching that i missed dinner or broke a promise...something. what does a guy like Cole do for fun? nothing because there's nowhere to go for that. where's the la nightlife?
the side missions are useless and never last long. I wish the time used to create them was spent on making an extra 3-5 cases or giving the city more life. I love the game and i'm having a blast but there are plenty of improvements that can be made.
Didn't start the next case, but how many stars did you get on 'The Golden Butterfly'? I got
chewed out as well AND I only got 2 stars. Missed a few questions can't recall the exact amount and maybe one clue but I've done that before and haven't even come close to a 2.
This case really pissed me off and makes me wonder if it wasn't supposed to happen this way to set up the narrative. If that's the case then I no longer care about my ratings on any of these future cases.
Well, for the most part, I want this game to be exactly what it is. Investigation > interrogation > a nice action set-piece to punctuate the case... Gaming nirvana. Unfortunately, that "nice" action set-piece is always going to detract from everything that preceded due purely to how shoddy the game's controls are in that area.
I'm completely happy not Niko Bellic-ing around town, blowing shit up; I quite like it, actually, but a well-placed shoot-out can do wonders for pacing, variation and satisfaction; it pains me that I can't look forward to that in L.A. Noire.
I disagree. Doing the random crimes has given me what I was looking for in the shooting sequences. I've only done a handful of them and so far I never know what to expect. I've had a shootout at a bank, a robbery gone wrong, and even a hostage situation that I never saw coming. I don't need to the shooting parts to be extended, right now I just love that I'm getting lots of different situations. So far I think it's been a great way to break up the action and I can go do them if I feel like it or not. I also don't hate the driving, which seems to be a big problem with people.
