Jump to content
IGNORED

L.A Noire


Lippel
 Share

Recommended Posts

This might spoil a bit of the upcoming plot so be warned @ K

It's another Golden Butterfly situation. It's neither of them, but the game wants you to choose the other guy because the guy you charged is already charged with murder, whereas you can nail the anarchist guy with the arson charge and so both of them are locked up. That's what I took away from it anyway. I did the same as you but evidently the game wants you to randomly play politics again. Very unsatisfying trick to pull again

You're right near the end so you may as well see it through.

That *did* spoil it a bit! You did warn me though, I've only myself to blame.

It's a bit lame that they're using that plot twist AGAIN. It's unsatisfying enough that you have to plod through four fake-out murder plots so they can pull a twist further down the line; to do it again reeks of desperation. Still, if I'm close to the end, I'll probably persevere. I'm keen to finish fairly soon though, as I want to trade it in, and I want to retain as much value as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like this game anymore. The interviewing is so random. People who gain nothing by lying and don't look like lying at all are most of the times lying. It's silly and random. And the searching for clues sections are boring :(.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just done the first arson case, and I'm really starting to hate this game. I charged the wrong suspect at the end, but again I've no fucking idea why he was the wrong guy. I got every question right in the interviews at the end, but neither suspect looked particularly compelling. It seemed pretty much 50-50, so went for the guy who

was taking kickbacks from a redevelopment company to get people out of their houses so they could bulldoze them and build new homes. That seemed more compelling than some vague waffle about anarchism.

And then all of the sudden, the chief's bawling me out for charging the wrong guy. How the fuck was I supposed to figure out it was the other suspect? What did I do wrong? What was my mistake, other than choosing 'heads' instead of 'tails'? There's just no way of telling.

I'm tempted to give up, to be honest. I hate the way that the game doesn't give you any opportunity to learn from your mistakes, or try a different approach without replaying the whole case. LA Noire just makes me feel like an idiot, which is an incredibly frustrating and irritating way to spend my leisure time.

It's because it's neither of them, it's some other bloke. You can't win. They rub it in your face with the fact that you get to see snippets of the guy committing the crimes at the start of the case, and it's neither of those blokes. Unwinnable game, thanks Team Bondi.

You should stick with it, the last two hours are really good and about 10 times better than the entire rest of the game put together. It's not worth slogging through to get to, but seeing as you've already done so you might as well see the good bit. Evidently someone at Team Bondi pulled a few late nights and managed to sneak a whole two hours worth of well written, well paced, and crucially not boring content in when Brendan McNamara wasn't looking. He'll go nuts when he finds out they've ruined his nonsensical dull-as-dishwasher not-very-noir police procedural.

Team Bondi should give this engine to Obsidian and let them create Fallout 4 with it. I would never leave home again.

Face-tech aside, I thought it was quite ugly from a technical perspective. The actual engine rendering wasn't great at all, poor-man's DOF, jaggies everywhere etc.

That face tech in a Bethesda game would be incredible though, but probably too expensive and time consuming to consider any time soon. Plus it would have to come on about 40 discs on 360 :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling the pain of this now.

When I first looked at the stats page and saw that there were only 21 missions, I thought it was going to be a short game. Now I've just finished mission 17 and I'm waiting for it to end. If I were only halfway through, I would walk away, but being this close to the end I feel I may as well finish it off.

I hate it when I get that feeling with a game as I'm acknowledging that I'd rather be spending my time with something else, but having given this one 15 hours, it might as well suck up 5 more so that I can at least say I wasted my time completing the game rather than just getting halfway through. I'm dumb.

Take away the GTA engine and mechanics and you're left with a few neat ideas that I'm sure will work better in the sequel, if they can flesh it out and add a bit more variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: the driving, I'm just glad you can get your partner to drive, by far the most tedious part of this game.

finding this an odd one overall, it feels like a bit of a sequel to Heavy Rain with more to do, essentially it's still press x to investigate the rumble clue, square to talk etc.

The interviews are quite funny though, the way Phelps' tone and aggression change at the drop of a hat is fantastic, one amazing bit in the Golden Butterfly case that stood out as the best case in point.

Overall, not too impressed but will carry on till it's finished, only about 10 or so more cases to go...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Face-tech aside, I thought it was quite ugly from a technical perspective. The actual engine rendering wasn't great at all, poor-man's DOF, jaggies everywhere etc.

We agree on the game being poor but ugly from a technical perspective? The face tech alone makes every other game's characters -regardless of platform- look like cartoon characters. As for the engine, it's really good. Sure it's just a front and generally not up there with RDR, but it's full of detail (even the NPCs use the face tech in real time) with glorious lighting, quite steady frame rate and and with good animation (don't forget the euphoria is still running underneath).

Don't forget that this is on consoles. I know you are probably looking at it from a PC perspective (which -if you are- makes you right) but, in all frankness, even the PC hasn't been able to give us something like this.

So for a tired Xbox 360 and a -quite chaotic to develop- PS3 to make this game run, I would say it's all good. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite enjoy just running around and barging people to the floor. It helps when I'm pissed off with the various shortcomings the game has.

Haha, I was doing this yesterday. Running in a little circle banging into them over and over. Eventually they fall over, dust themselves off, say a canned line (usually a total non-sequitur) and then let you do it again.

We agree on the game being poor but ugly from a technical perspective? The face tech alone makes every other game's characters -regardless of platform- look like cartoon characters. As for the engine, it's really good. Sure it's just a front and generally not up there with RDR, but it's full of detail (even the NPCs use the face tech in real time) with glorious lighting, quite steady frame rate and and with good animation (don't forget the euphoria is still running underneath).

Don't forget that this is on consoles. I know you are probably looking at it from a PC perspective (which -if you are- makes you right) but, in all frankness, even the PC hasn't been able to give us something like this.

So for a tired Xbox 360 and a -quite chaotic to develop- PS3 to make this game run, I would say it's all good. :)

As I said, the face tech is great. But with regard to the engine itself, putting any artistic merit aside, I don't think it's that great. The soft shadowing alone makes everything look like it has smoke clinging to it, and not in a good 'Noir' way! There was no sense of wonderment while I was driving around. Like I said many posts ago it may just be that the current consoles are getting on a bit. Plus hopping between LA Noire and The Witcher 2 probably does funny things to a man. That said, it just didn't get me in my gut like RDR did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not having an in car view or at the very least a bonnet cam destroys any sense of immersion the city should be displaying whilst you drive about. IMHO.

I've just finished the homicide desk and am half way through the 1st vice case. Generally only playing it in small doses of one case at a time helps to disguise the repetitiveness. I can't say I'm massively surprised by the game, it's roughly what I expected and don't see where people got the impression it was going to be so much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, I was doing this yesterday. Running in a little circle banging into them over and over. Eventually they fall over, dust themselves off, say a canned line (usually a total non-sequitur) and then let you do it again.

As I said, the face tech is great. But with regard to the engine itself, putting any artistic merit aside, I don't think it's that great. The soft shadowing alone makes everything look like it has smoke clinging to it, and not in a good 'Noir' way! There was no sense of wonderment while I was driving around. Like I said many posts ago it may just be that the current consoles are getting on a bit. Plus hopping between LA Noire and The Witcher 2 probably does funny things to a man. That said, it just didn't get me in my gut like RDR did.

If the atmosphere was noir and the story was actually noir it would though, wouldn't it? The story in this is just your every day crime story that involves a cop and corruption (more personal storylines are left without proper analysis and feel forced - the ending, too). It would work in any era so the "noir" era has really no gravitas.

I'm still amazed at how "critics" award this more than a (generous) 7 to be honest. It's not even noir and the word is on the bloody title!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Face-tech aside, I thought it was quite ugly from a technical perspective. The actual engine rendering wasn't great at all, poor-man's DOF, jaggies everywhere etc.

There are some issues, but considering the insane amount of detail put into it, it still manages to squeeze out very acceptable scenery at a pretty steady pace. Put some more atmosphere in the lighting using a little fogging and a different hue, and I think you'd be surprised how good it could look.

That said, Fallout uses a dynamic lighting system with day-night cycles and all that and the lighting in L.A. Noire is fixed and can't be changed on the go I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, Fallout uses a dynamic lighting system with day-night cycles and all that and the lighting in L.A. Noire is fixed and can't be changed on the go I think.

I think it may be fixed for the cases but in free roam the day/night cycle exists.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/l-a-noire-world-in-motion-time-lapse

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/l-a-noire-in-game-time-lapse

I'm only guessing though based on these videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every component part of the gameplay is bobbins when taken individually, but somehow the game as a whole is alright.

I would agree with this, it's a weird sort of feeling and from a totally pragmatic point of view I don't think you can rank a game higher than a 7/10 when there isn't a single gameplay element that stands out as being good on its own. I don't seem to have that much of an issue with the shooting etc. though, which is weird as I pretty much hated GTAIV, which everyone is saying was the exact same system? I reckon it's probably a little better than it but rose tinted glasses are coming into play. It may be that the lack of difficulty is also making it less frustrating for me, in GTAIV I would end up doing a long driving section to a gunfight where I couldn't remember how the controls worked and when I died I had to drive there again.

I think my biggest problem is just a lack of... excitement, interest, intrigue? I know the game is trying to be realistic and that not every case is going to be some Law and Order/CSI twisty turny story with a clear villain at the end but everything just seems to pan out without any clear reasoning. The first case where you're told that you have to choose a suspect, the interrogation totally didn't feel like it was pushing me to either suspect but in the end some deus ex witness pops up and says "thats the guy", he runs off, you catch him, case closed. I'm guessing that case will come up again in the future but right now there's not much to make you want to carry on. Was 1940's LA just completely full of people flipping out and killing people for no reason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my biggest problem is just a lack of... excitement, interest, intrigue? I know the game is trying to be realistic and that not every case is going to be some Law and Order/CSI twisty turny story with a clear villain at the end but everything just seems to pan out without any clear reasoning. The first case where you're told that you have to choose a suspect, the interrogation totally didn't feel like it was pushing me to either suspect but in the end some deus ex witness pops up and says "thats the guy", he runs off, you catch him, case closed. I'm guessing that case will come up again in the future but right now there's not much to make you want to carry on. Was 1940's LA just completely full of people flipping out and killing people for no reason?

For me the lack of intrigue comes from the fact that the game delivers bucketfuls of plot spoilers. I mean, the character is supposed to be a detective. So the player should be solving a mystery. Think of the Phoenix Wright games. Generally, the player was privy to exactly the same knowledge as the lead character. So if you had a suspect then you would never know if they were innocent or guilty until the plot twist was revealed. The player's role was to solve the mystery, both for themself and for the lead character.

Rather than type out a long explaination, I will copy one that Morrius usefully linked to previously which can be found at http://www.gamecritics.com/daniel-weissenberger/la-noire-has-problems. Warning, quite lengthy and very spoilerific:

L.A. Noire is a mystery game. In it you play a detective who's supposed to be solving crimes. If it seems like I'm stressing those words a little too hard, let me fill you in on L.A. Noire's most inexcusable structural mistakes. Once you become a detective (I'm leaving out the training missions and Jack's missions), there are 14 cases Cole will have to solve, broken down into 3 Traffic, 6 Homicide, 3 Vice, and 2 Arson. One case from each of the first three is a simple chase affair, and can be removed from consideration. The two other Vice cases are completely spoiled through other means that I'll get to in the next section. This leaves us with nine cases which can be called an actual "mystery", in that a murder has happened, the player isn't supposed to know who the killer is, and they have to figure it out by thoroughly investigating.

Of those nine, only the two traffic cases actually work as mysteries. The other seven—all the homicide and all the arson cases—all reveal who the killer is in the opening seconds of the case, completely ruining the surprise for the audience.

Does that sound hyperbolic? If only.

Every case is preceded by a title card, and most of them show footage of the crime actually being committed—the developers are careful to avoid showing people's faces, but in a game designed around asking the player to be able to pick up on subtle visual cues in order to figure out when someone is lying, simply refusing to show a face is nowhere near enough to preserve the killer's anonymity.

I'll show you what I'm talking about. The first homicide case is The Lipstick Murder, and in the introductory video, we get this shot of the killer:

So, he's a tall white guy wearing grey slacks in an overcoat, killing a woman with a pipe. Not a huge spoiler, but when the two suspects are a dumpy, middle-aged man and a short Hispanic man, the fact that neither one resembles the guy we actually saw commit the crime should leave the player wondering what's going on.

This is a sense that only get worse as the next mission, The Golden Butterfly, starts.

Look, it's a tall white guy in grey slacks, but now he's wearing a vest! We can't know for certain that it's the same man, but we can make an educated guess. Which stops being a guess at the beginning of The White Shoe Murder.

There he is again—grey vest man. And what about The Studio Secretary Murder?

Wow, they're not even trying to hide it now, are they?

At this point you might interrupt to say "But wait, Dan—the storyline of those missions is that the Black Dahlia Avenger is continuing to kill women, but the police don't want the press attention, so they're saying it has to be copycats—so that's why it's okay that we know we're dealing with the same guy!" and were you to do so, I'd have a question to ask in response—

What is gained by showing the killer at the beginning of these cases?

The question of whether or not we're dealing with a copycat killer should be at the forefront of the player's mind. They should be struggling, along with the characters, over whether they're dealing with the same killer every time, or whether people desperate to get rid of a troublesome woman in their lives are copycatting the crimes of the Black Dahlia Avenger in the hopes of getting away with their own murders.

These openings rob the player of that experience. While Cole isn't certain what's going on, the player knows for a fact that the same person is responsible for every crime, and that all the time and effort they're putting into tracking down a suspect in each individual case is a complete waste. A non-optional waste, mind you. The player has no option but to chase around innocent people and help the killer frame them for murder for a full six hours in a row. What could be more frustrating than that?

Now just imagine those same cases hadn't opened with a reveal of the killer—what would be the effect? The player could go through the early ones, genuinely thinking they were chasing a copycat, and then grow more suspicious of the similar cases, just as Cole does in the game—instead of feeling like the game is just padding out the running time, we could be actively trying to figure out what's going on, and then be rewarded with a vindication of our theories when it turned out that our suspicions were correct!

Oh, to be fair, one of the cases, The Silk Stocking Murder, doesn't have a teaser—but in that one the killer leaves a ridiculous blood/clue trail that only a crazed cinema-level preposterous serial killer, and not a simple copycat, would ever bother doing.

The craziest thing about all this is that after completely ruining the Homicide portion of the game with these teasers, the game does it again in the Arson section! The first case, the Gas Man features two separate depictions of the killer. First when he's burning down one of the houses—

And then again when he's setting up another murder—

—while Cole and Biggs are rushing out to brace the three suspects—can they get there in time to save some more lives?

No—because here are the three suspects.

Kindly note that none of them resemble the man we saw commit the crime in the least. Yet the player is asked to send one of these three obviously innocent men to jail, and then be taunted by the game when the intro movie for the next case flaunts the fact that they didn't even come close to the right guy—

That case, too, ends with the cops pinning the crime on another guy who didn't do it. Although this one dies in a hail of gunfire, so at least there won't be anyone to sue the department for wrongful arrest.

The kicker in the arson cases is that not only does the player know that they're not chasing the right guy, but they also know who the right guy is, and why he's burning down the houses—and they have known for roughly ten hours! How is this possible? Well, just—

Read all about it!

Spread throughout the game's investigative locations are newspapers. Unlike the "collectibles" that litter the game's world map, these aren't hidden away in back corners. They're placed out in the open, lying on tables, desks, occasionally a floor. The key element here is that they're not hard to find—music plays and the controller shakes when the player approaches them, just like any other clue in the game. They're not like any other clue in the game, though—they're designed specifically to spoil. every surprise the game has left to offer.

Reading the newspaper starts a cut-scene depicting the adventures of Courtney Sheldon, ne'er-do-well marine medic, and his association with a nefarious doctor named Harlan Fontaine. The upside of these articles? Additional screentime for the actor playing Harlan Fontaine, who manages to upstage John Noble and become the MVP of the entire cast. The Downside? This parallel plot completely spoils the entire Vice section of the game.

The Vice missions revolve around Cole and Roy's attempts to locate a shipment of morphine and firearms that were stolen from an army surplus ship, stop the rash of deaths caused by too-pure drugs hitting the streets, and quell the gang war raging over possession of the dope. The key mystery that Cole is presented with is "where are these drugs coming from" and "why are marines Cole knows being murdered"?

These would be compelling questions indeed, if the player didn't already know the answer to all of them. Simply by reading newspapers lying around the crime scenes we're shown the entire story of Courtney stealing the drugs, selling them to mob kingpin Mickey Cohen, backing out of the deal when people start dying, then enlisting all of his marine buddies to help back him up when the Mickster's goons try to rub him out.

There is literally no part of the scheme that the player is in the dark about when the Vice section starts, which means that instead of playing along with Cole, slowly discovering the connection between his flashbacks and these current crimes, we're left tapping our feet, waiting for the game to hurry up and get to the point already.

And if spoiling all of the Vice storyline weren't bad enough, as I mentioned above, Arson is ruined by these newspapers as well. There's a beefy man in a large jacket burning people alive? Gee, I wonder if it's that guy we saw in a newspaper article talking on the phone to doctor Fontaine, freaking out about the fact that he accidentally burned some people alive!

Is it possible to get through the game without reading any of the newspapers? Sure—but why would you? We've been trained by thousands of games to pick up every collectible we can get our hands on—and by the time you realize that the newspaper side-stories you're reading are going to dovetail with the main game you've already had the entire story spoiled for you.

The sad part is that these newspapers are even worse than the book pages from Alan Wake—the previous worst offender in this relatively niche field of game-ruining. At least there the only thing being spoiled were the timing of upcoming jump-scares and boss fights—here in L.A. Noire they're stripping all of the mystery out of a mystery game.

I've already discussed how frustrating it is that the Homicide missions expect the player to chase down people that they know are innocent—there's something I haven't mentioned yet, and it's possibly even more egregious than the whole "framing people" thing. Of the five "mysteries" on the Homicide desk, four of them are the EXACT SAME CASE.

Not just in the sense of a serial killer framing innocent people for his crimes, either—each one of the first four cases is about a married woman who's estranged from her husband getting murdered after a night out drinking alone. In each case the husband is the prime suspect, with a second suspect off to the side. Three out of the four times it's the other guy you're supposed to frame, and in one it's the husband (popular actor Greg Gruenberg!). The cases are inexcusably similar—you could make the argument that the killer liked preying on drunk women, and that's why he worked as a bartender, but did all of the victims have to have the exact same backstory?

The only variety is in the fifth case, where the dead woman is a hard-drinking vagrant who the killer seems to have just stumbled upon. But even she is a 40ish white woman, like all but one of the other victims.

It's bad enough that the Homicide desk asks players to kill time for six hours before meeting the real killer—why on Earth would the developers want to make it feel like five of those hours were spent investigating the same case over and over again?

And don't try to tell me the victim similarity was because serial killers like to go after the same victim type over and over again. 4/5 of the women were in their 40s and white (hispanic and 20s was the other), 4/5 of them were married but estranged from their husbands.

This is supposed to be the Black Dahlia Avenger they're chasing, and Betty Short didn't match either of those characteristics.

John Noble has an evil plan, and he'd like you to watch a brief filmstrip about it, if you've got a minute

It's rare to see a game just flat-out giving up, but it actually happens in L.A. Noire. Perhaps realizing that the player may not have been paying that close attention to the intricate conspiracy storyline, the developers decide to just lay everything out for the audience in a single info-dump. Who's in on the scheme, what everyone's up to, the whole magilla.

How is it done? In the most preposterous way possible!

Nothing about that video's existence makes sense. Why does it start as a promotional film, then cut into rich men cackling about how they're exploiting both the government and the working men? Why is it shot from multiple angles? Were there six cameras at this secret meeting of evil, or did they just do multiple takes? Why is it in an abandoned film studio, threaded through the projector in a trashed screening room?

Most importantly, since all of the men at that table are in on the evil scheme, why are they so happy to talk openly about part A of the plan, but not part B, which wouldn't be revealed until the next mission? Do they somehow know that the person watching this film isn't yet at the part of the game where they'll find out that this is all related to the freeway?

Oh, and if stealing land so that you can sell it to the government, profiting off the building of the freeway sounds like a familiar plot to you, it's because that was Judge Doom's plan in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

So I guess everything just worked out?

The developers had a tough job on their hands—wrapping up the whole plot of the game in a satisfactory fashion, trying together all the loose ends into a perfect tapestry. They weren't up to the task.

In fact, they botch the ending of the game pretty spectacularly. Let's skip to the end of the game, huh? Cole and Jack are running through the sewers, trying to catch the arsonist and rescue the singer. The plan, as I understand it, is to get the arsonist to testify about the fires, which will bring down the syndicate and their evil plan to sell land to the government for more than it's worth. Then they shoot the arsonist in the head—but it didn't really matter, since he only knew that Fontaine told him to burn houses, and Fontaine's already dead, and unable to testify.

So there's nothing connecting John Noble to the fires except for a verbal confession made to Kelso after Jack shot him in the leg—not really something that will stand up in court. Kelso never seemed to take any evidence with him, so he doesn't have any documentation to prove that the insurance pedophile was inflating the value of the houses—that kind of thing tends to mysteriously disappear before indictments come down. Really, the only thing they have John Noble on is building substandard houses and defrauding Gis, which—while bad—isn't what I'd call the final nail in the coffin. Especially when one considers the fact that he still owns the land that the L.A. Freeway is going to be built on, which can still be sold for a tidy profit. Also, the freeway itself was designed to service Noble's own developments out in the suburbs, which will still be successful. Not to mention the fact that he's still got the whole local government on his payroll—and while the a new DA might be able to shake things up, the election hasn't happened yet.

How was this a happy ending again?

The developers don't even bother trying to explain—they simply cut from the big action sequence to Cole's funeral, where the eulogy (given by Roy!) mentions, in passing, that Cole was instrumental in getting rid of the corrupt developer John Noble.

The developers were presumably hoping that the players wouldn't ask any questions about exactly how that happened.

The players of a game about BEING A DETECTIVE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like what?

The facial animation system, the attention to and amount of detail, the seamless integration of interior and exterior locations, the 'skip to destination' option, proper checkpointing, variety in mission branches/outcomes depending on success/failure during said mission.

For all its faults, I think L.A. Noire added quite a lot of improvements over GTA IV (although a lot of them were already done, and done better, by Red Dead Redemption).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played a bit more of this over the weekend and finished off Homicide, being promoted to Ad Vice.

This game is quite a mixture, feeling as revolutionary as Mario 64 and Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion, whilst being formulaic and boring as well. I played it for nearly 7 hours non-stop over the weekend it was released, adoring the acting, fresh approaches to action (No game has made a on foot chase this special or exciting) and atmosphere. However I put it down for over a fortnight and did not return, every time I thought about powering it up, I remembered the hammer A on everything approach to a crime scene, the jumps in character, the seemingly random and unexpected outcome of pressing Lie, Truth or Doubt and the complete sparseness of the world.

After spending the entire Saturday out the house in the sunshine, a soggy Sunday confined me to the house, prompting me to start the game back up. I’m glad I did.

The criticisms levelled at the game are fair and the silver lining can sometimes be hard to see, but when you’re deep into a murder case it’s so easy to see what the game does do well without hitting any of the snags. I’ve found myself completely ignoring driving case to case as it’s a mundane and dull reworking of Rockstar open world games, and using the thankfully included, skip to destination option. With this, the game does not become another mission re-tread of GTA set in period LA, but instead morphs into an adventure game with great acting, with the unique twist of being a police officer actually involved in the investigation, rather than just shooting the bad guys.

I’m probably about half way through now, so I don’t know if the story can keep up the momentum or how wearing the investigation component will become, but I really enjoy the core mechanics when it’s firing on all cylinders. I wonder how the game would have played if the open world was removed and focus was given to the main story progression?

Either way, it’s a really special game that should be played just to demonstrate how far acting and story has come, and what an individual title this is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facial animation system, the attention to and amount of detail, the seamless integration of interior and exterior locations, the 'skip to destination' option, proper checkpointing, variety in mission branches/outcomes depending on success/failure during said mission.

For all its faults, I think L.A. Noire added quite a lot of improvements over GTA IV (although a lot of them were already done, and done better, by Red Dead Redemption).

The facial tech didn't make me desperate to see it in other games, tbh, and you could walk in and out of buildings in GTAIV no problem. Skipping to destination in GTAIV just required you to hop into a taxi - and in terms of detail, GTAIV felt far more fleshed out than what amounts to some tedious sight-seeing in LA Noire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno whether it's a particularly bad example, but I started playing Splinter Cell Conviction at the weekend and the facial animation seemed laughable. It was exactly as someone said earlier - like watching the Canadians in South Park.

Is that me being spoiled by playing LA Noire immediately beforehand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.