Does anyone else think this about the game? (tl;dr) A review of sorts
I may just submit this to the review section as well since I wrote so much; I didn't expect to, though.
I've had this game for almost a year--scored it for ten bucks on Black Friday 2012, and I just got to it a few days ago. As I said in slk_23's topic about the city being too big, the game is utterly gorgeous, but my problems lie mainly in the game's advanced yet sometimes-confusing mechanics.
Questioning is probably the single most frustrating thing in this game. As my friend put it, it's kind of like rock-paper-scissors, where it can be hard to discern whether or not to "truth," "doubt" or "lie." For instance, when you think they're hiding information, to you doubt to press for info? Or do you lie to refute their claim for more info? Both choices seem tangible when you see they're reacting strangely.
So that when you do choose lie, it sometimes seems like there are several pieces of evidence that have to do with their statement. I remember reading a review about a Phoenix Wright game once kind of reprimanding this problem: do you show them the cup, or a photo of the cup? At least in Ace Attorney, you get a few chances to prove them wrong before you're dead wrong.
What I'm trying to say is, anything you have could somehow be linked to the question in one way or another. And that tends to make it seem like the detective's jumping around in his questioning; maybe that's what detectives really do, to confuse the person and cause them to slip up? If that's the case, it makes me feel like I'm the one being tricked by the detective's interrogation, instead of being the interrogator who knows what he's doing.
That being said, losing a guess on a statement is the most frustrating part of the game. You get just one chance, and then you're done. This might be less frustrating with checkpoints between locations or suspects and witnesses, so that you don't have to replay the entire case over in the exact right order to get a good rating. In that aspect, you have to replay it multiple times and remember which guesses were wrong, or else go the disappointing route and resort to a guide, neither of which I want to do, the latter especially since it spoils the fun immensely. But then again, there's no fun in replaying the whole entire case 5 times to do it right.
And lastly, there's truth. Sometimes someone will say something like "I don't know where they were." So you assume they're hiding something, and press them. And then it turns out: they really didn't know. So then you lost that one.
I understand that the mechanics behind the facial technology is supposed to aid you in this part, but personally, I'm having trouble discerning the patterns; between "person being shifty-eyed" and "person just in shock and move their eyes while they contemplate," it's still hard to read people.
I even remember questioning one guy with his face covered by shadows, so I couldn't even see to know how he was reacting.
Not that I don't like this game, but it's not quite what I was expecting. You could blame it on all that Detective Conan/Case Closed I've been watching, which inspired me to finally pop this game in and test my sleuthing chops. But Detective Conan are "whodunits," you know, "the murderer is someone in this room" mysteries, whereas LA Noire is more about the mundane aspect of detective work.
I'd have to give it about a 7/10, mainly because of all the care that was put into the visuals and stories, but the latter just kind of goes way over my head, I guess. Or maybe I'm being too hasty, IDFK.
I tend to agree that it can be very confusing sometimes. Having said that, you might be interested to know that you can safely choose the LIE option every time and retract your accusation if your evidence doesn't seem to go anywhere (before you use any of it) and if their reaction makes your accusation seem hollow.
Also, it's really bizarre that Cole just gives up if his first guess is mistaken. Wouldn't you want to own the mistake but pursue the other likeliest leads for all they're worth instead of just dropping them entirely? Seems unprofessional.
… … … … ../--~~,~~--,:”~|
I have to agree with much of what you said. If I just followed how a person acted, I would get things wrong about 30% of the time. Only when I looked at a walkthrough, did I do much better.
the interrogations were kinda awkward. Not that I could come up with a better Idea, but it seemed more game like and random, then real 100% logic.
The flash back stories were kinda long and unconnected, until the very end, they they seemed to get good. But by that time, I was not really interested in them any more.
I also hated the driving. It was WAYYYYY to slow and careful. I needed a mini game where I just rammed people and stuff. LIke IN Saints Row.
Still, a one of a kind game. Thank you for sharing.
Dr. Darrell of Michigan
Now playing: Saints Row 2, Dragons Dogma: DA PSN: DrClaeys | Vica | 125 Mage
For questioning, "Truth", and "Doubt" were relabeled last minute before the game was released.
It was originally, "Coax" and "Force".
I've found easier to think about like the carrot or the stick, or good cop/bad cop.
Truth = good cop, being nice about the question
Doubt = bad cop, being a hard case and trying to force an answer
Lie = you have to have evidence that proves they are lying.
"You're just jealous, because the voices talk to me"