I agree though funny and makes you think at times he doesnt really stand for anything just against everything with 3 expectionssravankb said:Yeah, this is true. I genuinely don't understand him sometimes. There's about 3 games out there that he seems to like, and what's funny is that Silent Hill 2 is one of them. I'm sorry, but SH2 has a shitload of gameplay problems. It's incredibly easy to rip apart that game, but hey, it's a matter of opinions, I guess.Luthir Fontaine said:No offense Yahtzee but nothing well ever make you happy, so why bother
Your in good company i thought it was awsomeEofofo said:Uhh, well,I actually really like L.A. Noire.
*puts up flame shield*
There are games he likes. And they aren't always good ones either... like No More Heroes: a game with an even more pointless sandbox than LA Noir.Luthir Fontaine said:No offense Yahtzee but nothing well ever make you happy, so why bother
Forgive me if I'm wrong but that seems to be what gaming has been doing for a while. Even when something that feels really original comes around, it's usually based on a very simple and old mechanic.Yahtzee Croshaw said:It gives me this horrible feeling that gaming is just going to drift around in the same cycle for the rest of eternity, rather than continually evolving. Forgetting about entire genres while everyone rips off the same dreary tripe, then rediscovering them for the novelty points before remembering how much we enjoyed making lots of money off the easy mediocre bollocks and starting the cycle again.
How come people take him , or to be more precise, his Zero Punctuation-Persona so seriously? Those reviews are mostly for the fun of watching a game being ripped apart, so naturally, his critizism, while, and this is what still impresses me a lot,in most cases, not unjustified, is blown out of proportion in contrast to the more kind aspects of the critique (not review). It helps noticing, that in many of his videos he doesn't state a game is utterly bad, just that it's pretty much mediocre and nothing exceptional and he admits liking (or not hating) parts of a lot of them.sravankb said:Yeah, this is true. I genuinely don't understand him sometimes. There's about 3 games out there that he seems to like, and what's funny is that Silent Hill 2 is one of them. I'm sorry, but SH2 has a shitload of gameplay problems. It's incredibly easy to rip apart that game, but hey, it's a matter of opinions, I guess.Luthir Fontaine said:No offense Yahtzee but nothing well ever make you happy, so why bother
Generally speaking, it has been my experience (and I'm as old as the hills) that you don't see paradigm shifting games until there is new technology to be exploited. Until that happens, you really are limited by the medium itself to the 'same cycle', with the hope that someone will come up with a fresh take on the 'same dreary tripe'.Yahtzee Croshaw said:It gives me this horrible feeling that gaming is just going to drift around in the same cycle for the rest of eternity, rather than continually evolving. Forgetting about entire genres while everyone rips off the same dreary tripe, then rediscovering them for the novelty points before remembering how much we enjoyed making lots of money off the easy mediocre bollocks and starting the cycle again.
The point is that, to my knowledge, this is the first game that made paying attention to facial cues a mechanic. I agree with you that L.A. Noire is not the be-all-end-all epitome of motion capture in games, but it is an excellent proof of concept for that tool. That's innovation, in my book.Fronzel said:But if it's that easy to tell if they're lying, where's the game? Would it really be different if the story included some sort of supernatural ability to detect lies that made the screen flash? Both are obvious "press button to continue" cues. What's the point?Kahunaburger said:Yeah, the technology is in its infancy - I just think it's cool proof-of-concept. And in terms of people lying in a more "suspicious" fashion, that kind of goes with the territory. It makes more sense for this mechanic to have people act in an exaggerated fashion than it does for them to act in a realistic fashion, because players shouldn't have to be actual interrogators to play.Fronzel said:But all I hear is that the faces look weird on the comparatively unrealistic bodies and it's blatantly obvious when people are lying to you because they over-act "suspicious" body language. Doesn't sound that great.Kahunaburger said:I think the thing that's new about this game is the use of mo-cap to get facial movements down to the point where you (maybe) can determine if a character's lying or hiding something. That sort of thing wouldn't be a route I'd mind seeing future games take.
I also like this idea, but I wonder if maybe you could have an option to choose one system over the other. This would mean that "easy mode" would have a clock for case by case basis, but "Hard Mode" would just have one ultimate countdown. That way the hardcore players could gamble one the whole game. It would require some additional writing, but not really too much more. The hardcore version you only receive one message from the kller about a deadline, while with the other one, you would get several.Dorkmaster Flek said:That's actually not a bad idea, because it would prevent you from blowing all your time on the early cases and not having enough overall time left for the later ones, thus completely screwing over your save. Of course, some people like the idea of a brutal system that can fuck over your current game if you don't have an earlier save. That's why they play Rogue-like games, right? But I don't think that would fly in a mainstream game.awesomeClaw said:Good idea, but wouldn´t correct application of yelling also make their patience wear thin?
But might I add that the killer forces you to solve each case individually and gives you a set amount of time to do so of each case? Like, Case 1: 12 hours. Case 2: 9 hours etc etc instead of a constantly ticking clock? That way, the designer knows KIND OFF how much time you have on you and can design from that.
This kind of system would actually work pretty well in something like Inform 7. It handles relationships between objects like this in a very interesting and powerful way.
You really only have to go that route if you make progress in the game dependent on the player being able to tell if a character's lying by picking up on facial cues. There are other ways you could use the technology from a pure storytelling perspective, esp. for games that center on stuff like inter-character interaction or intrigue. Allowing actors to give a better performance can only be a positive thing.Fronzel said:But where can you go in that direction? You said earlier the over-acting was necessary because you can't expect the player to actually be a competent interrogator. Doesn't that leave this new mechanic forever blunt and overstated?Kahunaburger said:The point is that, to my knowledge, this is the first game that made paying attention to facial cues a mechanic. I agree with you that L.A. Noire is not the be-all-end-all epitome of motion capture in games, but it is an excellent proof of concept for that tool. That's innovation, in my book.Fronzel said:But if it's that easy to tell if they're lying, where's the game? Would it really be different if the story included some sort of supernatural ability to detect lies that made the screen flash? Both are obvious "press button to continue" cues. What's the point?Kahunaburger said:Yeah, the technology is in its infancy - I just think it's cool proof-of-concept. And in terms of people lying in a more "suspicious" fashion, that kind of goes with the territory. It makes more sense for this mechanic to have people act in an exaggerated fashion than it does for them to act in a realistic fashion, because players shouldn't have to be actual interrogators to play.Fronzel said:But all I hear is that the faces look weird on the comparatively unrealistic bodies and it's blatantly obvious when people are lying to you because they over-act "suspicious" body language. Doesn't sound that great.Kahunaburger said:I think the thing that's new about this game is the use of mo-cap to get facial movements down to the point where you (maybe) can determine if a character's lying or hiding something. That sort of thing wouldn't be a route I'd mind seeing future games take.