×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

L.A. Noire 'Blurs the Line' Between Story and Game

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the a-little-blurrier-every-time dept.

Games 83

donniebaseball23 writes "Rockstar, never a studio to shy away from risks, first tackled Westerns with Red Dead Redemption, and is now about to launch a film noir-based title called LA Noire. IndustryGamers posted a feature on the game's unique storytelling method. 'One of the things we wanted to do was move away from exposition cinematics,' said Rob Nelson, art director at Rockstar Games. 'We incorporated the exposition into the gameplay, which blurs the lines between story and game. There's a lot of dialogue and exposition while you're playing the game. This was a pivotal focus for us and I think we've done it reasonably successfully.'" L.A. Noire has been seven years in the making, and is due to launch in the US next Tuesday. The Guardian recently spoke with two of the developers about the process behind their story-driven approach, and a launch trailer has been released.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

83 comments

LA Noire (3, Interesting)

aahpandasrun (948239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124472)

Games that try way too hard to be realistic usually don't come out well, but if LA Noire can do the story game thing as well as Heavy Rain then it will be a success.

Re:LA Noire (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124596)

I don't usually whore for visibility when not trolling, but this is serious business. From the Summary:

first tackled Westerns with Red Dead Redemption,

No, they first tackled Westerns with its prequel, Red Dead Revolver. Slips like that are starting to make me believe that Slashdot has, in fact, outsourced their entire operation to India.

Re:LA Noire (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124602)

oh noes slashdot editor mistakes one shitty console game for another very similar shitty console game.

2012 must be for reals!

Re:LA Noire (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124946)

oh noes slashdot editor mistakes one shitty console game for another very similar shitty console game.

2012 must be for reals!

you got that totally backwards man. completely bass ackwards. people here are very good at doing that. maybe you spend so much time in front of a mirror you forget sometimes that it's reversed.

more like - oh noes slashdot editor actually proofreads and does the very fastest most basic fact-checking like 2 minutes with google. since that's not so likely it could be an omen that the end is nigh. if it happened i mean. what we are seeing today is situation normal, nothing to see here, please move along.

i will say something alot more normal round here. i am really not a racist or a bigot. in fact i think humor can help fix shit like that. i just really really think the term "spear chucker" is hilarious.

didja know it was a black man named Anthony Johnson who first introduced permanent black slavery to the usa? how come Black History Month doesn't cover that one? oh yeah and the white man didnt have to take slaves from africa by force either. other black africans captured them in raiding expeditions and sold the captive blacks to the white slave traders. Black History Month missed that one too strangely enough.

so yeah anyway the cool thing about humor is you dont have to cover up the truth just to handle the truth.

What's the difference between a nigger and a pizza (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124864)

A pizza can feed a family of 4.

Re:LA Noire (2)

macshit (157376) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124904)

Eh? Heavy Rain had great intentions, but the actual game was a huge mess -- hard to control, frustrating. If anything it shows how difficult it is to really do this sort of thing well...

I actually have some hope that RockStar will do a better job, though, as they've got a lot of experience with sandbox games, and so will probably not screw up so many of the boring but critical details that Heavy Rain did...

Games like Red Dead Redemption do essentially fit in quite a bit of narrative and direction while still allowing the player a lot of freedom and control; L.A. Noire sounds like it will simply ratchet up the narrative side a bit, but won't really be fundamentally different from their other games.

Re:LA Noire (3, Interesting)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124988)

I disagree. There were occasional times I felt the controls were bad, but on the whole I felt they were very suitable. In general, I was very happy with the game. I don't know that I'll ever be able to play through it again, because it's not nearly as much fun knowing who the killer is at the end of a murder mystery, but it was an amazing game nonetheless. Worth the $60 I spent, certainly.

Re:LA Noire (1)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125356)

I liked everything about Heavy Rain except the horrible voice acting. I had to play it in French, which I don't understand, with English subtitles, to make it bearable.

Re:LA Noire (2)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125430)

I had to play it in French

Since it's made by a French developer, that is the CORRECT setting.

Re:LA Noire (1)

gilbert644 (1515625) | more than 2 years ago | (#36129610)

Considering the story is set in the United States and you play a freaking FBI agent at times, non shitty English voice work would not be too much to ask.

Re:LA Noire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125512)

Didn’t try French (which I would understand), but I tried it in Japanese and it felt more “real” somewhat. Weird.

Re:LA Noire (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#36128590)

I had a chance to watch a playthrough of LA Noir at PAX, and if the whole game is anything like what I saw, it is going to be a massive blockbuster. It may even outsell Red Read.

I've had it pre-ordered for months.

Welcome to 1998 (2)

heptapod (243146) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124492)

What makes this any different from the original Half Life?

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124546)

What makes this any different from the original Half Life?

This one is smack dab in the Uncanny Valley?

Re:Welcome to 1998 (2)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124552)

Um, facial expressions, interrogations, plot-driven instead of action-driven, etc.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (-1, Troll)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124564)

So it's Half-Life 2...

Re:Welcome to 1998 (5, Informative)

mustPushCart (1871520) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124642)

If you have watched the trailer or the gameplay video you would not be saying something daft like this. The whole game is plot and not action driven, the facial expressions are.... because theres no better phrase.. fking A, they are so good they are an actual gameplay element here. You need to watch peoples facial expressions for clues of guilt etc. It quite likely revolves around a massive story presented through lifelike cutscenes with GTA like free roaming. Nothing like HL2.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124668)

Half-Life 2? Really?

Wow. These gamers obviously never had their balls dropped since they never played Another World.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124698)

So it's Half-Life 2...

How fucking stupid are you? You boil something down to one item and them somehow make the retarded leap that that makes them "the same?"

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125680)

plot-driven instead of action-driven

There's a single word you can use for that expression - "linear".

Re:Welcome to 1998 (5, Insightful)

AdamHaun (43173) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124578)

The Rockstar guy doesn't say it's new, he just says that this is what they're trying to do. IndustryGamers layers a bunch of superlatives on top, then the summary adds some more. Bad article.

I'm glad that more studios are listening to Valve, though. I was starting to think that cutscene-heavy, gameplay-light was the mandatory style of this generation.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

theshibboleth (968645) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124922)

Personally I think there's a balance... with previous Rockstar Games (GTA IV, Red Dead Redemption) there was some in-game dialogue but it would sometimes be hard to make out (because it comes in the middle of a gun fight or chase) or possible to skip over (by just capping the motherfucker), but if they really integrate this into the game I could see that as good. On the other hand, I was actually kind of disappointed with Fallout: New Vegas (not by Rockstar) because of its lack of cutscenes--the game uses the same engine as a previous installment so it seems a little out of date, and all the dialogue is in-game. Another game, Alan Wake, largely uses in-game dialogue (with really good graphics imo) but in that case the story is absolutely linear, so it will be interesting to see something comparable in an open-ended game.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

JohnnyBGod (1088549) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126828)

Well... the thing about what Valve does is... it works really well the first time you play. Then you go and grab the game and go: "Oh, that was there. Why can't I skip it?"

Re:Welcome to 1998 (5, Interesting)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124592)

As usual, the summary completely misses the point.

The thing I would call the "big deal" in LA Noire is the facial animation technology. For (AFAICT) the first time, actual facial mocap is being used. While mocap isn't that new for broad animations, its use for facial expressions really could be revolutionary. Just watch some of the gameplay trailers - the facial animation in them is literally better than some pre-rendered cutscenes in other games. Hell, it's better than some CGI movies I've seen. The ability to make faces that genuinely seem alive like this is potentially game-changing (if you'll pardon the pun). I've done stuff with facial animation in other game engines - even with a HUGE amount of work, they still don't seem quite right. If you could just record an actor's performance, instead of having to make ramps for every muscle in the face...

The summary seems to be claiming that, in LA Noire, cutscenes ARE gameplay (and vice versa). Half-Life was the first game to have the cutscenes be continuous with the gameplay (there's no break, and there's no shift in view), but the cutscenes are still segregated from gameplay. You aren't playing the conversations, just watching them. If LA Noire actually pulls this off, it would be another potential revolution. It's a longer shot, though - it would require drastic changes to game design to make it work, and even then many players may not like it. You'll note that, even a decade after Half-Life, many games still use the "end level, break to cutscene" style, because it does have it's own advantages.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125942)

Facial mocap were already used in Heavy Rain.

As a result the game cost a fortune since they basically had actors acting the whole game.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

BlueTemplar (992862) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125988)

Crysis 2 does a very good job in keeping the player immersed in the action during the "cut scenes"...

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36126428)

Half-Life was the first game to have the cutscenes be continuous with the gameplay (there's no break, and there's no shift in view)

How about every NES/SNES game ever? Why is going back to the way things were before the Playstation ruined gaming with endless cutscenes a revolutionary thing?

Re:Welcome to 1998 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36127690)

"Actual facial mocap" has been used for TONS of games before. However, LA Noire is using a new technique for facial mocap which captures the actor's face from multiple video angles. This is similar to a 3D scan, but with video, and over time. Shadow and texture is also recorded at the same time and projected back on top of the captured geometry. Games and films before have used techniques such as marker based (optical mocap with lots of reflective dots) and video-based (such as Image Metrics) to record the facial performance.

You will notice that the game characters look almost exactly like the actors performing them. This is because they are trying to minimize the artifacts introduced when you retarget motion from one face to another since different faces will have different underlying bone structures, muscles, fat densities and wrinkles. It's the same reason Avatar's characters had faces remarkably similar to their respective actor's.

 

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 2 years ago | (#36128370)

Half-Life was the first game to have the cutscenes be continuous with the gameplay (there's no break, and there's no shift in view), but the cutscenes are still segregated from gameplay.

Not quite. That may be true of Half-Life 2, and certainly of the one or two cutscenes in Half-Life. But the trick of these games -- and you see it in the Portal series, also -- is that the majority of the plot and exposition unfolds without needing to take you into a cutscene, or out of the gameplay at all. I think Half-Life actually did this best, because so little of it was verbal -- you would find things out by looking around at the environment, or by actually doing things.

My favorite, I think, was discovering the houndeye kennels in Half-Life. (I suppose that was a spoiler, sorry, but it's been over a decade.) There wasn't so much as a sign, certainly no exposition of any kind, and other, more recent games might've had some sort of musical cue or even a five-second cutscene showing the expression on the main character's face. But it was the expression on my face -- my jaw dropped -- they've been studying these things for... months, maybe! Maybe I tore the gateway open to where aliens just warp in anywhere, but they knew what these things were and where they came from... And the game itself didn't have to say a word.

An English teacher once said to me, "Show, don't tell." That's as true for writing now as it was then, but it applies even more so to games.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

cavebison (1107959) | more than 2 years ago | (#36131170)

this is potentially game-changing

Watched the gameplay video, very impressive attention to expressions and body language, which is indeed a first I think in a game. But as usual it comes down to the gameplay. Hopefully at least it means this is a game with a good plot - that's rare enough.

I'm reminded of Deux Ex 2, which had a brilliantly immersive story in the game, no cutscenes, no need for amazing visuals to be evocative and engaging. IMO it's all in the execution, not the technology.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124620)

It's not a piece of shit like Half-Life.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124716)

Half-Life's exposition was a joke. Basically the writers were unable to come up with a good, detailed story and the artists were unable to create cinematics (they were also unable to make lips move, synced or not), so they took the lazy way out and just had some audio clip triggers sparsely distributed through the game.

The story is so disjointed and bad that I think Valve actually made the levels first and then tried to create a story to tie them all together. Now Half-Life 2 was an entirely different matter, as it was actually a good game.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

JulianDraak (1918564) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125172)

So it was a happy accident. Did you play HL when it was relatively new? As far as FPS games go it was revolutionary. HL2 was a very good sequel and I love what Valve's doing now, but to me it was the first FPS game that I played that was more than searching for keys and shooting monsters.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

paedobear (808689) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125312)

That would have been Sin surely? Admittedly Sin was rushed to release to beat Half Life, but Half Life was hardly unique in trying to expand FPS games beyond the limited gaming of Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake

Re:Welcome to 1998 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36126446)

I did play Half-Life when it first came out, though I probably only made about halfway through before giving up out of sheer disinterest and boredom.

Half-Life was far from revolutionary. FPS games like Catacomb 3-D, Ultima Underworld, Doom, The Elder Scrolls, System Shock, Quake, Unreal, Trespasser, Thief, System Shock 2, Deus Ex and Mirror's Edge were the truly revolutionary ones because they each introduced something that had never been done before. Half-Life was just a cookie cutter FPS that offered nothing new and wasn't fun to play.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (3, Informative)

novium (1680776) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125130)

John fuckin' Noble.

In fact, that's the one thing I know about this game: John Noble's got a role in it. Everything about it could suck, and that alone would make it awesome.

Re:Welcome to 1998 (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125936)

Having, you know, an actual story maybe? The only line Half Life blurred was the line between levels, where previous games send you on separate missions or levels, Half Life removed that separation and connected everything to one huge construction. Thats what made it special. The actual story in the game was pretty much garbage.

Wow. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124516)

This article blurs the line between buzzwords and marketing speak.

PC version? (3)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124558)

Has Rockstar given up on the PC for good? Has anyone heard if there will be a PC version of Red Dead Redemption or LA Noire?

Re:PC version? (1)

Morose (32606) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124612)

Supposedly, according to this site:

http://www.vgreleases.com/pc/releasedate-416969.aspx [vgreleases.com]

It'll be released on May 20th.

Re:PC version? (1)

Morose (32606) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124630)

Nevermind, spoke too soon. On yet another page Rockstar says they haven't announced anything yet. Blarg. Can't trust anything on the interwebs :P

Re:PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124650)

If it's as good as the PC port of GTA4, then they may as well spare us the misery and make it a console exclusive.

Re:PC version? (1)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125248)

What are you talking about? My 3Ghz Core2 Duo machine pulls a solid 17-18 fps with shadows, reflections, vehicle density, view distance, and detail distance at their lowest possible settings ( without being turned off )... and only hiccups every 8 frames or so, and I can get into 1 out of 10 multplayer games without being arbitrarily kicked ALL THE WAY BACK INTO IN-GAME SINGLE PLAYER.

Re:PC version? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124632)

I think so, which is a shame I've been wanting to play Red Dead Redemption and I've been eyeing LA Noire as well but I don't think well see even a PC port let alone a PC version of either game. I guess I'll have to wait 4 years until xbox360 emulators become sophisticated enough to run them.

Re:PC version? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125852)

I guess I'll have to wait 4 years until xbox360 emulators become sophisticated enough to run them.

Why the hell would you do that instead of just getting an actual X360 (or PS3) right now and play this game on launch day?

Re:PC version? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126554)

I don't really need or want a console. Nor do I think that the few console exclusive games are worth me investing in an xbox 360. Plus I generally dislike the xbox 360 as a hardware platform.

Re:PC version? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126774)

I don't really need or want a console

You do need a console if you want to play these games.

But whatever floats your boat of course. If you want to stick to your PC and play this game using an emulator in 4 years, that's fine. I don't really get the reluctancy against getting a console though. I'm not talking about you personally, but the general PC gaming crows as a whole. Isn't it about the games? So why is it such a problem to get the platform for which these games are created? Of course you have to spend some money, I understand that's a barrier. But a console these days goes for the same price as a graphics card or a monitor and most PC gamers don't make a fuss about upgrading those every few years.

Re:PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36127784)

I can explain why the reluctancy is in two words:
Sony fiasco.

Re:PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36128048)

Why would I want to buy something I don't need or want just to play 1 or 2 games.

As an adult who doesn't need to play every new game as soon as it comes out I have better things to do and can appreciate a game on my own time... even 10 years after it's released.

Re:PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36128262)

Why would I want to buy something I don't need or want just to play 1 or 2 games.

Same reason you'd buy a PC game, or a better graphics card to run the latest games. For entertainment. Also, if there are only one or two console exclusives that you're interested in, then you haven't taken an honest look at any of the three consoles.

Re:PC version? (4, Informative)

filthpickle (1199927) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124770)

They usually release a half assed PC port about a year+ or so later. If you are excited to play those games...get a used 360 and play it on that.

I admit that it looks amazing, and it may very well be a great game...but I couldn't be less interested in it. I'm sure I'm in the minority there, they will make a ton of money on it.

Who cares... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125168)

After the abortion that was GTA IV on the pc... I don't even give a damm about rockstar games anymore.

bloatware crashy buggy drm fucked unfinished piece of shit game for windows live.

Re:PC version? (1)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 2 years ago | (#36128922)

Who really cares i never could get into their games.
I am currently waiting for the unlock of The Witcher 2 :-)

Looks like ass (1)

rogueippacket (1977626) | more than 2 years ago | (#36124672)

I'm sorry, but this looks horrible. It's like they took GTA, kept the same shitty combat and driving mechanics, and simply tacked a new highly-scripted story on top. I guess the so-called "AAA" studios are so caught up in their profit margins they can't be bothered to experiment with, I don't know, actually immersing the player instead of making them watch the game play itself.

Re:Looks like ass (1)

Sepodati (746220) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125072)

This sounds pretty damn immersive to me. Instead of listening to the words, you have to evaluate their facial expressions and body languages to decide if you believe what they're saying. Sounds like you really have to be the character, analyze surroundings, separate fact from fiction, etc. in order to find a solution.

Obviously it won't be for everyone, though. I don't know that it sounds that appealing to me, personally.

Re:Looks like ass (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125492)

Well, either that or you take the easy approach: What is the intention of the game writers, what direction should it all take, then follow the lead. Games are suffering from the same problem movies suffer from, they have to follow a certain direction. It's pretty much impossible with contemporary means to create a game where you can really make your own decisions.

Re:Looks like ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36137184)

Dwarf Fortress is moving that direction, slowly but surely.

Well, heck, you can already make your own decisions, but in the future there will be more meaningful interaction besides "trade with that merchant" "ask that guy for a quest or to join my posse" and "kill that person/thing."

Re:Looks like ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125320)

Maybe if you took more than 7 seconds to learn about the game you wouldn't have such an ignorant opinion about it.

blur (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36124682)

Like this story blurs the line between story and advertisement!

Choose your own adventure...Mirror's edge (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125046)

Anyone remember those choose your own adventure books we had growing up? Kinda reminds me of that. I don't know how innovative it's going to be. Lots of games have a working plot and lots of cutscenes. Mirror's Edge comes to mind. Still might be a great game but it makes me cringe that every time a studio brings out a game they want to try to make it sound like it's nothing like anything before it, when in reality innovation is quite rare and usually comes in small chunks, especially in gaming.

beaten to the punch (2)

Gravis Zero (934156) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125082)

Heavy Rain was a bit more restrictive but it had a real and emotional story. If you check out the ratings on gamefly you will see a pattern, adults who loved the game, giving it a 10/10 rating and children who said it was boring and giving it a 1/10 rating. It really could be made into a movie and the critics would love it.

Oh great, another attempt at "cinematic" gaming. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125106)

In the words of Yahtzee, games are not movies, get over it.

At least it won't suck on the PC, because Rockstar doesn't release PC games anymore. Then again, after the shitfest that was GTA IV, I'm not sure I'm very sad about it.

long way to go (2, Funny)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125278)

It's got a long way to go if it's going to out noir Max Payne. Everyone is talking about that abortion Heavy Rain as if it was the first to do it. Well, I say, "Bah," to that.

Re:long way to go (1)

MWoody (222806) | more than 2 years ago | (#36128338)

But Max Payne wasn't film noir so much as a parody of film noir. At least, I assumed it was a parody. Oh god, they weren't serious, were they?

I note the complete lack... (1)

SilasMortimer (1612867) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125404)

...of the phrase "adventure game". Is this because it truly can't be defined as one, or they're afraid consumers will freak out, say, "I refuse to play a game in which I have to think," and skip it?

If the second case is true, I might actually be interested.

Re:I note the complete lack... (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125846)

Based on the leaked gameplay footage [dailymotion.com] I think there's enough searching for objects and talking to people to qualify LA Noire as an adventure game, yes.

Re:I note the complete lack... (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126188)

...while historical adventure games typically did suck in exactly that fashion (searching-for-objects being much too big a gameplay element), have you played much of the modern interactive fiction being noncommercially produced?

I follow IFComp when the opportunity arises, and the quality of the writing (and the puzzles) of each year's winners is astonishingly better than what the commercial games of the 80s offered.

Re:I note the complete lack... (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 2 years ago | (#36127158)

have you played much of the modern interactive fiction being noncommercially produced?

No.

Blurring the line usually means doing neither (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125484)

Let's be honest here, has anyone played a game that "blurred the line between A and B" that managed to do A or B right? A lot of games tried to blur lines only to end up as a blurry piece of junk that didn't deliver either, or at least a half assed combination thereof.

Now, I am not too spoiled by movies anymore, I cannot name too many movies with a good story lately, but games sure take the cake when it comes to half-hearted storylines. It's usually very easy to predict what direction the whole mess is going to take and waiting for the surprising twist usually leaves you disappointed. If there IS a twist in the story, you usually see it coming from a mile away since there's little else that could take place.

So I'd be happy with games with cutscenes that don't bother "blurring" the lines if those scenes are well done and tell an interesting and involving story. Get A and B right before trying to blend and blur.

Re:Blurring the line usually means doing neither (1)

Deep Esophagus (686515) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126390)

Most (not all) of the Infocom games did a terrific job of blurring the line between story and game, yes. The writing was so good I didn't mind that I had to get help for puzzles, and the puzzles were a great challenge. So yeah, the concept isn't anything new but the technology has improved tremendously.

Re:Blurring the line usually means doing neither (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#36141882)

Red Dead Redemption was pretty powerful. Never really cared for the Grand Theft Auto games, as I never found the chracters sympathetic enough to really care what happened to them. But Red Dead certainly had a powerful story and was also a lot of fun to play. If Rockstar can repeat that with L.A. Noire, I'm definitely in.

as a gamer (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36125490)

i can think of many games that have tried this to some extent, Deus ex, FFVII, the later Ultimas.
some of the big hurdles are
1.player not looking where you want them to when you want them to
2.player not being near enough to hear properly (distance, bad 3d sound, player using headphones (people only have 2 ears) missing dialogue on dropped surround sound channels)
3.player not being in the right place at the right time (my play style has always been slow methodical sneak and snipe, so if a game has real time scripted events i usually miss them and it turns an action game into a more forensic look at the aftermath game)
4. player taking some weird path and avoiding triggers for events

Weird (1)

lyinhart (1352173) | more than 2 years ago | (#36125630)

It's kind of weird seeing realistic face motions grafted onto dated looking character models. The whole effect reminds of the old cartoon Clutch Cargo.

Seriously though, I think motion capture is going a bit far here. It gets to the point where if you're going to go with that level of detail in noninteractive portions of the game, you might as well do FMV.

Can't wait (1)

Koen_dr (2155426) | more than 2 years ago | (#36126110)

I can't wait to get my hands on this game, hopefully it gets offered in the 5 games free titles for the playstation customer rewards program :D
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...