I tend to agree with others regarding the instant feedback you receive when you incorrectly interrogate someone. It seems incongruous with the (mostly) vague suggestions you get at the end of the case. I feel like that is the appropriate time to give the feedback because it has the ability to cause you to stop and re-think things -- to reflect on the case as a whole and not one individual question you blew.
But it's a minor thing, really. I hope that R* and Team Bondi can up the ante a little bit the next time around if they create a similar game.
@Vlad_Tiberius: I hope this is what actually happened. I would like to believe that it IS actually possible to protect something from outside hackers (even if they are 'determined') -- if not, then nothing will ever be safe. It's not like we're storing *less* personal data on the internet!
Delays don't always mean a game is bad...sometimes it means they actually turned out to be better than expected and need more time to be refined because of this. I heard some very positive things about this game after GDC, so maybe what was supposed to be a rush-job turned into a larger scale project because of all the positive feedback on the game.
This is what I suspect as well. I think the delay means they plan to take it a little more seriously when they discovered that they may have a real hit on their hands.
Log in to comment