So I was playing online for a couple hours for the first time and winning about 1 in 3 matches as Ermac. Usually everything was pretty close. There was one Scorpion player who juggled the shit out of me and I felt really humbled. Then I got a challenge from a dude with a pretty weak win/loss record (like 17/32) and thought "Ok great! Somebody on my level!"
I then experienced the hardest ass beating I have ever felt in a fighting game. The guy had this combo style that started with a teleport, LOOOOOOOOONG combo and finished with a superman. If that was blocked, he would teleport out, back in then try a grab. This pretty much went rapid fire for the match and I honestly had a hard time even figuring out which side he was going to be on. I didn't ever feel like I had a moment of breathing room. I couldn't get Ermac's teleport off, jumping or sliding back was met with an instant superman and blocking either got me a throw or a hard downward strike.
I managed one X-Ray and that was all she wrote.
So.... Whats the deal? How do I use more skill on that?
@sdharrison: Your an idiot to think re-playability is the key feature in weather or not a game is worth purchasing.
Oh wow, thanks! Great way to make a point about your view on replay factor not being a reason to rate a game one way or another. I, along with a good bunch of others RESPECTFULLY disagree.
Who are these people that take the time to constantly complain about threads they don't approve of? "OH GOD ITS ANOTHER ONE OF 'THESE' THREADS". The same could be said of posts like that. Oh gee, another dude who disagrees with somebody saying something on a message board. If it bothers you so much, ignore it.
And as far as the idea that it's really super cool to hate on "popular" games - that is ridiculous. L.A. Noire is a "popular" title because of it's massive marketing and new tech. It isn't like ironically hating the Beatles. The game has some big flaws and has very little to offer in the way of "gaming". It is an interactive movie with serious pacing and plot issues. Characterization is sometimes weak, the ending lacks emotional punch and side characters never even change their clothes (immersive!)
Taken as a game or an interactive movie, LA Noire has issues. It's ok to talk about them.
This thread is a shining testament to the freedom the internet truck provides for each person to have an opinion. Years from now this will be regarded much the same way as the federalist papers. Kudos to everyone who belabored this obvious point throughout the thread in the face of scorn and embarrassment. You are heroes. We do indeed.... (insert swelling music)... All have opinions.
I really enjoy the narrative and setting but the gameplay varies from mediocre to shitty. The sandbox is unnecessary and poorly implemented, making the driving and exploration a chore, and the shooting is mediocre. Combined with simplistic clue-hunting and somewhat wonky interrogations the game is flawed in every aspect mechanically. The reviews just brush over such issues, and there's quite an inconsistency between the praise for this game and the harsher reception for Mafia 2, for instance. They're both mechanically lacking games with sandbox elements they don't need.
Way more concise and effective way of laying this argument out. Well played
i dont get why people get so obsessed over review scores.there are games with low scores that i like, and games with high scores i hate. i dont let it get to me though, i dont even know why it would?would i have given LA noire a perfect score after beating it the other day? no. still wouldnt, but i dont begrudge people who would, i simply disagree with them. i still enjoyed the game enough to beat it in a couple days, that should say enough about the game itself.
I don't care what score a game gets for any other reason than because I will buy games based on reviews. I saw how much praise LA Noire was getting, I read the reviews and thought "This sounds like a really good game. A 1940s detective adventure game seems like it could be cool. I am wary of adventure games, not because I dislike the genre in general, but because bad adventure games tend to frustrate me to no end. Luckily, all these reviews and are saying this is a good adventure game. I like those."
After playing through it, I was incredibly disappointed. The game sidestepped the adventure game problem of convoluted puzzles not by giving logical puzzles, but by giving you shallow ones instead. Shallow ones that don't require any thought from the player in order to progress, and yet the interrogation sequences still fall victim to "the script writer designed it this way, so even though this other way makes prefect sense, I can't do it" issues.
I respect a reviewers right to have a subjective opinion. If they thought, despite it's flaws, a game was an excellent experience, fine, give it five stars. But don't let that stop you from pointing out those flaws. I feel like hardly any review did that. They were too busy praising how much of a unique game LA Noire was to just tell us, "hey, the mechanics are really shallow, and you don't so much investigate a case as you watch it be put together for you." Sure, the rest of the review can be about how that doesn't matter and thus it's a really awesome game anyway, but less us know more clearly the qualifications being put on. Because it cost me money, and that's why I care.
Reviews in games are always opinions. Your experience will not always match everyone else's, and where you see flaws, others do not. 5 stars isn't perfect, so I don't see how you can nit pick at small details and say it deserves an entire star less. Even if you do, however, its still your opinion and by no means make others wrong.
This is true, but somewhat of a cop out. There is a difference between g4m3br015 giving a user-review, and a full 5 page feature in game informer. When mainstream reviewers look at a game, it means they are acting as critics. The criticism (or lack of) for this game has been stunningly inept. There are very real issues in this title that could cause many gamers to seriously regret a full price purchase. The professionals that we look to for this type of advance information abdicated their duty to point out some glaring and obvious specifics inherent in the design.
It reminds me of Fable III - which is one of the worst games of last year, and possibly the most abusive DLC scheme yet conceived. But the first round of reviewers rode the hype and called it good but not great. Now IGN takes a clear look at the PC version some time later and guess what? Hype goes away and so does the high score.
LA Noire is a decent experience, but it is being praised for things other games get knocked for. I feel like the journalism side of the gaming industry took a big nap on this one. Sorry.
I knew what I was getting into, and was stoked. I don't want to kill civilians or base jump. I want to take my time around crime scenes and get into the dialog system.
The reason I felt disappointed and misled was the lack of depth or complexity in these systems that went essentially unnoticed through the initial round of reviews. The game has been proof of concept for two things: Their facial animation looks insane, and making adventure games on a console for a mass audience requires a LOT of compromise and simplifying of mechanics.
On a personal note, I also think Bondi wasted a lot of time and money making a gorgeous open world with nothing to do. Spend the money elsewhere.
Log in to comment