Looks like the developers "Team Bondi" did a good job with this new IP of a game. Gamespot gave it a 9. To me personally, this game does nothing for me. It doesn't look good, the animations seem very stiff and robot like. It's only because it has the name "Rockstar" people are thinking they developed this game.
IGN gave L.A. Norie an 8.5 out of 10. The readers of IGN gave L.A. Noire a 7.8, but the press gave it a 9.2. It's just like BRINK. It seems that the gamers gave it a higher/lower score than the actual reviewers. I would go with the gamers over
The story doesn't match the great performances. The "game" elements are sometimes distracting from the immersive environment.
The faces are pretty damned awesome -- it's the actors, after all. L.A. in the ‘40s looks good. At times the framerate stutters and there are a few annoying graphical glitches here and there.
So much great voice work. The real star is the soundtrack.
Despite its flaws, L.A. Noire does something we've never seen before. It's too often repetitive and predicatble, but it's still enjoyable.
Depending on how much time you devote to exploring the city, it will take anywhere from 12 to 20 hours to beat. Many won't find a reason to return.
It shows the ignorance of people. Just like with Battlefield 3. People think it's a direct sequel to Battlefield: Bad Company 2. They don't even know that DICE has made more than a handful of Battlefield games. They don't see it on the console, so they don't know they've exsited. It's a very sad place and the kids from the 1990's are the worse with their "gimme" attitudes.
With the game weighing in at only 20-25 hours, it seems very short and the replay value isn't great. It reminds me of an Alan Wake type game. Once you beat it, the only reason to do it again would be achievement whoring.
Here's a little blurt from IGN;
Even with its redundancies, L.A. Noire is still entertaining. Normally, I'd say a game like this has "great voice acting," but with its amazing new technology, L.A. Noire has great performances. It's more than just the voice – it's the mannerisms, the way someone's mouth thins after telling a lie, the unease of a wrongdoer being grilled in the box. There have been games with graphics far superior to L.A. Noire's, with a level of fidelity that makes the world seem more real than what's outside your door. But I've never seen an Adam's apples move when people talk or throat muscles tense when someone almost says too much. It's fascinating to watch a sort of hybrid between an action game and an episode of Law & Order.
Here's a blurt from Gamespot;
But all that attention to detail wouldn't amount to much if it weren't in the service of a game that was worthy of it. Thankfully, L.A. Noire is worthy. You play as Cole Phelps, a young veteran of World War II who enlists in the L.A.P.D. in 1947. Phelps is played by Aaron Staton, best known for his role on , and thanks to L.A. Noire's use of a new technology called motion scanning, his performance goes far beyond voice acting. Phelps' face is Staton's face, and while motion scanning doesn't quite capture all the soul of an actor's performance, it nonetheless allows for a great deal of the subtlety of that performance to come through. It may take a bit of adjustment, seeing almost-but-not-quite-real faces on these characters, and there's sometimes a bit of a blurriness around the lips that can be distracting. But for the most part, it's very effective, allowing for rich and nuanced performances that seem to fully inhabit the world of the game. And this isn't just for show. The story of L.A. Noire hits harder because its characters look and sound so believable. Phelps' commanding officer Captain Donnelly has a passion for swift, merciless justice and a preacher's gift for oratory, while the weathered face of Herschel Biggs, one of many partners you have throughout the game, speaks volumes about his years on the force. The performances have a concrete impact on gameplay, too. When you're interrogating a suspect or questioning a witness, it's the facial expressions of a real person that you're reading when determining what approach to take.
So to end this post, just take the reviews with a grain of salt, and remember Rockstar DID NOT develop this game, only published it. I just wish this game appealed more to me. Just doesn't seem fun, and seems to lack in replay. I just can't believe that it's getting a perfect 10/10, or A's across the board. I mean, oh wow, they used this cool technology where they captured the person's face and it has blood, but it just doesn't look... fun. I don't want to pick through garbage and crap. I was never one to get into those "Law & Order" shows.
I find all those law shows pretty shitty.
I find all those law shows pretty shitty.