The environments really let things down in this game, particularly the way they are lit. There's no ambient occlusion, no bounced light, no radiosity. Just crude directional, and very black, shadows. Looks like the lighting we had last gen, and worlds apart from the likes of Red Dead and Assassin's Creed 2.
Will this be the first Rockstar game where there are no hand-holding missions? You'll have to actually experiment and use your BRAIN to investigate crime scenes? (sorry, RDR and GTA games have soured me)
Commented on 2011-01-04 04:10:26 In reply to moroboshi
Posted by moroboshi
The environments really let things down in this game, particularly the way they are lit. There's no ambient occlusion, no bounced light, no radiosity. Just crude directional, and very black, shadows. Looks like the lighting we had last gen, and worlds apart from the likes of Red Dead and Assassin's Creed 2.
Kinda agree, but if they can nail the animation and the physics, I could care less about the ambio-radio-lumin-occulecense of the backgrounds. The way the characters move and interact will take the emphasis off some tree or building in the background. As much as I like pretty backgrounds, they rank quite low on the reasons I play games, so if they nail the story, atmosphere, and animations/physics, then this game will be amazing in my book. I'm not saying we shouldn't strive for perfection in games, I just think they have a different focus for this game, and I for one am damn excited!
Commented on 2011-01-04 04:14:44 In reply to digi_matrix
Posted by digi_matrix
Will this be the first Rockstar game where there are no hand-holding missions? You'll have to actually experiment and use your BRAIN to investigate crime scenes? (sorry, RDR and GTA games have soured me)
Dear God, I hope so. A game like this demands the hand-holding be kept to a minimum, or at the very least, make it optional. When I solve a difficult crime and bring in the perp, I want to feel like I accomplished something. I don't want to find the evidence because it was glowing bright green like it was covered in ectoplasm. I don't want to figure out who the murderer was because all interrogation options led me to the same damn conclusion. And I sure as hell don't want to arrest the perpetrator by use of a timed button sequence. Keep the game challenging, interesting, dynamic, and without hand-holding, and this will be a sure fire winner.
In reply to
This message and account have been deleted at the user's request
Commented on 2011-01-04 18:58:36 In reply to moroboshi
Posted by moroboshi
The environments really let things down in this game, particularly the way they are lit. There's no ambient occlusion, no bounced light, no radiosity. Just crude directional, and very black, shadows. Looks like the lighting we had last gen, and worlds apart from the likes of Red Dead and Assassin's Creed 2.
I see plenty of AO in there, and no game has real radiosity. The game looks just fine IMO. Lot's of detail- certainly more than GTA 4 had. I'm sure in motion it will look plenty alive and impressive.
Commented on 2011-01-04 22:49:35 In reply to moroboshi
Posted by moroboshi
The environments really let things down in this game, particularly the way they are lit. There's no ambient occlusion, no bounced light, no radiosity. Just crude directional, and very black, shadows. Looks like the lighting we had last gen, and worlds apart from the likes of Red Dead and Assassin's Creed 2.
Commented on 2011-01-04 22:54:54 In reply to shazui
Posted by shazui
My thoughts exactly. All you have to do is to look at Infamous 2 and factor in that there is also a lot more things happening on screen at any one moment to realise they could improve on this a lot graphically. http://images.gamersyde.com/image_infamous_2-13670... http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
Also looks like they're employing extremely low LOD distances and texture filtering http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
MLAA really would improve this game's IQ too. Love the facial animation though and it looks like it's going to be a far cry from 'hold-your-hand' open world games they've made before.
I agree that Infamous 2 looks sharper, but they are both doing very different things. I'd bet the physics intracacies are far more robust in LA Noire(if it's using euphoria, anyway). That eats up a ton of power...
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:21:11 In reply to Frozpot
Posted by Frozpot
I agree that Infamous 2 looks sharper, but they are both doing very different things. I'd bet the physics intracacies are far more robust in LA Noire(if it's using euphoria, anyway). That eats up a ton of power...
Then again you could say on top of the much better AA technique IF2 uses higher res. textures, has better lighting effects, a more generous polycount and it has yet to be seen if LA Noire's physics system will be any more impressive than, say, RDR. Don't forget there was a lot of physics going on behind the scenes in Infamous 1. That and impressive dynamic audio.
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:55:11 In reply to Frozpot
Posted by Frozpot
I see plenty of AO in there, and no game has real radiosity. The game looks just fine IMO. Lot's of detail- certainly more than GTA 4 had. I'm sure in motion it will look plenty alive and impressive.
I see no AO either on the backgrounds or the characters.
The lighting just looks weak to me, even without AO. It's too white, the shadows are far too black, there's no ambient at all (no simulated bounce of any kind). Obviously there are limits to what can be done realtime, but you can fake a great deal, and the lighting in Rockstar's Rage engine (GTA 4 & Red Dead Redemption) is far superior.
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:59:56 In reply to shazui
Posted by shazui
Then again you could say on top of the much better AA technique IF2 uses higher res. textures, has better lighting effects, a more generous poly-count and it has yet to be seen if LA Noire's physics system will be any more impressive than, say, RDR. Don't forget there was a lot of physics going on behind the scenes in Infamous 1. That and impressive dynamic audio.
That being my point though. Each engine focuses on different things. I've never seen any one feature eat power like good physics. GTA4 was both ugly as hell and incredibley gorgeous at the same time. Of course, I am assuming they are using Euphoria in addition to the usual Havok stuff.
I only played the Infamous 1 demo, but I didn't think it came anywhere near what Rockstar was doing( draw distance and physics-wise)...
From a preview I read recently, this the general structure of the game:
A crime has been commited, you investigate the crime scene like in an adventure game (search for evidence, objects of interest etc.), then come the interviews with possible suspects where everything you say is scripted but is determined by 3 choices (I think they were: believe, don't believe, accusation or something in the likes), then you should be able to determine the one who did it, and then it's the arrest (could be car chase, shootout, ...).
The preview didn't talk about a story arch, but there must be one.
The interviews or interrogations are influenced by which evidence you are able to gather in the crime scene (if you miss things, it will be harder to push the suspects buttons). Based on the facial animations and what or how a suspect tells things; you should be able to determine if someone is telling the truth.
A lot of people are dogging on this game, but I applaud them for at least trying something new when they know they could just spit out a new GTA every year and make millions. I am actually looking forward to a game that requires more use of my brain and less of my trigger finger.
The one thing that confuses me though, is how failure is handled in the game. I mean, if you don't gather enough (or the right) evidence, and you don't have the proper information to interrogate, will it just make you go back and try again, or can you actually convict the wrong person/let the criminal go? I really hope it is the latter, and not just a big hand holding, linear, playable movie style game. I guess the only way it would work properly is if the game is huge and extremely dynamic, so let's hope that is the case!
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:09:03 In reply to Frozpot
Posted by Frozpot
That being my point though. Each engine focuses on different things. I've never seen any one feature eat power like good physics. GTA4 was both ugly as hell and incredibley gorgeous at the same time. Of course, I am assuming they are using Euphoria in addition to the usual Havok stuff.
I only played the Infamous 1 demo, but I didn't think it came anywhere near what Rockstar was doing( draw distance and physics-wise)...
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:21:00 In reply to digi_matrix
Posted by digi_matrix
Will this be the first Rockstar game where there are no hand-holding missions? You'll have to actually experiment and use your BRAIN to investigate crime scenes? (sorry, RDR and GTA games have soured me)
Rockstar is just publisher in this one. So, we can expect something 10 times worse from The Getaway guys. :D
Commented on 2011-01-05 02:09:54 In reply to moroboshi
This message is in "Boulet Time" (TM), If you still *really* want to see it, click here
Posted by moroboshi
The environments really let things down in this game, particularly the way they are lit. There's no ambient occlusion, no bounced light, no radiosity. Just crude directional, and very black, shadows. Looks like the lighting we had last gen, and worlds apart from the likes of Red Dead and Assassin's Creed 2.
Hey mister complainer its because of you that I created an account here, if you want to live in missery because the 3d effects and capabilities are not to your liking write a letter complaining to Microsoft, Bill Gates and Steve Balmer for rushing a jump into a console generation in 2005 instead of waiting for a more appropriate time like 2008 or 09 where they could have shipped a console with a Radeon 3870 or 4870 GPU while also making their trademarked intellectual property DirectX 10 be the minimum requirement.
Of course the true reason Microsoft jumped into a console genenration while pulling the plug on XBox 1 was always to prevent Sony from also getting a GPU like G92b or GT200b where Microsoft's PR poster machine would not be able to make claims of xenos PR hardware features that are actually not being used at all because their console is just a Direct X box and not a platform where developers are allowed to make direct calls to the GPU unlike Sony's or even Nintendo's hardware.
Commented on 2011-01-05 03:01:33 In reply to Akumajo
This message is in "Boulet Time" (TM), If you still *really* want to see it, click here
Posted by Akumajo
Hey mister complainer its because of you that I created an account here, if you want to live in missery because the 3d effects and capabilities are not to your liking write a letter complaining to Microsoft, Bill Gates and Steve Balmer for rushing a jump into a console generation in 2005 instead of waiting for a more appropriate time like 2008 or 09 where they could have shipped a console with a Radeon 3870 or 4870 GPU while also making their trademarked intellectual property DirectX 10 be the minimum requirement.
Of course the true reason Microsoft jumped into a console genenration while pulling the plug on XBox 1 was always to prevent Sony from also getting a GPU like G92b or GT200b where Microsoft's PR poster machine would not be able to make claims of xenos PR hardware features that are actually not being used at all because their console is just a Direct X box and not a platform where developers are allowed to make direct calls to the GPU unlike Sony's or even Nintendo's hardware.
To be honest PC hardware is not utilised to the fullest. If developers pushed the 4870 like they're pushing the ps3/360 right now we would see 'next gen' looking games THIS gen. Problem is:
1. PC hardware is not universal, it's always unique
2. More money in multiplats on consoles
- higher price of console games
- piracy
- less gamers on PC (or less PC gamers buying games, either way)
3. Console exclusivity pays money for exclusive publishing rights
It's a shame :/
Loakum
Ugh….scratch that previous comment. The upcoming Game of Thrones video game is a F’in mobile phone game. Why can’t they came an open world GoT game, like Witcher 3 or God of War? (1 Day ago)
Loakum
By FAR, the upcoming Game of Thrones King’s Road was the Game of the Show! It plays like God of War Ragnarok! :) (1 Week ago)
Loakum
@Driftwood Awesome! I’m loving it! It does show a much crisper picture and the frame rate looks good! I was playing Stella Blade and Dragonball Soarkling Blast! :) (6 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@Loakum: enjoy, the one Sony sent us will be there on launch day. Coverage will follow asap. (7 Weeks ago)
Loakum
*takes a large sip of victorious grape juice* ok….my PS5 pro arrived early! So much winning! :) (7 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
@reneyvane: non ils l'ont publié le 1er octobre et je crois que tu l'avais déjà linkée. ;) (10 Weeks ago)
reneyvane
Factornews à joué à KingdomComeDeliverance2 au Gamescom 2024 mais ne publie sa preview que maintenant ? [url] (11 Weeks ago)
Driftwood
Download is now functional again on Gamersyde. Sorry for the past 53 days or so when it wasn't. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Another (French) livestream today at 2:30 CEST but you're welcome to drop by and speak English. I will gladly answer in English when I get a chance to catch a breath. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
GSY is getting some nice content at 3 pm CEST with our July podcast and some videos of the Deus Ex Mankind Divided preview build. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
For once we'll be live at 4:30 pm CEST. Blim should not even be tired! (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
More Quantum Break coverage coming in a few hours, 9:00 a.m CEST. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
We'll have a full review up for Firewatch at 7 pm CET. Videos will only be tomorrow though. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood
Tonight's livestream will be at 9:15 GMT+1, not GMT+2 as first stated. (> 3 Months ago)
Patreon
All comments (42)
Commented on 2011-01-03 23:50:47
Commented on 2011-01-03 23:51:00
Commented on 2011-01-04 00:02:54
Commented on 2011-01-04 01:29:49
Commented on 2011-01-04 04:10:26 In reply to moroboshi
Commented on 2011-01-04 04:14:44 In reply to digi_matrix
Commented on 2011-01-04 13:48:10
Commented on 2011-01-04 15:43:56 In reply to bleachedsmiles
Commented on 2011-01-04 17:35:09 In reply to bleachedsmilesJust show more of the shooting in the trailers, fool the people, then they get a not-shooting game, and let the Brutal Legend fiasco begin! :D
Commented on 2011-01-04 17:59:44
Commented on 2011-01-04 18:41:28
Commented on 2011-01-04 18:58:36 In reply to moroboshi
Commented on 2011-01-04 20:38:09
Commented on 2011-01-04 22:49:35 In reply to moroboshihttp://images.gamersyde.com/image_infamous_2-13220...
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_infamous_2-13220...
Also looks like they're employing extremely low LOD distances and texture filtering
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
versus
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_infamous_2-13220...
MLAA really would improve this game's IQ too. Love the facial animation though and it looks like it's going to be a far cry from 'hold-your-hand' open world games they've made before.
Commented on 2011-01-04 22:54:54 In reply to shazuihttp://images.gamersyde.com/image_infamous_2-13670...
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
Also looks like they're employing extremely low LOD distances and texture filtering
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
MLAA really would improve this game's IQ too. Love the facial animation though and it looks like it's going to be a far cry from 'hold-your-hand' open world games they've made before.
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:21:11 In reply to Frozpot
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:55:11 In reply to FrozpotThe lighting just looks weak to me, even without AO. It's too white, the shadows are far too black, there's no ambient at all (no simulated bounce of any kind). Obviously there are limits to what can be done realtime, but you can fake a great deal, and the lighting in Rockstar's Rage engine (GTA 4 & Red Dead Redemption) is far superior.
Commented on 2011-01-04 23:59:56 In reply to shazuiI only played the Infamous 1 demo, but I didn't think it came anywhere near what Rockstar was doing( draw distance and physics-wise)...
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:03:27A crime has been commited, you investigate the crime scene like in an adventure game (search for evidence, objects of interest etc.), then come the interviews with possible suspects where everything you say is scripted but is determined by 3 choices (I think they were: believe, don't believe, accusation or something in the likes), then you should be able to determine the one who did it, and then it's the arrest (could be car chase, shootout, ...).
The preview didn't talk about a story arch, but there must be one.
The interviews or interrogations are influenced by which evidence you are able to gather in the crime scene (if you miss things, it will be harder to push the suspects buttons). Based on the facial animations and what or how a suspect tells things; you should be able to determine if someone is telling the truth.
The one thing that confuses me though, is how failure is handled in the game. I mean, if you don't gather enough (or the right) evidence, and you don't have the proper information to interrogate, will it just make you go back and try again, or can you actually convict the wrong person/let the criminal go? I really hope it is the latter, and not just a big hand holding, linear, playable movie style game. I guess the only way it would work properly is if the game is huge and extremely dynamic, so let's hope that is the case!
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:09:03 In reply to FrozpotI only played the Infamous 1 demo, but I didn't think it came anywhere near what Rockstar was doing( draw distance and physics-wise)...
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_l_a_noire-14374-...
Hopefully they'll bring it to PC so we can solve that, though ;)
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:21:00 In reply to digi_matrix
Commented on 2011-01-05 00:37:41 In reply to _killzone_
Commented on 2011-01-05 02:09:54 In reply to moroboshiOf course the true reason Microsoft jumped into a console genenration while pulling the plug on XBox 1 was always to prevent Sony from also getting a GPU like G92b or GT200b where Microsoft's PR poster machine would not be able to make claims of xenos PR hardware features that are actually not being used at all because their console is just a Direct X box and not a platform where developers are allowed to make direct calls to the GPU unlike Sony's or even Nintendo's hardware.
Commented on 2011-01-05 03:01:33 In reply to AkumajoOf course the true reason Microsoft jumped into a console genenration while pulling the plug on XBox 1 was always to prevent Sony from also getting a GPU like G92b or GT200b where Microsoft's PR poster machine would not be able to make claims of xenos PR hardware features that are actually not being used at all because their console is just a Direct X box and not a platform where developers are allowed to make direct calls to the GPU unlike Sony's or even Nintendo's hardware.
1. PC hardware is not universal, it's always unique
2. More money in multiplats on consoles
- higher price of console games
- piracy
- less gamers on PC (or less PC gamers buying games, either way)
3. Console exclusivity pays money for exclusive publishing rights
It's a shame :/