= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Michaelos comments on Ace Attorney: pioneer Rationalism-didactic game? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (29)
Hold it!
There is little to no Gameplay And Story Segregation: the quest for truth by disentangling lies with evidence being the key difference with any other game. (Except perhaps L.A. Noire but I haven't played that one yet so I can't say.) Other adventure games usually rely on your solving a gratuitous amount of puzzles: it's basically an expanded Rubik's cube. Do Rubik's cubes teach you the rationalist virtues of seeking the truth for its own sake and abandoning lies with haste? I think not, and neither does any other game as far as I know.
Also, for one thing, and I'll say this even if it's a huge spoiler, your client is most definitely NOT always innocent. However, this game teaches you to look for the subtle (and, sometimes, for the Genre Savvy, frankly obvious) cues on the guilt of every client. In the games where Apollo Justice stars, there's even an entire gameplay mechanic based on looking closely at people and picking up the tittle ticks that betray them when they lie. You also don't really work with a bottom line. As an attorney, it's obviousl your duty to look for evidence that will absolve your client. However, you often don't know at if the evidence will weight in either direction: this is literally the opposite of TheBottomLine: you are obliged to go wherever the evidence leads you, and can't obfuscate your way around. On the other hand, the opposition is the one who has a bottom line written down, and it is them you have to clobber with evidence.
The games you have mentioned teach you how to be a good social manipulator at the best of times, but they won't teach you to uncompromisinly look for the truth among a nest of lies like the Wright games do.
Having played through part of L.A. Noire and a bunch of Ace Attorney games, I'll list a few differences between the two:
There is a case in L.A. Noire where there are two people who seem to have done it. The evidence was VERY similar (Access to one of the murder weapons, access to the type of clothes, correct shoe size, both had a motive.) You have the choice of charging either one, and either way you continue onto the next case. There is a an answer which will get you a higher rank, but it seems to be a case where you will be ranked higher because you told your captain what he wants to hear, and of course your captain is the one ranking you.
L.A. Noire also expands the "The witness is lying, and his face and body language says so" Mechanic. L.A. Noire will have you judge Truth or Lies 10-20 times per case once you get through the tutorial levels.
Also, you have to further judge between whether it's a lie you have evidence for or whether you think they're lying based on their expression but you have no evidence, where you pick "Doubt" instead.
If you fail to get certain evidence from people in interrogations it will adjust the course of the case. As an example:
Call a witness out correctly for lying: Get the location of the criminal. Do not call a witness out correctly for lying: You have to tail the witness carefully in your car to the location of the criminal.
In general there appear to be multiple paths to a conviction in L.A. Noire, although I can't say how many since I haven't played through the game enough.
The action scenes I have seen so far are fairly easy, forgiving and straightforward, so you don't have to be that good at shooting/racing style gameplay to play the game. There are also a lot of optional helpful tools which you can turn off if you want more of a challenge.
LA Noire is definitely a worthwhile purchase, and while I'd have to finish the game to be able to give it a full rating, I would definitely say that so far it's at least as good as the Ace attorney series.
Yeah, I'm starting to think of buying the PS3 just to play this game... The voice acting was really mind-blowing.
How good are the "visual cues" for lies and such? If it were a movie, would people say the performances are narmy or overblown? Or are they subtle enough?
My impression so far is that the cues keep you in the game the first time when you don't know what's really going on, but some actions can seem overblown if you already are familiar with the case and are going through the case again the third time.
Sounds like hindsight bias to me...
Wait, I was under the impression that hindsight bias would apply if I were to have said "Yeah, some actions seemed overblown even when I didn't know what was going on." Because I would have gone back and changed my memory of my first impression based on my subsequent impression.
Ergo: First Impression: X Subsequent Impression: Y Memory of First Impression after Subsequent Impression: Y (This SHOULD be X, but it isn't because of hindsight bias.)
But if I say: First impression: X Subsequent impression: Y Memory of First Impression after Subsequent Impression: X
Then I don't think I have hindsight bias. Am I misunderstanding something?
No, it is I who was confused. Anyway, it appears that the acting is overblown, especially to indicate the suspect is lying.