L.A. Noire

[*MURDOC*]

There's a murderer!?

 

 

YOU RUINED THIS FOR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pat]

And cops too.

Oh thanks a lot, asshole.

[*MURDOC*]

Why is he doing this!?

 

Forum suicide?

[.2D]

That's it. I might as well trade it in now, it's all ruined. THANKS GTAFORUMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Barry Spock]

dudes it's nice to see you all having a laugh but he was talking about a specific case, with specific suspects. I've played through it, but it'll ruin someone's day and make this thread useless to people who are just new to the game.

[Rockworm]

LOL how is that in any way specific.

 

I can say Roy Earle is a dick face douchebag who seriously needs to be shot but that should be obvious from the first time you meet him.

 

FYI I like Cole so shove it biatch.

[EmagmaLak]

I like cole aswell, i thought he was a very likeable character and i enjoyed playing as him!

 

Downloaded the rockstar pass last night for 800msp! Got all the outfits and the 2 new cases, played threw a slip of the tongue last night, not the most interesting case in the world but its good to play something new and meet the new characters! I found all the interrogations on this so easy, the faces were easy to read, but maybe thats because it was a traffic case so its easier then the vice cases?

 

Anyway both DLC cases come with some new achievements for anyone interest, both have 100 points to get

 

List of all the achievements, The secret achievements, and the new DLC ones:

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/game/la...e/achievements/

[Knife]

I liked Cole while (near-end of game spoilers) I played him. Not so much after becoming the insurance detective and seeing him from a 3rd person perspective. Lets face it, he's as much of a cock as all the other police officers

[OchyGTA]

How can you all like Cole, he is an arrogant, self centered dick who some how gets promotions above everyone else despite being a douche. I don't like him as a character at all and much preferred the detectives in Homicide and Traffic. I haven't finished the game yet. Had to edit previous post as I don't know how to do the spoiler line thing.

[Hodgey.]

Finally just got the platinum trophy the god damn Shamus To The Stars trophy takes a while.

[Barry Spock]

LOL how is that in any way specific.

 

I can say Roy Earle is a dick face douchebag who seriously needs to be shot but that should be obvious from the first time you meet him.

 

FYI I like Cole so shove it biatch.

Read the posts again. The problem wasn't with cole, but naming who was guilty in the golden butterfly case.

 

[Rockworm]

Wait... you mean the stuff in the spoiler shade? ummm isn't that what its there for?

[Narcis_speed6]

Had to edit previous post as I don't know how to do the spoiler line thing.

Select the text you want and press , or apply the tags manually.

 

 

part of the story

 

 

[LucianoLuchessi]

WARNING: This spoiler is about last case on L.A. Noire. ONLY READ IF YOU'VE COMPLETED ARSON CASE #5 - A DIFFERENT KIND OF WAR.

So, I was on the final case, where you're inside the tunnels looking for Elsa and that army veteran guy who was in your company in the war. When I got to the part where you pick a flame-thrower up, the first go I did, but I failed and died from the guy who shoots you, I then respawned and tried it without. I was wondering if the final cutscene changes depending on if you have the flame-thrower or not.

 

My cutscene was Phelps coming in, taking Elsa and walking off, when I was walking off Jack shot the army veteran dead, and then it goes onto Phelps helping Jack and Elsa out, and Phelps dying.

 

Does the Army Veteran get killed by a flame-thrower if you take that?

 

[The Nefarious]

I'm a little confused about this Rockstar Pass thing and I'm wondering if somebody could clarify something for me. If you buy the Rockstar pass for 9.99 dollars (or equivilent) do you get the Chicago Piano Machine Gun, The Naked City, A Slip of The Tongue, The Badge Persuit Challenge, The Broderick Detective Suit and The Sharpshooter Detective Suit now as well as Reefer Madness and Nicholson Electroplating when they come out for free??

[Algonquin Assassin]

then why could they create such a gigantic map but yet it is empty and the main missions dont even send you off to see most of the map. I admit the city is grand, vast, and spectacular but there is nothing much to do after the main story missions

Why do the missions need to send you off to see parts of the map when you can yourself? Do we all need to have our hands held by the game to do the sightseeing for us?

 

The city provided a back drop for the story. Anyone who expected an intense sandbox experience bought the wrong game, and should've known better really.

[GTA-Bobski]

 

I'm a little confused about this Rockstar Pass thing and I'm wondering if somebody could clarify something for me. If you buy the Rockstar pass for 9.99 dollars (or equivilent) do you get the Chicago Piano Machine Gun, The Naked City, A Slip of The Tongue, The Badge Persuit Challenge, The Broderick Detective Suit and The Sharpshooter Detective Suit now as well as Reefer Madness and Nicholson Electroplating when they come out for free??

Yes, for a mere 800 ms points you get all the dlc as soon

as it's released. Pretty decent deal tbh, especially for people

who didn't pre-order.

 

If you buy the Pass it looks like this in the game menu store thingy:

 

 

Btw, Rockstar announced yesterday this is all the dlc they

will release for L.A. Noire. So july 12 we'll get the last

case and that's it.

[The Nefarious]

I got A Slip of The Tongue free when I bought the game but it's still a really good deal. I will download this when the Playstation Store is back up. According to the latest reports that should be by the end of the week. I can't wait

[foohy]

WARNING: This spoiler is about last case on L.A. Noire. ONLY READ IF YOU'VE COMPLETED ARSON CASE #5 - A DIFFERENT KIND OF WAR.

So, I was on the final case, where you're inside the tunnels looking for Elsa and that army veteran guy who was in your company in the war. When I got to the part where you pick a flame-thrower up, the first go I did, but I failed and died from the guy who shoots you, I then respawned and tried it without. I was wondering if the final cutscene changes depending on if you have the flame-thrower or not.

 

My cutscene was Phelps coming in, taking Elsa and walking off, when I was walking off Jack shot the army veteran dead, and then it goes onto Phelps helping Jack and Elsa out, and Phelps dying.

 

Does the Army Veteran get killed by a flame-thrower if you take that?

No. I used the flamethrower right up to the cutscene and the crazy arsonist still gets shot with a regular old gun. If I remember right Jack takes the flamethrower off his back and sets it down at either the start of the cutscene or shortly before.

[OchyGTA]

I am borrowing the game off a mate, just completed first Vice case and it says please insert disc 3, which one is that, he only gave me two

[LucianoLuchessi]

WARNING: This spoiler is about last case on L.A. Noire. ONLY READ IF YOU'VE COMPLETED ARSON CASE #5 - A DIFFERENT KIND OF WAR.

So, I was on the final case, where you're inside the tunnels looking for Elsa and that army veteran guy who was in your company in the war. When I got to the part where you pick a flame-thrower up, the first go I did, but I failed and died from the guy who shoots you, I then respawned and tried it without. I was wondering if the final cutscene changes depending on if you have the flame-thrower or not.

 

My cutscene was Phelps coming in, taking Elsa and walking off, when I was walking off Jack shot the army veteran dead, and then it goes onto Phelps helping Jack and Elsa out, and Phelps dying.

 

Does the Army Veteran get killed by a flame-thrower if you take that?

No. I used the flamethrower right up to the cutscene and the crazy arsonist still gets shot with a regular old gun. If I remember right Jack takes the flamethrower off his back and sets it down at either the start of the cutscene or shortly before.

Well that's good to hear.

 

 

I am borrowing the game off a mate, just completed first Vice case and it says please insert disc 3, which one is that, he only gave me two

 

He's not given you Disc 3, you should inform him and ask for Disc 3, otherwise you can't finish the game.

 

[mark-2007]

I'm god-awful at detecting lies, always get my questioning wrong - gonna replay this a whole lot more. Completed the one where a car full of blood is found. I figured everything out before the end, figured the pig blood was used to fake the guy's death to then escape to Seattle with his mistress, but got the questions wrong so I didn't get to see how it should've properly played out. Ended up tailing Frank Morgan to his apartment after I failed to be tough enough on him at Cavanagh's Bar on the pig thing. Would there have been a different cutscene if I had been tougher on him?

 

Also, I've only done two or three of the side-mission things where you respond to dispatch calls, but there seems to be a lot of killing in them and few arrests or whatnot. Dunno if that changes.

 

What's this about different discs? I only got one...

Edited June 1, 2011 by mark-2007

[Icarus]

I bought the game last night (and noticed it was on three disks for the 360) and did the first few general cases before you get promoted to detective and then the first two as a detective.

 

I'm terrible with guessing if they're telling the truth or not. Sometimes it's obvious because they'll look away when you're interrogating and act kind of suspicious, but sometimes I have no idea if they're telling the truth or if I should doubt them.

 

Fun game so far, though.

[Canoxa]

I'm god-awful at detecting lies, always get my questioning wrong - gonna replay this a whole lot more. Completed the one where a car full of blood is found. I figured everything out before the end, figured the pig blood was used to fake the guy's death to then escape to Seattle with his mistress, but got the questions wrong so I didn't get to see how it should've properly played out. Ended up tailing Frank Morgan to his apartment after I failed to be tough enough on him at Cavanagh's Bar on the pig thing. Would there have been a different cutscene if I had been tougher on him?

 

Also, I've only done two or three of the side-mission things where you respond to dispatch calls, but there seems to be a lot of killing in them and few arrests or whatnot. Dunno if that changes.

 

What's this about different discs? I only got one...

The Xbox version is spread out over 3 discs.

 

Regarding your question, if you nailed Frank Morgan, there would be a different cutscene. Nothing substantial, but I won't divulge to allow you to replay the case freely.

[The Nefarious]

I don't feel like signing up to the L.A. Noire Forums just to post this (since I will likely never use them just like Reddead.net) so I have a question for you all here at GTAF.. or rather an observation.. or both.

 

In the homicide cases there are several suspects with each case having one "correct" suspect. At the end we find out that Garrett Mason is the Dahlia Killer. But I don't think this neccessarily means that he killed all of the women in the homicide cases. In the starting cutscenes of each case we can see Alonzo Mendez, Eli Rooney, Stuart Ackerman and Grovner McCaffrey carrying out each of the respective murders (in The Silk Stocking Murder there is no such cutscene). In many of the cases the murder weapon is also found in the suspect's possesion. In fact the only thing linking Mason to the killings is that he's in possesion of some of the victims' jewellry which he could have easily stolen from them post mortem. So in my view there is every possibility that Cole had the right men for each case and let them go because he can (or rather can't) pin the murders on Mason. Am I missing something or is this one massive miscarriage of justice??

Edited June 1, 2011 by Money Over Bullshit

[Chunk]

I don't feel like signing up to the L.A. Noire Forums just to post this (since I will likely never use them just like Reddead.net) so I have a question for you all here at GTAF.. or rather an observation.. or both.

 

In the homicide cases there are several suspects with each case having one "correct" suspect. At the end we find out that Garrett Mason is the Dahlia Killer. But I don't think this neccessarily means that he killed all of the women in the homicide cases. In the starting cutscenes of each case we can see Alonzo Mendez, Eli Rooney, Stuart Ackerman and James McCaffrey carrying out each of the respective murders (in The Silk Stocking Murder there is no such cutscene). In many of the cases the murder weapon is also found in the suspect's possesion. In fact the only thing linking Mason to the killings is that he's in possesion of some of the victims' jewellry which he could have easily stolen from them post mortem. So in my view there is every possibility that Cole had the right men for each case and let them go because he can (or rather can't) pin the murders on Mason. Am I missing something or is this one massive miscarriage of justice??

Nope, Garret is 100% the killer of all of the women. It's Garret in the case opening cutscenes and all the arrested men are all fall guys who Garret framed.

[The Nefarious]

 

I don't feel like signing up to the L.A. Noire Forums just to post this (since I will likely never use them just like Reddead.net) so I have a question for you all here at GTAF.. or rather an observation.. or both.

 

In the homicide cases there are several suspects with each case having one "correct" suspect. At the end we find out that Garrett Mason is the Dahlia Killer. But I don't think this neccessarily means that he killed all of the women in the homicide cases. In the starting cutscenes of each case we can see Alonzo Mendez, Eli Rooney, Stuart Ackerman and James McCaffrey carrying out each of the respective murders (in The Silk Stocking Murder there is no such cutscene). In many of the cases the murder weapon is also found in the suspect's possesion. In fact the only thing linking Mason to the killings is that he's in possesion of some of the victims' jewellry which he could have easily stolen from them post mortem. So in my view there is every possibility that Cole had the right men for each case and let them go because he can (or rather can't) pin the murders on Mason. Am I missing something or is this one massive miscarriage of justice??

Nope, Garret is 100% the killer of all of the women. It's Garret in the case opening cutscenes and all the arrested men are all fall guys who Garret framed.

I really don't think so man. Frankly that explanation poses a lot more questions then it answers. In order to frame those men he would have to have keys to each of their houses and do background research on them in order to know their movements etc. When I first played the last homicide case I thought the same as you but keener observation proves that that's not the case. Mason seems pretty intelligent but I highly doubt he can take on other people's forms. I knew who to convict in each case simply by paying close attention to the opening cutscenes.. it's definitely them. That I'm sure of.

Edited June 1, 2011 by Money Over Bullshit

[Firefly8000]

I don't feel like signing up to the L.A. Noire Forums just to post this (since I will likely never use them just like Reddead.net) so I have a question for you all here at GTAF.. or rather an observation.. or both.

 

In the homicide cases there are several suspects with each case having one "correct" suspect. At the end we find out that Garrett Mason is the Dahlia Killer. But I don't think this neccessarily means that he killed all of the women in the homicide cases. In the starting cutscenes of each case we can see Alonzo Mendez, Eli Rooney, Stuart Ackerman and James McCaffrey carrying out each of the respective murders (in The Silk Stocking Murder there is no such cutscene). In many of the cases the murder weapon is also found in the suspect's possesion. In fact the only thing linking Mason to the killings is that he's in possesion of some of the victims' jewellry which he could have easily stolen from them post mortem. So in my view there is every possibility that Cole had the right men for each case and let them go because he can (or rather can't) pin the murders on Mason. Am I missing something or is this one massive miscarriage of justice??

Nope, Garret is 100% the killer of all of the women. It's Garret in the case opening cutscenes and all the arrested men are all fall guys who Garret framed.

I really don't think so man. Frankly that explanation poses a lot more questions then it answers. In order to frame those men he would have to have keys to each of their houses and do background research on them in order to know their movements etc. When I first played the last homicide case I thought the same as you but keener observation proves that that's not the case. Mason seems pretty intelligent but I highly doubt he can take on other people's forms. I knew who to convict in each case simply by paying close attention to the opening cutscenes.. it's definitely them. That I'm sure of.

IMO, The whole homicide desk is very poorly written, and riddled with plotholes.

[AnotherDave]

Homicide spoilers, just to be clear.

 

@MOB Mason was specifically giving the police the impression that a certain person was the murderer, it was part of his game, part of the test. Making his appearance similar to those he wanted the police to believe it was - ata passing glance at least - would be a sensible thing to do in case of witnesses.

 

With that in mind, what do we actually see in the opening cutscenes? The Red Lipstick Murder shows the killer to be a man who looks like Mason and who definitely isn't Mendez as the shape of the face is different. The killer shown in The Golden Butterfly wears a hat similar to Eli Rooney's, but there's not much else to suggest it's him and nothing at all that shows it isn't Mason.

 

There's nothing to go on in The Silk Stocking Murder, but it switches up a bit in the cutscene of The White Shoe Slaying as Stuart Ackerman is almost certainly the man shown. We don't see him do anything except watch the victim get off a bus, though.

 

The Studio Secretary Murder shows the killer's face reletively clearly. It could be Grosvenor McCaffrey, but also looks like Garrett Mason. The two men look fairly similar anyway, though, and again there's nothing that shows the killer isn't Mason.

 

The messages written on the victims bodies also ties the murders to one another, as do the Percy Shelley references. The murder weapons being in the possession of certain suspects isn't really anything more than circumstantial evidence and often overly convenient. Throughout the cases you were always trying to make a suspect fit the evidence rather than having anything concrete on them.

 

 

@Firefly I'd be interested to hear more about these plot holes. I haven't noticed anything too bad myself.

Edited June 1, 2011 by something_else

[Firefly8000]

I dunno, it's just stupid how Mason could know who eveyone was and just plant evidence without them them ever realising. Also, why does no one go crazy and even try to debate they didn't do it. They just get charged, thrown in a cell and they're like "Oh no, they caught me, derp." Then, even though it can't be classed as a plothole, the ending of the desk is just stupid. "We killed the Dahlia murderer but let's keep it quiet because he's the half-brother of one of America's most influential politicians."