Would I like LA Noire?

#1 Posted by david61983 (150 posts) -

What is this game like? Is it anything like RDR or GTA V? I usually like just about everything that Rockstar puts out, but I've heard this game is slow and I hate slow games.

#2 Posted by withe1982 (450 posts) -

What is this game like? Is it anything like RDR or GTA V? I usually like just about everything that Rockstar puts out, but I've heard this game is slow and I hate slow games.

I love openworld games such as RDR, GTA and Saints Row. This however isn't one of them. It's extremely slow and repetitive. There's little to do of any note outside of missions. The whole game was quite a chore to play through.

This is basically the whole game in a nutshell:
1) leave the station and head to crime scene.
2) Walk slowly around crime scene looking for clues.
3) visit a suspect/lead/wifes house based on those clues.
4) Question suspect/lead/wife.
5) Learn about the real suspect.
6) Go the where suspect is and apprehend them (usually an arduous chase on foot)
7) Question suspect to get a confession.

Do that 20 times until the titles come up. Game does look good though and the facial animation is the best I've ever seen.

#3 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

Adventure Games are usually slow.

Rockstar has a habbit of slapping its Open World GTA formula on the their games, published and developed. LA Noire is kinda just like that. Its an Adventure game muddied by Open World, Driving and Gunplay.

If you're a big fan of Open World games then LA. Noire is definately not for you, there is literally nothing besides the 20 something or so cases the game consists of. Nor can you cause chaos in the streets, LA in 1940 is definately beautiful and features many landmarks, some of which you can walk into, but thats it , its just a facade. The 50 or so side missions will only have you doing two things, chase (on foot and by car) and shoot. And they impliment this in the most linear, scripted and boring way as possible.

Howerver, as an Adventure game, its pretty good, adventure games don't usually have production values this high. Infact I'd say LA Noire is the only one, hopefully Murdered Soul Suspect will join in too.

In the main game, you'l be Pixel Hunting evidence scattered around crime scenes, the occasional shoot out and chase, several easy puzzles and lots of talking to "People Of Interest". When interviewing these People of interest, you'l have to use any previous clues you've gathered or your instinct to determine if the person is lying or telling the truth.

Many have found LA Noire's Cases to be repititive because of the simplicity of its gameplay. And while that may technically be true, its also not the whole story. Its a thinking game, most of the work of piecing together what happened and how it happened will be done in your head. Every case will follow the same general formula of Investigating Crimescenes (and places of interests) then Interviewing People of Interest, but the cognitive process that brings you to each conclusion is unique. Theres only one down side, you'l always get your guy no matter what. Most of the game will play out the sameway no matter how badly you do in getting clues and conducting interviews, most of the time you get your guy because you just happened to catch them in the act or they did a piss poor job of hiding the smoking gun. You'l notice this when you get questions wrong. The game is at its best if you avoid settling into this complacency. Don't fake it till ya make, really try your best in each case and the game won't let you down. Only the people who don't really mind getting 5 out of 17 questions wrong call it repititive, same with Batman: only people who do the bare minimum (hitting and dodging only) call it a repititive button masher, its got 10 other moves they just negleced to used. In LA Noire, getting certain questions right may open up to new leads or further inquiries, some cases feature accessories to the crime, so even though you always get your guy, you won't always get you accomplices.

#4 Posted by marcheegsr (2465 posts) -

For 10-15 dollars, this game is worth it. Just don't expect GTA style gameplay. Your a good guy in this game and can't go around killing anyone you see.

#5 Posted by loafofgame (424 posts) -

I can largely confirm Lulu's story. The freeroaming is rather disappointing. I felt that discovery wasn't particularly rewarding and while the city looked good, I noticed I quickly got bored of driving around (luckily you can skip the driving). It's a large city with very little going on. That said, I quite enjoyed the different cases, searching for clues, interrogating suspects and the (voice) acting in general. But as has been said, if you're looking for an RDR or GTA experience, you won't find it in LA Noire...

#6 Posted by Jacanuk (3950 posts) -

What is this game like? Is it anything like RDR or GTA V? I usually like just about everything that Rockstar puts out, but I've heard this game is slow and I hate slow games.

It really depends on what kind of game you like and what your expectations are for LA Noire, because its not go crazy open world game, its actually a very linear game put down in a open world frame, where besides the 42 "streetcrimes" and limited collectibles, the world serves no purpose other than acting like a frame for the main story.

But if you are into a great story and great gameplay in the adventure/crime genre then LA Noire is 100% worth the cost on sale

#7 Posted by hrt_rulz01 (5659 posts) -

What is this game like? Is it anything like RDR or GTA V? I usually like just about everything that Rockstar puts out, but I've heard this game is slow and I hate slow games.

It's nothing like GTA or RDR... As for being slow, when I was playing it I never thought once of it being slow. It's quite different, and it seems to be a game you either love or hate. As for me, I loved it.

Maybe look up some videos of it to see if it's your thing.

#8 Posted by huerito323 (1372 posts) -

It's one of my personal favorite games. If you want a GTA type of game, do not buy this game. It's not GTA. You are a detective, and your main objective is to solve crimes. You look around for clues, you talk to people and get as much info from them as you can, and then interrogate the suspects and decide whether you think they're guilty or not. Throughout the game, you can free roam around the city, and you will be able to do side jobs. Cop type of stuff, like stopping bank robberies, muggers, and even a person who's about to commit suicide. The story is great, and the characters are all very believable and interesting. Give it a shot if you want something different.

#9 Posted by Qixote (10670 posts) -

Parts of the game are very much like any other Rockstar game. Those are the parts I did not care for as much as the parts that were different. Embrace the new stuff, just go with it, and you will find it a good game. Not perfect, granted. But still worth playing; it's a unique gaming experience.

#10 Edited by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

#11 Edited by mjorh (663 posts) -

For the sake of its unique and ground-breaking facial expressions and interrogation system , u gotta play it!

#12 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@ Minishdriveby

That happens more times than I initially thought it did. sometimes the suspects answers you (with a lie) to a question you never even asked. Ask for motive and he lies about his alibi, yet in your notebook you have clues to take care of both scenario.

The game also has a few cases where missing a clue obtained from an interview doesn't remove the question for the correspond clue that will be ask later.

#13 Posted by Jacanuk (3950 posts) -

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

#14 Edited by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

That's black and white; memory is distorted and lost and leaving or adding something to the story is commonly done without trying to deceive. If I'm interrogating a little girl and she says 'Mommy was suppose to pick me up from the school dance. She didn't so I called daddy and he came to get me.' That's a truthful statement; although the game tells you that is not the truth because she left out the fact that her dad didn't answer the phone at first. It's a game where you get one shot at the interrogation and cannot go back once new evidence arises; this can lead to some interrogations being impossible if you didn't visit one location before another location.

[Spoilers] The same case with the little girl being interrogated you have to make a choice between putting a pedophile in jail or the father of the little girl. All signs indicate that the father was the culprit. If you choose the father you get punished because the police chief wanted the pedophile in jail, even though he didn't commit the crime. A couple of acts later you learn that neither committed the crime. There was no way to solve the case until the story progresses past a certain point. No amount of in game detective work could be done to have a different outcome, making the detective work rather pointless in that part of the game because it culminates in putting innocent people in jail.[/Spoilers]

#15 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

^ That Sounds About Right ^

one should still try their best in these cases. Have you played the Download Content cases ? 3 of them were awesome.

#16 Edited by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

^ That Sounds About Right ^

one should still try their best in these cases. Have you played the Download Content cases ? 3 of them were awesome.

No I haven't. I'm not a big DLC fan and was pretty much done after the end credits. I think I might have them as a code though because I think I got the game of the year edition or something... I might check them out over summer.

#17 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

Yeah, I got the Complete Edition, I'm not a big fan of paying for DLC either.

I think there were a total of four new cases, two for Traffic Desk, one for Vice and One for Arson (this is the one I didn't like, it got a bit too shooty near its conclusion)

#18 Posted by Byshop (11067 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

That's black and white; memory is distorted and lost and leaving or adding something to the story is commonly done without trying to deceive. If I'm interrogating a little girl and she says 'Mommy was suppose to pick me up from the school dance. She didn't so I called daddy and he came to get me.' That's a truthful statement; although the game tells you that is not the truth because she left out the fact that her dad didn't answer the phone at first. It's a game where you get one shot at the interrogation and cannot go back once new evidence arises; this can lead to some interrogations being impossible if you didn't visit one location before another location.

[Spoilers] The same case with the little girl being interrogated you have to make a choice between putting a pedophile in jail or the father of the little girl. All signs indicate that the father was the culprit. If you choose the father you get punished because the police chief wanted the pedophile in jail, even though he didn't commit the crime. A couple of acts later you learn that neither committed the crime. There was no way to solve the case until the story progresses past a certain point. No amount of in game detective work could be done to have a different outcome, making the detective work rather pointless in that part of the game because it culminates in putting innocent people in jail.[/Spoilers]

Yeah, I remember that one. It made the "right" answer seem a bit hypocritical since technically neither answer was right, but the game still had one that it expected you to pick.

-Byshop

#19 Posted by CodingGenius (8116 posts) -

The interrogations remind me more of Phoenix Wright style gameplay than RDR or GTA. I'm a big fan of the amazing facial details in LA Noire and the atmosphere was incredible.

#20 Edited by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

@Byshop said:
@Minishdriveby said:

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

That's black and white; memory is distorted and lost and leaving or adding something to the story is commonly done without trying to deceive. If I'm interrogating a little girl and she says 'Mommy was suppose to pick me up from the school dance. She didn't so I called daddy and he came to get me.' That's a truthful statement; although the game tells you that is not the truth because she left out the fact that her dad didn't answer the phone at first. It's a game where you get one shot at the interrogation and cannot go back once new evidence arises; this can lead to some interrogations being impossible if you didn't visit one location before another location.

[Spoilers] The same case with the little girl being interrogated you have to make a choice between putting a pedophile in jail or the father of the little girl. All signs indicate that the father was the culprit. If you choose the father you get punished because the police chief wanted the pedophile in jail, even though he didn't commit the crime. A couple of acts later you learn that neither committed the crime. There was no way to solve the case until the story progresses past a certain point. No amount of in game detective work could be done to have a different outcome, making the detective work rather pointless in that part of the game because it culminates in putting innocent people in jail.[/Spoilers]

Yeah, I remember that one. It made the "right" answer seem a bit hypocritical since technically neither answer was right, but the game still had one that it expected you to pick.

-Byshop

I'm not sure which scenario you're talking about, but if you mean the choice between arresting the pedophile or the father, then while I understand the game had expectations for the player to pick one over the other, the fact that no matter who you pick culminates to nothing is what is more frustrating above all else. If you were talking about the interrogation with the daughter, then I also understand that the game had one answer it expected you to pick, but if neither choice was technically correct then the game has a flaw in a gameplay mechanic where you're suppose to pick through dialogue options to have a successful interrogation. If the game is placing the expectation on the player to pick a correct response, then the game should also give you enough information to make the correct response.

I think all of this could have been avoided if they didn't let the player know there was a right answer and a wrong answer in the way they went about informing you. Unfortunately, by making a correct choice "ding" the immersion of the interview process was ruined.

#21 Posted by downnice95 (89 posts) -

If your patient you should buy this game. It is rather unique game but it is not like RDR and Grand Theft Auto.

I enjoyed the game but this is a slow paced game but if you are patient it is a rewarding game to play.

#22 Posted by Tqricardinho (340 posts) -

It is a cool game but it gets repetitive very fast. I never got to finish it because of how boring it became doing the same kind of things over and over again.

The facial animations are great, the story is fun but nothing amazing and the gameplay sometimes feels a little bit clunky. It has nothing to do with Red Dead Redemption or Grand Theft Auto. I wouldn't pay more than $15 for that game, unfortunately I paid $35.

#23 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@ Tqricardinho

I bought it Twice ! :D. Full Price on both instances.

And its not entirely Reptitive, as I've mentioned earlier, its a thinking game, you play most of it in your head, the cognitive process that brings you to each conclusion is unique because each case features different Motives, M.O.'s, Methods etc.

Its kind of like Doing math in your head and only writing down the Answers, it only looks repetitive.

#24 Posted by Jacanuk (3950 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

That's black and white; memory is distorted and lost and leaving or adding something to the story is commonly done without trying to deceive. If I'm interrogating a little girl and she says 'Mommy was suppose to pick me up from the school dance. She didn't so I called daddy and he came to get me.' That's a truthful statement; although the game tells you that is not the truth because she left out the fact that her dad didn't answer the phone at first. It's a game where you get one shot at the interrogation and cannot go back once new evidence arises; this can lead to some interrogations being impossible if you didn't visit one location before another location.

[Spoilers] The same case with the little girl being interrogated you have to make a choice between putting a pedophile in jail or the father of the little girl. All signs indicate that the father was the culprit. If you choose the father you get punished because the police chief wanted the pedophile in jail, even though he didn't commit the crime. A couple of acts later you learn that neither committed the crime. There was no way to solve the case until the story progresses past a certain point. No amount of in game detective work could be done to have a different outcome, making the detective work rather pointless in that part of the game because it culminates in putting innocent people in jail.[/Spoilers]

Well, its how the definition is, a lie is leaving something out. so you might have a more relaxed opinion but the game is not wrong in calling it a lie. But again i didn't see a problem in that case, the interrogation was fine here, but that might have been because i was more involved in the story.

And to your marked bit, well thats part of the game, it is after all a story and the writers want you to experience it that way. the question was also not really "innocent/guilty" it was "Innocent/innocent" and more like since it was a toss up, which one would be best to lock up, since someone had to be locked up.

#25 Posted by Jacanuk (3950 posts) -

It is a cool game but it gets repetitive very fast. I never got to finish it because of how boring it became doing the same kind of things over and over again.

The facial animations are great, the story is fun but nothing amazing and the gameplay sometimes feels a little bit clunky. It has nothing to do with Red Dead Redemption or Grand Theft Auto. I wouldn't pay more than $15 for that game, unfortunately I paid $35.

Hmm, i would agree the interrogation and evidence collection is a bit repetitive but name one game that isn't like that.

Also LA Noire is one of those games that should be bought mainly for the story/adventure part and less for the "gameplay"

#26 Posted by Old_Gooseberry (3470 posts) -

I didn't like the slow pace of walking around crime scenes for evidence. I guess i'd be a bad detective. But this games every action is very scripted and theres not much free movement anywhere so you have to go along with its linear path. But its probably practically free to get now so you got nothing to lose except your time. Its still better then a lot of games out there, just a really slow, scripted game.

#27 Posted by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

It's very slow at times and the interrogation system doesn't always work the way you would think it works. For example, if someone is not lying but leaves out information from the story then by the game's logic that person is lying which results in a bad interrogation for Cole. Not to mention your interrogations and police work culminate in nothing due to story constraints. Great period piece though.

Never had that experience and leaving something out is by definition a lie. Also how did you come to that the interrogations and "police work" didn't do anything? the whole game is about that and it uses it constantly to drive the story forward.

That's black and white; memory is distorted and lost and leaving or adding something to the story is commonly done without trying to deceive. If I'm interrogating a little girl and she says 'Mommy was suppose to pick me up from the school dance. She didn't so I called daddy and he came to get me.' That's a truthful statement; although the game tells you that is not the truth because she left out the fact that her dad didn't answer the phone at first. It's a game where you get one shot at the interrogation and cannot go back once new evidence arises; this can lead to some interrogations being impossible if you didn't visit one location before another location.

[Spoilers] The same case with the little girl being interrogated you have to make a choice between putting a pedophile in jail or the father of the little girl. All signs indicate that the father was the culprit. If you choose the father you get punished because the police chief wanted the pedophile in jail, even though he didn't commit the crime. A couple of acts later you learn that neither committed the crime. There was no way to solve the case until the story progresses past a certain point. No amount of in game detective work could be done to have a different outcome, making the detective work rather pointless in that part of the game because it culminates in putting innocent people in jail.[/Spoilers]

Well, its how the definition is, a lie is leaving something out. so you might have a more relaxed opinion but the game is not wrong in calling it a lie. But again i didn't see a problem in that case, the interrogation was fine here, but that might have been because i was more involved in the story.

And to your marked bit, well thats part of the game, it is after all a story and the writers want you to experience it that way. the question was also not really "innocent/guilty" it was "Innocent/innocent" and more like since it was a toss up, which one would be best to lock up, since someone had to be locked up.

But again, the definition of a lie isn't the omission of information. It's the intent to cause deceit through telling of false information. There was no reason to mistrust the little girl, especially when the question I asked her was replied with a truthful answer. Many characters leave out information and the information they tell you ends up being the "truth" option. It was an inconsistent system that's all I'm trying to convey, and it doesn't offer the chance for a re-investigation if new evidence arose when going to a new area for the case.

As for the story here is the L.A. Noire's wiki take on it. The wiki implemented Rooney in the murder while letting Moller go:

Rooney's biography:

"While stalking children after a dance at the Belmont High School, Rooney witnessed an unknown man placing coveralls in the trunk of a car as well as dropping a golden butterfly brooch. Rooney pocketed the brooch hoping to pawn it for cash. Later, while still stalking the children, he is caught by Detectives Cole Phelps andRusty Galloway, with the brooch in his possession. Naturally, by being in possession of jewellery owned by a murder victim, Rooney inadvertently made himself a suspect in the case of Deidre Moller.

After being interrogated, and thanks to circumstantial evidence linking to the crime scene and due to his notorious background, Rooney was charged for the murder of Deidre Moller despite his calm claims of not being the killer. After being sent to his cell, he was struck in the face by Rusty Galloway in disgust. Presumably, he was later beaten by Captain James Donnelly. However, Rooney was eventually quietly released when the real killer is revealed to be Garrett Mason."

Moller's biography:

"When Michelle went to a high school dance one evening, Deidre and Hugo argued over who should pick up their daughter from the dance. Deidre went to the school and Hugo went for a drive to relax and much later picked up Michelle, however Deidre was not home. Hugo filed a missing person's report for Deidre and went looking for her, only to return home to be informed by Detectives Cole Phelps and Rusty Galloway of his wife's murder.

During questioning, Hugo became a suspect motivated by domestic violence, Hugo became outraged by their accusations while dealing with the pain of mourning for his wife. After Phelps and Galloway left, Hugo was caught attempting to burn blood-stained shoes in an incinerator, and was arrested. During interrogation atCentral Police Station, Hugo revealed that the blood was from skinning rabbits and that he burned them because he feared that no one would believe him.

Unfortunately for Hugo, his wife's car was found with evidence from her murder inside the trunk, most of it directly linking to him. Since Moller worked as a mechanic, the tire iron and overalls found implicated him. However, Eli Rooney was charged instead. Hugo was released and later reunited with his daughter, and was left to mourn for Deidre."

From this biography there was definitely a innocent/guilty scenario being applied to trick the player into a moral dilemma of choosing the 'guilty' family man or the 'innocent' pedophile, and only later on in the game was it revealed that it was actually an innocent/innocent scenario -- well for the murder case.

#28 Edited by Ariabed (1101 posts) -

@david61983: so,,,, what you reckon so far? Are you gonna get it?

#29 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18208 posts) -

Not the game for you at all, from the sound of it.

#30 Posted by Jacanuk (3950 posts) -

But again, the definition of a lie isn't the omission of information. It's the intent to cause deceit through telling of false information. There was no reason to mistrust the little girl, especially when the question I asked her was replied with a truthful answer. Many characters leave out information and the information they tell you ends up being the "truth" option. It was an inconsistent system that's all I'm trying to convey, and it doesn't offer the chance for a re-investigation if new evidence arose when going to a new area for the case.

As for the story here is the L.A. Noire's wiki take on it. The wiki implemented Rooney in the murder while letting Moller go:

Rooney's biography:

"While stalking children after a dance at the Belmont High School, Rooney witnessed an unknown man placing coveralls in the trunk of a car as well as dropping a golden butterfly brooch. Rooney pocketed the brooch hoping to pawn it for cash. Later, while still stalking the children, he is caught by Detectives Cole Phelps andRusty Galloway, with the brooch in his possession. Naturally, by being in possession of jewellery owned by a murder victim, Rooney inadvertently made himself a suspect in the case of Deidre Moller.

After being interrogated, and thanks to circumstantial evidence linking to the crime scene and due to his notorious background, Rooney was charged for the murder of Deidre Moller despite his calm claims of not being the killer. After being sent to his cell, he was struck in the face by Rusty Galloway in disgust. Presumably, he was later beaten by Captain James Donnelly. However, Rooney was eventually quietly released when the real killer is revealed to be Garrett Mason."

Moller's biography:

"When Michelle went to a high school dance one evening, Deidre and Hugo argued over who should pick up their daughter from the dance. Deidre went to the school and Hugo went for a drive to relax and much later picked up Michelle, however Deidre was not home. Hugo filed a missing person's report for Deidre and went looking for her, only to return home to be informed by Detectives Cole Phelps and Rusty Galloway of his wife's murder.

During questioning, Hugo became a suspect motivated by domestic violence, Hugo became outraged by their accusations while dealing with the pain of mourning for his wife. After Phelps and Galloway left, Hugo was caught attempting to burn blood-stained shoes in an incinerator, and was arrested. During interrogation atCentral Police Station, Hugo revealed that the blood was from skinning rabbits and that he burned them because he feared that no one would believe him.

Unfortunately for Hugo, his wife's car was found with evidence from her murder inside the trunk, most of it directly linking to him. Since Moller worked as a mechanic, the tire iron and overalls found implicated him. However, Eli Rooney was charged instead. Hugo was released and later reunited with his daughter, and was left to mourn for Deidre."

From this biography there was definitely a innocent/guilty scenario being applied to trick the player into a moral dilemma of choosing the 'guilty' family man or the 'innocent' pedophile, and only later on in the game was it revealed that it was actually an innocent/innocent scenario -- well for the murder case.

Of course the definition of a is the omission of information, since its rarely not intentional, you can always look it up if you are in doubt.

And a lie is providing an intentional false statement, and the dads phone call was clearly left out. In the game sense.

Also again i really didn't experience the things you complain about, and i thought you said you played the game? because yes from the brief bio, it does seem like a clear "guilty" but in game in the scenario you dont just have that brief info. You have a lot of extra info and with that the case isn't that clear.

#31 Posted by Minishdriveby (9631 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

@Minishdriveby said:

But again, the definition of a lie isn't the omission of information. It's the intent to cause deceit through telling of false information. There was no reason to mistrust the little girl, especially when the question I asked her was replied with a truthful answer. Many characters leave out information and the information they tell you ends up being the "truth" option. It was an inconsistent system that's all I'm trying to convey, and it doesn't offer the chance for a re-investigation if new evidence arose when going to a new area for the case.

As for the story here is the L.A. Noire's wiki take on it. The wiki implemented Rooney in the murder while letting Moller go:

Rooney's biography:

"While stalking children after a dance at the Belmont High School, Rooney witnessed an unknown man placing coveralls in the trunk of a car as well as dropping a golden butterfly brooch. Rooney pocketed the brooch hoping to pawn it for cash. Later, while still stalking the children, he is caught by Detectives Cole Phelps andRusty Galloway, with the brooch in his possession. Naturally, by being in possession of jewellery owned by a murder victim, Rooney inadvertently made himself a suspect in the case of Deidre Moller.

After being interrogated, and thanks to circumstantial evidence linking to the crime scene and due to his notorious background, Rooney was charged for the murder of Deidre Moller despite his calm claims of not being the killer. After being sent to his cell, he was struck in the face by Rusty Galloway in disgust. Presumably, he was later beaten by Captain James Donnelly. However, Rooney was eventually quietly released when the real killer is revealed to be Garrett Mason."

Moller's biography:

"When Michelle went to a high school dance one evening, Deidre and Hugo argued over who should pick up their daughter from the dance. Deidre went to the school and Hugo went for a drive to relax and much later picked up Michelle, however Deidre was not home. Hugo filed a missing person's report for Deidre and went looking for her, only to return home to be informed by Detectives Cole Phelps and Rusty Galloway of his wife's murder.

During questioning, Hugo became a suspect motivated by domestic violence, Hugo became outraged by their accusations while dealing with the pain of mourning for his wife. After Phelps and Galloway left, Hugo was caught attempting to burn blood-stained shoes in an incinerator, and was arrested. During interrogation atCentral Police Station, Hugo revealed that the blood was from skinning rabbits and that he burned them because he feared that no one would believe him.

Unfortunately for Hugo, his wife's car was found with evidence from her murder inside the trunk, most of it directly linking to him. Since Moller worked as a mechanic, the tire iron and overalls found implicated him. However, Eli Rooney was charged instead. Hugo was released and later reunited with his daughter, and was left to mourn for Deidre."

From this biography there was definitely a innocent/guilty scenario being applied to trick the player into a moral dilemma of choosing the 'guilty' family man or the 'innocent' pedophile, and only later on in the game was it revealed that it was actually an innocent/innocent scenario -- well for the murder case.

Of course the definition of a is the omission of information, since its rarely not intentional, you can always look it up if you are in doubt.

And a lie is providing an intentional false statement, and the dads phone call was clearly left out. In the game sense.

Also again i really didn't experience the things you complain about, and i thought you said you played the game? because yes from the brief bio, it does seem like a clear "guilty" but in game in the scenario you dont just have that brief info. You have a lot of extra info and with that the case isn't that clear.

I played the game in 2011, so I used to the wikia to make sure I wasn't distorting information about the choose a "guilty" party. From all the context in game I remember the game was obviously painting a picture of one being "guilty" for murder and the other being guilty for pedophilia but not murder of a woman. The game/chief wanted you to pick the pedophile even if he was the innocent one. The game was trying to have a moral dilemma for the player by choosing to either get on the good side of your boss or choose to get scorned but at least know you were putting a guilty man away that is until a couple cases later you find out that neither man was guilty.

If there was any doubt then Moller wouldn't have been charged in a police investigation. I know you might say in the games warped sense of logic it makes sense, but just because the game has it's own sense of logic doesn't mean it's logical.