hbdragon88 wrote:
Maybe that's true, WA, but this is Phoenix Wright and we come to expect very clean motives for murder, and if they're not clean and neat at all, to have a great and grand justification for why it was done.
That's about all I can think of in self-defense cases; I think every other muder has a very strong motive.
Spoiler: All cases in the PW series
That's about all I can think of in self-defense cases; I think every other muder has a very strong motive.
I don't "expect" a clear motive. I just want something fresh and interesting. Acro was a perfect sympathetic villain because we all do stupid things sometimes. I don't want every case to be cut-and-dry, "this is why this guy is bad and this is why you should care". I'm sick of these cookie-cutter good vs evil showdowns. Real life just isn't like that.
If all the JFA cases were as polarizing like 2-4, it would make 2-4 much less unique (and Edgeworth's "find out what it means to be a defense attorney" crap almost ruined 2-4 for me. Almost.) We don't need the game to spell out everything for us, and I certainly don't want them to.hbdragon88 wrote:
And if 2-3 was all about being more realistic, they certainly shot themselves in the foot with the insane cloak-bust theory that makes 3-5 look about as realistic as 1-1.
I said Acro was a believable character, I didn't say the case was realistic. I don't want a 6-month law simulation. I just want sympathetic characters. The circus felt like a real, dysfunctional family. That's why I loved it. The characters in 2-3 and 2-4 carried those cases because they were so multi-dimensional. For the opposite, let's use 1-1 as an example. The murderer in that case killed someone because they walked on him while he was burglarizing her apartment. That's realistic; it happens all the time. But Frank Sahwit is the most inanely bland character to have ever drawn breath, which pretty much killed the case. When it comes right down to it, the majority of the cases are carried by the characters.
