Court Records https://forums.court-records.net/ |
|
Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) https://forums.court-records.net/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=31978 |
Page 2 of 5 |
Author: | linkenski [ Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:23 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Yeah, just as how 2-4's quality dropped heavily when Phoenix postpones it one more day too /s I'm not really sure what I feel about it. But I've been thinking maybe this structure had been decided because technically DD also only had 2 real-length cases, so maybe that's what's within the team's writing budget for 5 cases, but instead of ending the game on a disappointing 1-day case they said "let's make case 2 the same way we made case 5 in the previous game" and then saved the best ones for the middle and ending instead. Who knows. I think the reason why case 2 is a 1-day trial (now that I've seen it) is maybe slightly arbitrary. It just seems... IDK, kinda unnecessary but at least they give you a story-reason for having to keep it all within a single day's lawyer work. |
Author: | Ash [ Wed Jun 22, 2016 4:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Personally, I think it's a good idea on its own to not allow themselves to be too fixated on 'traditional' case structure. It's the story they want to tell that should dictate how a story is divided, not some arbitrary notion they need to follow that scheme in each game. Takumi himself too changed it between AA1 and 2, and DGS in particular is a good example of building the game about the story he wants to tell, and not just go by the numbers. In terms of length, AA6-2 is really what you'd expect from any case 2, so it's not like that the one-day structure means there is less content. |
Author: | Doctor Nanjo [ Wed Jun 22, 2016 7:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Well, I went through ZSlyzer's youtube playthroughs, and dug up the numbers: I-2 is ~2.17 hours. 1-2 is ~2.5 hours. 4-2 is ~3.8 hours. 2-2 is ~4 hours. 6-2 is ~4.7 hours. 3-2 is ~5 hours. I2-2 is ~5.3 hours. 5-2 is ~5.6 hours. I think the 6-2 number is a little inflated because it is from bolt's stream, and he did a little of side-investigations in his play through, whereas the other numbers don't include that at all, but even if you subtract a half hour from his time, it's still an average length for case 2. |
Author: | Rubia Ryu the Royal [ Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Whew, this game is still hitting all the right notes with me so far. I'm quite enjoying the premise of this case, and especially revisiting Trucy's lineage. With how AJ had ended, the retcon was inevitable and pretty much the only way they could have written up something about the Troupe again. But it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm glad I was wrong about the return of the Gramarye line. They wrote it well. Rather, there is one thing I couldn't care as much for... Spoiler: Nonetheless, I'm coming to like Nayuta a lot. He has a respectable character design and a majestic theme, and he knows how to tell insults as they are. Spoiler: I was a little disappointed with the villain's breakdown, though. It was fun to watch while it lasted. And to that ending... Spoiler: |
Author: | Bad Player [ Fri Jun 24, 2016 3:25 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Rubia Ryu the Royal wrote: Rather, there is one thing I couldn't care as much for... Spoiler: Spoiler: |
Author: | FenrirDarkWolf [ Thu Jul 07, 2016 12:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
mfw Cases 2 and 4 are honestly my favourites cases in the game. |
Author: | Yash K. Productions [ Sat Aug 27, 2016 9:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
I'm going to sum up part of this case in four words. Spoiler: |
Author: | Rubia Ryu the Royal [ Sun Aug 28, 2016 4:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Yash K. Productions wrote: I'm going to sum up part of this case in four words. Spoiler: Yeah, but Spoiler: |
Author: | linkenski [ Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
I hate to ask, but when you say Spoiler: SoJ Is that a directly comparable statement to Spoiler: DD |
Author: | Thunder84 [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Spoiler: Also... Spoiler: Prologue spoilers So, uh, yeah. Great case. |
Author: | linkenski [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:26 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
I just started the case. I played all of the investigation segment in Japanese already, so now I get to make sense of it lol, but honestly while I was gushing hard over how cool this setup seemed, now that I understand it some things don't make sense, some things are forced and the writing is a step below what it was in 6-1. First off: Spoiler: |
Author: | Yash K. Productions [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Am I the only one who didn't like Nahyuta's English sutra? His Objection seemed pretty decent to me… |
Author: | Bad Player [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
linkenski wrote: Spoiler: Yeah, that bothered me too when I played. No, it's never explained/addressed. |
Author: | Blizdi [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Bad Player wrote: linkenski wrote: Spoiler: Yeah, that bothered me too when I played. No, it's never explained/addressed. It's for the show, it's to show no one was in the box, like when a magician goes "see guys, ordinary cylinder, no tricks" |
Author: | Thunder84 [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 4:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Bad Player wrote: linkenski wrote: Spoiler: Yeah, that bothered me too when I played. No, it's never explained/addressed. I'm guessing she did it to show that it was actually Trucy outside the box and that she did escape. |
Author: | Proyectil [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Well, I'm finishing this case's investigation, and these are my impressions for this first half of this case: Spoiler: |
Author: | linkenski [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 5:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Bad Player wrote: linkenski wrote: Spoiler: Yeah, that bothered me too when I played. No, it's never explained/addressed. Ugh. I have a feeling the writers realized this and just didn't want to do anything about it because it would've destroyed the case, and thinking up alternative scenarios to who could've been in the box or swapping positions only create worse outcomes. Hm. Shame, because going further in the case mystery is pretty nice. I mean, Yamazaki loves this stuff with mechanics and ropes and obscuring the body with props etc. And this is the most plausible setting for it, but eh. Really a shame the whole thing is pretty contrived. |
Author: | Coffee Prosecutor [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
One question: After talking to the producer-guy, I can't go and talk to Trucy in the detention center. She simply doesn't appear. Am I doing something wrong? Edit: Found it. |
Author: | Bad Player [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
linkenski wrote: Bad Player wrote: linkenski wrote: Spoiler: Yeah, that bothered me too when I played. No, it's never explained/addressed. Ugh. I have a feeling the writers realized this and just didn't want to do anything about it because it would've destroyed the case, and thinking up alternative scenarios to who could've been in the box or swapping positions only create worse outcomes. Hm. Shame, because going further in the case mystery is pretty nice. I mean, Yamazaki loves this stuff with mechanics and ropes and obscuring the body with props etc. And this is the most plausible setting for it, but eh. Really a shame the whole thing is pretty contrived. It's a shame, but tbf it's one small action in a magic act, and while there isn't much of a reason to do it, it's not like there's a compelling reason not to do it. Having one small strange action didn't make the entire scenario contrived to me. |
Author: | linkenski [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Yeah well, the rest is pretty fine and I can buy that it was more of a presentational gesture to stab the sword like some pointed out. Aside from that being a little distracting, I like seeing Ema again, Spoiler: |
Author: | Bad Player [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
linkenski wrote: Spoiler: There are still definitely some obvious hard limits, though... Spoiler: |
Author: | Kessler [ Fri Sep 09, 2016 11:33 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Spoiler: |
Author: | linkenski [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Bad Player wrote: linkenski wrote: Spoiler: There are still definitely some obvious hard limits, though... Spoiler: Yeah maybe it's a little... sought (or whatever you can call it), that did strike me as well. Spoiler: It's kinda the same issue with how they handle most of the established canon in general. It's all "Look at this sweet memory you have of (trilogy or AJAA)! Why don't we look at it some more exactly the way it was! ...anyway, back to the plot which has nothing to do with that, actually!" Spoiler: Another annoyance And ooooohhh no... I just realized this. They're giving Trucy a "backstory" akin to "I'm fine" now aren't they? Oh please, is this really necessary? Spoiler: |
Author: | Thunder84 [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Spoiler: Issue brought up before |
Author: | Kessler [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:30 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Thunder84 wrote: Spoiler: Issue brought up before Spoiler: |
Author: | CreativeAttorney [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:10 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
I just finished this case about an hour ago, and I loved it. The investigation was more interesting then I'd thought it'd be (I was actually interested in the investigation segment this time, usually I can't stand them) and the trial segment was pretty good as well! Some of my favorites things from the case (put in lovely spoiler tag format for anyone who doesn't want a itsy-bitsy spoiler for the case if they haven't finished or playing ) were... Spoiler: Trucy Spoiler: Bonny However... Spoiler: Spoiler: Nahyuta, or whatever his name is And that's pretty much the good stuff, I've probably rambled on for a bit too long, so I'll put my minimal dislikes in one Tag: Spoiler: Okay, now I can finally end this text wall. Overall, I'd get The Magical Turnabout a 4.8/5. Good case, probably my 3rd favorite. |
Author: | Reglare [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Spoiler: The Magic Act |
Author: | Pierre [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:26 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Man I'm not long into it but already I feel its delivering a lot of what I wanted from DD. A follow up on the Gramayre stuff Trucy dealing with actual turmoil and having depth as a result A distinct line about fans of her magic panties being disappointed (which I'm sure is to apologise for her being such a one-trick panty in the last game) I'm just so glad Trucy is back in a meaningful way. |
Author: | linkenski [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
The only gripe is that it feels too much like a response to the criticisms of how DD didn't do these things rather than something they wanted to do because it would serve a purpose. It's nice, but I wonder if they would've done any of it if people hadnt complained, and the result is that it feels a bit like "okay, here's your answer, now, back to SoJ!" |
Author: | Bad Player [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Pierre wrote: I'm just so glad Trucy is back in a meaningful way. for one case >_> (i guess there are so many characters now most can only get one case, but that's a different issue) |
Author: | Klonoahedgehog [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Pierre wrote: I'm just so glad Trucy is back in a meaningful way. Just leaving this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz9XYIiTkh0 |
Author: | linkenski [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Bad Player wrote: Pierre wrote: I'm just so glad Trucy is back in a meaningful way. for one case >_> (i guess there are so many characters now most can only get one case, but that's a different issue) Which is why if there is an AA7 it's about time they stick to one protagonist and say Athena or whoever are on vacation. Anyway, made it to the trial. First impressions ensues. How to write a Yamazaki rival: Make them blather about until you're no longer listening. And about his working relationship with Ema... too much Ema and Klavier in that she doesn't get along with him. They also simplified Ema's characterization. They are too upfront about her and "stress" now. |
Author: | Pierre [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Klonoahedgehog wrote: Pierre wrote: I'm just so glad Trucy is back in a meaningful way. Just leaving this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz9XYIiTkh0 ? Am I wrong? She's miles better compared to when she was in Dual Destinies. Likewise with Ema, a return to her bright persona that loves science that was lost in AA4. |
Author: | linkenski [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
I'm a bit further into the trial... And we're back to having DD-stylr writing where all the characters talk too much and are formal. I know it's court, but this is Ace Attorney not real life, a series that is literally defined by making trials "exciting" but ever since DD they decided to make it "realistic" in terms of the courtroom procedure so the characters talk in very articulate language and make everything very, very clear. Having to go through the process of Apollo first asking the witness to confirm what they states, then explain in full how it goes against the evidence, then hear the judge speculate what fact about the case has changed really sucks the energy out of the peppy Objection theme playing over it. I hate how they are obsessed with explaining stuff. It's not necessary to hear Nahyuta bring up the multiple other possibilities now that the facts have changed. I don't care if I can "argue it was ivoluntary manslaughter or if it's "accidental" >_> C'mon, make it funny and energetic, exclaim the contradiction and then make these conclusions in your head or have the prosecutor stealthily move on to his next point to change the tide. This is tedious. I wish the game would pep up this procedure. And we were starting off so well in case 1. |
Author: | Bad Player [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
linkenski wrote: I'm a bit further into the trial... And we're back to having DD-stylr writing where all the characters talk too much and are formal. I know it's court, but this is Ace Attorney not real life, a series that is literally defined by making trials "exciting" but ever since DD they decided to make it "realistic" in terms of the courtroom procedure so the characters talk in very articulate language and make everything very, very clear. Having to go through the process of Apollo first asking the witness to confirm what they states, then explain in full how it goes against the evidence, then hear the judge speculate what fact about the case has changed really sucks the energy out of the peppy Objection theme playing over it. I wish the game would pep up this procedure. And we were starting off so well in case 1. "realistic" The worst part is that even while they're overly-specific about the current point they're talking about, the Yamazaki team has a bad habit of letting the big picture get really muddy. |
Author: | linkenski [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Well exactly. I know why it's silly to call it "realistic" but you know, they used to talk to each other in court in a more quip way back in the trilogy and AJAA too, and they yell more, which is part of this series' identity I think, that's why we have these big speech bubbles exclaiming "OBJECTION!", and it really removes something when they keep taking it slow and methodical here going "You claim x happened, right? That isn't true, the defense asserts that the witnesses claim is false" or whatever. I just feel like they talk too much. Ironic since this series is known for its abundance of text, but I really feel like they talk too much in these games. |
Author: | Klonoahedgehog [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:38 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Pierre wrote: ? Am I wrong? She's miles better compared to when she was in Dual Destinies. Likewise with Ema, a return to her bright persona that loves science that was lost in AA4. I'll let the previous comment speak for itself: Bad Player wrote: for one case
>_> |
Author: | Pierre [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:46 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Klonoahedgehog wrote: Pierre wrote: ? Am I wrong? She's miles better compared to when she was in Dual Destinies. Likewise with Ema, a return to her bright persona that loves science that was lost in AA4. I'll let the previous comment speak for itself: Bad Player wrote: for one case >_> So you acknowledge that I am right but that somehow the fact they only do it for one case diminishes that? No...I think that's fine...even the person you are quoting said "well the cast is so huge now I think that's understandable." |
Author: | Gerkuman [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
This was an amazing case, but then, I like pretty much everything so I dunno if my opinion counts for anything. That being said, I don't get the whole 'it sucks that court dialogue is being treated differently' argument; As Prosecutor Sadmahdhi says 'let it go.' Then again, people said the same to me when I objected to Nick becoming main protagonist again, so maybe I'm not being reasonable. |
Author: | Bad Player [ Sat Sep 10, 2016 3:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Case two discussion thread (tagged spoilers) |
Pierre wrote: So you acknowledge that I am right but that somehow the fact they only do it for one case diminishes that? No...I think that's fine...even the person you are quoting said "well the cast is so huge now I think that's understandable." I didn't say that it was understandable. I said that was a separate problem :P Trucy is amazing, and while giving her an actual role in one case is a huge step up from "Hi, magic panties magic panties magic panties, bye!" in DD, it's still a far cry from her in AJ. |
Page 2 of 5 | All times are UTC |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |