Alright, Wooster gave me the green light for this sooo....



Hello, I'm making the 1000th guide on making Phoenix Wright/Apollo Justice (or any other AA character) fangames. Yes, I know Tap made one already, however, I'm going into bit more details on this one as far as planning goes (in my personal opinion). While I am relatively a rookie on these forums, I am quite able to provide some bit of information on this matter.
So let's not waste any more time. Let's get down to this. Oh, and by the way, this thing goes all over the place, so... yeah...

Planning is where you will create an idea that will fuel your fangame (or fancase). This is perhaps the most important stage, simply because of the fact that the 'idea' is what makes, or breaks your fangame and your cases. Many will tell you that for your first attempt don't go for anything too complicated, simply because it's very easy to get lost in that much information, causing a 'logic error' (which will be covered in the later stages). While that is true, that is a suggestion, not a rule. It all depends on how certain you are in what you're doing. People who have been able to beat all fangames, are relatively serious, and are mystery lovers, will probably jump right into the complicated rivers. AA fans who are not that experienced in making solid, complicated mysteries should start off with something simple. However, no matter what kind of person you are - the bottom line is this - until you have at least one case fully flashed out before your eyes, you MUST NOT announce the fangame on any forums of any kind. The reason for this is simple - over-hype. If you announce something that, by the summary, people judge to be awesome and incredible, without knowing WHERE exactly you're going to go with it, you're going to be in some pretty deep s%&t. That deep s%&t comes in many different forms, however, but it will always end badly. This brings me to rule No. 1 in making Fangames:

NEVER ANNOUNCE ANYTHING WITHOUT HAVING A GENERAL IDEA WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH IT. IT WILL ALWAYS GO WRONG AND END BADLY.

Don't ask me how this works. It's just a rule of nature. This rule, however, only applies to the first case. If you have an idea where the first case is going, if you're able to plan it all out, THEN you may proceed. Why do I say this? Well, dumbass, if you're going to plan, announce, and release the first case, then you're of course going to finish the other ones! First cases generally give a good idea to you, as a creator, where your series is going. They can be tutorials, however, they do not have to be. This is shown through the first case of Ace Attorneys: Rising Justice.

Nowdays, first cases tend to tie-in to the main plotline, which is a good thing. Again, suggestion, not the rule. This brings me to rule no. 2:

A SERIES MUST HAVE A STORY THAT COVERS AT LEAST TWO CASES. IN OTHER WORDS, YOUR FANGAME MUST HAVE A POINT. WITHOUT THE POINT, YOU ARE NOTHING.

What I mean by this is you can't have everything as filler.

YOU MUST HAVE A BIGGER PROBLEM THAT AFFECTS THE MAIN CHARACTERS.
YOU MUST HAVE AN ANTAGONIST. IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THIS ANTAGONIST TO SHOW HIMSELF/HERSELF BEFORE THE LAST CASE.

Nowdays, filler cases are useless. Authors would rather have their point across rather than spend a couple of months planning, coding, and releasing a case which does not fit in, in any way, with your story.

Now, let's talk about the first case, a bit. Your first case, as I said, one of several types:

YOUR FIRST CASE WILL BE A TUTORIAL THAT, IN NO WAY, TIES IN WITH THE MAIN STORYLINE AND IS THERE TO SIMPLY SERVE AS A TUTORIAL.
YOUR FIRST CASE WILL BE A TUTORIAL THAT LOOSELY TIES IN WITH THE MAIN STORYLINE OF THE FANGAME.
YOUR FIRST CASE WILL BE A TUTORIAL WHICH HEAVILY TIES IN WITH THE MAIN STORYLINE OF THE FANGAME.
YOUR FIRST CASE WON'T BE TUTORIAL AT ALL, AND WILL BE TIED IN THE MAIN STORYLINE IN ONE OF TWO WAYS DESCRIBED ABOVE.

IF THE FIRST CASE IS NOT A TUTORIAL, THEN IT MUST BE RELEVANT TO THE MAIN STORYLINE.

The first case is the stepping stone for your fangame. It's a pointer where you're going to go after it. Where you're going to take the series, relevant to the main storyline or not.
I won't discuss exactly what kind of main storylines there are, however, usually, I like to split them into two types:

THE MAIN STORYLINE IS AN EPIC WORLD (OR COUNTRY-REVOLVING; LIKE AAI) - REVOLVING BATTLE IN WHICH THE STAKES ARE HUGE.
THE MAIN STORYLINE IS A PERSONAL, BELOW THE RADAR STORYLINE THAT USUALLY AFFECTS MOST OF THE MAIN CHARACTERS.

Now, let's talk about the crimes, themselves. How do you come up with them? Well, that can be divided into several 'steps', so to speak.

STEP NO. 1 WHEN CREATING A CRIME OF THE CASE - THINK ABOUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Don't think - 'this is what this person has been accused of' and then work your way to the 'how' later on. Instead, work the other way around. Think of a crime, say 'this is what really happened' and then proceed further.

STEP NO. 2 WHEN CREATING A CRIME OF THE CASE - TAKE THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME ONLY THE KILLER KNOWS AND REMOVE THEM. WHAT YOU ARE LEFT WITH SHOULD BE USED TO BUILD THE PROSECUTION'S CASE.
STEP NO. 3 WHEN CREATING A CRIME OF THE CASE - THE DEFENDANT MUST BE ARRESTED FOR A LEGIT REASON (EITHER MOTIVE OR WITNESS TESTIMONY, OR BOTH).

Seriously, the defendant shouldn't be arrested for a bag of chips or something crazy like that. (Seriously, I think I played a trial at AAO that actually had that plotline. Must I go on further?)
And there you go, the crime is complete. An example of a finished crime plot.



Alright, now let's talk about the killers.

THE KILLER SHOULD NOT BE OBVIOUS. (This is actually what annoyed me in the AA games, but w/e, you're the boss)
THE KILLER MUST HAVE A BACKSTORY AND A MOTIVE THAT IS, IN THEIR HEAD, JUSTIFIED.

Now, think about this - will this case be trial-only or a several day case including investigations? Let me state this right away:

THE CASE DOES NOT HAVE TO HAVE INVESTIGATIONS TO BE TREATED AS AN EPIC FINALE. AS LONG AS THE CRIME IS CONVOLUTED, THE FACTS ARE VARIED, THE DIFFICULTY IS THROUGH THE ROOF, AND THE OVERALL FEEL OF EPICNESS IS THERE, IT WILL DO.

This, I leave to you. You may, while you do not have to do this. Keep in mind that investigations are quite hard to code no matter which case-maker you choose (including AAO!)

Now, I'm going to talk a little bit of logic errors. What is a logic error?

A LOGIC ERROR IS AN EVENT WHICH IS, CONSIDERING THAT FACTS, IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE HAPPENED AND YET STILL USED AS THE FINAL EXPLANATION.

If a logic error is a part of storytelling and it's done on purprose, then it's fine. However, otherwise it's unacceptable. This tends to happen in longer and more complicated trials.
Logic errors can be small and easily overlooked, and they can be big and just ruin the whole thing.



Logic errors are what will bring your entire work down in a single strike. So keep that in mind.

Now, I know that this is more about the actual cases that their planning, but it's essentially an important aspect of it.

Only now can we proceed with the story element of planning. Get yourself a clear image in your head:



To quickly cover the standard procedure, once you have your idea fully fit in your head (or on a paper, how should I know), proceed further with the dialogue.

THIS DIALOGUE MAY BE IMPROVISED, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT RUSHED!

I can't stress this enough. If you dialogue is done so fast, that it makes no sense, then end yourself right then and there (DON'T KILL YOURSELF, THAT'S NOT WHAT I MEANT! KEEP ON READING!). It's over. There's nothing you can do. Start over. Write it down in Word Pad, Notepad, Word 2007(3) - just write the entire dialogue down. You can't say - 'I'm not going to do that' - NO!

IF YOUR IMPROVISED DIALOGUE IS RUSHED, THEN YOU MUST WRITE IT DOWN!!!!



Let us discuss witnesses. A case that is remotely connected to AA has at least one witness, no matter what you do. It can be one witness, it can be two, but when you break it down, it all comes to a simple structure:
Druing the trial, the witnesses will be called in this order:

1. The Detective
2. The Decisive Witness
3. The MORE Decisive Witness
4. The Super-Ultra-Mega Decisive Witness

And so on and so fourth. XD
I can't really define what kind of people do witnesses have to be, because that is up to you, as an author, to define it. However, it's usually somebody that's eccentric, likeable/unlikeable, and someone who is suspicious just enough for the player to think that he did it.
If you're going with multiple witnesses, then I suggest this method (it's optional, however):

ONE OF THE [INSERT NUMBER HERE] IS THE KILLER, AND THE TESTIMONIES OF ALL OTHER WITNESSES ARE THE TRUTH, UNLESS IT'S REVEALED THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS TAMPERED WITH THEM.

This is what I usually go with, but there are exceptions on the subjects of accomplices and so on so forth.

The prosecutor doesn't really have to be anything mind-blowing. You can use a prosecutor from the existing games or create one, yourself. However, that's, as always, completely up to you.
If you go with the existing characters, you have to really nail the characterization. If you're going with a custom one, you have to create a persona likeable and heatable at the same time. (In other words, a person who is, by personallity amusing, by just enough of a douchebag that you'd want to fight him.)

Also, another thing I have to mention:

YOU MUST NOT HAVE MORE THAN SIX CASES.

Same thing as the first rule. It's over-ambitious, something the people will see. Seriously, you show me a fangame with seven cases, and I know that it's gone before it began. That is, unless you have shown that you can make quality, you've had a release or two under your belt (which was positively received) and yeah, sure, give it a shot. ...Just have three years of spare time.

So, you've got the characters down, you've got the crime down, you've got... most of the dialogue down. So what next?
Well, take into consideration all the elements your fangame uses, your coding experience and just how of an artistic talent you have.

Based on that, pick yourself a case-maker of all those fine case-makers (there are three) and drop yourself in a world of commitment and unfinished homework by making a thread of your fangame on Court-Records or AAO. Once there, depending on your answer for the 'artistic talent' question, seek help on the department of sprites or music, or do it yourself if you're able to.

That's it -- this guide may not be perfect, however, I'm trying to get illustrate what exactly goes into making a good fan-case (or fangame). Please leave your ideas, suggestions and comments below. (And don't be surprised for the horrible spelling mistakes.)

...And if this guide was useless to you, then I apologize for waisting your time.

---

Nice guide, though just one thing I'd like to say, filler cases aren't completely useless. If, for example, you're doing an OC series, sometimes you just need extra time to develop the characters.

---

I'm just gonna quote this for emphasis. I've seen a few cases where things ended rather quickly, simply because the creators didn't have any idea what they wanted. This is not good, ESPECIALLY if people have volunteered to help you. If somebody offers to help with your case, it's probably because the idea interested them. They're going to be pretty disappointed when they find out that you haven't actually thought things out and end up having to scrap everything.

However, I would actually disagree with the "no filler cases" rule. They can be useful for character development or building up to later cases, even if they aren't directly related.

---

This might be the greatest thing I've ever read on here.

---

Aha, I never actually called it out a 'rule' just to be clear. However, I was just simply saying that if the case has no real affect (A.K.A no real character development), then there's no need for it to be in the game. Hope this clears it up a bit. :)



Perhaps I was a bit too harsh with that line....

---

Pretty nice guide...


Why do you hate filler cases so much? They can be good for character development and using ideas you just can't fit into your main cases. And you don't address the real problem with filler cases: fancases take a lot of work. The problem is that people get so bogged down with filler cases, they never make it to the main cases. But if you're really really patient and really really dedicated, then it's fine. You also don't address standalone cases, which can be amazing :P


For your examples about the rule of the crime, does that mean the defendant actually did it in examples 2 and 3...?


Obvious killers are fine. Obvious mysteries are not, however. (So if, for instance, the killer is exceedingly obvious, but he has a perfect alibi, that's still really interesting.)
Also don't forget that, while the killer must have a motive, it doesn't HAVE to be revealed if it's part of the overarching storyline.


"If a logic error is a part of storytelling and it's done on purprose, then it's fine." Uh... no? There shouldn't be any logic errors ever. Perhaps, if you're ambitious, the attorney will obtain a certain solution to the case, and in a later case we find out that that solution was wrong. But there shouldn't ever be an actual error.

---

This is a fantastic guide for all fangame developers... it has a great detail of content for the varying elements of an Ace Attorney case from the crime to the dialogue itself and I think further experience will add more to it in the future. :)

It's definitely much more comprehensive and more up to date compared to the one I made back in late 2009... I'd rather see this guide stickied in its place.

---

I hate fillers because they killed my parents. :( Anyway, yeah, that's actually what I meant with 'they're not really needed.'



No, I was explaning the prosecution's case created from the remaining facts. :)



True, true...



Aha - I meant in a kid of different way when I said that; what I should've said is:

Logic errors are acceptable if the author knowingly puts them in, knowing that that theory will be either demolished, or used as a fail.
That's what I meant when I said 'on purpose'.

---

Well, that's a bit obvious, isn't it? I mean, there has to be some contradiction somewhere, or else the defendant really will just be guilty xD

---