One of these days, I'd like to see an announced murder take place. Mask☆deMasque announced his thefts before every one, and he somehow stole the thing each time, except the last one. Likewise, the attorney on the case will get to reveal the true murderer in the last incident that said assassin will have caused. As for who the defendant is... perhaps a recurring character would do. We don't have that many recurring defendants aside from the ones who've been suspected multiple times before.

---

More cases when the lawyer/s/ are getting contacted by someone after the murder, there has been many cases now where Phoenix and co. happen to be at a place and then a murder occurs, and it's getting a little old.

---

Those are pretty much the only ways to bring an attorney onto a case, aside from having the attorney go around looking for trouble. That third option is a pretty impractical idea, though. The players can expect a murder, but no one can expect when or where it happens. Besides, said attorney would be marked suspicious on the spot if he/she ran around looking for murder mysteries to solve.

If the murder is announced, though, it could provide hints before the actual act takes place. The primary questions would then be who among the involved parties sent the threat, and is this person the same as the person who committed the murder?

---

Depends on what's in the noodles ^_~ Soba/buckwheat allergy is a bit inconvenient because it's also used in certain kinds of noodles... But sure, if you throw something in the ramen that is the victim is allergic too...



I'm still busy figuring out the details pretty much everything, but the one I can tell is it's not a poisoning case.



That was a haunted house, right?[/oh, wait, this didn't happen]. Hmm, I acually think I haven't played that case since like one or two days after the original release. Which was also probably done in the train in Tokyo during rush hour. Memories are vague.



Have a homicidal bear lock everybody up and urge them to commit murders!

And about the ideas earlier: [murder 1] <- [defendant 1 (actual murderer, but blackmailed into it] [investigation mode, chance to meet everybody] [defendant 1 is killed by poison] <- [defendant 2] ? (too lazy to type out...)

---

Last edited by Ash on Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, and that's why I prefer if the client themselves contacts the agency. Or as in 1-3 and 1-4 where the lawyer hears about the murder and then contacts the arrested and offers defense for them.

---

What kind of silly idea is that? It's much better if Monokuma does it.

That somehow seems like an alternate scenario design for 4-4, where the defendant is actually guilty and dies of poisoning, but there's still a sequel to those events.

---

What the--?!


Well it probably was a haunted house, but the whole mirror thing ended up being the key to the case. If they reuse a really basic location (a hotel, an office, a park, etc) then whatever, but reusing really strange and unique locations (a circus, an aquarium, etc) just seems kinda... eh to me. And going "Last time was a haunted house, this time is a mirror house!!" would just be a cop-out excuse.

---

I know, how about a game that takes place in an alternate timeline in which DL-6 never happened, which lead to Edgeworth becoming a Defense Attorney and Phoenix becoming a prosecutor? You could have many returning characters, but have them different in their behavior and interactions with people due to the changes in the events leading up to the series? I know it may sound like a stupid idea, but I can see this working.

---

An alternate timeline where DL-6 never happened? Why hello there.

---

But how would DL-6 never happening make Phoenix a prosecutor?

---

Class trial would've made him into a criminal-hating vindicator of justice! They touch upon it at the end of 1-4 iirc

---

The class trial was before DL-6, so it should have affected him the same way.

---

Wait, did this happen in GK1-3? w

---

Shame on you, BP. You made me picture Phoenix as Detective Fulbright, but with a prosecutor's badge instead.


Where have I seen these pictures...? Let's see... I believe they were from a series of videos on Nico Douga made by a fan who was messing around with sprite editing. He has an amazing collection free to public viewing. IIRC, he's also the same guy who uploaded those hilarious mistranslated trailers. (。⌒∇⌒)。

---

If they make a sixth game I think they should stand back and pull the brakes a little. Go back to the first game/s/ and see that it's okay to have independent cases. It's okay with cases where the main characters and their friends aren't personally involved. It's okay with cases that are possible to win without using various gadgets. (Maybe an in-game solution could be to make the rules in court stricter as a result of the Dark age of the law: ban said gadgets and also attacks from the prosecution, whether it's a bird, a whip or a cup of coffee.) It's okay not to have an overbridging plot which is connecting all of the cases, and if there is one, balance it out with some independent cases. It's all in good intentions, but I think they're trying a bit to hard to max everything - it becomes overdone. Perhaps we should, as Ema put it, have a straight-forward killing once in a while. However I don't think the cases themselves are the real "problem", sometimes I even think that they mostly serve as a background for the stories of the main characters. Which is okay as long as it's balanced out. After all, the cases should be the main focus.
I also think that cases where one or more of the main characters are directly and personally involved is becoming overdone, probably because the developers know that it will guarantee an emotional response from the players. After all, the end-cases and the most popular cases are mostly this kind of cases, like 1-4 and 2-4. However it becomes repetetive and dull; it's starting to lack its punch. Part of what made 1-4 that fantastic was because it was such an emotional case which we hadn't seen up until then. It really felt like a lot were at stake. Sure, 1-1 and 1-2 also involved people Phoenix knew and shared a bond with, but it wasn't pressed the same way, especially since those were respectively the first-first and the first real case, so the focus was more getting to know the game. Compare this with DD, where every single case (not counting DLC) was somehow connected to at least one of the main characters. And 5-5, the grande finale, was in my opinion a fantastic and very intense case, and it touched me. But breaking it into pieces, it wasn't that original. I can think of at least three previous cases that had plot twists/backgrounds which reocurred in this case. And at the end of the day there is a limit. There is a limit to how many events Phoenix & co. can go to which are suddenly interrupted by a murder, how many times assistants can be accused and/or targets, how many friends and friends to friends that can be killed off, how many corrupt law workers we can take down.

Also, the final villains. Another area where they're probably trying to pull every lever to make them epic. Problem is it can be too big. Now we've taken down a large smuggling ring and High and mighty, epic, a pleasure to take down, but at the same time it becomes abstract. Some of the best final villains are just people who happen to be completely and utterly evil and insane. They don't even have to be lurking in the shadows behind the scenes of the whole game, the culprits of the first and second game is seen as their respective games final villains even though they're not present until the last case (now, von Karma's presence were there when talking about Edgeworth becoming a "demon prosecutor" and Misty disappearing, but he didn't have any impact on those particular cases. The 2-4 culprit is an even better example as they're totally irrelevant for the other cases in the game).

So, what I'm trying to say is basically slow down a little. No need to pull every single lever at the same time. An overbridging plot is cool if well-handled (which they so far have been in the AA-games), but not necessary, and if there is one, throw in some independant cases as well. More ordinary people. Less involvement in the cases for the main characters, because then, when they finally are involved one way or another, it'll pack a great punch. Less gadgets. Oh, and more diversity in the assistant-division.

Less useless cameos. AJ started off a new generation of characters, so I hope we won't see Lotta, Oldbag or Larry again. They've become charicatures of themselves; Lotta's just chasing a scoop, Oldbag is chasing Edgeworth and changing jobs, Larry alters between different jobs and girlfriends. They don't have a specific role to fill and they're not important to the story. Klavier was almost one of those in DD as he didn't have a real purpose; the nice prosecutor who's also a musician. He hasn't had any character development or a story of his own (he's been involved but it never was about him in the first place) and that's excactly why he should come back as a prosecutor. I really liked Simon, but his thing was to be mysterious, involved in the main plot and the fact that he was an inmate. Now his story is done and honestly, how exciting is he now? The same goes for Athena. The two of them mostly felt thrown into the game because of their stories, while say Klavier was thrown in as a prosecutor, nothing else. There's also another one who was important but won't make a comeback, but could be replaced by one or two previous characters whose roles in the game were kind of the same. . Other than that no more previous characters are needed, except for perhaps the Gramaryes and Maya, because of their importance in the storyline/s/. Threads I'd like the developers to continue pulling are
and


And last but not least: perhaps every crime doesn't have to be a murder. It makes for interesting stories, but for example, case 3-2 (stealth) was fun before the murder, and so was AAI-3 (kidnapping).

---

Noo, please, not Klavier coming back as a prosecutor.

He had wasted his chances fir development AJ already, so instead of patching things up, I'd like them to focus on a new story, just like they do that in every other game...

---

Whew.


Then only a few special prosecutors will be able to face against Phoenix's terrible finger point of doom. We can't chance a tragedy like that!


And make the game way too easy? No thanks.


No. It's one thing to return a character who deserves to earn the protagonist's respect; it's another to return a character whose little development across multiple games has cost them.


Actually, his thing was to be the courtroom's jerk, more jerky than any other prosecutor. You know why? Because birds like meat, best when fresh.


Don't you know the seventh rule to writing detective fiction?

Edit: ...Holy moly, I just realized the guy who wrote those twenty rules was named "Wright". It is a great place to start for budding mystery writers. Don't bend the rules unless you're experienced enough to know when and where to bend them.

---

I didn't mean that Klavier should be the main prosecutor, just that he could come back as a prosecutor. Yes, when I wrote he "should" return I actually meant "could". Trying to collect my thoughts a bit too late in the evening perhaps... And about Simon, even if he was more than his story I don't see a comeback for him. Godot was a jerk as well, and if he would come back for some reason it'd mostly be tiring. He and Simon have played their parts, and done it brilliantly, but their done as characters. That was why I chose to compare them to Klavier, who was there as a prosecutor and nothing else, which is why he could return, again as a prosecutor and nothing else. And about the "new game - new story" I can't really say I agree, the first three games were connected in a few ways, even if they are independent. Like they Fey story, and in a sense Edgeworth's story. I don't them to stretch any storylines, the two things I mentioned are just two things that felt uncompleted to me.

---

ピンポン正解。



But rule seven is the detective must not himself commit the crime.... :P

[slightly-off-topic]As much as I love detective fiction, I've never been a fan of Knox and Van Dine's prescriptive rules. I get the reasonings behind them ( a lot of them are about fair-play, so I actually think they'd better made one rule of that...), but they don't work as prescriptive rules either because you'd have to discard a great number of important novels and stories if you'd abide by their rules (you'd have to ignore a large number of Agatha Christie's work, for example). It's one of the major reasons I wrote my MA thesis on Japanese detective fiction by extracting descriptive characteristics (in this case, tropes) for a particular movement, rather than posing a faulty prescriptive set of characteristics.

In the couple of mystery stories I wrote I am pretty sure I broke some of Knox/Van Dine's rules too, but I doubt anyone would call them unfair mysteries ^^

---

Last edited by Ash on Sat Nov 23, 2013 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I had a read through those twenty rules of detective fiction, and some of the things in point 20 I found to be so true, (e.g: 'the dog not barking, therefore the killer was familiar') and shouldn't be re-used.
However a good twist in the formula is needed every now and then to make a story unique, and 'wow' the reader.

Cindy Stone's death was about as close as you'll get to that, and the 'straight-forward killing' is a little hard to have so late in the series. (Unless people think that there's a far deeper meaning to the evidence, when the truth was staring them in the face from the start, and everyone realises in the end.)

I'd like a 3-day Trail in GS6, we haven't had enough of them. Even if it's too hard to write. Pass the baton from lawyer to lawyer each day. Have Athena start off at one scene, then switch to Apollo for day 2 (as say another murder occurs) then day 3 Switch to Phoenix for the final day, bringing it all together and revealing the truth. This would allow a lot of characters (reason to bring in Maya, and Franziska possibly), and an alternative to the zapping system (Unless they actually adopt that in a new game.)

---

I'm not sure about that last bit, if we're flipping between Lawyers willy-nilly then they need a good reason for one to not be able to take up the case. Unless we want the Playable Lawyer to fall off a bridge at the end of every day it would be pretty difficult to work around. Also I think if you wanna throw in so many other characters it would be a bit awkward with everyone competing for screentime, we'd end with some appearances that don't really feel valid (looking at you Klavier and Pearl).

However something I'd like to see more of, now we have more lawyers is more simultaneous cases. Sort of like in 3-2 with Ron and Luke's trial going on simultaneously. Possibly with multiple culprits or an accomplice in Trial B getting framed by someone as a witness in Trial A. The information in each trial could affect the other.

---

I couldn't disagree with you more. I greatly prefer when the games have a larger, overarching plot to them, which is one of the reasons Justice For All is my least favorite AA game: The cases are too disjointed, they have little to no connection to one another. A final case is meant to wrap up the plot of a game in a way that is climactic and satisfying, JFA doesn't do that, as there wasn't really a plot to wrap up. I prefer when the clients are connected to the protagonists, as it makes it more dramatic, and keeps you on the edge of your seat, as you don't want these characters to be wrongfully imprisoned. For example, I didn't like case 4-2 because your client is a jerk, and at times I wonder why you're even trying to get him found not guilty. I like when the series goes larger in scale, as it makes it feel like you're not only trying to save your client, but millions of people at the same time. It just feels so satisfying to take down someone like

---

Be that as it may, the overarching plot has to feel relevant, something the so-called dark age of law didn't.

I also think you can introduce new clients that has absolutely nothing to do with any previously established characters and still desperately want to save them. All you have to do is make the client interesting and sympathetic. I didn't want to save Juniper because she was Athena's friend; that didn't matter to me. I wanted to get her acquitted because she was a fun character.

---

I agree with you, Thane. The character has to be sympathetic and fun. An example of a cool character that I wanted to get aquitted who wasn't related to the protagonists in any way would be Ron Delite.

Another thing that Going For Miles stated that I couldn't disagree more with is the fact that he/she said that we shouldn't have to use gadgets to solve the cases. I found the mood matrix to be a fun mechanic, and I was disappointed that Perception is only used in the field instead of in the courtroom, as it gave a bit of variety to the cross examinations. I want to see some new mechanic in GS6, so far GS3 is the only GS game that didn't introduce a new major mechanic. I do have to say that the Mood Matrix was used a lot more often than perception and the Magatama, which I was slightly disappointed in, perception for the reason above, and the Magatama as it seemed to just be an afterthought in GS4 and GS5, not being used to its fullest potential. I personally found the first game to be the most bland, as it didn't have any really cool mechanics to it. It was still a fun game, don't get me wrong, I just want more variety.

---

You did use perceive against , but I agree, it could've been used more in court. The Mood Matrix was indubitably one of the greatest additions Dual Destinies offered, along with the Thought Route (which was sorely needed considered how messy most cases turned out to be in the end). I'm very curious to see what else they can come up with - and of course I'm a bit miffed that the mood matrix is tied solely to Athena, since I really didn't like her, but I digress.

I can't agree with the first game being bland, however. To me, the first game is basically the epitome of story telling, and I can say that without any nostalgia blinding me, since I played the four first games this summer.

---

I didn't mean bland in terms of story, I meant bland in terms of gameplay.

---

If all of these rules were set in stone, then this entire genre would become boring very quickly. It is from 1928, after all.

Nonetheless, #15 remains true regardless of what kind of story is written. #20 provides some useful notes, but aren't meant to be followed blindly. (Too bad the term "Mary Sue" didn't show up until 1974, or it'd most likely join the ranks. In fact, since there are too many things to add to that list by this century, what's listed here is REALLY old stuff to watch out for.) #7 is worth a read just because of its witty truth. In fact, the first ten rules are pretty solid. I include #8 because it should apply only regarding how the case is solved. As much as I like case 1-2, it really ticked me off by how easily the latter trial ended.

I may end up saying stupid things once in a while, but with informational articles, I know where the boundary is set.


Keep in mind which character is meant to be the "only detective". The detectives in this series don't fit into the actual detective role; that goes to the current playable character, who's investigating solo or with an assistant. You don't want your assistant to end up overthrowing the protagonist's level of deduction either, or the roles would end up switched. You'd then be playing as the assistant, and it's no longer "classic" detective fiction, as described in that article.

I never said it was a bad idea to expand the main character pool, but it is risky.

---

But Van Dine's rules had already been broken (often, by very influential novels) by the time he wrote them; so they weren't 'true' from the beginning (which is why I find them strange at times).

Ah, talking about S.S. Van Dine reminds me, I hope GS6 fixes some of the narration problems. It's one thing to have different protagonists in one game, but switching between narrating and playable protagonists is often not a good idea. (How this relates to Van Dine? Van Dine is the narrator and attorney of amateur detective Philo Vance, who works with DA Markham solving crimes. Problem is, the stories are always about the duo of Vance & Markham, and the character of Van Dine apparently stands there in every scene, interacting with nobody.... the biggest surprise in The Bishop Murder Case wasn't the bizarre murders, but when Vance actually spoke directly to Van Dine. Oh, and that in turns reminds me, Christie's Evil Under the Sun was a bad, bad game, but the way they did the narrator/playable protagonist split was great).

---

Rules are meant to be broken, don'tcha know~

I don't think it's a problem to see them as guidelines for a mystery story. Basically, if you break one of them, you need to make sure you have a good reason for doing so, and it doesn't screw up the fairness/enjoyability of your story. I think that's the best way to use those "rules," rather than strictly following them or just ignoring them.


Eeeeeeh?! The cross examination system is the coolest mechanic in the franchise!!


Eh, I disagree. The dissonance between "In court, evidence in everything!" and "You're lying because you're feeling the wrong emotion!!!!" was kinda >.< I also feel like they did pretty much everything interesting they could do with the Mood Matrix in GS5; there's no room left to innovate with it.

Thought Route is also just terrible. It's nothing more than regular multiple choice questions with prettier graphics. And the fact that there are no penalties and they immediately tell you when you make a wrong choice (instead of when you get to the end of the question tree) makes it the most boring and easy "system" in the franchise. I really think the development team had a lot of nerve touting it as a new gameplay mechanic.

---

Oh, I quite agree, that was completely moronic, but it's still a delightful addition to the franchise in spite of that. However, I'd like them to maybe...I don't know...question the validity of it/not have the characters immediately admit their true feelings whenever we point out a contradicting emotion. That, and increasing its difficulty would be nice.



True, they could also make the Though Route harder, but I loved how it tied everything together; it felt like you had actually accomplished something, and just had to figure out what the missing piece of the puzzle was.

---

More importantly, Athena needs her own game. Nothing else.

---

Yeah, but there's absolutely no reason it had to be done in "Thought Route" rather than regular multiple choice questions =\

All they have to do to "fix" Thought Route imo is make it so that you don't find out if you're wrong until the end of the question path (different answers lead to different questions), and add a penalty if you get it wrong (even if it's a small one).

---

No, that part wasn't meant to be taken serious. What I would like however, is cases where the murder doesn't turn out to be some complicated plan. That doesn't mean it has to be straight-forward from the get-go, if we for example compare case 4-2 and 5-3:

I don't mean that one is better than the other, but those strange-but-logical cases are fun.

And how about the main theme of my previous massive text block; are the developers trying too hard to max every aspect of the game, should they pull the brakes a little and save the big fireworks for one or a few cases?

---

She already has. It's called Dual Destinies.

---

I'd like a new main character that still has 2 living parents ;-; or is that too wacky for AA.



I think for that stage in the game, it should be a full or half bar wipe out. I liked the thought route (simply because it looks good) and the mood matrix but they need to be harder, not having consequences just makes you click everything until you hit the right point which is time consuming and irritating.

Saying that though, catching Phantom's emotion would have taken me even longer because I really did hit every single mood on every bit of the testimony until I got it. With penalties I'd have resorted to walkthroughs so



Yeah it pissed me off how the judge was quick to accept it. Phantom was all like "no one gives a shit about what you think I'm feeling, show us some evidence" and judge was like "well no I've seen her use that before and it worked fine, thank you for breathing new life into the courtroom Athena". It's nice that the game is on our side but still.

---

Last edited by Louise on Sun Nov 24, 2013 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's PHOENIX's game, not Athena's. I meant something like "Athena Cykes: Ace Attorney". Deal with it.

---

It's most certainly not Phoenix's game. Athena is the only character who has a large role in every single case. The story deals with her past, her relationship with the prosecutor, her friends, her super special snowflake personality and powers and her development as a lawyer.

We already have an Athena Cykes: Ace Attorney, it's just called something else (and the 'Dual Destinies' part most likely refers to her and Simon anyway). And if you're suggesting yet another mediocre spin-off I'll simply have to veto you, somehow.

---

I think it would be really cool if Little Thief returned along with Kay as Edgeworth's assistant along with Shi Long Lang and Inspector Badd returning.

---

Like BP said, those rules serve as good guidelines, and as I said, it's best for the amateur writer. Most of what I see as problems in fanfiction is that they don't start or stay with the very foundations of what makes detective fiction what it is. I have that problem too. It's easy to start with a type of mystery, but it becomes tedious to fill in the details, and the core outline can become lost in the mess. That, and my insecurity with good hooks, prevent me from finishing any piece of fiction I write.


This mechanic will forever be my favorite in any game, no bars hold. <3


They always do that, don't they - pulling the brakes, I mean? This game is no exception; cases 1, 4, and 5 are the ones that are strongly intertwined. It was like that for T&T too. Besides, it's just the opposite; they're trying their hardest to keep the game from going overboard. One example of scrapped ideas Yamazaki mentioned in a blog entry featured vampires. I'm glad they only made it into the game as a piece of forgettable trivia.


Only if this happens.

---

Holy crap, that image was awesome! It's like men in black meets GS!

Anyways, I still like my idea of a game set in an alternate timeline, I think it would be a nice change of pace. I have a few ideas of how each character would have changed:

Edgeworth would have become a defense attorney, obviously, and could be the main character. This version of Edgeworth could be a lot different from the Edgeworth that we know, maybe more open and not as cold. Edgeworth and Co. Law Offices has a nice ring to it.

Mia Fey would have become a spirit medium, due to having no reason to become a lawyer in the first place since her mother wouldn't have left the village. Maybe she could be a client for one of the cases.

Phoenix could become a prosecutor, and could be the main prosecutor of the game. He could be a very different character, perhaps being harsher and more bitter than the Phoenix we now. Perhaps, since he stated that he didn't have anyone to help him growing up, he could be the one taken in and raised by Von Karma instead of Edgeworth.

Those are all of the ideas I've got for the moment.

---