|
Waffleman_ posted:2-5 A loving HOLOGRAM COME ON this is why i said "lol" earlier
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
I figured! E: oh poo poo the courtroom is on fire, get the gently caress out of there! Waffleman_ fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Aug 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 00:41
|
|
|
Tired Moritz posted:The hell, did they G2-2 premise spoilers retcon in another case just to gently caress with Natsume more Two of the characters made brief appearances in 1-4 so it was obviously planned, not retconned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 02:19
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:2-5 A loving HOLOGRAM COME ON i'd like to note my supreme handicap when we were arguing about weird escalation earlier and i was unable to bring up "sherlock holmes livestreams the case to queen victoria via hologram" e: what's up guys it's your boi herlock sholmes at it again at the old bailey Yinlock fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Aug 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 03:27
|
|
|
And there's the game. Just a couple days shy of a month from launch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 04:00
|
|
|
One thing I will say about 2: It does a better job of making the "cursed case from XX years ago" sound way more haunting than previous trips to this well. (Still only in the middle of 2-4) TheLoser fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Aug 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 05:27
|
|
|
Finished game one! 1-5 I actually thought right up until the point it was outright stated otherwise that Mason had deliberately made defect discs as part of his plan to end his sons relationship with McGill. Thought it would be the sweet end-case note but nope, of course it was a cliffhanger for game two  Do the events of 1-1 ever come back into play in game 2? I mean I assume so, just felt a tad odd to get basically no new information the last case. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Aug 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 06:42
|
|
|
TheLoser posted:One thing I will say about 2: It does a way better job of making the "cursed case from XX years ago" sound way more haunting than previous trips to this well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 06:44
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Finished game one! Spoilers, I guess: kinda in that the characters involved return. I think everyone in 1-1 is mentioned at least in game 2. Unrelated, (1-3 and 1-5) I kept expecting the fake out that McGilded wasn't exactly dead, since even though we saw someone banging against the carriage, we never actually saw his body.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 11:30
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Do the events of 1-1 ever come back into play in game 2? I mean I assume so, just felt a tad odd to get basically no new information the last case. Extremely yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Finished game one! I was rolling my eyes when the characters were confused about that, because it was so obvious that Ryunosuke had put the disks in the wrong sides. Flipping them around, so the dots were dashes and vice versa, would produce the real message Oops.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
futurefriend i know it was you who bought this cursed av!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
Lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
(2-2 spoilers I guess) https://i.imgur.com/KHzM5vT.mp4
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 16:51
|
|
|
Finally getting a chance to play this. 1-3 is really an amazing case. It has my favourite trick from the original trilogy - the defendant being (probably??) guilty, except it's actually fairly ambiguous this time. It has a great take on the Jury mechanic. It has the case turning on the honour of the London Omnibus Guild. It has fabricated evidence that is *in your favour*... And it manages to end without actually figuring out what happened. I had just a lot of trouble trying to keep track of what is real and fake... My thoughts right now are like... It *is* true that the roof witnesses didn't really see anything incriminating. The evidence of the bloody hands seems to exonerate McGuilded, and place Ginas on the scene of crime, which removes the "and he's the only one who can have done it" accusation. Then you've got the skylight which does open, (even if there's no blood), and the suspicious coincidence of all four passengers being connected somehow. The removal of the junk from the storage closet is very strange, because putting Gina under the seat only really serves to exonerate her. So what gives? With the start of 1-4, I'm guessing that McGuilded isn't really dead? Right now my theory is that he is this setting's equivalent of Moriarty. What with all the emphasis on the M initial... If he's like a consulting criminal as in the original books, then perhaps this case makes sense, if it's a number of his clients trying to implicate him and get rid of him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 17:23
|
|
|
I agree 1-3 is amazing, the coolest bit being able to explore the crime scene during the trial, it's a real neat take on the trial only format and a good way to speed you back to the court after the investigation only 1-2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
Oh good grief, the end of 1-3! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 18:13
|
|
|
ConanThe3rd posted:Oh good grief, the end of 1-3! Alternatively: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 18:50
|
|
|
I'm at the beginning of the first court phase in 2-3, and some comments on the series so far: It's really good, but sometimes the jury aspect makes things unbelievable in ways that would have been more believable if it were simply a matter of "the judge reluctantly upholding the dumb rules of the Ace Attorney universe." The worst example is in 1-5 when (1-5 spoilers obviously) the trial should have been over as soon as the existence of the third gun was revealed. Prosecution's case entirely rested upon the idea that there were only two guns. Once "the victim was shot behind while the door was open" and "a third gun existed" were established, Van Zieks' argument was basically destroyed. I'm pretty sure this also happens in other cases, but it stood out the most in 1-5. It gets even more ridiculous near the end (this actually applies to multiple cases) when you have some witness who has been just lying constantly and is sweating and freaking out and the jury is like "welp, unless you can physical disprove what they're saying we have no choice but to believe it's the truth, even though they've been lying their asses off for the last 30 minutes straight and already admitted to crimes." Games are great and this doesn't actually affect my enjoyment of them, but it leaves me going "lol what" when the jury acts like this stuff makes sense. Also, I think it was pretty unethical when (2-2 spoilers)Naruhodo decided to do character assassination on the victim (or at least the guy assumed to be the victim at the time) on the basis of him being a poor person stealing gas. One trend I've noticed throughout this game is that there are rarely clear "beating the bad guy" conclusions to the cases. In 1-1 you beat the bad guy, but know that they will receive no punishment. In 1-2 it was an accident. In 1-3 you successfully defend the actual culprit, who is then murdered immediately afterwards. In 1-4 it was another accident. 1-5 is the only one with a straight-forward "actual bad guy who you properly defeat." And in the first two cases of Resolve (the only two I've done so far), 2-1 has a culprit who was entirely justified in his actions and is only guilty of being willing to let someone else take the fall for it (which is admittedly bad, but the crime itself was understandable). 2-2 has an actual villain in the victim, but Green - who was also sympathetic and justified - is also imprisoned. To be clear, I like this trend; it's more interesting than the typical way these cases work. Comments from the beginning of 2-3's trial: "Evidence not counting because you provide it too early" hasn't been a big issue in this game so far, but in this case it was immediately obvious that the crossbow you find was an alternative way the victim could have been "stabbed." I tried presenting this when someone made a statement like "Harebrayne had to have stabbed him because he was the only one close to the victim before the experiment" but apparently it wasn't time yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
Just finished 2-3 and it was pretty silly how the entire second half of the trial had virtually nothing to do with Harebrayne at all and it was all about establishing motive for the real crimes that happened. Van Zieks basically got a day off as far as his job of being a Prosecutor is concerned. Was still interesting and all, but I don't think any defendant has felt as much like an afterthought as he did. And he spent his screentime during the first half of the trial trying to establish that he could have done it even, which was a fun, unique wrinkle! I also loved how Enoch was 100% a steampunk cyborg and no attention was drawn to it at all. Some people are just cyborgs in the year 1900 I guess, don't worry about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:16
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Also, I think it was pretty unethical when (2-2 spoilers)Naruhodo decided to do character assassination on the victim (or at least the guy assumed to be the victim at the time) on the basis of him being a poor person stealing gas. Seems like (2-2) that's just kind of a thing he does. Most obvious being that the first time Olive Green's even really brought up during the trials as relevant to this case is when Ryunosuke functionally out of nowhere accuses her of attempted murder. Olive being recurring through the investigations meant she was clearly going to be relevant to the trial eventually, but still. That was pretty drat cold.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
I thought it was fun in 1-1 when Asogi became the the first and last person in the Ace Attorney chronology to bring up the idea of seeking a retrial if the defendant is found guilty despite the defense already having proven that they couldn't have possibly done it, even though they hadn't identified the real killer yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
That’s why 1-1 has all the characters saying that this case jeopardizes Japan’s alliance with Britain. The alliance is more important than an innocent man’s freedom if they have to scapegoat someone to save it they gladly will
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
Dongicus posted:futurefriend i know it was you who bought this cursed av!!!!! thats right
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:That’s why 1-1 has all the characters saying that this case jeopardizes Japan’s alliance with Britain. The alliance is more important than an innocent man’s freedom if they have to scapegoat someone to save it they gladly will Oh well, two or three generations of iteration on the japanese court system will fix that, surely. Things surely won't devolve to the point where japanese-decendant(?) defence attorneys working in California are forced to interogate parrots. That'd just be silly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Also it was pretty wild to hear a defense attorney tell witnesses that perjury is a crime and lying under oath can have actual consequences. Weird how that ended up falling out of favor by the following century.Ytlaya posted:The worst example is in 1-5 when (1-5 spoilers obviously) the trial should have been over as soon as the existence of the third gun was revealed. Prosecution's case entirely rested upon the idea that there were only two guns. Once "the victim was shot behind while the door was open" and "a third gun existed" were established, Van Zieks' argument was basically destroyed. I'm pretty sure this also happens in other cases, but it stood out the most in 1-5. I thought this was kind of addressed in that [1-5] everyone acknowledged that Graydon's credibility was all shot to hell, but the testimony contained information that he wouldn't have if he weren't telling the truth, as van Zieks pointed out. I don't think the argument quite holds up, but there's a clear in-universe reason the jury believes his testimony and it is why the final piece of the puzzle is figuring out how to nail Gregson's rear end to the wall for aiding and abetting a murderer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
The reason is that despite the first two cases in Britain marveling at the excellent system of a case being considered by the dual perspectives the letter of the law and public opinion the British public is filled with absolute morons and in this case the game is exceedingly realistic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
Lotus Aura posted:Seems like (2-2) that's just kind of a thing he does. Most obvious being that the first time Olive Green's even really brought up during the trials as relevant to this case is when Ryunosuke functionally out of nowhere accuses her of attempted murder. Olive being recurring through the investigations meant she was clearly going to be relevant to the trial eventually, but still. That was pretty drat cold. I think that Ryunosuke was already pretty certain she was responsible for poisoning Shamspeare by that point. It was just a matter of proving it, but by that point he already seemed to understand the big picture. Zulily Zoetrope posted:I thought this was kind of addressed in that [1-5] everyone acknowledged that Graydon's credibility was all shot to hell, but the testimony contained information that he wouldn't have if he weren't telling the truth, as van Zieks pointed out. I don't think the argument quite holds up, but there's a clear in-universe reason the jury believes his testimony and it is why the final piece of the puzzle is figuring out how to nail Gregson's rear end to the wall for aiding and abetting a murderer. At best, it's just Graydon's word against Gina's by that point. IIRC Graydon didn't have any evidence other than "I was an eye witness" for Gina doing the shooting. And I also think I remember his account being really goofy and involving Gina shooting him through the hole in the door; it was something that was "technically possible" but way less plausible than Graydon himself doing the shooting. Again, not exactly a big deal since these games basically need the trials to continue until the actual culprit is identified, but it's goofy that the jury would consider that persuasive. The jury sort of alternates between being dumb as dog poo poo and being smart (when Ryunosuke is changing their minds).
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/marinmillerVO/status/1431381679461965824?s=20
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 03:39
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:At best, it's just Graydon's word against Gina's by that point. IIRC Graydon didn't have any evidence other than "I was an eye witness" for Gina doing the shooting. And I also think I remember his account being really goofy and involving Gina shooting him through the hole in the door; it was something that was "technically possible" but way less plausible than Graydon himself doing the shooting. The key point was that he testified about the overcoat being spattered with blood, which could only have happened if the murder happened exactly like he described, and he couldn't have known about if he hadn't actually witnessed it the way he said. Like it only works because Ryunosuke is somehow forbidden from suggesting that it's the blood of a different victim of a different murder that happened two months ago, which doesn't quite hold up, but is a lot more effort than the series usually puts in the "it's obvious the defendant is innocent but you still need to make the final push" scenario.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 11:07
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:Also it was pretty wild to hear a defense attorney tell witnesses that perjury is a crime and lying under oath can have actual consequences. Weird how that ended up falling out of favor by the following century. "by the following century" is a strange way to say "immediately", because everyone ignores it and goes right back to lying their asses off under oath at all times 2-5 On 1-1 chat: like how Sengoku seems way more sinister in 1-1 on a replay, you think he's being a standard Dumbass Ace Attorney Judge on the first playthrough but no he's actively trying to rush this trial though to cover his own rear end and is probably interally like "gently caress" whenever Ryunosuke gets a step closer to proving Rhett's involvement Every part of the Master Plan started derailing from this one goober proving himself innocent Yinlock fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Aug 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 11:19
|
|
|
Lotus Aura posted:Just finished 2-3 and it was pretty silly how the entire second half of the trial had virtually nothing to do with Harebrayne at all and it was all about establishing motive for the real crimes that happened. Van Zieks basically got a day off as far as his job of being a Prosecutor is concerned. Was still interesting and all, but I don't think any defendant has felt as much like an afterthought as he did. And he spent his screentime during the first half of the trial trying to establish that he could have done it even, which was a fun, unique wrinkle! Harebrayne's presence is mostly felt via Zieks, who believes his friend without hesitation and goes to absurd lengths to insist kinesis is real, even pulling dirty poo poo like glossing over the 2nd birdcage theory that he can't disprove. The only thing keeping the prosecution alive is the machine's destruction meaning that nobody can prove if kinesis happened or not(not without spending more than 5 seconds looking at the crime scene anyway, but lol forensics team), which is why part 2 revolves around getting Enoch to admit that the machine is a sham. I really like how the case hinges around general-knowledge of science not being advanced enough yet to know if electro-teleportation is even possible or not. Harebrayne kinda sucks in general though. Yinlock fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Aug 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 11:34
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:"by the following century" is a strange way to say "immediately", because everyone ignores it and goes right back to lying their asses off under oath at all times Yeah a big clue-in on retrospect is Shinn blatantly destroying evidence in the middle of a courtroom. Somewhat easy enough to dismiss as courtroom wackiness (You'd think she'd be tried for contempt of court on how blatant it was), but upon that revelation, that moment and the rest of that trial comes out in a pretty different light. It's blatantly rigged in retrospect and they pretty much have no choice other than to invoke diplomatic immunity after Ryunosuke gets himself out of that situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 11:42
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:"by the following century" is a strange way to say "immediately", because everyone ignores it and goes right back to lying their asses off under oath at all times How often are witnesses lying their rear end off, as opposed to telling the truth as they know it? [all game]: Almost everyone who straight up lies in a testimony winds up in jail after the trial. The culprits for obvious reasons, but also Gina, the Skulkin brothers, the Red-Headed League, and Daley Vigil. Mostly for unrelated crimes, but Gina explicitly has perjury as one of her charges, and I think it's mentioned for Vigil as well. Roly Beate is suspended and it's explicitly addressed as a mild punishment because van Zieks respects his service and believes he has learned his lesson. Gregson gets off basically scot free, but he was lying on Stronghart's orders and I'm pretty sure Stronghart gets the final say in how he should be punished. The only lies that aren't addressed explicitly or implicitly are the other Fresno Street Pedlars, and by the end of the trial the justice system has bigger problems than the petty crimes of two homeless people, as well as Madame Tusspells, who never gets caught in her lie. Otherwise you've got witnesses like Fairplay, Pat Beate, Metermann, Lune or Gorey, who just don't know the full story but tell you what they do know. By Ace Attorney standards, that's a sparkling clean record.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 12:09
|
|
|
Yeah compared to the other AA games, it comes up more often and punishments are actually doled out for people who aren't the culprits, and the culprits get punished for the murder on top of that, or are people who have the system rigged in their favor. I don't remember if it came up past the original trilogy, but there it literally came up like once. In 3-3, where an accomplice gets nailed for it, but the subject of perjury barely comes up in those games compared to GAA. I was actually surprised when GAA brought it up cause in the other AA games, everyone aside from that unlucky restaurant owner was free to change their testimony as they saw fit without any punishment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 12:33
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:How often are witnesses lying their rear end off, as opposed to telling the truth as they know it? [all game]: Huh, you're right. It doesn't really stop them from doing the usual witness bullshit but I guess perjury exists in Ace Attorney Britain e: I guess the rear end in a top hat Witness quotient is mostly filled by the jury, who have such sterling reasoning as [1-4/1-5, 2-3]"S/he's guilty because I have a personal grudge against the defense" and "My cob of corn says he's guilty" Yinlock fucked around with this message at 14:21 on Aug 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 14:13
|
|
|
Same tbh
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 14:22
|
|
|
I think the games are generally pretty good about the witness lies. Most of the times it's half-truths, misunderstandings or deliberate omissions of key facts. Most of the outright lying comes from culprits, accomplices or people trying to protect the culprit. The lies are rarely about the facts themselves, more often than not something that is true is presented from misleading angles. Now juries on the other hand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 15:18
|
|
|
I have to say 2-1Susato is pulling off the uniform way better than Ryunosuke. Also was Brett's Swan murdered too?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
Yinlock posted:I really like how the case hinges around general-knowledge of science not being advanced enough yet to know if electro-teleportation is even possible or not. Harebrayne kinda sucks in general though.  Even if his outburst about why his own lawyer's argument is flawed and how he totally could have theoretically killed Asman is inconvenient, I liked it. The important part is finding out the truth, not just defending your client! Also it says alot about him that he only wants you to defend his machine - he's completely willing to take responsibility for Asman's death, because he thinks he's genuinely at fault - he just wants the official charge to be Manslaughter instead of Homicide.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2021 19:35
|
|
