Hallo, alle miteinander. This is Wright Wednesday, the weekly blog series where we recap, analyze, and review the cases of the Ace Attorney series. Who is we? Well, I'm Roy, Ace Platformer.
And I'm Sam, Ace RPG...er? RPGist? Hmm. Anyway, last week Phoenix and Maya solved the mystery of the monster in Gourd Lake (which turned out to be the wholly non-monstrous shenanigans of one Larry Butz), and interviewed a senile old man who will testify for von Karma and, apparently, has some kind of connection to the DL-6 case that disgraced Maya's mother. Now, it's time for the second trial of Turnabout Goodbye!
Unlike last time, no lobby chat, straight to the court action at 10am!
The trial begins with von Karma declaring that it will be over in three minutes. He calls the old boat rental guy to the stand; the man doesn’t remember his name, but is apparently good to testify about these events since they were so recent (and, let’s face it, since his testimony is useful to von Karma). So he gives his testimony, after which von Karma claims there is no need to cross-examine, but Phoenix obviously objects. Von Karma throws a hissy fit when three minutes have passed.
It's a really funny hissy fit too, showing off his first pained animation so far.
The cross-examination reveals that Edgeworth passed by the old man’s window after the gunshots were heard, and murmured, “I can’t believe he’s dead.” This is taken as very decisive evidence, and Phoenix realizes von Karma’s frustration and his “three minutes” thing were a ploy to trick him into cross examining so this information would come out. Which is real clever, even if he totally could have just told the witness to say it to begin with.
I think it was more about giving Phoenix a moment of triumph, lowering his guard for what came next.
That kind of manipulation is definitely fitting for von Karma. Phoenix has no way to disprove this witness’s testimony, so the Judge declares Edgeworth guilty. But then, at the last second, who barges in but Larry Butz, here to save the day! He says he heard the gunshot too, and hearing the old man made him realize that he remembers things a bit differently than his testimony. The Judge prioritizes their duty to deliver the right verdict, and withdraws his previous conclusion.
At the same time, he actually declared Edgeworth guilty: if nothing comes of this, the case is over.
During a five minute recess, Phoenix and Maya talk to Edgeworth. He explains that his fingerprints are on the murder weapon because he was in a daze after the victim fell out of the boat, saw the gun, and picked it up without thinking. He then says that von Karma’s perfect record is the result of meticulous planning on his part, and that Larry’s unexpected entrance may be the first time von Karma has ever not been completely in control. His testimony won't be as polished, and this will be their chance to find some holes and get some real information.
It's difficult to quantify exactly how important Larry's outburst was.
Larry explains that he was out on a boat trying to find the inflatable Steel Samurai when he heard a single gunshot. Then he went home. Of course both Lotta and the old man heard two gunshots, so it’s easy to call out that contradiction, at which point Larry explains that he was listening to his radio through earphones and may have missed any additional gunshots. So Phoenix asks him to testify again.
In this testimony, Larry explains that he was feeling lonely, what with being out on a lake by himself on Christmas Eve, so he was listening to a radio station with an announcer who had a very sexy voice. Sure, he was listening really, really loud, enough that the Judge and most of the court audibly worries for his hearing, but Larry is insistent that he heard one gunshot for sure.
I love how von Karma claims that should disqualify his testimony, as though it's less trustworthy than the old guy who can't remember his own name.
He doesn't just not remember his own name: he has amnesia.
Well you know. It's Phoenix Wright. The prosecution can get away with just about anything.
Larry boasts his memory of the night is clear enough that he still remembers what the radio DJ was saying just as he heard the gunshot, and if pressed he'll reveal exactly what it was, "Hey, it's almost Christmas!" At first this seems like an inane detail...until it's pointed out that the picture taken of two men in a boat was after midnight, on Christmas Day!
Which leads us into finally using a piece of evidence that's been sticking out as a contradiction this entire time but never came into play for some reason!
That sure is what happens. The entire court freaks out at this frankly nuts assertion, but when von Karma pushes for evidence, Phoenix presents that the murder weapon was fired three times, once that Larry heard and twice that Lotta heard.
And, frankly, it's wild that this hasn't come up before. This is one of those rare instances where the game has a major and obvious contradiction staring you in the face for the entire case, but it never comes into play--even when it's relevant--until a particular point later on.
Actually, I don't think this is a contradiction: there's no proof the gun was fired three times that night. All that we knew was that in the gun's lifespan, it was fired thrice.
Not saying it's necessarily a plot hole, just that the evidence says it was fired three times, and the whole case up to this point has a ton of mentions of hearing two gunshots. On a mechanical level, one would expect that disparate information to matter, but it just never does until the story decides it does. It was bugging me for the entire case up to this point.
Well, it should. One of the most interesting things about the Court Record is that, when used well, every piece of evidence has lots of information. Most of it is fluff or of minor importance, but sometimes a piece of evidence you get early on has an easy to see quirk to it that won't bear out until much later. The fact that it had been fired three times just wasn't relevant information until now.
Despite all the times it was mentioned to have been fired twice? It no more contradict's Larry's testimony than it does theirs.
It being fired three times doesn't contradict anything, the fact was only brought up as evidence to support there being three gunshots by combining the two testimonies.
I suppose that's fair. It just seems a very important piece of evidence to have sitting there for the whole case while related information goes by without a word. It frustrated me throughout the case. More specifically, "this pistol has been fired three times in its lifetime" seems like such inconsequential information that, being presented with the simple statement, "It was fired three times," I understandably interpreted that to be relevant to this particular night, not in total since the thing was manufactured. Thus, it felt like it should have come into play long before now.
I'm sorry you were feeling that way, dude, and I can see how that was confusing. Anyway, when von Karma asks why there were two sets of shootings, Phoenix says that the victim was killed during Larry's testimony, on Christmas Eve. The prosecutor of course brings out the picture, asking who is in the boat with Edgeworth.
The answer, clearly, is that the picture shows Edgeworth in the boat with the real killer. The murderer killed the victim earlier in the night, dressed up as him, met with Edgeworth. The Judge, of course, wants to hear the name of the real killer. In a great writing moment, the correct option is "I don't know". After all, he never told the court his name.
Admittedly, I took this as "I don't know who it is, it's just clearly someone else," as opposed to "I know who it is, I just don't know his name."
It's one of those examples of using multiple choice options to carry the story in an interesting way. Of the options given, only the previously specified makes sense as a response, but Phoenix takes it differently from what most players expect. After all, he's less of an avatar and more of a character in his own rights. In moments like this, if feels awesome as he leads the player, along with the courtroom, to his conclusion.
This kind of thing does happen fairly often throughout the series, to varying effect. Sometimes it can make for a frustrating scenario, where the player doesn't necessarily realize how they should respond, but at times like this it works out well by using player choice to separate the protagonist from the player (not usually something we think to do with player choice).
You're absolutely right. A common complaint of the series are times where the player and protagonist are at wildly different stages of understanding the mystery. This is an example of where it can be used well, however: Phoenix is only a little ahead of the player, and you aren't forced to take huge leaps of logic to play, in fact answering normally progresses the story.
For sure. I'm sure we'll have some negative examples to talk about at some point, if we haven't already, but this is one of the better ones.
The next hurdle for the theory is the fact that there were no boats on the lake at 11:50, but as Phoenix immediately points out, one doesn't need to be on a boat to commit murder. The player is asked to point out the real scene of the crime, and considering who we think the killer is, the boat rental shop is the clear choice.
For evidence, Phoenix points out that Larry was walking near it when he heard the gunshot, which he could do despite wearing headphones at max volume. As for what happened on the lake later, the boat shop caretaker fired the pistol twice, once to get people's attention then again to make it clear what was happening, before dropping the pistol and jumping into the water.
The idea that he would have fired in such a way specifically to get onlookers and create witnesses is very clever on both his part and the game's.
Satisfied with the theory's possibility, the Judge has the bailiff summon the caretaker, and while they wait he brings Edgeworth to the stand. He confirms being sent a letter by someone claiming to be Robert Hammond, and that Phoenix's theory fits very well.
The fact that Phoenix basically flails about with the facts and so often lands on weirdly accurate, detailed retellings of what happened is a lot stranger than it seems when we've just been led through a series of puzzles to get there.
Suddenly, the bailiff return: the no-named caretaker is gone, no one can find him. A search warrant is placed for him, and the day of trial ends.
Certainly more of a cliffhanger than most trial days.
Oh, did you think that was the cliffhanger? Nope. After the trial, Phoenix and Maya are happy that if feels like the mystery has been solved, but Edgeworth is more somber. He's being haunted by something, and he doesn't know if he can tell them or not. It's a dream, a memory...of a crime. A murder.
Oh, I guess I took that as more of a hint at his backstory.
How is him admitting to a murder not a cliffhanger?!
I mean he witnessed a murder as a child, and as far as he knows was directly involved in one a few nights before. I guess I didn't really take that to mean Edgeworth had actually murdered someone. But maybe I'm just being confident in the foregone conclusion that Edgey totally won't get convicted.
Well, he says, "A memory of a crime...that I committed. A memory...of a murder."
That's fair. I suppose that is a rather large revelation.
You need to remember: to a new player, this isn't Series Main Character Miles Edgeworth, this is Main Rival, Possibly Villain Miles Edgeworth. Anyway, that's it for a recap, how about some analysis.
Well, much like the second investigation day, this was more about uncovering a bit more information than grappling with the story's core concepts. I can see why you said earlier that two days is better for trial lengths, because this whole second day feels like it suffers from middle sequel problems.
See, I see what you mean, except I would honestly say this is one of my favorite trial days of all time. There are no holes into the first testimony, and you lose! Larry's sudden appearance to save the day is great, and his bumbling reveals the information that allows Phoenix to piece together the truth in a logic chain that might be one of the smoothest and most well made in the whole series.
Oh wow, I'm... actually very surprised you hold it in such high regard! It was fine for me, and I definitely understand how the "guilty" verdict and Larry's sudden appearance is exciting, but I guess it never quite got me all that invested. Maybe my suspension of disbelief for certain elements wasn't as sharp as I usually prefer, but I was never particularly afraid that "guilty" actually meant "game over," and Larry both being at the trial and suddenly remembering something so important as hearing a gunshot on the night of the murder seemed sort of contrived.
Not that it's a bad trial day, mind you, it just didn't do as much for me as it did you. But then we were talking about analysis, not review, so none of this really changes the fact that there's not much of thematic substance going on here, just uncovering more information.
I'd say it's analyzing story structure. And there's at least a few things to bring up. For Phoenix's character arc, this would be, at least in my opinion, when he really comes into his own as an attorney. Him figuring everything out piece by piece in what will become his signature style has never felt as smooth, and the way he's able to completely overtake von Karma in the process is a big win.
It seems the structure and flow of the case made a much bigger impression on you, but based on your description I can agree that's the case, yes.
Maya reinforces where she is in her arc, making it clear that she wishes she could be more help, feeling useless without her spiritual assistance. Edgeworth ends the case with a hint towards perhaps one of the most integral aspects of who he is, a secret he's kept so far. While we don't talk too much about him, I also think the Judge being willing to hear Larry's testimony and overturn his own verdict was a big moment for him, finally definitively pushing back against Manfred and showing that he really does have an idealistic basis to who he is and what he does.
That is true, the Judge has actually shown himself to be very different from my first impressions of him in this case. He seemed rather easily manipulated and overruled in previous cases, and von Karma certainly made sure that trend continued in some cases, but the Judge has now also shown adaptability and a willingness to hear new evidence and allow irregularity if it means getting to the truth, even in the face of a controlling and intimidating prosecution.
The constant tug of war throughout the series with his character is his genuine wisdom fighting against silly old person jokes. I enjoy both, and most games give him at least some of both, but this case gives him multiple moments of definite competence. Some people try to graph these fluctuations as Character Flanderization vs Rerailment, but I think from the first game on its clear he's a man who is incredibly knowledgeable and learned in law...and little else.
That makes sense. The disjointed tone and treatment of this character feels like it kind of works, which is nice considering it really doesn't with some other Ace Attorney characters.
All of that said, the only other thing I can think to bring up is that his segment of the game inspired one of my favorite songs from Turnabout Musical: It's Gotta Be the Butz, which immortalizes Larry's testimony beautifully.
Oh I'm sure there's a lot to talk about with that, but that is a very fun project!
I actually did a whole article on it already (linky link), but I just remembered something else: the wrong multiple choice options in this segment were quite funny, especially for how obviously wrong they were.
Oh were they? You'll have to fill us in!
When asked who pretended to be Robert Hammond, who the real killer is, the options are "Miles Edgeworth", "Lotta Hart", and "I don't know". Like we said earlier, this clearly points you to the correct option, but claiming it was your client leads to everyone looking at Phoenix like he's a crazy person, and trying to defend the idea that Lotta passed herself off as Hammond successfully fails immediately.
In hindsight, I do wish I had claimed it was Edgeworth just to see that response.
The other example is when it's asked who is in the photo. The correct response is "Edgeworth and the Murderer", but "Edgeworth and the Victim" is more of "...are you okay, Mr. Wright?" and "The Victim and the Murderer" confuses everyone since Phoenix had just said the murder happened earlier in the night.
I do like that you can make choices that just obviously contradict the thing Phoenix just said. Good comedic setup.
That about wraps it up for this week of Wright Wednesday. Next time we'll cover the last investigation segment of the case, and perhaps uncover the real truth at the heart of it all. Auf wiedersehen.
Later everyone!
