Okay, so I'm to go first.

Where to begin, where to begin.

Case 6 was like turning the volume up to 11. Everything is moving, you're on the chase, the pieces are coming together, Plot twists, and then the final confrontation.

Without spoiling anything. Providence is a real Psycho. Psycho with a capital P.

However, when Providence explains his plans and events to Agent J, it's in the vibe of evil scientists of B-Movies all over the world. Unfortunately, the way I see it, there was no escaping the B-Movie grade confession. There were things and events even I was in the dark on until the end. (A total opposite from the Intro - Early Case 2 Era where I was figuring things out loong ahead of the cast.) So the player 'needed' to have the total scheme spelt out. There was no other character remotely qualified to explain away events that wasn't already dead by that point in the game. This isn't Phoenix Wright were you can deduce based upon crudely worded testimonies and puking out evidence. This is Again, emphasis is on interviews, and investigation, not evidence and testimony. You may not think there's a difference between interviews and testimonies, but there really is.

And... in the epilogue the seeds have been laid for a sequel. I have no idea what CiNG was planning on in a sequel, particularly since it's unlikely said sequel will ever be made, but I will say that Providence left a very dangerous legacy.



Now that I've played the full game, time for final thoughts.

Again: Eye of Providence was made with the intent of mimicking those government crime investigative shows, NCIS, CSI, you know the type. With that scope in mind, some rules were obviously laid out. No cross examining parrots, no rock stars who are also lawyers, keep the ethnicity and jobs down to what you'd expect to see in present day New York (Ergo, no Spirit Mediums, no foreigners with outrageous accents, no unhealthy fixation with coffee, no chefs with outrageous builds) the cast is supposed to be, hey I could run into those sorts of people.

However! Even with those limitations CiNG took some artistic licenses. The local detective wants to eat you alive for the first few cases you meet with him, your local hobo has some hysterical poses and expressions, your best friend looks like a total scalawag, and Dad. Oh yes, Dad. If I say any more on your Dad it'll totally ruin the effect, but man, just that little twist is worth playing until that point. (And no, that's not one of the plot twists that Bad Player and I have been raving about; those ones are BIG ones)

So the characters are indeed colorful. They're just not thrown into a bucket of paint, they're delectably tinted.

With that said, I can't judge the game for being things it can't. I can't judge Again for not having extraordinary characters in the same way you can't judge Earthbound for not having a first person shooter mode.

For attributes...

- Music -
It may not be composed by CiNG's legendary composer. But the music does build upon a central motif. If you've played Final Fantasy Tactics then you'd know that half the songs have a variation of a main melody in them. You don't often see that effect done in videogames for whatever reason, but when it's done it really has a lasting effect on you. I 'really' want to track down a copy of what I call 'Investigation Allegro' that was my favorite track in the game, and I'm frustrated that my rips are giving me Midis and synthesizer sound effects.

- Presentation -
The game is based on a TV show that doesn't exist. And boy did they do it detailed. The environments, the graphics, but most notably, the commercial ins and outs animations. Very cool effects. Makes for a nice transition between scenes. I'm not sure it'd work in all games, but it works really well in Again.

- Story -
With games like Hotel Dusk, the Mystery takes a back seat to human interaction. Think about it. In Hotel Dusk, how much time was actually spent chasing Bradley vs fixing puzzles for 10 year old girls? In Again, all you do is investigate. You're not an ex-cop reject looking for a hotel room; You're an FBI agent, and a killer is on the loose in your city. If you don't stop him now, there's going to be another murder. Lives are at stake. This game is 'all' about the Mystery. No side tracking chasing puppets and magicians fighting over the heart of an evil, yet almost blameless girl. The only game I've played that comes close to this method of story telling was Famicom Detective Club Part II for the SNES. It's a pleasantly refreshing method of story telling.

And oh MAN the plot twists. They're rare compared to Phoenix Wright, but the plot twists, when they happen, are REAL killers. I really want to talk about these twists, but they're 'very' 'very' spoiler-rific; as such I am very disinclined to even put them in a spoiler tag. It may sound like I'm dangling a non-existant carrot in front of your nose. But reading those spoilers without the greater context of the story 'as' you're playing it would totally ruin the effect. Trust me, you need to play it to get those twists.

- Pacing -
This is where things get awkward, the game is consistent in that it always gets better the further you get into it. The problem is the starting point. The pacing starts TERRIBLE. And I mean terrible. Works its way up to awkward, slow, and annoying. PLOT TWIST. Gets to a decent pace. Things are moving. Things are happening. Hey this is good! OMG STOP PROVIDENCE QUICK! You're on the trail! OMG OMG OMG What just happened? Go go go! FINAL CONFRONTATION. Ominous Epilogue.

The game is 'Good'. The problem is that you really have to trudge through some horrendously bad parts at the beginning.

- Cast -
Here's where things get a little interesting. Outside of a few select characters: Hugo the Reporter, the Hobo who's name I'm forgetting, Detective Lane (Or rather, Detective Badd); there's not a lot of personality in the characters. Lets be frank, the people you meet in real life, particularly people you've just met, don't show the full spectrum of color and personality that you run into in games like Hotel Dusk and Another Code R. The professionals act like professionals, the civilian witnesses act like civilian witnesses. Evil Psychotic serial killer acts like Evil Psychotic serial killer. No punches pulled.

Where the game takes a twist however, is the role or character class you run into. You've got your main characters, your partner, the lead Detective, the Forensic scientist, a Professor on Criminal Psychology, a retired cop with a ton of history and back information, a Reporter who can get you the scoop on anything, your boss, Civilian Witnesses. That's 9 primary character classes that can aid you in this game.

Now turn around and look at the PW series. We've had 4, 5 games now. And even with AAI, the mould hasn't really been broken from, Main Character, Aid, Detective, Witness, Mentor. Just 5 classes that help move Phoenix, Apollo, or Edgeworth forward. It's really sad.

That's where Again really makes its claim being different from the PW series. PW puts a ton of emphasis on evidence. Again puts a ton of emphasis on where and who you get your information from. (Just to give you an idea of how little emphasis on evidence is in Again, all evidence can be qualified as either a Photo, Autopsy Report, or Key item to solve a puzzle in investigation mode. That's it. 3 types of evidence. And of the 2 types that you can present to people, you may do it only 4 or so times in the whole game to move the story forward)

I really wish that there could've been a best of both worlds approach, animated characters and diverse character classes but one of those conflicted with the scope of the game, to mimic a US Government agent mystery show. So just the flip-flopping of presentation is a nice twist. Makes me hungry for more, but a nice twist none the less.

- Puzzles/Investigation -

The puzzles and investigation suffer from the same problems and are directly tied to the pacing of the game.

At the start it's justly accused of being a 'spot the differences' mini-game. Right side shows before, left side shows after (Or vice versa for you righties out there)

But as the game progress, it becomes less a gimmick and more a tool. It's no longer open the door so it matches the open door in your vision. It's there's something off or missing. There's a contradiction. There's something new. It becomes a tool to learn new leads and evidence. It becomes less find the difference and more full fledged investigation. (<3 Particularly case 6)


- Over All-
I honestly didn't know what I was getting into when I started playing Again. But I will say this, if you're into Phoenix Wright for the actual mysteries and contradictions, and not exclusively for pairing Maya with Phoenix or Edgy with Phoenix or whatever you're shipping, then you'll love Again. If you're after something superficial, you're not going to find it here.

Did I have fun?
Oh yes!

Will I play it again?
Most definitely.

Now?
No. I've got the Again American site to rip, and that eBook.

Sequel?
If there ever will be, what with CiNG's condition, CiNG left itself some nice room to work with.

Wooster! Could you give me a pointer on finding the password to you-know-who's computer?



EDIT:

Nevermind, got it!

Because you guys are really pushing it, perhaps?

For example, Wooster's final impression. All I heard was "I just finished the game, I liked it, it was awesome, it's unique because I liked it!".

Time Hollow had a lot of nice twists thanks to the time travel, but it didn't instantly become an amazing game because of it. The game was still the typical 80's "It was me who started these whole series of events because I told/showed/gave my past self what was needed to do what I did" storyline.

The pen was tool, and it was always a tool.

The "spot the difference" mechanic, without even playing it, can be easily seen as a tool from the start. It doesn't "become a tool". I presume you guys have needed it to advance the plot right from when it was first introduced. Like the Magmata.

Plus, when you typically start saying something's "really sad" about a defined series, like Ace Attorney, as if there has to be more people to help a lawyer (Hey, looking past what these characters did, did they have any personality? Or were they all just cookie cutter with different jobs and roles? Kinda like most mediocre Film Noir movies).

I mean, if you actually sit down and watch these cop and lawyer shows like CSI, Law and Order, NCIS, and the such, you'll find a lot of personality in those characters. It's not "I'm a pro, I gotta act all cool and cold towards everyone" for every character. Plus, psychotic villain is done to death. And having to explain something like a B-Movie Villain? Doesn't that leave out the mystery and also mean that they couldn't think of a way for them to integrate that monologue gradually into the story itself? That's the case 90% of the time, because these B-Movie script writers and directors are too focused on the dealings of the hero, not the villain.

Anyway, yeah, that's why I'm still not digging it. People love justifying purchases.

Of course people like justifying purchases. No one wants to shell out the extra money for something nice and then feel crappy because they could have bought something more useful! Given the fact that the game arrived in my mailbox yesterday and I'm already near the end of it, I could have just borrowed it from a friend and saved myself the money. I'm enjoying this game as much as I possibly can because I want to feel like I made a worthwhile purchase. I'm also quite good at ignoring flaws and letting the story sweep me up, so when I'm finished you may catch me fangirling over it like a very silly person!

You can either buy it or don't. In your case maybe you should go with "don't." You seem to be very critical and you'll probably have a hard time enjoying the game to the fullest extent, and therefore will not be very satisfied with the purchase! If you're interested, perhaps you could just borrow the game from a friend.

I see, I see. I just don't think the justification of a purchase should be used to recommend a game to another.



I can't buy it, or borrow it, because it seems unlikely to even be released in my country. And I know I'm being critical, that doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy the game, I would just know it's not super-dee-duper and not be full of super-dee-duper expectations set by others.

Ah. Well that's just how hype is, I guess! For some people it makes the game more enjoyable, others just set themselves up for disappointment.

I am stumped again. Could anyone tell me which bits to burn in that grate in the factory?

That's kind of the impression I've gotten as well, lots of justifying. Maybe I'm being too cynical.

Offtopic: OniXera, I have to ask--are you a Film Noir fan? Because I'm in love with the genre. I've already covered most of the "classics", and I've been trying to find someone to recommend lesser-known gems to me...unfortunately none of my friends are particularly into old 40's flicks.

I actually loved that puzzle.



What I look for in a text based game, are significant variations on what I view the norm as. I hate being locked into routine, particularly with titles that are based upon mystery. I loved PW:AA, but I was not half as impressed with GS2 and GS3. The cast was largely unchanged, there were no advances in game play. Even plot elements get recycled for little more then fan service. Maya gets blamed for murder, 'Something' goes wrong at Global Studios, practically anyone who isn't the murderer and/or defendant is a cameo character, (And even then, the defendant has a 50% of being a return character). There's no mystery, no sense of discovery. Even things that 'should' have been major advances in story telling, particularly Mia's role in GS3, fell flat.

Even with Professor Layton 2, while the puzzles were just as awesome as the first game, the plot had a lot of trouble, Don Palo and Fiona felt really forced. And, excluding the intro, it takes until about mid game before the game's plot starts to take place. (But I did however like that some puzzles had a role relevant to moving the plot forward)

After having played a whole lot of sequels lately, with very little change in the blatant fan service routine, I found it genuinely nice to have something that broke the mould. You've read my reviews, you know I don't sugar coat the game where it really fails. The beginning stinks. It reeks. But it saves itself nicely as you progress.



I keep bringing up Time Hollow because Time Digging and Eye of Providence investigation have a lot 'conceptually' in common, and both have a character you can go to for research. The similarities end there. Time Hollow had a great Sci-fi concept, but really fell flat when it came to characterization (Unless you were Morris or that 10 year old with the dog). And while I loved the Time Travel concept, I didn't really like time digging, no skill involved.



Actually no. When Eye of Providence investigation is first introduced, it does more to 'hinder' investigation then move it forward. By the second Investigation it's 'just there'; Not useful. By the third it's an interesting curiosity, but still nothing special. By the fourth investigation it's now, case 3. Eye of Providence investigation stops being a useless gimmick and becomes something that catches my attention as being really useful.

And the Magmata is an interesting comparison. Very interesting comparison. Right now I'd say I like Eye of Providence investigation a lot more then the Magatama's Psyche lock interrogation. Psyche-Locks are broken in implementation. With the exception of 2-2, (And maybe, Flashback 4-4), someone makes a statement and without provocation you're alerted that someone's lying. In a mystery title, having a lie detector like that is like giving yourself the Ultima weapon in Final Fantasy as your starting weapon. It's cheating. Eye of Providence investigation is initiated by the main character at the scene of the crime, and on its own tells you nothing about events in the present or the past. Except for maybe that there used to be a lot more furniture, or that the living room used to have a lot less fire and ash. But you already know that information going into the Eye of Providence investigation. You have to do your investigation, just like with the Magatama you have to do your interrogation. Neither are broken 'while' using them. The Magatama is just broken in initialization, and Eye of Providence Investigation has a ton of trouble in the beginning of the game (But then again the whole game has a lot of trouble in the beginning)



It's your latter observation about cookie cutter jobs and roles. The AA series really excels with character personality. Even characters that are locked into one of the 5 aid archetypes. The problem is that all of the aid archetypes have been introduced by GS1-2. Some characters bounce between roles, like Ema, going from Aid, to Detective, to Witness, but there's been 0 development from that cookie cutter in almost 10 years and 5 games.



Mmm... I'd say you're about half right. The game has plenty of personality, within the grounds that these could be real people you could run into. It's just really lacking compared to the exciting and wild cast we're used to in the AA series.

And Psychotic villain. You're absolutely right. I was really loving the game right up until that point. Then it started to recycle the contrived problems of the beginning of the game. Fortunately that part was short.

As for leaving out the mystery? I'd argue, in this case, no. The mystery was going really fine and really exciting until that point. But on your other point yes, it's very obvious the writers wrote themselves into a corner. As I said, anyone who could possibly explain the plot up until that point to the player was dead. It was simple process of elimination who the writers had left to explain the last holes in the mystery. In the vast majority of cases, there's someone else who can explain it, or at the very least deduce logically what happened. But in this case, no. And Honestly, his confessions were very important. While looking at both living (Providence) and dead (too many to count) there were many people who could've explained parts of the plot, but only Providence could explain 2 key things that set the game up for a sequel. Thus Providence was going to have his psychotic conversation with J anyways.



If that's what you're accusing me of, then fine. Really. It's fine. All I know is that, despite some painful short comings in the beginning, the game was well worth my time after the aforementioned. Of course, you could argue that I'm just justifying my purchase, eh?

Fuuuuuck, a cliffhanger? Cing, why oh why would you do that? You must have realized how dangerously close you were to being unable to continue making games! AAAAAARGH THIS MAKES ME MAD.



(Also thanks for the tip, Wooster!)

I KNOW!?

My take on that was, if CiNG is going down, then they're going down kicking and screaming. By far, the most fulfilling ending to an adventure game I've played yet. And by fulfilling I mean, GOSH DARN IT GIVE ME MORE.

However, the Ace Attorney series doesn't pride itself in being big in the mystery department, does it? No matter what promotion you see for any of the games, it's never "who did it", it's "prove who did it and bring justice to the court room". There may be a twist here or there diverting you from who you really thought was the one who did it, but pretty early on in a case you get in your head who actually did unlike (except for cases like 1-4, where the prosecution committing the offence really came out of left field) this game, which holds it's head high due to the "who is the mastermind" plot point, the real mystery.

If you had no effing idea what you were doing in the Ace Attorney universe, you'd not be the lawyer would you? You be the head investigator at the crime scene, you'd be a desk jockey. You'd essentially be a detective. Like Sherlock Holmes. Watch any show, even really recent ones like The Good Wife, and you'll see that the show doesn't pride itself on the mystery of what's happening, but instead the conflict between the characters. Notice how every real major event in Ace Attorney is more or less a confrontation, not a mysterious happening?

More or less, the general complaint about sequels can be seen in any series. I guarantee you, a sequel of 'Again"...would be as the title states. It'd just all happen again.



There isn't really any skill involved in sorting out a visual contradiction either. See where I'm getting at?



Despite it being a hinderence, or just 'being there', does it not advance the plot? You cannot skip such sequences, thus it is a tool, not a gimmick.

However, let's look at it this way. I criminal drama, what is one of the main ways of interrogating a witness? Through a lie detector of course. Bringing in the perp to the precinct to have them run a lie detector test, which can actually be bypassed by good enough suspects by calming oneself down, is exactly the same as running the magmata. No? It's no less cheating than being able to see into the past, something no normal person could do.

Initialisation? When the 'lie detector' is initialised, it doesn't tell you how they are lying or what you need to straighten them out, does it? It's probably the only plot device and tool that leads to any which mystery in the Ace Attorney games past the first game, especially those black locks in AJ-4, locks that have yet to be broken. That's probably the only mystery surrounding what may be in AJ2, other than Apollo's past.



Yes, but what other archetype can be introduced? So far nearly every element present in the crime genre has been present in the Ace Attorney games. All we're missing is the pub, bar man, bar maid and shifty guy who lives upstairs in said joint. It's just, when you actually look at the genre as a whole, there isn't really much to branch out to. Phoenix doesn't belong to a large law firm, he's not heavily connected with the police, he doesn't get a lot of jobs, he doesn't have a lot of close friends with varying jobs, he's not married, he has no special abilities and he doesn't really come from a controversial background. He's an odd character to have a main role in such a game, which is why he always has these archetypes around him, because he can't fill any of those roles (except for mentor).



Well, I have nothing really to add to that. Kinda took the words away from my fingers there, haha.



Well, I meant the mystery of the psychotic killer. It probably would have been more mysterious if you didn't found out how it was done right there and then, and maybe have had it play out in parts during the credits (like retracing the steps of the killer himself, showing how he did it in small snippits. Like, say, walking past a place in the house and picking up something and pocketing it, or something). Hell, even a letter probably would have done the trick.



That I could. I know I have done it myself, only to come back to said thing I bought and go "And why did I hype this again?" (See: Pokemon Emerald)

Well, I think Wooster did a nice job of reviewing the game, so my thoughts are mostly going to build upon his...

The climax: Basically what you said, that Providence was the only one who could fill in the holes. And it's not like it was done that badly.

Music: The music does fit the mood well, and it does have a very obvious constant theme. Although I'm debating between whether "Investigation Allegro" or "Investigation Largo" is my favorite xD

Presentation: There are some pretty catchy eye-catchers in the game. Whenever you go to a place, you get a little view of the outside. It fits in and works well with the whole TV show vibe.

Story: The game is focused on the case, way more than HD, and even a little more than PW. But there are great plot twists, and just the one in the beginning will make you want to play a lot to find out what's going on.

Pacing: This. The game as a whole gets better as it goes on. If you get it, make sure you play a bit before deciding it's bad, because yet, it is bad in the beginning.

Cast: About people you've just met not showing the full spectrum of personality... Also, most of the civilian witnesses you talk to were close friends/family of the victim. It's a stranger from the FBI comes and asks you to talk about a close friend's/family member's death, how do you think you would react? Also, I think as the game goes on and you interact with the civilian witnesses more, they do start to open up more.

Puzzles/Investigation: The thing is, the "spot the difference" part is only a part of the investigation system. Once you "spot the difference", you need to "fix the difference", and that's where the puzzles come into play. However, at the beginning it's very noticeable and very easily-changed things, like a toppled lamp or an open door. But as the game goes on, it becomes less noticeable, they throw in some red herring differences, and then add a bunch of stuff to do to make the present like the past. Calling Again a "glorified spot the difference game" is like calling Apollo Justice a "a glorified 3D renderer". (...best example I could think of >.<)



*phew* /rant


EDIT:
That would not have really worked in Again. When they say "The victim was hit in the head with a blunt object" in Again, they don't mean "The victim was hit in the head with a blunt object that we can't find that turns out to be a bust that was lost a few days before that was dropped down from the murderer's room but snagged on the cape the victim was wearing to make it look like the murderer was floating and then flew away to the witness that was there." They mean "The victim was hit in the head with a blunt object." I think the exposition and explanation Providence does do at the end was better being told instead of shown.

So...you're of the impression that "Wahaha, this is how I did it, wallow in my genius!" isn't overdone tiddly-splat?

Alrighty...I must have seen too many super hero movies then.



Exactly, so you show the victim being hit in the head with a blunt object from Providence's point of view. Isn't that much more interesting and less cliqued?



That...made no sense, sorry. "Renderer"? I think you were going for "a glorified 3D Where's Wally".

But, spot the difference puzzles do get harder. I mean, that is the definition of "spot the difference" right? "Pointing out what is different in one from from another".

Oh ho ho! Let me say that unless you read the spoilers, who Providence is really does come out of left field. The Mystery is the bread and butter of Again. Confrontation is the bread and butter of AA. But both are similar in that they rely on sudden twists to keep you off your toes. The GS series takes the twists in mass quantities. Again takes the twists in mass qualities. I know I keep saying it, but there are at least two very amazing plot twists that turn head over heals what the Ace Attorney series has ever kicked out.



It's a good argument, but I'm not sure that even the developers at Capcom believe it. If detective work, mystery and investigation were left to the 'proper people' then we wouldn't have the investigative phase in the AA series. The mystery is an important part of the genre. Granted, the investigation phase is the most obvious weak point in the series.

But again, look for the PW series for excellent characters. Look for Again for an excellent mystery story. There's no debating that point.



Even considering a good portion of the cast winds up dead, and ignoring that a sequel considering CiNG's current state is unlikely, I believe you are right.



In the beginning, it does have exactly those problems. But by case 3, that is not the case, or at least, 'significantly' less of an issue. You end up bouncing between investigation and interviewing to solve problems you find, CiNG adds puzzles, lots of red herrings. Infact, many of the contradictions you spot as differences have no pull in moving the game forward. I got really confused looking at the spot where a bullet hole no longer was that I could explicitly select in the present, but wouldn't trigger an Eye of Providence event. Eventually you learn that it's not necessarily the contradictions you're looking for, but rather points that lead to and from sequences of events.

Honestly, it's really hard for me to debate this particular attribute with you, since the scope of what happens during an Eye of Providence investigation changes radically depending on what point of the game you are in.



Just because you need to complete the event to move on in the game doesn't mean it really helps to advance the plot. Again, it's hard to explain because Eye of Providence investigation changes a lot as the game progresses.



In reality that works really well. In fiction it does more harm then good. The goal is to discover for yourself what the mystery is and when someone is lying. If you have it handed to you, particularly in an interactive format, then I personally feel it destroys the effect. I'm honestly conflicted on the Psychelocks. I love trying to break them and love what they do for the investigation phase, but discovering them, and the fact that at minimum 2 are needed per investigation phase, regardless of if the plot needed it (I'm looking at YOU Adrian in 2-4 Part 2) it becomes as much a cool feature as is is convoluted.



Yes, and those two factors are why I'm so hoping for AJ2 rather then PW4. AJ really set itself up well for a sequel. Something that really never existed in any of the previous GS games.



I just named a whole bunch of archetypes! Ignoring the parallels, boss/mentor, aid/partner etc... You've got the Reporter, the Forensic Scientist (Separate from the Detective), a Psychologist, and a Veteran law enforcer. Yes we've had Spark Brushel, and Detective Badd but there is NO overlap with the roles those characters preform and what the mentioned characters do in Again. Brushel acts like a Witness. He does almost nothing when it comes to giving you scoops. In fact, he spends more time trying to drill for scoops out of you. He's a funny character and a great addition to the cast, but as a character 'class', he adds nothing new to the series.

Detective Badd might be able to fill one of the voids that was present in Again; being the Veteran Law enforcer. But even though he shows up in 3 cases, his role was only really relevant for case 4, and even then acted more like a cross between Gumshoe's mentor and a witness. I want to reserve my judgement on weather Badd is a Veteran Archetype until GK2; if he or someone else returns with useful input then woo! FINALLY.



See? I don't pull my punches. If I feel something is wrong I won't say otherwise. If I see what the developers were thinking then I'll state weather or not it works within those bounds.



Visuals wouldn't work. The plot was too complicated at that point. It needed to be explained in verbal or written form.

Mmm... Providence did write a letter. But it sure wasn't a confession or a blue print of the scheme.
Thus that idea is not feasible.



I haven't played Pokémon since Red. But I do see where you're coming from.

If you want my two cents on my own two cents; I don't think my opinion is going to change. I read a lot of mystery and science fiction books, and my DS library is largely Adventure games. And I replay my games and re-read my books quite frequently (It drives my brother insane who can't watch a movie or read a book, or play a non-party game more then once) Generally when I form an opinion on something, I tend to stick to it. A sequel may tint my view, but I think I'm consistent. I like to analyze what I'm reading/viewing. Frivolous things like who Phoenix will marry really drive me crazy.

Often that backfires. Because I spend more time analyzing the game or book then really enjoying it. And since I took broadcast classes, and really tore apart what makes a good story, I can't watch movies anymore. Because I know exactly what's going to happen when within particular bounds. Conversation over, in comes spunky character with a problem or plot twist.

The explanation is more about "Why?" than "How?" There is some of the "How?" in it, but it is a bit too complex to show instead of tell.


That wouldn't work either. Getting into it any more would get too spoilery though.


To rephrase it, then... it's like calling Apollo Justice a "glorified system for exploring the DS' capabilities in displaying 3D objects."



There's more to the investigation to spotting the difference; you need to erase the difference, too, and that is where it differs from most "spot the difference" games andintroduces its puzzles. It's really more of a "fix the difference" than "spot the difference" system.

It 'is' an overused literary tool. But in most super hero movies that's done for lack of good writing. In Again, the final confession is done out of literary necessity. You've offered a ton of great ideas for how the ending could've been handled better. But unfortunately, not one of them is compatible with the story.



I can't go into detail without spoiling some of the game's primary plot points, But again. That won't work for similar reasons why a movie wouldn't work and the letter idea wouldn't work.



Err, yeah. I understand what you're trying to say Bad Player. But that was an outstandingly bad analogy. What I think he's trying to say is that while the spot the differences facet is the most obvious facet of the game, particularly since it takes up both screens of the DS to show. But that the spot the differences part is about as important as the luminol test is in GS1-5. Yes it helps move the game forward, and it's a snazzy effect, and an important part of what sets 1-5 apart from the rest of the Phoenix Wright Trilogy. But that's overlooking the unstable vase, the finger printing, the profiling, and the security camera footage. It's hard to explain what makes investigation a lot of fun in 1-5 because there's a lot of different things that need to be done. The problem with Again is that from the outset, one facet is really 'really' in your face and that blinds outside perspective. So it's exceptionally difficult to explain properly.

And don't bother watching the promo movies. They cover the horrid case 1 parts. It does the full game no justice at all.

At least I had a good one with the tinting xD

But from what I read(/skimmed >_>) of reviews and what people thought, it sounded like they thought that the game was just spot the difference, don't do any more, and then wait for the story to take you to the next part. Sort of like the split between stories and puzzles in Layton. I think the biggest problem with my analogy is that no one has called AJ a glorified renderer :P I suppose the luminol is a better analogy, tho (but within 1-5, not within AA)

That's a good point, and that's something I observed in the reviews as well. But if what RandyJA says is true about Temco getting a lot of calls about not being able to figure out the puzzles, then the reviewers only got so far with playing again.

My personal theories about the reviewers:

A: Lost interest because of the game's horrible start
B: Couldn't figure out some of Again's Puzzles and thus couldn't progress. I didn't have any real trouble, but we play adventure games a lot here.
C: Played far enough into the game where they felt they could get a good pacing for the game and quit.
D: Actually completed the game.

In any case, the reviewers had a good chance of not knowing what they were actually reviewing. Plus reviewers have as diverse tastes as any one else. Adventure games aren't that mainstream.

Anyways, my point is, they got so far in the game, and not further. They posted what they observed and thought, which were facts no mater what way you look at it. And conveniently omitted not completing the game. Because, be honest, who's going to challenge that? And it's a mystery title. You don't spoil that stuff. Again had a lot of things working against it, despite having CiNG behind it.

EDIT: Whoops, mistimed them. Reuploading now.

EDIT:

Okay, here's the OST as 2SF files:

http://www.mediafire.com/?wz2tg3xmngy

You'll need vio2sf to play them, and I'm uploading an MP3 version now.

Yeees, I need this sound track!

EDIT: OST removed due to big-time screwups in conversion. Please use the 2SF version above.

Thanks for the soundtrack, now actively searching your MP3's for my dear investigation allegro track.

Yeah, a very few games have their soundtracks labeled in the data, but most just have the basic file format, so they wind up completely unlabeled. Sorry about that - same thing happened when I ripped Last Window.

Okay, I think the track I was after is AGAIN2-0020, but; I'm not sure the soundtrack was ripped well. I'm blindly pumping the tempo up by 33% and it still sounds off. Actually, a lot of songs seem to have been toned down or distorted.

Aarrgh my computer hates megaupload D:<

Ah, shoot, no wonder. It looks like Winamp screwed up exporting the mp3s.

Download the 2SF version for now and use that, I'll see if I can fix the mp3 version.

EDIT: Okay! This should be fixed.

http://www.mediafire.com/?lennwcvdzzd

Since it's extremely unlikely that I'll own the game, I have actually been reading the spoilers, yes. However, before you were toting that AA was a major Mystery game, when that's only one smaller quality of the games.



Well, investigation is rather weak in any game that takes the visual novel way of doing things. And let's not forget that PW 1 through 3 were all originally on the DS, so it's pretty obvious why the investigation phases were as weak as they were (which is probably the real reason the magmata was introduced. It did make the games noticably longer).



Well, these companies don't seem to want to really try something different (for example, I'd like to see something other than murder in a mystery game...that isn't merely a fan game). The way it seems that CiNG set it out, both a sequel and a prequel would have the same result?



Well, there are red herrings in Ace Attorney and Hotel Dusk as well. So, I don't really see that as unique (not that I'm saying you were saying it was), just the same...ahem, excuse my language, "same shit, different ass hole".



Actually, that's debatable. Considering you can't progress the plot yourself without completing said in-game event, it makes it a tool.



Yes, but remember, Phoenix is a bonified idiot that only wins cases because he thinks outside the box. There wasn't really any mechanic for one to find out if witness is lying, outside of the court room, so the magmata was released. You also have to remember, this was the GBA.



Well, let's just hope they pull it off right.



I know you did, but adding in stereotypes for those archetypes just for the sake of it doesn't really do anything either, does it? Besides, Phoenix is on the wrong side of the law system for most of those archetypes to come into contact with him. Remember, he is an independent entity that runs his own law firm, him being the only lawyer within it. 'Sides, nothing in AA seems to be news worthy, or have reporters crawling over the scene. I do remember that a lot of minor characters in AAI seemed to be forensic scientists. The position does seem to be regarded as worthwhile in the AA universe, only being there to give you evidence you could previously not access. Having a major character fill this role would lead to another Gumshoe or Ema, but you would only interact with them to purely get evidence from some lab down town.

Besides, most of the time the reporter is your enemy. Y'know, "nothing to see here".

And Psychologist? Well, there's been no reason for one to appear in AA yet.



Well, it would be nice if they even showed up in AJ2. However, what's weird is that even though Badd is an obvious influence on Gumshoe (...somehow. GK-3 seems to be the first time they'd ever met), he acts as a mentor. As I just put in brackets...what is their relationship, they seemed to not even know each other within the force. Maybe in passing.

He does fit the veteran role though, yes he does (and other than knowing everything or acting surprised, he doesn't add much).



Jolly good show then.



I just thought y'know, since he was psychotic, that he may write letters, or even keep a diary or sorts to track his progress, and since there are two screens...maybe a text extract could show on the right, action on the left?



Let's just say that Pokemon Emerald was merely Pokemon Ruby and Saphire, but with a little added extra on the end (unlike the third game addition in the 4th generation, that added a whole lot more, or Pokemon Crystal (that kinda did the same)).



Well, I often replay games that I like myself, but my opinions may change over time though. Take the early Sonic games. I used to think they were awesome, yet not I just think they're simply good games. Over the years they seemed to lose something, it may be how easy I find the games now, or simply how repetitive they are.



I've seen enough stuff in my time to agree with you. I rarely go out to see movies now because of it, although I will occasionly go and see a movie with a truly great trailer or interesting concept. I went and saw the Alice in Wonderland sequel-like movie recently. Honestly, other than the White Queen and Alice, the movie was quite good. But I did spend most of the time going "Well, duh that's going to happen. Of course she's to going to follow orders" or, "oh, here it comes, she'll infiltrate the enemy's base...and do something stupid get caught".



So...how is that amazing again? That's nothing really that new either.



I actually understand point A. First impressions are everything, and it should be trying to pull you in. The "it eventually gets better" can often be met with "and what's keeping me playing this section right here, now? How do I actually know it's going to get better". Because, let's face it, a lot of players are going to pick up the game, play through case 1 and go "The fuck? I paid for this?"



...Really? Is that a bad thing...or a good thing? xD

Hooray! Now I can finally have the OST. Thanks a bunch n.n

My argument is that mystery is a very important part of the games. Even in cases where you know who dun it. You don't know how it lead up to that point or often why. Look at Portsman in GK1-1. You see him shoot Mr. Faith right in the opening sequence. But you don't know 'why' he was in the office', 'why' he wanted to kill him, or even what lead up to it. The Gyakuten approach to mystery is very different from other games in the genre, but it's still mystery.



Mmm... I know what you're trying to say; but as an aside, let me just suggest that you try out Famicom Detective Club Part 2 for the SNES/Super Famicom, as translated by Tomato. The SNES was about on par with the GBA. But the story and investigation is nothing short of epic. (My only problem was that Tomato never bothered to localize character names so I was constantly lost on that respect). It doesn't have any of Agains flaws, and will really take you around the bend about 5 times before you get to the epic conclusion. It's one of the best mystery titles I've ever played. Better then Again, better then AAI, better then GS, maybe on par with Hotel Dusk.



With the way the story is written, murder is very important to the plot. The story breaks down without it. The AA series doesn't 'need' it. And in fact, almost got away without it once in GS3.

There is murder in Hotel Dusk, but it's not an important part. Another Code: R has no murder, but the mystery isn't an important aspect .



The red herrings aren't the same. Not even the same league. GS2 goes until the last confrontation before the red herring is presented. Again has red herrings everywhere.



It may technically be a tool, but in my head, a tool is something you want to use to solve something; this is independent of it being a flag to advance the script. Otherwise it's a plot event, again, in my head. In the beginning of the game, it's a poorly executed event flag. By mid through late, it's an effective method of research and progression. My argument is in its implementation.



I'd have an easier time handling the Psyche lock system if what initialized it was better. Just by pressing through the conversation tree you suddenly find that a person is lying. That took no skill on your part to trigger.

Now, if persay, Locks got activated because you presented some rather unsettling evidence, or perhaps a profile that the witness wants to shut up on, then that's action on the part of the player that triggered the event. I love solving locks, and I love what they do for the investigation phase. But the trigger has always been something that has been eating away at me in an unpleasant way.



I'm aware that those classes are situational, and they're as situational in Again. Hugo (The reporter)'s used about every other case, but more frequently in the end. The Criminal Psychologist does most of his rounds from early to mid game. Your boss only does stuff in the intro and ending. Etc etc etc...

Even though I loved all the extra classes in Again, the one class I really wish would appear in the GS saga is the reporter. The reporter class worked very well in Again, the equivalent worked well in Time Hollow, and for similar reasons I think it would work well in the GS universe.



That's why I argued that you could only make a case that he's a candidate for that class. He has every qualification to be the veteran law official, but in implementation he does nothing along those lines as outlined in Again.



I so want to debate this point. But another critical plot point hinges on it. One of the end game plot twists. Let me say that, again, it's not possible; not with this story's presentation.



There's nothing really that's 'new' per say about Again's investigation. But 'as a package', as it's implemented, it's something refreshing and different.



Admittedly, CiNG had no excuse for that pitiful entrance. As such they did deserve a lot of the harp that goes against it. It's just incredibly unfortunate that it causes the gems in that game to be overlooked.

Oh yes, and thanks Bolt for the reupload. Muuuuch better. Thanks!

"Mystery" however is a blanket term, not an extremely specific term. The mystery in AA can't be compared to the mystery in Agaain due to being two totally different types of mystery.



Yes, but it doesn't need to be written in that way, does it? There are a lot of crimes out there that don't involve murder that could probably have been put into Again.



Stupid, easy-to-pick-out-if-you're-thinking red herrings are an annoyance, not something amazing. Continually using the red herrings doesn't necessarily make it good, and sometimes it really just looks like they're not very creative.



Yes, but arguing "in my head" doesn't erase the technicalities.



Yes, but remember this: The magmata isn't one with Phoenix. The magmata is essentially a completely different entity to Phoenix, able to sense things he cannot. Phoenix cannot order it to do something, he cannot use it at will. That was the whole point of the magmata, to aid him in his investigations.

By presenting evidence or profiles to activate the magmata, you remove the need for the magmata entirely. If a reaction is needed to trigger the magmata, Phoenix most likely could have figured this out himself, like he did for the entirety of the first game.

The magmata knows things Phoenix does not, and in turn it cannot communicate with him. It's not like Apollo's bracelet, which works with him due to his own powers. The bracelet only works as a medium to communicate those powers.



Y'know, that's nice and all, but why? Hm? Both you and Bad Player claim this, but I have not procured anything other than "it is not possible".

For all I know both you and Bad Player could simply merely think this is not possible. However, replacing a deranged guy talking with better scenes is entirely possible from a story stand point, and 100% possible. Or are you both hung up on monologues being a good story telling technique to end a story?

Okey, Imma pick my battles here...


A very interesting thing, if it actually turns out to be like that.


Due to certain... limitations on J's power that are established in-game, murder is really the most viable crime. And although the limitations could've been changed or removed so that some non-murder crimes could be implemented, that would probably mess up the murder crimes.



Y'know, that's nice and all, but why? Hm? Both you and Bad Player claim this, but I have not procured anything other than "it is not possible".

For all I know both you and Bad Player could simply merely think this is not possible. However, replacing a deranged guy talking with better scenes is entirely possible from a story stand point, and 100% possible. Or are you both hung up on monologues being a good story telling technique to end a story?[/quote]

That's probably the biggest reason your ideas just don't work with this particular story.

Hm, I see..




Well, if these limitations are as such, then a repeat showing would occur in Again 2, correct? Having limitations removed or added would actually probably screw up canon.



Then, how is it revealed then? Cutscene? If so, you can easily transcribe said event and make it less clique than it sounds.

I'd argue otherwise. Remember you're seeing two crimes at the same time. The red herrings are more often then not tied to the crime scene you shouldn't be focusing on. In this case, the red herrings are more, not less, relevant to the game.

On the other hand, the last investigation has a red herring like the ones I think you're thinking about. That one wasn't particularly creative; but at least there was only one.



But that wasn't my argument in the first place. I understand where I unintentionally mislead you, but I'm not going to fight a point I wasn't trying to make. I worded the point I was making wrong. I admit that much. The problem is I don't know what would 'technically' be the right term for what I'm arguing.



Hold it!

You're arguing with me about practically rewriting the way crime plays out in Again. But when it comes to the Magatama the case cannot be made?

...

Anyways....

The 'problem' with the Magatama vs Again's 'problems' is that Again's are plot oriented. The Magatama is a game mechanic. Changing what you suggested undoes a ton of critical plot. Changing what I'm suggesting changes implementation of a mechanic.

The way 'I' see it, with the Magatama, is that starting in GS2, Phoenix can't solve anything unless the problems come to him.

Your argument is that if how the locks are shown change, then the Magatama looses its whole use. But you're forgetting that the locks need to be able to be seen in the first place. It has to be explained why they weren't used in the first game; and still need to be reexplained anytime they're reused in a new game. What I'm suggesting is trying to fix that the Magatama appears as a cheating device.



You really want to know?

In other words, things that were the way they were in the past should be ignored? They are intentionally different, because they were a tiny bit different in the past. Of course...the building should have majorly changed anyway, which is why I find the "omg, red herrings make things ways harder" weird.



I knew that wasn't your argument, however you kept mentioning it anyway as if it had some kind of value.



I don't remember arguing that at all. You seem to have misunderstood me. The magmata is essentially a tool that cannot be controlled at will.



I don't remember Again's problems being put up against the magmata. I believe it was the magmata up against the power to see into the past.

Generally the problems that started in GS2 didn't exactly come to him. Remember, the magmata would only be used once or twice during an investigation, except for 2-4 and 3-4.

That's silly. The only reason why the magmata is re-explained as it is in every game is because it's a tool that advances the plot, and it needs to have instructions spelt out. As I've already said, unlike Apollo, the magmata is it's own entity. Apollo's bracelet communicate with Apollo to the point of letting him commence his special ability. Phoenix only sees the locks because he wears the magmata. If a visual response, like in court, or a slip up of speech, is needed to procure the locks, they aren't needed at all. The magmata allows Phoenix to know when someone is lying through their teeth, to his face, without him knowing it. Because it can sense things he cannot. It's not until he is older that he reveals he eventually figured out visual ticks can also be a sign of lying.





Hm, I still don't know why my method can't be applied then. He obviously still did things, correct? Despite not leaving a trail, he still commited these crimes right? Then why do I have to look at his sprite while he has some long winded revelation?

Argh, still no game in my letter box today =_=
Anyway, thanks for the awesome Bolt Storm and his rip of the game's soundtrack. Thank you very much! :)
I just listened to the very first track (I don't want to spoil myself the music, as music is always one of the most important aspect in adventure game IMO), and I really like it. It's really different from Satoshi Okubo's work, and it's very nice nonetheless. I got it it's the main theme that's repeated quite a few times in different songs... sounds good to me :)

Ah, I need that game...

OniXera, I'm starting to really loose this battle with you because I'm loosing track of what exactly I'm supposed to be arguing about. Nothing short of giving you a complete outline of what happens when and in what order will give you any idea what I think the big deal about this game is. And even then, I'm unconvinced that that would give you what you want. By that point you might as well buy the game and find out first hand, but that defeats the purpose of your position on the game in the first place.

So sure. You win. The plot's poorly constructed, the criminal's a sham, the red herrings are stupid, the gimmick is dumb, the characters are flat, the mystery is contrived.
*White flag*