The gameplay throughout the investigation was mostly fine. It didn't have annoying fetch quests or pixel-hunting and I never found myself spamming the Present option on everyone I could find. I highly recommend adding more "examine" dialogue to the first few rooms instead of just linking the same conversation to the entire room though. In the trial, I noticed a heavy reliance on testimonies, with very few instances of "present evidence", select-spot or multiple choice boxes despite there being many points in the trial where you could have added them (for example, when Raheem prompts Apollo to show the court how the shot was performed when he can't prove it, or when he has to point out that the shot could have actually been fired from the window). Sometimes the case felt like it was on autoplay because of how little input was required from the player despite the elaborate explanations the defense would deliver to the court. The evidence is serviceable, though I'd personally adjust the map so that it has labels for which rooms are the guest rooms, which room is Edgeworth's office, etc. I at least hope that the next part incorporates the bracelet or the magatama into the actual gameplay, since that'd offer some more variety within the investigation and trial segments.
Sadly, I think the mystery is the weakest part of the game so far. It starts out like a locked room murder with a second way out and it confirms itself as just that throughout this first trial day. The few attempts at adding more spice to the formula end up causing a multitude of problems which are explained poorly if at all. The most notable example is how the room the murder took place in was dark; the game decides to explain this with the used firecrackers under the bed, which would have been used to set up a trap to give away the victim's location for the killer, making the murder premeditated. As a result of this, a multitude of problems and questions arise, both for the Defense and the Prosecution, which are never really addressed in the case:
- If the culprit fired the gunshot from the window like Apollo claims at the end of the case, why is the gunpowder caused by the gunshot not near the window, but near the firecracker gunpowder? It was too dark to go in and move it, and traces of gunpowder would remain even if that was done.
- How was the culprit sure that Phoenix would be the one to set off the firecrackers? In fact, how did he know Phoenix would enter the room at all?
- On a similiar note, how was the culprit certain that no one would set the trap off before the murder?
- Since Jade was also locked in the room with Phoenix, how was the culprit sure he'd shoot Phoenix and not Jade?
- How does the trap work? The Prosecution doesn't even showcase proof that it was used as a trap, let alone how it's meant to function.
- If the room was dark, how would Jade be able to witness the murder in shock, see the gun, and pick it up?
- Why does the Prosecution not conduct any sort of fingerprint scan on the firecrackers? (This one is particularly important, because it pretty much breaks the case as a whole - Jade can't have touched the firecrackers in the dark since they were stashed under the bed, and they need to be on there or the Prosecution's case is instantly proven false. They'd either find gloveprints or the actual culprit's prints in the current state of things.)
- When could the culprit have had time to set up the trap to begin with?
- Honestly... can the room even be that dark to begin with? I get the lights are off, but wouldn't even a slight bit of moonlight pass through the massive window?
These aren't, of course, the only pivotal questions or problems never brought up in the trial or during the conversation with Jade (for example, "What were Jade or Phoenix doing in Edgeworth's bedroom?", "Why was Edgeworth's bedroom unlocked for Wright to waltz into to begin with?", "Why was Wright only now in Edgeworth's mansion?"), and it's infuriating that the game doesn't address them whatsoever. It railroads the case and makes it look more like a game of "find out what the casemaker wants you to do" rather than "prove your client innocent".
It doesn't help that the Prosecution barely comes off as threatening, like mentioned before, and struggles to explain very basic problems - they don't even supply a motive for the case. In fact, Raheem gleefully overlooks some important explanations throughout the trial (an example: the Prosecution stated that Jade likely tried the window and found it jammed and that's why she couldn't escape... so if she moved like that, wouldn't she have time to head back for the door, change position and thus explain the contradiction Apollo finds by the end of the 3rd testimony?), while simultaneously failing to estabilish many pivotal elements to prove his case (another example: to claim Jade tried the window and attempted to escape, he first needs to show that the window has her fingerprints). They don't have to be portrayed as valid counterarguments, but at least addressing them throughout the trial would make the trial more interesting, offer some more moments of gameplay and make the Prosecution appear skilled at their job like they allegedly are.
I assume some of these matters will be explained in the next part, but they're essential details that should be resolved as soon as possible in the trial. So I suggest that the trial segment is adjusted a bit to sort out some of these queries, ESPECIALLY the motive (it doesn't even have to be something elaborate; for example, Raheem could claim Jade did it as revenge for Wright causing the fall of the Gavin & Co. Law Offices and was only able to do it now due to not having any other way to reach out to Phoenix). I also highly recommend Raheem's dialogue is adjusted so that they're able to give explanations more quickly (for example: instead of a 30-minute recess to find the firecrackers, make it so Raheem had found them from the start and lured Apollo into a trap).
I also found the segway into the Edgeworth testimonies incredibly forced. Apollo is encouraged to call Miles to the stand by... Phoenix communicating with him posthumously via the Magatama? Overlooking the fact that I'm fairly sure the Magatama can't do that to begin with, this isn't really necessary. Apollo could just come to the realization on his own, or be nudged to do it by Athena. Even weirder is how Raheem, just as he's about to win the case, with the Judge clearly on his side, decides to grant Apollo his cross-examination. It doesn't feel natural whatsoever and gives the impression that you couldn't see any way to continue the case further at all.
I'd like to make one last paragraph about Edgeworth's first testimony, because I think it's the weakest point of the entire case. I'll list the problems I have with it in another bulletpoint list.
- It's a "press-or-death" testimony, which is particularly difficult to handle if you don't understand why they worked in the actual games. For starters, the penalties were about 20% of your penalty bar at worst - not the massive 40% featured within this trial. Furthermore, these penalties were only handed out on some statements, not on all except for one, and occasionally you were even given the opportunity to avoid the penalty despite pressing the wrong statement (see Moe's testimonies in 2-3). But most importantly, when pressing a statement Phoenix would actually question the witness, whereas here Apollo is always interrupted with the same exact dialogue before asking anything for the purpose of creating a cheap fakeout effect when you do press the correct statement. The only exception to all of these is Luke Atmey's final deduction in 3-2, but not only is that the final cross-examination of the entire case, but it's also a continuous, linear deduction with nothing to question on the various statements, where the press function only serves to point out the contradiction in one of these passages (which is fairly obvious, might I add). Solution: decrease the penalty to 20% or 10%, make it so Apollo always asks actual questions to the witness when pressing and only have the Judge penalize you if Apollo questions a completely irrelevant point or badgers the witness.
- Edgeworth mentions hearing a single gunshot despite the previous testimony estabilishing he should have heard two loud noises. When pressing this detail or objecting with the firecrackers, this point isn't acknowledged and you only get a penalty. Solution: change the line to "two loud gunshots" or rewrite it so that when pressing/objecting with the firecrackers, it prompts dialogues where Raheem explains he couldn't have heard the firecrackers due to the room being too far away from the bedroom or something along those lines.
- The solution comes across as random and not very intuitive. The explanation for the statement you're meant to press is so obvious that players would immediately figure that's what happened and wouldn't press on it (and yet Raheem fails to point it out, but Edgeworth does...), and it yields an unexpected element that isn't even mentioned in the added statement, which makes objecting to it with the autopsy report rather confusing. Solution: after restructuring the testimony like suggested in point 1, remove the statement about holding a gun and having a shocked expression. Rewrite the press to the correct statement so that, instead of Apollo acting triumphant as if he'd found a contradiction, he's merely asking Edgeworth to describe the scene. Edgeworth mentions that the defendant looked straight at them as the butler was turning on the lights, that she was right in front of the body, and that she had a shocked expression and was holding the murder weapon. Give the player to choice to add one of these three statements; the first and the third one won't yield real progress, but the second one contains the necessary info to object with the Autopsy Report. (NOTE: if possible, add the fact that the victim was shot from a distance of 4m to the autopsy report description and incorporate that fact into the objection as well. Have Raheem use the explanation mentioned earlier, only for Apollo to comment that it's conjecture and he has no proof for it, or whatever other explanation you can think of.)