Righty, in that case I'm fine with GS4 being an AU. The game was mediocre anyway.

I, for one, hope they tie up all the loose ends of the Apollo arc with GS5 instead of GS6, and then move on to a new era with absolutely NO recurring characters. Not even Payne or the judge.

Kefka, usually the first game would be a warm-up game. When AA first came out, it wasn't supposed to be the best game of all. That's why JFA and T&T came out. I'm fine with GS5 tying up loose ends, but please let the game be a long one.

---

@ LittleBakura: Yeah, since the "trilogy" would be one game short, they could have 6 cases instead of 4 or 5.

My position has always been 'GS4 was written and conceptualised as an AU to GS2 and 3, but the marketing department/Capcom etc then belatedly forced or claimed a bare minimum of association with it (GS2 and 3) for sales purpose.' (If there was any kind of staff infighting or disagreement over the issue, I have real no evidence to support any theory in that category.)

By the way, if GS4 was written an AU, but the marketing dept this time requires stronger association with GS2/3 and GS5 NOT being written as a conceptual AU, is when you're likely to get your 'it's Apollo's turn now' sunk and what you term 'fanservice' coming in to clean up.

Personally, I think GK will probably skirt the whole GS4 issue entirely. Probably the writers of that don't want to step on any of the GS4 writers' toes. In fact, it might just start its own timeline which conflicts or ignores them both...

---

No, it isn't. You're immediately assuming that Capcom will automatically go for the Fanservice option. XD

---

icer, do you know why we don't rebuke your posts? Because there isn't really much evidence to give that you won't except. On top of that, there isn't enough to be sure. About any theroy. Which is what all this is. Therioes, and ther many different ones that can't be properly rebuked, despite your "MY IDEA IS THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE ONE" attitude. We simply don't have enough info to prove your idea over mine.

---

Is Therioes like the analytical version of cheerioes?

---

...*snrk*

I do think G4 was written with AU in mind, but whether it will be taken as such in future games is still pending. So for now it's canon but future games are the only things that can prove or shoot it down.

I have my doubts GK will do anything for the debate, considering it supposedly takes place "around" TT. But who knows.

---

True, but I see it for different reasons.

One of the main reasons, from a practical view, because it'd be out of place. Same with AJ where you have all these complaints about where old characters went: there was no point bringing it up and it didn't add to the story. Let's assume GK takes place around the same time as what happened to Phoenix. IF the writers referenced it they'd have to go and explain it and deal with Edgeworth's reaction and that takes up too much time and doesn't add to the plot (well, unless the story is secretly leading up to a Phoenix/Edgeworth angsty ending).

Even if they dropped it in a passing (ex: someone asking how that spiky haired defense attorney friend is and Edgeworth just brushing it off or in curt comment) it would feel a bit out of place because it'll probably not be apart of GK's overall story.

---

I like how you think.

Not mentioning anything at all would be a little weird, though; I can see some sort of referencing and it not having the plot revolve around it. The game is already like 90% dialogue, it probably wouldn't appear too big a deal to add a little more. Considering his role, I don't think Phoenix will go totally unmentioned in the game, considering his whole BFFS status with Phoenix (;D) and all. And Gumshoe will probably bring him up because he's Gumshoe and he does that.

Then there's always the possibility they don't mention Phoenix turning into a hobo because GK takes place before that (maybe) or it pulls an AU and doesn't happen. No way to determine what will happen at this point.

---

I think half the reason they (franchise) did make GK was to be able to skirt the whole Phoenix/Apollo/GS4 issue entirely. And they'll probably continue with this policy in that game. I'm pretty sure it was lawyer not hobo sprite Phoenix in the TGS thing but wearing the Blue Badger costume so it's neutral with regards to disbarred status. Sadly we never seemed to get a video of that. Notice they seem to make merchandise and have those concert things with Lawyer Phoenix alongside Edgeworth and Apollo?

---

Strange dichotomy, right? :D I think it's a personal thing.

I guess my personal reason is simple. I've put myself in the middle position of the argument. I just believe, as I've said many times, that the writers have it all sorted out. From all the interviews and whatnot, I got the feeling that they really are continuing from GS3, especially as the writing team contains some of the SAME WRITERS as the previous games, (Including the same head writer). and is overseen by both Takumi and Maksuara. On the other hand, if they weren't going to bring back Maya or Edgeworth last time, I don't see why they should be forced to just because people want it.

So if that makes me a Centrist Ostrich, then fine by me

---

I have a hard time spelling "theory" sometimes, is that ok?

And do you know why I think it's natural progression from 3 to 4? For starters, it's GS4. NOT GSAlternatetimelinelive or GSsplit. Just GS4, which comes after GS3. You cannot deny this. Second, there has been no CONFIRMATION from the writers that it IS an alternate timeline. The natural thing to assume in this case (besides the 4) is that it's the next game in the series.

And do not give me the "unspecified time as a lawyer" or "retconning 3 and 2" stuff. There is no MOTIVE for them to do this. As Gerk specified, not ALL of the writing and higher ups have been replaced, there are enough people to know to put 2 and 3 in that timeline. Ockham's Razor implies that it is a natural follow up.

And why is it so important for Edgeworth and Maya to be in it because Phoenix is? Just because you want the fanservice during the reintroduction to the series, does not mean they will provide you with such fanservice.

---

It's not fanservice, it's proving that they're in character. The Edgey and Maya we know would be active in his life, and you'd run into them if you hung around with Phoenix.

^ What he said

Maya is like, Phoenix's best friend. She wouldn't be like "you lost your license? Huh. SEE YOU". And Pearl would be all "*armgrab* You can't do that to Mr. Nick! What you had was special!" Neither would Edgeworth, because he's very gay for him of their friendship, not to mention, as demonstrated by 3-5, his rediculous amount of pull in the justice department; you think he could have done something to help Phoenix, but no. And Larry would be all "LET'S BE LOSERS TOGETHER, BUDDY".

Yeah, I would like to see them all again, but there's a difference between fanservice and just making sense. The writers didn't seem to drop them because they didn't fit, but they dropped them because they'd rather go with their Hobonick plotline than write the others in-character. If all the characters did act as they would, Phoenix would probably not have been a run-down alchoholic (come on, that was so not "grape juice"); there at least would have been someone there for him, but by the look of it, Trucy was the only one, by default. And Kristoph, but he was actually a dick, so yeah.

---

IF this is a continuity of 'GS3's Reality' their appearance would NOT be fanservice! It would be aversion of total and utter plot, characterisation, continuity and reality FAILURE. Either you admit it's a alternate reality where they are not required because they have languished/regressed back to 1-5 timepoint, or you agree that since this is a continuation of GS3's reality and characteristion, they are REQUIRED.

So what's your alternate explanation for why the writers didn't include them? 'Because they are not relevant to the plot' just PROVES this was written as a conceptual AU. ANY follow up to game 3 in any circumstance would REQUIRE involvement of Maya and Edgeworth if Phoenix was included at all beyond a 1-line cameo. Such fundamental events in his life require at least allusion o them BY NECESSITY if this is, indeed, a conceptual follow up to game 3 scenario.


Why how the worm turns! I suppose you're going to cease all the 'IT'S APOLLO'S TURN NOW" mantras, if this is indeed a follow-up GS4, then that means its' an extension of game 3's reality scenario starring PHOENIX WRIGHT, and I eagerly await his redemption, the return of characters integral to this reality, and the imminent subordination of Apollo to 2nd-rate rookie substitute permanently, since this is part of PHOENIX's continued scenario. Oh but It's Apollo's Turn Now? It's unreasonable to expect the barest minimum of consistency with game 3's characterisation, plot, scenario or endpoint? It must NOT be a continuation of the same reality scenario as GS3 then!

AU means it's Apollo's Turn Now. The alternative, that it's a continuation of GS3 reality scenario, requires by necessity the return of integral elements of GS3's reality scenario.

The very fact you consider these irrelevant demonstrates that mentally, you already do CLASSIFY this a SEPARATE REALITY scenario to GS3 since the stark DISCONTINUITY does not trouble you and you think anybody mentioning it or wanting resolution to it is stupid and unreasonable! Like the writers, to you this is a conceptual AU, NOT a follow-up to game 3, so such continuity to it is 'irrelevant.'


Who cares about 'motive'. The 'evidence' of the GAME has already PROVEN they DID THIS, it's not speculation. GS2 and 3's character development has been ret-coned. It's a statement of fact (and if you 'disagree, where's your supporting evidence? All their game 2 and 3 development has been throughly contradicted. The fact that characters have 'changed' since 1-5 can be attributed to alternative, hypothetical development for the game. It's in no way consistent with game 2 and 3 development!)

My 'theory' to account for this is that the writers were producing a conceptual AU along an alternate scenario path after 1-5. What's your alternate explanation?

"Their GS2 and 3 characterisation is irrelevant to the plot' just implies that mentally you CONSIDER this in the context of an AU, NOT a follow-up to GS3's reality scenario.

We already discussed Ockham's Razor as being an irrelevancy that can be twisted to support any argument; you have 'proven' nothing, and it is, indeed, of as much use as Godwin's Law to resolving the issue.

So, where's your PROOF from the writers saying this is [even marketed as] a follow up to game 3's PLOT SCENARIO? I keep wanting to see it.

My impression of your position is somehow not centrist, but maybe you've become more moderate over recent months.. I don't know. I think nobody should make claims about being 'centrist' or 'middle', because it's human nature to think that their own stance on anything is the reasonable, centrist one and everyone else is extreme.

Evidence, plz. I only see this on CR. We know Takumi is still there, and he seems to be the only one but the lists are incomplete. The producer and production supervisors are not consistent (except with 1-5) and that's your top dog.(' ...that story came to its conclusion with Gyakuten Saiban 3. I don't want to add any new episodes to it.')

---

I agree with that. Therefore, in my head canon Phoenix's friends are still a part of his life. The only reason they DIDN'T appear in AJ is because most of the game was from Apollo's point of view,a and why would he care about Phoenix's friends?

Think about if the games were real, and you were in their world. Would you care about the weird so-called "spirit mediums" in the mountains, or the aloof man in ruffles, or the crazy whip-wielding prosecutor, or the horribly incompetent detective, or the womanizing idiot who dates all those models...

You see my point. Apollo's game, Apollo's point of view... Apollo has no reason to want to know about Phoenix's friends. Therefore, any reference to them would be shoehorned.

See my earlier post- The Edgey and Maya we know would be active in his life, and you'd run into them if you hung around with Phoenix.

*sigh*

This topic just proves my point.

NO PW Trilogy characters should have been in AJ.



You're right, because it was never meant to be a trilogy.

---

And... how do we know they aren't? He could have been hanging around with them behind the scenes, after all. A good chunk of a game from someone else's perspective doesn't mean he never saw his friends again. Especially since there's seven years that we don't know about.

The point of veiw thing does make sense, but I wasn't necessarily reffering to just encountering them as Apollo. It was when you actually played as Phoenix that stood out to me.

In the trial, he had no sidekick; you think they could have added Maya in there or something, but she wasn't there. It's not like they had to make new sprites or anything or do anything other than have her stand there. I suppose she might not have been there because it was a last-minute case, but she's still the assistant manager and like, follows Phoenix everywhere anyways. This wouldn't have been confusing to new players, ESPECIALLY if they had used her being there to explain the Magatama, because to new players, that makes no sense when it shows up.

And this might just be me speaking from MY opinion as a writer, but I would have added something, even very briefly, after Phoenix got his license revoked. Having someone else, maybe Edgeworth or someone, stating their dissapointment in Phoenix, would have added more to that "emotion" thing the writers were aiming for. That might just be me, but it still would have been nice.

---

I am terribly sorry, Ms. icer, but if you can't definitively show the possibility of a motive, then I'm afraid you have no case. Your evidence has been... passionate, to say the least (and I mean least). But...







Without that, all it has been is a long-winded and fanciful trip to nowhere, and an irrevocable waste of our time!

---

Sure, why not. Because clearly when someone who now has to take care of an entire village of spirit mediums who need training, guidance, whatever a master needs to do isn't there for a single one-day trial, it means that they are out of someone's life forever.

Though I see where you're coming from, and agree, the argument is more something along the lines that she never showed up in-game after that to help out is what miffed people like icer, which leads to all these weirdo assumptions (to my ears) of regressive characterization, conceptual AUs and other nonsense.

I usually tend to see it that for a long time, Phoenix didn't care so much about being a lawyer after the past case as much as it was for finding the truth. The people probably wouldn't give him back his badge, so there really wasn't a pull in the legal system that could get him back on. So, he dedicated himself to discovering what really happened in the Gramarye case. It's really all he could do at that point; all he could do was search for the truth and try to help the people still involved with the case (the Mishams and Trucy). Phoenix had to shift gears and put away thoughts of becoming a lawyer again in order to help people, which is why he became a lawyer in the first place. A long legal battle to regain his badge that he could lose was not as important as stopping people like Kristoph Gavin.

That's why, during the game, he dodges questions and inquiries made by Apollo (or flat out shoots him down) when Apollo wants to know why a guy like him could ever be happy with not being a lawyer. Because a badge wasn't as important.

It's only until after case four that Phoenix says "I might retake the bar exam". Because he "solved" the case. He could be at peace for that miserable time in his life and career, where he put people at risk, and let his fame get to his head.

Sometimes, I think that there was a lot of frequent contact between Phoenix and his old friends at that time after the trial, but I think over time he told them or explained to them that trying to convince him to become a lawyer again wouldn't work (much like he did with Apollo). So they became relegated to the role of off-screen support (which I saw the DVDs as, frankly). They are still rooting for Phoenix, and may even provide direct assistance, but none of this shows up in Apollo's game as it would be a little confusing for newer players to have these characters show up. I know, it is not the strongest reasoning, but it seems like the one that makes the most sense to me, so that's what i am sticking to.

If you want to make a super-long post refuting it, I won't stop you, but despite all these talks of "evidence", what we really all mean is "how I interpreted the events of the game".

---

She clearly says in TT that she was going to continue to work with Phoenix. I also didn't say she was out of his life forever, but they could have included her to at least explain the Magatama; come on, the newcomers to the series wouldn't be too idiotic as to get totally confused by just that. It's not like it would require massive flashbacks and perfect explanations of all three previous games. She could still be there. BUT she might not be.

This is what I'm saying.

This entire topic and the ideas within are made of "what if". I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here; it's just, as Ing said, my interpretation of the game and speculation. I'm really not trying to force any of it onto you guys =/

---

And the trial was one day-surely, she could have taken a day off to take care of Kurain? Or are you suggesting that she seriously feels she always has to babysit Phoenix at all his trials, just in case he makes a boo-boo and needs Mia's help to make it all better?

And they'd also need to explain why she had something like the Magatama in the first place, which would involve explaining the whole spirit medium thing, and possibly an explanation of why she's Phoenix's assistant, which would include Mia's deal as well, and the whole thing would both push Apollo out of the spotlight and annoy people, as longtime fans would react with "Yes, I KNOW this" and the newcomers would ract with "And why is this important?"
Meanwhile, in the current system, the newcomers know there's three older games which could explain why Phoenix has the Magatama, as well as websites such as this one and Wikipedia to explain it if they can't find the games. Therefore, we don't need large chunks of exposition explaining why Phoenix has a weird lie-detecter item, especially since Apollo has the bracelet.

But you admitted she could be there. As there's no evidence either way, anyone can interpret it as they wish. I can't see Phoenix's friends abandoning him, therefore in my mind, they didn't.

It would certainly not have been mandatory to explain everything; if a cameo just involved him saying she was his assistant then that would be that. It wouldn't need a huge explanation. "Here's my assistant, she's a spirit medium who gave me this when I helped her a long time ago" or something like that. Vague, but not too vague. It's to the point and if players wanted to know anything more they'd have to play the other three *wink wink*

But seriously, you're right, there's no real evidence proving it either way. I'm mostly just trying to be the devil's advocate. But there's no real evidence proving everything in this topic. I think it's perfectly possible just to muse over the situation without getting all fussy, now don't you agree, everyone?

---

Considering this topic...

Sources point to no

---

Hey, I just don't want to start a fight, so I'm making that clear.

---

It's clear to me that there would be a lot less fighting on the internet if people had better sarcasm detectors, PI.
This is a perfect example of what I mean.

-End of tangent-

---

...wow.

I...I kind of want to laugh but I feel so soiled at the same time

(Lulzy post by you, by the way)

Butuhyeah sarcasm on the internet is always a fun thing to use

---

Motive for what exactly? Motive for writing a conceptual alternate timeline scenario?

-A 'COMPLETELY NEW STORY' which doesn't 'add any new episodes to' GS3 old story scenario.
-SO they can allow a CONTINUATION OF THE New GENERATION PRODUCER'S own creative vision of 1-5, not the OLD story's scenario/reality of GS2 and 3 which are somebody else's creative vision? Creative freedom is further curtailed if they have to maintain any consistency with the GS3 ending. Greater freedom to create a NEW STORY with the new producer's OWN concept was effected by conceptual AU.

-Forced by Capcom to bring back Phoenix the Character, they fill this criteria with the option which LEAST CONSTRAINS developing their new generation creative vision and still allows Phoenix to be worked in in a major way. If told to make a follow up game or 'sequel', they made it to the MOST RECENT GS game, which was not GS3, but Phoenix Wright 1 DS (Gyakuten Saiban: Yomigaeru Gyakuten) with its new case of 1-5. This placed the least constraints on their new vision, since 1-5 already was part of the new vision (and GS3 wasn't), and had far greater potential for alternative development than from GS3. it's part of this producer's creative vision and story and can be aligned as part of this NEW story, since it kind of already could be viewed as a new story.

-Writing an AU, NOT a continuation of GS3 reality IS really the only way they can write a NEW STORY. We know that the undoing of the actual GS3 ending is virtually impossible, barring mass assassination. IF flashback trial had happened after 3-5 scenario,. Edgeworth would dimply have used his precedented power to call an enquiry into the forged evidence, and the truth would have NOT taken 7 years to come to light, Maya could have helped investigate... They KNEW this scenario COULD NOT HAPPEN to Phoenix after GS3's actual plot and reality and that if it DID, his old friends would just help him, therefore there would be no NEED for him to have to forge close ties with the NEW arc chars! Because following on from 3-5's actual reality, PHOENIX WOULD HAVE NO NEED FOR APOLLO or new chars, in any scenario. Writing a follow up to GS3 reality would require killing off the old chars etc, a step the writers didn't want to take. Therefore, they made it an actual 'sequel' or 'follow up' to the only time when the characters could be safely removed with superficially no discontinuity = 1-5 Why?

Because with Maya and Edgeworth there would be no need for Apollo, Trucy or Kristoph to involve themselves in Phoenix's predicament or solve it. Any continuation of Phoenix's GS3 reality would merely star these characters, by necessity, thwarting the attempt of a new arc and new story. Continuity was reset back to alt scenario off 1-5 SO Edgeworth and Maya did NOT have to be returned and thus there would be actual requirement and room to develop new chars associated with Phoenix. Because Phoenix simply wouldn't need to reply on Apollo in a post GS3 reality. Takumi knew Edgeworth and Maya would have cleared his name way before 7 years were up if that reality scenario was continued.

Regressing the timeline back to 1-5 development was the only way to remove them sufficiently from his life to allow SPACE for new chars to 'fill' this role.

Motive? They wanted to make a new story with new cast. They were forced to return Phoenix minimum and didn't want to return Edgeworth and Maya as they wanted to develop a new cast. No scenario continuation of GS3 reality could ever sever Phoenix from the old cast short of mass assassination. A conceptual reset back to 1-5 and an alternative development path was the only way to allow a new-gen future Phoenix without these chars, short of such tragedy. It was seen as the least destructive to GS2 and 3 and the most creative freedom option of returning a Phoenix character which even was required to from ties to new cast.

The error (and damage) lay in failing to specifically be allowed to market as an alternate scenario off 1-5 than GS3 when this was how it was conceived in Takumi's and most likely Matsukawa's head-canon.

---

It's comprehensible that Maya might, for some reason, not attend one trial. It is NOT comprehensible, that in CLEAR CONTRADICTION to her DESIGNATED 3-5 ending from less than 2 months previously, her absence is NEVER MENTIONED OR EXPLAINED (unless, of course, this is not really meant to be a follow-up to 3-5 at all, which it isn't.) Even something like 'Oh it's unfortunate my assistant couldn't be here but I'll do my best etc.' would have sufficed. The fact that they didn't bother to put it just indicates.. this is not meant to be a continuation of 3-5 characterisation for anybody. Maya not attending is possible, Maya's absence or existence being considered irrelevant since this contradicts 3-5 and all past characterisation is NOT.

As for take a day off? What do you think Kurain is, a prison? You think she can take a day off 'babysitting' Phoenix but can't take a day off 'babysitting Kurain'? No wonder Misty and Mia left if you think Kurain Master means a bondage servitude to who knows what in the middle of nowhere. Why would anybody have centuries of feuding over such an awful position? No way. Kurain Master has diplomatic status and power, even with the government. (Like could, you know, even get Phoenix's name cleared, before 7 years..).
Boring tasks like looking after acolytes are delegated out to other people. Morgan seemed to be attending to it before and she sure wasn't Master. (Bikini, too.) Also, there's Kurain branches all over [Hazakurain etc.] so staying in Kurain would also be detrimental to the position.


Why? They didn't explain why Phoenix had it and you thought that was okay.

The only evidence in the game points to her NOT seeing him. She 'keeps sending DVDs'. If she 'sends' them, she doesn't see him. If she 'keeps sending' them, she hasn't seen him for a long time. It's pretty clear that at 4-2 timepoint, she has indeed, not seen him for a while. (Just like her status between 1-4 and 2-2 aka post 1-5, obviously.)

And there's no evidence to her whatsoever, even indirectly, in the scenes after the disbarring. She would have rushed back and helped him out, whatever she was doing at Kurain. It's totally consistent with her character. But he's clearly all alone.

---

No-ones brought up the possibility that something happened which stops her from visiting.

I mean, it could be anything, so long as it was a very important reason. But speculating on it's pretty superfluous. XD

---

icer... In the end, are you really saying anything?

Think about it, everyone. Is there any actual disagreement? I don't really think so. I think the real problem is that you're using the term "alternate universe" in subtly, but extremely importantly, different ways.

I think many of us are actually in agreement with icer. Putting , , etc. in 2 in a major role is probably a bad idea. should essentially have its own story. I think most of us agree with this. However, the problem is in the usage of "AU".

So, what exactly is an AU? What exactly is the extent of icer's statements? Icer is going for a "conceptual AU", but the term "AU" itself is misunderstood and so there's a lot of confusion. I would say that if something were an alternate universe, it would have no qualms whatsoever in making blatant contradictions to the original universe. None of what icer mentions counts as a blatant contradiction. If were an alternate universe, we could go back to the universe, have him continue as a lawyer, and eventually reach the era whilst still being a lawyer. However, I doubt any of us sees that happening at all.

I think this is what icer's detractors refer to when they refer to an AU. However, it seems clear that icer is not using "conceptual AU" in that way. It seems she is simply repeating what many of us are thinking, that putting elements in major roles in would be ultimately awkward and just plain stupid. Now, it's possible still to put in references or even minor character roles, like having as a final case prosecutor or something (that would be awesome), but they just don't make it about him. It's clear to me that icer is referring only to this when she says that, otherwise, and would have to have major roles in the game. This isn't a consequence of anything. It's just an axiom that hints at what she means by "conceptual AU". It's just that the way she's communicating it is obviously rubbing people off in a bad way.

Another thing is how icer has reached her conclusion. Sure, everything seems to fall into place the way she's put it. However, whatever conclusion she's trying to draw from it does not follow just because the string of logic connects well. That just means it doesn't contradict itself. But that isn't proof of anything.

The thing is, icer, that you've put yourself in a position of certainty of your views. This means that all anyone has to do is to show that an alternative is plausible at all, not that it's more plausible than your theories. The Great Seven Year Gap was not an accident; they could easily have set it to one year or one month later and it would have been just as plausible. Or are you going to dismiss that as marketing tactics as well? The other thing is that while probably won't reference in a significant way, it still can jive with it and explain things indirectly, like why isn't around or whatever. There's also that simple explanation someone else gave, that it just wasn't important enough to to mention even if contact with others was still happening.

Finally, there's the issue of the Gramarye case. As independent as the writers may have wanted themselves to be, they aren't stupid. They're not going to make severely OOC for no reason. But there are reasons. The writers clearly wanted to emphasize that the case was a (rare for ) standard textbook case, no turnabouts about to happen. Additionally, in case you haven't noticed, had never, EVER faced a newbie before. was a seasoned prosecutor with four years under his belt. had four years. had 40 years. He was fooled into thinking was well-known, and by the time had revealed he had never prosecuted any cases, it had become clear that there was more to him, that he was hiding something that still somehow gave him experience as a lawyer. Klavier was a freaking newbie when he faced . Finally, had taken the case yesterday. It's not like it's impossible for him to have taken it; he had done it before (:wellington:). He probably feigned arrogance somewhat (justifiably) to reassure himself. Idk. I wouldn't exclude myself from the group of people who'd put their guard down in such a situation.


So TL;DR:

1. Icer isn't actually saying anything terribly controversial or even important, albeit in a controversial way.

2. Icer's conclusions are rather fallacious and ignore the huge ambiguities that allow alternatives to her opinion to hold just as well.

Well well.. constructive feedback!



Yes, the term 'Alternate Universe' is misleading. I don't know how the argument centred around using that term. It's not literally an 'alternate universe' in a physics/literal reality sense. It's an alternate STORY SCENARIO. A separate story which conceptually follows up 1>1-5 and game 2 and 3 were NOT part of the 'conceptual scenario' being continued. For example, say there was a famous book, and 2 more books were written in continuation of the same plot.
Then another linked series is made as a 'sequel' to the first book, but it's a sequel to the first book only, ignoring the rest of that series. It's a different story and different scenario with a different concept. A scenario where 'book' 1 is the only one which is considered past history in the plot. (The other series, book 2 and 3, were ignored and are considered irrelevant as they did not 'happen' in this scenario.)

(So, any ideas what exact term I should use to define my concept? The problem is, metaphorical terms like 'alternate life scenario' 'alternate conceptual scenario' etc. which are the norm in conceptually writing and envisaging different stories and plots, become confusing if erraneously associated with any literal in-game reality concepts. They're not. There isn't literally 2 universes in GS Reality or something.)

Are these the things which are supposed to make my argument 'implausible'? I don't get it..


I don't see that it makes any difference in terms of alternate scenario or not whether it's 1 year or 7. 7 was a symbolic number, Takumi [?] said so in an interview. Also long enough for Phoenix to get a different sprite to further differentiate him from the lawyer story.


We still have no idea whether GK will ref GS4 or just avoid/ignore it. Regardless, I assume Capcom continues to market GS4 as occuring in the same life scenario for Phoenix as GS2 and 3, since that's what everybody else seems to assume.. although I have never actually seen the evidence of this. For all I have actually seen, it could merely have been marketed by Capcom as a sequel/follow up to the most recent new 'game', Gyakuten Saiban: Yomigaeru Gyakuten with 1-5. How the game continues to be marketed is not necessarily consistent with Takumi and Matsukawa's conceptual intentions as they were writing it.

I belive Takumi and Matsukawa, when writing their new story, were deliberately conceptualising an alternate plot scenario for the character Phoenix, not a scenario following on from the story scenario in GS2 and 3. This new story continues off the closest thing to a 'new' story in the arc, the new gen 1-5.


This is acceptable when playing from Apollo's perspective. This argument breaks down as we play as Phoenix in 4-4 for both trial and investigation. (And don't give me the argument that the playing in MASON is just a 'game' Phoenix made for the jurists. it isn't. Not straying into THAT awful topic.. except just to mention that with such surreal game elements, and the boundary between 'in game reality' and '4th wall breaking' so difficult to define in 4-4, just lends support to wafty concepts like 'alternate scenarios' being in the writers' heads and concepts.)


eh, too late to write more ATM

I'll just mention that people who did not have a problem with the glaring absence of Maya, Edgeworth and the stark contradictions of discontinuity from 3-5 in a series devoted to exposing contradictions and think others stupid for seeing them, are already mentally viewing the GS4 game in the context of an alternate scenario, not one after the GS2 and 3 plot scenario, you're just not consciously aware of it. Because otherwise such discontinuity from GS3 would be glaringly obvious and seem implausible.

---

I'd say alternate timeline, kinda like the Marvel What If books. Apollo Justice's timeline is the answer to "What if Phoenix got too cocky?", which accounts for the alternate years of experience and the OOCness of the flashback.

This is exactly, and I mean EXACTLY, my setiments. This is pretty much how it played out in my eyes, and it's pretty logical, along with the point of it being Apollo's game. Why would he need to see Phoenix's old friends to advance the plot?

And icer, Robbie, I've had enough. YOU TWO MAKE ME WANT TO PUT MY HEAD THROUGH A WALL! YOU CALL THAT EVIDENCE? I'LL SHOW YOU--NO BRUCE, LET ME FINISH!

All kidding aside, you two are pretty much ignoring what we're saying just so you two can think you're right and we're wrong. You two think that Capcom must have thought of all of this stuff to put in their game in the short 2 year (not even) gap between 1-5's release and GS4's release. Yeah, it makes total sense to do this and that and this and that...in your eyes at least.

Now, you keep asking for evidence, but you yourself still fail to present it yourself. You keep noting all of these "Inferences" that you must be so proud of yourself for making; you're jumping to conclusions, and will accept nothing else. Now, until you have actual evidence AND a motive, you cannot back up your claim, my (and Ing's) claim, a more logical turn of events, will make more sense. No more inferences, no more jumping to conclusions. ACTUAL. EVIDENCE. And don't dare avoid it by turning it back on me. You're so attached to this idea of yours, now prove it 100%.

---

I remember the whole AU thing on Gfaqs....

I'll only really repeat two things since I've argued about this before and don't like arguing when nothing is going to change+don't feel like outlining all my arguments again:

1. Considering the GS series is made by Capcom, they're more likely to say "lolz, AU" about DMC2 or even the anime before AJ. DMC series=same world, same characters, so continuity is expected even though each game could really stand on it's own apart from the others (well, except 4 if you count the unanswered questions). Anyways, DMC1, okay game, not ground breaking but fun with a hero that was some-what cliche but a bit of a smart ass and he ends up being very close to a lady named Trish. DMC2 comes along, Dante suddenly becomes a stoic with a grand total of FOURTEEN lines (about half being being extremely short) in the entire game and Trish vanishes off the face of the planet (both which could be applied to the Phoenix and Maya complaints) and to top it off, the 'plot' sucked. All in all, it was TERRIBLE and despite that, 2 games, an anime and a manga series later, it is STILL considered canon, just supposedly far, FAR away from the latest DMC game. So as much as I LOATHE it one day, according to the canon, Dante is going to stop being a cheesy smartass and become a boring stoic. If they're going to keep a pile of crap like DMC2, there's no way they're going to chalk up AJ as an AU.

2. You can argue, wish, and write essays on why something should be but it doesn't change the fact that unless the creators (and even then, I can see Capcom forcing them to keep it like with DMC2 and the DMC series) say it's an AU, it isn't anything more than wishful thinking. Outlining a stock pile of reasons why you WANT or think it SHOULD be an AU, doesn't=having the creators come and say AJ was a all a bad dream.

---

That's why I thank God for the concept of personal canon.

This is not something unprecedented we're asking for. The creator of the castlevania series has also done this :

http://castlevania.wikia.com/wiki/Koji_ ... ontroversy

---