Did anyone else find the answers to get stricter/unintuitive during the second game, case 2?

[Katie]

I'm just starting the first trial, and I'm already feeling the game's answers are too narrow, or even don't make a ton of sense because of the language the game uses, probably due to translation issues.

For example:

"The defendant attacked and killed a person, who, without a doubt, was not fighting back"

I feel like showing any evidence of bullet holes should be acceptable. For example, showing the bullet hole on the folding screen should have been acceptable - it demonstrates a shot was fired in the opposite direction, but the game only accepts Maya's costume.

In neither case can you really demonstrate the holes weren't already there, so show both answers should have been acceptable honestly.

The impression of the weird answers don't get much better during the very next testimony:

"The victim took a shot, but because they were too close, he missed."

This statement just doesn't even make any sense at all. You've got the autopsy report that shows Dr. Grey was murdered at point-blank range, which means Maya would also have been "too close" yet somehow managed to hit him?

Also, the word "missed" is stupidly confusing here. Does missed mean not hitting the person specifically, or not hitting her clothes as well? Depending on how you interpreted the word "missed", you probably won't consider the costume as being the correct answer at all (which was the case for me - I consider not hitting Maya's person a miss. The game considers this a hit even though the bullet didn't actually hit her......... how is this not a miss again?).

The first game, which I just finished today, did not have such ambiguous testimonies really. I feel these ones are much more obtuse already... not a good sign. I just find that I am wasting my health bar on dumb things like guessing and the game doesn't give you enough health to guess like crazy. So, the experience feels a lot less fun. The interpretation of "missed" just feels unfair, like its not your fault. Like I didn't even get the answer correct on 4 tries, but if the wording was a bit more clear, I would have got it no problem.

[Wyrtt]

Thats how thigs go in this vn. Sometimes you already know who and how did that ad have evidence but game wants you to do other things right now,

[Trygger]

Odd, sometimes (like Case 1 and 2 in game 1) the game accepts multiple pieces of evidence or on different statements. So sometimes the designers knew the player could realize a contradiction in different statements (or prove their point with different pieces of evidence which support the same conclusion) and took it into account, other times, not so much.

For "Missed because they were two close" thing I imagined it being because at super-super-close range in cramped quarters it can be hard to judge your aim, especially after being wounded.

EDIT: Pressing every statement can help if you're unsure. Sometimes they explain it in a way it's easier to see the contradiction or it'll add new statements.

[Katie]

Luckily the second part of this court case wasn't quite as obtuse. I'm hoping that was just a poor string of QA and things will go back to the same level of quality as before :) On Case 3 in Game 2 now.

I too wish the game accepted more answers, because the context of the items means a lot, like the Ball linking to the broken pot, yet the game doesn't consider this link during the times you could present either to demonstrate what happened in the Winding Way. It's impossible for the player not to understand how these items are linked at the time you need to present them in court. It's a bit frustrating to deal with this sometimes because you obviously know the answer, and you're not wrong, yet are penalized all the same. I feel like if anything, you shouldn't get points docked off for very close answers or related items - the game should ask follow-up questions instead to clarify. I mean, the worst part of these games is redoing huge sections of the case or trial all over again - something I think should be avoided since nothing is skippable.

[Sutherus]

Uhm, what do you mean by "nothing is skippable"? There is a skip button which you can use to rush through the case pretty quickly even if you have to restart from the beginning.

I do agree that in some parts the game is incredibly strict when it comes to the order in which to present the evidence even though there might be multiple possibilities from the player's pov. I like to think it's because the games are quite old already. Or maybe it's just a problem of the localization while in Japanese it's much clearer. Can't say for sure.

[Vogel100]

Justice for All is the least intuitive Ace Attorney game imo. I had the same problem with case 4 and even case 1. If they gave higher penalties in case 1 I would have definitely gotten a game over in what's supposed to be the tutorial case (even after completing the entirety of game 1). All the other games make more sense.

[Katie]

Originally posted by Sutherus:

Uhm, what do you mean by "nothing is skippable"? There is a skip button which you can use to rush through the case pretty quickly even if you have to restart from the beginning.

Really? Where is it? I pressed all the buttons :/ (Again, I am on switch version)

[Battler Ushiromiya]

Originally posted by Katie:

Originally posted by Sutherus:

Uhm, what do you mean by "nothing is skippable"? There is a skip button which you can use to rush through the case pretty quickly even if you have to restart from the beginning.

Really? Where is it? I pressed all the buttons :/ (Again, I am on switch version)

I'd assume B. That's what it is for the DS version.

[Sutherus]

Originally posted by Katie:

Really? Where is it? I pressed all the buttons :/ (Again, I am on switch version)

Objection! "Again"? You never mentioned you were talking about the Switch version. Since we're on Steam I figured you were on PC. Then again, it doesn't say you own the game so I could've known. I demand the witness include that information in their testimony! :P

You should probably check the settings for keybindings and text skipping. From what I'm seeing after a quick google search and after Battler's advice, I guess B should be it. Make sure you have text skip enabled in the settings.

[Katie]

I played around with it. If anyone's interested, to skip the text, you press the screen :P LOL. They have so many buttons that are not mapped to anything and this is what they make it...

[Peelsepuuppi]

The worst part is when you get it "right" but you still get it wrong because your reasoning is solid but you chose the wrong line even though it essentially is the same as the correct line. After a while out of options you end up trying that thing again with the other line and it is ends up being correct. Man that is infuriating.

[Katie]

Originally posted by ToveriJuri:

The worst part is when you get it "right" but you still get it wrong because your reasoning is solid but you chose the wrong line even though it essentially is the same as the correct line. After a while out of options you end up trying that thing again with the other line and it is ends up being correct. Man that is infuriating.

Yeah, I couldn't agree more.

Parts of me even wonders if having a "life bar" is even necessary. The game would be fun regardless. Like, there's already nothing stopping a person from saving and reloading just before they are asked to produce the right answer anyway, so if you wanted to do that, you can. I think it just ruins the flow of the game to do that - the idea of that takes me out of the experience. And if a person just wants to try every piece of evidence on every statement, well, they wouldn't feel rewarded and are cheating themselves anyway, so I don't think anyone who enjoys the games would seriously do that. I'm just not sure what the life bar actually brings to the game.

[Panda o' Plenty]

Sadly the first few Ace Attorney games weren't that polished. AA2 is pretty bad in particular. Or at least the first case of AA2. If person breaks his neck he dies in instant, why are we trying to figure out what he wrote?

Originally posted by Katie:

Parts of me even wonders if having a "life bar" is even necessary.

Original GBA versions were brutal from what I heard. No saves. You lose - you start over. Something like that.

At leas they still serve a purpose of giving a feel of the stakes being raised by increasing the damage of penalty. At least they started with AA2 as it was a game that introduced a classic-like life-bar. In AA1 they had these 5 exclamation marks (I think) as life system so it would take only 1/5 of your lifebar on any penalty.


Overall, best way to play it is with a friend who already beat those games and will help you with stupid part of it without spoiling solutions.

[VolnuttHeroP64]

Originally posted by Foxysen:

Sadly the first few Ace Attorney games weren't that polished. AA2 is pretty bad in particular. Or at least the first case of AA2. If person breaks his neck he dies in instant, why are we trying to figure out what he wrote?

Originally posted by Katie:

Parts of me even wonders if having a "life bar" is even necessary.

Original GBA versions were brutal from what I heard. No saves. You lose - you start over. Something like that.

At leas they still serve a purpose of giving a feel of the stakes being raised by increasing the damage of penalty. At least they started with AA2 as it was a game that introduced a classic-like life-bar. In AA1 they had these 5 exclamation marks (I think) as life system so it would take only 1/5 of your lifebar on any penalty.


Overall, best way to play it is with a friend who already beat those games and will help you with stupid part of it without spoiling solutions.

Ace Attorney's Life Bar was in 1 Remake, 2, 3, 4 & 5. When parts of the Life Bar is highlighted, it shows the factor of the player's mistake if the player gives a wrong answer while a court trial is in session in an episode.
Here's an example from Episode 1 of the First Ace Attorney game's remake:
"...a fact which is clear if you..."
= Mistake Factor: 2 if incorrect
Correct Answer: "Try sounding the clock."