The Ace Attorney Series

"Heart scope"?

Gauging nervous tics was a bit shaky already, but it did give Apollo a heading to follow up on, so to speak. (as in, he never used the nervousness as evidence itself, but extrapolated from it and used evidence to support his new conclusions) How in the world do you use the witness's emotions to prove guilt? How would you even verify that sort of thing as evidence?

It's like if Phoenix tried to use the Magatama's readings as evidence... Oh wait, MASON.

edited 21st Sep '12 1:26:56 PM by Enlong

I imagine it'll be just like perceiving where he'll use the contradicting emotions as a springboard for his argument. In the trailer Barashima even says that just his emotional state is no proof of wrongdoing.

Phoneix likes his witnesses to screw up. Pointing up how their emotions don't work with what they are saying will still help trip them up.

edited 21st Sep '12 1:44:05 PM by Envyus

Lang Zi says: "that's bullshit."

I kid I kid. But I wonder how this tech will be introduced, or if questions of its legality will come up.

You know, every time I read the new assistant's name, I keep reading Kokonoe.

I imagine it could also be used to give hints on where to press or object. If the emotions don't line up with what you'd expect you can tell there's something fishy.

Uh ohhhh I'm stuck on Ron's testimony for the 3rd(?) day of the trial.

Can you describe where you're stuck?

The part where he testifies about his blackmail letters and how he was fired (part 4-1).

Oh wait I just had to press a statement again.

edited 22nd Sep '12 12:03:51 PM by Bookyangel2438

Yay I beat the 3rd case!

i used a guide for some of it though

Let me guess, the 3rd case had you stuck at the bit where Godot tells you you can only press one statement, or lose, and every statement opens with the same lines from Godot for failure or success, causing you to repeat it over and over again if you were Save Scumming?

Wait, what?

Recipe for Turnabout has that? I thought it only had the penalty thing in the later ones?

I beat 3-2 yesterday. Have to say, was a little bit annoyed at how some of the evidences to present were somewhat unintuitive. Like the whole "the note mentions a red diamond, but the jewel in this newspaper clipping which is irrelevant to the red diamond is blue! Contradiction even though no connection between the red diamond and that blue jewel was ever made!"

That's in 3-2. I actually got stuck there because I reset thinking it was the wrong answer due to Godot's line. I ended up caving in and looking it up only to see I was right the second time.

edited 26th Sep '12 8:57:31 AM by Anomalocaris20

The part of 3-3 that really tripped me up originally was at the end where you're penalized for pressing "irrelevant" parts of Tigre's testimony. Problem being that the irrelevant parts seem to only be irrelevant if Godot says so, not if they're actually irrelevant, and the game fgakes you out by having typical pressing banter before hitting you with the penalty. If you have a full health bar you can afford to brute force it, but otherwise...

edited 26th Sep '12 9:06:07 AM by ComicX6

I just used a guide for figuring out which statements to press.

And also when I didn't know what to present and stuff.

is that bad?

Not really. I love Ace Attorney, but sometimes what you need to to do progress is very unintuitive. Not in the "Oh, why didn't I think to do that?" sense, but in the "What? What does that even have to do with it?" sense.

There were a couple moments in Investigations that tripped me up pretty badly, like the timezone change in I-2, that infamous testimony in I-3 and everything to do with who wore which costume. Though the final piece of evidence in the last case being a box of hotdogs was hilarious. It was like "oh shit, they're really going to do it!"

What's infamous in I-3's testimony?

The one where you have to prove that the kidnappers knew each other not by presenting the piece of evidence that says so, namely Colin's dossier, but by simply showing that there were three kidnappers.

That's silly.

I hate when I find a contradiction that isn't the one the game was thinking of and it refuses to accept it.

Yeah, this series had a few prime examples of You Can't Get Ye Flask in action. Not quite as bad as many other point-and-click games, however.

The most annoying ones are the ones where you need to press every statement, even the ones you know won't actually yield any results, in order to trigger some event flag. Hated those so much.

One annoying one is when you have to press everything, and then press some statement again.

I don't mind pressing statements to get stuff (Though I wish there were text speed options...). But the ones where an overlooked contradiction doesn't work, or the evidence needed to "point out" a contradiction isn't the one you'd think to use, is annoying.

Yeah, those too. Most events involving randomly pressing statements.

I tend to press everything anyway. Pressing Oldbag's testimony in 2-4 was just hilarious every single time. Especially when Edgeworth bribes her into shutting up with a stick of gum.