LogFAQs > #956649459

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	great ace attorney playthrough topic
transience 07/31/21 5:29:04 PM #41:	Case 3, Trial 1 we meet Van Zieks, our new god of prosecutors, and our new judge that looks like Santa. the whole place looks very stuffy and high class. and here we are, two foreigners who are treated exactly as such. but that's not the biggest deal. we've got a jury! after 15 years! the jurist system doesn't count! these six dudes look like miis. each one is a caricature of a real person, even more one-note than actual AA characters. the jury doesn't come into play immediately. first we converse a little with our new co-stars and learn that van zieks hasn't been in front of the court for five years. is that because no one dares face him, or some other reason? we'll find out soon, I suppose. we start our first cross examination with three witnesses who all saw the crime, and as we gather more information, the jury gets more and more convinced that my rich bro is guilty. the mechanics here are wacky: dudes shooting fire over their heads onto a scale that decides if people are innocent or guilty. I... don't love this, just because I kinda just want to navigate the truth, not massage the feelings of a bunch of randos. but I don't hate it either. eventually all six dudes go guilty and the case is basically over. except, Susato pulls out an archaic trick: a summation, whereupon the jurors need to give their reasoning. Van Zieks hates this but the judge goes along with it without pause. like the OG Judge, this guy is ancient, and seems to follow tradition. we have the option to pit the arguments against each other, something that feels a little flimsy, but eventually enough guys turn to the point where we have more not guilty votes than guilty. we manage to extract information about the cost of Beppo's omnibus and that there was possibly one missing person, but otherwise it just seems like a waste of time. again I don't hate it, but I don't want to drag trials out any more than they already are. Van Zieks gets mad and takes off his cape. looks like he's recognized that we might actually be a decent opponent and is ready to respond in kind. I still don't see any evidence at all that suggests we're going to get off here, but I'm sure we'll conjure something out of thin air soon! --- xyzzy <cite>transience posted [p:956649459] in great ace ... [t:79586410]...</cite> <quote>Case 3, Trial 1 we meet Van Zieks, our new god of prosecutors, and our new judge that looks like Santa. the whole place looks very stuffy and high class. and here we are, two foreigners who are treated exactly as such. but that's not the biggest deal. we've got a jury! after 15 years! the jurist system doesn't count! these six dudes look like miis. each one is a caricature of a real person, even more one-note than actual AA characters. the jury doesn't come into play immediately. first we converse a little with our new co-stars and learn that van zieks hasn't been in front of the court for five years. is that because no one dares face him, or some other reason? we'll find out soon, I suppose. we start our first cross examination with three witnesses who all saw the crime, and as we gather more information, the jury gets more and more convinced that my rich bro is guilty. the mechanics here are wacky: dudes shooting fire over their heads onto a scale that decides if people are innocent or guilty. I... don't love this, just because I kinda just want to navigate the truth, not massage the feelings of a bunch of randos. but I don't hate it either. eventually all six dudes go guilty and the case is basically over. except, Susato pulls out an archaic trick: a summation, whereupon the jurors need to give their reasoning. Van Zieks hates this but the judge goes along with it without pause. like the OG Judge, this guy is ancient, and seems to follow tradition. we have the option to pit the arguments against each other, something that feels a little flimsy, but eventually enough guys turn to the point where we have more not guilty votes than guilty. we manage to extract information about the cost of Beppo's omnibus and that there was possibly one missing person, but otherwise it just seems like a waste of time. again I don't hate it, but I don't want to drag trials out any more than they already are. Van Zieks gets mad and takes off his cape. looks like he's recognized that we might actually be a decent opponent and is ready to respond in kind. I still don't see any evidence at all that suggests we're going to get off here, but I'm sure we'll conjure something out of thin air soon! --- xyzzy</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1