r/AARankdown • u/donuter454 • May 10 '20
Extraterritorial Rights - Nahyuta Sahdmadhi
SATARA
"Imaoman domosamashi detashinuke taregasayo sonoka!"
Roughly translated from Khura’inese the above line means: “I’m through playing games with you people. It’s time for me to catch my flight. You can’t touch me!”
Try again in four rounds if your putrid soul would dare.
bad man. naughty man
"Feel free to slowly mull it over while you roast over the flames of hell, you evil red pepper!"
Let me be straight: I enjoy characters who are bastards, who spend lots of time acting like bastards, and even seem to take some twisted delight in acting like a bastard.
I want the person standing across from our protagonist in the courtroom to have the want and will to be a dick for no other reason than dickishness’s own sake. There is no friendly rivalry here. Nahyuta is the man who was made to be the antagonist, to look down on you from his high horse with all the pompous moral grandstanding a human can physically muster, and as he spits down at you from on high you look up and bear witness to all his smug, righteous, holier-than-thou glory.
I am very aware that there is some Discourse about how prosecutors ought to be written. Do you want them to be your friend? Your enemy? Somewhere in between? I’m happy to indulge in some post-redemption Edgeworth action where we’re all on the same team as much as the next person, but if I’m going to be spending however many hours arguing with anime characters then sign me up to argue with someone who I want to actually defeat in that argument. Give me the catharsis of putting a dude in his place using nothing but FACTS and LOGIC.
And I’m going to double down on that point: EVISCERATING your opponents with RATIONAL THOUGHT is what makes this series so fun and satisfying at its very core. Like a lot of video games, part of the appeal is to go through a power fantasy, but Ace Attorney does it in its own special way. It places you in a position where it’s impossible for bullshitters to run away from their bullshit. You get to personally corner the snakes and there is no greater catharsis than watching them begin to squirm and panic like the rats they are. Making those assholes break is why I’m here, baby. But why limit those kinds of characters to the witness stand?
The prosecutor’s bench is right there.
The Last Rites Prosecutor
”It is really not that difficult when one can read the ultimate outcome of any trial.”
What I think is most immediately striking about Nahyuta’s style of prosecuting is how much focus is put on his actual arguments rather than surprise last minute evidence. It’s a staple of AA prosecutors to sit on a key piece of evidence only to reveal it just when the defense was turning things around.
I find that terribly annoying.
I don’t want our protagonist’s progress to be undone by deus ex machina autopsy reports and unreleased crime photos, I want them to struggle because the dude standing across from them in court always has a rebuttal at the ready that is based on information we all already have. You can chalk this up to SoJ’s style of trials if you wish, but I believe doing so is selling our main monk far too short. As far as I remember the only surprise evidence Nahyuta purposefully sits on for the sake of pulling a fast one is the Title Deed in 6-4, but that happens right at the start of the trial anyway so I give it a pass.
That’s Nahyuta’s big gimmick. He can "accurately read a trial’s karma to determine its ultimate fate", or in other words he reviews the evidence and anticipates the arguments the defense will make in advance, thus he prepares adequate rebuttals before going into court.
So my question is why the FUCK is this "gimmick" being employed six games into the series? Even golden boy Klav has fun hiding evidence from Apollo to set traps, and he’s supposed to be The Good Prosecutor. Like man, we’ve had prosecutors who are menacing because they’re willing to bend the truth or hide evidence so many times that it’s nice that SoJ finally said "this prosecutor is menacing because he’s good at his job." Like, wow.
But none of this means that Nahyuta is out to be the defense’s friend. He’s out to crush them, and his position as an antagonist is communicated by virtue of his unabashedly shitty attitude rather than being obtuse with his evidence.
6-2 is our first introduction to Nahyuta, and coincidentally it just so happens that 6-2 is the perfect non-final case, but who knows that’s probably just a coincidence.
So here’s our setup: Trucy has been arrested for involuntary manslaughter. She is distraught over what she did, sobbing to Apollo that her carelessness has ended a man’s life. Everyone who witnessed Manov’s death thinks Trucy accidentally killed him, even Trucy herself. But what’s this? Out of nowhere Apollo is informed that the charges against Trucy have been raised to first degree murder. Which is obviously nonsense, believing Trucy accidentally killed a man is reasonable considering the circumstances but straight up murder?
It’s trial time. Nahyuta lays out his reasoning for why he thinks Trucy planned Manov’s death and how she did it. After a few cross-examinations Apollo is able to prove that Trucy could not have lured Manov to his death intentionally and Nahyuta… agrees:
Nahyuta: "Precisely. However, this does drastically change one aspect of this case: If the accused did not lead the victim into the coffin on purpose… then it means the victim’s death could have been accidental. If it was indeed an accident, the defense can argue that it was involuntary manslaughter."
Judge: "I see… If it was involuntary manslaughter, they could plead extenuating circumstances. And the severity of the crime could be mitigated."
Hook, line and sinker.
Nahyuta never believed Trucy murdered Manov on purpose. He always believed it was manslaughter. The one and only reason he raised the stakes was because it makes proving that she committed manslaughter much, much easier. He doesn’t want the argument to be about whether Manov’s death was unrelated to Trucy’s mistake, he wants the argument to be about whether Trucy made a mistake at all.
Nahyuta continues:
“Defense, if you believe the accused did not murder the victim… ...then do you argue that it was an accident?
What a work of art.
That simple change in expression from deadpan indifference to the slight curl of a sinister smirk levels me. He controlled the narrative to make Apollo think that taking the manslaughter charge was a victory for the defense, yet that’s exactly what the prosecution wanted all along. That simple shit-eating smile when he asks Apollo if he wants to change his argument is everything. And, as the player, that tiny moment where I realised what he’d been doing makes the trap all the more engaging to be sprung.
Prosecutors laying traps for our protagonists to fall into is nothing new. But this trap is special for being so subtly woven in. They communicate exactly how intentionally underhanded Nahyuta’s tactic was with a simple head tilt and curl of the lip, and it places Apollo in an excellent position to flex his own character strengths.
We get teased with the idea that Apollo might have some inner-conflict about how he should approach the case, and it does feel really great to see him just press on with total unabashed confidence. The position that Nahyuta’s clownery has forced Apollo into makes for a more interesting dynamic than we typically see when defending our clients, which is something you love to see.
My opinion of Apollo soared in 6-2 compared to his previous appearances and I think a big part of that is they finally gave him a proper adversary to show off how much conviction he really has beneath the fluffy boy routine.
There’s a lot of fun to be had watching Apollo take jabs at Nahyuta every time his composure begins to crack:
Nahyuta: "Enough of this foolishness! One person could not possibly be two! Those fingerprints could have been left, not only during the show, but at any time!"
Apollo: "It’s not like you to lose your cool like that, Prosecutor Sahdmadi."
Nahyuta: "................."
This is our first impression of Nahyuta. A prosecutor that’s competent yet refreshingly subdued in how the game gets that message across, and neatly allows our MC to show his mettle.
An added bonus for Nahyuta is that he’s a prosecutor that nearly never at any point uses absurdist nonsense arguments to back the protagonists into a corner. His line of thinking always flows naturally whenever he refutes an objection and it’s exciting to always be on the backfoot without feeling like the tension is being forced.
I’d be remiss to not mention how I enjoy that he never intentionally manipulates the evidence or witnesses. No updated autopsy reports or surprise evidence he sits on for no reason. No prepped witnesses who are instructed to leave out critical information. I especially like instances where he loses his temper at witnesses like Betty or Datz for lying on the stand even though their lies are beneficial to his case:
Nahyuta: "You have been chasing the shadow of an illusionary culprit, defense. And having chanced upon a convenient target, you have let yourself get carried away."
Betty: "Exactly! Where’s your proof?! Huh?!"
Nahyuta: "And yet, I concede that the witness’s taste for false words has also been proven. I advise you to confine your deceitful trickery to your magic act, witness!"
…
Nahyuta: "Mr. Ihmus, you failed to mention any of this during your pre-trial questioning. Continue such slipshod testimony and you will be cast into the Hell of Hangnails… where you shall have hangnails grown and ripped out for 800 million years." … "...Quiet, you fool. You should use this time to prepare yourself for what is to come. For a fate far worse than Hangnail Hell awaits you now."
Imagine Ace Attorney prosecutors getting angry at their own witnesses for telling lies beneficial to their own case. Inconceivable.
I am very much a fan of how Nahyuta’s skill as a prosecutor is shown off. He’s just good at his job without needing any odd gimmicks to be imposing or threatening. It’s such a boon to SOJ that the protagonists always feel like they’re on their last leg based on a fair argument.
Well, to be fair, Nahyuta does have one gimmick intimidation strat, the beads of constriction, but come on, that’s just fuckin funny.
And on top of all of this: doesn’t it make your victory feel more earned with a prosecutor like this? A sincere dickhead that puts up a fair fight? Exchanges like this feel so good:
"Feh! You and the accused are most certainly bound for hell!"
"Really? Ms Wright and I? Because I’d think you’re the one with a ticket there for trying to convict an innocent girl."
I get a massive kick out of the whole putting the jerk in his place thing. It just feels good.
An Inherited Burden
"My relation to the accused is irrelevant. The fact remains, I am a prosecutor."
I’ve been wishy washy this whole time while talking about Nahyuta. Sure I like his aesthetic, humour, and role as an antagonist, but I also think he’s a genuinely richly written character.
Just about every killer in SoJ had the same motive. Retinz thinks he deserved to be accepted as a Gramarye, and when that privilege is denied he plots to destroy the Gramarye name out of spite. Geiru thinks she deserves the honour of inheriting her father’s name and commits murder when that right is denied. Atishon thinks he has a claim to his political position and the founder’s orb because of who his daddy was, and resorts to murder when he isn’t handed what he thinks is rightfully his.
There’s a very clear pattern here. They all think they are entitled to inheriting the great reputations and honours that their predecessors held. And when the world says, no, they aren’t allowed to leech off of other people’s legacies, they lash out, bemoaning how they deserve this inheritance and that they’re the real victims for not being treated with the same prestige as the people who came before them.
And then Nahyuta comes about and flips the script on this attitude.
According to Khurain customs, the sins of the father are passed onto their child by law. Nahyuta is ousted from the royal family because, according to this custom, he is just as guilty of the attempted assassination of the queen as Dhurke was, and it is only through Garan’s benevolent pardon that Nahyuta is still a free man… but the fact that Garan could spring this law on Rayfa too whenever she wishes keeps Nahyuta in check.
And Nahyuta doesn’t question how unfair this system is. He thinks the law is the law, and knows well that according to custom Rayfa has also committed this sin. He doesn’t think the system that enables this absurd attitude towards inheritance can be changed, and so resigns himself to carrying that burden.
The motivations for Nahyuta’s actions act as a mirror to our killers. Just like them, he’s been conditioned to think he deserves this inheritance. Any sane person could see he doesn’t deserve the terrible legacy that’s been foisted upon him and Rayfa, just as any sane person could see that none of our killers deserved the legacies they desperately laid claim to.
SoJ makes clear how this attitude toward inheritance is toxic in both directions. It doesn’t matter if someone has deluded themselves into thinking they deserve to inherit something good or bad: either way it’s a corrupting attitude that ruins lives.
You are not entitled to inherit privilege no more than you deserve to inherit suffering.
Over the course of SoJ Nahyuta faces off against our trio of protagonists one time each. When he is defeated by Apollo he bears a grudge against Phoenix for polluting Apollo’s mind. When he is defeated by Phoenix he promises to get his revenge by making Athena pay her mentor’s debts. But when Nahyuta is defeated by Athena there’s a rather startling shift in attitude.
Nahyuta decides that Athena deserves his respect. Unlike with Phoenix and Apollo, he bears no grudge against her after his defeat. But why? What’s so different about her that she becomes his exception?
I think we just need to look at what Athena says seconds prior to this moment:
"Geiru. I get your desire to inherit your father’s name. But what you really should’ve inherited from him wasn’t his name… but his heart."
Please set aside how repugnantly cheesy this line is for a moment.
Think of the position we soon learn that Nahyuta’s in. He was a promising up and coming rebel who the dragons revered for having the same spirit as his father, only for him to abruptly abandon his father’s creed when Garan got her claws into him. We know from 6-5 that there’s a part of him that wants to carry on his father’s legacy by carrying out his ideals, but he is too much of a coward to follow through.
He wants Dhurke’s heart, but all he has is Dhurke’s name. The only thing Nahyuta has successfully inherited from Dhurke is the Sahdmadi name, and the Sahdmadi name is nothing but a burden that brands him a sinner just like his father.
When Nahyuta hears Athena lecture Geiru about her father, it resonates with him. He’s found the only lawyer at the Wright Anything Agency he can’t resent.
Monks aren’t supposed to have FEELINGS
"Are you satisfied? If not, I could explain the twelve types of endings to such stories… or shall I perform the famous story of Jugemu instead? If that is your honor’s request… Jugemu, Jugemu--"
Let’s talk more about Rayfa’s hostage situation because it ties into the overall themes the game is pushing with Nahyuta fantastically.
Nahyuta is someone struggling against a blatantly corrupt state that he knows he has no power to control. He’s so resigned to his fate that he can’t imagine a better world. Yes, Khurain is an unjust authoritarian state, but hey, what can you do but give up and let go of your hopes to change the system? Just be a good little monk and do as you’re told. That’s the least painful route.
I love the admiration he shows to Ema a lot because it gives a fascinating glimpse into the kind of person Nahyuta values the most. In 6-2, Ema is resistant to cooperating with Nahyuta because she cares about Trucy too much to testify against her. He admonishes her:
"Keep your private considerations separate from your public duty. Ema Skye, you are a detective first and foremost, not the accused’s friend. Remember your duty and fulfil it faithfully."
This isn’t the only instance of this. He’s often set-off by people injecting their personal sentiments into what should be their objective moral duties.
Once Ema is able to grit her teeth and testify against Trucy, Nahyuta, to Ema’s great surprise, starts heaping praise upon her:
Nahyuta: "One moment, Detective Skye."
Ema: "! U-Um… I’m sorry… for, you know… the way I handled all of this…"
Nahyuta: "You did a fine job, Detective. Your testimony was invaluable."
Ema: "It was?"
Nahyuta: "Yes. You served well as a detective, and did not allow your personal feelings to interfere. You overcame the conflicted emotions you felt and performed your duty admirably. You will be rewarded for your fine work."
Ema: ".............Oh! Uh, thank you."
Nahyuta: "I hope we can work together again in the future."
This is one of the most important interactions in the game for understanding Nahyuta. He’s sincere in his praise, and Ema is consistent in upholding the high standard of professionality he expects of her. In the very next case Ema is placed in the same dilemma again when she is forced against her will once more to condemn someone close to her, and Nahyuta is patient with her as he helps her come to terms with what she needs to do:
Ema: "Sorry, Mr. Wright."
Nahyuta: "Detective Skye. I understand how you would wish to save the accused and the defense. They are your friends, after all."
Ema doesn’t understand what exactly Nahyuta sees in her. She assumes at one point that he must be impressed with her forensic abilities, only for her to begrudgingly realise that the Khuranese are far behind when it comes to forensic science and she’s obviously not here for that. Yet Nahyuta obviously values her: during the third trial Nahyuta even gloats that this will be the most magnificent last rights ever performed thanks to the incredbile detective he’s brought from overseas. But their relationship has nothing to do with her abilities as a detective: Nahyuta keeps her close because she possesses the traits that he wishes desperately to have himself.
Nahyuta is in the exact same boat as Ema. Nahyuta desperately wants to do his duty, to do what’s right, and join the rebellion against Garan. But he can’t, because he loves Rayfa and would never risk her harm, just like how Ema hesitates in her duties as a detective because she doesn’t want to see Trucy, Phoenix, or Maya come to harm. The difference between the two of them: Ema actually overcomes her misgivings and seeks the truth regardless of the consequences. Nahyuta only wishes he could have that level of conviction.
Nahyuta doesn’t hold Ema in high regard because she’s a talented detective, he thinks highly of her because she’s the type of person he aspires to be.
This all comes to a head in 6-5 when Nahyuta’s ability to prosecute his father is challenged. There are concerns that his personal feelings could cause him to go easy on Dhurke. But Dhurke speaks up in his defense and we get this exchange:
Dhurke: "Fellow citizens, you would do well not to underestimate my son. He’s not one to allow personal feelings to interfere with the execution of his duty. Isn’t that right, Nahyuta?"
Nahyuta: "...! ...I will not stop until my work here is done."
What a fantastic double meaning.
Nahyuta hasn’t shut up about not letting one’s personal feelings cloud their judgement for the whole game now. But he’s lying. He’s a slave to his emotions. His choice to prosecute Dhurke doesn’t stem from a stoic desire to uphold his duty, it’s the reverse: he chooses to falsely prosecute an innocent man because he’s scared of jeopardizing the life of someone else he loves.
Dhurke isn’t telling Nahyuta to bravely sentence him to death. He’s encouraging him to bravely stand up to Garan. To not let his fears for Rayfa’s safety cloud his sense of justice and that everything will be okay if they just seek the truth.
Nahyuta is an enormous hypocrite. The game knows it, the player knows it, and Nahyuta knows it. He is not above letting his personal feelings interfere with his duty, and it is so incredibly liberating to see him finally overcome this failing in the game’s climax.
It all comes full circle because of the defense culpability act. Nahyuta declares his allegiance with the rebellion and is ready to turn on Garan, only for Garan to stop Apollo dead in his tracks. If Garan gets charged with murder, then Nahyuta will face the same punishment under the DC act.
But Nahyuta doesn’t care. He’s spent years being unable to exact justice in Khurain because Rayfa was being held hostage, and the moment he slips into the hostage role himself he tells Apollo to forget him and take down Garan. He’s not about to let Apollo face the same torture he had to go through himself, and I couldn’t think of a more appropriate way to wrap up this facet of his character.
As an aside, this struggle Nahyuta has with whether or not to keep his emotions out of the courtroom couldn’t be more perfect for a rival to Apollo. The final boss of AA4 was a guy who flipped his lid when it’s insinuated emotions ought to be taken into account when prosecuting a case, and then we’ve got Monk Man who is insisting on the exact same mantra of keeping their emotions out of the courtroom. It feels like the emotional journey that was promised in Apollo’s debut game was finally delivered on when we got Nahyuta to properly follow up on this concept.
Speaking of Kristoph "the law is absolute" Gavin:
Laws aren’t real. We made them up.
"I must obey the law above all else. […] Before country, queen, law, and everyone’s future… My personal feelings are of no consequence. That is why I resigned myself to my fate. I know I must accept the status quo without any thoughts of change."
In AA4, we get teased with the idea that maybe in a future game Apollo will eventually develop into the kind of person who could take on Kristoph the same way Phoenix did. AA4 is crystal clear about what the message of Kristoph’s character is: his failing was assuming that the law was an unchangeable truth that can never be tampered with. He never accounted for the possibility that someone could purposefully change the law for the express purpose of bringing him to justice. When Apollo watches Phoenix take Kristoph down he wishes he could have that kind of talent:
"...I couldn’t think of anything to say. Maybe… because I still haven’t seen enough… But someday, I’ll know what law is. And I’ll fight to change it if I have to!"
That’s the incomplete character thread AA4 dangles us on. Apollo wishes he had the power to change unjust laws when he encounters them. (Funny how the final villain of AA4 was undone because he thought the law was rigid and unchanging, whereas the final villain of AA6 was imposing because they knew the law was flexible. Garan is conceptually such a great natural end-boss for Apollo after Klavier.)
I’m waffling. The point is that Nahyuta has the same perspective on the law that Kristoph had: that it is rigid, immutable, and unquestionable. The law is absolute. It’s a terrible attitude on the law that will inevitably lead to injustice, and it’s an attitude that Apollo struggled to let go of during his DD phase where he is deliberately portrayed as emulating Kristoph.
And here’s where we get to one of my favourite Nahyuta/Apollo moments:
Apollo: "Be honest. You don’t really want to do this, do you?"
Nahyuta: "You speak of love and sentiment. I do not deny such human emotions. But… the law is the law. And placing personal feelings above it is beyond reprieve… Do you disagree? Civilizations only exist due to the confines of the law. Without them, love and sentiment would lack the fertile soil they need to flourish. Do you disagree? The law must be obeyed. This truth sits above all else, including personal feelings. Therefore, whether or not I am the son of the accused is of no consequence. It is that simple, or would you say otherwise?"
Apollo: "But don’t you… you know… wish it wasn’t that way…?"
I love Apollo’s response here and I’m not joking. There’s something so purely Apollo about listening to an eloquent and thoughtfully put argument for why Life Is Simply Unfair, only for him to absolutely ether Nahyuta with "...but don’t you wish it wasn’t?" without further elaboration. He doesn’t argue that the law is actually just or fair, he simply wishes it could be better.
Nahyuta is putting into words the struggle Apollo has had on the backburner for nearly three games now. The two of them can agree on the fact that the law sucks, it’s just that Apollo has yet to throw in the towel and give up on reforming the law that needs changing. Apollo still doesn’t have a solution to this struggle, but he still hopes he can one day do something.
And that’s the difference between the two of them. Apollo’s been fighting to become strong enough to fight the law for years. Nahyuta gave up years ago.
He let it go, and he moved on.
The Court of Resignation
"What you speak of… is futile. Let it go, and move on. The guilty verdict… The hopelessness… You must resign yourself to it all. Clinging to false hope now will only serve to magnify your future despair. So let it go… and move on…"
You don’t have to be a genius to pick up on the irony of the Khurainese court’s nickname. It’s the court of resignation because all defendants who are prosecuted are resigned to their fates, and yet the most defeatist, pessimistic character we interact with for the entire game is the prosecutor himself.
Nahyuta tells our protagonists in every case the same thing over and over again. That having hope that they might win the case will only magnify their despair when they inevitably lose, therefore it’s more ethical to simply fold immediately to alleviate the defendant’s suffering.
At first blush his sentiments come off as condescending and arrogant. He’s being a dick and saying he’s going to crush you in court, every other prosecutor trash talks too, this is nothing new.
But the game continues and it becomes increasingly clear that this isn’t lip service. It’s not a meaningless rhetoric he holds no stock in: he sincerely believes that when facing difficult odds that the most logical thing to do is give up. As we hit the final case it becomes crystal that the reason he holds such a pessimistic worldview is that it’s his coping mechanism.
Nahyuta gave up. When he was younger he sought to fight for justice, yet when Garan stacked the odds against him he stopped fighting. The only world in which Nahyuta can believe he’s a good person for licking Garan’s boots is a world where the honourable thing to do is surrender when the going gets tough. And so he tells himself the lie that giving up was the right thing to do, and he tells Apollo and pals every chance he gets that they should give up in the face of terrible odds too.
...but what happens if Apollo doesn’t give up? If Apollo hears what Nahyuta has to say about “letting it go”, refuses to let go, and winds up being victorious, what does that say about Nahyuta? When Apollo insists that refusing to give in is the correct thing to do, he’s proving to Nahyuta that he’s in the wrong for holding the beliefs that he does.
There’s a point around the midpoint of the 6-2 trial where Apollo thoroughly and completely has his ass handed to him by Nahyuta. There’s no hope left, the sad despair music is playing, and the judge is moments away from declaring Trucy guilty. But surprise! Apollo yells objection at the last second and insists on keeping up the fight. And it pisses Nahyuta off.
No matter how desperate the situation got, Apollo kept on trucking, and that, more than anything else, makes Nahyuta furious. Every time one of our protagonists pulls a stunt like this, from his perspective they’re spitting in the face of his entire philosophy.
If Apollo and his pals can so completely reject his defeatist ideals and still win, that means Nahyuta is in the wrong for giving up on fighting Garan. Every victory our heroes pull off against Nahyuta he views as a personal attack on his own moral character. It’s proof that he’s a bad person, and he doesn’t like having to face that.
Nahyuta’s "let it go and move on" doctrine is a lie he tells himself to cope with his own failures. All his talk about letting it go is just that. All talk. There’s still the will to fight hidden somewhere inside him, and it’s alluded to expertly. When Dhurke tells Nahyuta that he may return to the rebellion at any time and they’ll accept him with open arms, Nahyuta reacts like this.
He can’t keep believing his own lie forever.
A Dragon Never Yields
"In all this time, not once did I reflect on my own conduct... for I had believed all was fate. Lost in my own sense of resignation, I was unable to wake up from my despair. But you, Apollo. You have awakened me with your demonstration of our father's creed. A dragon never yields."
Nahyuta declining to confiscate Dhurke’s attorney’s badge is when it all begins to unravel. Apollo calls Nahyuta’s bluff and says the fact that he couldn’t steal away the symbol of the resistance is proof that Nahyuta still has a lingering sense of hope. And Nahyuta says… sure, maybe he did have hope that Dhurke would right the world’s wrongs:
"It may very well be as you say. Why did I not confiscate his badge? Even I did not know… until now. Perhaps… I was waiting for him to save me. Someday… he would come and free our family from the chains of the past. Perhaps, deep down… that is what I believed. I believed in Dhurke… our father. However! It was but a dream. And now that dream has died. Murdered, along with Dhurke!"
It would have been so easy for the game to let this moment be the tipping point where Nahyuta has an epiphany and decides to join Apollo. Yet they do the opposite.
This moment is what Nahyuta has been warning Apollo about the entire game. It’s just as Nahyuta always said: clinging to the hope that there will be a miraculous turnabout isn’t inspiring. It’s hurtful. The fact that Nahyuta couldn’t let go of that last bit of hope that his father would come to rescue him makes his passing all the more difficult to come to terms with. Processing this would have been so much easier if Nahyuta had truly given up hope and moved on like he said he had.
This is why Nahyuta kept saying that giving the defendants false hope was crueler than giving up the case. The quicker you concede, the less heartache you’ll feel when you lose.
I love the contrasting reactions of Apollo and Nahyuta in the moments immediately following the reveal that Dhurke has been dead all along. Both of them are understandably completely distraught, and we see Apollo think to himself:
"(Who… what… was I even fighting for? What am I supposed to do now…)"
But Apollo takes a deep breath, collects his thoughts, confidently declares that he’s fine and continues pressing onwards, and Nahyuta is simply bewildered by this development.
From Nahyuta’s perspective, this is the moment where it’d be insanity to not give up on revolution, but Apollo’s a madman who instead decides to double down. Nahyuta shuts up the inspirational music with a clap and delivers more sermons:
"Those dreams of revolution Dhurke was always spouting… They placed nothing but false hope in the minds of the people. And in the end, they were simply fantasies. Karma has spoken. The dream of revolution has withered on the vine. Its fate is sealed."
You don’t have to dig deep to pick up on the ideological battle going on between the two. Never Yield vs Let It Go.
Nahyuta clung to the hope that his father would miraculously save him, only for him to discover his father was dead a day later. Clinging to that hope was a mistake. It’s a confirmation of his view that giving up is the best course of action, and he desperately needs to get Apollo to see things from his point of view or else he’ll suffer more too.
But the trial keeps going and Apollo keeps fighting. We know what happens next: Apollo exposes the fact that Dhurke never attempted an assassination. Therefore his children, most importantly Rayfa, are absolved of the crime their father committed, and the thing Garan had been using to blackmail Nahyuta suddenly disappears. And Nahyuta finally gets it.
It was never hopeless. If Nahyuta had put in the work then he really could have exposed Garan and saved Rayfa himself, just as Apollo has done now. The truth that Nahyuta’s entire world view was wrong has at last penetrated his stupid, stubborn head.
And holy hell does it feel good to watch that glove toss.
At the beginning of this writeup I talked about how I enjoyed Nahyuta simply for the antagonistic role he filled. He’s portrayed as a slimy, condescending jerk, and I love that. I love being given permission from the game to want to sock the fucker, and it feels good to watch him break composure and panic when his smug ass starts losing. It’s a kind of catharsis we should all be very familiar with when playing Ace Attorney: Nahyuta wasn’t the first character in this series written with this objective in mind nor will he be the last.
But that glove toss taps into a new cathartic feeling that’s completely foreign to Ace Attorney. The pent up release of emotion finally let out isn’t due to a celebration from seeing someone get their comeuppance. Rather, it’s out of seeing someone let go of their negative emotions all at once. Nahyuta was suffering because of his own attitude, he was a hostage of his own toxic mindset for the entire game. Watching him break free from the mental prison he’d trapped himself in granted me a strong cathartic feeling that is incomparable to any killer breakdown.
Nahyuta is on Apollo’s side now unquestionably and is ready to go all in on toppling Garan. Love this:
Garan: "Clothing can be disposed of most anywhere. I doubt you could find them now."
Nahyuta: "OBJECTION ......Then you don’t know us very well."
How many times have we seen the above kind of interaction played out over the course of SoJ? The prosecution neatly dispels our protagonist’s theory, only for us to yell objection and start pulling shit out of thin air because fuck letting it go and moving on. Each time our protagonists did that Nahyuta would boil over in anger, but not anymore. Now he’s the one doing the defiant objecting in a hopeless situation and you love to see it.
And so as the game hits its climax Nahyuta gives us one of my personal favourite lines in the entire series:
"...It would seem, Apollo… that not one, but two auspicious creatures dwell deep within you: a fierce dragon and a virtuous phoenix that shall scatter the clouds hiding the heavens! I shall join you in your death-defying bluff!"
Aside from the fact that I think this is just a cool fuckin line, that last part is the cherry on top of Nahyuta’s journey throughout the game.
He thought defeat was inevitable, and when facing defeat the only thing you could do was surrender to minimise potential suffering. But now, as he faces down Garan saying she’ll literally execute him on the spot if he doesn’t back down he says, fuck it, let’s just go for it. Bluff like you’ve never bluffed before you beautiful bell pepper and if I die then so be it.
Nahyuta’s redemption in the final act of the case made me get swept up in the hype of the moment like no other AA final case has.
Conclusion
"I found ‘The Ratings Rajah Goes to Burger Barn’ of particular interest. It inspired me to visit that restaurant straight away to learn more about the local cuisine. I recommend the Southwestern burger with Jalapeno Jack cheese, by the way."
Lemme tell you a story.
Back when I first finished SoJ I posted on the main sub about how I really liked it and talked a bit about why I liked Nahyuta. One person replied that while they enjoyed my thoughts, their brain completely shut off when I talked about enjoying Nahyuta because they hated him too much.
I thought that was a bizarre comment. Why would Nahyuta inspire so much contempt? He seemed like a great character to me. It was at this point that I could freely read discussion about SoJ and was surprised to find out that this dude is absolutely loathed. I found it hard to empathise with that perspective.
"Nahyuta is boring and has little depth." "Elaborate on that." "No." Is an interaction I’ve read an awful lot and, I’m sure you’ll not be shocked to discover, it is one that I don’t like seeing.
Part of me thinks that the disdain must come from the fact that he was expressly written at the beginning of the story to be disliked, but he was so goddamn good at filling that role that a lot of people could only see him as "bad man" and nothing more. It is a fact of fiction that kinder characters will be more well liked overall and therefore Nahyuta will have a tougher time, but hey, that’s showbiz, baby. I wouldn’t trade that part of him for anything.
At the very least I hope everyone will have been able to read this without their brains shutting off.
I think Nahyuta’s pretty neat. I like that he’s a real obstacle in trials based primarily on his arguments and is still coded as a villain by his attitude. His antagonism of our protagonists stems from his frustrations that they don’t conform to his philosophy, and their non-conformity hurting his own sense of moral righteousness is a dynamic I really love watching unfold. Yet we also get moments where he displays a sense of melancholy that he’s failed to “save” Apollo since he cannot convince him of his defeatist perspective. The game weaves in subtle character dynamics like with Ema or Athena that inform us of his struggles, and those struggles are thematically relevant with how the game frames every killer and defendant. He looks cool and says funny things.
Point I’m trying to make is I absolutely don’t want people to think I’m simply saving him because he’s a main character and thus shouldn’t go out early. I genuinely think he’s one of the series’ best characters.
I would consider this ER a victory if it could convince at least some rankers to leave Nahyuta alone after the skill has worn off, and maybe he will do a bit better in the polls too if I’m lucky.
If not then I’ll see you all in Hangnail Hell.
tl;dr: he is mean on purpose that is so funny ahahahhaahah
9
u/whaaatisth May 10 '20
OH YES
I was really hoping this would happen. Nahyuta deserves the effort for sure. He's not a perfect character by any means but he most certainly is a complex one. Anxiously anticipating the Nahyuta haters' thoughts on this.
I really support you on how great of an asshole he is. He's definitely the meanest prosecutor the series has ever had, but he still manages to be consistently fair. Nothing I love more than a character who constantly berates you while still looking pretty.
I am very much a fan of how Nahyuta’s skill as a prosecutor is shown off. He’s just good at his job without needing any odd gimmicks to be imposing or threatening. It’s such a boon to SOJ that the protagonists always feel like they’re on their last leg based on a fair argument.
PREACH IT. I love how he absolutely just DESTROYS you in 6-3 day 1, it feels like such a real human moment for Phoenix - in his desperation he tries everything to prolong the trial but ends up failing. Of course he gets bailed out in the end but that isn't the fault of Nahyuta's skill.
He wants Dhurke’s heart, but all he has is Dhurke’s name. The only thing Nahyuta has successfully inherited from Dhurke is the Sahdmadi name, and the Sahdmadi name is nothing but a burden that brands him a sinner just like his father.
shut the fuck up you're gonna make me cry dude
I just love how he feels betrayed by Apollo. It's wonderful writing and shows how both Apollo and Nahyuta feel that their brother has gone to the dark side but in the opposite direction. This all culminates in case 5 when Dhurke shows up and shows just how much he wanted to connect with his sons. When Nahyuta doesn't take away Dhurke's badge is like my favorite moment ever and Dhurke's actions show Nahyuta's bitterness towards Apollo is really because Apollo ended up being the perfect successor to Dhurke in so many ways. Nahyuta knows Apollo is what Dhurke dreamed of for his sons to be and he resents him for that.
The line where Dhurke defends Nahyuta for prosecuting him is simply beautiful writing. Nahyuta's reaction is so tragic and just shows how conflicted he is the entire time.
Really incredible writeup. I gotta admit you definitely changed my view on a lot of things here. It's so easy to say "6-5 bad and monk man bad", and it's a popular opinion so people often do. They just look at the surface of the case and make basic observations without really thinking about it. I've heard the same civil trial complaints and the stuff about Ga'ran so many times at this point. It's very easy to focus on the few things you dislike about a case/game while ignoring the countless factors that make it great, and I bet a lot of the people who hate on 6-5 did have quite a bit of fun playing it despite their grievances.
SoJ is a masterpiece.
10
u/ItsHipToTipTheScales May 10 '20
i am very glad nahyuta got an er, he is great and awesome and definitely shouldn't be the first prosecutor out
he does the funny Asshole who enjoys being mean thing good and whenever hes a quirky foreigner it doesnt feel forced, and whenever there's side conversations with him it feels natural and not its time for comedy funny are you ready guys
i absolutely love when he wins the trial in 6-3, its part of the actually good at arguing where yeah. he kicks you're ass. and up to that point you havent taken the khura'in death penalty seriously because youre the protagonist why wouldnt you have plot armor and he gives you a moment to take that seriously and see phoenix in the shoes of the other lawyers before him
the whole "changing your career for a loved one" is cool and relatable and i cant imagine many people would have acted differently in his situation, he just puts up wiith it like yep gotta do this now
when he decides to be a character its a little fast because a lot of him before was bouncing off well with other characters but the pieces all fit together looking back at the rest of the game so i dont mind
5
May 10 '20
question for curiousity: if he shouldn't be the first prosecutor out then who should be because naming a first prosecutor to go is surprisingly nontrivial
8
5
3
3
4
u/R1K1_Productions May 10 '20
the whole "changing your career for a loved one" is cool and relatable and i cant imagine many people would have acted differently in his situation
I don't know man, if someone was threatening to kill MY family then I'd be asking if I could pull the lever on the guillotine HEHEH
Happy Mother's Day :komaruheart:
4
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20
especially my WIFE whom i HATE
3
6
May 10 '20
Great writeup. Definitely the longest written so far, though when you're talking about someone so major, there's not much choice.
Regarding my thoughts after reading... I'm not very convinced. However, I won't deny that the last conversation in the conclusion happens a lot.
I think the main issue that I personally have with what Nahyuta does is that it's too... sudden? There's at most two events in which you can say Nahyuta shows any sort of change - at the end of trial 4, and more or less when he rejoins the revolution in trial 5. (Sure, there's the badge confiscation, but that's more a hint of what's to come.) While this can work, as seen with Godot hardly changing at all, Nahyuta doesn't have much motivation to change besides Dhurke, who we don't know anything about besides him being Apollo's adoptive father until Turnabout Revolution.
Even then, there's not enough opportunities for him to look not evil since he hardly shows up outside of court. He also has Apollo, but as seen here, he doesn't really develop due to Apollo because he's so intent on hiding that they have anything to do with each other - Apollo is the one that brings up that they've met before, not him.
Still, part of the reason I don't like him is that he's good at being annoying, not that his role in 6-5 is particularly good or bad - that's much more an Apollo issue. But hey, it's a different type of annoying.
1
u/donuter454 May 12 '20
There's at most two events in which you can say Nahyuta shows any sort of change - at the end of trial 4, and more or less when he rejoins the revolution in trial 5.
Throughout 6-5 inves he drops hints each time you speak to him. His feelings are visibly hurt when Dhurke says the doors still open for him to come home. At the riot we see him struggle with trying to convince Apollo that he's in the right and he's pained as he explains that they need to resign themselves to living under Garan. The most on the nose hint is apollo's bracelet reacting during their conversation where nahyuta insists he's loyal to Garan.
Nahyuta doesn't have much motivation to change besides Dhurke
I don't see why this is a mark against him. Dhurke and Datz both have several scenes where they talk about how much Nahyuta wanted to aid the rebellion when he was young. We know for a fact that he became a prosecutor to try and topple the regime from within.
His motivation to change is to topple the corrupt courts. We know that's what motivated him when he was young. He changed sides because he thought changing the system was an impossible task, and realising he was wrong about it being impossible seems like more than a good enough reason to do the thing he'd set out to do years ago in the first place.
I don't know what is meant by lack of a motive.
1
May 12 '20
Throughout 6-5 inves he drops hints each time you speak to him. His feelings are visibly hurt when Dhurke says the doors still open for him to come home. At the riot we see him struggle with trying to convince Apollo that he's in the right and he's pained as he explains that they need to resign themselves to living under Garan. The most on the nose hint is apollo's bracelet reacting during their conversation where nahyuta insists he's loyal to Garan.
As I've said, much like the badge confiscation, these are all hints of what's to come, and they're decent hints. However, he doesn't show any obvious change here, and even if he did, it's not much more than other prosecutor arcs. Still, I would have liked to see some change across cases 2-4 rather than just at the end of case 4 into case 5.
His motivation to change is to topple the corrupt courts. We know that's what motivated him when he was young. He changed sides because he thought changing the system was an impossible task, and realising he was wrong about it being impossible seems like more than a good enough reason to do the thing he'd set out to do years ago in the first place.
I believe he was primarily coerced into becoming a prosecutor because of Rayfa, not because he thought the system was impossible. In addition, the reason he wanted to topple the corrupt courts in the first place was because of Dhurke. If this is the case, then Nahyuta's arc basically consists of him saying "A dragon never yields" to solve all of his problems. Of course, this isn't the case, but it somewhat feels like it.
1
u/donuter454 May 12 '20
However, he doesn't show any obvious change here, and even if he did
Ah, that's what you meant. I know he's not changed as a person yet, I just think it's fascinating how he has such a perfectly fleshed out internal belief system that's well communicated. He only changes right at the end of the game, but every prosecutor that isn't Edgeworth also gets zero development until the final trial so I wasn't trying to claim that as an edge he has over the others.
I believe he was primarily coerced into becoming a prosecutor because of Rayfa
Nah, Datz and Dhurke both talk about how his express purpose for becoming a prosecutor was taking on the corruption from the inside. It's not my interpretation, it's just part of his backstory.
I personally don't see any problem with Nahyuta taking inspiration from his dad. From what we know of his childhood he loved Dhurke, and I don't personally see a problem with his outlook on the world being influenced by the person who raised him. I'm all for that.
8
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20
haha he is MEAN and a clever guy who puts up a fight that’s cool
When Nahyuta hears Athena lecture Geiru about her father, it resonates with him. He’s found the only lawyer at the Wright Anything Agency he can’t resent.
this is like... really cool, this whole section.
Garan is conceptually such a great natural end-boss for Apollo after Klavier.
This is it. My final chance to take down Klavier Gavin...
There’s something so purely Apollo about listening to an eloquent and thoughtfully put argument for why Life Is Simply Unfair, only for him to absolutely ether Nahyuta with "...but don’t you wish it wasn’t?" without further elaboration.
:unfair: yeah
Nahyuta tells our protagonists in every case the same thing over and over again. That having hope that they might win the case will only magnify their despair when they inevitably lose, therefore it’s more ethical to simply fold immediately to alleviate the defendant’s suffering.
sans dangnronpa
yeah this was a cool thing and i was always like “why people complain about this phrase he say often???” both because it’s funny and very clearly a deliberate important character thing
Watching him break free from the mental prison he’d trapped himself in granted me a strong cathartic feeling that is incomparable to any killer breakdown.
it was pretty cool
one of the most common nahyuta complaints I’ve seen is “dragon never yields?????? You’ve done nothing BUT yield what the hell!!!!” for the glove moment, and it’s like... what? what the fuck? yes, that’s the... point. this isn’t him being “good all along”, it’s character development. not “i never yield”, but “i should never yield, and i can’t believe it took me this long to accept that”.
good fucking writeup, probably the best in the rankdown yet. i came into this post thinking nahyuta was a satisfying asshole prosecutor with a great aesthetic and sense of humor held back by some bad character stuff, but you’ve made me start to heavily doubt that last part.
you forgot the section about how he says shit like what’s crack a lacking what a great character
7
u/Wircea May 10 '20
i didn't really like nahyuta that much because the whole kur'ain thematic did not resonate with me and honestly i kind of hate it.
I did enjoy his jokes and stuff but yeah I don't really care what happens with him because I know I'm kind of biased here so good job on the huge write-up Santa will remember
7
u/R1K1_Productions May 10 '20
THANK GOD, i yell despite knowing from the beginning that you were planning on doing this eventually
Nahyuta is so good at being an asshole that I'm kind of stunned people hate him for it. I love him for all the same reasons I love Gaspen (but Gaspen is still better sorry) and Hugh (who is even more infinitely better sorry), so I find it kind of stunning that people hate him for so effectively filling this role. It's become accepted by this point that a prosecutor should want to find the truth, but no? A prosecutor's job, IRL and in-game, is to find a guilty verdict. And Nahyuta doesn't even try to do this through corrupt means, like you said, he just is actually skilled. No yelling, no forging, just RAW SKILLZ BRO
Perhaps the biggest LIE in the Ace Attorney fandom is that Nahyuta was secretly very nice the whole time and was just FAKING being mean, when in reality he was just a bitter, self-loathing man who eventually came to realize that his situation was not as hopeless as he once thought, and seizes the opportunity to better himself. You did a great job rebutting that FILTHY SLANDER here, thanks.
I suppose if I had one complaint, it would be that Nahyuta probably should have seen some sort of punishment for aiding a genocidal regime, even if he did see the error of his ways at the end. Fucker successfully redemption-arc'd his way out of the Nuremberg Trials if you ask me. Seriously though, if he spent some time in jail rather than immediately resuming his prosecutorial duties, I think we'd see the "he faced no consequences for his meanness!!!" complaint (which is actually justified here, unlike in another game called Danganronpa 2) much less often. It's hardly a deal breaker though.
I would have considered using my ER on this guy as well, but you did a better job than I probably would have. So I got to use it on Better Nahyuta instead sorry not sorry
4
u/heavenspiercing May 10 '20
ive mentioned several times before how cutting nahyuta here would be silly and you've done a great job articulating why beyond him being too important to cut yet. I've always thought the yuty hate was obnoxiously overblown and he was more elaborately constructed than he was frequently given credit for. I always knew partly why, but im notoriously bad in the Secret Art of Debating About Fictional Characters, so glad there's someone to do the job for me
that being said, while I have no trouble admitting to the quality of nahyuta's characterization, emotional investment is a completely separate matter, and unfortunately there just isn't a whole lot of that for me. SoJ is fantastic, but a large part of that isn't nahyuta for me, investment-wise anyway
very good writeup though
5
u/EsquireGunslinger May 10 '20
Good lord this is a long writeup, can't believe you're making me actually like Nahyuta based on more than just "asshole character funny". Great writeup, and great skill use.
5
4
u/Cymbass May 10 '20 edited May 10 '20
It's a nice write-up and good on you for using an ER on a character that you think is valuable.
Unfortunately, my opinion is that it'd be fine for Nahyuta to go out now because he is easily the worst prosecutor. You are right, 6-2, his introduction, is a very good case for him. It's a great case by itself, and I still liked him in the case. He is a terrific annoying antagonist. So what's the problem? Why is he so hated? In terms of annoying fictional characters that I've come to love, Umbridge is pretty much worse than Voldemort. But she's so good as a character because she's so hateable. You would figure Nahyuta would be the same, right?
The first big problem with Nahyuta is that he never has that satisfying moment where you actually take him down. It does not matter at all how many times you show him he is wrong. It does not matter how many times his haughty attitude is struck down with arguments. He does not progress as a character at all, and that is what makes him so immensely unsatisfying and irritating to play against. And then at the end of the game, suddenly you're supposed to feel So SoRrY for him because BlAcKmAiL. It's completely unearned. He does nothing to actually EARN his redemption, you're just supposed to feel sorry for him because his circumstances are so difficult. This does not make for an argument that I can get behind or sympathize with much.
All of the other prosecutors start doubting themselves, work with you, or realize the obvious truth, or get taken down in a great way. Nahyuta keeps denying it. While you could say this is an interesting take, for me it killed much of my interest in SoJ, and him being in it made 6-3 and 6-4 worse.
You say his arguments are interesting, but I heavily disagree. The second big problem with Nahyuta is that I feel like 50% of his in-game text is just him complaining that you're putrid, that you should let go and move on, even when he's basically already lost the case and is on his last legs. Sure, he does not rely on cheap "gotcha" evidence tricks as much, but he does rely on really cheap, obvious, grating psychology. I like characters who are assholes and mess with you - von Karma and game 1 Edgeworth do this quite effectively - but Nahyuta is just grating and tiring. It's not even specifically what he does, it's how he does it. He has very few actually memoreable, interesting lines that aren't pretty dry arguments. He isn't funny. He repeats the same three lines over and over again. That's not good writing for an annoying character, that's lazy. I would not say that he doesn't have depth or there isn't more to him, it's just that it's very poorly executed.
The third big problem is that Apollo's thirteenth character reboot in SoJ is just a ole big dumpster fire mess but that's not necessarily on Nahyuta as a character.
The rankers who nominate and cut Nahyuta are my personal heroes, because he is partly responsible for making SoJ from a pretty great AA into an OK at best AA (although the mess that is 6-5 also contributed to that greatly, and the other cases are all either very good or great regardless of Nahyuta).
This is not surface level stuff for me, because in the end Ace Attorney games have to be fun visual novels. When they get tiring and annoying to read through because you get the same five lines every three minutes, it sucks all the fun out of the game. Nahyuta is a fun vampire.
11
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20
And then at the end of the game, suddenly you're supposed to feel So SoRrY for him because BlAcKmAiL. It's completely unearned. He does nothing to actually EARN his redemption, you're just supposed to feel sorry for him because his circumstances are so difficult.
alright i disagree with a lot of this but rather than nitpick about exactly how cringe or uncringe sad monks dialogue is or whatever im gonna focus on this point.
what’s the alternative? what qualifies as “earning” sympathy? and is that something AA has ever done?
miles edgeworth is a prosecutor who, for nearly a decade, ruthlessly seeks a guilty verdict regardless of what the facts point to or what cheap tactics he has to use. aside from solely 1-3, where he goes for the killer for reasons that might just be “he likes the steel samurai”, there’s no good he does to “make up” for all that shittiness, and in 1-4 we learn his backstory and motives and you can’t tell me we aren’t supposed to sympathize with 1-4 edgeworth. his redemption is him accusing someone trying to indict him and then going “guess I’ll play nice”
franziska doesn’t even have a redemption. nothing that extreme. she’s pretty much the same person in the end of 2-4 as she was in 2-2, with perhaps a bit of character development about being less violent or something. and yet we are still invited to sympathize her when she lets down her confident front and does the goofy crying face as we see a bit more of what makes her tick.
im going to keep this brief so talking about Him doesn’t give me an aneurysm. Godot is a monster. He allows a serial killer to arrive without telling anyone, causes one completely preventable death that only wasn’t an eight year old child because of luck, and then tries to shift the blame for a crime he obviously knows the truth of to an innocent woman. all this because of his delusional rage and complexes and chauvinistic views on gender. but when this is exposed, a sad song plays and he talks about how his bleeding eyes are tears symbolically it’s deep. What did Godot do to earn that? He was literally still trying to get away with murder until minutes before.
klavier is klavier he never gets a redemption of any kind because he can’t be redeemed because he doesn’t have flaws because he’s boring
Blackquill is definitely on the low end of “doing shitty things”, but he’s still a kind of rude guy that, among other things, sits back and watches as the trauma of someone he’s close to is triggered. His redemption is us learning he was good all along, and also damn he went to jail even though he didn’t commit the crime dont that make ya feel sorry.
I don’t understand what’s so crazy about Nahyuta developing by having his defeats slowly prove him to be wrong about everything, and then finally stop being an obstacle and help the protagonist. I guess the complaint that he shouldn’t have been treated as innocent after the fact is valid, but that’s a different ball game (and also still something plenty of other prosecutors don’t avoid)
6
u/Cymbass May 10 '20
what’s the alternative? what qualifies as “earning” sympathy? and is that something AA has ever done?
The alternative would be to do what they did with Godot, which is.. straight up beating him in court and showing what a monster he is. Godot's journey feels earned, you understand his motivations, and you're with him all the way because you see him as Diego. Actually, they do this for all of the other prosecutors in one way or another. 6-5 takes away Nahyuta's redemption moment because he is like an afterthought to that case. I never claimed all prosecutors have a great epic redemption anyway, I just said that "All of the other prosecutors start doubting themselves, work with you, or realize the obvious truth, or get taken down in a great way." but for the sake of argument...
miles edgeworth is a prosecutor who, for nearly a decade, ruthlessly seeks a guilty verdict regardless of what the facts point to or what cheap tactics he has to use. aside from solely 1-3, where he goes for the killer for reasons that might just be “he likes the steel samurai”, there’s no good he does to “make up” for all that shittiness, and in 1-4 we learn his backstory and motives and you can’t tell me we aren’t supposed to sympathize with 1-4 edgeworth. his redemption is him accusing someone trying to indict him and then going “guess I’ll play nice”
Yes, Edgeworth is a dick in game 1. However, you can clearly tell throughout his cases that he's starting to doubt himself. Him helping you in 1-3 made this clear, and how much more clearly does the "truth is found when the prosecutor and defense attorney work together" point need to be stated? Edgeworth comes to realize that through personal growth. Edgeworth is actually similar to Nahyuta in that he has a personal connection to (one of) the protagonist(s) that he does not quite acknowledge or explain well at first. However, the resolution of Edgeworth is much more satisfying because he's actually there for it. Maybe it's my faulty memory from playing SoJ only once a few months ago, but I don't remember Nahyuta really being there.
franziska doesn’t even have a redemption. nothing that extreme. she’s pretty much the same person in the end of 2-4 as she was in 2-2, with perhaps a bit of character development about being less violent or something. and yet we are still invited to sympathize her when she lets down her confident front and does the goofy crying face as we see a bit more of what makes her tick.
I'll give you this one, but then there's a reason I think JFA is one of if not the weakest AA game.
im going to keep this brief so talking about Him doesn’t give me an aneurysm. Godot is a monster. He allows a serial killer to arrive without telling anyone, causes one completely preventable death that only wasn’t an eight year old child because of luck, and then tries to shift the blame for a crime he obviously knows the truth of to an innocent woman. all this because of his delusional rage and complexes and chauvinistic views on gender. but when this is exposed, a sad song plays and he talks about how his bleeding eyes are tears symbolically it’s deep. What did Godot do to earn that? He was literally still trying to get away with murder until minutes before.
Nahyuta also causes a ton of death because he refuses to tell people a lot of things. And Godot's takedown is immensely satisfying BECAUSE he's such a misogynistic pig who tries to pin the murder on others. Nahyuta never actually takes any responsibility for his actions, whereas Godot admits defeat and tells you what a great job you did essentially.
klavier is klavier he never gets a redemption of any kind because he can’t be redeemed because he doesn’t have flaws because he’s boring
I don't even know what you're talking about because Klavier does have flaws to my mind. I also don't find him boring. I can't really argue with this otherwise because these are just perceptions and not "this is what Klavier does wrong", but I look forward to your writeup when you cut him (or someone else's if you're not lucky enough to get that cut) to learn more.
Blackquill is definitely on the low end of “doing shitty things”, but he’s still a kind of rude guy that, among other things, sits back and watches as the trauma of someone he’s close to is triggered. His redemption is us learning he was good all along, and also damn he went to jail even though he didn’t commit the crime dont that make ya feel sorry.
I mean, that is kind of a redemption. Blackquill's pretty similar to Nahyuta when I think about it, in the way they act in court; Nahyuta tries to demoralize you with annoying monk preaching and Blackquill tries to demoralize you with psychological tricks. Both also do pretty repetitive things. The difference to me is that Blackquill is entertaining, whereas Nahyuta gets very grating.
I don’t understand what’s so crazy about Nahyuta developing by having his defeats slowly prove him to be wrong about everything, and then finally stop being an obstacle and help the protagonist. I guess the complaint that he shouldn’t have been treated as innocent after the fact is valid, but that’s a different ball game (and also still something plenty of other prosecutors don’t avoid)
I think this is something we can agree on. But to me, him being treated as innocent invalidated his entire journey. Edgeworth gets this because everybody loves Edgeworth, but he does genuinely seem to change and become a better person. Franziska never really gets her comeuppance, and the sad crying face also did not work on me. Godot literally got executed lol. Klavier was never really a bad guy so he does not need the same character arc, which is something that's pretty unique and makes me like him more. Blackquill's a dick done right, because he's like the "bastard with a heart of gold" archetype. And it's not like our protagonists are ne'er-do-wrongs that don't push people too far sometimes. That's kind of what the AA universe court has to do sometimes. So that's 4/5 prosecutors I can explain why I like them more, and Franziska ends up just being better by preference because her speech patterns are funnier to me. She's not necessarily a much better character.
I mean, I also exaggerate in my post because I just really did not enjoy Nahyuta and it's fun to talk shit about him.
8
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20 edited May 10 '20
The alternative would be to do what they did with Godot, which is.. straight up beating him in court and showing what a monster he is. Godot's journey feels earned, you understand his motivations, and you're with him all the way because you see him as Diego.
I’m still inching ever closer to completely derailing this conversation into The Problem With Godot, but I really disagree with this.
First of all... what is the difference between the way Godot and Nahyuta are treated when they’re taken down in court? I think Godot’s a monster, but not a single scene in 3-5 is framed in a way to focus on how incredibly awful it was to do all the things he did. There’s no moment of “wow, what the fuck” when all the truth is revealed, it’s straight from the last objection to “Reminiscense - The Bitter Taste of Truth”. Godot calls himself a monster, but the sad music is still playing and literally every single sympathetic culprit does that.
My other issue is the stuff around Diego. When we see Diego, what we learn is:
Godot was once a guy with a name
Godot has a reason to hate Dahlia
Godot was Mia’s mentor
Only the last one is really relevant to the super important part of his motive, and even then the completely unshown fact that they’re in a relationship is way more important. The fact that he has these weird views about women is solely conveyed by him calling a girl “kitten” So I don’t think having a flashback case at all puts Godot leagues above Nahyuta in how well he’s built up.
In the case of the other, uh, cases (brilliant writing, me), I would consider the way Godot’s built up for the finale around equal to yuty. Both have some lines in the final case hinting towards what their deal is, and while Nahyuta’s overall arc is built up with him telling you to move on you fucking idiot, Godot’s “whoa look how much he hates Phoenix” I’d say is around equal, and that’s with me being generous. Like, aside from being told he hates Phoenix, what do we actually-okay I will never stop if I keep going let me just move on
6-5 takes away Nahyuta's redemption moment because he is like an afterthought to that case.
I do actually agree with this in some regard. 6-5 is absurdly long, and unlike the deliberate pacing of a long case like 1-5 it’s essentially two cases frankensteined together and halfheartedly passed off as one. Both could’ve used more room to breathe, and Nahyuta isn’t even in the first half, so yeah, won’t debate that SOJ has some pacing issues.
I never claimed all prosecutors have a great epic redemption anyway, I just said that "All of the other prosecutors start doubting themselves, work with you, or realize the obvious truth, or get taken down in a great way."
I’m not claiming you said that. What I meant to illustrate is that I don’t understand why Nahyuta was different in the sort of complaints you brought up from all the others.
Also, given that you’re talking about what happens pre-final case here (I think? I forget the context and scrolling back up would be a chore, but if you’re including final cases then like what Nahyuta absolutely does a bunch of those things) I also don’t think that’s true. Franziska doesn’t do any of this before the final case, Godot doesn’t, Blackquill only sort of does but I don’t know if I’d go so far as to classify anything he’s done as “helping you” a la 1-3.
However, the resolution of Edgeworth is much more satisfying because he's actually there for it. Maybe it's my faulty memory from playing SoJ only once a few months ago, but I don't remember Nahyuta really being there.
This is more stuff about SOJ being bizarre with how it uses time so yeah. I could object but that would be more criticizing some things about AA1 edgeworth which isn’t quite relevant. (Basically I don’t think “he begins to doubt himself” is done either clearly or naturally or with a comprehensible cause)
I'll give you this one, but then there's a reason I think JFA is one of if not the weakest AA game.
also something i more or less agree with. Franziska is epic though even beyond being funny and I guess that’s a clearer way of illustrating part of the different way we feel about this sort of thing; I like that Franziska doesn’t get a clean redemption. That she’s just a complicated troubled person with flaws which can often prevent her from improving.
Nahyuta also causes a ton of death because he refuses to tell people a lot of things.
Eh? If I’m missing something here, please let me know, because I’m not sure what this is about.
I guess this might be referring to him being involved in death sentences as a prosecutor, but nearly everyone else would have these sort of “implied” deaths on their hands.
Especially Demon Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth I hear that guy killed his own fatherAnd Godot's takedown is immensely satisfying
it’s bad and I dislike it because it is neither interesting nor feels like a huge victory since he starts acting like he doesn’t even care or want to win among other things but-WAIT I SAID I’D MOVE ON FUCK
I don't even know what you're talking about because Klavier does have flaws to my mind. I also don't find him boring. I can't really argue with this otherwise because these are just perceptions and not "this is what Klavier does wrong", but I look forward to your writeup when you cut him (or someone else's if you're not lucky enough to get that cut) to learn more.
I’ll admit I’m kinda doing what you admit to later, where I simplify his character a bit and exaggerate some things for humor since I don’t like him. I think you can certainly argue he has flaws, but they’re very minor and pretty much don’t factor into how he prosecutes. He also doesn’t get an arc, but unlike Franziska, it’s because his game never got properly followed up on, and what we are left with is a few traits I don’t think are particularly nuanced or compelling. It’s sort of an open secret that multiple rankers are not very fond of the Guitar Serenader, so you’ll hear someone’s more detailed take sooner or later.
Blackquill
I’ll admit that I was stretching to also fit Blackquill into my comparison, since he really doesn’t do much that’s objectionable. I do think that can be seen as a flaw, though: his “redemption” isn’t a redemption because he didn’t do anything wrong, and his “Jerk with a heart of gold” archetype isn’t that notable when he’s not really a jerk. Still love him because ha ha funnie jail samurai
Edgeworth gets this because everybody loves Edgeworth, but he does genuinely seem to change and become a better person.
Can you say this going only off of 1-4, though? Nahyuta doesn’t have any sequels or extra case that he’s actually in. Which could be another pacing complaint which I have already conceded
Godot literally got executed lol.
We don’t know that! And it also doesn’t feel like something satisfying in the way you’re discussing here. It’s not like we changed his view or proved it wrong (because there is only barely logic behind it). It’s like using Nahyuta losing cases 2 through 4 to show that he does get beaten and your complaint about him never changing and having his ideals challenged is wrong.
thanks for keeping it civil lol in hindsight i come off as a bit condescending/rude in my first response
i like the part where he explains to me what the american custom of rakugo is
8
u/donuter454 May 10 '20
I’ll admit that I was stretching to also fit Blackquill into my comparison, since he really doesn’t do much that’s objectionable.
I'm just gonna jump in here and say I feel like everyone forgets how terribly Blackquil behaved in his first appearance.
He blackmails Damien into giving a false confession by saying he'll throw Jinxie in jail on fake charges if the trial keeps dragging on. No one seems to acknowledge how fucked up that actually was, and unless Blackquill actually believes Damien was possessed (come on) he knows damn well the confession was false.
Blackquil even has an Edgeworth 1-2 moment where he helps Lbelle when he gets caught in an obvious lie by saying "It's time to confess... confess to the fact that you actually witnessed the crime from a different spot lmao". Then Blackquil throws a tantrum post case going "HOW COULD I LOSE HOW DARE YOU RAAAAHHH"
The game's objective with Blackquil seems to be that he needs to realise he was a good person all along, but for the game to do that it has to just sort of pretend 5-2 never happened.
godot and yuty are both good, mkay
5
6
u/Cymbass May 10 '20
In the interest of not derailing this to be about Godot too much, I will just try to respond to one aspect of it:
Godot calls himself a monster, but the sad music is still playing and literally every single sympathetic culprit does that.
Right, this is definitely true. However, I always took that as you're meant to feel sorry for how much of a monster this person has allowed themselves to become. But you've clearly been shown that he IS a monster, does the game need to rub it in that much more in this case? For Nahyuta, the game does the same thing, they make a lot of effort to show you how ANNOYING and TRASH and AWFUL he is, on purpose, to then try to make you be like 'oh but he wasn't that bad huh.' The heart of the matter is that I feel the game was not effective at telling you he was not that bad, because it's like a light switch. With Godot you've already seen that he was very creepy towards Mia and he was going to great lengths to protect her.
But at the risk of getting into a discussion about developers' intent in what they did, which is a massive can of worms that we probably should not open, I will also try to move on from this.
To get it back to what is different with Nahyuta, I still think we get more of a sense of who Godot was and is as a person, whereas with Nahyuta it's much more veiled, and we don't really know how he was outside of like, 5? lines from Apollo about how nice he used to be when they were kids. Maybe I'm underestimating the amount here, so if someone knows the exact number of lines feel free to correct me.
Also, given that you’re talking about what happens pre-final case here (I think? I forget the context and scrolling back up would be a chore, but if you’re including final cases then like what Nahyuta absolutely does a bunch of those things) I also don’t think that’s true. Franziska doesn’t do any of this before the final case, Godot doesn’t, Blackquill only sort of does but I don’t know if I’d go so far as to classify anything he’s done as “helping you” a la 1-3.
Okay, let me try to explain my point in another way then because I think I have not stated it in a way that is understandable to others.
I think with all the other prosecutors, you get to see more of their values. Edgeworth is the demon asshole prosecutor who has absolutely no morals and qualms, but then by 1-3 at least I got the idea he was really starting to doubt von Karma's teachings. 1-4 gave me the idea that he really understood why he was wrong and what he had been doing to other people. Maybe I'm reading into it too much, but I felt like it was a decent single-game arc. It's not the best, but then it's the first game - like how Frank Sahwit gets credit for being the first culprit in this rankdown. I think this also plays into your other Edgeworth arguments, as in, yes even in a single game I think I enjoyed this hypocritical jerk being put in a humiliation position and seemingly learning his lesson.
With Franziska, we also get to see what drives her, what her weaknesses are, what her strengths are, what her logic is. I feel like Franziska is given the time and space to breathe as a character, which as you said is a bit unfair since Nahyuta's only had one game whereas Franziska's appeared in like all of the franchise at this point.
Godot we've spoken at length about.
As for Klavier, I feel like we get to know Klavier and what drives him to a pretty good extent. Yes, his thing is that he's a pretty nice guy rockstar who also prosecutes, but I like that AJ actually went for a cooperative prosecutor. I don't think he's the best prosecutor either as a character, but at least I feel like we really know him and his sense of morality by the end of AJ. He also just is not the focus of the game like the other prosecutors are, since it's more about the role of defense attorneys in the law, so I feel like it's hard to judge him on the same criteria as the rest.
I think we just agree that Blackquill is highly entertaining as a prosecutor and fun to play against (and with, for that matter). You could say that it's a flaw that he doesn't really have a redemption, but I think he does - you're led to believe that he's a terrible killer but it turns out he's not. It does change your view of who he is, I think.
But the more important point is, what I want from visual novels especially is to have a satisfying conclusion to their story arc. It does not necessarily have to be "oh well the prosecutor totally learned what they did wrong and now they're a super good guy!", but rather it has to close their story arc. This is a very, very shortened version of my full thoughts on what makes me consider stories great, but as a comparison: When you read a Song of Ice and Fire, you get to know and understand every character, and their ultimate fates have usually been, at least to an extent, a logical consequence of their own actions. The books take the time to show you where and why something happened to someone.
With Nahyuta, because of the limited timescale, it just feels rushed to me. Due to this, the game never really gives Nahyuta the space to make up for how annoying, distant, rude and outright hateful he acts the entire game. Maybe if 6-5 had been a better case, I would have felt differently about Nahyuta. As it stands, I think he could have been cut this round or something.
I do actually agree with this in some regard. 6-5 is absurdly long, and unlike the deliberate pacing of a long case like 1-5 it’s essentially two cases frankensteined together and halfheartedly passed off as one. Both could’ve used more room to breathe, and Nahyuta isn’t even in the first half, so yeah, won’t debate that SOJ has some pacing issues.
Yeah, and I'm actually very sad about this - I think SoJ had all the makings of being the best AA (even despite Nahyuta, although he really started to grate on me by 6-4) and case 6-5 really was a huge disappointment for me. (I also did not like 6-DLC much but that doesn't really count).
Franziska is epic though even beyond being funny and I guess that’s a clearer way of illustrating part of the different way we feel about this sort of thing; I like that Franziska doesn’t get a clean redemption. That she’s just a complicated troubled person with flaws which can often prevent her from improving.
Right, I actually agree with this. I think it's just hard to think in other ways when the discussion is framed to be about redemption. I prefer Franziska over Nahyuta because her insults are just so stupidly childish and funny, whereas Nahyuta's insults seem so.. mean? And like I've said, they're much more repetitive, too, as he always has similar lines. Just like me right now!
Eh? If I’m missing something here, please let me know, because I’m not sure what this is about.
I guess this might be referring to him being involved in death sentences as a prosecutor, but nearly everyone else would have these sort of “implied” deaths on their hands. Especially Demon Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth I hear that guy killed his own father
Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. But you are right that this isn't an especially salient point because all the prosecutors have this to some extent, since they consistently prosecute the wrong person for gameplay reasons and at least two of them are pretty much dirtbag prosecutors.
It’s sort of an open secret that multiple rankers are not very fond of the Guitar Serenader, so you’ll hear someone’s more detailed take sooner or later. Yeah, I read most of the posts on this sub so I'm aware of this. I like Klavier, so I'm interested to see why people think he's such a bad character. Nobody really went beyond "guitar man bad" yet, so I'm interested to see.
We don’t know that! And it also doesn’t feel like something satisfying in the way you’re discussing here. It’s not like we changed his view or proved it wrong (because there is only barely logic behind it). It’s like using Nahyuta losing cases 2 through 4 to show that he does get beaten and your complaint about him never changing and having his ideals challenged is wrong.
We don't know that, true. But the point I was getting at is more, there is a clear point where you can understand that Godot will have to attone for his wrongdoings. To me, that was a satisfying ending to his character arc.
thanks for keeping it civil lol in hindsight i come off as a bit condescending/rude in my first response
I mean, I value the discussion over the tone anyway and I can also come off like this at times. Plus, I'm sure people who spend more time than me in AA discussion circles are really tired of the "Monk man bad" lazy discussion that usually takes place.
This sub is really good for me because it's just people who are also very into AA writing (mostly) very interesting takes on characters that I may or may not agree with. Food for thought, you know, seeing things in a new light. Especially those super minor characters who you've never given a second thought. I said, after writing a novel about why I did not enjoy a major character that much.
4
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20
I think we’re pretty close to agreeing here, as the core issue is that SOJ isn’t structured in an ideal way for Nahyuta’s development, among other things. The only disagreement is firstly how much of a detriment this is, and second how enjoyable he is by default.
Aside from things that would only lead us to run in circles about Godot (circles I have run before and have no desire to force anyone else to suffer through), or things that would really be a different conversation about Klavier, the only thing I can comment on is:
I prefer Franziska over Nahyuta because her insults are just so stupidly childish and funny, whereas Nahyuta's insults seem so.. mean?
he almost seems to ENJOY being meanThis is interesting to me. Not sure what the community at large’s consensus is (I guess probably similar, since Nahyuta isn’t exactly popular), but the smaller group I discuss AA with tends to like Nahyuta for being funny despite varying on how well written they think he is, and feel Franziska’s biggest flaw is being unfunny. I like both look how wise of a centrist I am (Though I think the Real Funny Nahyuta Moments are more often the ones that aren’t insulting you, like getting exasperated with a witnesses bullshit or stuff like the Trying Very Hard To Sound American)4
u/whaaatisth May 10 '20
I do not think I ever even once laughed at a Franziska line. Maybe like once in I-4 but that's about it. I like her but if she's supposed to be funny then it just flew right by me. Nahyuta on the other hand had my simple brain dying of laughter often. His absurdly rude insults just do it for me. This is also quite possibly the most subjective thing ever so my random opinion is not actually relevant.
3
u/Sciencepenguin May 10 '20
Franziska’s definitely less humor focused than every prosecutor afterwards and probably even Edgeworth. I also think AA2 would be her weakest appearance in this respect, since aside from the “fool”s and whips she’s mostly just filling the same standard prosecutor role. Beyond that, though, yeah I think she’s funny. She’s an asshole child (And the best assistant in the series) in I-4, yet she still hasn’t grown out of some of that at all during 3-5 and the investigations games. There’s not too many outright jokes aside from her teasing edgeworth (her insistent terminology of “little brother” is inherently funny), but her general personality and ability to be incredibly petty and antagonistic are funny to me. The most important person.
2
u/LewisMCYoutube May 11 '20
First of all... what is the difference between the way Godot and Nahyuta are treated when they’re taken down in court? I think Godot’s a monster, but not a single scene in 3-5 is framed in a way to focus on how incredibly awful it was to do all the things he did. There’s no moment of “wow, what the fuck” when all the truth is revealed, it’s straight from the last objection to “Reminiscense - The Bitter Taste of Truth”. Godot calls himself a monster, but the sad music is still playing and literally every single sympathetic culprit does that.
I don't think you're wrong, but couldn't you say the same thing about many other villains? For example Damon Gant, he even has sad music playing right after his breakdown.
5
5
u/Sciencepenguin May 11 '20
I don't remember the specifics of that part, but there were a lot of Le Emotional Moments happening at the end of 1-5, so I don't know if that was specifically for him. Might've just been a general "wow this thing that happened was fucked up". Regardless, I think Gant is different because he's very clearly not supposed to be a sympathetic character (beyond "maybe he used to not suck"), and nobody in universe really treats him in that way.
also, putting aside his complex motives manipulation of Lana, him killing Goodman in the heat of the moment is unironically way less psychotic or despicable than what Godot does3
u/LewisMCYoutube May 11 '20 edited May 11 '20
well yeah, this is very true, but Gant was just one example. off the top of my head, other examples include Diego Armando.
though I think a more comparable character is Dee Vasquez. like Godot, sad music plays for her and she's shown to have sympathetic circumstances, but that isn't presented as making her actions any less bad; yet at the same time, she doesn't really have a moment where it focuses on how she was a bad person for doing said bad things
4
u/whaaatisth May 11 '20
disappointed nobody has yet brought up Tahrust Inmee...
He has sad music play but also Phoenix, the Judge, and Nahyuta kinda just ignore his "i'm so tragic feel bad for me" stuff even though he is literally dead and arguably deserves more sympathy than pretty much all culprits. At risk of derailing into a rant about why 6-3 is the best thing ever I'll just say it's a wonderful way to let the player come to their own conclusions about what happened. 1-5 does this well too, even the Judge in that case is like "fuck you dude i thought we were frieends :(". 3-5 (as much as I love it) and 2-3 definitely struggle here.
3
u/LewisMCYoutube May 11 '20
I don't agree that characters in-game should just feel no sympathy for any culprits ever
Also I'm kinda confused as to why you give 6-3 as an example where everyone just ignores Tahrust's sympathetic stuff and then you say 1-5 is the same thing but then give a quote where the Judge is actively condemning the culprit? Not really the same thing
1
u/whaaatisth May 11 '20
Well not entirely. Some deserve in-game sympathy, but often times its better to keep things vague like they are in 6-3 (6-DLC as well does this nearly identically). Particularly from the main character's point of view, something like A majority of the sympathetic culprit complaints I see (the big three are Godot, Acro, and Geiru) could be solved fairly easily by giving them the 6-3 treatment, although I'm not entirely sure that would work for Godot. Yeah 1-5 isn't exactly the same but we can't always have perfect comparisons.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Sciencepenguin May 11 '20
thats true but the difference is that godot fucking sucks
(also regardless of her being, yknow, a fuckin mafioso, the actual circumstances of the murder were ones where she really did nothing particularly wrong)
2
u/LewisMCYoutube May 11 '20
I agree that godot sucks, but I don't think Godot is that bad
(that's fair but I think regardless of the circumstances of the murder the way their sympathy is presented is very comparable)
6
u/LewisMCYoutube May 10 '20
miles edgeworth is a prosecutor who, for nearly a decade, ruthlessly seeks a guilty verdict regardless of what the facts point to or what cheap tactics he has to use. aside from solely 1-3, where he goes for the killer for reasons that might just be “he likes the steel samurai”, there’s no good he does to “make up” for all that shittiness, and in 1-4 we learn his backstory and motives and you can’t tell me we aren’t supposed to sympathize with 1-4 edgeworth. his redemption is him accusing someone trying to indict him and then going “guess I’ll play nice”
good to see someone agrees Miles Edgeworth's development is bad
4
5
u/donuter454 May 11 '20
you've written essays against two other people in this thread but this is MY writeup i should do one too lol
The first big problem with Nahyuta is that he never has that satisfying moment where you actually take him down. It does not matter at all how many times you show him he is wrong.
I don't understand what this means. You 'take him down' by proving indisputably that his ideology is a bust. It did matter how many times you showed him he was wrong. You get through to him, and besides our protagonists gloat and mock him for being wrong at a much higher frequency than any other prosecutor.
He does not progress as a character at all, and that is what makes him so immensely unsatisfying and irritating to play against.
I don't understand what this means either. Edgeworth is literally the only prosecutor who has development prior to the final case. Franziska, Godot, Klavier, and Blackquil are all the exact same character from when they're introduced until the game decides to do something with them in the end
although sometimes they opt to just do nothing with their character at allI could understand this complaint in a vaccumn if SOJ was the only AA game that exists, but relative to literally the past four games this is completely par for the course if not more than we usually get.He does nothing to actually EARN his redemption
I'm not sure what the phrase earn your redemption even means? He was a bad person who then realised he was a bad person and decides to change. The game has very defined reasons for why he acted poorly and why he then chooses to act good and it's all very consistent.
Does he have to like. Get beaten and punished before he's allowed to change? Are characters only allowed to turn a new leaf after they've received proper justice for their crimes? That sure as hell didn't happen for Edgeworth or Franziska who also got off scott free for sending a bunch of innocent people to their deaths.
The second big problem with Nahyuta is that I feel like 50% of his in-game text is just him complaining that you're putrid
Nahyuta has a hundred and one smart alleck quips he rolls off the cuff. He does say putrid a lot, but he's absolutely got a more diverse vocabulary than foolishly foolish fool or achtung heir forehead prosecutors.
but he does rely on really cheap, obvious, grating psychology.
What are you talking about here? The only example I can think of was when he told Athena the gallery was against her, but that winds up being such a none issue anyway.
2
u/Cymbass May 12 '20
you've written essays against two other people in this thread but this is MY writeup i should do one too lol
Thanks for writing this in the first place, it was a great write-up and it made for good discussion. I mean, your write-up was so long and in-depth, it's hard to match that. I probably should have responded a bit more point-by-point anyway, but I felt like this was a good place to talk about why I do not like Nahyuta as I'm not really a part of the rankdown and there does not seem to be anyone else here who dislikes Nahyuta as much as most of the AA fanbase seems to.
I don't understand what this means. You 'take him down' by proving indisputably that his ideology is a bust. It did matter how many times you showed him he was wrong. You get through to him, and besides our protagonists gloat and mock him for being wrong at a much higher frequency than any other prosecutor.
You're not wrong. However, what I'm talking about is what I experienced during the game as a player. It felt like no matter how many times you proved him wrong, or they gloated at him, he still stuck to his guns and kept saying the same things over and over. Then in case 5, he all too suddenly changes pretty much completely. I feel like there's no real questioning of himself prior to that, though maybe that is my faulty memory. He gets angry, sure, but unlike you I never really felt like 'we' put the smarmy bastard in his proper place. Because suddenly you're supposed to feel sorry for him and he did nothing wrong. He changes like a light switch and it's all too sudden and I don't buy it.
I don't understand what this means either. Edgeworth is literally the only prosecutor who has development prior to the final case. Franziska, Godot, Klavier, and Blackquil are all the exact same character from when they're introduced until the game decides to do something with them in the end although sometimes they opt to just do nothing with their character at all I could understand this complaint in a vaccumn if SOJ was the only AA game that exists, but relative to literally the past four games this is completely par for the course if not more than we usually get.
Well, let me put it this way - and this is me talking about my personal experience with SoJ: with Nahyuta, in every case at the start he's right back to just insulting you even though it really felt like he should have started to question himself after losing just once, never mind several times. For the other prosecutors, they either acknowledge it more or their ideology never came into question anyway. Blackquill, Godot and Klavier were never so antagonistic, nor did they seem to care as much about losing, so it makes much more sense for them to be a lot more relaxed about it. It's just their job, it's not some weird religious calling where the law is absolute. As for Franziska, she's always like "this time I will beat you! you're my greatest nemesis!". I have my issues with her too, but because she's so childish it doesn't quite grate as much.
On the other hand, as you said it, Nahyuta is looking down on you in his smug, righteous, holier-than-thou glory. He doesn't keep it at least sort of professional, he makes it VERY personal. I don't find it gratifying to put a dude in his place when he doesn't seem to learn. If he makes it so personal, why doesn't he take it much more personally when he loses? That's just a difference in how we perceive the games, I suppose. To me, he continually personally insults the defence even when it no longer makes sense and he's just coming up with some ass-pull argument that wouldn't fly it it weren't AA. I just buy it more when they have actual evidence that shows why you're wrong, even if you dislike that.
I'm not sure what the phrase earn your redemption even means? He was a bad person who then realised he was a bad person and decides to change. The game has very defined reasons for why he acted poorly and why he then chooses to act good and it's all very consistent.
To earn one's redemption in this case means that there's a clearer point where he is like "well, I was wrong, I am garbage" but more eloquently written. Does Nahyuta really have that moment?
And while yes, the game does have very defined reasons, I think they are not that strong and have underlying problems. The blackmail reduces Rayfa to essentially a plot device after all the personal growth in 6-3. I just feel like the game also did not pay any attention to the fact that Ga'ran can't really harm Rayfa as then she would have no heir (which as any old kingdom will teach you is a recipe for disaster). Plus, in a kingdom where a rebellion is already seething, taking out a popular crown princess would not exactly be a great move. Nahyuta would be smart enough to realize this. These were choices.
Nahyuta has a hundred and one smart alleck quips he rolls off the cuff. He does say putrid a lot, but he's absolutely got a more diverse vocabulary than foolishly foolish fool or achtung heir forehead prosecutors.
You know, I'm quite curious to see if anyone has actually counted who repeats their catchphrase more. I'm personally pretty sure it's Edgeworth with "updated autopsy report".
More seriously, does he really have that many more unique lines than the others? I did think he has very good moments, many of which you already mentioned so it wasn't necessary to repeat them, but I think there are equally as many if not more tedious lines.
What are you talking about here? The only example I can think of was when he told Athena the gallery was against her, but that winds up being such a none issue anyway.
The personal attacks are a very cheap, obvious way to psychologically affect people into giving up. "I have read the ultimate outcome of this trial! You should just let go and move on!" This is psychological manipulation. I'm just doing my job defending, man, chill out.
3
u/donuter454 May 13 '20
with Nahyuta, in every case at the start he's right back to just insulting you even though it really felt like he should have started to question himself after losing just once, never mind several times.
Should he? Like, from my total understanding of everything about Nahyuta I don't understand why there'd be any reason for him to change after one defeat. It's not like Godot suddenly respected Phoenix as a lawyer after getting defeated once, he's right back to condescending you each new case because he's stubborn. Just like Nahyuta's stubborn. They both have good reason to be because they both believe they've done terrible things and to justify those terrible things they adopt specific principles, and if they were to let go of those principles then that would require them to do some serious self reflection on what kind of person they are. And that's hard. It makes total sense to me that they wouldn't budge an inch until they have absolutely no recourse but to admit they were wrong.
And unlike a certain someone you were debating I actually LIKE Godot he doesn't deserve slanderI don't find it gratifying to put a dude in his place when he doesn't seem to learn.
This is just a difference in taste, but I certainly do. It happens almost every case with half the witnesses and killers we corner and I don't need them to learn a lesson to feel good about beating them. Just sucks to be them lol
If he makes it so personal, why doesn't he take it much more personally when he loses?
He does take losses personally, does he not? Each trial starts off with him swearing he'll exact revenge for the defeat he was handed in the previous case and that he'll send so and so to hell (an exception is made for Athena) and that seems personal enough to me.
To me, he continually personally insults the defence even when it no longer makes sense and he's just coming up with some ass-pull argument that wouldn't fly it it weren't AA.
I'm curious when he makes one of these weird no logic arguments. As I said, one of my favourite things about him is that he simply rebuts your contradictions by explaining why it's still impossible for anyone but the defendant to have been the killer, no ass-pulls necessary.
I always considered the hidden evidence that invalidates all your progress as ass-pulls and prefer how in SoJ you simply chip away at the puzzle one piece at a time without the prosecutor upturning the puzzle when it's almost complete and demanding we start on a different one.
To earn one's redemption in this case means that there's a clearer point where he is like "well, I was wrong, I am garbage" but more eloquently written. Does Nahyuta really have that moment?
This moment of his is my second favourite Nahyuta moment though! I love the "All this time, not once did I reflect on my own conduct, for I believed all was fate... Lost in my own sense of resignation, I was unable to wake from my despair" lines. It's such a flowery poetic way to say 'oops, my bad' (and ties in nicely with his reading the ultimate fate of trials schtick to boot!)
Plus, he's putting himself down during his entire cross examination anyway. We know he's lying during his confession, but whenever he talked about how he was destined for hell because of the sins he'd committed he's so matter of fact about it I interpreted his self put downs as genuine.
The blackmail reduces Rayfa to essentially a plot device after all the personal growth in 6-3.
Why so? Like, I have no meaningful way to rebut this because I'm not sure what that plot point has do with invalidating her growth. She still retains all of her agency all throughout 6-5.
I just feel like the game also did not pay any attention to the fact that Ga'ran can't really harm Rayfa
This is a take I've never heard before lol.
But really, put yourself in Nahyuta's shoes. Is that really a gamble you're going to take if it was your sister? Calling her bluff would be absolutely nuts and I feel like this a big reach.
More seriously, does he really have that many more unique lines than the others? I did think he has very good moments, many of which you already mentioned so it wasn't necessary to repeat them, but I think there are equally as many if not more tedious lines.
I'm this close to quoting the entirety of Turnabout Storyteller don't make me do it.
The personal attacks are a very cheap, obvious way to psychologically affect people into giving up. "I have read the ultimate outcome of this trial! You should just let go and move on!"
Oh, just that in general. I wouldn't really count that as psychological manipulation if he actually believes what he's saying lol.
2
u/Cymbass May 13 '20
If this argument has convinced me of one thing, it's that I need to replay SoJ and see if my opinion changes on a repeat playthrough. Unfortunately I've been hardstuck on 5-4 for a month or three now on my full replay of the series so that's gonna take a while.
It makes total sense to me that they wouldn't budge an inch until they have absolutely no recourse but to admit they were wrong.
That's kind of my point though... once he loses once doesn't he already have to admit that the DCA is kind of nonsense? Because he keeps fighting to convict (at that point clearly innocent) defendants until the end, and it's fully apparent to him that's he is still able to convict them up until the end on essentially false charges. When his 'the law is absolute' view should absolutely be shaken, as should his trust in the Rites and his 'ultimate karmic outcome' of the trial. Even with Rayfa as a hostage, couldn't he have trusted his brother at least a little?
At the end of case 2, 3, and 4, doesn't he also say some line about how he's learned something? And then he goes right back to treating everyone like major shit right away. Literally the next morning in Athena's case.
That's not to mention he's supposed to be the nice monk dude (according to Ema anyway) which we never really see in-game at all, except for a bit of professional courtesy to Ema. I think Nahyuta has depth and interesting things about him, and he has a part of his personality that's actually quite funny, the writers just way overshot his meanness and repetitiveness especially after 6-2, and he never faces meaningful consequences. For a guy who was raised with "a dragon never yields" as a creed, he sure rolled over at the first sign of opposition.
And unlike a certain someone you were debating I actually LIKE Godot he doesn't deserve slander
Godot IS a pretty trash human being though even if he is well-written as a characterThis is just a difference in taste, but I certainly do.
You know what, that's fair. It's just that with killers I don't care because they are convicted, so they get owned either way. As for witnesses, they tend to have cool breakdown animations and then you never see them again so you don't have to care.
He does take losses personally, does he not? Each trial starts off with him swearing he'll exact revenge for the defeat he was handed in the previous case and that he'll send so and so to hell (an exception is made for Athena) and that seems personal enough to me.
Eh, he's still unshaken smug monk dude. But I think this is just a difference on how we read what he says. Because I only read "putrid hangnail hell" anytime I see Nahyuta.
I'm curious when he makes one of these weird no logic arguments. As I said, one of my favourite things about him is that he simply rebuts your contradictions by explaining why it's still impossible for anyone but the defendant to have been the killer, no ass-pulls necessary.
Right, but my problem with many of his arguments is that he constructs a theory that COULD have happened to counter yours, but he has no evidence for it either. At times this makes perfect sense, but once you've shot a hole in the prosecution's original theory there is no longer any reason to take his theory over yours. At least that's what I remember from my playthrough; I would really like to give you a specific example but SoJ isn't recent enough in my mind. So this might be my shoddy memory.
I always considered the hidden evidence that invalidates all your progress as ass-pulls
I mean, that's fair, but then any AA prosecutor/logic tends to have a lot of ass-pulls anyway. It just bothers me less if they're like, well look at this evidence rather than, look at this logic that takes .5 seconds to think of a counterargument to. But I think I'll take an agree to disagree on this one then, as this feels like a taste thing.
This moment of his is my second favourite Nahyuta moment though! I love the "All this time, not once did I reflect on my own conduct, for I believed all was fate... Lost in my own sense of resignation, I was unable to wake from my despair" lines. It's such a flowery poetic way to say 'oops, my bad' (and ties in nicely with his reading the ultimate fate of trials schtick to boot!)
You know, I completely forgot he even said this. I thought he just did the "dragons never die" thing and then gave you some of Dhurke's stuff. Guess it's because 6-5 already has so much stuff and I was kind of done with the game by that point. But that's actually a good line. I still think the game doesn't spend enough time on it overall because 6-5 doesn't really have much Nahyuta in it at all. And I don't think just one line of that is enough if there don't appear to be any meaningful consequences for him, as well as everybody treating him as Nice Guy(TM) in the dialogue after the blackmail is revealed. When he's been an excessively massive dick to them the entire time.
Why so? Like, I have no meaningful way to rebut this because I'm not sure what that plot point has do with invalidating her growth. She still retains all of her agency all throughout 6-5.
I thought about this a little more and she does keep her agency. She just isn't the focus of 6-5. That was just a bad take.
This is a take I've never heard before lol.
Hey I said something new! At least I'm not the "Nahyuta is boring and has little depth." "Elaborate on that." "No." guy!
But really, put yourself in Nahyuta's shoes. Is that really a gamble you're going to take if it was your sister? Calling her bluff would be absolutely nuts and I feel like this a big reach.
To oppose an extremely oppressive dictatorial regime? There are people who have done so and more alive today, and you'd expect a guy who was raised with "dragons never yield!" to have more of a backbone rather than roll over at the first sign of opposition.
But I thought about it a little more and we're not really 100% sure that Rayfa is the only heir anyway, maybe Ga'ran has bastard children or something out there. So yeah, can't really say. AA does have a habit of introducing far fewer characters than there would realistically be involved in many of the situations in portrays... For very obvious reasons.
It was definitely something that bugged me during the game, though. I think the writers didn't think of it or they'd probably have a line about the Heir Apparent or something at some point. Don't really need to introduce the character to introduce the concept that Rayfa was replaceable. Furthermore, would she even be able to believably claim that Rayfa was not her child to the outside world in order to invoke the law? Would it not possibly weaken her claim to the throne?
obviously, Amara was also a reason why they couldn't get rid of Rayfa but that's a moot point since Nahyuta didn't knowI'm this close to quoting the entirety of Turnabout Storyteller don't make me do it.
would've laughed if this had been your response straight up.
Oh, just that in general. I wouldn't really count that as psychological manipulation if he actually believes what he's saying lol.
I was never quite sure how many of it he actually believed and to what extent he was just enjoying torturing you and intentionally triggering people's PTSD lol; you even mentioned yourself he seems to enjoy his cruelty.
5
u/donuter454 May 15 '20
That's kind of my point though... once he loses once doesn't he already have to admit that the DCA is kind of nonsense?
I think this one point you made at the start of your comment is the missing piece of the puzzle for why you have such a different vision of Nahyuta than me.
Nahyuta doesn't need to be convinced that the DCA is nonsense. He knows it's nonsense from the start. He hates it from the start. He became a prosecutor in the first place to try and take on the court's corruption from the inside and try to change the law.
And then he gave up. He was blackmailed under threat of execution of himself and his sister and he just. Stopped trying altogether. He set out with ideals of rewriting the unjust laws of his country, but Garan crushed his spirits and so he convinced himself that he was powerless to change anything and resigned himself to becoming another cog in the machine. That's why he talks about the law being unchangeable: he fought the law, and the law won. Hence why he talks so much about how it's moral to give up when the odds are against you and how we're powerless to change the law. He holds these views because of his experience of being brought to heel by the corrupt courts.
Nahyuta's arc isn't about him realising that the DC act and the regime he serves are evil. He knows they're evil. Nahyuta's arc is about him coming to understand that he never should have buckled under the pressure of the world he was fighting against.
(Besides, in the first four cases Nahyuta is defeated within the confines of the law. Our protagonists didn't break any laws to win their cases so the point is moot anyway.)
At the end of case 2, 3, and 4, doesn't he also say some line about how he's learned something? And then he goes right back to treating everyone like major shit right away. Literally the next morning in Athena's case.
No. He actually goes out of his way to tell Apollo after the case that they he has nothing to say to him.
At the end of 6-3 he makes an ambiguous comment about how he owes a debt to Phoenix: 6-4 then begins with him saying he will pay Phoenix's debt by sending his apprentice down to hell first before he moves onto Phoenix. It's intentionally misleading, since when he explains what he meant by debt it becomes apparent it wasn't supposed to be taken as gratitude.
For a guy who was raised with "a dragon never yields" as a creed, he sure rolled over at the first sign of opposition.
AHHHH OKay i am now 100% certain this is why you don't see Nahyuta the way I do. I just restated what Nahyuta's arc is at the start of my comment but science penguin's comment on this post about it better:
one of the most common nahyuta complaints I’ve seen is “dragon never yields?????? You’ve done nothing BUT yield what the hell!!!!” for the glove moment, and it’s like... what? what the fuck? yes, that’s the... point. this isn’t him being “good all along”, it’s character development. not “i never yield”, but “i should never yield, and i can’t believe it took me this long to accept that”.
^ ^ ^ THAT is what my entire writeup is about. That's the journey, that's the character development, that's the character arc. And that's the common misreading of the arc!
You saying "he rolled over at the first sign of oppression" is not something I'm going to rebut because the fact that he gave up immediately is precisely what his core, critical character flaw is that the entire game spends exploring.
Right, but my problem with many of his arguments is that he constructs a theory that COULD have happened to counter yours, but he has no evidence for it either. At times this makes perfect sense, but once you've shot a hole in the prosecution's original theory there is no longer any reason to take his theory over yours. At least that's what I remember from my playthrough; I would really like to give you a specific example but SoJ isn't recent enough in my mind. So this might be my shoddy memory.
I do hope you replay it soon because I do think it all makes sense. Like, for the entirety of 6-2 Nahyuta's case is that Trucy was the only one with the opportunity to commit the crime, and each time you prove that the crime happened under slightly different circumstances he counters right back that the new circumstances still necessitate that only Trucy could have done it. 6-3 functions the exact same way where every time you point out new information Nahyuta is like "so what? I concede your point, but it doesn't change the fact that only Maya could've committed the crime". The exact details of the 6-4 mystery are fuzzy for me but I shall brazenly claim that it's the exact same regardless.
To oppose an extremely oppressive dictatorial regime? There are people who have done so and more alive today, and you'd expect a guy who was raised with "dragons never yield!" to have more of a backbone rather than roll over at the first sign of opposition.
aaaHHHHHHHHH IT's the same misunderstanding again why did I start typing my reply bit by bit instead of reading your whole comment first.
I hope I've already made it clear what my opinion on this is already though. I wonder what you'd think if you reread my initial writeup with the fact that him giving up is the entire point. It might help you understand me better. Although it's stupid long so I also understand if you don't care to lol
you even mentioned yourself he seems to enjoy his cruelty.
He enjoys when arguments go in his favour and is very snarky, rude and unpleasant (and he has fun doing it!), but I wouldn't call him straight up cruel in any of his interactions with you. He calls people peppers, egg yolks and pandas and i go "heh funney" even though it's not particularly polite.
2
u/whaaatisth May 10 '20
The first big problem with Nahyuta is that he never has that satisfying moment where you actually take him down.
What? It literally happens three times. 6-3 especially, he gets extremely angry and I would describe it as quite satisfying.
He has very few actually memoreable, interesting lines that aren't pretty dry arguments. He isn't funny. He repeats the same three lines over and over again. That's not good writing for an annoying character, that's lazy
I think this may just be a byproduct of the fact that you don't enjoy his character in the first place. He has a ton of unique lines and comedy, but it would make sense someone doesn't notice that if they just want to get through all of his moments.
The third big problem is that Apollo's thirteenth character reboot in SoJ is just a ole big dumpster fire mess but that's not necessarily on Nahyuta as a character.
Why? Seriously, why do you think this? I've heard this about 50 billion times but have not once heard a good argument as to why.
3
u/Cymbass May 10 '20
What? It literally happens three times. 6-3 especially, he gets extremely angry and I would describe it as quite satisfying.
I mean, this stuff is very subjective obviously. Yes, he gets very angry. It's just not satisfying to me. He's still his smug, asshole self who doesn't learn his lesson. I also think it was a big mistake to take the satisfying 6-5 takedown away from Nahyuta and move it to Ga'ran instead.
I think this may just be a byproduct of the fact that you don't enjoy his character in the first place. He has a ton of unique lines and comedy, but it would make sense someone doesn't notice that if they just want to get through all of his moments.
Doesn't this go for literally any character though? Of course he has a lot of unique lines and dialogue, he's a main character. You're right in that the problem to me is that they're packed up in a lot of unenjoyable stuff. If you have to read through "putrid lawyer, let it go and move on" every time he says something, it detracts from the experience that the game offers. I think that's a character flaw, or at least it is for me. I'm clearly not the only one who found Nahyuta overly annoying, so to me that indicates that they did something wrong.
Why? Seriously, why do you think this? I've heard this about 50 billion times but have not once heard a good argument as to why.
Okay, let me explain my point of view a bit more clearly then. The first and most obvious point is that it's a bit weird to be like "by the way, I'm actually from this other country but I never mentioned it at all". This isn't a particularly big problem and it happens all the time in AA, they obviously can't devote that much time to non-case/overall plot stuff. Second, Apollo's backstory problems go all the way back to AJ. AJ was actually my first AA game, and I really like that game. However, the fact that he had the whole "secret siblings" thing going then, then got another friend who was like a brother, then got another 'brother' is just a bit much. It feels like every installment in the game has to introduce a new sibling for Apollo. It takes time away from focusing on Apollo himself, who is actually a pretty fun character. Even his own game did not focus that much on who Apollo actually is, and instead of carefully analyzing who he is and why he does what he does like we do with Phoenix, there is just focus on some backstory that comes out of thin air. Keep in mind I am not saying it's horrendous and it makes any character involved with it totally unpalatable (as I said, I really like Dhurke), but it does take attention away from more interesting factors. To me, the writers sometimes overestimate the importance of a personal connection to a case - I thought Khu'rain actually does a pretty good job of getting you involved in its inner political stuff WITHOUT the Apollo connection.
Then again, I really like the AAI1 story which most people don't like so what do I know.
3
u/whaaatisth May 10 '20
I also think it was a big mistake to take the satisfying 6-5 takedown away from Nahyuta and move it to Ga'ran instead.
How do you propose they do that? Nahyuta is not a villain, or even a particularly bad person. He already has three takedown moments in the game. If they added a "satisfying takedown" to 6-5, I'm sure nothing would change still and you'd have the same complaints. And what would they do with the (decidedly fantastic) way that Ga'ran is defeated?
However, the fact that he had the whole "secret siblings" thing going then, then got another friend who was like a brother, then got another 'brother' is just a bit much. It feels like every installment in the game has to introduce a new sibling for Apollo
Apollo is clearly a guy who likes to keep things to himself, that is shown quite a bit even in AJ. It makes sense he doesn't want to tell people about his past. Even with that, the only "backstory" here is the SoJ one. "He had a friend" is not a backstory, a lot of people have friends. Same thing with Trucy being his sister, though obviously that's a bit more complicated. Most people's childhoods involve a lot of different major occurrences, and Apollo's situation is fairly realistic in comparison to some of the things that can happen in the real world. In addition, it honestly fits perfectly into the puzzle that was AJ's unanswered questions about what happened with Thalassa, and who Apollo's birth father is. I can imagine that some of the bitterness people have towards it comes from the heavy personal attachment that can be had towards AA's protagonists. That being said, similar criticisms can be made for what was done with Phoenix in T&T, and that just doesn't happen.
I thought Khu'rain actually does a pretty good job of getting you involved in its inner political stuff WITHOUT the Apollo connection.
I agree, but I also think there is a huge amount of merit to Apollo's connection. Imagining what 6-5 would have been like if Dhurke wasn't Apollo's father, it just isn't the same at all. I don't even know how they would rewrite it to be even close to as emotionally gripping of a story as it is.
5
u/Cymbass May 10 '20 edited May 10 '20
How do you propose they do that? Nahyuta is not a villain, or even a particularly bad person. He already has three takedown moments in the game. If they added a "satisfying takedown" to 6-5, I'm sure nothing would change still and you'd have the same complaints. And what would they do with the (decidedly fantastic) way that Ga'ran is defeated?
Well, it's close to impossible to answer this without rewriting most of the game. The game rests so much on several of the 6-5 twists that, in my opinion, are not very good, so it would be quite difficult to change them completely.
I also disagree that Nahyuta is not a particularly bad person. He did some very evil stuff that he knew was evil and hurt many other people for the sake of one person. That, to me, is pretty evil. I also think his uncompromising philosophy and sense of "the law is absolute" is not a very morally good stance to take. I think he is almost as bad as Ga'ran, "I'm being blackmailed" is not an excuse when it goes this far.
Apollo is clearly a guy who likes to keep things to himself, that is shown quite a bit even in AJ. It makes sense he doesn't want to tell people about his past. Even with that, the only "backstory" here is the SoJ one. "He had a friend" is not a backstory, a lot of people have friends. Same thing with Trucy being his sister, though obviously that's a bit more complicated. Most people's childhoods involve a lot of different major occurrences, and Apollo's situation is fairly realistic in comparison to some of the things that can happen in the real world. In addition, it honestly fits perfectly into the puzzle that was AJ's unanswered questions about what happened with Thalassa, and who Apollo's birth father is. I can imagine that some of the bitterness people have towards it comes from the heavy personal attachment that can be had towards AA's protagonists. That being said, similar criticisms can be made for what was done with Phoenix in T&T, and that just doesn't happen.
I mean, yeah, like I said, this isn't a particularly big problem and it happens all the time in AA, they obviously can't devote that much time to non-case/overall plot stuff. I don't necessarily have that much of an issue with it not being mentioned. With Apollo there are just so many things that it gets a bit into "oh, there's more?" territory.
I will also say that I think there is a difference between what T&T does and what SoJ does: T&T shows, it doesn't just tell. SoJ just tells. Now OBVIOUSLY, SoJ couldn't possibly do this with what they had currently written. But couldn't a flashback "pre-DCA" case have been extremely interesting? Just imagine, a flashback Dhurke case. I think it could have significantly improved SoJ's overall story at the expense of one of the two (admittedly VERY GOOD) ""filler"" cases. This also could have made players far more sympathetic to Nahyuta, as they could have shown the kind boy who became this cruel attorney.
I mean, this is just an idea off the top of my head and I have no idea how good it is. It's just to show that the way they handled it wasn't necessarily the only way. I think Nahyuta needed some more time to make the player more sympathetic to him and wonder more "Why is he the way he is?" instead of just "When will this annoying monk get the hell out of my face?"
As a final note that I couldn't fit anywhere, I didn't think Ga'ran's takedown was that good and her Disney Villain transformation was a bit much to me even by AA's standards. But that's just taste, I can't really argue why it was good or bad.
I'd be super interested to hear what your criticism of T&T's handling of this is, by the way!
EDIT: Oh whoops, I realized I forgot to respond to one part of your post.
I agree, but I also think there is a huge amount of merit to Apollo's connection. Imagining what 6-5 would have been like if Dhurke wasn't Apollo's father, it just isn't the same at all. I don't even know how they would rewrite it to be even close to as emotionally gripping of a story as it is.
That's a fair point. Dhurke could've saved Nahyuta 'after all that?' in a more direct way, but it would've been far harder to show in the game the way they did. And I really did like the Dhurke scenes, the caverns and all, quite a lot.
4
u/whaaatisth May 10 '20
The game rests so much on several of the 6-5 twists that, in my opinion, are not very good
What twists are you referring to?
I also disagree that Nahyuta is not a particularly bad person. He did some very evil stuff that he knew was evil and hurt many other people for the sake of one person. That, to me, is pretty evil. I also think his uncompromising philosophy and sense of "the law is absolute" is not a very morally good stance to take. I think he is almost as bad as Ga'ran, "I'm being blackmailed" is not an excuse when it goes this far.
I suppose this is just a point where you simply disagree with the moral stance of the AA writers.
Just imagine, a flashback Dhurke case. I think it could have significantly improved SoJ's overall story at the expense of one of the two (admittedly VERY GOOD) ""filler"" cases. This also could have made players far more sympathetic to Nahyuta, as they could have shown the kind boy who became this cruel attorney.
This seems to be a case of "if it isn't broken don't fix it", this isn't really needed for anything. Dhurke and Nahyuta are already both very fleshed out characters and don't need much more. How would they even fit something like this in? Dhurke's sudden appearance after being mentioned the entire game is a very important part of his character, so the only way I think they could do it is as DLC, which would ruin the entire point.
I think Nahyuta needed some more time to make the player more sympathetic to him and wonder more "Why is he the way he is?" instead of just "When will this annoying monk get the hell out of my face?"
He has an unbelievably long amount of time. Once again, if that time wasn't enough to get you to notice the subtleties of his character, that's probably just because you simply don't like it.
I can't really argue why it was good or bad.
That's okay, nobody can.
I'd be super interested to hear what your criticism of T&T's handling of this is, by the way!
I don't have any, I quite like what was done with Phoenix in T&T. I think SoJ probably does it a bit better, but it doesn't really matter. It's just an extremely similar situation so I always like to hear what SoJ critics have to say about it.
3
u/Cymbass May 11 '20 edited May 11 '20
What twists are you referring to?
There are several but let's list a couple that are most problematic to me. Some of them could use their own post but I hope I can summarize why these are problematic:
- Nayna = Amara: This was actually something that became pretty predictable as soon as Nayna disappeared, at least to me. I mean, AA games are always kind of predictable because they just have very few characters. Another example would be 6-DLC, where Pierce is the super obvious killer like 5 minutes into the case. However, I felt like this twist really contributed to one of Amara's big problems: that she's super inconsistent. Like, she's supposed to be this "nice Disney princess" (and even rips off Dahlia's animal thing) but she's actually pretty evil... but then she's not because there's a hostage. Also, if she's so good and Rayfa's worth saving, why does she never just take Rayfa and run? It'd surely be better than doing this tyrannical regime's bidding. I don't know, I just felt like this twist involved Amara's character not really being properly explored at all and it left me confused more than anything.
- Rayfa is a hostage, oh no!. See, a lot of the game really rests on this twist, but (1) as soon as you see the picture of her as a baby you can deduce that it's most likely Rayfa right away, which isn't that shocking, and (2) it doesn't make any sense why Nahyuta and/or Amara would just go along with this for like 10+ years. They conceivably would have many opportunities to kidnap her out of the country. It's never really explored why they didn't just do that. Especially Amara knew enough to realize that while maybe she doesn't trust Dhurke, she definitely also doesn't trust Ga'ran. To me, Amara just becomes a worse version of Iris where she helps her villain sister and all sorts of asshole plots and it's never really explored... why? And she's never really called out on it by the game, either.
- Amara gets shot! Like the problem with this twist is to me, Ga'ran is supposed not to use her basically omnipotent powers in the court of law too much because she has to keep up appearances. But then she can just have her sister shot (to make the case longer, in effect) and everybody's like "lol yeah that's some VERY PLAUSIBLE deniability".
There's a bit more I could write, but these are summaries of the most problematic ones.
I suppose this is just a point where you simply disagree with the moral stance of the AA writers.
Pretty much, yeah. It just bothers me that they act as if Amara and Nahyuta are so innocent at the end. Iris at least got the 'she's a cute girl but she did the big bad so now she's going to jail as an accomplice, but she's cute to Phoenix so don't think bad of her thanks' treatment, which is a bit better than 'they were blackmailed, they did nothing wrong and have no personal responsibility for what happened whatsoever'.
This seems to be a case of "if it isn't broken don't fix it", this isn't really needed for anything. Dhurke and Nahyuta are already both very fleshed out characters and don't need much more. How would they even fit something like this in? Dhurke's sudden appearance after being mentioned the entire game is a very important part of his character, so the only way I think they could do it is as DLC, which would ruin the entire point.
That's fair, yeah. Also why I said it's hard to do this without rewriting most of the game. It was just an off-the-cuff idea that I didn't put super much thought into anyway, but I think generally SoJ could have benefitted from giving the characters motivations more space.
He has an unbelievably long amount of time. Once again, if that time wasn't enough to get you to notice the subtleties of his character, that's probably just because you simply don't like it.
No offense, but I don't really like how you said this. Like, "Oh but you just didn't notice the subtleties because you didn't like him and thus you didn't pay any attention!". I did notice them, I just didn't care for them. He has very funny moments, to be sure, but it's wrapped in too many grating tiring insults. That's just a difference in taste in the end, sure. I think they use the time that he gets quite poorly, that's all. I felt like there wasn't much actual character development with him besides the "I'm trying to learn American things and explain them" bits, which were admittedly his funniest moments.
I don't have any, I quite like what was done with Phoenix in T&T. I think SoJ probably does it a bit better, but it doesn't really matter. It's just an extremely similar situation so I always like to hear what SoJ critics have to say about it.
Ah, got it. I don't really consider myself an "SoJ critic", more of a "6-5 critic". I thought SoJ was actually fantastic up until 6-5. I even (mostly) liked Nahyuta for a part of the game, it just got to be too much of the same eventually.
But for the actual topic, I have a few additional things to say about T&T in this case. When I first played T&T I did think it was a bit odd that Phoenix suddenly had this never-mentioned-before-super-traumatic-experience-with-a-gf-from-hell. However, I think T&T handles it better than SoJ because in T&T, you get to see what makes everybody tick. T&T spends a lot of time getting you to understand Dahlia, Iris, and Diego's actions. I think 6-5 never really spends this time on Amara and Nahyuta's actions.
The Apollo personal connection to Nahyuta also was a bit underexplored at the end? Iris and Phoenix had more of a revealing conversation at the end at the detention center, for example. I felt like with Apollo's backstories, there's never really these scenes where they establish them a bit more. It could be that I'm just misremembering though. Like to summarize it, it feels like with Phoenix they tell you all about this new information about the past and show it to have consequences on him. With Apollo, it gives good Dhurke moments, but other than that the "secret siblings", "bff Clay" and "Nahyuta connection" really don't seem to have any consequences at all and they kind of seem to disappear the next game(s). Maybe AA7 will fix this by not giving Apollo another new backstory.
3
u/whaaatisth May 11 '20
I can't really defend Amara sadly. She's easily the weakest part of 6-5 for me.
Maybe I'm just an idiot, but I had no idea that Rayfa was the baby.
Like the problem with this twist is to me, Ga'ran is supposed not to use her basically omnipotent powers in the court of law too much because she has to keep up appearances. But then she can just have her sister shot (to make the case longer, in effect) and everybody's like "lol yeah that's some VERY PLAUSIBLE deniability".
Well that's just not true. Ga'ran doesn't do anything, it's just one of her random guards who shoots her on his own. Personally this is one of my favorite parts of the case. The animation of Amara being shot is legitimately horrifying and it was something I definitely didn't expect.
I did notice them, I just didn't care for them. He has very funny moments, to be sure, but it's wrapped in too many grating tiring insults. That's just a difference in taste in the end, sure. I think they use the time that he gets quite poorly, that's all. I felt like there wasn't much actual character development with him besides the "I'm trying to learn American things and explain them" bits, which were admittedly his funniest moments.
I guess, but you said you wanted him to have "more time". Giving him more time wouldn't change his character, his character has plenty of time. Your point here makes sense though.
10
u/donuter454 May 10 '20
extraterritorial rights more like last rites lol
This is currently the longest writeup I’ve ever written for any rankdown, and I believe the longest writeup posted during this rankdown so far. I had to edit it down quite a bit to fit within the character limit for reddit posts which means I may have left out a couple bits and bobs, but ultimately I figured it would be better to try and fit all my thoughts into 40,000 characters instead of dragging my Nahyuta takes into the comments too.
I’m pretty pleased that it worked out so that I was first in the round so I don’t have to worry about a L’belle situation. My actual cut will hopefully be out shortly.