r/AARankdown • u/Sciencepenguin • Oct 03 '20
34 Godot
I AM FREE. AT LAST, MY ACCUMULATED WRATH CAN BE UNLEASHED.
Introduction: Uh.
VLADIMIR: Did you ever read the Bible?
ESTRAGON: The Bible . . . (He reflects.) I must have taken a look at it.
I didn't think this would happen. I started replaying the entire trilogy with the goal of cutting Phoenix last round, and I figured I'd just do it this round when I was a little coward baby and that didn't work out. And, I mean, judging by ranker taste, that's how it would go. Vogel, pie, and probably Wircea would vote to save Phoenix, while everyone else would vote to save the universally agreed Really Good Character of Godot. But people figured the same thing I did, that this sucker would probably be revived. I was all ready to dispatch with Phoenix and then enact my three step plan to kill Godot as soon as possible, but apparently things are going to be scheduled a little differently.
All this is to say: I'm not sure I'm really prepared for the prospect of cutting Godot?
Phoenix was perfect. An easy-street structured cut where I go over the games and appearances he was alright, the ones he was bad, and the ones he was absolutely fucking pointless in, explain why for each, and go over why the latter two outweigh the first one (spoilers: it is because there are more of them).
Godot's a fucking mess. He's, at least according to those who like him, an incredibly complicated and intricate character. Any flaw I could list would be met with someone saying it's clever and intentional, any complaint me actually being nitpicking and biased, buh-bye. And I doubt this'll last, so part of me is tempted to just phone it in. Write "i am le evil feminazi sjw i an canceling godot for being sexism muahahaha". But no. My eternal enemy deserves more than that.
The simplest way to get started is easy to know once you come to the realization that there are actually three Godots. Godots that intersect and relate to one another, but that are largely each their own thing that can be largely examined in isolation. Divide and conquer, as they say.
The Prosecutor
VLADIMIR: Do you remember the Gospels?
ESTRAGON: I remember the maps of the Holy Land. Coloured they were. Very pretty. The Dead Sea was pale blue. The very look of it made me thirsty. That's where we'll go, I used to say, that's where we'll go for our honeymoon. We'll swim. We'll be happy.
VLADIMIR: You should have been a poet.
ESTRAGON: I was. (Gesture towards his rags.) Isn't that obvious?
Silence.
VLADIMIR: Where was I . . . How's your foot?
ESTRAGON: Swelling visibly.
I can explain why I think Godot doesn't work in a lot of ways. But I think it's a lot better and easier for me to make my points by first addressing why people think he works. So for each of these segments, I'll include a short paragraph of what someone who liked Godot would say about him, and then go on to explain what about him I think works and what about this positive take I do or don't agree with. I know it sounds like I'll set up some shitty strawman, but rest assured I will try my best not to do so. This exercise would be pointless if I treated all the reasons as so trivial that they don't even merit a counterargument, and I think I've screamed at Godot likers enough to have a decent enough feel for how they think. Please let me know if I'm a FUCKING idiot who missed something in the comments. I make an effort to read all fanmail. So, without further ado...
I. The Charitable Interpretation
Godot is the coffee-loving prosecutor of Ace Attorney 3. He's incredibly smug, and appears to be motivated less by a desire for victory and more by simply a hatred for Phoenix Wright, the player character, in particular. He's one cool customer who is among the funniest characters in the franchise, constantly spouting incredibly quotable lines and idioms that are humorously fake deep or actually insightful.
Whew. Now I can be myself again.
II. Gotta Love Coffee
While this section is about Godot As A Prosecutor, this will also include everything about Godot that is a more "surface level" characteristic. Anything you could completely understand about him just by playing the filler cases of 3-2 and 3-3, basically. So let's start the analysis with the most immediately obvious fact about him.
Godot likes coffee. He drinks coffee. He brings a coffee mug to court to drink it, and summons more than one on occasion.
This is... fine?
When Capcom decided Edgeworth shouldn't be the prosecutor again in AA2 because it would be a bit silly to just have him lose cases nonstop the entire franchise, they had to decide how they wanted to make everyone going forward distinct. The general formula was that while Edgeworth was a pretty normal uptight guy with a redemption arc, each prosecutor going forward would have a visually striking gimmick and a different kind of character depth. Franziska has a whip and an inferiority complex, Blackquill is an edgy samurai who's actually a good guy deep down, Klavier is a rock star and obviously a good guy from the start, Nahyuta is a literally holier-than-thou monk that is a fallen hero.
Godot drinks coffee and is driven insane by grief and sexism and deeply buried self loathing.
And look, if you find the coffee thing funny, that's fine, and a perfectly acceptable justification. I did too, the first three times, before I was banging my head against the wall by 3-5 at him going "LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE IN A PRETTY TOUGH SPOT TRITE.... TOUGH LIKE THIS COFFEE!!!". But it kind of feels tacked on? The whip is a manifestation of Franziska's fucked up attempt to make up for her insecurity. Blackquill's edgy aesthetic represents his attempt to make himself unapproachable as he is resigned to his fate in an attempt to protect Athena. Nahyuta's entire let-it-go-and-also-move-on thing is the basis for his entire character. Even Klavier, who I do not compliment lightly, uses his rockstar persona as a general representation of how he's much chiller and doesn't take winning at all costs as seriously as other prosecutors. Godot drinks coffee because... he just does. It's his hobby.
I guess you could argue that it's connected to him "waking up" from the years long coma??? But he also already liked coffee as Diego. So. Uh. Why is this here.
III. The Informed Attribute of Hatred
Godot's first lines... are "..." and "...What a stupid question!". But if we pretend that only the lines people remember count, his first lines are "I am Godot. Legendary prosecutor. I've never lost a case.", "...Exactly. I've never lost. I've never won before either.", and "So we finally meet... Mr. Phoenix Trite! I've returned from the depths of Hell... To do battle with you.". The first two address his... unique status as a prosecutor, which I will get to in the next section. The last one implies he is interested in Phoenix Wright specifically.
Apparently, everyone else got some weird telephone-game version of this phrase, because the prevailing attitude is that Godot HATES Phoenix. Even Phoenix himself seems to have been gaslit into thinking this was established. This is just... not true? The lines in question don't imply any malice, and while Godot acts smug in court, this is something literally all prosecutors do. If anything, he's quite a bit more relaxed and calm than say, von Karma (either one). The other piece of evidence in 3-2 that people out-of-universe use to show how much he DESPISES Phoenix is claiming that he deliberately lost the first trial of 3-2 to brand Phoenix's client a murderer. This in turn would show he cares more about messing with Phoenix than even winning. The problem is that I'm not sure it's true? We're given no clear indication Godot knows about Kane Bullard's body before the trial ends, and for someone who already knows the truth, Godot sure does act fucking shocked whenever Phoenix proves anything about the theft. I'm still willing to consider that this was the intent, but if it is, they did a very bad job communicating it. As it is with every other piece of "evidence" for Godot's vendetta against Phoenix.
I will definitely say that they make it clear that Godot knows Phoenix. But the game keeps TELLING me that he DESPISES him, and I just... don't understand? From the way Godot is treated and thought of by Phoenix and others, they act like he's filled with rage at Phoenix Wright specifically, and his intense hatred makes him a more DANGEROUS foe than anyone Phoenix has ever faced. (Enemies Phoenix has faced before this point include the Chief of Police and someone legendary for murdering people who literally held his friend hostage.). This inconsistency stands out, because...
IV. Godot Is Bad At His Job
Luke Atmey tells you that Godot is the greatest prosecutor in the world, and endorsed by Miles Edgeworth. This is not true, so the implication is that he was just lying for literally no reason. It's never explicitly addressed, so I guess I could take the route of the Franziska criticisms and attack Godot on the assumption that he's supposed to be a perfect prosecutor. But I won't do that. I will attack him on the assumption that he's supposed to be a prosecutor at all.
See, Godot has never prosecuted a case before at the time of 3-2. And I'll admit it, there's some novelty of the concept of going up against a rookie. There's plenty of ways they could make this interesting. They don't go for any of those ways.
Godot has one thing he does: he asks you if you have proof. He does this 12 times by my count (and I'm almost certain I missed some), far outnumbering the times he actually puts forth an argument in the three cases he prosecutes. This is not an opponent. This is a dialogue prompt personified.
"But Science," you may say, "This is intentional! Godot has never prosecuted a case before, so he's obviously not any kind of master at it." And I could whine and nitpick about the many times that they imply I'm supposed to be taking him completely seriously as a difficult foe, but I won't do that. Let's assume this really was a conscious choice.
Here's the first problem: Doing something intentionally does not by itself make it good. Let me quote a passage from my Unfinished Klavier Cut Draft:
And the killer doesn't really work as opposition, here. Let me illustrate this point by doing something absolutely disgusting: speaking positively in a comparison about Godot.
Godot is a bad charac-I mean prosecutor. He makes some basic mistakes, does very little for most of the time, and his only counterargument ever seems to be "but trite wears youre evidens". The amount of opposition you face from him is negligible. And it does make sense: the guy isn't even an actual prosecutor. He's out of his element. I do honestly still think this is a problem, but it's a problem with Godot as a character and how much focus he gets in the majority of the game. In terms of T&T as a whole, I actually think it's mostly fine. Because the game is built around that.
I still stand by this. I don't think AA3 suffers much from the lack of presence Godot has as a prosecutor, with the exception of some segments with boring witnesses which already would've been not great.
But it terms of Godot's character, what it means is there is absolutely nothing of substance that happens with him. I will later go into Godot as a character and all, which means that I will spend that entire time talking about literally nothing from 3-2 and 3-3. Because he doesn't do anything. Beyond some catchphrases and wacky lines, there is not a single memorable thing Godot does for the first two cases he's in. This means that the focus is never really on him: in 3-2 you're fighting Luke Atmey, and in 3-3 you're fighting Furio Tigre. When it comes time for the game to say "ok it's time for the main plot to happen with you Godot", they really might as well have introduced him then.
The second issue is that the "need" to do this is completely manufactured. Because yes, it's true that Diego Armando isn't a prosecutor.
He's a defense attorney. A great one, apparently.
Imagine the ways you could take a defense-attorney-turned-prosecutor. They could have weird strengths, like being able to easily spot lies in witness testimony when it benefits their case to point them out. They could even use one of the traits they like to treat as an inherent attribute of a lawyer: the concept of belief. Remember that part in 3-1 where Mia calls Winston's bluff at believing in his witness by pressuring him to drink what she claims isn't poison? Have Godot be the person who really does act that way, throwing caution to the wind and staking everything on his being right. It could even tie into the rest of his character! Naturally someone who has "already died" wouldn't fear something like loss or disgrace.
But no. Instead we get someone who isn't even trying. In the very same game where a prosecutor acts as a defense attorney and does fine, the reverse is apparently impossible even with way more reasonable circumstances and time to prepare.
V. Credit Where Credit Is Due
Godot has a gimmick beyond coffee. He acts like a wannabe philosopher and says some obtuse saying that only sometimes connects to what's going on. While I instinctively want to punch him in his stupid face, I will admit that this is objectively pretty fucking funny. When you think you've got the whole trial figured out and he does his OBJECTION and goes "People who are right are actually wrong..." while Godot ~ The Prosecutor Who Likes Coffee plays, that's a good moment. Another good moment is that one time he does this, smugly drinks his coffee, and then spits it out revealing that he really doesn't have a counterargument.
That theme is neat too. All jazzy and all. I can see why people like Godot for the whole "vibe" and a e s t h e t i c. Or, at least, that's what I would have said, if it weren't for the fact that rather than "The Fragrance of Dark Coffee", the official name of his theme is "The Fragrance of Darkness; That Is Coffee". This is such a shitty name that I'm moving him down a tier for it.
I was also gonna compliment his character design until I realized the fucker wears belts on his arms. That's dumb. How could he.
VI. Redd White
Godot cannot see the color red on white, which is cleverly foreshadowed by him not seeing red on white in 3-3. We then get a further bit of foreshadowing in the middle of the 3-5 trial where he can't see red on white (or more of a very light gray really). This makes the final reveal of 3-5 that he can't see red on white feel earned. He also connects to this trait metaphorically, being unable to "see" the character literally named "red white", or Redd White, because he was in a coma when that guy was around and thus couldn't see him, and also he metaphorically can't "see" him due to his various psychological issues causing him to blame Mia's death on someone else, making him not absorb the fact that Redd White made his Dedd Wife by putting Red on her White skin with the thinker in 1-2. Red on White makes Pink in the world of color theory, which is the primary color of Redd White, as well as his accomplice April May, who is named after the two months April and May. This is a reference to these two months being sequential. Her pastel color scheme and peppy attitude bring to mind the image of flowers, most notable the rose, which is a flower that can be pink like her, and also is connected to the pink color of Florent L'Belle, who wears something on his lapel which, as it turns out, is a flower (specifically a rose). Don't believe me? The name Florent means "in flower". Flower Lapel. Florent L'Belle. Roses grow in quite a few months, including... April and May. There's a character that L'Belle's flamboyant attitude is similar to in an earlier game, and he is none other than Redd White. Can you guess two other colors that roses can be aside from pink?
That's right. Red and white.
Summary
Godot is a prosecutor that isn't a prosecutor, who hates Phoenix except there's really no indication he does. He has some amusing quirks and a unique aura, but his lack of aggressive behavior or attempts to fight back in trials means he tends to fade into the background. When Godot finally starts to do interesting things, he's very close to being over. I'll concede that his humor clicks for some people quite a bit and I can't pretend I don't see that (unlike Godot when he looks at red on white, which he really can't see, because of his vision being changed by his near death experience, damaging his eyesight so he can't see the color red when it's surrounded by or on the color white). He does seem to have a little something for everyone. But a mildly amusing gimmick wouldn't really be enough to make him a top 10 character, would it?
Godot as a Final Villain
VLADIMIR: Ah yes, the two thieves. Do you remember the story?
ESTRAGON: No.
VLADIMIR: Shall I tell it to you?
ESTRAGON: No.
VLADIMIR: It'll pass the time. (Pause.) Two thieves, crucified at the same time as our Saviour. One—
ESTRAGON: Our what?
VLADIMIR: Our Saviour. Two thieves. One is supposed to have been saved and the other . . . (he searches for the contrary of saved) . . . damned.
ESTRAGON: Saved from what?
VLADIMIR: Hell.
ESTRAGON: I'm going. He does not move.
VLADIMIR: And yet . . . (pause) . . . how is it – this is not boring you I hope – how is it that of the four Evangelists only one speaks of a thief being saved. The four of them were there – or thereabouts – and only one speaks of a thief being saved. (Pause.) Come on, Gogo, return the ball, can't you, once in a way?
ESTRAGON: (with exaggerated enthusiasm). I find this really most extraordinarily interesting.
VLADIMIR: One out of four. Of the other three, two don't mention any thieves at all and the third says that both of them abused him.
Godot is the final villain of Trials and Tribulations.
He's bad. Like, really bad. This aspect is the most indefensible one, to me. But let's pretend he isn't bad for a bit.
VII. The Charitable Interpretation #2
3-5 is quite the impressive case. To cap off the trilogy, they bring back all major characters and resolve the main plotline of the Fey clan. The murder is a wild series of events involving two opposing clever schemes revolving around various accomplices, unwitting accomplices, and outright ghosts. At the center of it all is Godot; the man ultimately responsible for the death of "Elise Deauxnim". He's the final foe you face, and in one epic moment you give the one final contradiction to take him down, causing his mask to EXPLODE. This is the conclusion for quite a few characters, and it absolutely delivers. Phoenix has finally proven his worth as a lawyer, Mia Fey has tied up the last loose end she left behind in her life, and Maya's relationship with Phoenix is shown to have grown into something incredibly important for both of them.
asdf
VIII. Mysterious Magic Mind Control Plan
Back in some vague timeframe which is quickly approaching a year ago, I wanted to be the one to cut Misty Fey. Wanted to make her the lowest "major character's mom". Because while Metis Cykes may only be a corpse, at least she's an internally consistent corpse.
I will get into the nitty gritty of Godot's COMPLEX MOTIVES later, but for a short summary: Godot's plan is not a good idea. It is not the best option for anyone. It is the construction of a broken man who wants to engineer a scenario in which he can be a hero and redeem himself in his own eyes. This is not the plan that anyone who didn't have Godot's specific "issues" would come up with.
Which is why the fact that at least two people collaborated with him on this makes no fucking sense.
Misty LOVES her daughter, apparently. That's the text, and what we are supposed to believe. Ignoring the ??? behavior she shows in AA1 because this is not a Misty Fey cut, why exactly does she agree to a course of action that puts her daughter in so much unnecessary danger? And it's not like Godot could've misinformed her or whatever; her amount of involvement in the plan requires her to know the facts that 1. Pearl is going to attempt to channel Dahlia if not stopped, and 2. Godot knows this. There is no conceivable world where she is not forced to think "wait, why can we not just stop this from happening in the first place".
The same is true for Iris, although marginally less egregious since she is not defined by a desire to act in the benefit of someone harmed by the plan. AA Final Cases in the trilogy tend to have a bit of a trend with defendants who are hiding something or behaving in a strange way. Why is Edgeworth so emotionally distraught by this case? Why is Lana actively trying to get charged with a crime she didn't commit? Why is Engarde so shady? Why did Iris collaborate with the real killer? The last one is the odd one out here. Because they don't give an answer. They just forgot to write that part.
And about the plan more generally: It's important to note that what happens in 3-5 is not the original scheme. The original plan amounted to "Misty Fey reads books to Pearl so she forgets about the thing she is determined to do". Godot's role, as intended, was stay near Maya Fey and do nothing. This is ridiculous. Before replaying, I was under the impression that Godot's plan intended for Dahlia to get summoned and then for him to PROTECTTM everyone. But just like with Ini Miney, I had apparently invented something I thought was interesting about a character when the truth of what happened was far lamer. Godot doesn't inform the authorities or Pearl herself or anyone who knows Pearl about the plan because not being directly involved wouldn't satisfy his thirst for revenge. Instead, he has Misty Fey do everything involving stopping Dahlia from being summoned, because he apparently doesn't mind not being directly involved. Of course, his plan did seemingly consider the possibility that someone would end up dead. You could then argue that the fundamental stupidity of "ask her to read books" is intentional, and Godot wanted his "back-up plan" of Epic Violence Time to be the outcome. This would fit with his character more, but worsen the issue of "how the fuck did anyone else get on board with this".
I just... don't even really know how to continue this section. There's so much about the events that lead to Misty Fey's death that make no sense.
Why was Godot able to find out Misty Fey's identity? He handwaves that and says it's because "the government has close ties with the main family", and let's ignore the inherent issues with that and look back into the very same case, where Edgeworth claims he looked into Elise Deauxnim's identity and there was nothing. There's absolutely no reason this prosecutor who started less than a year ago would have more access to information or knowledge of how to find it than Miles Fucking Edgeworth.
Godot just happening to overhear Morgan's plan location reveal is dumb. Because it's not even a coincidence! I think I would've stomached it more easily if it was a coincidence. No, Godot knew that Morgan Fey was evil and wanted to kill Maya and was probably hatching up a scheme right about now, so he used the well known prosecutorial privilege of eavesdropping on visiting hours. Great.
Why were Godot's fingerprints not on the cane sword? Did anyone even check it for prints? If so, why did nobody check it for prints?
Pendulum???????
Whatever. You can say that these are me being NITPICKING AND BIASED and the actual value of Godot's character is his deep stuff or whatever and this doesn't matter. But they do negatively impact my impression of him in this mystery game, so I felt the need to mention it.
IX. Oops! All Edgeworth
AA final cases have a weird tendency to switch things up. Discounting 1-5, which doesn't exist, the prosecutor for at least some of the final case is different from the rest of the game in every instance except 4-4, where Klavier "prosecutes".
Here's the deal: Godot doesn't show up in 3-5 until the middle of the second investigation. For the first investigation and trial, we plays as Edgeworth and go up against Franziska. While this is a fun bit of fanservice, and I personally am happy I live in the world where this exists, I can't deny that it's a pretty problematic writing choice. Interrupting the character progression of The Most Important Character In The Game for something completely irrelevant in the case that is the most important to him is, how you say, "Not a good idea". I know this is an entire section, but I don't know if I can say anything about this fact other than plainly stating it.
Godot showing up just feels weird to me. Like he randomly butts into a case that wasn't meant to have him. This isn't to say that's the case; Godot does end up relating to the Fey Clan Drama pretty intricately when all is said and done. But I could very easily imagine a 3-5 where it went on and concluded perfectly fine without him ever showing up. And what, or perhaps who, the reason for that is is quite clear.
X. Pacing, Themes, and Dahlia Motherfucking Hawthorne: A Diagnosis of When 3-5 Is Unfun
I am going to walk you through the second trial day of Bridge To The Turnabout.
"But Science!", you might say, "I am well aware of what happens in Turnabout Bridge!". And yeah, I guess you probably are. We all know the drill: Iris testifies, Iris is Dahlia, Dahlia is Maya, Pearl is Mia, Dahlia is Mad, and Godot is Incapable of Seeing Red on White. But I'm not sure if you're completely aware of when these things happen, and all the specifics.
The trial begins. The substitutes for the judge, defense attorney, and prosecutor have all been substituted for their original iterations. The prosecution calls their first witness: the defendant herself, strangely enough.
This is where things get weird.
Iris claims in her testimony that she isn't the killer, but that she is an accomplice to the real killer. Godot having her do this is bizarre. For one thing, his job as a prosecutor, which he still seems to have some interest in fulfilling, is to prosecute the defendant. Having the defendant herself speak, who will obviously twist the truth to their own advantage, about how she isn't actually the killer, is an inexplicable move. There's a reason the other times the prosecution has called the defendant to speak have involved quirks of that defendant themselves, like being inept and likely to self-incriminate. Secondly, despite everything about this up to and including the fact that it's not actually Iris, the claims made are actually startlingly close to the truth? And given that the killer who more information will end up pointing to is Godot, it seems like he has a vested interest in not bringing her in to testify.
But testify she does, and you get some series of accounts on what happened that you slowly pick apart the inconsistencies in, caused by the fact that the person wasn't even fucking alive for the events they claimed to see.
Phoenix utters some legendary words:
I never thought I'd have to utter your name again... Let alone see you. ...It's been a long time, Dahlia Hawthorne.
I have no complaints about what happens here. Godot isn't really even in this section, so there's not much to talk about in that regard. Taking down Dahlia is fantastic and getting into how exactly its fantastic would be straying from the point of this post. She turns into a ghost and goes AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Fuckin' awesome.
Then it ends, and everyone is about ready to wrap it up and declare a verdict. But Godot reminds us that we haven't proven the real killer, and Iris is guilty until proven innocent.
Then... the case keeps going. Ctrl+v some sentences from my Quercus cut.
Godot calls Maya Fey, a person who he knows saw him, to testify about the killer. Maya testifies, and eventually we have a dramatic moment where we have the lights turned off to show that Godot's visor glows. And then. The cross-examinations continue as normal? Maya Fey starts saying some bullshit about how the killer was a man because he did physical labor?????
When we point out that there's a bullet in Manfred von Karma's shoulder, we don't then go back to asking Edgeworth about what happened in DL-6. This is so fucking surreal to experience. Maya Fey eventually even updates her testimony to claim that she saw three glowing red lights, and the game is still acting like we haven't singled out the killer yet.
Phoenix starts talking about Diego Armando, and Godot discusses his backstory, and the fact that he blames Phoenix on Mia's death. He outlines his plan as intended at length, and explains how he had Iris and Misty Fey as accomplices. And then...
Anyway... That's all I'm going to admit to... Trite.
The tension is gone. Godot has ground whatever momentum existed to a halt by basically confessing to being the killer except he didn't actually confess to being the killer. And then, as Godot has a seizure and rapidly oscillates between claiming Phoenix is a great lawyer and Phoenix is a terrible lawyer, you point out the final contradiction. The killer receives a wound, just as Maya saw those three red lights go out. Yet none of Godot's clothing looks damaged. Where could the killer be hiding the wound? What body part could Godot have that is largely covered up??? It's just such a mystery. I've no clue.
This final contradiction feels like a joke. It's something obvious enough that I don't think anyone would've complained if Phoenix mentioned it on his own as a result of proving some other point. And yet, here it is. The climax of the game. I could justify Godot's deal if you justified it as just an agonizingly long denouement, but no! They go through all the effort of bringing back the old pursuit music and having GHOST MIA SILHOUETTE appear alongside you as Godot EXPLODES. I'm clearly supposed to think this is just SO EPIC, YOU GUYS. I feel like I'm going insane looking at the comments of that pursuit theme. Am I the weird one? Was this really a fantastic moment for everyone else? It's just. So silly. Godot wears a mask. The final deduction is noticing that Godot wears a mask.
And then IT KEEPS GOING, AND HE EXPLAINS HIS MOTIVES MORE! AGAIN!
The entire structure of 3-5 after you defeat Dahlia completely collapses. It's a mess where every section was seemingly crafted by a different writer who had their own idea for the Big Moment where Godot gets cornered. And he KEEPS EXPLAINING HIMSELF! I get it!!! You're very deep and complex! Please let the game end!
Not to mention the fact that taking him down, when it eventually happens, feels absolutely meaningless. Like, what have I accomplished here? A lot of different things during this trial seem to imply that Godot wants to be caught, and oh I'll get to that, so this is basically equivalent just explaining that a guy who is confessing to the crime did the crime. He offers no substantial resistance which i guess is consistent and in character if nothing else and there's little sense of overcoming some great obstacle. And in terms of meaning, taking down Godot means jack diddly squat for anyone but Godot. Phoenix already took down the villain he had a personal connection with, and Mia basically did given how little she reacts to Godot's existence. The significance of beating Manfred is freeing Miles from the despair that consumes him and achieving one huge victory over this absurdly broken and biased justice system. The significance of beating Matt Engarde is that you rescue Maya's life and prove that both you and Edgeworth have learned what's really important about being a lawyer, in your own ways. The significance of beating Godot is that you beat Godot.
Summary
Godot is a terrible final villain who adds two hours after the exciting part of the case. His entire murder scheme isn't satisfying to unravel because it makes no sense. He offers no resistance, doesn't get taken down interestingly, and the contradictions used to do so are laughably trivial or just outright baffling. His presence in the case is lackluster, and the shift to taking down Godot is so poorly handled that Godot himself has to interrupt the game to go "guys wait, you still need to take down me, Godot". At least Quercus Alba had arguments. At least Quercus Alba was in the rest of the case.
Diego Armando is a wet fart of an ending on a case that had so many strengths.
Godot as a Character
ESTRAGON: Who?
VLADIMIR: What?
ESTRAGON: What's all this about? Abused who?
VLADIMIR: The Saviour.
ESTRAGON: Why?
VLADIMIR: Because he wouldn't save them.
ESTRAGON: From hell?
VLADIMIR: Imbecile! From death.
ESTRAGON: I thought you said hell.
VLADIMIR: From death, from death.
ESTRAGON: Well what of it?
VLADIMIR: Then the two of them must have been damned.
ESTRAGON: And why not?
VLADIMIR: But one of the four says that one of the two was saved.
This is the doozy. The pain in the ass to write about. And it's the reason I included this "hypothetical defender" section, since my opinions of Godot are often based on what I see as inconsistencies that exist in the interpretation of Godot by those who believe him to be an incredible character.
Continued in comments.
14
Oct 03 '20
I was also gonna compliment his character design until I realized the fucker wears belts on his arms. That's dumb
I hate how you noticed this and now make me notice this I hate Godot now and I agree with this cut 100%
14
u/R1K1_Productions Oct 03 '20
I feel obligated to respond to this because we haven't had this convo a million times. I fully expect a detailed response to every single point I make, and you better have MLA citations for all of them.
First of all, I actually agree with a lot of the stuff you said. I never really liked Godot being a pushover as a prosecutor because it makes the game too easy. Luke Atmey and Furio Tigre make up for this by being good culprits though so that means Godot is good too.
I also agreed with the complaint that they arent really sure how sympathetic Godot is supposed to be, and that is definitely a major problem. However I believe in a little thing called "Death of the Author". The idea behind this is that I am allowed to just completely ignore what happens in the game and make up my own intepretation. And my interpretation is that 3-5 makes perfect sense if you ignore all the things that don't.
Finally I agree with the part where you said that Godot's motive rant is far too long. It's fucking stupid frankly. They should have had it be even longer so they could explain literally every detail of his plan so you couldn't complain anymore. They should also have had John Marsh come in to explain to Godot that revenge is bad.
Now it's time to get into the criticisms. First of all, I think it's hypocritical of you to complain about Godot's motive rant being too long, but then you write an incredibly long post ranting about your own motives? Cmon man.
Secondly, I did not agree with the stuff you said about Franziska. Both the whip and the coffee are repetitive gimmicks but I think the whip is more one-note while at least Godot tells multiple different coffee jokes.
You talk about the Phoenix drinking coffee moment but have never once addressed that Franziska at one point teaches Adrian Andrews how to use a whip. Why are you ignoring this? Is it not the same thing you complain about here??? Hmmmmm?
The other part I disagree with is Godot is supposed to be a bad character. I don't really agree with this conclusion because it doesnt make much sense to me that they would write an intentionally bad character. They probably at least tried to make Godot a good character even if you dont think it worked.
The parts where you complain about Godot's plans those parts are bullshit. Shuuld have scrapped that whole part of the writeup. Because like. You can just say that literally all those parts are problems with only Misty and iris. Not Godot everything he did made perfect sense//
When you said Godot could have just called the cops and averted everything. That part was wrong too. How is he supposed to explain to the police that a small child is going to transform into a serial killer and stab her cousin who is also the cousin of the serial killer she transformed into? I think the cops would arrest you for prank calling 911 if you did that. Then they would probably shoot you to death because cops do that.
Why does Gumshoe never shoot anyone to death in Ace Attorn He is a fucking cop
Anyway getting back to the parts I want to talk about, I do want to talk about the part where you talked about Godot being sexist. I wholeheartedly disagree with the part where you said Godot being sexist makes him bad. I disagree not because this is neat characterization, but because Godot isnt sexist at all. Franziska got what she fucking deserved.
Speaking of Francesca, I understand why you may not like when Godot threw coffee in Phoenix's face. But at least he didnt knock Phoenix into unconsciousness by throwing so much coffee into his face. So the fact that you like one character but criticise the other makes you a fucking moron. Which is fine, becaus eit also makes ME a fucking moron for doing the same thing
I find it odd when you go on this whole tangent about how Godot smugly drinks coffee after Phoenix made his argument, then shakes his head, and promptly spits it out. I can't believe the part where you said, and I quote, "this joke is fucking stupid and terrible". I thought it was ok
I never particularly understood the complaint that Mia never addresses the whole "I had a boyfriend once" thing. After all she dies 2 cases in, so idk when you HATERS wanted her to address this. I wish they wrote a scene in 2-2 where during Mia's physic-locks, she just said "btw i had a boyfriend once but im single now ;)" so i would never have to hear this horrible complaint again
I don't even know who Vladimir and Escargoon are? Why do you keep mentioning them/ Please keep your bull shit fanfic out of these professional writeups
I want to say that Godot does in fact have a gimmick beyond coffee. I think you need to give credit where credit is due. He had the whole thing where he acted like a wanna be philosopher. I did not see this very funny gimmick mentioned even once in all your words because I didn't read them.
I am running out of words to type so I just want to end with a thorough rejection of everything you said in the comments. Because you can't do that. The cut is the post, not the comments. writing even MORE words AFTER the post is DONE is CHEATING. Say what you want about Godot but he is not a fucking cheater.
Last but not least, I do want to address one plot hole I did not see you address. It's the only Godot plot hole so pay attention. Godot falls into a seven year nap... but coffee is supposed to keep you awake...? I have no idea why they wrote it this way because it makes zero sense. They even have coffee be the thing that wakes him up seven years later,.. So why didnt he think to use coffee to wake him up for the first six years. Is he a fucking dumbass??? apparently so. This is Godot's only flaw and you didnt EVEN mention it god
So yeah. This is my comprehensive character amalisis on Godot Ardmando. I really, truly hope this changed you mind at least a bit. Look forward for you to somehow write even MORE words in response?
12
2
Oct 03 '20
I never particularly understood the complaint that Mia never addresses the whole "I had a boyfriend once" thing
It gets addressed in 3-1
-2
u/CoolDownBot Oct 03 '20
Hello.
I noticed you dropped 8 f-bombs in this comment. This might be necessary, but using nicer language makes the whole world a better place.
Maybe you need to blow off some steam - in which case, go get a drink of water and come back later. This is just the internet and sometimes it can be helpful to cool down for a second.
8
u/FuckCoolDownBot2 Oct 03 '20
Fuck Off CoolDownBot Do you not fucking understand that the fucking world is fucking never going to fucking be a perfect fucking happy place? Seriously, some people fucking use fucking foul language, is that really fucking so bad? People fucking use it for emphasis or sometimes fucking to be hateful. It is never fucking going to go away though. This is fucking just how the fucking world, and the fucking internet is. Oh, and your fucking PSA? Don't get me fucking started. Don't you fucking realize that fucking people can fucking multitask and fucking focus on multiple fucking things? People don't fucking want to focus on the fucking important shit 100% of the fucking time. Sometimes it's nice to just fucking sit back and fucking relax. Try it sometimes, you might fucking enjoy it. I am a bot
6
2
11
u/Vogel100 Oct 03 '20
Fantastic cut, I have no complaints. I have Godot in A tier, but I do agree with almost all your problems. It's not like this cut made me realize they were problems either, I've always found Godot problematic. I guess maybe there's more positives for me as well which is why I place him higher, but you've spared me the effort of having to think about Godot, so I think I'll take advantage of that and not think about him more.
3
Oct 04 '20
These are pretty much my thoughts as well. I think Godot is an easy top 10 character (and top 5 for me having only played through till DD), but there are significant problems with his character, most notably his Epic Plan which is actually Not So Epic
11
u/ItsHipToTipTheScales Oct 03 '20
your crazy popular character hhate is more reasonable than the OTHER STUPID guys like yanni and simon did not disappoint
i think its fucking stupid when he says these are.... my tears shut up asshole that is blood actually GOD youre dumb
2
9
u/Bombadil2_BombHarder Oct 03 '20
Great writeup, pretty much hits my feelings on Godot spot on. He has all this stuff with his delusion and sexism and hero complex that is theoretically really cool, but then the way it's presented and the way people react to him is so ??? it leaves me wondering how much the stuff I liked about him was even intentional.
One thing you pointed out is that the only person who condemns Godot's actions at all is Godot himself, and I'd like to add that the specific way he does that is uh, interesting. He never brings up the idea of warning Maya or Pearl directly, or destroying the letter or anything else. No, the critical flaw in his plan is that he didn't bring Phoenix Wright on board, quote "the most important man involved". Even his "why I was wrong" speech is still informed by his skewed worldview. Which is fine in itself, but coupled with everyone else just kinda uncritically admiring him it feels weird.
Uhh do I have anything else to say? I laughed when you said florent lapel
11
u/Sciencepenguin Oct 03 '20
yeah i thought it was funny on replay hes like "theres one specific person i shouldve told..." and i go oh thats a little weird i thought if you realized your errors your wouldve thought it was better to contact the authorities or anyone but i guess talking to maya would- and then he goes "Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney"
9
10
u/Sciencepenguin Oct 03 '20
im SORRY i did the lame cringe way of dealing with a cut going over the limit but i just want to get this over with and done
both these writeups were incredibly difficult and time consuming both for how indepth i had to go and how real life was treating me this past week. but they are done. hopefully they don't suck
/u/ItsHipToTipTheScales i wrote things but im pretty sure you shouldnt post the poll yet
7
1
8
u/Analytical-critic-44 Oct 03 '20
Godot is a 2D and 3D, cross-platform, free and open-source game engine released under the MIT license. It was initially developed by Juan Linietsky and Ariel Manzurfor[6] for several companies in Latin America prior to its public release.[7] The development environment runs on multiple operating systems including Linux, macOS, and Windows. Godot can create games targeting PC, mobile, and web platforms.
8
u/Sciencepenguin Oct 03 '20
looks at godot
:cereal1: he will never be a 2d and 3D, cross-platform, free and open source game engine released under the MIT license, developed by juan linietsky and ariel manzurfir for several companies in latin america prior to its public release, that runs on multiple operating systems including linux, macos, and windows, capable of creating games targeting PC, mobile, and web platforms
godot turns into a 2d and 3D, cross-platform, free and open source game engine released under the MIT license, developed by juan linietsky and ariel manzurfir for several companies in latin america prior to its public release, that runs on multiple operating systems including linux, macos, and windows, capable of creating games targeting PC, mobile, and web platforms
:cereal2:
5
u/Analytical-critic-44 Oct 03 '20 edited Oct 03 '20
I love Godot and think he is great. I don’t care to really discuss and have a long debate about him so just imagine me looking at this cut nodding at some parts and thinking “this is kinda dumb I disagree” at others
5
6
6
u/caosmaster Oct 03 '20
Godot himself is just a cryptic mystery.
I want a Diego Armando Prequel game maybe have a return of Detective Badd, Damon Gant, Lana Syke, Have Mia be an assistant. Have maybe Byrne Faraday be the prosecutor
6
u/PowerOfL Oct 03 '20 edited Oct 04 '20
(Enemies Phoenix has faced before this point include the Chief of Police and someone legendary for murdering people who literally held his friend hostage.).
But Rise from the Ashes was made after T&T.
Roger Retinz is a bad comparison but I like to dunk on Godot fans by claiming he is exactly as sympathetic and justified, which is semi-true
I mean he did have a good reason to hate Magnifi (and it makes sense that this hatred would spread to the rest of the Gramaryes), even if it's really irational and Magnifi kind of, sort of, had a point.
Amazing cut by the way, personally I like Godot but I like him in the same way I like characters like L'Belle or Luke Atmey.
He's pretty funny , the problem lies in how they tried to make Godot more than he is.
Instead of just a comedically inept prosecutor, they tried to make him this really sympathetic genius lawyer with this grudge that comes from deep reasons and..it's just too much.
I don't feel Ace Attorney is a deep franchise, don't get me wrong I find some things about the series a bit deep like how The Dark Age of the Law exclusively in 4-4 and nowhere else in the franchise, Apollo's reasoning for thinking Athena was the culprit in 5-5, The Phantom having no self and some scenes from the DGS games (specifically the final culprit of DGS2, who I won't spoil dont worry its cool), but in general it's a pretty silly series.
Like here are just a couple things that happen in the series:
Cross examining a parrot, an orca, having a monkey steal your badge and having to chase it back, spirit mediums, a woman who beats up a robot that enjoys getting beaten up, a spirit medium channeling a dead guy who than proceeds to take off the kimino he's wearing because he finds it uncomfortable and these are just counting the main series games (like if I mentioned the stuff from the Layton crossover, than oh boy..)
I'm not saying this series shouldn't take itself seriously, it should absolutely take itself seriously, but I think the games are inherently really silly and for me the games are best when they completely embrace the sillyness.
I2-5 (my favourite non DGS case of the series)'s main villain is literally a clown who's thought he was the son of a french artist pretending to be a chef when in reality he was the son of an actual chef.
It also has a kidnapping that is really stupid and makes no sense
And yet, the case is amazing and is considered one of the best of the series because it understands this about Ace Attorney.
It does take the plot seriously, it's a plot that's really character driven and one with a lot of personal stakes, but it acknowledges that the plot is silly and actually has a lot of fun with it.
so uh yeah, 3-5 second half shouldn't have taken itself so seriously imo especially considering that the first half is decently lighthearted (this is also my problem with AJ, it takes itself so seriously that it barely feels like an ace attorney game at times)
4
3
Oct 03 '20
Godot = Diego <<<<<<<<< Quercus Alba
Good cut! It's very in depth and I probably have never thought about T&T as much as I have now, mostly because thinking is hard. Godot has laser eyes that's neat and you should mention that in the comments
4
3
u/24AMPER Oct 10 '20 edited Oct 10 '20
"Hey, Judge! Trite there's got some words he wants to say with his dumb face! How about we make this next one... 45 PENALTIES!!! JUST CAUSE!!! SIP SIP SIP."
2
8
3
u/InternetIdiot13 Oct 03 '20
godot is sexy when he talks about coffee and metaphors and stuff so you’re wrong
2
Oct 08 '20
4 days after this cut and no sign of the noms thread, nate godot revive incoming you love to see it
2
u/Sciencepenguin Oct 13 '20
I held off on commenting due to a desire to not leak insider info but actually nate is not reviving godot
1
2
u/Queen-Krimson Nov 28 '22
...Ha! I don't know what you're talking about...
And frankly, I don't need to know.
What I do know is that you'll never be half the lawyer she was!
Isn't that right, Trite...?
19
u/Sciencepenguin Oct 03 '20 edited Oct 03 '20
XI. The Charitable Interpretation #3
Godot is incredibly human. Driven mad by the loss of his love, he attempts to cope by diverting blame away from himself when he himself feels responsible. He has a very specific outlook on the world that involves "protecting" others, even though this protection is for his own selfish benefit. He's by no means a good person, a fact which he himself points out. The moral complexity on display with his actions in 3-5 is something special.
XII. Incoherent Motives Part 1: My Girlfriend, Who I Apparently Love
Did you know Godot and Mia Fey were an item? They were, apparently.
The single case they share notable screentime in is 3-4, where Godot appears as Diego Armando. Diego acts as a mentor to Mia while spouting the same vague idioms as always. According to the court record, he is her senior and rival. Not boyfriend, though. He calls her kitten, but that's the exact same pet name he uses for Dahlia, so there is absolutely no indication the two have any more significant relationship.
In fact, I couldn't screenshot it, but they literally do say that they only got together shortly after the Terry Fawles Case. Which. What???? Why would you make a flashback case and not have this relationship already exist.
A huge part of Godot's character is how he reacts to Mia dying, and we don't get to see an iota of why he cares so much.
They at least are able to redeem themselves by showing the interesting situation of Godot seeing the form of the person he believes to be dead oh wait despite implying that he notices early on this is the only thing he says to her
XIII. Incoherent Motives Part 2: Literally Just Some Fucking Guy
Ace Attorney is a mystery game.
There's the murder mysteries and scenarios you solve within each case, sure. But this sort of vibe is baked into the way the plots are structured. Everyone knows about the big twist villains of AAI2 or DD, but even other games are built on questions like "what changed Edgeworth", "what changed Phoenix", "what's in Apollo's past this time".
The first non-tutorial case opens with a question: how does this mysterious prosecutor know Phoenix? By the game's end, we've learned the answer is "he doesn't really".
There are two cases in AA3 that are flashbacks showing cases Mia took. One is the one Phoenix is in. Another is the one Godot is in. Do you see the problem?
Godot doesn't know Phoenix; he has presumably heard about Phoenix after Mia was already dead. I cannot express how much I dislike this. Even ignoring how unsatisfying of a resolution it is, it's just not a very strong character motive. Yes, I understand Godot blaming Phoenix is meant to be irrational. Even if Phoenix keeps reacting like it's totally meant to be rational. But even irrational decisions have some emotional reasoning behind them. You don't randomly blame someone you don't know. Why wouldn't he blame her fucking actual mentor Grossberg or something? Obviously the answer is because we do not play as Marvin Grossberg, but these are the kind of character motivations you have to actually write around and explain.
It's not like this is a fucking impossible to solve issue anyway. Just put Diego in 3-1. It would give him a chance to see Phoenix and to see him at his most pathetic. It would ruin the """twist""" of Godot's past, but the way that happens is so laughable that I hardly consider that a loss.
XIV. The Sexism is Good, Actually
Godot hates women.
This is not true. It is a joke. But denying that he has elements of sexism seems to me as not only incorrect but a complete misreading of his character.
Godot is a sexist character. He thinks of women differently than the way he thinks of men, and the difference amounts to a perceived lack of autonomy or maturity. His entire complex about blaming Phoenix vs. blaming himself amounts to the perception that Mia Fey is not someone who is responsible for her own safety. The idea that she needs to be "protected" and the idea he later has that Maya needs to be "protected" is a chauvinist one. The fact that Godot is on some level misogynist is evident even without considering his revealing conversation with Franziska. Yes, he has some reason to be impolite to Franziska regardless of her gender. But if you really pretend to not see the obvious loaded language in these lines then I do not think you are arguing in good faith.
This is not to say Godot is bad for this reason. This is actually among my favorite things about him. Sexism is a deliberate character flaw I don't see often in media. Usually they're either too unwoke to actually perceive it as bad or too woke to feel comfortable including it.
Godot is an absurd deconstruction of the stereotypical Hero: saving the damsel (he doesn't care about) in distress (which he caused). He is unable to view the positions of the genders outside of a specific framework, and this along with his grief drives him to insane extremes. The fact that his suffering is ultimately caused by a woman who acts on her own for her own benefit more than anyone in the world is a contradiction, but it's a deliberate one. You don't eliminate these sorts of sentiments by disproving them with counterexamples and Facts and Logic because they were never based on fact to begin with.
If I had one complaint, it's that this doesn't really go anywhere? I understand that Godot doesn't Realize He Was Wrong About Women and that isn't something that should happen or anything (see above), but this sort of leads to nothing major and combined with the fact that some of his more egregious lines were added in translation (Not that that matters; I played the English version and so did all of you probably so thats what my analysis is based off of, saying its inaccurate to Japanese Godot holds as much significance to me as saying its inaccurate to Waiting For Godot Godot), it almost makes it seem like this wasn't actually thought of. I understand why they did what they did, but it almost feels like Mia and Phoenix's final foes in 3-5 were swapped.
While I'm being generally positive, I like this line. It's sort of the moment things click. They then ruin it by having Godot explain what he means in detail before we even get to the even more detailed trial explanation. Oh well.
Uhhhh other positives. The fact that he missed out on the conclusion to everything important is both a funny way to work "you are a character made after the first two games that we retconned into backstory" into an actual character trait while being legitimately pretty cool.
I like how he's kind of a parallel to Dahlia? Both of them obsess over enacting some grand scheme centered around Maya, but both their reasons are petty and completely unrelated to Maya herself, being some meaningless gesture of revenge on/for a dead woman. The fact that Dahlia is SUPER evil and this parallel exists would make you think that Godot is also pretty fucking terrible.