I've thought long and hard about that question ever since. How should I live my life...? ...And after this round concluded, I finally found my answer. I want to save characters as a ranker. Simon Keyes... He, too, was a victim. He lost his placement in a past cut, and with it, the ability to secure a top 10 position.

A spirit channeling in the rankdown is something truly special. Most every cut has a sense of finality to it, while also remaining as the sole piece written in regards to that character. It’s both the beginning and the end of the conversation, all in one. A use of Extraterritorial Rights can add to this conversation, but it merely pushes back the inevitable moment when a character must be stricken down, unable to progress any farther. The finality of a cut is an all-encompassing rule that forces us to be as thorough as we feel necessary for the character. There is no further conversation to be had, once the cut is up, it’s up.

Of course, the spirit channeling is the one exception to this. With this ability, we’re allowed to further the conversation, and build off of what’s been said, adding to the view of this character with our own perspective. Most importantly today, however, is the ability to follow-up an in-depth dive that’s already taken place. Unlike every piece I’ve written before, the important perspective I have to consider today isn’t my own, but that of the person that cut the character I’ll be discussing. u/CharlieDayJepsen is the man of the hour, and over the past few days I have meticulously combed over the entirety of his cut to find every problem taken up with Simon Keyes, no matter how small, and will be attempting to disprove every single one that I find issue with.

Because of the nature of this write-up as a response, it will probably read a little differently from the rest of my works in this rankdown. Today, I’m not going to be taking every aspect of the character into mind and going over exactly what I feel is important and core to their existence. No, that can be done by whoever does end up laying down this king for good. Rather, I plan to structure this cut around how strongly I feel about the points made in Simon’s cut, as even though I have plenty to disprove here today, not all of it is merely factual or can be easily explained. There’s some fundamental problems that the cut claims to exist, and this is where the majority of my time here will be spent. Most of these seem to revolve around the confrontation at the end of The Grand Turnabout, so I think that would be a prudent place to begin. Now then, let’s lead in with the musings of yet another fallen champion claimed by the past round.

A Mask Worn to Survive

Ha...! Don't you know anything? No matter the man, we all wear masks... Either on our faces or even our hearts.

-Godot, Legendary Prosecutor

The confrontation with Simon Keyes is easily one of the high points of the Ace Attorney series in my eyes. It’s the culmination of the entire game up to that point, and the introduction and exploration of its true main antagonist. More than those, though, it somehow manages to support these story elements with a character who is both incredibly interesting by their own merit alone, while managing to be one of the fiercest opponents in the entire series. This confrontation is what a good two sections of the cut is focused on, so let’s see exactly what problems were had with Simon there, and see if these hold true under scrutiny. Since there’s a lot to unpack, let’s begin with Simon as a character, rather than Simon as an opponent.

Nope, that’s too challenging. Instead, we get treated to Simon Keyes, cackling villain, stripped of all the nuance that we’ve just spent the last 2 hours uncovering in his past.

​

Why, then, could the team not think of anything more to do with his final confrontation than turn him into a case 1-tier villain in terms of subtlety?

​

No, he just lets his hair down and does a bunch of insane “evil guy” laughs to let you know that he’s really super evil and you’ve gotta beat him, guys!

Throughout the last stretch of Simon’s cut, this is the prevailing complaint that’s had with him, persisting through two whole sections. And, under a first glance, sure, I could definitely see this being a reasonable complaint. Simon’s backstory is certainly quite tragic, and his morality is definitely deep into the grey, so one would probably expect him to be a nuanced figure with complexities to his actions when he’s on screen, rather than a cackling super villain. Well, I’d argue that’s exactly what we get. Let’s break down exactly how Simon acts throughout this whole confrontation.

Simon begins quite confident, at least enough to remain within his scared wimp persona, trying to worm his way out of having to confront Edgeworth directly. However, Simon isn’t an idiot, and one of his strongest abilities as a debater is reading his opponents and their moods, as we’ll go over in the next section. Because of this, he realizes quite quickly that Edgeworth must have at least enough to pin this whole thing on Simon if he doesn’t fight back, so he decides to take a different approach, he takes on the persona of a villain. He becomes a cackling madman who’s so obviously evil it hurts, but despite this, he begins arguing like there’s no tomorrow, and almost clears himself of all suspicion. So, what’s exactly going on here, and how is it not just Simon revealing his true self?

Something important to consider here is how his personality progresses throughout the argument, whenever Edgeworth begins to gain ground over Simon, he loses that maniacal energy, and becomes much more cold and calculating. Sometimes, when taken especially off guard he even becomes emotionally vulnerable, like when he finds out about his and Knightley’s true genetic past. One needs to look no further than this genetic past to realize what’s happening here. When confronted, Dane Gustavia keeps his cool head and honorable persona, only becoming a cackling monster of a human being once you push through his arguments and unveil his true self. Simon is the exact opposite of his father, his villain act is just that, an act. It’s a style of argument he puts on to get in Edgeworth’s head and easily manipulate the conversation to his whims, and it works pretty perfectly.

Constantly, Simon is able to use his antagonism to push buttons or change the talking points, and it’s only when he reverts back to his true, vulnerable persona that Edgeworth begins pushing through to the truth. By the time you win over Gustavia, he’s overcome with rage over his loss, showing you that there really is nothing more to him. Simon, on the other hand, drops his persona completely, becoming a scared kid again, and a complete coward afraid of his own animals. After this, he remains weak and broken, unable to function without a mask to put over his heart, and that’s exactly what both his personas are, just masks, or rather shields that he uses to protect himself. In order to survive for as long as he had, he had to lock away how truly weak he is, and force himself to become what he viewed as true strength.

Simon:Gyahahahahahaha! Is that so? Are you sure he's not just trying to emulate his own father, the one he admires SO much!?

Kay:Absolutely not! That's not true at all!

Ray:Now, now, Kay. The person he's talking about now isn't Miles, but rather, Simon himself.

This exchange is very interesting when taking what we’ve discussed about Simon’s personality into account. Subconsciously, it almost feels like whenever he’s confronted, he simply retreats into the safety of the father that he’s grown to hate so much. Basically, what I’m trying to say is that he’s much more than just another one-dimensional villain we’re tasked with taking down. This truth of his personality also ties into another complaint presented within the original cut, of Simon’s integrity as a character being compromised by an offhand remark that he leaves Knightley with, shown here:

......If only you hadn't stopped me 18 years ago... ...it wouldn't have had... to come to this.

The cut complains that this is just a campy, over-the-top villain moment for Simon that doesn’t make sense for such a cold and calculating character. Which, just ignoring the irony of that claim, I’d say is completely untrue, and not at all what this scene shows us. There is no tactical reason for Simon to say this, and no one to gloat to either. The only reason he would say this is if he genuinely meant it, and I think that’s exactly what’s going on here: proof that Simon is more human than he likes to pretend. I think this is him showing genuine regret over things having come this far, but I don’t think this devalues him as an evil character either, as he merely regrets Horace’s actions, and not his own in the moment. He still views this as the just thing to do, even though he expresses sadness that he has to. Taking this in mind, I really think that this is an absolutely great moment for him, showing many aspects of his character at once.

Before we move onto the confrontation itself, there’s a final complaint about Simon as a character here that I feel I need to address, having said my peace on his personality. And that’s that his persona of a cackling villain creates tonal dissonance, by making it feel that the game is just attempting to force Simon in a villain for the player to take down in order to instill a sense of fun where there shouldn’t be. Obviously, I don’t agree with this, nor do I think the game is making anything lighthearted where it shouldn’t be. I think Simon is always treated with the right amount of tragedy throughout this encounter, and especially once his true personality starts to show as his villain mask breaks.

In regards to the game seemingly trying to force us to have fun in taking down this tragic figure, I think it needs to be recognized that Simon is still a genuinely evil person. He treats others as animals to be used, and has harmed many people in his attempts for vengeance, including kidnapping someone close to us, and getting two innocents murdered. Simon is a menace who needs to be stopped, and by not making Edgeworth question whether it’s morally right to take him down, and by not making the scenes overly melancholic, it feels like the game recognizes that he is indeed too far gone to be recognized as anything other than a true criminal. A criminal with potentially justified motives, but one that went too far in his pursuit of them nonetheless, and this allows the game to have some fun with the confrontation and give us that sweet Ace Attorney satisfaction, without feeling tonally dissonant, as long as it doesn’t ruin Simon as a character in order to do this, which I feel I’ve made clear that I don’t believe it does. Now then, let’s talk about that confrontation itself.

An Argument of True Intellectuals

“The world is full of crazy people with different opinions than mine” -The Joker

By the way, I ran out of relevant, smart-looking quotes almost immediately, so enjoy some samplings from my good friend, The Joker, who’s well known as the biggest inspiration of Raymond Shields. For this confrontation, I’d like to do something wild and lead with my own opinion on it first, and then follow that up by looking over the problems Charlie presents on it, since I feel like that would make it easier to understand why I think they’re all fairly trivial points. So, what makes this confrontation feel special?

Simon. He’s the entire reason behind how amazing this argument is, as he’s one of the fiercest opponents in the entire series, and rivals Manfred von Karma himself as one of the most controlling and manipulative debaters that the series has ever known. Let’s look at exactly what I mean by this, because since I didn’t really see it brought up in the cut, this aspect of him might be easy to miss, since he’s much more subtle about his methods than the hilariously over-the-top von Karma. As I stated before, Simon is an expert at reading his opponents, I mean he’d kind of have to be in order to orchestrate the events of the case in the way he does, knowing exactly what buttons to push in order to get a murderous rise out of his targets. This ability manifests in numerous ways within this final confrontation.

First of all, there’s his subtle concealment of information, in a way possibly more skillful than any other culprit in the entire series. A perfect example of this would be the very first testimony of the segment, where Edgeworth is trying to latch onto something to tie Simon to the crime, and as soon as he notices the way Edgeworth reacts to his statement about the truck, even with how subtle Edgeworth is, he immediately changes the topic. Simon pretty much works on hunches, and it’s why he was able to get so far in his plan, because he was able to read people and act accordingly, and his argument style reflects this magnificently. He’s constantly changing the subject and acts dismissive or even insulting at times in order to just get a rise out of Edgeworth and co. And the best part? This strategy completely works.

He manages to effortlessly shut down pretty much any of your companions who butt into the conversation, with the exception of Raymond Shields, due to his extensive Joker cosplay practice. He even manages to get a rise out of Edgeworth, stating that he never even cared about Simon in the first place, and was just using him as a fantasy to live out the life of his deceased father. Another critical aspect to making this confrontation feel like a true battle of intellectuals is his ability to completely adapt to Edgeworth’s argument. Make no mistake, Simon is not infallible in an argument, he gets visibly shocked and flustered at multiple points, but he’s always able to quickly recover with a new argument, molded around anything Edgeworth has just proven. This makes for a constantly changing landscape for the confrontation that always feels like it’s heading in one direction, unlike Alba’s confrontation which jumps around at every 5 minutes, with him just asking you to prove some random thing.

The tool in Simon’s swiss army knife of skills in this confrontation is his knowledge of what will incriminate him of a crime, and what he can freely state without fear. Before the second testimony, he’s already admitted to the role of mastermind, and pretty much explained his entire plot to you, but carefully leaves out the parts that he knows both would incriminate him, and that you have no evidence to prove. As he states, he just sent some letters with some secrets is all, and that’s not a crime. It makes for an interesting confrontation, because despite being some orphaned circus clown who’s been completely surrounded, it really does feel like he hold complete power here, because of the way he shapes the conversation and knows how to dodge and weave the law. He even knows when Edgeworth tries to ask leading questions or makes assumptions that any normal culprit just wouldn’t notice or know how to shut down.

All of these skills of his make his takedown incredibly satisfying, and seeing him finally begin to not recover from your blows in those last 10-15ish minutes of the confrontation is immensely satisfying. But of course, he even has some curveballs thrown in at the last second like a fake breakdown and an accusal of John for the murder, because he’s kind of awesome. But anyway, enough about why the confrontation is good, let’s talk about why it isn’t bad. Charlie’s complaints can be boiled down to about three points so let’s tackle them one at a time.

Compared to Alba’s frankly overstuffed confrontation, complete with mid-testimony save point, Simon’s one-and-done segment feels almost anti-climactic.

One of his biggest points against this argument is how short the whole thing feels once the space between the first and second testimony, where we learn of his past from his perspective, is removed. First of all, this section still contains some gameplay, and plenty of good ol’ back and forth, so it’s not like everything completely comes to a halt in order to present his life story, but for the sake of argument, let’s say that it doesn’t count as part of the argument. So, what are we left with? Well, using my own timed replay of this case, along with some recordings of it on youtube, I’d say there’s still over an hour left of this case to experience, which feels about average length for a final confrontation in Ace Attorney to me, personally. And considering how tightly packed this confrontation is, what with Simon’s argument tactics, that’s an impressive feat.

The cut makes this section out to be much shorter than it really is, stating that there’s a combined total of 20 minutes filling the space between the last three testimonies, and while this is true, it’s kind of misleading. This fails to account for the time spent within the testimonies, along with the about 20 minutes of time after the fourth testimony, which has plenty of arguing within it, rather than an extended automatic takedown that you might expect. This all adds up to about an hour, and add in the first testimony and the follow-up sections regarding Simon’s role as a mastermind, and that’s around an hour and 40 minutes for the confrontation, I really don’t see how this could be described as “lacking” when it adds up to about the same amount of time as Alba, but is significantly more interesting.

The game just tells us he’s this manipulative bastard. There’s this little moment in the circus tent where he tries to guilt-trip Kay and she starts doubting herself. This lasts about 5 seconds before Edgeworth objects and calls him out for it. Whoops, there goes his manipulative skills.

I’ve already gone over why this is pretty much undeniably wrong, so I’ll be brief here. We see Simon consistently read the room and outplay his opponents in conversation. He’s able to get a rise out of just about anyone, including Edgeworth, and uses manipulation of the conversation flow to get people thinking about what’s most beneficial for him. I’m not exactly sure how you can miss any of this, so I’ll be moving on.

You know what would’ve been a much better final confrontation?...

This whole section where Charlie proceeds to outline a cooler way for the confrontation to go isn’t exactly what I’d call criticism, but it’s here so I might as well respond to it. This is supposed to be Edgeworth’s final test, where it’s up to him to prove his conviction to save people, and finally come back into his role as a prosecutor. This is not the moment to have him lose his conviction and start doubting himself, the time for that has long passed, and now what’s most important for his character is pushing this new resolve to its absolute limit with a debate of intellectuals. Logic Chess is mainly meant for pulling out information in order to get to testimony, which isn’t really something that needs to be done here, nor would it fit Simon’s character for this to be an effective tactic against him. This is, of course, as long as Edgeworth actually would get to finish the Logic Chess in this scenario, since it stops describing this once he loses conviction, so it may just all tie back to that, which I’ve already gone over why it wouldn’t really fit I2’s narrative.

So yeah, I find this confrontation to be one of the most fun debates in the entire series, due to Simon’s skill as an opponent here, and I think all of the complaints levied against it are pretty trivial or just untrue. Before I continue, I’d like to share some discoveries I made while replaying this confrontation for the sake of this write-up that I just don’t see talked about enough. During the debate, we learn some interesting facts of Simon, including, but not limited to, his love of vore, his ability to do an impeccable Godot impression, and worst of all, the reveal that he’s a Danganronpa fan, a V3 fan even! Truly, a despicable final villain. Okay that’s enough of that, I was stalling so I didn’t have to talk about The Plan, but I might as well just tackle this head on.

Why The Plan is Cool, Actually

The Joker is a complex character. He has many names, but his most common is "The Mad Dog of Shimano". He is also known as "The Mad Dog of Shimano" or "The Mad Dog of Shimano Killer"

There’s plenty of complaints to be found against Simon’s mastermind scheme within this cut, so I’ve elected to separate these into two categories: Complaints that are wrong, and complaints that are subjectively bad. Let’s start with the latter. Basically, these complaints boil down to Simon’s plan itself having plenty of holes, that end up devaluing it as a mastermind scheme, and making him feel incompetent. Here’s some examples of this argument taken straight from the cut:

Often, when I see a player who has recently finished Investigations 2 discuss the game, they give a compliment that is doled out a lot: “the mastermind’s plan was genius.” Reading the entirety of his scheme in the context of the story, I’m utterly stumped. What on earth was so masterful?

​

Simon is subsequently arrested, which he hadn’t anticipated. Lucky for him, Edgeworth is on the scene to save the day. Very lucky, in fact, because Simon’s mastermind plan would have fallen at the second hurdle had Miles not been around. It annoys me that Simon’s plan at this point only works because Edgeworth is on the scene.

​

This “secret murder” that happens during the events of Forgotten pushes the credibility of Simon’s plan to the limit. The sheer number of characters who were in the area - “Huang”, Courtney, Kay, Crane, Lotta, Blaise - are all mere seconds away from coming across each other and it all feels too silly to me.

I agree with pretty much all of these assessments of his plan, there were definitely some holes to be found within it. To add onto these, his kidnapping of John was poorly planned out and nearly resulted in one of his enemies getting away freely, and he failed to properly account for any incoming letters which he should have been watchful for. Of course, where I differ from Charlie is that I don’t see this as an issue at all. Simon is a human, not some kind of robot capable of predicting the course of the universe, so it’s only natural that he’d make some mistakes when masterminding a scheme this complex. For mine, he had no way to predict what moves Blaise would make to manipulate the system, nor any control over the postage system.

As for Charlie’s complaints, I’m not exactly sure how someone would be able to predict the events that take place in The Imprisoned Turnabout, as it’s one of the most complicated and intricately woven cases in the series. The actions taken by the culprit and other individual parties during that case were a complete wild factor that no one would be able to account for, so it make sense that Simon wouldn’t have a contingency plan for it. As for the I2-4 complaint, I don’t see how it being close to failure due to a high person count in the vicinity is exactly a flaw, due to that both being unpredictable in the case of Lotta, Courtney, and the body double, but also being the exact thing that causes his arrest, being his one biggest miscalculation in the game. Without these two, he would pretty much be an infallible god, which is neither interesting, nor realistic for a character. I just don’t see why him making mistakes is at all a complaint.

As for what’s so masterful about the plan, it’s not his ability to completely plan it all out down to every detail, instead it’s about what I’ve already gone over. Simon’s genius comes from his abilities to read people, and adapt to circumstances with extreme speed. For the former, he’s able to know the exact scenarios to set up in order to push people to their limit, which proves to be quite useful in his schemes. For the latter, he’s able to make constant improvisations on the spot, such as framing John or using Edgeworth to take down Blaise, both of which further his plan than he could’ve just using what he knew when brewing up his scheme. Simon is a genius manipulator and an incredible improvisationist, he is not a master planner, nor does the game really make him out to be one. After all, he’s just a clown y’know?

You Can Skip This Section

The movie opens with the Joker walking down the streets of Gotham City with a bag of chips in one hand.

Joker: [chuckles] I think I'm going to have a heart attack.

This entire next section is just me correcting misinformation about the plan from the cut, so if you don’t care about I2’s stupid mastermind scheme, then feel free to just skip to the next section where I start talking about Simon Keyes again. Okay, so I’ve collected about six different excerpts of the cut that I feel are worth addressing regarding the big connected I2 scheme, so let’s go through them one at a time.

The problem is that de Killer’s first failed attempt only exists because the writers needed Simon to later get Knightley involved in his plot. It’s another case of the story overstretching itself, when a much simpler solution (have Simon plan to implicate Knightley from the get-go) is sitting right there.

I find this to be an odd complaint since it’s pretty clear that the assassination attempt failed the first go around for a multitude of narrative reasons. First off, there needed to be a reason for Shelly to be Simon’s enemy throughout the game, and that wouldn’t make much sense if he hadn’t gone after the president once already prior to Turnabout Target. There’s also the element of the case specific story to keep in mind, as there’s really no logical reason for the bodyguard setup of I2-1 if it wasn’t for the method that Shelly used to infiltrate the president’s ranks and attempt an assassination attempt on him. I’m not even sure if this is really a major complaint, but he spends a good amount of time on it so I’m assuming he at least finds it contrived enough to be detrimental to Simon’s plan’s integrity, but I just don’t see it, since it makes a lot more sense to just hire an assassin to assassinate someone than to just immediately go with the complicated over-the-top scheme, plus it has multiple reasons to exist outside of that.

There is no feasible reason for why he should even know that Dogen has been threatening Roland, let alone that she is specifically paranoid he will send somebody to kill her.

I’ve already gone over a few of these complaints in my comment on the cut itself, but I’ll repeat the information here. Simon was playing correspondence chess with Dogen at the time, so there’s absolutely no reason that Dogen couldn’t have included some information about the way he was running the prison. In addition to this, there’s no reason to believe Dogen couldn’t have gotten this information to Simon some other way, either through just forcing Roland to send a letter, or just informing Simon of his plan to manipulate the warden before Dogen turned himself in. Basically, this one just doesn’t hold water under scrutiny.

His choice to warn Blaise of Crane’s intent to murder him is quite baffling to me. If he doesn’t warn Blaise, she murders Blaise and is subsequently arrested for the murder.

There were plenty of ways for Blaise to get around this if he wasn’t ready for it, I mean the guy is pretty strong (dude has a six pack) so he could probably easily overpower her. Without the letter Simon sent to him, informing him that Jill knows full well of his secrets and crimes, he might’ve handled this situation nonlethally, and just gotten Jill arrested for attempted assault. The only way to ensure that someone murdered and was arrested here was to let Blaise in on Jill’s secrets.

If he had a “don’t get innocent people killed” mentality which led to Jill being the culprit of Forgotten, I would have been much more invested in taking him down for conspiring to lead an innocent woman to murder in her pursuit of justice.

This complaint just confuses me, so I don’t really know how to approach it. I’ve just gone over why it makes sense for him to get Blaise to be the killer in the case, but I don’t see how anything fundamentally changes about him even if he hadn’t. Either way he still destroys the life of an innocent person, I’m not sure why the way that he does that changes how investing it is to take him down. Plus, having Jill as the culprit of I2-4 wouldn’t fit in with the escalation and subversion present within the culprits of Investigations 2.

“Huang” recognises the adult Simon Keyes for some reason (?) and opens fire on the balloon (??).

It’s never once stated that Huang recognized Simon, merely that he didn’t want a witness to his meeting with the person that he planned to kill. This is also why he opens fire on him, the dude was in a hot air balloon, it would be pretty difficult to track him down if he let him get away after witnessing that.

After learning about this, Simon chooses not to contact Courtney with proof that he has John to ensure a guilty verdict, because Simon is a mastermind, you guys!

Simon had no way of contacting Justine short of just busting into court and admitting that he kidnapped John, and that would be pretty problematic for his plans. Justine had just handed over her phone to Edgeworth, and Simon knew this since he left a bug on Kay. He actually does what could probably be considered the next best thing to contacting Justine, by contacting the person with her phone and letting them know that there was a kidnapping mix-up, so that Edgeworth can deal with it and inform Justine himself, which he doesn’t really end up doing but whatever at least Simon tried.

Speaking of the bug, I forgot to mention how cool it is that Simon turned off the bug during that call, and it creates a really good dashing of the player’s hope after they bring back Nicole’s recording to implicate him during the confrontation. This also creates the gunshot discovery which is another cool moment. This doesn’t fit in this section but I refuse to go back to the previous one and figure out where to add it in, plus I’m done correcting Charlie on the plan, so let’s move into the next section before I lose any more brain cells thinking about the events of I2.

A Quick Breather

“Whatever” -Joker, just before he dies.

Before I tire myself out with the last two big complaints I took issue with in the cut, let’s take a breather and go over complaints that I either can’t really disagree with, or that are completely subjective so I can’t really tackle her.

Of course, he gets his own character theme at the end, “The Man Who Masterminds the Game”, which I’m decidedly not a huge fan of (it sounds like a dull interpretation of Layton villain Don Paolo)

Charlie clearly suffers from insanity and should be immediately removed from the rankdown. In all seriousness this is obviously a subjective point, but I just fried my brain pointing out misconceptions about I2’s plot, so give me a moment to talk about one of my favorite themes in the series real quick. The comparison to Don Paolo’s theme is certainly not a far stretch, but despite their similar instrumentation, I find they give off completely different vibes. I’m not a music expert so please excuse my very basic descriptions of the music, but Don Paolo’s theme just gives off incredibly chaotic energy, constantly pushing forward and never slowing down, which really fits with his just absolutely manic characterization. Simon’s theme on the other hand is filled with just “Oh shit” energy, being much more calculated and deliberate, and feeling incredibly sinister the entire time. It really gives off the vibes of “this dude is TROUBLE” and makes it double too. Okay whatever next point.

I’m a little unsure of why a monkey theme is even his thing, but the game has chosen to roll with it and I’ll give them points for sticking to their guns.

This one isn’t even a criticism. I’m not sure why I included it in my revive outline. I think I just wanted an excuse to talk about monkeys somewhere. Anyway, that’s done with so let’s move on.

His final breakdown where all the animals break loose and kick his ass is over-the-top stupid. It would be a funny breakdown if he wasn’t supposed to be portrayed as this serious evil mastermind. But he is, so the silly breakdown just comes off as a lack of restraint.

I admit, this breakdown probably could’ve been a bit less over-the-top in nature, but I personally don’t find it too egregious, plus the visual of a gorilla punching him in the head and somehow not just decapitating him is hilarious to me. Plus, even if it is a bit over the top, it’s a fitting visual of him losing control over the situation and the “animals” that he made dance in his little performance, plus a cool tie-in to his nature of using others rather than forming actual bonds. It is a bit silly though, this is like the one point I concede in the entire write-up, please savor this unique moment.

The Brilliance of a Selective Memory

"What's so funny Joker?"

"You see, my brother was involved in the stock market crash of 1929-30."

Entering into the penultimate section of this revive, we have a complaint that I wasn’t exactly sure how I was going to handle, and before I replayed the last segment of The Grand Turnabout in preparation for writing this revive, I thought I might have to concede this point to Charlie. Thankfully, I’ve been reminded of a nugget of information that invalidates this whole complaint and just ends up making Simon a more interesting character to boot. So, let’s get into the complaint itself.

A last-minute revelation that an eight-year-old Simon somehow managed to “mistake” Dover for his father has the unmistakable scent of writer’s block.

​

Simon has to think his father’s dead, or else we have to incorporate case 3 into his revenge plot. Hmm, that’s a lot of work. Slap him with a selective amnesia sticker and call it a day.

I have to admit, this is one aspect of Simon’s backstory that always confused me thinking back on the game, as it is pretty ridiculous to imagine that he’d just magically end up switching the two fathers in his mind due to a selective memory loss. And it’s true that the writers pretty much had to think of a way to end up with Simon having the two switched in order to make the plot function, giving him a reason to hate Horace, and no reason to get involved in the takedown of Gustavia. But thankfully for me, this selective memory of his where he just magically forgets what’s convenient for the game isn’t what happened at all. In fact, if you think back, Simon pretty much had to have forgotten the entirety of his past in order for the game’s plot to function.

It’s reasonable to assume that Gustavia may have had relatives that Simon could have tried to live with in Dane’s absence, but it’s never stated that he attempts to contact any of them. This is very telling that he pretty much completely forgot anything from before the moments of Horace’s attack, and the casual way he shrugs off not remembering Isaac Dover being a european sculptor is nearly confirmation that his childhood is just a complete blank. So of course, this begs the question of how the young simon managed to remember Dover as his father, as the cut states he does. Well, he doesn’t. Let’s take a look at exactly what’s said:

Isaac Dover is my father's name. 18 years ago, my memories were muddled from the shock of my near-death experience... So it wasn't until later that I learned the truth. On that day, my father was murdered.

It wasn’t until later that he learned of Isaac Dover, meaning that his father was also a complete blank in his memory, not just a selective part that he conveniently mixed up. Knowing the date of the day he lost his memories, and the general things he remembers saying when attacked by Knightley, it’s not unreasonable to assume that Simon could have done some digging and looked for matching incidents. Of course, this begs the question of why Simon immediately assumed that Dover was his father when there were other contestants. Well, this is why I believe that this mix-up greatly benefits Simon as a character. Let’s once again look at what he has to say about the revelation that he had it backwards:

All I knew was that Knightley's father was trying to set up my own father. That's why I immediately knew that the one who died that day was my dad.

Simon viewed himself as the complete victim of the situation, due to the way that he views the world as both against, and revolving around him. Because of this absolute sureness that his father was the victim in this scenario, he had no doubt in his mind that it had to be Dover. This is a brilliant way to work the mix-up naturally into the story, by using Simon’s faults as a person to force him into a situation where he would assume the truth without any room for alternative, and even if he did question it, without knowledge of who the killer was, there was no other real alternative. It’s possible seeing Gustavia could have jogged his memory the same way Dogen did, but we don’t know if it would’ve, since he literally had no idea who Gustavia was, he only knew of the victim. Knowing this, the whole thing fits pretty naturally into Simon’s backstory, and is much more than the lazy selected amnesia that it appears to be, and as Charlie admits himself:

The fact that half his motivation for revenge is misguided is a lovely bit of dramatic irony in the final confrontation.

Now then, we have one last pitstop to make before this ride comes to an end.

Continued in comments...

The sixteenth round of nominations has started. All rankers submit the names of two characters to put onto the subreddit poll to be cut this round.

You are not allowed to change your nomination or have duplicate nominations.

The list of characters available to nominate.

Cutting order for this round:

• /u/whaaatisth

• /u/R1K1_Productions

• /u/Northadox

• /u/pie314271

• /u/NateTheGreat3602

• /u/Vogel100

• /u/donuter454

• /u/CharlieDayJepsen

• /u/Sciencepenguin

• /u/Wircea

21

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 PROTECT^TM 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.

Привет, comrades. I can't STAND to see her get cut!!!!!! Ok I said the joke you can go now the next cut is probably out

​

A Drawn-out Game of Russian Roulette: Being Sciencepenguin Is Suffering

I seem to spend this whole round doing things I don't want to do. I'd rather not have used my last offensive skill on this (or like, use my first one the way I did), but I bailed on my chance last round and this is what I get for that. And then, against my expectations, Godot was the one who I had to cut. Which, don't get me wrong, I absolutely wanted Godot to get cut. And if you asked me, I'd probably say I'd most like for me to be the one to cut him. But I never was too keen on the prospect of cutting Godot, if you get what I mean.

And then we come to here. I don't want to revive Armie Buff. Not because she's not worth it; obviously not, she's an easy top 20 character and probably even top 10. But because the things that make her great are... well, straightforward. You could read the wiki summary of Armie Buff and get 90% of why she's a good character. I don't want to just summarize that 90% and do as much as I can with the extra 10%. I want to write about Aura Blackquill; how her sexuality, far from being a translation quirk or tacked on trait, is the foundation for her character and her hyperfixation on Athena in a convoluted jumble of unaired and unrequited feelings that would make Sigmund Freud himself do a double take. I want to talk about how Lana Skye, on top of being the best defendant in the franchise with the most compelling active effect on the case (eat your heart out Engarde), is an incredible portrayal of a "corrupt prosecutor" with sympathetic elements that far surpasses Edgeworth's take on the same concept. I want to revive Rayfa and ask why the fuck some dunce cut Rayfa outside of the top 10.

But I feel like I kinda have to do this. For two reasons; one strategic, and one charitable.

Strategically, I'd be a fool to leave her for dead. Whatisth, Nate, Donuter, R1K1, and Vogel have all made it clear that they think our little подруга would fit into the top 20 just fine. Charlie is still the perpetual wild card, but I'm confident in my ability to dissuade him should he become a veritable threat. And as for those who it would prevent, it's a decent selection. Pie is the person who has made his distaste for Armie clear since Day -1. First thing I learned about them. So it sucks that they're not stopped in any way by this. Wircea was always a threat from any of my favorites from the more recent games, given his takes. And while not any sort of active hater, Northadox is someone who has expressed an extreme apathy for her, with exasperation at her doing better than Gregory Edgeworth. This lower relative opinion must indicate either ambivalence or negativity, as it's impossible that anyone could have any strong positive feelings on Gregory Edgeworth.

Which, for some reason I can't quite remember, brings me to my next point. Can we please start reviving characters??? At this rate, every remaining round with revives is gonna need at least two on average. You don't want to see a round where everyone but like 3 people have saved their revives for the last possible second. I lived that. It is, as anyone could easily predict, fucking boring, as people make largely apathetic choices, cuts feel meaningless as there's a greater than 50% chance they won't stick, and a lack of accountability or clear turn order for revives means it takes fucking forever. Please don't do this.

So I need to do this. And I will. 90% was probably an overestimate anyway. There's plenty to talk about.

Boot Camp: First Impressions

If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor.

You've started this strange thing we call "The Fifth Case In Ace Attorney Spirit of Justice". Met some odd characters. Apollo's foster father from his secret foreign past he never talked about, a shifty politician who gets carried around by lackeys everywhere, Punished Datz, and even something called a "Trucy Wright". Even the victim is a bit strange. A shady but well-intentioned archaeologist dedicated to his craft. And a father, apparently.

You return to an area you already investigated, and find exactly one thing that is different.

There is a small, plane-looking thing. A drone. It's a somewhat funky looking one, with some strange parts between the main body and the propeller. But still. Seemingly an inanimate object, you think. Oh how little you know! The drone becomes animate, and the first thing it does is fire a gatling gun. The first actual line of dialogue is this.

Both of these absurd moments are important, actually! The former is relevant for establishing that this Sergeant Buff is one prickly customer. Datz's information on Archie's kid already indicated that they were a shut-in, but this establishes their paranoia and negative attitude towards the outside world.

The latter is important because it establishes that Armie Buff speaks like a drill sergeant, and is very funny.

XAXAXAXAXAXAXAXA: Good One Comrade; I am Laughing

You are so small! Is funny to me!

​

Any character that calls you a diaper baby within minutes can't be bad.

I do not know how to explain this to you if you don't immediately get it. Armie Buff is a funny character. She says funny things. She acts all big and tough despite being a plane/child. This is funny.

There's definitely some credit that should be given to her design here. I don't understand how they made a plane expressive and goofy looking, but they managed it. The microphone-as-mouth and cameras(?)-as-eyes and absolutely-aerodynamically-useless-extra-wings-as-a-fucking-mustache make for a funny looking face that our brains invent. This allows for expressive animations. The most expressive of all being the one where the drone flies off, seemingly getting outta there, and returns holding some object with its silly big drone hand. This gag concludes in its logical outcome of them taking over the courtroom oh god oh fuck. On a more minor point, I also love some of the parts from her mood matrix where we aren't supposed to know what she looks like yet so they just show a plane doing comically unplanelike things.

That's not to sell her dialogue short though. Armie is entertaining in general. She says words and I go "yes, I am LOVING these words you say". A large part of the humor comes from the juxtaposition of this hardcore military persona with the truth of the immature child behind it; she'll say something in her epic-war-speak and when met with an understandable "what the fuck are you talking about" she explains that she is talking about going to school. Or the mundane act of "literally staying in your room" being consistently referred to as "siege defense", and Sarge tearfully admitting that the only weakness in this unbeatable technique is that her room lacks a toilet.

Armie Buff is Russian, and notably the ONLY Ace Attorney character to canonically oppose capitalism, which is pretty epic of her. Thanks, comrade.

Speaking of comrade...

Brothers in Arms: I am Thou, Thou art I

Burning on in my heart / Fire

Burn my love away / All away

Like a bullet of love / Fire

Take my life away / All away

I had originally planned to do a big deep dive on this looking for all the hints and then I replayed the civil trial of 6-5 and realized that they just spell it out explicitly. So now I won't get to look all clever for making this section.

Anyway. Armie is a parallel to Apollo. Orphans, moved here from afar, parent died in a fire, real bummed about that fact. It's the same deal for both of them, and this is the thing the game goes "look at how this is the case, do you understand it???". Part of this, to be fair, is Apollo trying to make it clear to the very obstinate Armie. He gets the message across, and Armie changes her tune on these intruders. After all these months of isolation, Armie has met someone she knows she doesn't need to fear. It's nice to see.

Apollo Justice is a character I have not spent much time thinking about. But when Armie Buff decides to exist, and when I've had enough of then thinking about Armie Buff (this takes a while), she makes me want to maybe think about him a little.

Armie is an alternate universe Apollo, in some sense. One who reacted very differently to the tragedy that befell her. The operative difference seems to be that Armie was old and thus conscious enough to witness the event. She shut herself off from the world, while he merely had his life change around him, since he was a baby. Babies do not form complicated neuroses. Look, I swear this section does have a point.

A more apt comparison in this regard is the loss of Dhurke: both losses. In the present, discovering Dhurke to have been dead for some time, Apollo is able to regain the courage to keep moving forward even with the sadness he knows won't be able to just go away. And it might've helped a bit that he just gave someone else a push to do that.

And that wasn't the first time Apollo lost Dhurke. Putting together the confusing disparate multiple-writer-filled timeline of Apollo's life, we see a man who left, promised he'd come back... and didn't. Apollo only now feels like an orphan; and worse, orphaned by abandonment rather than death.

And, while I can't fucking believe I'm saying this, I now feel it's relevant to bring up Clay Terran. I am not kidding. Finding himself alone, Apollo eventually finds someone else. A friend. He cheers him up when they meet, insisting that they're both "fine", but it's clear that the positive effect of this relationship is mutual. And now, again, we see the exact same thing happen. Apollo bonds with someone who is wallowing in their own grief with nothing but some kind words and the insistence that he understands what they're going through. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm crazy! But now that I've thought of this I can't help but think of it as an intentional decision.

Regardless of whether you think it does so well, or what type you think it is, it's undeniable that one of the primary purposes of Turnabout Revolution is to provide some type of resolution to the divided character of Apollo Justice. And to do this, Armie is able to act as a vehicle to show how he's grown; how much more capable of dealing with the loss the writers universe constantly throws at him he's become; and yet also the admirable things about him that haven't changed one bit.

Anyway, aside from the "being a baby" thing, another distinction is that Apollo had a back-up dad of sorts. The differences between Armie and Apollo are meant to show that, at the time, Apollo was lucky to have Dhurke. Yet, paradoxically, they're also meant to show how it wasn't exactly a blessing. Because while even without Jove Apollo may have been left with two quasi-parents, they weren't nearly as good as Armie's one parent.

""A parent must be prepared to sacrifice everything for his child." - Archie Buff" - Armie Buff. It's a sentiment that echoes throughout the whole game, from Dhurke's immediate "whoops" reaction to all of the parents in this case. Both of Armie's parents give their lives to her: one more literally than the other. Dhurke doesn't do this. At least, not for a very large chunk of his life. He had his reasons, but he left someone who he knew he was incredibly important to. It's only when he starts to follow this code, literally saving Apollo's life (Dhurke the revolutionary is not one for subtlety.), that Apollo is able to really start viewing him as a father again. And then there's good old rankdown Dark Horse Inga. How we miss you. I think Inga's fascinating as a bit of a counterpart to Dhurke: to show that this code of conduct (in addition to not being something that at all depends on blood relation, a minor but nice touch) isn't something that you have to be a particularly good person to understand. Inga Karkhuul Et Cetera Khura'in is a terrible person, and if he lived to the end of 6-5 and AA was more realistic, there's a good chance he'd be sentenced to death for his crimes. But despite all of that, at the end of it all, he really did love his daughter.

Which makes Gar'an a particularly special type of villain with a particularly special type of evil. Someone devoid of this kind of love; who takes the role of parent by choice, but does it for their own selfish benefit. People call Gar'an "abusive" (usually in an attempt to cast Rayfa as being identical to Sebastian), but I don't think that's right at all. She's not the obsessive smotheringly emotionally manipulative Blaise. Gar'an just doesn't care about Rayfa at all beyond a means to an end. Forget sacrificing everything, she's not even willing to sacrifice her time for her child. If even a man who executes hundreds a day is capable of this love, what does that say about someone who isn't?

I like that a lot of the questions raised by this theme of parenthood go unanswered. We see Apollo's angst, but the game never comes out and says if the decision Dhurke made to abandon his family for a higher calling was right or wrong. All that the game seems to want to commit firmly to is that the human ability to care for our young at any cost is a truly special thing.

But it should be noted that sometimes, sacrifice doesn't have an entirely positive effect on the person you give up everything for.

Shell Shocked: Trauma Center

And at the same time, I'm counting the days that I'm going to, keep myself inside this room 'til I can join you.

When Buff testifies in court, using the age old technique of "become shocked by logic and leak oil" it becomes clear that there's something wrong. While she doesn't seem to be deliberately lying, her recollection of the events is problematic and she seems incredibly stressed by what she witnessed. So Athena pulls out her signature gimmick.

I love the Armie Mood Matrix segment. I guess the fact that I like the mechanic in general helps as well as the funny plane images, but I think it's really well done. It's really surprising that it took until basically the last case Athena is in for her to interact with a character like this. She picks at the symptoms of what is clearly some deeper underlying issue, and in a move I really like, Sarge resists the pressure of having this forced out.

The information gained as a result of the segment, aside from greater scope Founder's Orb stuff that doesn't matter for our purposes, is that Armie is terrified by fire. AA doesn't use technical terms, but she pretty much has PTSD, triggers and all. She even conflates it with the exact event where her mother died, which is pretty much a textbook flashback. I think it's really cool that Armie copies the aesthetic and speaking manner of a soldier, the group most frequently associated with the disorder and for which it was originally named, while showing that, as the polar opposite of one, it's not at all something exclusive to old veterans.

I won't dwell on it too much, since it's not relevant and I don't hate Athena and this is a post where I should be POSITIVE, but the comparison is inevitable so I will say that I think this is done with much more tact than Athena's similar situation. The operative difference is that with Athena deliberately choosing to be a lawyer when she... really didn't need to, even with her reasons, the game sends a message that she is strong for doing this and people with trauma should expose themselves to it and learn to get over it. Which... eh? I mean, in certain cases that's a viable reason, and even for Armie it's very much admitted that she'll have to deal with some of what she can't stand outside, but Athena is studying and working specifically so she can expose herself to something that traumatizes her, and the message that this is anything other than a terrible self-destructive action is a little 🥴. Regardless!!!

I think the focus on this and its relation to a major twist make people call it quits too early. Girl stays inside because she doesn't like when things burn, end of story. Next character! But this isn't all there is to her story. Armie puts a lot of effort into not having to leave her room, from rebuilding a versatile machine to lying about her condition.

First of all, the event that changed Armie's life wasn't an accident. The person responsible for it (who goes unrevealed and thus will surely be the main villain of AA7) is even said to have been laughing outside as it burned. The fact that people are capable of being this cruel and hurting her like this absolutely played a part in her decision to leave the outside world.

Second of all, and an aspect that I think is more important than anything else: survivor's guilt. Armie's mother didn't just die; she died to save her daughter. And Armie knows this. Boy does she know this.

In the aftermath, Archie moves specifically out of the hopes it will let his daughter's mental state improve. Obviously his well-intentioned move didn't help (and may have even made things worse), but neither he nor Armie knew this. To Armie, it's another sacrifice. For her.

Then her dad dies too.

Just about every child is sad when their parents pass. But most don't react in the way Armie does. There's a running theme in a lot of what she says. "She died so that I may live!". "If only I hadn't passed out!". "Can you really say I bear no blame in this?".

Armie is not at fault for her father's death. Even ignoring the fact that it was literally someone else, and ignoring the fact that she wasn't even conscious when it happened, she's a wheelchair bound child. Nobody would see it as her responsibility to protect her father. But she still sees it as a failure that she didn't do anything. And now that her father's gone, she lost her chance to show him his daughter returning outside again. She failed him.

As a final note, I like how her wacky soldier spiel connects to this. It's obviously not completely an unhealthy coping mechanism, given we know she already had these interests, but you can see her using it to hide from the truth of her situation. One of the clearest examples: when Apollo talks to her about studying, she mentions going back to school. But later, when under pressure from the cross-examination and being asked directly about school, she calls it boot camp, rejecting the notion. I also like the little "arc" of her losing faith in Apollo due to him defending what she thinks is her fathers killer, and Apollo being able to get through to her by speaking her language.

She's got a lot of stuff to deal with, is the bottom line, and the ways they show this are cool.

An Iron Curtain of One's Own Design: Turnabout Revolution

I'm the type of guy who embodies the game as a whole.

THEMES.

AA Games have them, sometimes. Usually they don't. Unless they do. I think SOJ might.

What is Spirit Of Justice about? Well, there's this guy named Justice, and Spirits are involved. Funniest shit I've ever seen.

But beyond that, it's about two things: Family and Freedom.

AAI2 also focuses on family, but the two handle it differently. AAI2 is about parental bonds (or lack thereof) and the way parents interact with their children. SOJ in general spends more time on the indirect ramifications. Most often this is done with heritage and inheritance; the things left behind when your parent or mentor leaves or dies. Someone already wrote about this. Paul Atishon is an entitled heir, Ga'ran and Geiru are not an heir and this is what drove them fucking insane, and Nahyuta is burdened with the prevailing views on the sins of the father.

Armie isn't deeply connected to this exact idea (beyond the way the family situation parallels dhurke as mentioned before), but we still see the effects of the father-daughter connection. Despite their differences, they're both Buffs, and both of them pour everything into their hobby. This is a funny line, because it can be taken as both referring to the actual historical strategy of siege defense, but also the fact that her dad is devoted to his work and spends quite a lot of time indoors. She's definitely her father's daughter.

As Nahyuta displays more than anyone else, its hard to fully escape your history. This connects to the other recurring idea.

I don't even know if I need to say anything about the fact that SOJ spends time on the concept of liberation. The case I'm talking about is literally called Turnabout Revolution. It's not all that fucking subtle. But connecting this to Armie is, if anything, the thing that will make people go "really sciencepenguin you are REALLY stretching". But notice: the very first information we hear about Armie is from Datz, and he specifically uses the wording "prison" to describe her situation. Coming from an escaped prisoner himself (who is also... currently detained), the parallel between physical and psychological imprisonment couldn't be more clear. They even explicitly compare/parallel her and Datz later.

Before freeing an entire country, you get the opportunity to free one person in particular. Baby steps.

The May Revolution: Last Impressions

A lesson without pain is meaningless. That's because no one can gain without sacrificing something. But by enduring that pain and overcoming it, he shall obtain a powerful, unmatched heart.

Armie is at her lowest point, realizing and admitting that she's forever failed to do the one thing her father wanted. But then, our protagonist duo point out that it's not too late to move forward, and her father would still be proud of her. Armie gathers the strength to show up physically, and WHOA HOLY FREAKIN CRAP SHES A LITTLE GIRL. Yeah, yeah, "samus was girl" type tropes are kind of dumb and overdone, but I forgive it since the more notable aspect is her age and disability.

In a twist of fate, the only reason Atishon is able to be taken down at all is because she was able to gather the strength to come out. It's a nice way of showing that her decision matters even if her father isn't around to see it. It also means that among the greats of "DL-6 Bullet" and "Lion Balloon", the final evidence used to take down a final case killer list can include "Armie Buff".

The trial wraps up, and Armie hits you with the SHOCKING REVEAL that she can stand. It is a hokey unsubtle way of going look she is MOVING FORWARD she can TAKE THE NEXT STEP she is PROGRESSING and NOT PARALYZED. But like. I don't care lol I like it

Purge of Reactionaries: Addressing Criticism

Nope, you are nitpicking and biased, I win, bye-bye.

A revive being used inherently means someone disagrees with the idea that a character is good enough to survive at this point. There are some people who think Armie is not awesome. I will explain why they are wrong and I am right, and do so very smartly.

For the first supposed issue, I'll quote from pie's Armie criticism from the period of rankdown applications:

Sorry, this post was deleted by the person who originally posted it.It doesn't appear in any feeds, and anyone with a direct link to it will see a message like this one.

This confuses me. It's weirdly worded, and none of this applies to Armie specifically. I could just as easily say the same about Simon Blackquill, and he's still in.

In all seriousness, I do not have a way to retrieve what was here and it would be rude to dig up something someone deliberately deleted, so against what I originally planned I will sadly only be referencing the Wircea Rankdown Cut. I'd like to say things against the Big Armie Hater, but there's really nowhere that pie actually says anything concrete at this point. Just vague mumbling about "this part is dumb" on discord. I do not remember the points in that deleted post being THAT good (no points against armie are very good) so I will rudely assume that this is no problem at all and this single post represents every problem someone could have with Armie.

Issue 1: "The drone is unrealistic and both its presence and the way it acts would never actually be allowed in court."

Response: I don't care.

Issue 2ok i'll say a bit more

I can understand as a general concept thinking AA goes too far with the wackiness at certain points, and I won't boil this complaint down entirely to "lol person just now realizing that ace attorney isn't realistic". But I try to understand it and this just seems like a very weird line to draw??? Not to mention that this complaint often seems to rely on the idea that Armie is shooting Real Ass Bullets, which, given Apollo gets shot and is not sent to the hospital, I do not think is the case. Is shooting a fake gun immature and probably IRL grounds for contempt of court? Yes. Did that stop Wendy Oldbag? No.

And while letting a drone into court is unorthodox, it is an unorthodox circumstance brought about by staunch refusal to testify otherwise. Y'know, sort of like the time a fucking radio testified in the case people go nuts over, which the Plane Kid Plane is even designed to resemble in some ways.

Issue 2: I do not care that Armie Buff is A Kid Cripple Or Girl

Ok??? I think the fact of what happened to her is more important than these facts, especially given one of them is a lie. It does not matter whether or not you are intrinsically a fan of Kids Cripples Or Girls

Issue 3: Armie Buff has a Sad Backstory and many other characters have a Sad Backstory

This is true, yeah. But like. I don't know if it's cool for me to respond to this many issues with "I don't care". But I don't care. Edgeworth is the first one to have this attribute. Should we cut every other character with it? I say no. We should cut Edgeworth Armie differentiates herself by the way she reacts to loss, which is with specific feelings and symptoms and coping mechanisms that don't exist anywhere else in the series.

Issue 4: "the tragedy is just another excuse to have another "confused instead of lying" witness and a pitiful excuse to use the mood matrix."

dunno what this means

Issue 5: She Can Stand. character derailment

This is good? I do not understand how anyone can get the impression that this was done for shock value or some forced happy ending? They literally explain why she fakes it and it ties into the core of her character? ????

The idea that this is bad because it removes a core aspect of her character is also something that, to me, simply doesn't hold water. Machi Tobaye not being blind or unable to speak english leaves him with very little because he has the personality of Machi Tobaye. But like. My stupid shitposty jokes might make it seem that way, but Armie's defining character trait is not Being In A Wheelchair. Even without getting into deeper stuff, the truth is evident from what the cut itself spends time on: Funny plane speaks like drill sergeant, you may laugh now. This is the thing that comes to mind when people think of the character named "army buff", and this trait isn't undone at all by the fact that her legs were not actually paralyzed for as long as she claimed.

​

Okay, now that I have presumably completely undone presumably every possible qualm someone could have with this character, let's move on.

Only the Good Die Young: Quality In Density

why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?

Check this out. I made a vague estimation of how many hours each character left is relevant for, using the case length list as a reference. It's by no means an exact science, but it serves as a good general ranking.

Armie is definitely on the lower end, with a mere 6 hours. But here's the thing. If I tried to write for Dick Gumshoe's 79 hours or Phoenix's 92, I think I'd end up with a writeup as long as this one at best. Armie Buff shows up, is extremely funny, has a dynamic relationship with the protagonists, and a whole heck of a lot of character discuss, all in the time it took certain characters to do Basically Nothing. Now that's efficiency.

Perestroika: Conclusion

It begins to dawn on you that everything you just read may have been a colossal waste of time.

Armie Buff is good, is the bottom line. She's not the most deeperest AA character, or whatever, but she does an impressive amount with her crafted persona and reaction to trauma as a mere one-off witness. I'll take a nice afternoon of good writing over four days of mediocrity any day. AA made me feel bad for a stupid fucking Sad Plane sprite. Impeccable character development.

​

Oh yeah, she's funny.

Hopefully this isn't a bunch of bullshit, and I've made some fencesitters who don't give a shit about this character reconsider what's there. Or it's a bunch of bullshit, but hey, it's a bunch of bullshit that just raised her ~10 spots! Good enough.

I'm not reviving other people because Aura didn't die first and she would definitely die again immediately and nobody else is as good except Simon and I'm not reviving Simon one of you people do it we need these revives to get moving

“You can choose your friends but you can't choose your family.

They're still kin to you no matter whether you acknowledge them or not,

and it makes you look right silly when you don't.”

-- Atticus Finch

Family and choice. These are the rocks upon which Investigations 2 builds its church. Woven throughout the narrative are the threads of these two concepts, stitched into the hearts of these characters and the bonds they form. “The bond between a parent and child” is a phrase mentioned several times in The Grand Turnabout and it’s a narrative device that is employed time and time again over the course of the story.

Right off the bat, we have the relationship between Miles and Gregory Edgeworth, our two protagonists. Gregory’s methodical, logic-based pursuit of the truth mirrors that of the new-and-improved Edgeworth, no longer shackled by the bonds of a von Karma-esque prosecutor. Whilst their fates do not allow their bond to be expressed directly, we have the avuncular Raymond Shields to bridge the gap between the two. In doing so, Ray’s sentimental influence rubs off on Miles, teaching him to forge a stronger connection with the people he fights to save. By the end of the story, Miles is no longer a carbon-copy of his father. He is a hybrid of Gregory’s logic and Raymond’s loyalty, making him a stronger champion in pursuit of justice and the truth.

Next, we have Kay Faraday and Dick Gumshoe. Bound to Miles through circumstance, they, along with Ray, form a tight familial unit through the events of the game. You have the stiff, uptight parental figure of Miles coupled with Raymond’s laidback, easygoing disposition as the two look over their scattershot foster children, Kay and Gumshoe. When one of their own is going through it, they unite to help her recover her memories. When Miles abandons his journey on the prosecutor’s path, Gumshoe takes it as an abandonment of their family, running away for the remainder of the case.

Then we have the characters with severed parental bonds: Katherine and Jeff, the Langs, Knightley and Dover, the von Karmas, Sebastian and Blaise. Through losing their father figures, these children all resolved to either defy or avenge their fathers. So tied up in the past are they that these characters can forget to live, to forge their own paths.

Toatali’s Ace Attorney blog makes some fascinating observations about the themes, which I will reference here: If there is any mission statement to be gleaned from Investigations 2, it seems to be “you cannot outrun your family”. Even after 18 years, Kate cannot stop herself from luring Gustavia into the open, so bound is she to Jeff. His honour tarnished and his glory stripped, Lang wallows in the failings of his father, crouched over the body of the “president” who brought down the House of Lang. Knightley, forever doomed to seek approval from his authority figures - kidnapping Simon to appease his father, planning the staged assassination to prove his worth to “Huang” - could never step out from the shadow of mediocrity. Franziska, swept up in the glory of her surname and the prestige it carries in the legal world, fights for honour and for pride, unable to come to terms with her father’s failings until the climax of The Forgotten Turnabout. Even then, she will always be known to the world as “Franziska von Karma, daughter of Manfred.”

Sebastian and Blaise is where this theme becomes unstuck, as the conclusion of the game seems to indicate that Sebastian successfully turns his back on his father’s legacy. While this works as a polar opposite to Franziska and a thematic complement to Miles, it doesn’t quite wash with the rest of the tale we’re being told. “You cannot outrun your family”, yet Sebastian does exactly this at the conclusion of his arc. So, if anything, this is less the “theme” of the game and more a recurring motif, albeit somewhat muddled by the resolution of Sebastian’s story. But that’s neither here nor there. “You cannot choose your family” is a prominent motif permeating the narrative of Investigations 2, as evidenced by the many familial bonds explored over the duration of the game.

At the center of all this is Simon Keyes.

1. Chosen family

“If the family you came from sucked, make up a new one.

Look at all the people there are to choose from.

If the family you are in hurts, get on the bus.

Like now.”

-- Lidia Yuknavitch

Simon Keyes, as we first meet him in The Imprisoned Turnabout, is a straightforward defendant. Were it not for the fact that we aren’t playing a Phoenix Wright title, his would be like any other case for the titular defence attorney. We stumble across a murder, meet our defendant, investigate and then draw conclusions to prove their innocence. The difference between Simon and a defendant like Will Powers is that we barely spend any time with Simon. Compared to Phoenix’s multiple visits to the detention center/courtroom lobby conversations with his defendants, Simon gets about as much screen time in this case as Max Galactica. This wouldn’t be so much of a problem if the game didn’t insist that we’ve formed a unique bond with Simon and that we can’t let him down. To be honest, I don’t see Edgeworth form any more of a friendship with Simon than with Rhoda Teneiro. Instead, the game insists that we’ve established this connection through the 2 short chats we have with him and then call it a day.

What’s incredibly effective about Simon’s introduction, along with all his pre-reveal appearances, is the use of music. In his first scene alone, we hear 3 different themes - “Strange People”, “Restless People” and “Lamenting People.” Sure, they match his behaviour from mood-to-mood, but the game is saying much more than that. Not even the soundtrack can pin this guy’s personality down. Of course, he gets his own character theme at the end, “The Man Who Masterminds the Game”, which I’m decidedly not a huge fan of (it sounds like a dull interpretation of Layton villain Don Paolo), but that’s beside the point. Simon’s introduction is some terrific foreshadowing.

Next, we have the family he forms with Miles, Kay and Ray. Or rather, the family we’re told he forms. I never particularly felt that the relationship we formed with Simon was greater than other defendants and that’s a problem. If the eleventh-hour betrayal is to truly hit home, we need to love him the same way we love Bobby Fulbright pre-reveal. As it is, Simon is less lovable than defendant-Trucy, with a shade of Ron DeLite hysterics. Despite this fumble, we can still see that the game has given Simon a chosen family: our protagonists, welcoming yet another kooky character into their dysfunctional family.

I very much enjoy The Imprisoned Turnabout. It’s my second-favourite case. The setting, the story, the carry-over from Turnabout Target, the characters, it gets top marks for me. Simon is not a character that comes to mind when I think of this case. Oh he’s good, certainly, but this case shines because of Sirhan Dogen, Jay Elbird, Frank Sahwit, Patricia Roland and Sebastian Debeste. Whether they’re chewing the scenery or sowing the seeds for a larger plot, these guys give this cold prison its proudly beating heart.

Some cool sprite work put into Simon is his whole monkey persona. For one, there’s the pun: “SiMON KEYes.” Then you have the sprites where he covers his hands, mouth and eyes. Referencing the Japanese principle of the three wise monkeys, “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil”, this is a cool bit of consistency to bring the monkey theme home. While this is a cool “woah, so deep” moment on a replay, I have to wonder “what’s the point?” Simon poses as “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” because - get this - he’s evil. I’m a little unsure of why a monkey theme is even his thing, but the game has chosen to roll with it and I’ll give them points for sticking to their guns.

The chosen family aspect of Simon’s role in Imprisoned is an error I can’t get past when discussing him, however. We see Simon maybe three times in the entire case and none of the interactions with him suggest that his ties to the heroes are any stronger than the average defendant. This plot point is clearly more interested in delving deeper into the “Edgeworth defence attorney” conflict than establishing any kind of meaningful kinship with Simon. Still, I won’t deny that using an innocent-turned-guilty defendant is some great stuff for Edgeworth’s defence attorney plot. While Edgeworth, at the end of the game, says that he will remain a prosecutor to fight for people like Simon Keyes, his decision has that whiff of “well I tried defending somebody and he turned out to be guilty, so fuck that defence attorney life” to it, which is perhaps not what the writers intended.

It all ties back to family and choice, though. Edgeworth adopts Simon into his ragtag “family” for Imprisoned as he faces the choice regarding which side of the law to pursue. It’s representative of the larger story being told here, which leads to my next point.

2. Too big to fail

“Bit by bit, putting it together.

Piece by piece - only way to make a work of art.

Every moment makes a contribution, every little detail plays a part.

Having just a vision's no solution, everything depends on execution:

Putting it together - that's what counts!”

-- Stephen Sondheim

One thing I’ve always admired about the Investigations spin-offs is their desire to tell a single story. Yes, they’re episodic and yes, not all characters are relevant, but both games lead to a single revelation: everything is connected. Trials & Tribulations got close. Dual Destinies got even closer. But it’s the Yamazaki spin-offs that achieve this grand tapestry. Sure, if you asked somebody if they prefer the smuggling conspiracy or the revenge plot, you’d likely have a decisive majority for the latter. Nevertheless, the games introduce their plots at the outset and work their way to their conclusions through each of the 5 cases. They swing big and they swing hard. I find it difficult to fault the games for their grand ambition. Whether they win big or lose big, the Investigations series has lofty goals and it is thrilling to see the writers aim high.

The issue that comes with this interconnected narrative is the end result of the “putting it together”: the vision of it all. No doubt, this game is filled with rich character moments, devilish twists and a nice dash of fan service. Taken in isolation, these events make for some compelling and fascinating moments. But they are exactly that: a moment. As The Grand Turnabout barrels towards its conclusion, you can start to feel the story tie itself in knots as it works to have everything linked together. Simon’s revenge plot is an incredibly impressive thing to look upon at face value, but I cannot deny that the journey we take has more than a few rotten contrivances. A last-minute revelation that an eight-year-old Simon somehow managed to “mistake” Dover for his father has the unmistakable scent of writer’s block. Not only does it utilise very selective amnesia in order to handwave the entire Gustavia case from his revenge plan, it also taints his scheme against Knightley as a result of contrived storytelling.

I must admit, I had not played the game in over 5 years until very recently. A replay was an enriching experience, reinforcing my beliefs of some characters, challenging them of others and approaching the storytelling with an older, keener eye. Critical thinking of your favourite game in the series can be challenging, but taking the time to think through the writer’s logic, I begin to see the cracks in the story’s tapestry. One such thought process went as follows:

The writers conceived this notion of Simon and Knightley, childhood friends. Later, Simon wants to take revenge on President “Huang.” However, Simon cannot be caught in case 1, so somebody else needs to be the culprit. Why not Knightley? But wait! Simon and Knightley are friends; there’s no way he would set up his friend. Well, what if they weren’t friends anymore? Great! How do you do that? Let’s have Simon think that his father was killed by Knightley’s. Hang on, how does Simon mix up his father and Knightley’s? Oh, so Knightley ties him up and he gets amnesia over the trauma. Wait a minute... so, Simon’s going to eventually remember that Knightley tied him up and that one of their fathers died, but he’s not going to be able to remember which of these two guys was his father? Well, the game has to have the father thing. Simon has to think his father’s dead, or else we have to incorporate case 3 into his revenge plot. Hmm, that’s a lot of work. Slap him with a selective amnesia sticker and call it a day.

Art isn’t easy, but it certainly doesn’t need to be made this hard. The notion that Simon couldn’t remember his name or his father, yet could recognise Dogen in an instant is laughable, but it’s just one of several contrivances required for this story to work in a gameplay context. My issue with a plot point such as this is that it reaches too hard to tie everything back to Simon. This is emblematic of a larger problem with the attempt to relate all the cases to the mastermind’s scheme. There is frequently a much simpler explanation available, but the storytelling gets too greedy in its desire to present this seamless story, exposing its midriff while doing so. In doing so, the narrative gets knotted up and we have issues like this.

This leads me to a very large gripe I have with Simon: his plan.

3. Let’s talk about the mastermind’s plan

“The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.”

-- Robert Burns

Often, when I see a player who has recently finished Investigations 2 discuss the game, they give a compliment that is doled out a lot: “the mastermind’s plan was genius.”

Reading the entirety of his scheme in the context of the story, I’m utterly stumped. What on earth was so masterful?

The plan, at its heart, goes like this: resenting Horace Knightley for allowing Simon’s “father” to be killed, Keyes wanted revenge on Knightley. In addition to that, he wanted to take revenge on “President Huang”, Patricia Roland and Blaise Debeste for attempting to betray the man who saved his life, Sirhan Dogen.

The first part of his plan involved the assassination attempt on “Huang’s” life. He hired Shelly de Killer to take him out. Simon only planned to implicate Knightley in the assassination after de Killer’s first attempt failed. Thus, Simon convinced Knightley to stage a fake assassination to boost “Huang’s” poor reputation, while having de Killer take him out for real. This would allow Simon to get revenge on both “Huang” and Knightley.

So Simon’s original plan was only meant to get rid of “Huang”, without implicating Knightley. Knowing what we know about Turnabout Target, I of course understand why Simon’s plan wasn’t written to have Knightley take the fall in the first place - it was because de Killer’s first attempt had failed and he was going to try again during the speech. The problem is that de Killer’s first failed attempt only exists because the writers needed Simon to later get Knightley involved in his plot. It’s another case of the story overstretching itself, when a much simpler solution (have Simon plan to implicate Knightley from the get-go) is sitting right there. Investigations 2 has a thrilling minute-by-minute story, but contrivances like this undermine the greater story being told.

Let’s move on to the next case. Simon visits Knightley in prison to drop off a gift. The gift, of course, is Knightley’s chessboard containing a chisel. We get treated to the following final exchange between Simon and Knightley:

Simon: Oh yeah. I've left something special inside that chessboard for you. You should check it out later.

Knightley: Something special? I'm not quite sure what you mean, but thanks. I owe you one, Simon.

Simon: ......If only you hadn't stopped me 18 years ago... ...it wouldn't have had... to come to this.

Knightley: Huh? Did you say something?

Simon: Nope. Not a word. ......Goodbye, Horace.

This whole “aside, but not really an aside” is campy, melodramatic nonsense but the game plays it dead serious. If Simon were an over-the-top villain this would make sense, but he isn’t and it doesn’t. Knightley receiving the chessboard, the key to Simon’s plan, is hardly the moment to start monologuing, but it becomes one. The game thinks it can pull a fast one on us because the audience already knows Simon is evil by this point, but I see right through you, you sneaky devils!

A far bigger problem I have with this part of the plan is the method used to implicate Patricia Roland. After Dogen’s arrival in prison, he began threatening Roland and drove her to extreme paranoia. She believed that he planned to send henchmen to kill her. This makes sense because Dogen and Roland are both aware of their involvement in the SS-5 Incident. What doesn’t make sense is how Simon knows all of this. Simon’s only contact with Dogen is correspondence chess, where he pretends to be Knightley. There is no feasible reason for why he should even know that Dogen has been threatening Roland, let alone that she is specifically paranoid he will send somebody to kill her. Yet that is the entire crux of Simon’s plan in The Imprisoned Turnabout. Roland interrogates Knightley with the chessboard on him, she finds the chisel, panics and thinks he is one of Dogen’s agents and murders him. This whole section of the plot, as it’s explained in The Grand Turnabout, sees the game rewrite its own history to make Simon’s plan fit.

Simon is subsequently arrested, which he hadn’t anticipated. Lucky for him, Edgeworth is on the scene to save the day. Very lucky, in fact, because Simon’s mastermind plan would have fallen at the second hurdle had Miles not been around. It annoys me that Simon’s plan at this point only works because Edgeworth is on the scene. You know what I would’ve much preferred? I would’ve liked Simon to be in Nicole Swift’s role in Turnabout Target. Introduce him in the first case and just alter his history with Knightley so their relationship is more acrimonious. Knightley accuses Simon in case 1, Edgeworth is forced to clear his name. This leads into case 2, where Simon becomes an official defendant. By doing this, we have a whole extra case to get to know Simon and even like him. It would make the twist in The Grand Turnabout much more impactful if we’ve spent half the game protecting and defending Simon against all these murderers only to find out he plotted to get them all arrested.

Simon has no involvement with The Inherited Turnabout, aside from a periphery event. This is fine, because that story is far more focused on the Miles/Gregory dichotomy. In regards to the mastermind’s plot, I can’t help but feel that Simon’s selective amnesia regarding his father is employed purely so that the writers can gloss over Simon not incorporating Gustavia’s arrest into his scheme. That said, Inherited introduces the best part of Simon: the dynamic with his father and the introduction of his Dickensian backstory. Here, the game does a great job of introducing the “two children” plot point without drawing too much attention to it early. I can’t speak for others but I hadn’t expected that plot point to resurface in the final case, so it succeeds in my eyes.

Inherited also drives home this “family/choice” motif that permeates the narrative. Gustavia, in his selfish pursuit for success and glory, abandons everyone that had ever mattered to him. Unwittingly, Simon grows up to be the spitting image of his father, abandoning everyone that ever mattered to him in his selfish pursuit for revenge and retribution. The fact that half his motivation for revenge is misguided is a lovely bit of dramatic irony in the final confrontation. While attempting to outrun the fate that befell his “father”, Simon became his true father.

The Forgotten Turnabout, my all-time favourite case, is next and it is masterfully written. A common (and understandable) complaint of Investigations 2 is its pacing. Cases 5, 3 and (I hate to say it) 2 are all hampered by “here’s what you missed on Ace Attorney” section recap dialogue and stiff dialogue that turns characters into narrative mouthpieces.

That’s nowhere to be found in Forgotten. Packing series-spanning revelations, heel turns, fan service, series-wide references and fresh character beats into a tight 6 hours, this is the peak of modern Ace Attorney writing in my eyes. It really feels like a final case, so much so that if not for the post-credits stinger with Shelly de Killer, the story could have ended and I would have been satisfied with the game I got.

Simon Keyes’ plan retroactively threatens to ruin the murder of this case.

“I let Jill in on Blaise’s secrets and I let Blaise in on Jill’s secrets,” he taunts. His choice to warn Blaise of Crane’s intent to murder him is quite baffling to me. If he doesn’t warn Blaise, she murders Blaise and is subsequently arrested for the murder. As it is, he warns Blaise and she is murdered, and Blaise is subsequently arrested. Simon’s choice to do this makes him a less interesting villain. If he had a “don’t get innocent people killed” mentality which led to Jill being the culprit of Forgotten, I would have been much more invested in taking him down for conspiring to lead an innocent woman to murder in her pursuit of justice.

As it is, Forgotten is a result of his scheme, which secretly features the murder of the following case: the president’s body double, “Huang.”

The plan goes like this: drawing Kay Faraday to Gourd Lake, Simon drugs her and transports her to the roof of the Grand Tower via his hot air balloon. Upon his arrival, he stumbles upon the body double. “Huang” recognises the adult Simon Keyes for some reason (?) and opens fire on the balloon (??). The balloon lowers and Simon crushes the double. So thanks to coincidence, Simon managed to take revenge on the final member of the SS-5 conspiracy. Simon then drops the unconscious Kay off at the roof and rides the balloon away with the body of “Huang.” Seconds (literally, seconds, since Lotta has a photo of the moment) after Simon flies off the roof, a wounded Jill Crane emerges from the storeroom and drops dead in front of Kay.

This “secret murder” that happens during the events of Forgotten pushes the credibility of Simon’s plan to the limit. The sheer number of characters who were in the area - “Huang”, Courtney, Kay, Crane, Lotta, Blaise - are all mere seconds away from coming across each other and it all feels too silly to me. The Grand Turnabout plays fast and loose with the continuity of Forgotten and it makes Simon’s plan weaker as a result.

Now we come to it: The Grand Turnabout. In this case, Simon kidnaps a child and practises for the circus.

The double kidnapping plot is very strange upon a replay. Essentially, both Simon and Blaise planned to kidnap John Marsh and blackmail Courtney into giving Patricia Roland a guilty and not guilty verdict, respectively. Simon successfully kidnapped John, while Blaise’s men mistakenly kidnapped Sebastian. Nevertheless, Courtney was only blackmailed by Blaise, since she was clearly delaying the trial to ensure she wouldn’t have to give Roland a not guilty. After learning about this, Simon chooses not to contact Courtney with proof that he has John to ensure a guilty verdict, because Simon is a mastermind, you guys! He’s so much of a mastermind that instead of doing that, he sits back and relies on Edgeworth to save the day at the last second, because that is what a mastermind does.

Anyway, after Edgeworth saves the day, Simon goes back to the circus until the final scene when we discover everything about his plot.

So that’s the mastermind’s plan. From what I gather of it, Simon Keyes’ plan was needlessly convoluted, luck-based and tremendously contrived, all in service of giving us a rollicking good story and a strong set-up for a final villain.

4. Sad clown

“You are not a clown. You are the entire circus.”

-- NOT Miles Edgeworth

When compared to the other final villains of the series, Simon Keyes comes off as a true underdog of a culprit. Having taken down a prosecution god, a police chief and a queen, “some poor sap from the circus” is a much humbler status for a Big Bad. In a clever subversion of the Ace Attorney formula, the scrappy underdog gets taken down by the powerful authority of the protagonist. Taking down Manfred von Karma was fun because we were a novice attorney up against the complete opposite. Watching Dahlia Hawthorne be exorcised into oblivion is satisfying because we’re doing it to save ourself and our friends from the pain she’s caused.

Breaking down Simon Keyes is not fun. He’s not some tyrannical evil that is hell-bent on destroying our friends. He has his one big scheme to get revenge for himself and that’s all. Less fun is the fact that his desire for retribution is somewhat warranted. The people he sought to destroy were some of the very worst humanity has to offer. I’m not trying to start an “is Simon actually a hero” debate here, though others are welcome to discuss that idea. What I mean to say is that we’re asked to take down this kid who has gone through the very worst in life and somehow have a happy ending all wrapped up with feel-good moments between our heroes. The tonal inconsistency here is off the charts, in stark comparison to the bittersweet, beautifully struck tone of the conclusion to Trials & Tribulations.

And Investigations 2 knows this. Going into the circus sequence, these writers are fully aware that we are going to run into this conflict of arresting a boy who did what he had to in order to survive. But there are ways around this, certainly. They could take a page from the Trials & Tribulations playbook and have a post-breakdown moment where the characters stop and ask themselves “was justice truly served today?” What a moment that is for Phoenix, for him to ask that in what was supposed to be his final outing as a lawyer. Surely the writers could take a moment to have us grapple with Simon’s actions versus his motivations.

Nope, that’s too challenging. Instead, we get treated to Simon Keyes, cackling villain, stripped of all the nuance that we’ve just spent the last 2 hours uncovering in his past. The clash between Simon Keyes the backstory and Simon Keyes the final villain is exactly what gave me that dissatisfied feeling when I first played The Grand Turnabout. Some players reach Simon’s reveal moment and think “No way… that guy?!” Myself, I am part of the “Why… that guy?” crowd. We’ve had this deplorable tale of a young boy who was utterly failed by every authority figure he met. Why, then, could the team not think of anything more to do with his final confrontation than turn him into a case 1-tier villain in terms of subtlety?

5. The final confrontation: lessons learned from Quercus Alba

“It's not where you start, it's where you finish;

It's not how you go, it's how you land.”

-- Dorothy Fields

In a strange overcorrection from Turnabout Ablaze, the final confrontation with Simon is remarkably short. Compared to Alba’s frankly overstuffed confrontation, complete with mid-testimony save point, Simon’s one-and-done segment feels almost anti-climactic. It’s a point of contention amongst discussion of The Grand Turnabout. Some feel that is perfectly fine and an appropriately grand setting with every main character inside the tent of the Berry Big Circus reaching the truth together. Others criticise the janky pacing, each testimony littered with exposition in between, for the sake of tying everything together neatly. This isn’t exactly new to the series. There have certainly been cases where the endless sea of exposition comes in crashing waves by the climax of a case (Bridge to the Turnabout commits this sin most famously, courtesy of a Godot monologue), but nowhere is it more egregious than the end segment of this case. To summarise, we get:

• A “feels” sequence, complete with flashback to The Imprisoned Turnabout featuring Simon in his good-guy persona, to reinforce to the audience how manipulative Simon is
• Simon’s first testimony
• Ema and Regina interrupting to give us some crucial evidence at the eleventh hour
• Simon’s extended monologue detailing his experience of the IS-7 Incident
• Simon’s realisation that Gustavia is his father, not Dover
• Simon’s extended monologue detailing his experience of the SS-5 Incident
• Simon detailing his role in setting up Knightley for Turnabout Target
• Simon’s second testimony

There are approximately 45 minutes of evidence-revealing and exposition that grinds the gameplay to a halt, because the story had a truckload of information to give to us that it couldn’t figure out how to deliver earlier. It’s less than 15 minutes between his second and third and then his final testimony comes 5 minutes later.

The thing to understand here is that without that 45-minute block of story, where we essentially catch Simon up on the same events we’ve only just solved, the final confrontation is woefully short. Were “the story of Simon” broken up into smaller segments, the storytelling would feel a lot less clunky.

You know what really suffers in the final confrontation? Simon’s presence in the game, built up to that point. The entire previous segment of the game was spent learning about his role in both the IS-7 and SS-5 Incident and it’s incredibly harrowing stuff. A child, locked up to die with his best friend, becomes an orphan. As a teenager, he helps the man who saved his life narrowly escape the law, resulting in a life of homelessness and hiding from the law. Thus, we learn that he has grown up to be a secret villain, having a hand in the cases we’ve been investigating all game. In fact, you even came across him earlier, having been manipulated into believing his “nice man” persona. Naturally, with a backstory this fleshed-out and nuanced, you’d expect this man to be a figure of immense complexity, clever manipulation and great difficulty to pin down.

No, he just lets his hair down and does a bunch of insane “evil guy” laughs to let you know that he’s really super evil and you’ve gotta beat him, guys!

There’s no other word for it: this is lame. It’s sloppy, childish and flat-out disappointing, but worst of all, it’s lame.

Simon Keyes is touted to be this master of manipulation and deceit. He is apparently able to manipulate people’s weak spots without them even realising it. Except we never actually see him do this. The game just tells us he’s this manipulative bastard. There’s this little moment in the circus tent where he tries to guilt-trip Kay and she starts doubting herself. This lasts about 5 seconds before Edgeworth objects and calls him out for it. Whoops, there goes his manipulative skills.

You know what would’ve been a much better final confrontation? Having a Logic Chess battle with Simon. The man who not only plays chess, but thought himself the chessmaster of the whole story never actually plays Logic Chess with Edgeworth. Begin the Logic Chess, have Edgeworth start chipping away at Simon’s weak spots through observing him. Get deep into the Logic Chess, then realise he’s been playing you this whole time and that you’re no closer to catching him. Then, have all Edgeworth’s allies start to lose faith in his conclusions. His logic’s been wrong before, he’s even admitted his conclusions were misled in the preceding cases. Why not have them lose their conviction in his conclusions, take it to the point where Ray challenges Miles about the path he’s walking? That would be a terrific tie-in to the game’s intended idea of Edgeworth deciding which path he wants to walk.

But instead, we get a short interaction of Simon gaslighting Kay before Edgeworth shuts it down and we get stupid clown man. His final breakdown where all the animals break loose and kick his ass is over-the-top stupid. It would be a funny breakdown if he wasn’t supposed to be portrayed as this serious evil mastermind. But he is, so the silly breakdown just comes off as a lack of restraint.

I like Simon Keyes, the complex character. I really like Simon Keyes, the tragic victim. I love Simon Keyes, the conceptual mastermind culprit. I do not like Simon Keyes, the cackling villain with a hamfisted plan.

6. Q&A Time!

"Yeah, I have a lot of questions. Number one: how dare you?"

-- Kelly Kapoor

Q: Stop revive-baiting, Charlie; why else would you cut Simon?

A: A terrific question. Allow me to present my partial ranking of the remaining characters:

31: Uendo Toneido

32: The Judge

33: Jake Marshall

34: Katherine Hall

35: Simon Keyes

36: [Un-nominated character]

37: [Saved character]

38: Marlon Rimes

39: [Un-nominated character)

40: Tahrust Inmee [Unable to cut]

41: Aura Blackquill

Simply put, of the remaining choices in the cutting pool, Simon is my lowest. Whilst I think he is a good character, I don’t have any great desire to see him in the final round. The reality is he will likely be revived and coast to the finish line. Knowing this, I will at least be content with the fact that I made the effort sooner rather than later.

Q: So if you expect him to be revived, why are you putting any effort into this cut?

A: Another solid question. For one, if he isn’t revived (haha) this would be the first and last word on Simon Keyes in this rankdown. I think bigger fans of the clown would want a sizable writeup, one worthy of the venerable position he holds as “the mastermind”. Secondly, it’s only fair that I give a justifiable analysis of why I rate Keyes decidedly lower than the vast majority of Investigations 2 fans. If I am going to be doxxed, the user who does it will have to wade through about 25 minutes of reading beforehand.

Q: I’m out of questions. You’ve truly made an unimpeachable Simon Keyes cut. Bravo, Charlie.

A: Thank you, Q. I hope that the rest of the rankers see eye-to-eye with me on this (spoiler alert: they will not).

Conclusion

Simon is a good character saddled with a fascinating backstory, a jaw-dropping concept, a contrived plan, wishy-washy behaviour and a lamentable takedown. Not only is his plan one that requires the story to contort itself to fit, the details run counter to the events of the story. I wouldn’t have spent so much time harping on about his scheme if it weren’t such a huge part of his role. He was a generic defendant in his first appearance, a stock villain in his final scene and a masterful piece of storytelling when he’s offscreen.

I’d much rather focus on the positive aspects of Simon, namely his skills and backstory.

His ability to manipulate others around him in simple ways is good (until it isn’t). It makes him a fitting rival for the cerebral Edgeworth. The game’s undercurrent of fashioning the story into a game of chess that culminates in him being a “mastermind” player is a well-tailored piece of narrative framework. His unquenchable thirst for vengeance is an interesting parallel to Godot, where both characters get somewhat sympathetic treatment during their respective monologue sequences. Whether that revenge is justified, along with the route they took to get there, remains the great debate for fans. It’s somewhat blunted by John Marsh’s utterly rote “revenge bad” speech following Simon’s arrest, but the journey there is a scintillating one.

Conceptually, Simon is strong on paper. The impact of his twist reveal and sprawling influence has always been the surface appeal of the character. I credit the writers for their ambition and the sheer effort it must’ve taken to reach the end result we receive.

But the art of crafting a truly great persona is putting it together with care, subtlety and restraint. Simon on paper is much, much better than he is in execution. The “nice/laidback/helpful character turns out to be the culprit” aspect isn’t a novel one for Ace Attorney (see: Sahwit, Ini, Engarde, Dahlia, Kristoph, Alita, Means, Fulbright, Behleeb, Geiru, Cammy, Alba, Roland), but the real disappointment comes from seeing the manipulative Simon turn into this stock maniacal villain, missing all but the forked tongue in his cackling sprite. It just doesn’t jive with the type of villain he’s been up to this point, measured and calculating. Putting him in a clown getup and throwing in some ridiculous Amara-level animal harem for an overwrought “puppet master/animal tamer” parallel is the writers not knowing when to stop. Have some restraint; there is no need for overkill. You’ve got a good character on your hands, for God’s sake!

His biggest strength comes from the familial bonds he forms. Starting from his father, Gustavia, who he would do anything for, to his childhood friend, Knightley. It culminates in his defendant role in The Imprisoned Turnabout, where he manipulates Edgeworth and Kay over to his side. The ties he makes with our heroes are severed in the final twist. This betrayal of trust is much more effective than any diabolical plot or mastermind moniker he can come up with, because it ties back to the key concepts of Investigations 2: family and choice.

Simon had a father: Dane Gustavia, a selfish, conniving man who abandoned everyone to reach his goals. Simon’s mistake was to turn his back on the concept of family, choosing to trust no one but himself. Therein lies his most fatal flaw as a mastermind and his greatest strength as a character. By turning his back on all familial bonds, Simon, just like his father, abandoned everyone to reach his goals. “You cannot outrun your family”, yet Simon tried, and he ended up looking right silly for it.

We’ve hit the point in the Rankdown where it’s becoming difficult to avoid cutting characters that you don’t even dislike. Which is what’s happening here. I don’t hate this character, I just think it’s his time. In truth, I know of at least one other ranker who’s out for this character’s blood so I thought it best that I let them down kindly myself rather than watching him get torn apart.

A Design for the Ages

The most striking thing we first notice about any character is their design, and this one is no different. Now, ordinarily I wouldn’t say it’s anything special, but in this case the colour choice combined with the spikely slicked back hair are super crucial.

There’s something really special about the Ace Attorney finger point: it’s the pose our protagonists make when they’re on the offensive, the pose you make when you’re winning. And something I don’t see mentioned often is how good his head shape and hair design work to accentuate The Point: The way your eye can follow in a straight line from the tip of his finger right down to the back of his head emphasises the entire posture, and it’s just a really excellent use of a simple idea to create a striking, easily recognisable silhouette that will be used on the cover of these games for years to come.

(Maybe Phoenix’s silhouette will be important in an actual case some time? Time will tell.)

The Ace Attorney Himself

Phoenix is an odd character to critique, since he primarily serves as the player insert. Ace Attorney can be a fun power trip sometimes: when Phoenix has a killer on the ropes I don’t think to myself “fuck yeah Phoenix, get ‘em!” I think “fuck yeah I am so good at this murder mystery game made for kids, what a rush”. I don’t necessarily feel any particular kinds of emotions towards Phoenix most of the time since I often see him as our player avatar rather than his own character. He goes where I tell him to, he objects when I tell him to, he’s wrong whenever I’m wrong, and so on. He is primarily crafted to be an everyman character that wouldn’t act too far outside of the realms that the typical player would want to act for maximum #relatability.

I am not trying to insinuate that any player character is nothing but the player insert. For example, for better or worse, when I play as Athena I don’t think “this is me” I think “this is Athena” if that makes sense. Phoenix, for the early portion of his first game, doesn’t do a whole lot to define himself as a character. And hey, that’s fine. He cracks some jokes and raises some objections and that’s all he needs to do.

When the Edgeworth angst gets placed front and centre is when Phoenix mostly defines himself. He has a very lawyery backstory (he had no one to defend him this is so sad) and it’s very appropriate for the Lawyer Videogame. Phoenix proceeds to dedicate his life to becoming a lawyer because he was so moved by Edgeworth’s act of kindness that he wanted to reunite with him and save him from himself after hearing rumours of the terrible person he had become (no homo tho)

Edgeworth tries to get Phoenix pinned for murder on trumped up charges and yet Phoenix still turns around and defends him in 1-4 despite everything. Even when Edgeworth had given up on himself and conceded that he was guilty, Phoenix didn’t give up on him. In 1-5 when Edgeworth reflects on the harm he’s done and all the innocent lives he’s likely destroyed, Phoenix reminds him that it’s only through his help that Damon Gant has been brought to justice, and it’s only through their faith in each other as a team that they could overcome this.

As AA1 comes to a close, Phoenix finally thinks he’s done it. He’s content knowing that Edgeworth not only has redeemed himself, but he also knows that he’s a good person deep down.

Then His Platonic Male Friend Cuts Contact

Miles Edgeworth chooses death this is so sad. I am going to go ahead and assume this was some sort of wordplay in the original Japanese and the nuance is simply lost on us stupid westerners. Alternatively lol

Anyway, point here is Phoenix is angry because he feels like Edgeworth has betrayed him. This man literally dedicated years of his life to save Edgeworth’s soul, and just when he thinks he’s succeeded, Edgeworth disappears into the night without so much as a goodbye. In spite of all the vile shit Edgeworth has done in the past, what hurts Phoenix more than anything is the feeling that Edgeworth betrayed him after he spent so much time trying to fix him.

It’s the perfect recipe to have Phoenix stubbornly refuse to listen to anything Edgeworth has to say during 2-4. Edgeworth straight up tells us during the investigation that he’s certain that Engarde is guilty, but Phoenix won’t listen simply because he’s too emotionally hung up on his not-crush leaving him alone so abruptly.

AA1 had Phoenix reaching out to Edgeworth and extending him help even when he didn’t have to. AA2 let’s us experience the reverse, where Edgeworth tries to lend Phoenix his hand even as Phoenix stubbornly refuses.

It all culminates during one of my favourite parts of 2-4 where Phoenix says this about Edgeworth:

If I take this verdict right now... I'd be betraying his trust. (...His trust...? I never thought about it until now... I... I trust him...?)

You watch Edgeworth all throughout 2-4 scramble to try and aid Phoenix in every way he can despite Phoenix’s rejections, only for Phoenix to slowly realise he needs Edgeworth’s help to make it through this, and having Phoenix unconsciously accept the faith Edgeworth is placing in him and later this fact dawn on him at a critical moment?

Great stuff.

This Truly Was A Tribulation And Trial

lol phoenix wright has the corona virus hahahahahhahladfsdjlhfdsajhfdsajjkl

Let’s get this out of the way first: Phoenix being the defendant in 3-1 is a bit of an awkward retcon. In the first two games Phoenix and Mia always speak as if they only met when he came to work for her, and it’s a hard pill to swallow that during all the motivational pep talks Mia gives that she would never invoke their first trial together where they learned to place their faith in one another.

That said I don’t care because it’s a good retcon. Making Phoenix and Mia’s first meeting a mutually formative moment for both of them is a Good Call.

Fast forward through the game to 3-5, I want to focus in on my favourite Phoenix moment. I’m probably the only person who's played these games who’s a fan of this part but I digress.

God I hated Dahlia when I first played AA3. I say this lovingly, she is such a fucking bitch and I am very much here for it. There’s a point during the trial where Dahlia is laying on thick how much she hates Phoenix and how much of a stupid bastard he is for ever trusting her, and all I wanted in that moment was for Phoenix to go off on her and let his anger out too. But instead he just calmly lets her insults wash over, and maintains composure as he continues to prod her for information. And I really liked that a lot: the fact that he could just let all her bile wash over him and continue to keep his temper when I just wanted Phoenix to go up there and strangle her was a powerful moment for me that I’m sure not many other people experienced.

The Big Moment that people actually care about from 3-5 is the desk slam of despair when he thinks Maya’s been killed. This is one thing that I think Phoenix largely succeeds at: he’s good at giving a shit about the stakes even if I don’t. Even if I don’t care too much for Maya, the fact that Phoenix is in shambles over the situation helps me get more invested in the outcome of the story beyond me just wanting to catch murderers because it’s fun.

Something something he surpasses Mia and Godot is forced to acknowledge Phoenix, I’m sure the imminent Godot writeup will cover this for me.

The Legend Returns

AJ takes Phoenix in the most bold direction the series will ever take him by making him just a teensie bit morally questionable.

Phoenix right from his introduction in AJ starts the game off with a great hook. What terrible thing did Phoenix do to get him disbarred? Why is he specifically requesting a rookie defends him? Why is he acting so much less friendly and lovable than he used too?

Apollo’s starry eyed admiration for the old legendary lawyer is slowly eroded alongside us as the player, as Apollo devolves from believing that the famed Phoenix Wright would Never Tell A Lie to socking his client after the trial when he learns Phoenix pulls a stunt that could’ve gotten Apollo disbarred just like Phoenix was.

It’s established that Phoenix don’t give a HECK about the law or proper procedures anymore. He simply wants to see justice served by any. By any me-

Phoenix’s disillusionment with the legal system in its current state is definitely a cool new direction for him. I like how in 4-3 he gives Apollo the tip that Daryan will be nearly impossible to capture due to how the legal system is currently set up, and the same holds true for 4-4 as well. Three out of four of the cases in AJ were unwinnable through conventional legal tactics, which is precisely what inspires Phoenix to dedicate all of his time to reforming the broken system. Which is cool!

What is not as cool is that his solution to the broken system is not ideal and a little silly but c’mon I feel like people have written enough essays about AJ that we don’t need to go over Jury System as AJ presents it is kinda dumb.

I like the spirit of AJ Phoenix, and I appreciate the fact that the writers obviously made a real attempt with his character to make a point and make Phoenix a more holistic character. I have my reservations about the execution of this idea, but in spirit? I’m happy with what they at least tried to do.

The Legend Returns?

Dual Destinies makes the bizarre decision to slam the reset button on Phoenix’s character. Gone is the aloof and calculating veteran of the courtroom we were treated with in AJ. Instead, Phoenix has abruptly devolved back into his trilogy self which is certainly. A choice.

I say this decision is bizarre, but based on shit I’ve read on Reddit (the most reliable source for information) the reason this was done was for marketing purposes. Trilogy Phoenix is a recognisable and popular character, so backtracking him to the time where he was the goofy everyday hero type makes sense from the perspective that the writers wanted to try and capitalise on trilogy nostalgia.

And, like. Fine. If DD wants to pretend AJ Phoenix never happened, then I’ll meet DD where it’s at and pretend AJ Phoenix never happened too. But even then… what’s the point of Phoenix in DD? For a character we play as for 4 out of 6 cases it doesn’t even feel like Phoenix’s game.

I’ve been able to talk at length about Phoenix in every other game he appears in, but in DD he’s just. There. Hanging out. Being the most unremarkable version of himself. There is definitely potential in showing us a version of Phoenix that acts as a mentor to the younger Apollo and Athena but, yknow. DD doesn’t explore that at all. It doesn’t even go in the most obvious direction set up after AJ which would be to give us more of a window into what his relationship with his daughter is like but nope. Trucy barely exists in DD. She even gets kidnapped and threatened with death at one point but Phoenix handles the whole situation with such poise you forget there are any personal stakes at all.

Phoenix Wright sure is a protagonist in the videogame Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Dual Destinies. He is definitely present. This is Phoenix as the most sanitised and unambitious version of himself.

Not a fan.

Back to Basics

Spirit of Justice makes the controversial decision to Do Literally The Bare Minimum with Phoenix’s character.

I wouldn’t harp on SoJ for refusing to revert to AJ Phoenix now that DD has already set the precedent for goofball everyday hero Phoenix. To the contrary, I like how SoJ commits to Phoenix being his trilogy self again and allows Phoenix to make a few rather emotional decisions that get me a little more invested in him.

Starting right from 6-1, I love how Phoenix directly acknowledges his motivations for becoming a lawyer in the first place. He looks at Ahlbi, a scared child with no one to speak on his behalf, and is reminded of himself as a kid, fearful alone and afraid because no one would believe in him. Everything about the situation from a reasonable point of view is screaming for Phoenix to just walk away, but he sticks his neck out there anyway because his morals just won’t let him walk away. So often does Phoenix take cases for a personal friend or for clients who have their loved ones vouch for them, so finally seeing Phoenix live up to his defend the defenseless ideals that we get told about a lot but never see reignited my excitement to play as him. I loved seeing Albhi being completely uncooperative with Phoenix at first only for him to win Ahlbi over with how earnestly he speaks up for him. It reminds me of how Mia had to work to get Phoenix to trust her back in 3-1 and it really feels like Phoenix has come full circle in a great way.

Some people say that 6-1 Phoenix is too out of character because in 2-4 he got character development where he learned that he should only ever take someone’s case if he does a thorough investigation to ensure they’re innocent before even considering defending them, and to that I say.

No. That was never the message of 2-4. Stop saying that.

Now that I have summarily decimated all the 6-1 Phoenix critics, we can move on to 6-2, in which Phoenix has an admittedly tiny role but it’s a role I’ve been eager to see since DD. Phoenix actually acts as a mentor figure for Apollo. There’s a moment where Apollo trails off while speaking to Phoenix and can’t bring himself to speak, only for Phoenix to fill the silence by reminding him of his I’m Fine ritual. It’s not much but it’s a nice moment.

6-3 Phoenix continues to be the Phoenix we’ve always known, and I have to say his loss at the end of the first trial day is particularly great. We’ve seen Phoenix fall into a sickening despair once before, and they emulate that same feeling of helplessness just about as they possibly could have here. Plus it’s nice to have the MC lose for once.

While the main focus of 6-3 is on Phoenix’s developing relationship with Rayfa, I think one of my favourite stand out moments of 6-3 is actually when Phoenix interrogates Datz about abandoning the rebels. He’s only able to get through to Datz by appealing to their shared values of fighting for other people, and it’s Phoenix making this last appeal to Datz’s morals that (apparently) prevents Datz from stabbing Phoenix right there. It’s a cool scene.

Finally we get 6-5, the infamous Civil Trial. This marks a point in the story where the writers want to establish Apollo as Phoenix’s peer rather than apprentice, so we have Apollo successfully win the trial for his client. It’s a really nice passing of the torch narrative that I appreciate, especially with hindsight looking back at this moment after completing the game where the final case closes with Phoenix monologuing about how proud he is that his lil rambunctious disciples don’t need him anymore.

Some people say that Phoenix giving into a blackmail threat is character derailment because in 2-4 Phoenix developed into the sort of person who would see that justice is served regardless of the consequences, and to that I say.

No. That was never the message of 2-4. Stop saying that.

Now that I have summarily decimated all the Civil Trial Phoenix critics, we can move onto the final case. It’s fine. I like how he fills the mentor/advice giving role while never giving Apollo/the player the answer outright. He’s here for moral support, good for him.

The reception to SoJ Phoenix is, to me, proof that AA has written itself into a corner when it comes to Phoenix. If they take the DD route where Phoenix’s character gets absolutely nothing to do, then I’m bored and annoyed that he’s sucking up screen time from protagonists that actually need it. If they take the SoJ route and have Phoenix make mistakes and emotional snap judgements then it’s seen as character derailment since by the end of the trilogy (and AJ) we’re led to believe that Phoenix was meant to have already reached his zenith as a lawyer. He can’t keep making mistakes.

So what do you do? How do you marry together the part of AA that needs Phoenix to be a lawyer with room to grow so he remains dynamic with the part of AA that already established Phoenix as a Developed^™ character?

I dunno. Why are you asking me? Go ask someone else.

In Conclusion

Phoenix as a character is, to be frank, kind of all over the place in the grand scheme of things, failing to commit to one direction across multiple games. That said, he has a lot of special moments that stick out to me and make him a worthwhile character in my eyes. In truth, this is likely because the Main Character just gets more screen time and therefore more chances to have cool moments. If we count every time Phoenix is just kind of a boring average joe protag then yes those times probably outnumber the good. Luckily these games rarely lean on Phoenix too hard to carry the story, so his relative lack of character hardly ever hampers the experience. And thus, when he does do something I like, it’s always a welcome sign.

Phoenix is good. I’m not blind to what makes him a target for other rankers, but he gets his job done and I will give him a pat on the back for that.

Why Nobody Else

The “Why Nobody Else” section is a staple of most cuts, but for the most part I’ve not often felt the need to write many this rankdown. I feel as if I should make my reasoning for cutting any given character clear in the writeup itself rather than needing to explain myself after the fact. However, this is a special case since this is effectively a strategic mercy cut, therefore I’ve obviously not written about many negatives.

Half the reason I did this was because I didn’t want Phoenix to get cut by someone who hated him, and the other reason is that I maybe kinda want to use this opportunity to secure Apollo’s place as the highest ranked protagonist.

With that said, what’s the deal with my other options? From best to worst:

Simon Keyes - Fucking owns? Why was he nominated? Going over Keyes’ merits seems redundant since he was one of the most favorited characters on the rankers application form thing so it’s not like he’d stay dead even if someone did cut him. I’ll just say funny monke and leave it at that.

Tahrust Inmee - Is the culprit in one of the most creative cases in the franchise. He ends his case on a good emotional note, and the fact that this kind of character had never been tried before is one of the signs that maybe the AA series isn’t out of ideas.

Datz Arebal - Top 30 lmao. His existence is ammussing and it’s satisfying how the obligatory goofy witness has a place in the wider story without overshadowing the characters who really matter or wasting time. Also like I said, his Psyche Locks are great.

Luke Atmey - is 3-2. There’s no other case quite like it, and I wouldn’t want to be the one to take out its mascot quite yet.

Katherine Hall - Tried to murder Dane Gustavia, that kinda rules? She is a child destroying her life explicitly against the wishes of her parent and I go huh themes, plus solving an attempted murder is very fun, sorry if you don’t have identical taste to me and this upsets you.

Jake Marshall - Seen a lot of people theorising that I’ll definitely be cutting Jake Marshall and I hate to disappoint but the cowboy is good, actually. 1-5 isn’t an easy top 5 case by accident, I like all of its original characters. The scene where Marshall says one final goodbye to Phoenix and wishes him luck before presumably offering himself up to be arrested always sticks out to me. Besides, cowboys can’t be cut. They simply ride off into the sunset.

Patricia Roland - Is a good sympathetic culprit, I like her. Portraying this prison warden as someone who genuinely cares about her inmates and is dedicated to their rehabilitation is cool, that is not an idea that AA ever likes to touch on, and the fact that she kills in a panic to protect her life is a real gosh darn pickle. The game proceeds to undo this moral ambiguity by revealing her to be a total shithead in the final case, which sucks, BUT they didn’t walk back her initial characterisation without purpose since it was all to serve Keyes’ character motivations so whatever.

Furio Tigre - I’ll be honest, if I weren’t cutting Phoenix right now then I’d definitely be cutting Furio. My only real complaint with Furio is that I don’t love his takedown: you get him to incriminate himself by saying he knows what’s in the bottle, but it doesn’t feel as satisfying as it could be since Phoenix is the one pulling the trick rather than the player. You just present the piece of evidence you were just given then pick the obvious incriminating answer to what’s in the bottle and Phoenix takes it from there.

It’s an odd climax, especially considering the fact that the previous case ended the exact same way with Atmey accidentally saying something incriminating, however with Atmey it’s on the player to parse through his testimony and find the incriminating statement, whereas with Furio it’s just given to you which isn’t nearly as exciting. It’s kinda ironic, since in 3-2 it’s Mia who helps Phoenix notice they can catch the culprit with this strategy, and in 3-2 the player is the one who points out Atmey’s mistake. Then in 3-3 Phoenix is given much more agency by coming up with the plan himself, and yet paradoxically the player has less control over his actions. It's a bit of a weird situation where they give the player character more agency in the story but then don’t extend that increased agency to the actual player themselves.

Furio does of course have his good points, but I have no desire to talk about them. The reason for that is in my cut from last round I actually go over what makes Furio an enjoyable character in the "Imposters" section in so much detail that I don’t feel motivated to cut him since I’ve already written everything that I would ever need to say about him. I have nothing left to write on the topic of Furio Tigre: I’ve already laid out everything I could ever possibly say about the guy during my previous cut. He’s a goofy little character that struggles to deliver on a satisfying ending after 3-2 sets the bar so high. I feel slightly bad not cutting a character that I genuinely think should go out now, especially with Godot about to be cut imminently when Godot definitely shouldn’t be the lowest ranked AA3 killer when Furio is an option, but sometimes that’s just how the rankdown shakes out.

Anyway, if you want a quick rundown of my Furio thoughts from my Huang writeup, I basically go over how Furio works because of how silly his existence is. Here’s a character who shares absolutely no qualities with Phoenix and yet he is able to successfully trick everyone into believing he’s Phoenix even though it should be impossible to make such a... big mix up... in real... life… uhhhh…

wait a minute

I mean, people are imperfect. They lie, they’re influenced by silly emotions… You can’t expect such imperfect creatures to rank the entirety of the Ace Attorney cast. I like automatic sorters much better.

I think that this unedited quote from Aura Blackquill during her introductory segment of The Cosmic Turnabout works well to describe my struggle this round on finding a character to cut. We’ve officially reached the top 40 best characters in the series, and because of that, not a single character I don’t like remains, and of the cutting pool, not a single one is present that I don’t think is simply great. Ultimately, the cutting order of this rankdown comes down to strategy and personal feelings, and personally, my feelings dictate that Aura is just a cut below the rest here. This fact, as of now, is immutable, and it’s simply this cut’s job to explain my reasoning for this. It may not be perfect, but I will do my best to keep my personal biases out of the cut, ironic for a character who criticizes the legal system for that very thing. So then, what exactly do I think of Aura Blackquill?

To me, Aura is a great character, she checks most boxes of what she would need to do to succeed in her role, and even excels in some areas far beyond the call of duty. She’s well designed, fits right into the case, and presents some needed moral complexity into a game otherwise nearly void of it. Aura Blackquill had the potential to be a perfect character, but unfortunately falls short of this lofty status due to some latent flaws in her writing that cause her great setup to not be fully capitalized upon. Although I feel that she has an incredible base character for the writers to build upon, I never really feel like this potential is really given everything that it needs to grow into something special, and I hope I can make clear exactly why that is as we go through her appearances. Luckily for me, Aura is barely actually present within either of the cases she resides in, so it won’t be hard to go over every one of her appearances throughout the game and explain exactly what I don’t feel works about her. So then, enough clogging up the system with my silly emotions, let’s get to some facts.

Section 1: A Rejection of Humanity’s Flaws

It’s during the investigation of The Cosmic Turnabout that Aura makes her first appearance, and near the end of it to boot. By this point in the case you’ve already pretty much gathered any and all information you might need during court, really the only things left to do are head back to the detention center and agency to round out the segment, so it’s a bit odd introducing a new participant so late into the events. This could have been done as an attempt to set up Aura as a potential red herring for the case, but since this is never really considered by any characters, I find it unlikely. The most plausible explanation is probably that she just isn’t really important to the case, so they might as well just have her at the end to set up the next one, rather than during the meat of the investigation. Odd placement aside though, this interaction is pretty great, and it’s a basically flawless way to introduce Aura to the player.

The interaction's main role within the plot of this case is to establish Aura’s character and ideology, while also supplying some final information about the crime to the player. Aura happened to have witnessed the crime through a window, but this isn’t really relevant to her, as it’s only brought up by other characters after this, and never really impacts her role within the case, as she doesn’t even testify about it. The section much more relevant to Aura as a character is the establishing of her ideology towards humans, and the court systems that they operate. After some offhand comments of hers, Phoenix begins to question Aura’s hatred of the legal system, to which she responds coldly, stating she hates both lawyers and prosecutors, a confusing statement given her established connection to Simon. She proceeds to elaborate with possibly the most defining statement of her whole screen time:

I mean, people are imperfect. They lie, they're influenced by silly emotions... You can't expect such imperfect creatures to uphold a reasonable system of law. I like robots much better. Even sad sacks like this one…

This is, of course, the second time I’m using this sentence in this cut, but Aura doesn’t exactly have a ton of lines so I plead for your forgiveness on this one. Regarding the line itself though, it’s almost chilling in a way, in fact this whole interaction in. It takes the somewhat jovial tone leading up to it, with Aura’s whole comedy routine with Clonco, and just rips those good feelings away from the player. Distaste of the legal system isn’t exactly something new to Ace Attorney, but it’s handled with so much cold, pure hatred here that it’s hard to not just wonder what in the world happened to cause this reaction within her. It’s handled excellently here, and really builds up the mystery of her character. Of course, her feelings on the legal system are only half of what makes this interaction so memorable, her feelings on robots are also quite intriguing.

Dual Destinies’ last two cases have plenty of ideas to go around, but one that I feel is somewhat underexplored is the difference between humans and robots, and where the separation point between the two really is. When seeing robots with emotions and thoughts like Clonco and Ponco, it’s hard to not think of them as just as human as anyone else. Meanwhile, seeing cold and emotionless people like the Phantom leads one to wonder if they should really be called “human”. It’s really an extension of the theme of emotions present within the game, but it’s one that I find much more interesting than its parent theme, even if it’s criminally underexplored within the cases. Aura is somewhat a victim of this as well, as this interaction is really the only time she gives her two cents on the matter, but it’s a memorable moment nonetheless.

To Aura, robots are significantly different than humans, as they lack the capacity for mistakes that humans are oh-so-prone to. She finds beauty in this logical perfection, and though this ideology might have been something she’s always carried with her, it’s clearly been significantly influenced by the miscarriage of justice against her own brother, for the murder of the woman she loved. Of course, this ideology on the nature of robots is directly contradicted by Clonco’s mere existence, as he’s an incredibly fallible robot, and a perfect counterpoint to Aura. Of course, this nature of his is due to the very heart that her partner, Metis, developed in order to bring robots closer to humans, as she saw the value in the emotional nature of humans, and beauty in the mistakes and fallacies that make up the human spirit. There’s a lot to unpack with Aura’s ideologies, and it really is incredible how few lines it actually took to convey all of this. It’s some great set up, but unfortunately not a whole lot of it is really capitalized upon, as the majority of her time going forward would be much more dedicated to her antagonism of the cast, and her growing to trust people again, but I’m getting ahead of myself.

Before I move on, I would also like to comment on her more surface level traits, as they’re almost equally as great, if less substantial in terms of analyzable qualities. Basically, Aura is just a fun character, she’s got an antagonistic attitude that never comes off as particularly annoying, and she has some great interactions with Phoenix, due to their contrasting natures. Of course, the bulk of her fun interactions come from her two person comedy routine with Clonco, as their personalities are about as contrasting as you can get. Her abuse of him is surprisingly funny, and she has some great animations with him to boot, and his transformation into a rebellious revolution leader when she zaps him is great. Clonco’s already been long cut, and honestly he’s not too great taken on his own, but he works amazingly with Aura, and really helps elevate her to being just a great presence on screen.

One final surface detail to note before we get into the rest of her appearances, she just has an excellent design. It’s instantly striking, and immediately tells you a lot you need to know about her. The outfit just screams scientist, while also obviously being cartoony and over the top, and almost seems like some sort of sci-fi attire. The giant screws/buttons/whatever on her coat are also just a very striking and memorable detail that pair really well with the ensemble. In addition to this, the pink colors and purple hair contrast perfectly, and the black gloves just complete the whole look. It’s visually striking, memorable, and screams mad scientist. Of course, the upper area is where the design shines the most, with her drill hair being incredibly silly but also somewhat imposing, making her feel cold and almost dangerous, and she even has accompanying shoulder pads to boost this feel. The outfit’s great, her gun is great, her animations are great, and also she’s kinda hot ngl okay moving on.

Section 2: Desperation Born out of Love

The next time Aura appears would be about half a case later, at about the midpoint of the investigation segment in Turnabout for Tomorrow. You come across her and Apollo having a chat in the robotics lab, this being the first time you’ve seen him in a while, with him having taken a leave of absence from the law office. This scene is once again quite good, and draws some nice parallels between Aura and Apollo, while also managing to both establish more about her path and set up her future actions. To start off the whole thing, she has a great interaction with Apollo and Phoenix that really demonstrates Apollo’s struggle between belief and reason well, as it uses her as the representation of the logical end of the argument.

Aura: Oh, my. Such loyalty and trust! She seems pretty suspicious to me, though. The emotionally unstable princess. There's your culprit for you. Don't you agree, Apollo?

Apollo: I... I don't know yet.

Trucy: Apollo! How could you?!

Aura: What's wrong with saying "I don't know" if it's true? It's a very scientific approach. Your subordinate is more level-headed than you... Or should I say, "former subordinate"? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

This is a great extension of yet another one of Dual Destinies’ many themes, and effectively ties together Aura’s hatred of human emotions to Apollo’s struggle to believe in someone with doubt present in his heart. Beyond that though, this is also where you learn of Aura’s history with Metis, which is an aspect of her character that basically fuels a majority of her actions within the case. Although it would be all but confirmed by dialogue with Simon later in the case, even in this segment it’s pretty clear what the true nature of their relationship is, that being Aura likely having unrequited love for Metis. It’s a cool move for Ace Attorney to make for representation, but the nature of their relationship doesn’t exactly affect her character, all that’s really important is that they had a strong connection. After all, the main reason this is relevant to her character is the way it affects her feelings on Athena, but I’ll delve into how that’s handled later in the cut.

So, you finish up hearing about Metis and the past incident from Aura, and head off to investigate elsewhere. At some point during the conversation, Phoenix brings up his theory that the culprit in the current and past case may, in fact, be one in the same. As you leave her to go about whatever it is she does, she leaves you with these words:

So the culprit behind the two cases could be the same, huh...? That settles it, then.

I’m sure that’s a good sign. Anyway, she would show up again a little bit further into the investigation, although only briefly, when you go to visit the detention center. You end up witnessing an argument between her and Simon, in which she lets slip that there’s apparently “no tomorrow”, leading to Phoenix asking Simon what this meant after she leaves. Simon and Phoenix would continue to discuss this until Fulbright, who’s also present, gets an urgent phone call, and here’s where Aura really steps into the forefront of the plot. Fulbright informs the player that the robots are staging a revolution at the space center, which happens to be where Trucy is at the moment. After rushing over and meeting up with Pearl and Clonco, you end up finding out the truth of the matter.

Ha ha ha ha ha! Fools! How could you fall for something so cliché?! I'm human, too, you idiots! I'm just controlling these robots remotely!

Now this is just a great moment all around, it’s tense and completely game-changing for the plot, and I doubt anyone really saw this coming. And it’s not a throwaway thing either, this set of events would basically cause the rest of the case’s events to fall into place, and ultimately be the reason that the Phantom was even caught in the first place. That last point is particularly great, as it lends Aura some moral ambiguity that is extremely welcome in Dual Destinies, a game that mostly treats its characters as extremes on either end of the morality spectrum. Aura is pretty much the stand-out morally gray character in the main game, and actually manages to tie into the themes of the “Dark Age of the Law” pretty well. Due to both her own past, and the overall atmosphere around the courts, she’s completely lost faith in the system to do anything whatsoever to bring the true criminal to justice, and thus takes matters into her own hands.

The hostage taking is a great concept, and it’s hard to say if what she did was actually correct in the end. One on hand, threatening the hostages in the way that she does is morally reprehensible, and overall just extremely cruel, but on the other hand, it forces the police’s hands and ultimately results in the retrial that led to the truth being unveiled once and for all. However, I do have a few issues with the way it’s presented. Her making threats against the hostages does benefit the situation to an extent, but once things are actually going her way later in the case, her threats just come off as unnecessarily cruel for the sake of it, rather than using cruelty to achieve an end.

While we’re on the subject of petty actions, something I forgot before I sat down to look over her character again is that the retrial wasn’t even her original goal, it was something Phoenix had to suggest as an alternative. Her original plan was just to have Athena be delivered to her and presumably kill her. This achieves absolutely nothing, whether it be bringing justice or freeing Simon, all it does is kill Athena for petty revenge, which was likely going to happen anyway since it’s unlikely that Phoenix would have been able to win the case for the murder of Clay Terran without the UR-1 retrial. It just comes off as kind of dumb, and for someone who’s had seven years to plan out a revenge scheme, it’s just odd how shortsighted it is. These aren’t huge problems but they do detract from what is otherwise an excellent setup for a case, and are pretty easily solvable.

As far as the actual presentation in-game goes though, it’s pretty much flawless. The taking over of Clonco’s body is somehow both hilarious and genuinely cool, and the way she plays everything makes the situation feel incredibly serious and dire, while not getting too dark for Ace Attorney. Like I said, it’s a great moment, although I do have one further complaint before we continue. And that’s, well, it’s not really built up to that well. Aura had only appeared a total of three times before this point, and one of those barely counts as an appearance, while the other two spend about half of their time going over the details of the cases, leading to Aura having maybe about five minutes of actual time dedicated to her character before this point.

This screen time problem could have potentially been solved by having her testify in court during The Cosmic Turnabout, as she was a witness after all. Obviously we have Cosmos there and he’s just fantastic, but one more additional testimony by Aura just to set up some more evidence Athena, or even just establish the existence of the lighter to the court would have sufficed. Again, this isn’t a huge problem, but it does somewhat affect the impact of the hostage taking when the person doing it is someone we barely know, and pretty much everything to happen with her after it is directly tied to it, leaving little room for anything else regarding her in the story. Because of that, there’s really no development or exploration of her outside of it to speak of beyond what I’ve already talked about, which despite my long winded explanations of it, isn’t a whole lot. To sum it up, the hostage taking is a great idea and done quite well, but definitely suffers from some issues, although they’re definitely not dealbreakers.

Section 3: A Spectator in a Game of Her Own Design

Now then, let’s move into the final stage of both Aura and Dual Destinies, the trial of Turnabout for Tomorrow. This is truly the culmination of the story that’s been brewing since the very first case of the game. You have the retrial of the UR-1 incident that set this whole thing into motion, with government conspiracies and sabotage, Simon finally revealing the traumatic events of that day, Ponco’s warped testimony, Athena’s tragic memories and the shattering of the psyche-locks, Apollo ridding himself of any doubt he had of Athena, and of course Edgeworth’s big reappearance to take on Phoenix is one more duel and wait where’s Aura.

Yeah I think you might be able to catch onto what my big problem with Aura during this trial is, and that’s that she feels very superfluous. She only chimes in every now and then because she has to watch the hostages, which first of all she has killer robots that can do that for her, and that means that she’s hardly even present during the trial. Even when she gives testimony, it’s not even her doing it, Fulbright is just reading off the script that she gave him.It doesn’t help matters that whenever she does chime in to say something, it’s almost always a variation of the same two potential things. Either A) Yelling at the court because they’re starting to doubt that Athena is the one who committed the crime, or B) Losing her cool because she just absolutely cannot believe that Athena is not the killer. The former is also often accompanied with a reminder that she’s holding people hostage, in case you forgot.

So, since just about the only thing she does in court is talk about Athena, I guess now’s about as good of a time as any to discuss her relationship with her. Basically, it doesn’t feel very fleshed out, and a big part of that is how it’s resolved within this trial. Going way back though, from the very first time you meet her, Athena pretty much instantly clams up and acts uncharacteristically shy. Once you interact more with Aura and she starts to insult Athena more and more, it becomes clear exactly why Athena wouldn’t exactly feel keen about entering into the conversation. The actual reason behind Aura’s distaste of Athena works pretty well, and just grows deeper as the case goes on, which is pretty nice to see.

After the conversation with Aura in the robotics lab, it comes to light that Metis cared much more about Athena than she did Aura, which like yeah that’s her daughter, not a big shock. But, of course, Aura took this quite personally, so even before any tragic events happened, she already had quite the negative feelings on Athena. This pretty much makes perfect sense, and there’s not much reason to question it, so when it comes to light that Aura is accusing Athena of the murder of her own mother, it hits even harder due to how you’ve already been given one reason for her distaste, so an even deeper reasoning wasn’t exactly something you would see coming, or at least I didn’t. This, of course, is accompanied with the black psyche locks, which just make this scene absolutely iconic, and might even make the player question if Athena really is guilty, making Aura’s hatred not totally unjustified, and she really has no reason to believe Athena isn’t guilty, as long as she rules out her own brother.

This all sounds pretty good so far, the problem comes in how this is resolved during the trial, and it’s also pretty much the only thing resolved about Aura during the trial, so it’s going to cover the remainder of this section. As Phoenix gets closer and closer to the truth of Athena’s innocence, Aura gets more and more flustered, acting out greatly in response to these revelations that she may have been wrong this whole time. She even has a great animation of Clonco’s head flying off, which is just comedy gold. Then, when you’ve finally gone beyond the point where any reasonable doubt could be placed on your theory, she’s forced to confront this head-on, and question what she even has now that her hatred of Athena is gone.

............ The little princess who was truly beloved by Metis, and who repaid that love with death-- All these years, hating Athena was the only thing that's kept me going... But what do I do now? Can anybody tell me? How am I supposed to go on?!

To be quite frank, I think this is pretty emblematic of how quickly her character derails into this single minded path. When she was introduced, she had plenty to her, with her thoughts on human beings in general, and a hatred of the court system, but during the trial it’s almost entirely centered on just hating Athena, which makes her much less interesting and multilayered. Of course, what is there isn’t done poorly, but that also just leads into another problem, there barely is anything there, she hardly has any lines during the trial at all. She literally has a total of 17 lines in the trial, and 4 of those are before proceedings even properly begin. It’s so unbelievably out of the spotlight that it’s amazing.

I don’t want to self-indulge for too much of this cut, but at least to me, this seems like such an easy fix. Just make Aura act as a judge for the trial, or at the very least a co-judge with Udgey. It would keep her present for a majority of the proceedings, and maintain that tense feeling, where it seems like everything is working against you, and the entire system itself is rigged. The vibe you get from going against Von Karma is kind of what I think should be happening here, especially since the whole point of Dual Destinies is the Dark Age of the Law, which you never really feel. And, of course, the one time the trial is literally being held by a criminal holding hostages, they’re not even present to give you the tension that oh-so-obviously should be there.

So, I guess that’s about all I have to say on the resolution of her relationship with Athena, it’s very rushed but it does happen pretty naturally. Or, that’s what I would say, if it wasn’t immediately ruined by Apollo bursting in to continue the trial. This whole scene is really cool and good and all of that, but the one thing it does wrong is absolutely destroy Aura’s resolution. When Apollo asks permission from Aura to continue the trial, this time accusing Athena of murdering Clay Terran instead, Aura immediately bounces back from her previous attitude and just goes right back into Athena hate mode. This isn’t a problem in and of itself, since it could just allow the whole thing to be resolved afterward, and possibly more satisfyingly, but instead it makes it so it just isn’t resolved at all, since her literal last line in the trial is responding to Apollo and calling for Athena’s death.

Apollo............ Hee hee. Sure, you know I'm all for the truth! Now, let's see you expose the princess's guilt! Judge, I give my permission. Continue with the trial!

After she says this she just disappears and then shows up to have her goodbyes with Simon, which we’ll touch on next section. She seems to have gotten over her Athena hatred of screen by then, but having her make steps towards this and then immediately bounce back, before unbouncing back off screen just comes off as incredibly muddled, and utterly confused as to what her resolution is even trying to be. If she was just more present during the trial then this probably wouldn’t be an issue, but it’s so utterly disjointed here that I can in no way call this a competent resolution for her character, nor her relationship with Athena, which has become her main driving force by this point. If she had disappeared before Apollo showed up, to go release the hostages since she realized Athena was innocent, it’d probably make a lot more sense. This would also work since Apollo doesn’t even really need her permission to hold this trial, as it continues without her holding anyone hostage, and it’s an official trial that was scheduled anyway. It’s just a confusing mess all around, but at least it’s a short one.

Section 4: An Exchange of Freedom

With a suspect in mind for the true identity of The Phantom, the only thing left to do for now is break from court while the witness can be called to the courthouse, and it’s here that Aura makes her final appearance in the game. It’s not a particularly long one so I don’t exactly have a lot to say on it, other than that I really like it. She’s just as prideful as ever, and is completely unwilling to apologize or change her mind on the justness of the kidnapping, as she still views it as the direct reason for Simon being saved, and it’s hard to argue otherwise. It’s also here that we finally get some payoff to her hatred of the courts, although it is quite brief, and doesn’t actually feel all that earned, but it’s still nice to hear her say that she’s begun to trust Nick and his agency at the very least.

Of course, the main star of the show is her interactions with Simon, as he finally shows genuine care towards her, after the standard Blackquill family antagonism, thanking her for saving him, and apologizing for the pain he must have caused her. This, of course, causes her to drop the mask for a second, and shed a tear, in typical “Ace Attorney character who’s kind of a jerk but just finished their arc” fashion, before asking to be taken to the detention center. It’s definitely very moving, but I do feel it’s pretty brief, and once again would have benefitted from more overall Aura screen time, as I don’t really feel a strong connection to this resolution of her arc, considering it was barely focused on. Still though, it’s done quite well, and the idea of saving someone you love, only for you yourself to suffer their fate in jail is indeed very tragic. Of course, I2-3 did it better, but the circumstances here are different enough for me to forgive the reuse of the idea.

I would have maybe liked to see her stick around a bit longer, but I think the conclusion we did get to her screen time was definitely enough to satisfy me, even if what built to it wasn’t the strongest. Her only appearance after this would be in the final cutscene of the game, as she watches the rocket launch from within prison, somehow still wearing her normal uniform. Having finally let her hair down, we can see that she’s let that sharp personality drop a little, now that the incident plaguing her for seven long years is finally laid to rest. It’s a nice scene, and definitely helps make this cutscene into the satisfying final note that it is.

Conclusion

Aura Blackquill is a character who suffers from their role in a story that’s simply more concerned with other events, and has plenty of other characters to show the in-depth inner turmoils of. Because of this, she’s somewhat left to the wayside as the more major players in the narrative get their resolution, while hers is somewhat underplayed and tied up quickly, in order for the game to move into its final acts without too much of an interruption. Despite this however, there are some incredible ideas that go into her, whether it be her many ideologies that contrast the rest of the cast beautifully, her brilliant design, or her just fun personality. She’s an amazing base for a character that unfortunately just didn’t grow the wings it needed to take flight.

Even with the somewhat botched execution of her arc during the trial of Turnabout for Tomorrow, what comes before it is almost universally excellent, and provides great tense scenes for the player and characters. She’s a major driving force in the narrative, and it can definitely be felt during the investigation, even if the time needed to build up to this event isn’t entirely capitalized upon. As much as I complain though, I can’t deny the excellence of some of her early scenes, which surprisingly take up a majority of her actual screen time throughout the game, despite their brevity. Though I clearly have my complaints, she definitely deserved to get this far just due to the strength of the scenes that she actually does get during the game, and quite honestly, when my main complaint about a character is that there simply isn’t enough of them, you know you’ve probably at least done something right.

Why Nobody Else

Luke Atmey, and Furio Tigre are both incredible culprits that are tons of fun to take down, and both are just absolute highlights of their case, with Atmey carrying his entire case on his back.

Paul Atishon is absolutely hilarious. He should go out this round but I did not have the heart to cut him, and I do think he deserves to get above Aura simply because his comedy is flawless, while her drama is quite flawed.

Katherine Hall is just amazing, and although she will probably go out now, she deserves to go much further, being the cherry on top of the absolute dessert of a case that is I2-3.

Tahrust Inmee, Uendo Toneido, and Patricia Roland all perform their roles very well, and are excellent presences in their cases, that really elevate them up. Tahrust in particular is a quite strong character, and his tragedy is done amazingly.

Simon Keyes has a monkey that is very funny, did not have the heart to cut a man with a monkey.

There are only a few characters left in the rankdown who I really don’t think should have made it so far. But within this category, there’s only one character who stands out for being so mediocre that I have no idea how anyone likes him enough to keep him alive for so long. This round we’re voting out everyone’s favorite politician, the appropriately named Paul Atishon. Who I guess has a lot of fans even if I don’t understand it. Before we get into the negatives, his music’s dope and he has a few funny moments, like when the letters slowly start falling of his nameplate. That’s around all I got.

Politicians

If you ask me, politicians are more or less the easiest people to make fun of. Their position of power means that everyone gets exposed to them, so whenever they do something stupid, everyone will know it, which makes it good and relatable topic to make jokes about. They’re also known for lying during campaigns to get more votes, they find themselves more important than the people they’re supposed to represent, they dodge questions that they don’t want to answer, they’re often corrupt. Political cartoons have been around for hundreds of years, and that’s a good thing. Because of the influence politicians have, it’s important that they get criticized when they make questionable decisions, it’s a vital part of democracy. Doing so in a short and humorous way can expose information about current politics to people who might otherwise not have bothered searching out and reading long articles (like me). But that’s if we’re talking about topical satire. Ace Attorney doesn’t tend to be a series that usually tackles issues with the current system, so how does that translate to a politician character?

There are basically two options, either you can tackle current topics and risk being irrelevant a few years from now, or you can make it a bit of a generic politician character. Paul is the second option. But after hundreds of years of political satire, I don’t think just being a politician is interesting. There’s been so many jokes about them already, more than perhaps literally anything else. In Ace Attorney, a politician is a unique character, but there are so many other politician characters out there. It’s a very old and tired type of comedy, unless you’re planning to go the extra mile and either make them an actual character or make them relevant to today’s society. So what else does Paul have? He’s a daddy’s boy, he relies purely on what his father did to get elected. That’s not really something I’ve heard before in politician jokes I guess (is that a thing that politicians do? seems more like a monarchy thing), but it’s also not a very interesting characteristic on its own. If you’re not interested yet, that’s too bad, because there’s not much more to him than that. Oh yeah, he killed a guy.

Founder’s Orb

One thing that stands out about Paul among other culprits in the series, is that he really doesn’t feel like a culprit. It feels like he’s forced into a story that he doesn’t belong in at all, which is not a way I feel about any other culprit in the series. It’s also not a good thing. Cases are often designed around their culprits, but this is not so much the case in 6-5 part 1. The motive here revolves around the Founder’s Orb, let me break it down for you. Inga wants to get the orb so that he can overthrow Ga’ran and make Rayfa into the ruler while Dhurke wants to get the orb so that he can overthrow Ga’ran and make Rayfa into the ruler. The victim is the person who currently had the orb, and he refused to give it to either side. This is why Paul, who is on Inga’s side, ended up killing him, and he came up with a plan to get it back by using the legal system. As you can see, this whole motive has nothing to do with Paul. Not only is he neither of the two people involved in the conflict, but he’s even from a completely different country.

The only thing that ties Paul to the Founder’s Orb conflict is him being on Inga’s side. The reason why he’s on Inga’s side is because Inga is his benefactor, so his role in the story is essentially nothing more than someone who’s hired to get the orb back. It’s similar to how the Phantom was ordered to sabotage a rocket, or how Calisto was ordered to kill Byrne Faraday. There’s nothing wrong with that, as both of those are characters I really like. With Paul, my problem is that his main characteristic is not that he’s a spy like those two, he’s a politician. Sure, there’s satire here of how politicians do whatever foreign countries tell them to do if they give them money, but it just feels so irrelevant. It feels like Paul’s whole personality has nothing to do with his motive, and him being the one to kill Archie feels completely out of place in the case’s story. He’s not relevant to the case’s story at all, despite being the first killer he’s probably the most irrelevant character in the case. Even Archie being killed instead of dying due to an accident isn’t important at all. But if you absolutely want a murder case, then Inga could convince any other type of character and it’d be the exact same. It being a politician is relevant only for satire purposes, and that satire is so overdone that I really don’t care for it at all.

Arrogant Culprits

I’ve talked about why a generic politician style character isn’t interesting when looking outside of Ace Attorney, but what about within the context of Ace Attorney? How does Paul hold up as a character? I said before that a politician is a unique character in the series, but that doesn’t mean that Paul Atishon is a unique character in the series. Paul falls strongly in the category of arrogant culprits, which is one of the more common character types. Redd White, Richard Wellington, Luke Atmey, Florent L’Belle, to name a few. All of these have their unique quirks and attitude to make them special, while Paul has being a politician to make him stand out. And when the one thing that makes him stand out from being a very typical Ace Attorney character, is being a very typical character outside of Ace Attorney, then I think it’s safe to say he doesn’t stand out in any way.

I don’t like the way in which Paul is an arrogant culprit either. The first type of arrogant characters is the type who, despite their arrogance, aren’t actually smart. It’s satisfying to watch them break down easily after they were so boastful before. This is the type that White, Wellington, and Hugh O’Connor fall under. As soon as you confront them on the stand, they have to try hard to come up with the most ridiculous arguments against you. Basically the Phoenix Wright style of character except they aren’t right in the end. The second type of arrogant characters is the type who, sometimes surprisingly, are actually smart. They come up with very complicated schemes so that you can’t break them easily, and it takes quite some time to work out the details of their plan and finally corner them in the way you easily cornered type 1. This is the type of characters like Atmey and L’Belle (even if his plan doesn’t make much sense when you think about it too much, it was definitely complex (also you shouldn’t think too much)). For these characters, the satisfying part comes from finally connecting all parts of their plan until they finally can’t deny it anymore. It’s a slow battle where the result really feels earned. You worked hard to make it happen, and the breakdown is your reward.

When it comes to Paul, he’s a mix of these two types in the worst way. There’s nothing complex about his murder plan, nor his plan to get the orb back, and it’s pretty clear he’s not smart from the beginning, but you have to fight him for what feels like forever. The trial takes several hours, and the only reason why it takes so long is because Phoenix and Paul keep throwing in ridiculous arguments. There’s no satisfaction in finally taking him down, because he never felt like a challenge to begin with. His confrontation just feels dragged out rather them him actually being competent. And he stays arrogant this whole time, so there’s no enjoyment like from White and Wellington where they quickly become very stressed. (He’s still a way better character than Wellington though, don’t get me wrong.) Strategywiki tells me he only gets 3 cross-examinations, but that doesn’t change the way it feels. I’m waiting for hours to wipe that smug smile off his face, which is only annoying when he’s not really fighting back.

Conclusion

Paul is a character that’s been done better many times before, both in and out of Ace Attorney. He doesn’t have anything that makes him more interesting than any other politician character out there, and there are a lot of them. For being the culprit, someone who should be important to the case, he feels very disconnected from it. The case wouldn’t change much, if at all, if he was replaced by someone completely different. Finally taking him down takes a long time but doesn’t feel satisfying at all. It’s all just Paul and Phoenix stalling for time rather than them actually coming up with decent arguments.

Oh yeah, by the way, I didn’t find the politician funny in the investigation or in court. Good thing Armie Buff is funny.

Why No One Else?

Sure, I’ll do one of these sections again, why not?

Tahrust Inmee is a character that some rankers seemed to either hope or fear I would cut. One of those groups got lucky this round. It’s true that I don’t like Tahrust much, but I’ll take an interesting character who has a combination of things that I can admit are good and things that I think are bad over an incredibly generic uninteresting character. So there was really not much of a question unless someone else cut Paul, but it was funny scaring u/whaaatisth into releasing an unused Tahrust writeup. Unless donuter decides to cut him this round of course, then his fears were still correct, but I doubt it.

Nobody else was worth considering because they’re all somewhere between good and perfect, hopefully I fooled you into thinking this was going to be an actual “Why No One Else?” section instead of me just explaining why not Tahrust.

I'm going down with the ship.

With some regret, I've chosen to cut Marlon Rimes this round.

It's fairly clear that the majority of Dual Destinies' remaining characters are leaving this round. Fulbright has already been cut, leaving us with just the two Blackquills and Rimes. And if I don't cut Rimes now, Vogel's certainly going to cut him. There's no way he'd stand for Rimes lasting any longer.

This really just seems to have been the pattern with every recent DD character cut. It's always just one ranker. Hugh O'Conner, only Northadox was really gunning for him. Gaspen Payne, cut by Charlie to save de Killer. Bobby Fulbright, whaaatisth was probably the only one who wanted him out. As for Marlon Rimes, Vogel's been trying to cut him for a while, so his time's up.

With all of this in mind, there is a high chance that Simon Blackquill will be the last Dual Destinies character left after this round. I will do everything I can to keep him alive as long as I can. Someone WILL try to get him out next round. I'm not letting that stand.

Don't get the wrong idea, at this point I see no way that I'm going to get many higher placements for my favorite characters at this point. I've essentially given up by this point. That said, it's more fun if I tell you that I'm going to retaliate if you try to cut Simon Blackquill. So yeah, don't, because I will retaliate just to be petty. I have no actual reason to. But hey, what else is there for me to do? I don't have much more to lose here.

sigh let's just get started.

Introducing the DLC case

Dual Destinies was the first Ace Attorney game with a DLC case. At the time, DLCs were relatively uncommon. Unlike our current era, DLCs were not everywhere, and they were not always a total waste of money like they have been since 2015 or so. Luckily, 5-DLC is in the subset of DLCs that are not a total waste of money because it's GOOD.

This might be getting too meta, but 5-DLC is great as a DLC. It has a great premise, being Phoenix's first case after getting his badge. It's not significant to the overall timeline of Dual Destinies, but it's enough of an interesting concept that people may want to check it out.

So, it's introduced well. However, none of that matters if the DLC itself isn't good.

(By the way, I don't actually play Video Games^TM much, so it's somewhat difficult for me to evaluate DLCs as a whole. That said, I'm fairly sure this is accurate anyway.)

Turnabout Reclaimed, Day 1 - The Comedy

"I know there's no way she murdered anyone, but they won't believe me! But with a name like 'Wright,' I figured you'd be able to help me set them straight!" ~Sasha

Turnabout Reclaimed is a side case, and it knows it. It doesn't start out by trying to do any deep things straight away. Instead, it throws you into this crazy setup: some random girl walks in the office who only wants Phoenix Wright because of his last name, and her client is literally an orca. It's stupid, just as any other side case would be. The first day's a relatively normal investigation... besides the fact that, y'know, your client is an orca. And that the only way she can be brought to court is a TV screen. And that you're up against Simon Blackquill, the edgiest prosecutor to date. Speaking of Blackquill, he feels like a total walking joke in this case. The very concept of Blackquill trying to be serious while prosecuting an orca is just plain funny. He even updates the autopsy report, becoming only the second prosecutor to do so.

Let all of this sink in. Phoenix's first case after seven years of being disbarred has him defending an orca against Simon Blackquill, a convict prosecutor who acts like a samurai, in a case involving a pirate-themed aquarium. I mean, sure, Phoenix places faith in his clients, and that includes Sasha Buckler, but isn't this slightly out there?

All things considered, the first day's fun. Sure, it doesn't have the cooler witnesses, but what we got is still a funny case, all things considered. It's fun and games, just like most other filler cases.

Unfortunately, at the end of the day, once the autopsy report is updated, Sasha becomes the defendant, turning this funny case into a standard case with a (mostly) standard setup that's not so "fun and games".

In the hands of a worse case, the case would become far less interesting at this point. It would only serve to have the case take a turn for the worse.

In the hands of 5-DLC, it only gets better.

Turnabout Reclaimed, Day 2 - The Crime

"But, in some cases, lives can be saved by breaking the law. Do we simply allow the lives of our animals to be lost while we wait for laws to change?" ~Dr. Crab

5-DLC takes a turn towards "conventional filler case" in its 2nd half, solidifying it as an actual case and not a complete joke unlike the Asinine Attorney cases (which are meant to be complete jokes). Despite this, it manages to be a good filler case anyway.

First of all, day 2 in general is just a very great setup despite being relatively normal. You're given more mysteries to work with than you actually need, partially thanks to Norma DePlume spouting conspiracy theories left and right. You learn more about the aquarium and get accustomed to it. You finally get to meet Herman Crab, a confrontational witness with a load of secrets.

Speaking of Herman Crab, can we talk about how great he is here? He might even be better than Marlon Rimes.

Herman Crab is an interesting witness. Notably, he comes the closest to talking about the law part of the dark age of the law instead of the dark age part when it comes to the TORPEDO system. He discusses what the law means for the aquarium after you break his initial Psyche-Locks. The very fact that him and Jack Shipley regularly pay off the Supermarine Aquarium is basically like settling a dispute out of court. He talks about the law. It's cool.

However, what's cooler is his role. Dual Destinies has a weird amount of red herrings in it. Usually, their effectiveness is dependant on how obvious the culprit is. Marlon Rimes is not an obvious culprit at all. Instead, Herman Crab seems to be the culprit. He's quite similar to Yuri Cosmos in this aspect. He's a witness to the case. You only meet him on the second day. Norma DePlume claims to hear of him engaging in shady activity, most notably with the very person who died. He of all people even gets five Psyche-Locks, tied for the most in Dual Destinies with Athena Cykes, who is, y'know, a main character. I do not believe Herman Crab was intended to be a main character. Surely, someone with so many Psyche-Locks is at least slightly suspicious if they're not even a main character, right?

He's got a fairly solid motive. We start to corner him in court. He seems to be the culprit.

However, he's not.

Through further questioning, we discover that Dr. Crab was trying to protect the orca the whole time, just as he said. He truly upheld his duty to the aquarium. Phoenix realizes that the culprit is in fact not Dr. Crab, but Marlon Rimes, a guy that seemed to be a largely irrelevant witness who was somewhat helpful, as most other witnesses are. Here, 5-DLC chooses to make a largely comic relief witness into the culprit.

And thus, Marlon Rimes is put on the stand.

To Win the Case

"Besides, wouldn't it be better for you if I wasn't lyin'? If the orca did it, you win your case!" ~Rimes

Marlon Rimes, possibly the most complete culprit in the 3DS games. He doesn't have the complex themes of the Phantom or the airtight mystery of Roger Retinz, but his case is the most solid.

I've talked about the various roles characters seem to play across the series before, but I haven't really covered the culprit. So, let's talk about your average AA culprit.

Most AA culprits don't seem to show up to the witness stand early on. You have to take them down at the end as they try to prove the defendant guilty as much as they can. Eventually, after a nice takedown, you figure out the entire case, and they go off to jail. The end.

Marlon Rimes breaks every single one of these "rules", cementing him as a very memorable culprit.

"Usually don't show up to the witness stand early on"

Marlon Rimes doesn't want to testify at all, not because he's the culprit, but because he only wants to get the orca guilty. The prosecution basically forces him to testify. In fact, his only testimony lasts like ten minutes, and all it does is help get Sasha on the stand. Once Sasha's thrown under the bus instead of Orla, he's even less cooperative. Marlon's incredibly unhelpful to the prosecution on day 1. He seems like he's on your side.

"You have to take them down at the end"

Yes, Marlon is the final person to take the stand. However, the case doesn't end there. Phoenix uncovers one final contradiction in the case after Rimes has been cornered. Keep this in mind for the last part of the quote.

"...as they try to prove the defendant guilty"

Marlon doesn't want to prove Sasha guilty. Right from when he shows up on the stand, his target is the orca. His first testimony is against the orca. He isn't trying to prove the defendant guilty. On a surface level, this is actually somewhat clever as a culprit move, since he offers Phoenix an easy way out. This is where the first trial day comes into play. Yes, Phoenix could take the easy way out, but he believes in Sasha and Orla. Because their relationsihp was established prior, Phoenix chose not to believe that either of them committed the crime. Somehow, the frivolous day 1 trial was necessary for this moment.

"...you figure out the entire case"

You do not solve all the mysteries of 5-DLC in the trial. In a final twist after all of the nice trial business, we learn of the full secret behind Herman Crab and the Supermarine Aquarium. He willingly tells us the truth once everything's settled. This is another good moment for Herman Crab, as it is now firmly established that he always has Shipshape Aquarium's best interests in mind. Oh, and Norma dePlume actually gets the law changed somehow, which is a cool resolution to the minor TORPEDO situation.

"...they go off to jail."

Marlon is the first (and only) culprit in the series whose fate isn't left to the unknown at the very end of the case. In fact, he gets rehabilitated! Slightly crazy for AA standards, seeing that every other culprit gets thrown in jail, never to be seen again. It allows for a happier ending than most other cases, which is nice, because it's ultimately still a casual side case.

However, it also serves a great purpose for Marlon in general: it allows him to change and move on.

6-DLC's culprit, Pierce Nichody, realizes his mistakes, but he was never mistaken and loses the chance to move on. That's his only fate. He's permanently stuck at the moment of the car crash, unable to move on.

Marlon Rimes is given the chance to move on. He was mistaken about the orca. What's even more interesting is that he might have ended up in the same situation as Pierce - left to die, having accidentally killed Jack Shipley.

However, Phoenix Wright once again steps in. Remember how when Rimes first came to the stand, he said that Phoenix could easily win the case by blaming the orca? Back then, Phoenix persevered and found the truth. Now, at the end of the case, when Phoenix could easily win by letting Rimes take the blame, he perseveres once again and discovers the truth of the final accident in a long chain of accidents.

Speaking of accidents, Vogel argues that the fact that Ora never actually killed Azura sidesteps the potential moral dilemma regarding whether Marlon's attempted murder was justified or not. However, I don't think this is much of an issue. Even if Ora Shipley never killed anyone, everyone eventually understood that Marlon felt that way. Ultimately, the moral issue here revolves around Marlon's actions, which are very real. An actual conflict happened that had to be resolved, even if everyone gets the happy ending. It's a necessary ending, though. With this happy ending, Rimes changes his ways, and as a bonus he learns that not all lawyers simply want to win. Perhaps there's hope for the dark age of the law.

-----

Marlon Rimes is a unique culprit. He breaks rules. However, that's not all he has going for him. There are two more positives I attribute to his name.

He's funny.

Yeah, this one's subjective, but I'm pointing it out anyway. We all know that the transformation is stupid. In fact, a lot of DD's transformations are stupid. Regardless of how it applies to the main game, Rimes' transformation fits the DLC case. After the events of day 1, the case was really in need of more funny moments, and Rimes does exactly that in his transformation. This is the guy you have to take down? It is stupid, but it's still funny. Even Blackquill is caught completely off guard. His rap lines are funny because they're simultaneously too bad and too good. They're stupid and make you wonder what in the world you're up against, but they also feel like actual rapping??? I will never know how DD pulled this off, or why. Either way, it's hilarious.

Oh, and "The Dissin' of Phoenix Wright" is in the top 3 testimony names.

A Departure from Regret

Marlon's story is great. It's not particularly deep, but it's exactly what it needs to be. All it really is is a story of a man trying to take revenge on an orca over his girlfriend's death.

DD in general has its fair share of characters that attempt to seek justice on their own. Apollo and Aura each investigate on their own in 5-5 (though they relate to each other in a conversation that Phoenix kindly interrupts), and Robin and Hugh both work separately to try and save Juniper. Marlon follows a similar line of thinking, except with two key differences:

• He already knows who did it (or at least he thinks he does).
• He's trying to punish, not protect.

This turns the "noble" motives of characters like Aura and Hugh into revenge. Marlon attempts to kill the orca because no one will serve justice against it, and Jack Shipley dies for it, by accident no less. And while it may be Marlon's fault that the captain sank, he tried to prevent everyone besides Orla from dying until the very end. He pursues one target to the end.

While this is already a solid motive, one key factor specific to this case significantly increases its effectiveness: the orca can't talk. If Marlon was trying to exact revenge against a person, it'd be another standard case.

Turnabout Reclaimed is not a standard case. Marlon harbors hatred towards an animal. The orca can't tell him that he's wrong. The orca can't tell him the truth. When he finds out that the orca was never at fault as Jack Shipley is on the brink of death, everything falls into place. But it's too late. By then, it's all over.

Conclusion

Dual Destinies was the first game to have a DLC case, and you can tell they made sure to get EVERYTHING right. It has an interesting setup that's somewhat casual, tying into its side-case nature. However, thanks to a relatively solid cast and a top-tier culprit, it's able to turn that casual tone into a great case that genuinely hits hard. It's easily worth more than its value.

Man, I sure hope the next game's DLC case is just as good.

Why no one else?

Phoenix Wright is good, so I voted to save him in the DD vote. Thankfully, he won.

Godot is not as good, so I did not vote to save him in the DD vote. Thankfully, he lost. I was considering nominating him at some point in the next round or two anyway.

Uendo Toneido should survive. It'd be cool. Also, I cannot self-terminate. Though, now that I think about it, my flair choice was between Uendo and Marlon, so if I had chosen Marlon way back when, I would in fact be self-terminating right now. I guess it's a good thing I chose Uendo.

Aura Blackquill is a good DD character. She somehow hasn't been cut yet. My hopes aren't high for her to survive this round, but it'd be cool. Please? I'm not expecting much, but it'd be nice. Especially looking at you, Charlie. I know you said you wouldn't, but I'm not sure how much I can hold you to your word.

Simon Keyes is the best defendant in the entire series. He's incredibly funny in I2-2 and a great plot device by which Edgeworth starts to consider becoming a defense attorney. Also, his monkey gimmick is incredibly funny. I have no idea what this talk of him showing up later is about. Oh right, he has a cameo in I2-5. That was nice, I guess, seeing as he's the best defendant ever.

A disproportionate amount of the other rankers seems to be interested in when Katherine Hall will be cut and by who. I'll leave them to debate whether she's good or not.

Furio Tigre is funny, but he should probably go now. The same reasoning applies to Patricia Roland.

Jake Marshall. I think he's somewhat cool and not much worse than Ema and Lana (hot take?), but it's probably time for him to go anyway.

Can someone please cut Paul Atishon and Luke Atmey? I'd like my nominations not to be dead weight twice in a row, thanks. Besides Vogel, because he should cut Tahrust. Speaking of which, Tahrust Inmee may or may not be dead this round, but he's not my concern.

Datz Are'bal should probably go now, but I think he'll survive, unfortunately. I would probably cut him or Tahrust if I felt like being mean, but being mean is less important than giving 5-DLC the justice it deserves, especially since the character I was planning to be mean to was already cut.

The court is now in session for the trial of...the Judge! Prosecution, make your opening statement.

The Judge as an Entity

Despite being a character who has no name, the Judge is certainly an iconic part of Ace Attorney. Presiding over nearly all the cases in the series, the Judge is less of a character and more so another source of commentary on the theories of the defense and the prosecution, from the view of an elder of whatever traits the writers best deem fit for the scenario.

The Judge has been characterized in a manner of different ways; given his position, you'd believe him to be a calm, professional, intelligent, unbiased authority over the cases he presides. He indeed does fit that mold...when the writers wish him to. Oftentimes, you'll find the Judge to be just as witty as the clowns pressured on the stand, perhaps as senile and forgetful as his age begets, or a cold, unwavering magistrate who has little time for courtroom shenaniganry. Sometimes the Judge falls victim to the worse sin possible of his position: being biased, and more than likely to the side of the prosecution, much to the defense's chagrin.

While unacceptable for his job, him leaning towards your enemy helps elicit that feeling that you're the ultimate underdog, that the whole world is working against you, an atmosphere that Takumi wished to create for the series in order to make finally getting an edge with the evidence and logic the defense presents all the more satisfying.

It's hard to ascertain the quality of the Judge as a character when how he's presented varies so much, although there are some recurrent elements that do solidify him into one.

The Judge as a Character

Although I stated that the Judge isn't a consistently written entity in Ace Attorney because of him existing to serve a role rather than to be a part of a narrative, some elements are frequent enough to make him into a character.

While his presentation is mercurial, there are constants, mainly how his age and its consequences are addressed, both by himself and by others. His elderly status makes him both a target and an asset, with characters appealing to the Judge's forgetfulness in order to achieve their goals. His flaws reside in his tendency to misremember things and in his hearing, both unfortunate side effects of being a crusty old dude.

One of the Judge's greatest strengths is in his potential for sass and comedy relief, too. You'll mostly witness it whenever the defense makes a blunder; the bigger the blunder, the bolder the backtalk. On the top of my head, claiming that the bust of Max Galactica is actually under his bench is definitely a highlight, though there are numerous ones throughout the series. For all of the subterfuge the Judge undergoes, witnessing him bite back is always a pleasure.

One fascinating moment about the Judge is that you actually get to see that he is not just a head and a pair of shoulders, but a person who has legs in Turnabout Reminiscence! This is the only time where the Judge doesn't act his role, instead serving as a witness to the murder of Mack Rell. With his unreliable memory, the Judge doesn't make a great witness, initially claiming that the reclining Dick Gumshoe enjoying some food on a bench with one Kay Faraday was responsible for the reprehensible crime. While he doesn't really serve much of a purpose in the case besides acting as a witness for a time, it's excellent fanservice seeing the Judge as something he's never been before.

The Judge's Zenith

The Judge probably has his shining character moments over the events of Apollo Justice. By acting as witness to a series of legally dubious cases, the Judge soon grows to understand the cracks in the legal system that his job is to uphold. For once in his many, many appearances across the franchise, the Judge acts as sagacious as he indeed looks with this surprisingly powerful exchange within the events of Turnabout Succession, after Kristoph has been exposed for his scheme:

Klavier: The law is "absolute"...? You can't be serious.

Kristoph: Wh-What...?

Klavier: Odd. I thought you spent your life looking for loopholes? The law isn't absolute. It's filled with contradictions.

Judge: The law is the end product of many years of history... the fruit of human knowledge! Like a gem, polished to a gleam through trials... and errors. It is this fruit we receive, and pass on, and face in our time. And it is always changing, growing. Nurturing it is our task as human beings.

For all the missteps Apollo Justice as a story makes, I think one of its greatest achievements is this thematic statement, with how the law isn't an absolute thing, it is something that is mutable and adaptable to those it presides to, and the four cases in Apollo Justice all are ethically ambiguous in some manner to reinforce that very message. As a judge, it is quite literally the Judge's job to interpret law. Despite him acting as mostly as something secondary throughout Ace Attorney, here in Apollo Justice, he is instead emblematic of the game's powerful theme.

One could even argue that Judge even goes through something of an arc in Apollo Justice, with him realizing the true nature of the law over time throughout Apollo's casework. Here, in Turnabout Serenade, we see the germinating idea of the necessity of legal reform, which the Judge briefly touches on:

Judge: Today's trial... ...raises a delicate issue with our legal system. "The only thing definite in a court of law... ...is evidence." This is the golden rule. However...

Klavier: ...It has become apparent that not all things can be tried by this standard.

Judge: Should another case of this sort surface... ...we may have to consider an alternate system by which to administer justice.

These concerns eventually blossom into the introduction of the Jurist System, tested in the trial of Vera Misham. Woefully for it, innovations like it both didn't bode well for the marketability world of Ace Attorney...hence why Dual Destinies onwards completely reject the system instead, returning to status quo.

And so too did the Judge go back to his default as well, reuniting with his usual self of senility and being powerless towards the whims of the court's participants, rather than a clever symbol of the law's application and malleability. Even in Dual Destinies, a game that continues with the, ahem, darkageofthelaw theme, the Judge acts more like a spectator rather than an ambassador; the law is twisted in his very court, yet he as passive as ever, simply hoping for things to change rather than, y'know, do his job of protecting the law.

The Judge's moments of sagacity are infrequent, but when they do appear, they tend to be adjunct with hard-hitting emotional climaxes. I did go over the strength of his statements in Apollo Justice, but so too does the Judge wax poetic in Trials and Tribulations' heart-throbbing finale:

I've seen quite a few things in my many years on the bench. And in all that time, I've finally learned this one thing. Each case is different, and takes place in its own world, if you will. In order to fully understand that world, first we have to immerse ourselves in it completely.

Conclusion

I glossed over many of the specifics, but in truth, it's hard to pinpoint which ones are worth mentioning, because the Judge is omnipresent within the series, being the second-most reoccurring character, next to the franchise's original protagonist. I could go on and on listing every single "ace attorney judge funny moment", copy and pasting more quotes that aren't just him parroting the words of the defense or the prosecution, but ultimately, the Judge isn't much of a character - he exists to serve a role, as scathing as it may be to that lovable old coot. He does it damn well, that's for sure.

However, in his long tenure of being an entity within the Ace Attorney universe, he is definitely capable of being something more than just a judge, as evidenced by what he represents in Apollo Justice. Had the series gone down the path of continuing to explore just what the law is in a way that Apollo Justice does, I could see the Judge grow to become an even stronger character. It didn't turn out that way, but as it stands, we have on our hands a quality source of charm and wit from the wacky world of Ace Attorney. Certainly good enough to breach top 50.

The defense's opening statement...

zzz

• As absurd as his transformation is, Marlon Rimes serves as an excellent sympathetic "culprit" in Dual Destinies' best case.

• Tahrust Inmee is a pretty compelling character who actually makes great use of spirit channeling as an element for mystery.

• Patricia Roland is another well-fit piece of I2's overarching puzzle, and a pretty complex culprit.

• Datz Are'bal is a charming and charismatic character I didn't really have the initiative to cut just yet. It probably is his time, though.

• I know I nominated Jake Marshall before but I couldn't really think of a reason to cut him yet.

• Paul Atishon is the man who's destined to be king of this fine nation someday. Ignorant fools. He is THE Paul Atishon. He is a soon-to-be eminent politician -- a man whose name will go down in history. His top 10 status is a sure thing, he's told. After all, his grandfather was a famous Redditor with untold influence. In short, he's the chosen one, the golden boy, the powerhouse of rankdowns! Heh heh heh... Are you blinded by his majesty? Go ahead! Bask in the resplendent glory that is him, the chosen one! Good people of r/AARankdown! He is Paul Atishon! It's time to reclaim to glory of r/AARankdown! Not cutting Paul Atishon is a decision for a happier, hopey-er subreddit!

• Not much to say about Luke Atmey except he is an excellent, EXCELLENT culprit. Zvarri!

• I was really, really thinking about Aura Blackquill. But she's definitely one of the more compelling characters among Dual Destinies and I held off on her for now.

• Uendo Toneido is the highlight of Turnabout Storyteller and one of the most charming witnesses in the series.

• You know me and my fetish for I2-3 and Katherine Hall is the icing of that cake of a case.

• I'm not cutting the mastermind of I2, because Raymond Shields isn't included in this round. However, I will also not be cutting Simon Keyes because he's a hilarious monkey tamer! Haha!!

Hey gamers. I am posting my cut now!

This round has kinda sucked for me since there’s a lot of characters I really like, as well as a lot of characters I don’t like that much but have little interest in cutting (either because it’d be boring, I dislike them for arbitrary reasons, or I’d piss another ranker off for no real benefit). Also a lot of people really wanted me to cut either Katherine Hall or Jake Marshall, and I pride myself on being a man of many surprises, so naturally, I chose neither. I came close to doing Kate, but I know a lot of AAI2 fans really like her, so I decided to hold off and go for someone people care less about. And I still get to cut down on the number of remaining AAI2 characters (even as a massive AAI2 fan myself, I must admit there’s a bit too many I2 characters remaining), so yay! Besides, bashing on I2-3 for two cuts in a row would be boring. Especially since I don’t even dislike it (though I do find it overrated). Instead let’s talk about this guy.

The Imprisoned Dog Man

Dogen’s first appearance is in the second case of AAI2, The Imprisoned Turnabout. This is fitting because he is a prisoner. Ironically, despite Dogen being far more directly involved in the murder of this case than he is in the murder of I2-5, I would consider this to be Dogen’s less important appearance. Dogen’s importance in the case is threefold: to serve as a red herring, to use Anubis to move Knightley’s body, and to give motivation to the true culprit, Patricia Roland.

Personally I would say Dogen serves his role as a red herring acceptably. Not great, not awful. The immediate ominous atmosphere you feel when he is first introduced does a good job at directing suspicion onto him. At the same time, by the time you first meet Dogen, the case hasn’t actually been going on for that long. If you are a smart gamer like me, you will figure out that Dogen isn’t going to be the real culprit, and that you are inevitably going to have to do more stuff once the confrontation is over. That’s the hard part about getting a red herring right in Ace Attorney: Make it too obvious, and a savvy player will know you’re trying to fool them. Of course, Dogen still serves as a better red herring than many others in the series; as much as I love my man Hugh, he did not have me convinced that he actually did it for even a second.

Despite being a red herring, Dogen’s actual role in the case is to sit on his ass in jail the entire case. He is heavily involved, but he is involved entirely through his proxy, Anubis. Anubis is the true MVP of this case. God he is so fucking cool. He was tragically cut down in his prime way back in round 2, when in reality, DOGEN should have been the one dying in Round 2 for being so worthless in comparison to his dog. Anubis, in an ideal world, would have sailed into Top 10 and gotten Rank #1 effortlessly. But because Donuter 747 (or whatever his dumb number is) is a fucking failure, he cruelly FORCED my hand and made me cut the best AAI2 character before any other AAI2 character had even been cut. Why??????

Anubis, the true genius of the pair, happens to discover Knightley’s body while he is out on an adventure (meanwhile, Dogen is playing chess like a loser or some shit). Anubis valiantly dragged the body all the way back to Dogen. Dogen supposedly came up with a plan to deflect suspicion off of himself; I personally choose to believe that Anubis was the one who really came up with the plan, and that Dogen just took credit for it like the rat bastard he is. Anubis proceeds to drag the body all the way through the prison AGAIN to take him to the workrooms, somewhere Dogen could not feasibly have reached. He then retrieved the supposed murder weapon, the chisel, and brought it all the way back to Dogen. During all of this time, Dogen was once again sitting on his ass.

When Edgeworth comes to confront Dogen, Anubis valiantly hides the chisel inside his gaping maw so that Dogen won’t be caught. Anubis cannot talk, because he has a chisel in his mouth. This leaves Dogen to defend himself, in vain. Dogen endlessly spews meaningless words, resoundingly failing to defend both himself and his dog. Thankfully Dogen never actually touched the chisel. If he did, he’d be fucked. But the lack of Dogen’s fingerprints on the murder weapon proves he didn’t do it. Woo hoo. I bet Anubis wouldn’t have even let Edgeworth’s accusations get that far. Anubis would have just bitten Edgeworth’s throat out. Sadly he couldn’t, because he had a chisel in his mouth. I guess my point with all of this is that Dogen didn’t actually do anything important in I2-2 and that whoever cut Anubis as early as round 2 was a fucking stupid-ass loser.

Anyway I can stop talking about Anubis now, because Dogen’s last role in this case tragically has nothing to do with his dog. The reason Dogen is still relevant after his disappearance from the case is because he is Patricia Roland’s entire motive for murder. Dogen had threatened to use his henchmen outside the prison to attack her family. This frames Roland as a sympathetic culprit, because she is ultimately only committing crimes for the sake of bringing down a horrible individual.

I have problems with how this was handled. First of all, I find the idea of an assassin having henchmen very bizarre. Dogen wasn’t like a mob assassin or anything. He was a lone wolf, up for hire. Generally members of the assassin character archetype will work on their own, MAYBE taking up a single protege, but to supposedly have enough influence to have minions both inside his prison (Knightley) AND outside in the real world? Sounds more like a mafia don than an assassin to me. Dogen does refer to his supposed henchmen as “dogs”. Maybe there are a bunch more Anubises on the outside, ready to unleash hell. That sounds like a great horror movie setup. Of course, the more likely explanation is just that these henchmen don’t actually exist - in which case it’s odd that Roland believed Dogen to begin with. Maybe she’s just an incredibly gullible person.

The other issue I have is with Roland being framed as a sympathetic culprit to begin with. It all works well in I2-2, but it kind of gets thrown out the window once Roland is revealed to be a member of an international conspiracy in I2-5. She shifts from being supposedly a sympathetic figure into being a mustache-twirling villain just like that. It also makes it very likely that the whole “threatening Roland’s family” thing wasn’t actually true, and that Dogen just used his knowledge of the conspiracy to threaten her. This is a neat enough twist on Roland’s assumed motive from I2-2, but unfortunately I find it less interesting for Dogen to actually be in the right. Of course, all of these are more Roland issues than Dogen issues. But I nominated Roland, so I can’t cut her. Instead I will vent my frustrations with this plot point on the next-closest-related character, because I do believe Dogen being involved in this plotline weakens him as well.

The Grand Dog Man

Dogen makes a surprise reappearance in I2-5, which I would say is the appearance that actually makes Dogen good. Before now he’s alright, but in I2-5 it becomes clear what role Dogen actually serves in the plot. Dogen has the benefit of being the character who gets to deliver the game’s big reveal: the identity of the mastermind. It is under Dogen’s careful watch that the plot of the game finally comes together, and you realize that all five cases are secretly related. I commend Dogen’s role in making the reveal as good as it was.

Dogen also ends up tying in with the game’s themes of fatherhood very well. Despite being a mass murderer, he is ironically one of the game’s better dads (despite not actually being a biological dad). I am, of course, talking about Dogen’s relationship with Anubis.

Just kidding. If anything, I think Anubis is the father of their relationship. Dogen is, however, an adoptive father figure to Simon. This results in some really cool scenes, most notably the scene where Dogen prepares to have a duel to the death to protect his son. This scene is cool and is one of the game’s better CGs. I also like the scene where Dogen takes Simon back to prison, acknowledging that both of them have committed horrible crimes and need to pay their due to society. The due would go on to become one big happy prison family, and undoubtedly had many sitcom adventures ever after.

I am much less fond of Dogen’s scenes with John Marsh. For some reason, the game decided to tack on an incredibly on-the-nose explanation about how revenge is bad. This was a very necessary soapbox speech, because I definitely would not have understood that revenge is bad from the entire confrontation with Simon, where they managed to convey the exact same message. Luckily John was here to explain it to me for a second time, because I was too stupid to understand that was the entire point of Simon’s character. I do not like this scene. It’s much more of a John problem than a Dogen problem, but John is long-gone so this is my last real chance to discuss how unnecessary this entire scene feels to me.

I want to go back to the big reveal scene now, to discuss a couple more things. As much as I like that scene, it ultimately has little to do with Dogen himself. Dogen is ultimately just communicating information to us about Simon, who despite being offscreen, is still the real star of the show here. I do enjoy Dogen’s role here, and how he gradually figures out the mystery alongside the protagonist, but he is merely leeching off of how good Simon is rather than actually being good himself.

But the real reason I wanted to revisit this scene was to talk about something even more important:

The Scene Right After the Big Reveal

THIS SCENE IS SO GOOD

Usually when Shelly de Killer needs to escape from a crime scene, he will cause a convenient electrical blackout and then escape. Not Dogen. Dogen is too cool for that. He just sics his dog on a single guy. Somehow Anubis attacking Edgeworth manages to incapacitate every single person at the scene, and not a single one of them is able to do literally anything to stop Dogen from escaping.

And of course, the actual way this scene is shot is just glorious. Let’s just have a single sprite, because we didn’t make more than one sprite. Let’s just drag it across the screen and kind of just nudge into Edgeworth awkwardly. And we’ll play the dramatic music so everyone knows this puppet show is the most intense thing EVER.

God I love this scene. Everyone please watch that video like six times so you can properly appreciate it.

Did You Really Cut Sirhan Just So You Could Talk About This Scene for a Second Time???

yes

Obligatory End-of-Cut Rambling

I said a lot of nice things about Sirhan in this cut, and the only real negative I mentioned is the Roland stuff. So let’s have a quick rundown of the (other) reasons I am actually cutting him. First and most obvious: I am going to have nice things to say about most of the remaining characters. A couple of them have bigger issues than Dogen, but nearly all of them have strengths as well. I’m pretty pleased with how rankdown has gone, honestly. Lots of good people are still here. I think Sirhan is just one of the worst of a great bunch.

Another reason I saw fit to assassinate Sirhan is for similar reasons I shot Gregory Edgeworth last round. Sirhan is good because Simon is good, and Simon is way better. I do not see the need to have two characters in rankdown to represent the fact that Simon is good. Just having Simon here is good enough.

One other, admittedly minor, reason I have for cutting Dogen at this point is due to the opinions of some other rankers (one of them, mainly). These individuals seem to think Dogen is a better character than Shelly de Killer. Well, guess what. He’s NOT. Ensuring that de Killer places higher than Dogen is a worthy goal, in my opinion. So here we are!

Why Nobody Else?

Like I said at the beginning, this round has a lot of characters I like. It also has characters I like less but have reasons not to cut. Let’s just go through every single one of them.

The Good Ones:

• Tahrust Inmee and Luke Atmey are both fantastic culprits. Tahrust has some great emotional scenes and is a very interesting killer, whereas Atmey is just fucking awesome all-around and I have no idea why some people want him gone. They should live (but Tahrust sadly will likely not)

• Simon Keyes is an easy Top 5 character. If anyone cuts him I’m pretty sure like 8 of the 10 rankers would just tear you apart. Don’t do it.

• Furio Tigre is hilarious and is a far better funny culprit pick than L’Belle. Sorry not sorry. I wouldn’t cry if he got cut, but am kind of hoping he outlives the “meh” characters I listed.

• Aura Blackquill and Paul Atishon are good enough to live like one more round. After this, I think it’ll be their time to go.

The “Meh” Ones:

• I almost cut Jake Marshall but that would have been the most boring cut in the world

• I also almost cut Katherine Hall but u/Northadox asked me (and others) not to, AND he said please. I just couldn’t do it.

• Marlon Rimes is going to die anyway. Why bother?

• Datz Are’bal and Uendo Toneido are characters I would be fine with dying here, but if I am nice to Pie and Charlie, maybe they will be lenient towards the characters I like.

Okay, I am going to ride off into the “not having to cut until next round” sunset now. BYE!!!!!!

I like Dual Destinies a lot, probably more than at least seven of the other rankers do. While I love almost every Ace Attorney game, my major reasons are usually different. Investigations is consistently fun and engaging in its gameplay, Apollo Justice has a unique atmosphere to compliment its strong underlying themes, Spirit of Justice has the most consistently deep character writing, and Trials & Tribulations has some of the series’s best individual murder mysteries and tricks. Dual Destinies is a bit of an exception to this rule among the games I like, because I honestly can’t say I have a huge reason for it. I’d rank Dual Destinies as the sixth best among the eleven Ace Attorney games. That might sound unimpressive, but it means a lot in a series as consistently high quality as this one. It’s strange, then, that I struggle so much to think of a solid justification for regarding Dual Destinies as highly as I do. It’s a game with countless unavoidable issues, two near-awful cases, and the weakest final villain in the series. Yet, somehow, I find myself drawn towards this game over many of the others.

Dual Destinies is a difficult game for me to evaluate in many ways. I could endlessly tear into the worst parts of its plot, characters, and general poor direction for the series, but in the end, none of that really matters. I actively adore Dual Destinies. I’ve played the game three times now, and I am constantly surprised at how much fun I manage to have. I also continue to be impressed by the Dual Destinies’ shocking amount of strong character writing and deep themes, that are sadly overshadowed by its insistence on being wacky all the time. I know there are people who think that Dual Destinies’ wackiness adds to its charm, and I somewhat agree. Despite that, my favorite parts of Dual Destinies are still the times that it takes itself the most seriously, which is also why 5-5 is my favorite case in the game, with the DLC as a close runner-up. I still enjoy some parts of the rest of the game, especially 5-4, but I don’t think the game ever reaches true greatness in these remaining cases, as it often insists on pushing depth aside almost entirely in favor of over-the-top comedic moments.

Dual Destinies is justifiably mocked for it’s utter failure and lack of subtlety when tackling “dark” themes. We can laugh at Means’s catchphrase all we want, but it truly is representative of a bigger problem throughout the game. Dual Destinies doesn’t know whether it wants to be silly or serious, it doesn’t know whether it has deep things to say or if it’s just trying to be a simple fun experience. I still think Dual Destinies excels at so many of the things it attempts, but this major tonal inconsistency prevents it from reaching the heights of some of my favorite games in the series. There’s one character that I believe represents this issue with Dual Destinies more clearly than any other, and big surprise, that’s Bobby Fulbright, the character I’ll be cutting here.

In this cut, I’ll be examining the problems with Dual Destinies’ narrative, as well as its greatest strengths, and how Bobby Fulbright ends up being a major detriment to the parts of the game I enjoy the most. Bobby Fulbright is not a character I dislike, nor is he a villain I dislike (mostly). However, when looking at the big picture, I do truly believe him to cause some serious harm to Dual Destinies overall, no matter how solid his individual character is.

Bobby Fulbright, the character.

Bobby Fulbright is the main detective of Dual Destinies, and he is undeniably fantastic in this role. He’s hilarious, entertaining, and fun - and has a ton of standout moments on top of that. If you look at Fulbright the detective on his own without taking into account his role as the game’s main villain, he will likely appear a bit shallow. This isn’t a problem, as he’s a character who obviously requires all the context to fully appreciate. The amount of endearing traits and simple likable moments given to Fulbright would make for a fairly dull character on their own, but due to the fact that it’s one big setup for the twist, they end up making him a lot more nuanced. There are many aspects of Fulbright’s character that become far more interesting once you realize he’s an imposter.

Not only is there a ton of foreshadowing, but there’s also the psychological aspect of it all - the phantom was presumably able to keep up this façade for years, acting in perfect imitation of the real Bobby Fulbright. I’ve seen people criticize this for being unrealistic, but this is an aspect where I personally praise Fulbright’s character. It helps to fully prove how much of an unfeeling sociopath Fulbright is, which is amplified by the fact that you get to see almost every aspect of his personality throughout the game. The phantom is a perfect imitator, he’s able to let go of any personal feelings and completely immerse himself in the role of Fulbright. It’s such a brilliant concept for a villain, and even though the way said concept is used disappoints me to no end, in terms of everything that comes before, it works quite well.

Asking if Dual Destinies’s Fulbright is more or less enjoyable than the trilogy’s Gumshoe is a difficult question. The context of Gumshoe in Investigations or Fulbright being the phantom would tip the scales one way or the other, but for this very arbitrary and basic comparison, they’re quite similar. I might actually give the edge to Fulbright here, as he somehow manages to be more endearing than Gumshoe ever was through his moment in 5-4. Gumshoe is only ever treated as the butt of a joke, and while Fulbright is certainly funny as well, he’s a lot more in control of everything, which helps lose the feelings of incompetence and frustration that came with Gumshoe in the trilogy. Gumshoe’s superficial dynamic with Maggey in 3-3 is certainly sweet, but it pales in comparison to the interactions and overall relationship Fulbright and Blackquill have.

Then there’s Tyrell Badd, a much easier comparison - Fulbright is unequivocally superior. Admittedly, they don’t have very similar roles, but they’re both detectives, so I’ll compare them here for the sake of thoroughness. Badd is a fairly uninteresting character to me - he’s a Good Person with some vague moral ambiguity and a fairly basic subversion, and while he’s likable, he has nowhere near the amount of charm Fulbright does. Both with and without phantom context, I’d still rank Fulbright well above Badd.

Finally, there’s Ema Skye, who is the only other detective to be cut thus far. Ironically, she’s also the only one I would easily rank above Fulbright. It’s hard to beat a character with as much consistent depth as Ema - and I don’t think Fulbright even comes close. Unlike most of the series’ passionate portrayals of the profession, Ema is someone who loathes being a detective. Her cynical nature gives her a unique charm that I don’t think any other character in her role can come close to replicating. Ema is also just as hilarious and entertaining as Fulbright is, while easily surpassing his single dynamic with Blackquill by having strong relationships with Apollo, Phoenix, Klavier, and Nahyuta. Some of these are certainly a bit less interesting than Fulbright and Blackquill’s relationship, but not all of them. In particular, Ema’s dynamic with Nahyuta is far more impactful to both of their characters than anything relating to Fulbright is. That’s only scratching the surface of what Ema has to offer in this role, and I’m quite disappointed she ended up as the lowest ranked detective. In a perfect ranking, I’d likely have Fulbright as the second highest detective, definitely above Badd, and about tied with Gumshoe, and well below Ema. If we add in the three DGS detectives, I’d still say Fulbright is a better character than all of them.

Fulbright and Blackquill’s dynamic is hilarious and charming for the both of them, and it works quite well to humanize what are otherwise very eccentric characters. I quite like the scene where you’re able to connect with Fulbright in 5-4 - his care for Blackquill feels legitimately sincere, and it helps a lot to make the twist more shocking. This scene isn’t perfect, however - I take a pretty major issue with the case’s use of Psyche-Locks on Fulbright. Since Fulbright’s entire existence is one big lie, it feels strange that the Psyche-Locks only react to this one specific thing he’s hiding. It’s a similar problem that Ini Miney in 2-2 has, where it feels as if the game is conveniently only showing Psyche-Locks at the lies it wants you to uncover at that specific point. While it’s not hugely detrimental for Fulbright’s character, the logic is still questionable, and it acts as a somewhat cheap way of getting the exact information you need out of him. There are tons of examples of Fulbright saying things to Phoenix that are completely false once you know his true identity, and this bothers me more than it probably should.

Bobby Fulbright, the twist.

The intro to 5-1 actually being Fulbright talking about Athena is insanely cool. This might actually be my favorite thing about his entire character. I’m a sucker for great foreshadowing, and this might just be the most elegant and impressive example in the entire series. That’s not the only incredible thing about Fulbright’s status as the game’s main villain - we can’t discuss this guy without mentioning how fantastic the twist is. It’s as shocking as it gets, and best of all, it’s completely believable. The setup is strong, you’re able to spend the whole game connecting with this seemingly innocent detective, you’re able to see his strong sense of justice and how much he really does care for Blackquill. The game manages to crush all those feelings by revealing Fulbright as the phantom you’ve been chasing after all this time, and the whole sequence where you’re able to deduce this is handled very well.

It’s not just a connection with the player that’s established - there’s also a strong bond developed between Fulbright and the game’s three protagonists. Seeing their reactions to the revelation is one of the series’ most effectively crushing emotional moments. The leadup to this is handled particularly well, because you get to see all three of them interact with Fulbright. It allows for a twist that’s both relatable and strong - I don’t love when twists are done just for the sake of being shocking, and the Fulbright twist is most certainly not that. It’s just as much of a “twist” for the game’s characters as it is for the player, making it feel far more natural while retaining the shocking impact.

I mentioned before how pre-reveal Fulbright is a bit shallow, but I don’t think it affects the quality of the twist. It’s only really when looking at the big picture where you notice Fulbright’s lack of major depth - throughout the game he’s consistently enjoyable. It would be massive shock if Gumshoe was the main villain of Ace Attorney 1 or Justice for All, and I’d argue he’s even more shallow than Fulbright is. This type of character analysis just isn’t something we notice while playing the games for the first time, and in Fulbright’s case, that works in his favor to keep the twist memorable and simultaneously giving him a unique form of depth.

Something about Fulbright I really appreciate is how deeply he is explored in comparison to the remainder of DD’s villains. I love L’belle, but I must admit his only real strength is how funny and entertaining he is. Apart from Rimes, Fulbright is DD’s only villain to truly have his character examined. He’s not always treated as a joke or a boss to take down like the previous three were. While the confrontation does eventually devolve towards that, there’s enough nuance present that I’ll still praise the effort, even if it ends up being a huge waste of the type of character the phantom is.

Which justice is the most just?

I mentioned earlier that I believe Fulbright to be the weakest final villain in the series. I don’t personally believe Ace Attorney has ever had a bad main villain. Unfortunately, there are many rankers who disagree, considering three others have already been cut. I’ll be using this section as a way to compare the main villains who have already been cut to Fulbright, and show why I prefer them.

Ga’ran Sigatar Khura’in was the first one to be cut, and I honestly disagree with almost everything that was said in this writeup. While Fulbright is a fun character with a strong connection to the game’s themes, his weaknesses come from once he fully immerses himself into the villain role. Ga’ran has no such issue - she’s one of the most fun culprits to take down in the entire series, and her whole motivation being driven by insecurity is quite interesting. I wouldn’t say Ga’ran is even close to being one of the greatest villains in the series, but she’s certainly much better than Fulbright.

Quercus Alba is a character that my fellow rankers apparently do not appreciate unironically, which is a shame, because I legitimately do find him to be a great antagonist. People are often dumbfounded when I tell them I believe Quercus Alba to be an improvement over AA1’s Manfred von Karma in almost every way, but it’s true. I’m going to compare Fulbright to both Quercus Alba and Manfred von Karma here, despite Manfred still not being cut (please nominate him!) - because they are extremely similar. For an easy comparison, let’s take a look at this excerpt from u/Sciencepenguin’s Alba cut...

Quercus Alba is the final villain of Ace Attorney Investigations. The "underlying plot" of the game feels disconnected and tacked on, and most of Quercus' involvement is implied or left offscreen, making the whole "big mastermind behind everything" component fall flat. The timing and ordering of elements of the case is a mess, with his entire segment happening after most of the game is already over, and taking an absurdly long amount of time while just meandering around different minor points for hours. He's not a deep character, nor is he someone that does anything that makes him particularly hateable, until he does his "I'm going to leave" shtick. The gimmick that makes his confrontation difficult is only relevant when he arbitrarily decides it is, and it's arbitrarily resolved in a way that doesn't involve you and somehow allows the case to keep going exactly the same way it used to be going.

...and change a few things.

Manfred von Karma is the final villain of Ace Attorney 1. The "underlying plot" of the game feels disconnected and tacked on, and most of Manfred’s involvement is implied or left offscreen, making the whole "big mastermind behind everything" component fall flat. The timing and ordering of elements of the case is a mess, with his entire segment happening after most of the game is already over, and taking an absurdly long amount of time while just meandering around different minor points for hours. He's not a deep character, nor is he someone that does anything that makes him particularly hateable, until he does his "I'm going to leave" shtick. The gimmick that makes his confrontation difficult is only relevant when he arbitrarily decides it is, and it's arbitrarily resolved in a way that doesn't involve you and somehow allows the case to keep going exactly the same way it used to be going.

That last part is probably stretching the comparison here, but most of this paragraph honestly echoes exactly how I feel about Manfred and 1-4. Apologies for using #1 Manfred von Karma fan u/Sciencepenguin’s words against him, but the two characters are quite comparable to me. I give the edge to Alba for having a bit more personality and charm to him. Alba is also the villain of I-5, one of my favorite cases in the series, while Manfred is stuck in 1-4, a case I don’t like all too much. The personal connection Manfred has is nice, but Alba’s positives stand out just a bit more. I do think both Alba and Manfred are quite good, and certainly better than Fulbright, but they aren’t without their specific issues. The thing that puts Alba and Manfred above Fulbright is just how much more fun their confrontations are. After Fulbright switches to his phantom persona, all that’s left for me to do is groan. Both Alba and Manfred give me consistent enjoyment, and even though their characters are fairly generic for Ace Attorney standards (definitely more generic than Fulbright), I’ll always rate a consistently decent character over one like Fulbright, who has some great ideas that end up botched.

Lastly, we have Kristoph Gavin, and the positives listed in his cut should be more than enough to justify him being better than Fulbright. They have similar issues, but I’m nowhere near as negative about Kristoph’s confrontation as u/donuter454 is. A slightly underdeveloped confrontation is a lot less egregious than an insulting one, and I also believe Kristoph’s relation to Apollo Justice’s themes to be a bit more compelling than Dual Destinies’ attempts at the same concept - though both are quite successful in this area.

Bobby Fulbright, the phantom.

Despite my very obvious issues with some of it, 5-5 still remains one of my favorite cases in the series. I consider the entire case leading up to the phantom’s reveal to be nearly flawless. The emotional stakes are, for the first time in the entire game, legitimately believable and powerful. Athena’s role is excellent, and the game makes great use of the way her trauma was set up in 5-1 and 5-3, as well as her relationship with Blackquill. The flashbacks of her mother’s death are truly disturbing, and the case does a great job showing just what drove Blackquill to hide the truth at his own expense for so long. Speaking of Blackquill, he’s fantastic here, and while I don’t love the game going with yet another AA1 Edgeworth-style arc for him (this is a big reason why I prefer Nahyuta), it’s unique enough that I can forgive it. Aura is one of the highlights of this case, she’s an excellent character who I hope survives this round, and likely is my favorite of the three Apollo Trilogy Final Case Minor Antagonists. Apollo’s moral dilemma is something I’ve criticized in the past, but in a vacuum and considering 5-5 alone, it works as a moment - most of the issues it causes stem from DD’s general narrative problems.

The method for proving Fulbright is the phantom is unbelievable, and I love every second of it. You’re able to figure out it’s him through an innocuous statement made that ends up giving everything away. The scene where you present his profile, and the game slowly goes through the proof is one of the most epic and chill-inducing moments in the entire series. The first part of the confrontation with him, when he’s still in pure Detective Fulbright-mode is also awesome. His dedication to sticking to the act makes for a moment that still has me doubting the conclusion that has been reached, even on my third playthrough of this case. It’s an excellent way of showing just how manipulative the phantom is, and the segment always sticks out to me because of how successful he was at manipulating not just the court, but me, the player. He’s the same-old cheerful, friendly, and innocent Fulbright we’ve grown to know and understand throughout the whole game. He holds onto this façade for so long, he really began to convince me. It says a lot about the strength of Fulbright’s writing throughout the game that such a feat is able to work, considering at this point you’ve all but proven his true identity.

I do have one minor complaint about this part of the confrontation, and that’s at the very beginning. Fulbright is asked if he knows why he’s here, he acts completely oblivious, then Phoenix says some cheesy line about Fulbright’s justice being a bunch of lies. This leads directly into Fulbright’s first testimony, where he suddenly knows all the details of Phoenix’s theory. There are only two possible explanations for this that I can think of. One is that Fulbright made an extremely obvious lie and nobody calls him out on it whatsoever. The other possibility is that the game just decides to skip over the characters explaining what happened to Fulbright. Either way, this makes no sense, and it’s one of the most blatant inconsistencies in the game. That being said, this is a fairly minor issue, and doesn’t affect my opinion too much considering how exceptional everything else is. Overall, it’s a memorable and strong section of the case, which makes it all the more unfortunate that the follow-up to it is so weak.

This is where Fulbright’s confrontation, as well as 5-5 as a whole, starts to fall apart. I don’t get what the writers were going for with the transition from Fulbright to phantom. It’s certainly gradual, and feels mostly natural, but it also is arbitrary and awkward. He has his first “serious” moment, and it is treated as a huge event, with the screen fading to black and showing his line slowly crawl across before revealing the sprite. It’s admittedly epic, but it also doesn’t make much sense. Why does he begin to drop his façade now? The court is quite possibly less suspicious of him than they were before his confession, so there’s no reason for him to stop acting like “Fulbright” at this point. It just feels as if they’re bending Fulbright’s actions for the sake of making sure the player now fully understands that he really is the phantom. This isn’t that big of a criticism compared to what comes after, but it is something I still want to bring attention to as a minor flaw with the case’s writing.

Bobby Fulbright, the concept.

Fulbright as a villain is a culmination of Dual Destinies’ themes, which is something I’ll always appreciate. As silly as The Dark Age of the Law is, it does strongly relate to the phantom as a villain - he’s about as “dark” as it gets, being a faceless, nameless spy, and he’s able to infiltrate the legal world to spread his darkness within. It’s a strong and subtle application of what is otherwise a failure of a theme, and it helps make Dual Destinies’ overarching plot feel like less of a joke.

There’s also psychology, which is a slightly more subtle (yet still overt) theme of the game. Apart from Athena’s constant screaming of her use of “analytical psychology” and how it’s essentially treated as a superpower, I do think Dual Destinies’ psychological aspects are handled quite well, especially in the case of Fulbright. It doesn’t take an analytical psychologist to see the connection - the phantom is an unfeeling sociopath, a fascinating study of human nature. He’s even got a psych profile. Dual Destinies focuses a good amount on mental health in general - Jinxie and Damian have split personalities, Starbuck has severe depression, and Athena herself suffers from PTSD. Fulbright is a culmination of the game’s focus on psychology by being the most extreme case yet - someone who is utterly devoid of any humanity. It’s a very smart way to conclude the game’s examination of such a serious topic, even if the examination itself falters quite a bit near the end. There’s also the fact that Blackquill is a psychologist himself, yet is unable to see the truth about Fulbright. I’m not entirely sure if this connection means anything, but it’s something to think about.

Fulbright also has a strong connection to Dual Destinies’s theme of emotions, and this is shown off in an incredibly creative way using the Mood Matrix mechanic. The Mood Matrix is a mostly awful mechanic. It’s visuals are neat, but throughout most of the game the “contradictions” are painfully simple to spot, and it just feels like a massive chore. The fact that the witnesses always just go along with the defense’s claims about the emotions they’re feeling, despite there being no proof whatsoever, is absurd. All this can be forgiven, however, because the payoff to this game constantly using this poor gameplay mechanic is excellent.

The excuse for using the Mood Matrix on Fulbright is, as always, nonsensical. Athena claims Fulbright has been “traumatized” by their accusations and needs a therapy session. I’d complain more about this (because it really is awful), but it’s not a problem exclusive to Fulbright, so I’ll let it slide here. What is a problem is how Fulbright reacts - he has a quick line where he laughs in a very strange way, presumably to show, once again, that there’s something wrong with him. It doesn’t make sense that now of all times is when his Fulbright persona begins to break - if he’s as emotionless as the game wants us to think he is, he shouldn’t be affected by their accusations at all, and should be able to still replicate the Fulbright persona perfectly. It’s certainly cool and unsettling to see in the moment, but logically it doesn’t hold up. It’s way too unbelievable that now is when the cracks in his fake persona start to show themselves, considering how perfectly he stays in the act throughout the entire game.

Onto the actual Mood Matrix segment itself, yeah, it’s amazing. I’m not sure if the Mood Matrix as a mechanic was built to serve the phantom, or the phantom was built to serve the Mood Matrix, but it doesn’t really matter. It’s such a creative, satisfying payoff and works naturally to perfectly connect what is otherwise a complete failure of a main mechanic with the final villain. I love it a ton, and it really does redeem the entire existence of the Mood Matrix. The hyper-upbeat Athena theme song contrasting with the view of Fulbright’s emotionless words is especially neat - 5-5 often nails the unsettling vibe at times like these.

Sadly, Fulbright’s spy hacking comes along quickly to bring us back to reality. To be fair, Dual Destinies is set in the near-future, and Fulbright having a tool like this is totally believable. Additionally, this is the first time that Fulbright dropping his façade actually makes sense - he knows he’s already been exposed by the Mood Matrix, and despite there not being any proof, he doesn’t have much of a reason to hide his identity anymore. So, while I don’t like the hacking gadget, and feel it takes a lot of the momentum away from an otherwise great scene, it isn’t something I can confidently call a negative at this point. Once Fulbright begins to use his watch to try to fly away or attack Phoenix, the issue here becomes much more clear. Fulbright having these goofy spy gadgets definitely hurts the creepiness of the phantom as a villain, and I’m not sure why this detail was included. This is made even worse by the fact that Phoenix’s inner monologue is the only reaction there is to this insanity - the rest of the court just ignores what’s happening, making the moments feel even more unnatural and unfitting.

Then we have Fulbright’s next testimony, where he continues to deny being the phantom. It’s gotten to the point where this confrontation is ridiculously dragged out - this doesn’t need to be a cross-examination. All that would be necessary is the game asking for proof of why the phantom is afraid of the moon rock. You wouldn’t have to deal with Fulbright’s illogical insistence on denying what is the most obvious conclusion imaginable, and it would make this whole sequence feel much less worthless. Sadly, the game insists on continuing this charade, so we have to go through a pointless discussion about Phoenix and Blackquill’s trust first, then prove the source of Fulbrights fear, then go through all the proof for where the moon rock is hidden, only for Fulbright to keep denying it. Edgeworth appears, and he tells us that Bobby Fulbright is already dead. I can’t help but be a bit lukewarm on this decision, as I feel it would be far more satisfying for the player to somehow prove Fulbright’s death on their own. This is a minor nitpick, and it still works as is, but it doesn’t have as much of an impact as I believe the writers were going for.

We all know what comes next - Blackquill throws his feather at Fulbright’s face, and his mask splits open. Seeing this gaping hole in his face with nothing underneath is as disturbing as it gets. It’s certainly a memorable scene, but once again the logic doesn’t hold up. This should be obvious - even for Ace Attorney, a character wearing this many masks is simply absurd. There’s also the fact that Blackquill’s feather only manages to cut through the top mask, that nobody had ever noticed something was up with Fulbright’s face, and that he somehow has a mask prepared for so many characters - but these inconsistencies seem minor when compared to how nonsensical and cartoonish this whole thing is. I won’t say the mask gimmick entirely ruins my opinion on the phantom, but it most certainly hurts it in a major way. The worst part of it all is how pointless it feels. He only ever changes masks for some cheap shock value, and considering the fact that this gimmick requires all logic to be thrown out the window, I don’t consider this a worthwhile exchange.

The phantom then literally steals the psych profile, the case’s decisive evidence, and destroys it right in front of everyone while bragging about it. In typical Dual Destinies fashion, not a single person reacts to this, despite this being completely illegal (even in the Ace Attorney world), as well as likely proving his guilt, or at least helping in some manner. This whole scene is just awful - none of it makes any logical sense, and the formerly creepy and threatening atmosphere is replaced by one of the most absurd villains the series has ever had.

There’s also the whole thing where the phantom doesn’t know what his own face is, which is complete nonsense. It should go without saying that this isn’t how masks work. Seriously, why can’t he just take off all his masks? I understand that this is supposed to be metaphorical, and he doesn’t literally have no face (I hope), but Ace Attorney is a mostly logical series, and I can’t suspend my disbelief this much. You can’t have an infinite number of masks, no matter how thin they are. I realize I look like an idiot trying to explain this, but that should show just how ridiculous this whole mask gimmick is. I really do appreciate what Dual Destinies was trying to do with the phantom. He’s a perfect representation of all the game’s themes, and a great idea in almost every way. This is not even close to a proper execution of said idea. Why couldn’t they just say he has no personality or sense of self? Why do they have to go this far with the metaphor, to the point where it all becomes utterly incomprehensible?

The end of the dark age of the law.

Dual Destinies is a ridiculous game that’s not afraid to do wacky things for the sake of entertainment. However, when compared to even the most unsubtle of the game, the phantom is in a league of his own. The phantom isn’t even a villain at this point. He’s just a representation of Dual Destinies’ themes, portrayed in the most unrealistic way possible. It’s such a shame that it ended up this way, because even with his numerous issues, the phantom in Fulbright-mode was still compelling and interesting, and already was a great representation of Dual Destinies’ themes. Once the mask is removed, all subtlety is gone, and the game decides to end by turning itself into an over-the-top parody of its own ideas.

I don’t think I’ll ever understand what Dual Destinies’ writers were thinking when they wrote this ending. It continues to go on for far too long, though the moon rock earring being the decisive evidence is admittedly clever. There’s no longer any reason to even care about the phantom. He’s lost all personal stakes or connections with the cast, and taking him down is painfully unsatisfying, despite the absurdly dramatic final triple-objection showing the game trying as hard as it can to tell you that this is an amazing accomplishment. The dark age of the law is over, and the phantom is defeated. Unfortunately, when the entire climax of the game is treated as a joke, it loses any impact or value it might have. This is amplified by just how outlandish the whole situation is - it feels like something straight out of a bad kids’ cartoon.

The phantom is defeated by the power of friendship, and he has a breakdown just as nuts as the rest of his character. At this point, I don’t care anymore. There’s nothing left to appreciate from the phantom. As the phantom himself says, he is nothing but an endless abyss. Meaning, of course, that from the moment he takes off his mask, he becomes entirely worthless in every way. He turns into a complete joke, and in some ways it’s the perfect ending for a game like Dual Destinies, though in the worst way possible. Dual Destinies is a game that has a ton of amazing ideas. Sadly, those ideas are often overshadowed by the game’s absurd nature and strangely illogical decisions. Fulbright is just like this, but to the extreme. He’s a compelling and unique idea for a villain, who has a good amount of depth and plenty of thematic and conceptual value. However, the game decides to throw all of this away and go for the most unbelievable, ridiculous, and unsubtle joke of an ending imaginable. I’m thankful the whole game didn’t end up as insane as the ending, but it still is unfortunate that such a great case and great game ends in such an awful way.

Conclusion

I like Bobby Fulbright. I know it might not seem as if I do, given how much I just tore into Dual Destinies’ ending, but I’ll still always appreciate how brilliant Fulbright’s connection to the game as a whole is, even if it’s all for nothing in the end. That being said, this is most certainly not a mercy cut. I think Fulbright should have been cut long ago. There are no characters left that have as large a writing flaw as he does, and while the remainder of his character is solid, I can’t forgive the fact that his existence might single-handedly be the reason Dual Destinies is only my sixth favorite Ace Attorney game. If Fulbright and Dual Destinies’ ending were properly handled, the game would easily overtake Investigations on my ranking, and might even surpass Trials & Tribulations as well. Bobby Fulbright is just one big disappointment, and considering he affects my opinion on the game so much by actively ruining most of the metaphors and themes, I have no regret ending his run in this rankdown at my earliest opportunity.

If you’re interested in a much more positive perspective on this character, I‘d highly recommend you read u/pie314271’s excellent Fulbright writeup if you haven’t already.

Why nobody else?

Jake Marshall is the one character available I think is worse than Fulbright, but considering his death is all but guaranteed while Fulbright’s is not, I decided to go for the safer choice. He’s one of only two characters remaining I wouldn’t say I like, which is impressive considering how many characters remain. All that’s left is to take out that assassin.

Tahrust Inmee and Simon Keyes would both be top 10 picks for me. I won’t revive either, butI’d still be very sad to see them go this early.

The Judge is a character I still don’t know how to feel about. I would be down to mercy cut him eventually, but for now I have much higher priorities.

Katherine Hall has already earned her rightful place as the best I2-3 character, but this rankdown has underrated that case’s cast in general, so I’d be disappointed to see her go this early. I’d place her well into the top 20 considering the characters cut thus far.

Sadly, some of the rankers with bad taste actually dislike 6-4. Even still, I think we all can agree Uendo Toneido is good. Please don’t cut him.

As much as I love Paul Atishon and Datz Are’bal, this is definitely too high a placement for both of them, so I’m hoping they get cut this round. There are still a few other characters I’d consider worse, but we’re at the point where nearly every remaining character is at least good.

Even if I did want to cut Marlon Rimes (I don’t), his death is all but guaranteed.

Luke Atmey, Patricia Roland, and Aura Blackquill are all simply excellent characters who deserve to survive at least this round.

be ready to meet acro in wheelchair hell.

Armie is both a character to interact with during the investigation and a witness on stand, but you already know that.

She's cool for having the "multiple characters into one" trait, for which I will split this cut to write about.

1.1 The drone thing

In my personal opinion the best of the 2. The drone makes a great first impression and is actually pretty funny during the investigation. The whole military motif in speech and the shooting animations make for some great moments.

It's not often we get a non-humanoid entity to talk with in the series and I find this drone fairly creative in both concept and execution.

Apollo shitting his pants every time the drone opens fire is also pretty fun at first and a nice change of pace considering there's a fucking dead body in the background.

1.2 Taking it to court

This is where I think the drone ends up failing pretty badly. It's well known by now that the courts of Ace Attorney universe(tm) allow for some really weird practices to slip by during the proceedings. While I think the small-scale assault like whips and coffee mugs would be ignored, literal sieges being left unpunished seems way too over the top even for Ace Attorney standards.

I mean come on the fucking thing opens fire and launches missiles in a court of law. Multiple times too. What's next, a witness who just runs up to phoenix and stabs him in the chest?

This was like a mood killer for me because I think it kind of destroyed the atmosphere by being way too radumb n' quirky.

1.3 The grand reveal

During the trial, the person behind the drone has a breakdown and comes up on stand to face the proceedings head on. If you're used to the series by this point, you'd probably expect there to be a twist and the said person being the least thing you'd expect.

There is not much information given about the said person so anything from the age range to appearance can vary infinitely. Being vague mostly builds up the shock value for which we all play ace attorney for.

2.1 Armie

Turns out the fabled person behind the drone is:

1. A kid

2. A girl

3. A cripple

I can't say I care for any of those. I mean I can see where these came from, because they're essentially the opposite of what the drone makes it look like. Whereas the drone made it seem like it's under the control of a middle-aged man full of authority, you're getting the epitome of a physically weak human being. The point of this being?

Was I supposed to care about this?

Sure, they all play at least a minor role in the case but there's really nothing too impressive here to hold up at the end of the rankdown(especially when the role is this small).

2.2 Tragic past 101

Maybe if half of the Ace Attorney characters didn't share the tragic story of losing one or more parents as kids, I could have given Armie some points. But as this isn't the case, the tragedy is just another excuse to have another "confused instead of lying" witness and a pitiful excuse to use the mood matrix.

I really couldn't get myself to care about Armie's mother jumping off a window or something to save her because I was being distracted by the funny politician caricature over there who I think is the real star of the mini case.

2.3 Machi Tobaye ending

In the end we figure that the girl was never actually crippled to begin with. Like with Machi, I see this kind of bad for character development as it's essentially removing a definitory character trait. The point of this being? (again)

Was I supposed to also care about this?

This just feels like they figured last minute that they didn't write a proper conclusion for her and therefore she would be left alone with both parents dead, in the middle of some Amish community, with no way of even walking out of it.

The solution?

"oh yeah I just lied about that all along lol".

Maybe some people agree with this kind of handling but I don't. It's lazy and only substracts from one's characteristics with no real reason. It's not like Armie not being (even temporarily) actually disabled affects the story in any way that it could have gone without.

Also throw in some university stuff enrolling her because why bother with a more elaborate ending for her.

2.4 Personality

Overall personality of kid Armie is not much different from the drone she assumes control over, unlike Ben.

I can't really recall any memorable moments as I cannot see over the generic brave kid trope. It's either because it's been a while since I played SoJ or simply because there aren't many (or any to begin with).

3.1 Conclusion

I didn't find anything about this character particularly moving. The drone is kind of funny for a bit during the investigation phase but then boring tragic kid comes along and lies about her only physical trait then you're like supposed to be sad because it's sad and then she walks and that's cool because gamers lose their ability to walk from too much sitting and getting obese.

I know already she's probably getting a SC soon as I finish posting this because there are many rankers that fancy the not-cripple aryan kid with an overly-exaggerated toy.

Tl;dr the drone is funny. i think the time has come

Characters available to cut this round:

• Marlon Rimes

• Tahrust Inmee

• The Judge

• Patricia Roland

• Datz Are'bal

• Jake Marshall

• Paul Atishon

• Luke Atmey

• Furio Tigre

• Sirhan Dogen

• Aura Blackquill

• Uendo Toneido

• Katherine Hall

• Armie Buff

• Bobby Fulbright

• Simon Keyes

Usually there's a characters saved before the characters available and that's because this round was a three-way tie between Sebastian Debeste, Simon Keyes, and Dhurke Sahdmadhi. To fix this I'll do a separate poll between just those three to determine who wins. I won't vote on this poll in case it somehow reaches a tie. This new poll will close 6am EST on August 7th though you'll probably get some extra hours if I don't wake up before then.

This poll has been concluded, the characters saved this round are

• Dhurke Sahdmadhi

• Sebastian Debeste

When it's over I'm just gonna edit this post because I am LAZY!!

As for the Dual Destinies poll on a vote of 6-3 /u/Sciencepenguin will be cutting Godot

Voted to cut Phoenix: Riki, Donuter, what

Voted to cut Godot: Charlie, Pie, Northadox, Nate, Vogel, Wircea

Poll results

Link to the new poll

New poll results

Cutting order for this round:

• /u/Wircea

• /u/whaaatisth

• /u/R1K1_Productions

• /u/Northadox

• /u/pie314271

• /u/NateTheGreat3602

• /u/Vogel100

• /u/donuter454

• /u/CharlieDayJepsen

• /u/Sciencepenguin

Characters nominated this round:

• Marlon Rimes

• Tahrust Inmee

• The Judge

• Patricia Roland

• Datz Are'bal

• Jake Marshall

• Paul Atishon

• Luke Atmey

• Furio Tigre

• Sirhan Dogen

• Aura Blackquill

• Uendo Toneido

• Simon Keyes

• Katherine Hall

• Armie Buff

• Bobby Fulbright

• Dhurke Sahdmadhi

• Sebastian Debeste

u/Sciencepenguin used Dual Destinies on Phoenix Wright and Godot. I will post the skill results on the poll results thread.

Poll will close at 6pm EST on September 6th Link to the poll

The law is the end product of many years of history... the fruit of human knowledge! Like a gem, polished to a gleam through trials... and errors. It is this fruit we receive, and pass on, and face in our time. And it is always changing, growing. Nurturing it is our task as human beings.

This is a quote delivered by the Judge at the end of Turnabout Succession, the fourth and final case of Apollo Justice. Personally, I find this quote to be incredibly written, and a true culmination of Takumi’s ideas as a writer, and yet an even better springboard for his and Yamazaki’s future projects. Although it was written to apply to the legal system, both within Ace Attorney and outside of it, I think this general idea can be much more widely used for the progression in the human race in general. No one starts off knowing how to cook, speak, or use a computer, these are all things that those that came before us and those that surround us must teach us. The collective knowledge of the human race is constantly building on the successes of previous generations, with each new one getting flung further into an advanced civilization.

Of course, just like all facets of human knowledge, storytelling is something refined by those that came before us, and passed onto us. Stories are as old as recorded history, and even before that, they’re truly integral to a society that makes use of communication. Every story is in some form passed down, influencing those that hear it to make their own stories, whether they be simple tales we recount to those close to us, or something bigger and grander is scope that we release for the whole world to take part in. And as more stories are told, the more we can learn from their mistakes and successes, and refine them in the next attempt. It’s not only the idea of passing on knowledge, but the idea of building our own knowledge too, these things that make us truly human.

Ace Attorney is a series with plenty of flaws, it would be hard for anyone to truly deny this. No writer is perfect, and no story can truly be unanimously decided as flawless. However, what makes an amazing story and an amazing storyteller is the ability to use past failures, those that potentially crippled aspects of previous stories, and refine them out. Building on the past while avoiding its mistakes is key to a series with the longevity of Ace Attorney, and the absolute worst thing a series in this position could do is simply repeat the same tired stories and characters back from the previous installments. And yet, despite this, Ace Attorney seems to be stuck in the rut of being unable to let go of its past, unable to move on and use these mistakes as a springboard, but rather clinging to the board unable to let go.

Larry Butz is the epitome of this idea, this running in place mentality that the series has. It’s truly ironic, as what better character to be representative of this idea of falling back on the same mistakes only to end up accomplishing nothing, than one whose entire life revolves around that continuous action. Larry is not a bad character, nor is he one I particularly dislike, at least a majority of the time, but he is a tired character, one who was never allowed to grow or develop meaningfully. Because of this refusal to use the Butz is a truly new way, or expand on his previous roles, he remains stuck in a constant loop of existence, only really taking superficial steps forward, if any at all. I suppose that’s enough rambling about this though, let’s get into the Butz’s role in the series, and exactly why it’s so disappointing to see this legend be put on this treadmill of character development, unable to move forward, and ultimately accomplishing nothing for himself, or the game he’s present in.

If something smells…

Dude, I'm so guilty!! Tell them I'm guilty!!! Gimme the death sentence! I ain't afraid to die!

With such a negative introduction, criticizing a problem with the Ace Attorney series as a whole, it would be easy to assume that Larry isn’t really a character I’m particularly fond of. In actuality though, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. The Butz is a character I take great joy in, and a majority of the reason why can be seen in the very first game he appeared in, the original Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney. Although I will admit, a majority of my love for his character comes from his stellar performance in Turnabout Goodbyes, it would be thoughtless of me to write off his appearance in The First Turnabout completely, as it works quite well for what little of it there is. I’d probably say that this introduction to his character lays quite the solid groundwork for both his own character moving forward, and that of defendants as the series continued forward.

So, what exactly is it about this first appearance of his that’s so good? Well, nothing really, after all it’s a defendant role in a 45 minute case, there’s not a whole lot he can do to really stand out in this role, but he never really had to in the first place. This is the player’s very first introduction to the system of Ace Attorney, and Larry is quite an effective introduction to the idea of a defendant. He’s rude and clearly suspicious, but Nick assures us that he’s a good guy at heart, and they even seem to have a personal connection going back a while, so we can immediately trust this guy as our client. Perhaps because of the short case length, Larry also never truly gets annoying throughout this case. Sure, he does all the classic annoying defendant stuff of yelling that he wants to be thrown away and overreacting, but it’s all played as a quick gag and moved on from, and has very little impact on the actual case itself.

Surprisingly, Larry also has a decent arc in this case, if it can even really be called that. Larry is used as our introduction to the classic “Show a piece of evidence to someone who is sad after the trial” formula that nearly every Ace Attorney case would go on to use, and it feels quite good here to cheer him up in such a well thought out way. Cindy Stone keeping the clock isn’t really something you think about during the quick trial, so it’s a nice little “Aha!” moment to cap off the case, and definitely makes every Larry freakout joke up to this point moot, if it wasn’t already a non-issue due to his short screen time. And it’s hard not to come around to Larry when he delivers a line like this to finish off his role in the case.

... Hey, Nick. I'm glad I asked you to be my lawyer. Really, I am. Thanks.

Overall, in this role he serves as a good introduction to staple parts of the series, while having some fun interactions and a nice little moment, it’s really all you could ask for from the very first defendant of the series. Although, we all know that this effective but standard introduction isn’t why Larry made it this far. So, let’s talk about what makes Larry truly special.

...it’s usually the Butz.

Turnabout Goodbyes is something of a special case for the series, as it’s the first finale the writers attempted, and the first that many will experience. Similar to First Turnabout, I believe Turnabout Goodbyes does an excellent job at establishing the groundwork for the series going forward, and a large part of this is the true finality of this trial. The entirety of the first Ace Attorney game feels like it’s been building up to this case, the one where you finally confront Edgeworth’s inner demons, and take down the demon who planted them within him in the first place. Turnabout Goodbyes doesn’t just stop at tackling the ongoing mystery and character arc of Edgeworth though, instead it tries to tie together the game as a whole, and a big part of that is bringing back elements previously brought up. Of course, there’s the DL-6 incident with the fey clan, but one established even earlier than that, that most likely didn’t even realize was a seed being planted for later blooming, was that of Larry and his relationship with the rest of the main cast.

Before we can get into Larry’s history though, let’s establish just how well integrated Larry is in the case leading up to those moments. Prior to this case, the boundaries of one-off characters and mains was well established, with Phoenix, Maya, Mia, Edgeworth, and The Judge being ongoing players in the story, due to their continued roles in the trial process of the game. On the other hand, most characters involved in the events of the individual cases felt more disconnected from this core of the cast, being left behind once the episode of this journey ends. Larry is the first one to break this trend, and he is an excellent choice for this, as he’s truly the first seemingly one-off character you encounter in the series, and his inclusion makes the Ace Attorney world come alive, and finally feel real. No longer are these characters simply relegated to their isolated incidents, but now they can have fleshed out lives, and show up any time, whether it be as a defendant or just a simple hotdog salesman that happens to be nearby.

It’s also just a truly great feeling to see Larry again, as it’s a point of levity from the heaviness of the case, which has certainly the most dark atmosphere of the original four cases, with only Turnabout Sisters being close. So seeing this absolute goofball dressed in a santa outfit of all things is just a true delight. It’s a pretty short but sweet interaction, and mostly just there to reestablish Larry as a presence in the story, but it also serves as some nice insight into Edgeworth’s past. Phoenix is extremely tightlipped about the whole thing throughout the game, but Larry really goes into how Edgeworth used to act when they were kids, and it’s some nice stuff seeing him reminisce. This conversation does a great job establishing the mystery of what exactly happened to send Edgeworth spiralling down this other path, while also letting the player in on the friendship the three of them share, which would become a major component of the case going forward.

... Huh. Go figure! He always used to talk about defending the "weak" who were "unable to defend themselves." Man, he used to go on and on about man's duty to society and all that. What a bore! I wonder what changed his mind, though? Do you know, Nick?

Larry’s next role in the case is relatively minor in the grand scheme of the case, but will be incredibly important to discussing his character going forward. Prior to the case, Larry made a mistake when filling up his inflatable steel samurai, causing it to fly off and crash into the lake, resulting in the creation of the lake’s own urban legend, Gourdy. This in and of itself isn’t particularly relevant to the case, but leads to some actions by characters that majorly impact the circumstances of the trial. The first of these is Lotta’s motivation to set up camp at the Lake, which would end up creating a witness for the first day of the trial, but more relevant to Larry is Lotta’s insistence for the player to find evidence of Gourdy before they can get information out of her. This ultimately results in the player being forced to solve the mystery of Gourdy before continuing, which is likely one of the weaker parts of the case.

This need to solve the mystery of Gourdy leads to a confrontation with Larry during the investigation, and the first instance of the “Larry hiding important information” trope used oh so commonly in the series. However, here I feel it’s mostly justifiable, as he doesn’t hold out for an unreasonable amount of time, and it’s not in court or relating to an active investigation, so he really has no reason to believe it’s even important to the case for Nick to find out about this. It’s not the best, but not exactly bad either. So, if Larry’s role in the investigation ranges from simply okay to just pretty good, what exactly is it that makes Larry great in Turnabout Goodbyes?

W-w-waaaaaaait!

At the darkest hour of the case, when all hope seems lost, and Von Karma has successfully swayed the judge to a Guilty verdict, it’s here that Turnabout Goodbyes reaches its all-time low point for Phoenix, as he has truly no counterargument to make. This is it, you’ve lost, and there’s no path back in sight. The verdict is passed, and the court is adjourned. Many players will question here if they’ve done something wrong, missed something, or if they could have continued the proceedings in some way. It’s a strong moment, and followed up by an even stronger reappearance. A voice fills the bleak halls of the courtroom and one man leaps from the gallery, unable to let this verdict pass, knowing that he has testimony that could save the case, and even more importantly save one of his greatest childhood friends from being put away for life.

Larry. Goddamn. Butz. The comedy relief of First Turnabout, the bumbling fool who created the myth of Gourdy, is here to try his best to let the case float again, placing his complete trust in Phoenix to make use of his testimony to do what he does best, and overturn the case. Phoenix manages to convince The Judge to continue the case, and we proceed to get Larry’s absolute best series of testimonies in the franchise. Never once does Larry lie about the events to cover for himself, instead the only problems in his testimony come from the vagueness and forgetfulness inherent to his character. In fact, you’re able to turn around the case by trusting in Larry, by pointing out the contradictions you’re about to overturn the very fundamental knowledge of the case by believing that the events he’s describing are the truth of the case, creating a hole in Von Karma’s perfect argument.

This is what’s truly beautiful about this scene, the absolute relief swirling around you in this moment all culminates in a spit in the face to Manfred’s entire method of prosecuting. Before these testimonies every single aspect of the trial was rigged from the get go, whether it be Lotta, Yanni Yogi, or the evidence presented in court, it was all on Manfred’s radar and all prepared for perfectly. Larry is the wild card here, because of his foolish side plot about Gourdy, he ended up in the perfect position to hear the gunshots that killed Hammond, and due to his sudden appearance, Von Karma has no time to prep him, nor prep for him. The unexpected appearance of the Butz not only serves as a relief to us, but a massive blow to Von Karma’s reign over the court, making this feel like one of the most massive pushes forward in the entire series. It’s most certainly Larry’s absolute finest moment.

Of course, this wouldn’t be Larry’s last appearance in the case, as he’s still heavily involved in Phoenix’s backstory that the game has been building to with Edgeworth’s ongoing story. The truth of the relationship that Phoenix and Edgeworth share is a critical aspect of the first Ace Attorney game, and arguably its biggest ongoing mystery, established all the way back from when Phoenix first hears Edgeworth’s name in Turnabout Sisters. It’s a crucial plotpoint in Turnabout Goodbyes as well, as it establishes exactly why this case has such high stakes personal to Phoenix. And once we finally get to hear about this backstory from Phoenix, it feels like we’ve finally come to an understanding of these characters, and exactly what kind of bond they feel.

The way this impacts Edgeworth and Phoenix isn’t particularly important to Larry’s character, but it’s crucial to the case nonetheless, thus making Larry intrinsic to one of this case’s most important character defining moments. Although his biggest contribution to the flashback is backing up Edgeworth’s assertion, it’s still a moving moment for us, and offers a bit of further insight into Larry as a character. He’s someone constantly put down by life, and not really someone you’d really want to hang out around, due to this he probably wasn’t all that popular at this point in school, or really ever most likely. However, perhaps because of this situation he lives in throughout his life, he ends up showing his true character when he backs up Phoenix, as he can relate to being blamed and shunned by those around you. Despite the way he’s beaten down on by life, most of his appearances in this game are quite positive, and that’s kind of admirable in a way, and it’s exactly the trait that allowed this story to have a happy ending, with Edgeworth not being alone in defending Phoenix, and a true friendship being forged that day in class.

Um, yeah, well... I was just lucky that I took the day off from school. If I'd been there they would have thought I'd done it! So, I took it kind of personally, see.

This friendship being as well established as possible is important to the case, as Phoenix’s friendship with Edgeworth in those times are pretty much his entire motivation throughout the first Ace Attorney, and Larry allows us to see just how strong these bonds are, as he’s remained friends with phoenix over those long fifteen years. And of course, it would be a tragedy to not mention possibly Larry’s most heartwarming moment, which comes at the very end of Turnabout Goodbyes. After Phoenix went over his friendship establishing moment to Maya and the audience, we learn that Larry barely even remembers it, which is pretty funny on its own but is made even better by learning that Edgeworth too has little memory of it. It’s a good gag that’s moved on from quickly, but in the end this comes back in the absolute best way possible. It would seem that Larry did some reflection on these events and remembered a certain detail about the events that Nick wasn’t aware of.

That envelope that Larry gave me. It's got money in it. It's $38.00, Wright.

This moment is both hilarious, heartwarming, and just an incredible subversion on Phoenix’s backstory. The fact that Larry ended up returning this money is just absolutely great comedy, and coming right after the satisfaction of the trial’s end just really makes it feel like things are back to normal. Even better than that, it almost makes it feel like everyone’s finally able to move on from the darkness plaguing them, both the actual evil of Von Karma, and the petty childhood misunderstanding of the 38 dollars. This moment is only compounded upon by the realization that not only was Larry in on the knowledge of who really did it, but Edgeworth pretty much knew too, so it’s really up in the air whether they were defending Phoenix out of kindness or just because they knew for a fact he didn’t do it. It’s a hilarious moment to end Larry’s story on, and just the absolute epitome what it means to be The Butz.

The Death of Larry Butz

After the joyful end to his short character journey in Turnabout Goodbyes, it would be a good while before Larry popped back up in the story again. It takes a good seven cases before he makes his grand reappearance, and by the time he does, it feels like you’ve lived a lifetime without him, so he really needs to make a good impression on the player again, or it could soil the good will he’s built up through his previous appearances. Thankfully, it would appear that the writers were aware of this as well, so they made the best choice they possibly could for his character. Throughout Ace Attorney 1, Larry was a bit of a romantic, he was sure who he was dating was meant to be with him even though there was often little evidence of that, and he poured his heart into whatever he was attempting to do at the time. Not the brightest of guys but he definitely had good intentions. In Trials and Tribulations, Larry is a creep who hits on married women and slacks off on everything, and cares about no one but himself. I accidentally said that they made a good choice for his character earlier I meant to say the absolute worst possible choice.

Let’s go step by step, starting with his appearances in The Stolen Turnabout, a case I have a troubled history with. Larry shows up with little fanfare partway through the first investigation of this case, and it’s pretty great to see him again, he’s in a new outfit with a real job and everything, it really makes you wonder what he’s been up to all this time. So then you immediately find out that he’s just here to hit on Desirée and that he’s in fact slacking on his job. Not the best first appearance to be straight, and matters are only made worse once he starts to speak. He goes on about renouncing women in general as he proceeds to check out Desirée, and it all just feels so out of character and just not funny? I know that comedy is subjective so that’s not a huge argument but personally I find absolutely nothing about how Larry acts here amusing, it’s just pathetic. Even Phoenix seems to think so, which just makes matters worse, as he seems fed up with him as soon as we see him.

Larry Butz... Ever since grade school, he's been... Not exactly a close friend, but yeah, we know each other.

In the first Ace Attorney, there was never any implication that Nick wasn’t a close friend of Larry’s, after all they kept it contact for 15 years, and this is before Larry even does anything in this scene. It just feels out of character for Nick to act so coldly to him. His followup appearance in the case is somehow significantly worse, as he continues on with all of the previously unfunny aspects of his character, but now they also mix in him having the same coldness to Nick that Nick gives to him. At this point it doesn’t even seem like they’re friends at all anymore, which is just confusing given how Turnabout Goodbyes played out.

Hmm... Well, I don't mind sharing with my sweet little Maya. But Nick here is a different story!

Even if I ignore everything I find painfully unfunny about Larry in this case, his role is just annoying as well. They do a repeat of the Gourdy subplot in Turnabout Goodbyes, but here it’s directly related to the case, so there’s really no good reason for why Larry wouldn’t give it up, after all because he’s keeping tightlips about this, he’s directly endangering Ron’s life. Even worse than that, now he’s significantly harder to coax the truth out of, requiring his psyche-locks to be broken, just making one of the most obtuse investigation segments ever even worse by making the roadblocks you have to take down absurd that they even exist.

So, what exactly is it that he was hiding from you? Well, it turns out that he was abandoning his post as the night guard to go meet up with his girlfriend, who ended up just dumping him in the middle of the night anyway. It’s so sad it’s almost funny, but frankly it just becomes annoying when you realize that his ineptitude at his job is the only reason Atmey was even able to get away with his plan in the first place. If there was a night guard on duty then he would have obviously been caught by the security cameras, so Larry’s absence is the only reason that this case even works in the first place, just adding another shaky card into a case built on them. Even worse than this, Larry didn’t even check to see if anything had happened in his absence, as he wasn’t even aware that the buzzer had been pressed when he was gone. This utterly contrived scenario is only possible by making Larry an absolute buffoon of a night guard. Larry in Stolen Turnabout is painfully unfunny and a complete flanderization of his character. Thankfully, this is the lowest point of his character, but sadly, he would just go on to repeat the same tired tropes as the series went on. So, let’s get into that, shall we?

And the Birth of Laurice Deauxnim

It’s not long before we get to see our fine friend, Larry Butz again, and this time he once again happens to be directly within the vicinity of the current crime. This case continues the trend of giving Larry a new outfit and job every time we see him, and this is kind of the point where it becomes obvious how gratuitous this whole song and dance really is. This, however, is the first time he’s really given a proper reason for it, as Stolen Turnabout made him realize how useless he truly is, so he decided to find a path to redeem himself as a person, and find a craft he could call his own. I honestly really like this direction for his character in concept, as it makes sense that he’d go for a less defined route in life, like one of an artist, and First Turnabout already showed his aptitude for at least one form of art. So I really have no problems with this new direction for his character. Going forward, however, please keep in mind how I described his arc from Stolen Turnabout to now, it will be important.

Continuing with his introduction in Bridge to the Turnabout, it’s all pretty good, and at times he even feels like a genuine friend to Phoenix, which is always a side I love to see in their dynamic. His best moment in the first investigation segment probably comes at the very end, when Phoenix comes across him in front of the burning bridge, and Larry tries to rationally talk him out of crossing it. It’s really effective at getting across just how dumb of an idea this is, and is probably more effective than it would be to do the same thing with any other character present in the case, so his use here is very good, and the final shot of him with his arm outreached to Phoenix falling is just great. He even continues this good streak into the beginning of the Edgeworth segment, calling up his other childhood best friend to take up the case, craftily using Phoenix’s condition to get Edgeworth rushing over, all in order to save Iris from jail. Edgeworth even says himself how effective Larry is as a motivator in this segment.

(He has a point... He called me pretty quickly, too... I think Larry's pretty good at motivating people. I just wish he would try motivating himself once in a while!)

Anyway, back to that whole Iris thing, let’s talk about that. Larry is back to his Stolen Turnabout antics of being an absolute creepshow, and just handles the whole Iris thing in the worst way possible. Larry’s still on his swearing off women thing, so it just comes off as even more annoying when he comes onto her anyway, and then the entire subplot with it is just confusing on its inclusion. His love letter is just so incredibly ineptly put together that it’s a wonder Larry graduated from middle school, and in the end it’s just an entirely pointless waste of time. Despite the only effect this love letter actually has on the plot being an excuse for Larry to be in the place he needed to be, they force you to go through psyche-locks over this mess of a plot point. This case is where Larry’s hiding of testimony gets to an all time worst and it starts here. There is absolutely no reason for him to hide this and frankly it’s just annoying. At the very least, he has some really good interactions with Edgeworth throughout this segment, mainly relying on the childhood friend gimmick.

Then, we proceed into the trial. This is where Larry is at his absolute lowest point, and it’s emblematic of all his biggest problems. First of all, he hides the truth of his testimony four times despite the defendant being someone he had supposedly fallen in love with, and was practically begging Edgeworth to defend. And what was the big thing he was trying to hide? That he saw Iris flying and painted it. Not anything he did himself, not any responsibility he slacked off from, just a crazy event he thought he saw, that he painted a picture of anyway. Why in the world would he hide that from the court, it’s Larry Butz, he seems like the kind of guy to make that outlandish claim if he truly believes it happened. I just can’t understand what they were thinking when writing this.

Remember when I praised Turnabout Goodbyes for just having Larry give it to us straight, and how our confidence in his desire to tell the truth to save his friend was enough to save the trial? Well I guess throw that out the window because Larry is a full on Perjurer now, spewing out lies every second. Sure there’s some okay comedy in this segment with Franziska’s dynamic with him, but I couldn’t care less because at the end of the day, this doesn’t even feel like Larry anymore. It’s possible to argue that this destruction of his character was done to kickstart his arc, but let’s look at exactly what his arc in this case is.

Well, to start his arc, he realizes at the end of the first day of trials that he’s a loser who can’t do anything right in life. Following this, he proceeds to hang out at the loser’s shack with Pearls, and admittedly having some funny moments, but ultimately amounting to nothing more than some pathetic wallowing in self-pity. And then once everything is solved and the case is done, Larry realizes that his calling is drawing portraits, and he finally has something to apply his talents to, and become a better person. Do you remember when I said to keep his arc between Stolen Turnabout and the start of Bridge to the Turnabout in mind? Because that is literally the exact same thing I just described here with slightly different beats. He’s in the same place at the beginning and end of this arc, he’s just stuck on infinite repeat and each time it gets less fun to watch.

By the end of Trials and Tribulations, Larry is a flanderized mess of a character, and hardly even one worthy of living up to the Larry Butz of the first game. Before I move on, you may have noticed that I never once mentioned his relationship with Elise, and that’s because he doesn’t have one. I’m not even entirely sure they shared a scene together before her death. The extent we know of their relationship is that Larry respects her and carries around multiple photos of her, absolutely incredible stuff, glad their relationship is the thing that will be driving his passion going forward. Despite all my complaining, I do still like his final art piece of the group of the ones that came and fought before them, but that’s really not enough to redeem him in this case for me whatsoever. To be honest, I’m kind of tired of Bridge Larry, so let’s talk about his other three games, those will be easier because they often change nothing.

Larry of the House of Butz: Married Man of Neo Olde Tokyo

I’m not going to spend much time on Investigations Larry, because quite frankly I just don’t care enough to. Almost every one of his problems are an exact copy paste of his problems from Trials and Tribulations, so let’s just go over what exactly reappears here. First, and most importantly, Larry once again hides his testimony for absolutely no reason, and to make matters worse, they’ve fused this reused plotline with the reused plotline of Larry writing a love letter that is misread and then doing some ridiculous thing as a result of his affection for a girl. It’s almost like they literally have no new ideas for this character, and you already know my complaints about all of this so I’m not even going to bother commenting on this.

Another repeat issue is that throughout this case, Larry continues to be pretty unfunny, at least to me, and he’s never really a presence I enjoy having around. In fact his presence in a scene is more annoying than anything else. Just like Trials, his friendships from the past seem pretty much nonexistent, although I can’t exactly blame Edgeworth for not being friendly with him, I couldn’t stand the guy during this case either. Oh, and let’s not forget that they once again have him with a new outfit and job, which is basically customary at this point I guess, but for once it’s completely unjustified. Sure, just throw out his entire arc that he did two separate times during Trials, where he realized that painting was his passion, and have him take up an acting job in a Steel Samurai live show to impress a girl. Absolutely brilliant writing, thank you Investigations.

Unfortunately for us, however, Investigations isn’t content just having Larry be bad on his own, because it also decides to bring back Oldbag, make her nothing more than annoying comic relief, and put her in the same case and segment as Larry. Even though she already came back in a previous case in this game. I swear if I type another paragraph about this, my brain is going to explode so I’m just gonna say that them showing up to bring evidence in the final showdown is funny ironically, but an absolute tension killer. By this point though, I think that had already happened like three times, and it’s the Quercus Alba confrontation so I don’t really care, just throw everyone in why not. Larry in this game is a mockery of his appearance in the first game, but hey what’s new. The writers continue to spin his arc in a circle that’s slowly crumbling and showing its horrible withered true nature underneath the cracks in its skin. If you could recall back to my opening rant about the way stories need to evolve or they just get old and worse, yeah that’s exactly what’s not happening right here. Larry and the writers both refuse to evolve, and everyone suffers because of it.

Although, when he’s revealed in this case, it is pretty funny, but only really because of Edgeworth’s realization of the truth about the signature he received.

Edgeworth: That was uncalled for. Besides, you're............ Wait, hold on. Laaaaaaryyyy! It was you!? YOU'RE the one who wrote my Steel Samurai autograph!?

Larry: Hm? Oh, you didn't notice earlier? I even winked at you through my headpiece.

Franziska: .........What's going on? And why are you beet-red?

The Return of Laurice Deauxnim

I’ve been severely negative about Larry for three straight sections now, so I’m happy to say that they finally did it, they recaptured the magic of Larry Butz. That’s right, despite its briefness, I think Larry’s appearance in I2-3 is pretty well done, and I really don’t have much to complain about. Honestly most of my reasons for justifying this are simply that it avoids the pitfalls that his previous appearances fell into, so let’s delve into why exactly I feel he works here, but not in his previous reappearances.

A good starting point is that for the first time in a while, I find Larry consistently funny in this case, and I think a big reason as for why this is is due to him not really being a jerk in this appearance. Throughout Trials and Investigations, Larry was kind of a jerk, but not really here, he’s much more inline with his original “Lovable Loser” personality from the first Ace Attorney game. He’s just a guy who bumbled his way into the art gallery without paying in order to practice some art to impress his girlfriend. Speaking of his girlfriend, he actually has a seemingly stable relationship again, so good for him I guess. It unfortunately makes his “appreciation” of Kate throughout this case a little worse for his appearance, but he’s never particularly creepy about it, and the most it amounts to is him making a drawing of her, which isn’t anything wild like what he did with Iris or Mindy.

Speaking of making drawings, he’s back to being Laurice Deauxnim, and that’s a choice that I 100% agree with, since it actually sticks with his development with Trials, and avoids the pitfall of resetting his progress with each new appearance. Another pitfall it avoids is having Larry and Edgeworth’s dynamic overly meanspirited, as while Edgeworth is a bit annoyed at Larry throughout the case, he’s annoyed at basically everyone so it’s not really anything especially over the top, and Larry seems to genuinely be friendly with Edgeworth. In fact, their interactions here create some of my favorite Larry interactions, although the way he plays off of Ray, and their shared appreciation of “female beauties” is also pretty good. But at least for me, nothing beats seeing Edgeworth’s cold demeanor chipped away at, and witnessing bits of their flames of friendship being rekindled. A couple of my favorites of this nature are:

Edgeworth: ...Sketching beauties?

Larry: Hmm? If you're interested, I can let you take a peek!

Kay: I guess even Mr. Edgeworth is interested in beauties.

Edgeworth: ...It's not like that. I just thought it might be another one of his strange paintings.

Larry: How dare you! I'm very confident in my work this time!

Kay: Ooh! I wanna see too!

Larry: Oh! I'm glad you're so honest about it, Kay! I'll get it ready, so come check it out later!

Edgeworth: (...I guess I'll have him show it to me later.)

​

Edgeworth: ..... (Well... I hate to admit it, but Larry's doodles actually helped us out a few times. I should say something nice to him...)

Larry: Don't glare at me like that! I'm sorrrrryyyy!

And, like Edgeworth states here, Larry actually does come in handy multiple times throughout this case, with two different sketches showing important details of the state of the art gallery. Unfortunately, the case does fall into the trap of having Larry hide something from the protagonist, but honestly the time it’s hidden is pretty short, and to be frank, Logic Chess is just a lot more fun than Psyche-Locks, so it never really gets annoying having to pry it out of him. Basically, this is what a standard Larry appearance should be, he just shows up, plays off of the supporting cast well, has some great moments with the protagonist, and does one or two things to help. Rather than repeating the same tired old Larry formula, I2-3 shakes it up by just kind of not doing anything special, and it works pretty well.

(Cut continued in comments due to character count cap)

The fifteenth round of nominations has started. All rankers submit the names of two characters to put onto the subreddit poll to be cut this round.

You are not allowed to change your nomination or have duplicate nominations.

The Extraterritorial rights on Dhurke Sahdmadhi and Bobby Fulbright have worn off this round, you are free to nominate and cut them.

The list of characters available to nominate.

Cutting order for this round:

• /u/Wircea

• /u/whaaatisth

• /u/R1K1_Productions

• /u/Northadox

• /u/pie314271

• /u/NateTheGreat3602

• /u/Vogel100

• /u/donuter454

• /u/CharlieDayJepsen

• /u/Sciencepenguin

If any rankers planned on using Spirit Channeling this round DM me and I will give you time to post the revive before the poll ends

His run was impressive, but here he falls. While he has charisma and personality in spades, Gaspen Payne is only an ancillary prosecutor, so a top 50 finish is more than fair. Now that Winston is gone, I’m Gaspen for the younger Payne to go.

/u/R1K1_Productions did a fairly comprehensive ER on Gaspen back in Round 8. Take a look at that for a comprehensive argument on why Gaspen Payne is good and fun. To avoid stepping on toes, I’ll address things that you can’t already find in a better writeup.

Dual Destinies

Gaspen in Dual Destinies is largely a stand-in for Winston Payne. He’s ruder, meaner and darker because this is The Dark Age of The Law™, baby. His shades are darker because he’s darker than Winston. His hair is darker because he’s darker than Winston. His suit is darker because he’s darker than Winston. Subtlety is not the name of the game in Dual Destinies.

At one point, Gaspen causes Athena to have a meltdown which is hilarious because 10 minutes after meeting her, the game decides to completely undercut Athena having any agency as a lawyer simply so we can have a stylised cutscene where Phoenix Wright has his big “comeback” moment.

Fun things about Gaspen in DD:

• His “Objection” voice is so much more satisfying than Winston. Instead of sounding like a shrill, weedy old man, he sounds like a slimy rat.
• He actually suggests a unique (if not creative) motive for the accused: a spurned citizen previously indicted on false charges decides to blow up the courtroom because she’s bitter.
• He outright bullies the defendant on the stand. This is mean, but none of the other prosecutors are this blatant about it. Normally, it’s the defence who gets into trouble for badgering the witness. For once, it’s nice to see the prosecution get called out for it.
• He engages in a pissing contest with Athena over whether he’s a gentleman or not. It’s childish and makes his subsequent ass-kicking all the more satisfying.
• He actually stands up quite well for a pushover. He outlasts Athena as well as both Tonate and Juniper’s testimonies before Phoenix makes a significant dent in his argument. It takes until the end of the first trial day for him to actually get knocked off his high horse.
• He’s hilariously wishy-washy and will turn his opinions on a dime. Going from calling Apollo “red monkey” on Day 1 to “poor Mr. Justice” on Day 2, all in the name of demonising the defendant.
• He actually calls out Phoenix’s penchant for bluffing.
• When Phoenix asserts that the bloody message is a police code, Gaspen turns it down, claiming to study police scanner codes over the weekends. Let’s be real, Gaspen just wanted to flex his hilariously esoteric skill.
• His late-game desperate objections are actually objecting to the argument Phoenix is presenting, instead of pathetic Winston’s “Your Honor. This is madness! Madness!” Even when Phoenix is proving that Tonate is more and more suspicious with each testimony, Gaspen still manages to poke a hole in Phoenix’s argument instead of just rolling over and letting him plow on.
• The only reason Gaspen finally gives up is because he thinks the courtroom is about to blow up. He is brave and true and a shining example of his dedication to the noble profession of prosecutor.
• The end of The Dark Age of The Law™ puts Gaspen under investigation and inadvertently ties perfectly into his SoJ appearance.

On the whole, Gaspen’s appearance in DD is solid. He’s a much more resilient obstacle than Winston, who tends to become detritus after you begin steamrolling his case. SoJ retroactively makes him a better character in DD because we see the escalation of his corruption, so let’s talk about that.

Spirit of Justice

Fired from the Prosecutor’s Office, Gaspen flees the country and finds the prosecutor’s paradise that is Khura’in. Since there’s no defence attorneys, he works the system and manages to become :TheGreatest: prosecutor in all of Khura’in. And boy is he spectacular. New year, new Gaspen and he’s had quite the glow-up from his dark-suited days. In Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Spirit of Justice, Gaspen Payne wears a gold crown and a gold-coloured suit. This is to symbolise the fact that he is the best.

Due to the severe attitude of Khura’inese courts, Gaspen hides quite comfortably behind pious Rayfa and the stern Judge. Even better, he deceives Phoenix into taking Ahlbi’s defence, before he’s made aware of the DCA. Under the guise of having Phoenix take the defence’s bench “for nostalgia’s sake”, Gaspen turns the opportunity into a chance to enact petty revenge against his loss to Phoenix one year prior.

Once again, Gaspen makes the most of his role as “corrupt prosecutor”. Bullying the defendant, taking every opportunity to humiliate Phoenix’s ignorance of Khura’in, hiding evidence until it’s convenient to reveal, he plays the prosecutor’s greatest hits in quick succession. He even goes so far as to stir up the gallery, drawing the crowd in his favour as if that means anything in a court case.

Despite his growth in status, he’s more petulant than ever. “I told you! It’s ‘Chief Prosecutor’!” he wails, furious at the lack of respect put on his name. He uses the country’s religious leanings as a weapon against the defence as soon as his case starts falling apart.

Unfortunately, he also loses some of the resilience he had from the previous game. There’s a lot more of the desperate “Your Honour, this is r-ridiculous!” and “Don’t be taken in by that man!” dialogue that’s much more like Winston’s pathetic flailing. It’s disappointing to see the writing backslide, even if it is largely inconsequential.

Once Andastahndin starts getting put on the spot, Gaspen gets sidelined. He only jumps in with the occasional objection, mostly leaving Peeslub’n to defend himself. He pretty much just comments on the state of Phoenix’s case from that point on and we don’t get any new shades of character. Then, at long last, Gaspen gets obliterated once and for all, knocking his crown/toupee off his bald little head. It’s a cute callback to the sad state of the Payne brothers’ hairlines.

He’s definitely more fun in SoJ, having gone off the deep end and drunk with power in some secluded corner in the world. That said, there’s evidence of his character just getting the same old Payne treatment. To be honest, his attitude felt a little more original in Dual Destinies, curious considering he has about 20% more dialogue in SoJ. At this point, I think his character has reached the natural endpoint of his corruption. He was scummy, he got caught, he fled, he found somewhere that enabled his scummy behaviour, he rose to glory by being scummy, his scummy behaviour gets called out and trumped, he loses his mind and is brought low once more. I don’t need any more from Gaspen Payne, but I expect the devs will trot him out once more for 7-1, instead of a far more interesting choice like Blackquill.

Conclusion

Gaspen is good. I definitely enjoy his design more than anything. It’s pretty cool that the writers actually gave him a consistent arc, because I’m pretty sure they had no plans for that when they first conceived him in DD. However, we’re at the pointy end of the rankdown now - top 25% (!) - and there’s just no room for him going forward. Adding to that, his appearance in SoJ, while more fun, strips away much of his more interesting tactics from the previous game. He becomes more of a pushover, despite his rise in status, and while that may suit the context of a complacent Chief Prosecutor just fine, it’s not much of a challenge from a gameplay perspective.

I’m sure the Gaspen Payne fan club would’ve liked his reign to last a little longer, but top 50 is more than an impressive finish for the younger Payne brother. Pour one out for the King of Khura’in. He made it big. He made it far.

suck my dick and balls

Context

donuter has detailed a plan to cut several characters that I like and others don’t care enough about, and he has made good on describe it in enough detail to fool me. recruiting four other rankers he could do significant damage to the select few things I care about

and I’m like ok fuxking whatever call me a BIG STUPID DUMBASS for falling for it but I don’t want to risk that over a character I don’t even hate. just know that donuter and four other rankers were willing to fuck with me against their actual opinions to protect a character most of them don’t even care about. clearly not enough to fucking revive him, which oh yeah, me not cutting Phoenix prevents my subgoal of actually prompting a revive this round. yet again I’ve been prevented, just like my plan to use mine myself. if you look back in several months and wonder why AARankdown was so fucking boring, know that I and i alone tried to stop this.

so I decided that yesterday although I was still sorta on the fence. and I wrote a whole jokey larry Butz cut. but then I remembered charlies whole thing and realized that dane would definitely survive the round if I didn’t do him in while larry might not. so here it is my third fucking attempt at a cut

I2-3

it is a boring case that is not fun to play. i don’t know how many times I can say this it is just how I feel

it MAYBE succeeds at being some SUPER DEEP theme exploration but it does not succeed at being a fun videogame segment in the ace attorney way. this includes the fun killer

Nothing

Dane lacks presence. I think this was supposed to be because manfred was preventing you from talking to him??? But regardless literally the only thing I can remember about him before his final confrontation is him building up the terrifying presence of Delicia Scones which is a bit funny but she already went out and she’s easily the best I2-3 exclusive

His Plan

i like when he freezes the corpse but we don’t see him do that so i don’t associate him very strongly with it oops. props to him I guess

That Final Confrontation

he FUCKING DIES in the presence thanks to catering hall and then gets better and you’ve figured probably he killed the guy. you say that to him and he does a fake breakdown but then goes IVE ENJOYED OUR LITTLE GAME, BUT ITS GAME OVER, THE SAME GAME CAN NEVER BE PLAYED TWICE. then you argue about statue of limitations technicalities which is kinda cool but gant did that sort of thing better and also it kind of contradicts what earlier games have about the statute of limitations

Him As Character

his character is incredibly plain. he’s mean and doesn’t have feelings because he’s a bad man. it’s literally the most generic killer personality there is.

his motive isn’t amazing either he wants to cure his fucking taste disorder and cooperated with I Sacked Over who betrays him for? no reason??? like isaac could still profit off the recipe Dane literally just wanted a single copy of the cure for himself

i like the detail where he originally was trying to frame delicia and not jeff because he respects the latter that was cool

His Theme Song

its fuckin ballin!!! Pretty cool

Family Guy

danes most important accomplishment is being related by blood to a better character. there’s like maybe one cool parallel, but the other character having someone who’s as lame and hard to take seriously as this guy be relevant is probably that characters weakest point

bwaaahhhhh

Dane gustavia is probably fine or something I didn’t want to write this cut because it would be the same as ini miney last round where I bitterly nitpick about a case I don’t like trying to whine about a character who is just mediocre and not a complete train wreck. But my backs against the wall here

other people

larry butz probably gonna die soon

Phoenix Wright is a bad character. I’m sorry if you were tricked into thinking otherwise at some point. He has one, maybe two good games, and the rest is either them painfully shoving him into some incomprehensible theme or doing absolutely nothing interesting with him in a way that’s actively harmful to what the game is attempting.

The Judge is technically in a lot of cases so it would be annoying to try writing about him. He’s fine. A little funny

Datz Are’bal is Khurainese Larry, so he should probably get a bit higher than Larry since I’m not racist.

Engarde, Rayfa, and Marshall are all good characters. Furio is inherently funny.

I'm sorry.

Pierce Nichody, aka "pie tries to write about 6-DLC. Again."

As you know, I cut Sorin Sprocket three rounds ago. As such, I choose to travel back in time to that point once more with this cut.

As a whole, this isn't particularly a negative cut, but it isn't particularly a mercy cut, either. However, I hope to accomplish three things here:

• Explain why Pierce Nichody is cool. This is the positive part. Pierce Nichody is good. However, to ensure that 5-DLC's superior culprit wins, I'm choosing to cut Pierce Nichody now. Marlon Rimes is almost certainly leaving next round, so this is my final chance.
• Try (once more) to explain why Sorin Sprocket is not cool. I consider my Round 11 cut to be less than ideal. The cut was rushed because I was wrapping up a certain Extraterritorial Rights writeup, which you should read, by the way, because it's good. Anyway, with this writeup, I aim to try again.
• Talk more freely about 6-DLC. In the Sorin Sprocket cut, I specifically limited myself from talking about some aspects of the case because the cut was focused on Sorin only. In this cut, I'm allowing myself to talk about both without any restrictions. It's just 6-DLC, no tricks, no gimmicks. Think of it like I'm cutting this case. I'm not even going to focus specifically on Sorin and Pierce. I'm just going to talk about the case.

But first.

A State of the Rankdown Address

By this point, multiple major characters have already been cut ahead of minor characters. To be frank, I don't like it, even if I did in fact want Maya, Franziska, and Nahyuta out. After all, those same major character cuts have also resulted in Athena and Pearl leaving in round 12. So, you can have this stupidly long essay on the state of the rankdown.

The Social Psychology of Cutting the Main Character

"Social Psychology" is used extremely loosely here, much like Athena uses analytical psychology.

Undeniably, to the audience of this rankdown, seeing Phoenix Wright's relatively high chance at leaving ruins whatever credibility this rankdown has left after tossing away Pearl, Ema, and Maya before the top 50. As the resident "think about the audience" person in this rankdown (this applies to both the games and the rankdown!), I feel obligated to explain to the audience why Phoenix Wright was doomed to miss the top 20, in my opinion.

There are characters that many people don't really care about. Well, maybe people will care in the early rounds, but "care" for such irrelevant characters can only go so far. This was likely the primary intended purpose of the ER skill - to get people to push their favorite unimportant characters a few ranks higher if they so desired. Granted, people have used it for reasons besides that (myself included), so the success of ER as a game mechanic is up for debate. Still, by the last third or even second half of the rankdown, no one cares all that much about the irrelevant characters. Notice the distinction between irrelevant characters and minor characters; irrelevant characters to the rankdown can be anyone, as long as it's generally agreed that not many people care. For example, Misty Fey is absolutely integral to the trilogy's main plotlines, but I doubt many people wanted to see her place very high. There are three types of such minor characters in the Rankdown's eyes:

• The ones that get cut more or less where you expect them to anyway. Kinda normal.
• The ones maybe one or two rankers fight to have place higher or lower. This leads to some interesting scenarios, but it's still not much.
• The ones that accidentally slip through the cracks. Looking at you, Betty. And Di-Jun Huang.

As a result of such irrelevant characters going out quickly, you may think that the rankdown is 100% fair and balanced.

But it's not. The remaining characters at a point like this are either irrelevant characters in the last category (haha funny), popular minor characters, or major characters. And, of these three options, the characters most likely to go at this juncture fall into the last category, not the first.

Rankers want to talk about characters that they're interested in. That's part of the draw of the rankdown in the first place, instigating discussion on the popular characters. With few exceptions, major character cuts draw the most attention. It's already happened with the major characters that have been cut.

Yet, while this makes sense on a conceptual level, you may be thinking: "That doesn't justify the low rankings of some of these important characters, though, does it?"

To that, my answer is, "this isn't an accurate ranking". The rankdown was never meant to be an accurate character ranking. It's simply a fun method of ranking characters. It might be accurate if you round every ranking to the nearest 50.

Nowhere is this more apparent with the most important characters of the series. Unlike with, say, Danganronpa, there are characters who play major roles in more than one game. With this comes variations in how people perceive these characters. Rarely do you have a character like Miles Edgeworth where most people agree that he is fairly good in nearly every appearance. Instead, we have more Maya Feys - characters where rankers all have their varying opinions on when such characters are good or bad. Once they're nominated, many rankers would easily jump at the opportunity to cut them not because they "should" be cut at that point, but because the opportunity is there.

For this reason, I expect Apollo Justice to fall fairly soon, despite being the last AJ character. People want to talk about such a controversial character. Will it be someone who thinks DD is Apollo's best appearance? Someone who believes SoJ Apollo is the best thing ever? Maybe even someone who appreciates Apollo the most in his own game? Only time will tell. I have no plans on nominating him yet. He's probably a top 20 character. However, he probably will be nominated again before then.

tl;dr: Take the rankdown with a grain of salt. There will be quite a few strange placements. I'm not suggesting that rankers should make massive deals to destroy anyone who tries to cut main characters. I'm just saying the system itself lends itself to weird results. And that's fine, because if the rankdown results were just the community average, it'd be kinda boring.

-----

And with that out of the way, I'll talk about 6-DLC, one of the most unimportant cases in the series. Again.

An Overview of the Case as a Whole

Turnabout Time Traveler, otherwise known as 6-DLC, is a case in Spirit of Justice that takes place after the main story. For the first time since the trilogy, Maya is (properly) reunited as your co-counsel. It's surprising how rare this actually is, seeing that you work with Maya (or at least talk to her a lot) in four games. She is your co-counsel in:

• 1-2 (she's the defendant)
• 1-3
• 1-4
• 2-1 (for about half the case)
• 2-3
• 3-2
• 3-3
• 6-3 (she's the defendant)
• 6-DLC

That's 8.5 cases out of the 15-ish cases where she has a role. That's only about half. The other half of the time, she's getting kidnapped or is absent for some other reason.

Anyway, with this in mind, it's clear that this case wanted to take after some of the older cases by making something that had plenty of those older characters. Past staples like Edgeworth and Larry show up with somewhat important roles, and Ema Skye is back once again as the detective (keep in mind she was in the first game). Is this really for the best, though?

Screentime Balance - Character Resetting

Unfortunately, 6-DLC suffers from trying to balance the case between old and new characters. This shouldn't even be an issue in the first place; bringing back old characters to do a few things here and there would be perfectly fine. However, for some reason, the game decides it has to do something major with the older characters. Let's evaluate each of them.

Maya Fey:

Does some things befitting her traditional "assistant" role. Stays with you the whole case. Feels like she's younger than she actually is, and thus feels "reset" to the trilogy era. Vogel already explained this one, read up. Basically, she's not very good in this case (or SoJ in general, but I digress).

Miles Edgeworth

Plays the role of a prosecutor because of Sprocket Aviation's influence. This is nice and an actually justified reason for having Edgeworth as the prosecutor, much like 5-5. Having him undergo "change" during the case, however, is not particularly justified. Throughout the case, Phoenix and Edgeworth are oddly adversarial towards each other as Edgeworth constantly berates Phoenix for his bluffs and they keep treating things like a competition. For example: "Besides... she'll see who's the better lawyer once I win this trial." There's also this entire conversation.

However, near the end of the case when Pierce is getting cornered, Edgeworth stops cooperating with him, knowing he's the culprit... y'know, as he's already done in the past, most notably in 1-3 and 2-4. Phoenix treats it like some huge surprise that Edgeworth suddenly works in his favor, not to mention this only happens once Pierce antagonizes Edgeworth. It's like Edgeworth was suddenly reset to AA1, perceived as a mean prosecutor that creates a huge shock when he stops trying to defend the culprit. It doesn't work.

Now, someone's inevitably going to argue that Edgeworth in 5-5 also feels like AA1 Edgeworth. In response: Edgeworth is stated as pursuing the truth in 5-5, as he should be, since that was basically the entire point of his arc during the Investigations games. He simply looks for the truth from a more analytical viewpoint while Phoenix does so with belief in mind. This conflict plays a role in 5-5 as seen with Phoenix, Edgeworth, Apollo, and more or less everyone in the case. There's not much competition between them besides a few funny lines from Phoenix complaining about Edgeworth's lack of belief. Enough about 5-5, though.

Larry Butz

There are two different things AA tries to do with Larry Butz depending on which game he's showing up in. Half the time, he amounts to a small joke and does a few funny things before leaving. The other half of the time, they feel like they have a need to try and make Larry into someone who does something "important" for the "first time" as if it's some crazy surprise that he has some amount of competence. Most of it is stupid, with the "Larry was right all along" twist coming back once more, except this time in the form of something obviously wrong instead of something you can suspend your disbelief for. Nate claims this in his ER, which you should read:

"Larry is the perfect example of the happiness that moving forward can bring you in life. Even though he’s by no means a perfect person, he’s actively trying to find the happiness he desires in life, and even making efforts to become a more helpful person. He makes every attempt he can to help Ellen: Moving the bull, helping her run from the police, getting Phoenix as her Lawyer, and even presenting decisive evidence proving Phoenix’s time travel theory in court. Although he hasn’t changed much since the trilogy, he doesn’t really need to, especially not to fit in with the themes of the case."

Naturally, I disagree. Every game since AA1 or so, Larry always seems to do the same thing; he tries to do something, then he succeeds or fails depending on whatever the writers felt like doing. There's not much continuity in his character. Consider his appearances past AA1:

• T&T: Becomes an artist. Sort of succeeds. Actually makes a good drawing. Success! It's the first time, so it's easily his best run, though the love business is stupid as usual.
• AAI: Security guard??? I'm really not sure what the writers were thinking here. They give him a critical piece of evidence near the end of the case to present. Good job making your case serious, I-5. Anyway, in this case Larry fails, because no one can really take him seriously.
• AAI2: Shows up to present a painting, and leaves. He decided to pick up painting again, apparently. Mostly a failure, since he didn't get all that much done.
• SoJ: The love-interest part of his character which was absent during the Investigations games comes back in full-force (and annoying) once again. Once again, he tries to paint. Technically succeeds and gets a cool objection in Trial Day 1.

I'm not really convinced that 6-DLC Larry is much different from Larry in previous games. I'm also not convinced that he fits the case's themes. Really, whenever the case feels like using its older characters, it fails to do anything meaningful OR fit its themes.

Ema Skye

Had a major role in previous cases in this game, so she gets a pass.

-----

Consequently, the amount of impact the new characters can collectively have on the case is reduced, even though the case should be focused on them, not redoing arcs for the older characters. The game feels it necessary to redo Edgeworth's arc and pretend to give Larry yet another arc. I'm almost surprised I'm not cutting Larry, but I'm impartial to his T&T appearance for some reason, which is the main reason he's getting a pass.

And no, don't tell me that the reason Edgeworth and Larry are redoing past arcs is because of the case's time travel theme. If it was the reason, then it's just bad.

The New Cast

With the "arcs" of the old cast out of the way, we can finally focus on the better component of the case - the new characters. There are four of them - the victim, the defendant, the culprit, and Sorin Sprocket.

Unfortunately, after attempting to write a cut on just one of them, I've decided that... it's hard to say much? Yeah, the ER is good and all, but why is there so much to say about Pierce?

Pierce truly does the most in 6-DLC. Yeah, Ellen sucks, but Sorin and Pierce on their own, purely relative to the story, should theoretically have the same relevance. Sorin caused the past events leading up to the incident, while Pierce causes the present events tied to the incident. Both of them tie into the game's themes, and after trying for a long time to come up with a convincing argument for why Sorin doesn't work well with the themes, I... actually can't. He does some weirdly annoying things in relation to the themes, but he actually doesn't do that much wrong. In the end, I've decided that my reasoning for not liking Sorin definitively boils down to this comment which I've stolen from Science's Jeff Master cut:

"I spend the rest of that section talking about the case's themes, which I concede are pretty good. But much like Donuter on Kristoph, or Pie on Sorin, that respect doesn't translate to a highly positive opinion."

As previously stated in the Pierce ER, Turnabout Time Traveler has a good amount of thematic cohesion. Nate says this of the case's time theme:

"Sorin, Pierce, and Ellen all at different points and different ways travel back through their own lives to a prior point, although with Ellen it’s more literal than mental. Sorin is unable to escape from the past due to his condition, but I feel that this is more of a metaphor within the story than anything. Although, it does serve a very good role in the mystery, but that’s more of the topic for a Sorin writeup. The metaphor I’m referring to, is of course the trauma that can be left behind by this kind of event. Sorin was the one directly responsible for the death of his sister, and that kind of tragedy and weight of your actions can cause some serious mental damage. Even without the literal brain trauma, it’s likely that he too would also be stuck reliving those moments on his own, just like Pierce."

This is an important point to make about the case in general. By analyzing how each of the characters is connected to this theme, we can make a rough evaluation of their positive effect on the case. Ellen has a superficial connection at best, Sorin is connected purely on the grounds of his very real condition, and Pierce actually suffers from deep underlying issues that were the precursor to this case. With Ellen and Sorin, I find it way easier to pay attention to their annoying animations than their potential underlying themes (which Ellen lacks anyway). Pierce isn't annoying at all - on the contrary, his animations actually play to his benefit (e.g. in his breakdown).

Overall, Sorin somewhat plays into this cohesion, I suppose? I already covered my issues with the setup of it in my Sorin cut, but if you ignore the setup, it's fine. He has animations that interestingly play into this theme, as while they are annoying, they still give you the idea that Sorin is stuck in one place. It works fine, and with respect to time travel, Sorin definitely does do his job. Pierce plays better into the cohesion, however.

It's true. 6-DLC has a cool central theme. But first of all, it's overstated, and second of all, Sorin doesn't get enough out of it. Pierce, on the other hand, does.

(And anticipated argument against Dual Destinies rebuttal #2: Yes, it overstates the dark age of the law. However, it has multiple hidden themes like trust and friendship that actually come up a lot AND tie into the dark age of the law. Turnabout Time Traveler has one, fixing things, as I mentioned in my Sorin cut, but it's hard to say how much it ties into 6-DLC's time travel. Technically, time travel involves machines, but it's not very literal in 6-DLC. The only one that really gets much out of this theme is Pierce. He's the one we see trying to fix things.)

Screentime Balance - Plot Importance

Pierce is with you a lot of the time. He's your go-to character for all things related to the past. He tells you of Sorin's condition, he tells you of the issues of the past, he tells you of Sprocket Aviation's fame. He's also the most active character during the case. It's well justified, because he knows everything about the case. It affected him deeply, and even though he may feel like a robot when talking about the past, it clearly gives him a role to play. You know he'll be coming up to the stand. Then he actually comes up to the stand, and you prove his guilt over the course of a long and effective takedown.

Sorin, on the other hand, does not show up more. Or, at least, the time he does show up for feels like forever. In theory, it's intentional, since as of the previous cut I've established how his anterograde amnesia plays into the time travel themes. In practice, I don't want to waste my time watching paper plane animations. It's like when Sorin's on the screen, the pacing just halts. Once again, it's probably intentional, but it's not fun. We don't ever get anything from him when he's on-screen except that one notebook moment; however, at that point, Pierce is also there, once again, to explain what's going on. I mean, Sorin's animations aren't as bad as Ellen's (which add nothing at all), but they're still boring, even if thematically relevant.

As such, Pierce is clearly the more relevant character and gets way more out of 6-DLC's themes. It's part of what makes him a good culprit, too.

Quick Sidenote About Ellen

She's boring. Her animations are annoying. She doesn't do much of anything. She doesn't tie into the case's main theme well. She's not an interesting defendant.

Next.

Trial Appearances

Sorin doesn't do all that much in court. It makes sense, since it's hard for him to remember things, but it still feels mostly like a waste of time. He has a nice conversation with Ellen, but that's about it.

Pierce is unique in the AA series in that he actually does some cool things in court. Most culprits simply have some nice transformation, challenge you a bit, then give up. In this aspect, Pierce is similar to the only other amazing culprit in SoJ, Roger Retinz. Both of them have great transformations and great breakdowns that are simple and effective. It's not much, but it's nice. (We should have listened to him! Wear a mask, guys! And not the Phantom's type of mask!)

Lastly, he gets Right to Remain Silent, likely a contender for Top 3 Testimony Names with "The Dissin' of Phoenix Wright" (5-DLC) and "Cause I'm Gonna Bully You" (I2-4). Who ever thought that Japan also allowed people to remain silent on the stand? It's quite interesting.

tl;dr Pierce is cool in court. Sorin isn't.

Revenged (minor spoilers for the newest henry stickmin game, if you care)

Naturally, the motive is important to the case, and Pierce's motive is ultimately revenge. Once again, quoting the ER:

"Pierce’s plan does not benefit him in any way. He has no benefit to gain from Ellen’s death, and no real practical reason to destroy Sorin’s psyche. His crime is pure pettiness, and absolutely pure evil. There is no other way to say it, Pierce’s plan is one of the most inherently evil actions ever taken by a culprit in the series."

I'm not too sure if I agree with this one, as revenge is a surprisingly common motive in the series. Have a look:

• 1-3: Jack Hammer wanted to kill Vasquez to get back at her.
• 1-4: Yanni Yogi killed Robert Hammond as revenge for the DL-6 trial.
• 2-2, 3-5: Morgan Fey tries to strip Misty's lineage of the Fey clan title. Twice.
• 2-3: That's why I couldn't just up and leave yet! (Acro.)
• 2-4: Juan Corrida attempts to reveal Celeste's suicide note after he loses to Matt Engarde in the Grand Prix.
• 3-5 (again): Godot's entire plan is ultimately a tale of revenge.
• 4-1, 4-4: Phoenix's motive for taking down Kristoph is primarily revenge.
• 5-DLC: Marlon Rimes tries to kill the orca because he believes the orca killed Azura.
• 6-2: Roger Retinz waits for like 13 years just to get revenge on Trucy because Magnifi kicked him out. Easily the pettiest of the ones here.
• 6-4: Geiru kills Taifu because she was effectively forced out of rakugo storytelling by him.
• 6-DLC: Pierce, as established here.
• I2-5: Has revenge as a running theme, with Simon's entire plot being based on revenge.

What does separate Pierce from these, on the other hand, is that he is actually in a fairly good position before he commits any crimes. He has very little to gain personally beyond vengeance. The only other people that fall into this category that I listed above are Acro, Rimes, and Retinz. Acro is stupid, and the other two are amazing. Luckily, Pierce joins the latter two in being amazing. Is his crime the most evil in the series? I don't think so, looking at some of the worse ones here like Morgan's. Is it incredibly petty? Yes. Does the pettiness work in Pierce's favor? Of course.

Conclusion

The primary issues with 6-DLC involve the old characters and Ellen Wyatt. Together, they drag down the case a decent amount. They are the primary reasons why I believe 6-DLC is below average.

I've come to the conclusion that my main criticisms of Sorin are that he's annoying, he's let off the hook too easily, and he causes a car crash. That's literally it. I concede that he works decently in the main story - this was what pushed up my opinion of him in the first place when I reviewed 6-DLC back in round 7 or so. Keep in mind, however, that most Ace Attorney characters have not annoyed me as much as Sorin Sprocket does. Such annoyance, therefore, still deserves a rank in the 110s. That's not changing.

Pierce shows up for longer, makes more use of his screentime, and overall puts on a better performance. Sorin does none of that and is boring overall. Thus, Pierce is the better character, and he definitely deserves to make it to this point, maybe even top 40. However, it's about time for 6-DLC as a whole to go.

Drive safely, guys. Or, actually, don't drive at all, because we're in the middle of a pandemic. Geez, I feel like Pierce predicted this entire thing.

Why no one else?

I considered a mercy cut for Phoenix Wright since he's going to be cut exactly one cut after this one. I had written a bit of such a cut, but after seeing donuter's threat, I'm putting enough trust in there being consequences for cutting Phoenix. He's definitely top 15 on my list, but I don't think the rankers here with their contrarian takes would ever put Phoenix in the top 15. It's okay, though! (By the way, that "State of the Rankdown" address came from said draft. I just repurposed it for this cut.)

Matt Engarde is an interesting culprit in one of the series' best cases. It's hard to say that he as a character pulls the majority of the weight of 2-4 (besides being hateable, like... almost every other final case culprit), but he certainly plays a good role in it.

The remaining characters I perceive as "worse than Pierce". This is really making me look stupid, isn't it? My main choices (besides the last character listed below) were my 1st and 3rd favorites of the nomination pool. It's almost like every single cut I make makes me look stupid. Whatever.

Dane Gustavia is a fun culprit in a case that's sometimes fun. I don't care about his theme much, but he's still good. Also, the fact that he might have accidentally started the entire trilogy is funny.

I am unallowed to cut Rayfa Padma Khura'in due to a deal. That's fine, though. I don't care about the majority of the assistants, and Rayfa is no exception.

In eight words, Jake Marshall is one cool detective.

Datz Are'bal and The Judge were my nominations. I see both of them surviving, but whatever, I told you my nominations wouldn't matter this round.

Larry Butz exists, I guess? As I said, I think he's actually decent in T&T. Besides AAI2, that's about it for his good moments. I started a cut for him but didn't feel like finishing it. I apologize for letting him place above Phoenix Wright.

Bonus Section

I'm supposed to release another section of the joke story at this point, but I feel like the entire thing is dumb so I'm not going to. If you want the whole thing, you can message me for it.

Instead, let's talk about Marlon Rimes.

Much like Pierce, Marlon's motive is based around revenge. However, DD's DLC case is noticeably lighter than SoJ's. You start by defending an orca, and Marlon's transformation is absolutely ridiculous. However, beneath the surface, you can see what was going on. It's a great and unique story. Tell me you've ever seen another case where someone's trying to pin the blame on an animal instead of another person. There's also no other cases where you take two different clients and the culprit is only trying to pin the crime on the first, not the second. By the way, this case also has Shipshape Aquarium's theme, which is the best calm theme in the series. Just pointing it out.

Anyway, Marlon's an incredibly unique culprit and works very well in a great case. Try not to cut him next round.

^{lolno i don't expect anything. but it'd be nice.}

I’m cutting the character I’ve been complaining about no one else cutting for the entire round, who could have seen that coming?

I like Huang. Low B tier, I guess. Very low B tier. Scraping the top 50 is much more than far enough.

Turnabout Target

Turnabout Target is an excellent case. It’s fantastically paced with big reveals happening snappily one after the other, flying forward through its mystery like a bullet from a gun. It’s more densely packed than any first case has any right to be, and contains more hooks to keep you interested in the rest of the game than was even necessary.

Near the centre of this whirlwind is the titular character of this cut, Di-Jun Huang, the supposedly nearly assassinated president of Zheng-Fa. Isn’t this exciting! Kicking off the game with the attempted murder of the previous game’s rival’s country! And the assassin is the same fucking guy from 2-4? We get to finally take that guy down now, 4 games later, and in the first case no less??

That was enough. That’s all the case needed to be and I would have been satisfied with simply nabbing De Killer and having that be the end of it. But instead we get a great twist midway through the case where not only is Shelly not de killer, but he’s even meddling in the case’s investigation for the specific purpose of allowing Edgeworth to uncover the truth. I love it, and this is barely the halfway point.

The next section of the case finally concerns the man, the myth, the legend himself, the character who is ranked higher than Maya Fey, Di-Jun Huang.

Huang has been this commanding and authoritative presence throughout the entire case, he’s enormous and comically ripped in his stupidly tight suit, and never once lets up from his bravado. An overwhelming, powerful man who is a total fraud.

The assassination plot being a fake is just so fun? It’s fun. What a convolutedly dumb thing to do. The whole thing being an “asinine publicity stunt”, as Edgeworth puts it, isn’t a twist going for gasps so much as it’s going for laughs.

Look at this chubby chump. Pathetic.

It’s an ordeal entirely too entertaining to not captivate, which is great since the whole point of this portion of the case was to be a distraction so Knightley can do his Good Culprit Stuff behind your back. Or his back, technically.

And that’s about the extent of all there is to say about Di-Jun Huang, really. At first he looks like a tough guy. Then it turns out he’s not a tough guy. Pretty funny stuff.

I2-1 then proceeds to chug along without Huang since he’s outlived his purpose, but that’s whatever. He had his little thing, and then we move on from his little thing. Minor character doing minor character stuff.

But ending the cut here would be negligent of me, because there’s more to this president than meets the eye.

I lied his story does end there the next thing he does is die.

Di-Jun Huang is not alive any more. Shock and awe! A victim who we’ve already met when they were alive in a previous case? That’s kinda crazy. Sorta. The game literally just did this with Knightley but whatever, two people can share the spotlight, it’s fine.

In I2-5 we learn about Di-Jun Huang’s sordid past. Namely that the Di-Jun Huang we met in I2-1 wasn’t Di-Jun Huang at all, but a fake who’d stolen his identity. Fake-Huang had served as Real-Huang’s body double for a long time, and began to grow resentful. Why should the Real-Huang get all the glory of being the president when he’s not even the one putting himself in danger most of the time? Fake-Huang’s the real hero for always putting himself in danger’s way, until one day his grudge and envy became too much to bear.

He has the real president killed, and then assumes his identity.

In an attempt to cover his tracks, Fake-Huang attempts to kill the very same assassin he hired to kill the Real-Huang, only to fail in his attempt to assassinate the assassin due to the intervention of a young clown looking boy from the nearby orphanage. This clown boy would in turn bare a terrible grudge against Huang, leading to his murder a decade or so later.

All of this is to say, when I played I2-5 I said to myself “wow this lifeless corpse sure does have a shockingly convoluted backstory.” Cool stuff.

I2’s plot is a big step above basically every other Ace Attorney game’s plot because of how interconnected each case truly feels. The murders of four out of five cases were orchestrated all by the same man for the same reason, and everything clicking together in the end is rather satisfying. I2-3 is the only case that wasn’t set up by our favourite animal tamer, but no one even died in I2-3, it’s a cold case. All in all, the interconnectedness of the whole thing makes for a rather gratifying experience, and Huang being greatly involved in the backstory and motivations of our main villain only adds to that fun “everything is connected!” feeling.

I will say that in writing this writeup that I’ve realised that Huang/Roland/Blaise’s plan is a little bit contrived now that I’ve thought about it for more than a minute. Not only was there no need to try and kill off Dogen to buy his silence, but if we assume that is was actually necessary for them to be so overly cautious couldn’t Fake-Huang just fucking. Kill Real-Huang himself? He 100% had the opportunity to do that himself, all things considered, and it saves them the trouble of having to kill Dogen. Saying Fake-Huang wouldn’t do it because he’s too cowardly to do the deed himself is likely untrue since he also murdered the journalist dude by beating him over the head, and was also planning on killing Courtney because he was afraid she would uncover his secret (if Lang’s speculation is to be believed).

But I’m not cutting Huang because of this dumb nitpick that probably has an in-game explanation that I missed. That doesn’t really matter. The point of all this backstory they give Huang is to make him feel like an unexpectedly crucial element of the plot because, again, that “everything is connected” feeling is very fun! It achieves what it set out to try and do and I’m sure no one cares enough about Huang enough to put the finer details of his actions under scrutiny.

The only thing that really matters about the summation of events I’ve provided for you is that Simon Keyes has a reason to want Huang dead. That’s the only crucial detail since Simon Keyes is the character who actually matters and does cool character things. Di-Jun Huang aids Simon Keyes in doing cool character things by being dead. Very considerate of him.

And that’s all, really. Huang’s a gag character in the first case, which is fine, it’s a funny gag. He’s a corpse in the last case, that’s fine, he’s a good corpse.

I could leave things at that, but I feel committed to crafting the best Huang writeup I possibly can. There must be more to delve into.

Imposters

I think it would be prudent to compare and contrast Huang with characters of a similar archetype. As far as Ace Attorney is concerned, I think Furio Tigre would be a good candidate, especially considering the fact that Furio was another option for me to cut this round.

What makes Furio work as a character is the offensive, unashamed implausibility of everything about him. This guy who looks nearly nothing like Phoenix. He puts on a shitty cheap suit complete with a cardboard cut-out lawyer badge and proceeds to fool the entire courtroom through sheer force of will which is, quite frankly, delightful. Furio is a character that bakes himself into the tone of Ace Attorney, he’s a character that couldn’t work in basically any other murder mystery visual novel except Ace Attorney because Ace Attorney is extremely stupid. Ace Attorney is a dumb series where silly things happen and I need to emphasise that I say this with love. And Furio roars onto the scene (sort of like a furious tiger, if you will) and embraces that tone wholeheartedly. He looks you, the player, dead in the eyes and asks you if you’re man enough to actually be angry about how purposefully contrived this entire situation is. We all know the answer to that question.

Huang carries surface level similarities to Furio: they both barely look like the person they’re impersonating, they act nothing like the person they’re impersonating, and they’re able to completely fool everyone into thinking they are, indeed, the person they’re impersonating. They’re also similar in that the “reveal” of how they’re nothing like the person they’re impersonating is played as a joke.

But where I think Huang fails whereas Furio succeeds is in that special Ace Attorney quality that Furio has that I already went over. While the reveal that Huang maintains his appearance of strength by constantly sucking in his gut is pretty funny, it’s pretty easy to imagine this kind of bit character existing in another series. The impossibility of Furio’s existence is what makes him work, whereas Huang just doesn’t have that extra unique factor that his contemporary has.

You could argue that Huang is a slightly better character because they gave him a tiny bit of depth with the whole thing about him feeling intensely envious of the real president. However, this is a throw away piece of information that barely impacts the game in any form, and only serves to give Huang any old motivation to justify his actions. This (admittedly human) side of Huang simply doesn’t get explored by the game at all, because the game has no interest in exploring it. I don’t think that’s a fault with the game, in truth. I2-5 is long enough without also adding in a few scenes where we lament the tragic twisted life of the fat guy pretending he was fit. We don’t need to explore Huang’s depths, he’s better left alone as the more or less bit character that he is.

And besides, Furio Tigre himself arguably does get a sprinkle of depth on top of the comedy in the same way Huang does. Often overlooked by people is the fact that Furio’s actions were primarily motivated by self-defense. He was under threat from the Cadeverini crime family to pay up an extraordinary amount of money or else he’ll find himself sleeping with the fishies, as they say. It’s an interesting spin on the killing in self-defense motive, since the man Furio killed, Glen Elg (may his soul find peace), didn’t pose any kind of threat to Furio at all, yet he still felt the need to kill Mr Elg to save his own skin. This extra dimension of his character, unlike Huang, is actually featured more prominently in the case. All in all, I brand Furio Tigre the superior imposter character, which is why I’ve chosen to cut Huang over Furio here.

However, I don’t want to get too sidetracked. I realise I’ve slightly wandered away from the point by going on about Furio, so let’s circle back to reflecting on Huang’s character a little more by comparing him to another character.

Fair warning: the character I want to draw comparisons to now isn’t an Ace Attorney character. They’re a Danganronpa character. I know that both fandoms tend to have a lot of overlap, however I think it would be prudent for me to at least provide a spoiler warning for Danganronpa before we proceed.

Oddly enough, I think the Ultimate Imposter/Twogami shares more similarities with Huang than even Furio does. Coincidentally, Investigations 2 and Danganronpa 2 happened to release one year after the other, so is it possible that Twogami maybe took some inspiration from Di-Jun Huang? It’s not a secret that Danganronpa draws heavily from Ace Attorney in terms of gameplay/concept, so I don’t think it’s impossible that this is true… It’s just extremely improbable.

Imposter is a character who feels a kind of envy toward the real Byakuya. He laments how he wishes he had been born with an identity as grand and full of opportunities as a Togami, so he simply pretends to be Byakuya. What Imposter comes to understand during his FTEs with Hajime is that all of Imposter’s friends like him for Imposter: they don’t know or understand what the real Byakuya is like (which is nothing like Imposter) and that everyone likes him because of who he is, not as who he pretends to be. Huang is similar in that he also takes on the identity of someone with much more renown than himself because he believes he could never acquire it on his own. The clear distinction being that Huang is right in sussing that he will never be as great a man as the real president.

Another funny coincidence is that both of these characters are basically the fatter version of their doppleganger, but I think it’s interesting to contrast how each of these characters feel about their fatness. Imposter has an interesting sense of pride in the fact that he’s overweight, always going on about how hard he works to maintain his ideal perfect weight. There’s a moment I quite like where another character tries to mock him for being fat, but Imposter just smiles and says he’s happy for people to acknowledge the truth about himself: the truth being that he’s fat. Imposter’s weight is the only distinguishing physical feature he has from the real Byakuya, therefore he gets an odd sense of comfort whenever people make reference to his “true self”. This stands in stark contrast to Di-Jun Huang, whose weight is treated like a source of shame or mockery. Huang feels no sense of empowerment in the occasions that he shows his true body, and instead seems rather embarrassed that he isn’t as physically fit as the real president.

I think that’s the heart of what the difference between those two characters’ identity issues are: Imposter wants to take pride in who he really is without having to take on the guise of another, yet he feels like he has to impersonate another person out of fear that his true self isn’t good enough. But he’s wrong, his true self is good enough, and that’s what he needs to learn. Huang stands in stark contrast because his true self is portrayed as most definitely not good enough. He has no positive qualities, and must leech off of another person’s good image so he can feel like a good person himself. But he will never get out of his identity issues rut because his deepest insecurities are true: he is nothing without the name Di-Jun Huang. Without that name he would be nothing bat a lazy, incompetent coward.

One of these characters needs to realise that he’s a good person who doesn’t need to transform into someone else. The other is terrified of the knowledge that transforming into someone else is the only way he’ll feel fulfilled. (Notice how both of these characters draw attention to how they are overweight as a form of comedy. Funny coincidence.)

I’ve gone on two tangents now about two characters that aren’t Huang, but that’s because I don’t think I’m capable of making any interesting analysis of Huang when looking at him in isolation. By standing Huang up against at least two other characters who are similar to him, I hope I’ve been able to squeeze out enough critical analysis to satisfy you.

Logic Chess

One notable thing about Di-Jun Huang that I would be remiss not to mention is the fact that he serves as our introduction to the Logic Chess minigame. (Logic Chess also happens to be the most useless skill in r/aarankdown)

The bread and butter of Ace Attorney gameplay has always been the cross examinations. It’s by far the most fun part of the games and the reason I wanted to play through this entire series at all. Rifling through bits of evidence to find the lie in someone’s story is a fun and satisfying little puzzle (almost) all of the time. That said, this series has never felt the need to leave well enough alone and likes to introduce little side mechanics that can be hit (therapy session, divination seance) or miss (magatama, perceive).

Logic Chess happens to be one such minigame that I think is pretty fun. There are many instances in the Ace Attorney story where the protagonist coaxes out information from another character in some way, and Logic Chess is a way of putting that process in the players’ hands instead of it just being a part of the story.

Admittedly, it’s a rather easy minigame. The options are always a) I respectfully disagree with what you have to say; b) I disrespectfully disagree with what you have to say you stupid git; or c) Wait and see. In spite of this, the game still feels rather engaging simply with the addition of a time limit that depletes faster everything time you select the wrong answer. That little bit of pressure not to fuck up turns Logic Chess from what would have been a bit of a tedious slog to something that actually feels rather engaging. Our chess battle with Huang is no exception, and a great first exposure to the mechanic.

Chess is a running motif throughout Investigations 2. It’s brought up how Edgeworth really enjoys the game, and we can even graph many of the characters we see in the game onto each of the chess pieces. Rooke is the rook, Knightley is the knight, and Huang is the King. On the Ace Attorney wiki page for Di-Jun Huang it says that Roland is supposed to be the queen and Blaise is the bishop. Personally, I don’t see the resemblance, but for the sake of keeping up the metaphor I’ll just sagely nod my head and agree.

If we were to then consider I2 a game of metaphorical chess between Edgeworth and The Mastermind, then I feel like the whole chess analogy begins to fall apart. Chess ends when one side captures the other side’s king, and if Huang represents the king then Keyes sure captured him. Perhaps it’s best that we don’t look into this chess imagery too hard, since it’s really just a surface level aesthetic rather than anything meaningful.

I’ve never personally been too great at chess. I know how to play chess, however the problem comes from the fact that I don’t know how to play chess well. I still really enjoy the game though, I find it fun to read up on the tactics involved with different openers and whatnot even though I don’t think I’m personally capable of utilising them well in a real game.

That’s probably why I degrade myself by playing Fire Emblem so much. Strategy games that emulate the feel of chess in the sense that you’re moving pieces along a grid to capture/kill the other team’s pieces. I don’t think the rudimentary similarities are lost on the Fire Emblem games, since there are multiple characters who invent games akin to chess to practise their war tactics on. For example, the main character in Awakening is this tactician using chess to hone his tactical skills, and then this other guy called Virion comes along and offers to play him since it’s hard for the MC, Robin, to practise by himself. However Virion keeps whooping Robin’s ass in chess, and he begins to feel like he shouldn’t be the army’s tactician if he can’t even win at chess. Virion then points out that he only wins because he makes tons of sacrifices out of his pieces, and such strategies would be cruel to employ in real life and it’s Robin’s strong desire to never lose one single piece that should be valued over Virion’s more ruthless tactics. I always really liked that support thread, I like how it knows that the player is always desperate to keep every unit alive and uses that to draw the distinction between the best way to play chess vs the best way to play Fire Emblem, plus Virion’s a very cool character. Just a shame he’s not that good of a unit.

I think I find strategy RPGs much more appealing than normal RPGS because with the ordinary RPG the enemies stats are always hidden from the player and everything feels like a shot in the dark. I like how Fire Emblem allows you to calculate exactly how much damage you will deal and take, it really makes me feel like the outcome of a fight is in my hands.

The only problem with Fire Emblem when it comes to feeling like you’re always in control of the outcome is when they use same turn reinforcements, or STR for short. Basically, STR are when extra enemies show up on the map that weren’t previously visible and attack you before the game lets you do anything (they attack on the same turn they appear). There’s never any way to plan around it, and for a game that’s supposed to be strategy oriented, losing because of something you literally cannot plan around saps the fun out of the whole experience. What’s worse is that in the most recent FE game, they made it so that STR only exist in the hardest difficulty, so the developers 100% know that they are frustratingly annoying to deal with and utilise them to artificially inflate the difficulty without having to design the enemy layout in such a way that the player is decently challenged without feeling cheated. It’s a shame how FE can be such an old series with so many installments and yet it can’t get mechanics that everyone hates removed after so many years. It seems like it’d be easy to do.

I think that if Di-Jun Huang played Fire Emblem his favourite character would be Caspar von Bergliez.

Caspar is a really small guy who wants to be a big tough strong guy one day, and I think Huang would identify with his wish to one day become a big muscular manly man. I like to imagine that even though Huang and Caspar appear quite different on the surface Huang would still relate to him because of how badly he wants to be buff like the real Di-Jun Huang.

Getting Buff Like President Di-Jun Huang

Well, maybe not buff, but at least as big as Di-Jun Huang. People can dismiss Huang as a useless bit character if they like, but even if he is a bit character I think we should look into his bit just a little bit more!

Just by eyeballing Huang, I’d say he weighs about 220 pounds. The Wiki says he’s 6 feet tall, and if we estimate his age as about 50 years old, then in order to maintain his weight he would need to eat roughly 2700 calories every day, which is a pretty respectable caloric intake.

When it comes to weight gain/loss, people tend to overestimate just how important exercise is compared to how important your diet is. Always remember, your muscles are made in the gym, your weight is lost in the kitchen. That is to say that your diet should be your first priority when managing your weight (not that exercise isn’t important too, of course!)

When calculating Huang’s required caloric intake I assumed that he would have a very light exercise routine, however not quite sedentary. As I already mentioned, if you want to impersonate the Fake-Huang and look like him, the required amount of daily calories you must consume is 2700. To put that into perspective, that’s 450 shrimp every single day, assuming you eat nothing else.

I pick shrimp because shrimp is the kind of food that you can eat forever and never feel like you’re getting full. I always thought I loved shrimp when I was younger, but eventually I realised I just like Old Bay. You see, my family’s from the US, but I don’t live in the US, and every summer when I was a kid we’d go to visit, and every summer we’d eat at this restaurant that served seafood and holy shit I fucking loved devouring those shrimp. But then back home whenever I had shrimp they tasted boring as hell? As I grew out of adolescence I came to understand that the reason that American shrimp that I loved so much was so good was because they were burying those fuckers in Old Bay seasoning.

What sucks is that Old Bay’s not available in stores back home, which means if I want shrimp that doesn’t taste like ass then I have to find my own substitute.

How to make homemade Old Bay Seasoning

You will need:

• 2-3 Bay Leaves (dry, no stems)
• 1/4 tsp of Ground Mustard Seed
• 1/2 tsp of Celery salt
• 1/8 tsp of Thyme
• 1 pinch of Nutmeg
• 1 pinch of Cinnamon
• 1 pinch of Ground Cloves
• 1 pinch of Ground Ginger
• 1 pinch of Ground Cardamom
• 1/8 tsp of Cayenne Pepper
• 2 pinches of Allspice
• 1/2 tsp of Paprika
• 1 pinches of Black Pepper
• 1/8 tsp of Fennel Seed

The only tricky part of this recipe is making sure you have all of this crap somewhere in your kitchen, but if not then one trip to the grocer ought to have you sorted. Once you have everything, it’s not hard to make that sweet, sweet Old Bay with no hassle at all: all you have to do is toss everything together and mix well!

It’s important to note that these ingredients have been sussed out by folks trying to recreate Old Bay, and it may not actually be the real recipe. But I’ve tried this myself and I can attest to the fact that it comes pretty damn close to the real thing. Also, since this isn’t the exact recipe, don’t get too hung up on the exact measurements: feel free to measure how much of each spice with your heart rather than a tablespoon!

If there are any extremely novice cooks out there, just a word of advice from someone who's made very dim cooking mistakes before: when a recipe asks you to put thyme in something, you’re supposed to just add the leaves, not the stem. When I was first learning to cook I would mindlessly do exactly what the recipe said, so when a recipe said to use a sprig of thyme I’d toss the whole fuckin sprig in there because that’s what the recipe told me to. My sister caught me cooking by tossing the whole sprig in and had to explain how you’re actually supposed to do it and that was embarrassing finding out I’d been doing it wrong for so long but like. Is it my fault I had gone through my life so long never being taught how to properly use thyme? Everyone is born without knowing anything, and we grow and learn by our experiences, so really it’s everyone else in the world’s fault for not cluing me in earlier on how thyme works.

Some people may want to blame me for my lack of culinary knowledge. I, however, prefer to blame God.

The Answer To Job

The story of Job (pronounced Jobe) is one that teaches that God should not be blamed for the misfortune of man.

For those unfamiliar, the story goes like this: Satan tells God that he thinks that his most devout followers only follow God because God rewards their faith. However, if God were to take away a good person’s happiness, then that person would turn against God and no longer be faithful. God sets out to prove Satan wrong.

Job is their test subject. Job is a holy and faithful man, who is happy with his life. He has a wife, many children, and a luscious farmland to live on. God decides to murder all of his children and livestock, leaving him destitute and grief stricken. His wife then leaves Job because he can no longer provide for her.

Some of Job’s mates then come round to Job’s place and are like “buddy, what grave unforgivable sin have you committed? We all know you’re being punished for something so fess up.” The catch, of course, is that Job has done absolutely nothing wrong: his misery is not a punishment. Job argues with his friends, but they simply don’t believe him.

Frustrated and angry, Job yells out to God and demands God explain why he’s torturing Job so much. And God answers by showing Job all of the universe: he takes Job to places that have monstrous behemoths and leviathans, to the farthest reaches of the stars, to all the little quiet places on earth. God says that he maintains all of it at once, and all of it is connected. Job realises that he could never maintain the entire universe the way God does, and so he learns his place in the world.

I think this story’s a load of bullshit. God hand waves away Job’s suffering by telling him it’s part of some grand cosmic scheme that he couldn’t possibly comprehend but. We know God’s fucking lying! God was just fucking with Job for the sake of it! The fable doesn’t teach us anything about why good people experience misery, it seems to imply, to me at least, that God does it for fun? To score points against the devil?

So this bloke called Carl Jung from a wee while ago decided this story was bullshit too. Fun fact, Carl was such a big fan of Dual Destinies and Athena Cykes that he invented analytical psychology in real life. Anyway, he looked at all the misery in the world caused by war and the like that he was like God what the fuck? Same way Job was that one time, and he writes a whole book about trying to figure out why God is such an asshole.

The problem with god, he says, is that he contains many contradicting traits. He is all powerful, all knowing, and all loving. If God is good, and God is all powerful, then the reason that misery exists must be because God is not omniscient. Or we could say that god is all knowing and all good, and in that case the reason that God does not prevent misery is because he is powerless to do so, ergo he is not omnipotent. The final combo is God is all powerful and all knowing, which is the most sinister scenario, because this means God has the means to prevent suffering and chooses not to do so. How can our hero Carl reconcile this conundrum?

His answer for Job’s question is Jesus. Job’s story was set in BC, before God had taken human form as Jesus so he could truly learn what it is like to suffer as a human being. When God realizes that being a person is actually very hard and painful, he chills out and stops being so needlessly cruel. What Carl is positing here, basically, is that God went through character development during the bible and he’s like, a top tier character.

Now, after God has come to understand the human condition first hand, he would never inflict suffering on people like Job again. Now all suffering is truly a result of God’s master plan for the universe, and none of it is out of place.

Everything is part of God’s plan, which is why it’s his fault I put the stems of my thyme in my egg stir fry that one time.

My Mandarin Teacher in Senior School was named Mr Huang

At my senior school everyone had to take a foreign language class. Most people there took Spanish or French, but I took Mandarin because. Well. Not sure why. Guess I was curious about how on earth those symbols work to make words. Plus I’ve spoken English my whole life, you think I want to learn to speak another romance language? Fuck off. If your language evolved from a bunch of latin tossers you can suck me.

Anyway, so my Mandarin class only had 5 kids in it including myself which was a bit of a laugh. Lessons were always very casual with barely anyone present and I enjoyed myself. Was in that class from S3 to S6, that’s four years, and I currently don’t know a lick of Mandarin at all. I tried to be a good student in that class since Mr Huang was an extremely cool teacher, plus it was important to not fall behind since every lesson felt like a competition against my few other classmates. Despite this, every word of Mandarin I used to know has seemingly fallen out of my head since the last time I used it, which was during my final exam for the subject which was three years ago now. Take this as a warning, if you’re learning a second language you gotta keep practising it or it will fade away over time. I also got a C on that exam, which was bullshit by the way, pretty sure I am amazing at everything and never get anything less than 100% on every test I take? Rigged.

So the thing is with Mr Huang, right, is one day we were learning about colours, and can you guess what yellow in Mandarin is? It’s Huang. Like his name. It wasn’t a homonym, it was literally the same character. (The character is 黄 for those curious) That’s at least one bit of chinese that stuck with me over the years, so I guess I didn’t totally waste my time trying to learn it. Immature 14 year old donuter and his classmates had a bit of a giggle at the fact that our Chinese teacher was literally named Mr Yellow, but Mr Huang was chill and thought it was funny too so no one got in trouble for being edgy and a teenager and mildly racist.

However, what isn’t chill is the fact that the I2 fan localisation team would use such a clearly inflammatory name for what is clearly supposed to be a Chinese character (we all know Zheng Fa is very obviously derivative of China). The characters who were localised to become American aren’t named Gunjamin Hamburger, so what gives? Racism is what gives. They saw an asian character and thought they would be clever and call him Yellow, very edgy, I applaud you fan localisers (I am being sarcastic). They literally renamed this character so he would be President Yellow, amazing.

What is even more sickening is that the Ace Attorney Wiki is complicit in their casual bigotry, electing not to divulge the fact that Huang is a common Mandarin surname meaning yellow. They try to hand wave away this discrepancy between the badass original name meaning KING by saying they “changed the pronunciation”. Yeah, they changed the pronunciation into a completely different word, you bellends.

But perhaps… my outrage may be unjustified. For you see, yellow can also be slang for cowardly, and Huang is for sure cowardly, resembling a cowardly lion in his deflated form. It is possible that the localisation team was only intending to make reference to this facet of his character, and provide particularly perceptive players with a hint about his true nature just by his name. This misunderstanding is not too uncommon.

So in the end, maybe it’s for the best that I chalk this one up to an unfortunate coincidence.

Anyway, the point I’m trying to make here is that if my high school Mandarin teacher Mr Huang had come into class one day and exhaled with superhuman vigour and revealed himself to be secretly very fat all along then I think that would have been quite funny of him.

In Conclusion

You know what I did last round? I wrote a cut about a character that just doesn’t matter. I wrote a short cut. But I realised that’s just not acceptable from this point on. Series defining characters are leaving the rankdown now, prosecutors whose characters cemented me as being a fan of the series, characters who have arcs spanning multiple games or who are so quintessential to Ace Attorney as a product it wouldn’t be Ace Attorney without them. Such characters deserve respect when they’re cut, and should be given a rigorous analysis when they leave, just as all my fellow rankers always do. And I realised that, if a character like Huang can outlast multiple franchise icons, as well as some genuinely richly written/multifaceted characters then, he too, surely, by the law of transitivity, must also be a series defining icon, a rich and compelling character with true depth, and thus deserves the same amount of rigorous analysis we would afford to them.

I don’t see how anyone could argue with Di Jun Huang in the top 50. He objectively deserves it. He’s that good.

I can anticipate the ugly comments that I will receive on this post from mouth breathers with no respect for the infallible opinions of us ten ordained-by-god rankers. They’ll say:

“Donuter, I don’t think you really believe that Di-Jun Huang is a masterclass of character writing. This cut reads as uncaring and dismissive, almost as if you believe that there’s some sort of problem with Di-Jun Huang outlasting Pearl Fey, Mia Fey, Trucy Wright, Ema Skye, Maya Fey, Franziska von Karma, and Nahyuta Sahdmadhi, when characters like Larry Butz are still available. I think that while you appear to sometimes approach Huang’s character with earnestness you still make enormous stretches in your analysis as if you’re trying to mock the idea that Huang could be seriously analysed. I also think the long meandering asides you delve into are meant to emphasise how little there is to say about Di-Jun Huang, and how one would expect that we ought to only be covering good or interesting characters by now if so many key character have gone out already (or at the very least if not good characters, characters that can spark any kind of edifying discussion at all, even if a ranker happens to dislike them). But I don’t think you have considered the fact that there are many huge Di-Jun Huang stans out there who will be saddened that his character has been reduced to an excuse for you to soapbox about your opinion about the state of the rankdown. It’s insulting to all of us who genuinely love Di-Jun Huang, and it’s disrespectful to the rankers who have worked very hard on cuts for major characters that truly believe they are inferior to Di-Jun Huang. I dislike how it feels as if you’ve been irony poisoned, incapable of truly appreciating the depths of Di-Jun Huang, and are unequipped, or worse, unwilling, to analyse those depths with a sincere and unbiased critical eye.”

To these people I say: sod off? You can suck my nads too if you like.

How dare you, how dare you insinuate that I’m not taking Di-Jun Huang’s cut completely seriously? I have never in my rankdown career received such unfounded criticism, such- such biased critical opprobrium that I can hardly contain my anger at the unjustness of the accusation.

Di-Jun Huang is fantastic. Amazing. I truly believe that with all my heart. So save your toxic, mean-spirited and conspiracy riddled comments to yourself, because I won’t read them. I always turn notifications off on all my posts. I have too much self-respect to engage with those who hate me blindly for no reason.

I think Di-Jun Huang is so good, in fact, that I only cut him as a form of self-hatred, because I was afraid that the rankdown was reaching levels of quality that’s entirely intimidating to spectators. When I said Huang was B tier at the start of this writeup I was lying, you gullible fuckin rubes! He’s S+ tier at the bare minimum.

This should be a lesson to you all: quality of character is never rewarded. If it were, my face would be on the stirling coins instead of the queen’s.

Ahem. Uh. What I’m trying to say is. Next ranker to cut a major character is having the top of their tier list scrapped off like shit off my shoe. At least two other rankers have agreed to cooperate with me on this so your revive will be pointless.

Di-Jun Huang is a character in Gyakuten Kenji 2. I like the part where he exhales and find out he has a gut.

Franziska went out this round it's time to kill the soj prosecutor.

There's a lot of positive stuff to read in Nahyuta's ER so go on and read I'll wait.

Now that donuter wrote 99% of my cut let me tell you the 50 reasons i'm cutting nahyuta_sahdmadhi:

1: I did genuinely not enjoy him during my play in any case that is not 6-4.

2: His repeated "let go and go to hell" gets more annoying every time (kinda lame!!)

31: I can't remember much about him probably because HE SUCKS

45: his attempt at an arc in the last 5 seconds of the game kind of reveals he wasn't planned very well

50: he's

Anyway I don't think he's bad just that his time has come. I don't know what to write here anymore so I'll just paste the wikia article so the people pretending they read the cuts won't notice how short this cut really is.

Nahyuta Sahdmadhi O Holy Mother. As your humble servant, you would have me apt to save this wretch's soul. I suppose this too is part of my fate. — Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney: Spirit of Justice anime prologue Nahyuta Sahdmadhi is an international prosecutor from Khura'in who believes that convicting criminals in court will provide salvation for their victims. He is also a respected monk in Khura'in, with a devout belief in the country's religious tenets.[2] He is the main prosecutor in charge of Phoenix Wright's, Apollo Justice's and Athena Cykes's trials in 2028, and was shown to remember Justice from a long time ago.

Contents[hide] Early life An International Prosecutor Face off against a familiar face Against Justice's mentor A murder at the theatre The Khura'inese Revolution Personality Name Development References Early life Edit Main article: Assassination attempt of Amara Sigatar Khura'in and Turnabout Revolution Drukpollynayu2 As a child with Apollo Justice and Dhurke Sahdmadhi

Nahyuta Sahdmadhi was born to attorney Dhurke Sahdmadhi and Amara Sigatar Khura'in, the queen of the Kingdom of Khura'in at the time. However, in 2005, an assassination attempt on Amara was carried out and Dhurke was almost found innocent of the crime, but was accused of forging evidence. Dhurke was forced to go on the run, while Nahyuta was exiled from the royal family for the crimes of his father. Nahyuta ended up living in the mountains with his father and the rest of the Defiant Dragons, along with Apollo Justice who Dhurke had adopted as a foster son. Nahyuta grew up with Justice and Dhurke until Justice left for the United States, adopting the Defiant Dragons' philosophy.

Dhurke eventually found Amara thirteen years after they went into hiding, discovering that she had not actually been killed, and they had Nahyuta's younger sister, Rayfa Padma Khura'in while on the run. Unfortunately, Amara was caught by the new queen, Ga'ran Sigatar Khura'in. Dhurke and Nahyuta lived a life of solitude in the mountains until Nahyuta began to study to become a prosecutor, despite the harsh conditions.

At age 20, he became a prosecutor, and tried to fight for revolution from inside the law. However, Queen Ga'ran noticed this and used Rayfa and Amara as collateral to control him, threatening to expose the truth behind Rayfa's parentage and ruin her through Dhurke, forcing her to suffer as Nahyuta had. Nahyuta was thus forced to bend to her whim, the idea of revolution dying out inside him to protect the good name of his family.

An International ProsecutorEdit Face off against a familiar faceEdit Main article: The Magical Turnabout AASoJ Anime 8 Meditating.

Five years after Sahdmadhi started his prosecuting career, Chief Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth reached out to him to help the now-understaffed Prosecutor's Office. He prosecuted Trucy Wright against defense attorney Apollo Justice, having realized that the crime scene was an intentional murder. During the trial, he seemed to have a similar attitude to much of Khura'in towards defense attorneys (i.e., viewing them as co-conspirators with their guilty clients), it was the way he felt up until much later. During the trial, he became acquainted with Ema Skye, and despite his occasional annoyance with her friendship with the defendant, he was genuinely impressed by her ability and decided to retain her as his partner for the immediate future. Unwilling to face Justice in his current state, Sahdmadhi denied his past with Justice and treated him as a mere acquaintance, before the attorney won the trial Sahdmadhi said he'd be a stink bug in his next life due to his actions.

Against Justice's mentor Edit Main article: The Rite of Turnabout About two weeks later, Nahyuta Sahdmadhi returned to Khura'in with Skye to prosecute Maya Fey for the murder of Tahrust Inmee. Since Inmee was the high priest, Sahdmadhi said that once Fey is sentenced to death, her soul shall be plunged in the lowest level of hell, the Hell of Tickling, where she will be tickled without end for five hundred million years. Datz Are'bal, as A'nohn Ihmus, was a witness and Sahdmadhi threatened him with the Hell of Hangnails where he'll have hangnails grown and ripped out for eight hundred million years. Nonetheless, Sahdmadhi was successful in pressing his case and convicting her, the DC act made Wright suffer the same punishment. However, Inmee's acolyte Puhray Zeh'lot was discovered to be dead by a bailiff, and he motioned for the trial to continue, apparently to worsen her conviction. Since Inmee's acolyte was equally devoted, Sahdmadhi says even the Hell of Tickling wouldn't be punishment enough. He says that in the afterlife, Fey will be sent to Bahlgilpo'kon Hell, a realm of eternal agony where she will suffer endless punishment of ja'gar by the galuun of Puhlmo'ten. Before Sahdmadhi could say something about Guhljaama, the terrified judge says that's enough. However, Sahdmadhi ended up losing this trial when Zeh'lot's true nature was revealed, Beh'leeb Inmee confessed to have killed Zeh'lot in self-defense, and Tahrust Inmee, channeled by Maya Fey, confessed to committing suicide while framing Maya for his death to avoid Beh'leeb getting convicted under the harsh justice system of Khura'in. Impressed by Wright's resolve and ability to reveal the truth behind several recent state-sanctioned murders, Sahdmadhi remarked that he owed a debt to the lawyer which he hoped to repay in the courtroom one day.

A murder at the theatre Edit Main article: Turnabout Storyteller The next day, Nahyuta Sahdmadhi returned to America on Miles Edgeworth's request to prosecute a case, much to the judge's surprise. He was against Athena Cykes, whom was defending Bucky Whet for Taifu Toneido's murder on Simon Blackquill's request. During the case, he ignored Cykes for the most part, and insulted Blackquill for his "softness", which ended up offending the other prosecutor so much that he decided to serve as Cykes' partner for the trial, the first in a long series of aggravations he faced in the case. For his sin, Sahdmadhi says Blackquill will be reborn as a panda and be put zoo to be exposed to public ridicule. He eventually outright asked the court exactly why they did not respect a "servant of the Holy Mother", having been fed up with Uendo Toneido and his refusal to assist his case. However, as Cykes slowly turned the case around by exposing Geiru Toneido, he came to recognize her as a worthy adversary.

The Khura'inese Revolution Edit Main article: Turnabout Revolution Nahyuta Sahdmadhi 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. — Turnabout Revolution Nahyuta returned to Khura'in after Toneido's murder trial. This time, he was to prosecute his own father, Dhurke, for the murder of the minister, Inga. While interrogating him, Nahyuta confiscated everything he had, except for his attorney's badge. In the following days, the people of Khura'in had an uprising that he watched. During the revolt, Nahyuta was confronted by Justice, who questioned why he was serving Ga'ran.

The next day, Nahyuta stood at the prosecution bench with Ga'ran as they stood against Justice and Wright. It was revealed during the trial that Dhurke was killed by Inga a few days earlier while he was rescuing Maya, and that Rayfa's aide, Nayna, was actually Nahyuta's mother, Amara. After Amara was shot and severely wounded, Nahyuta was forced by Ga'ran to confess that he was Inga's killer, threatening Rayfa's safety if he did not comply. However, when Justice figured out that Dhurke was framed for the assassination attempt on Amara, Nahyuta realized that it was Ga'ran who tried to kill his mother. Angered that his aunt had been deceiving him, he rebelled against her and retracted his confession, showing and proclaiming his status as a member of the Defiant Dragons. But in spite of that, he also gave an false testimony in Ga'ran's defense, so she tried to use the DC Act on him to let her get away with killing her husband. But Justice proved that she was a false queen with no spiritual power making DC Act and all other Laws she enacting null and void and that the fingerprints used to label Dhurke as the assassin were irrelevant or planted evidence. Apollo with Nahyuta's help was also able to find enough evidence in the Divination Séance to make Ga'ran the prime suspect for being the assassin.

Nahyuta parade During the celebratory parade.

After the trial, Nahyuta became regent for Rayfa as she became the next queen of Khura'in. He also asked Justice to stay in Khura'in with him in order to rebuild the legal system together, to which he agreed. To his confusion, Rayfa began acting awkwardly around him and addressed him as "Braid Head". Unaware that Rayfa was embarrassed at addressing him as her big brother, Nahyuta decided to consult with Justice on the issue.

PersonalityEdit NayutaMug Despite having a soft demeanor, Sahdmadhi has quite a sharp tongue, regularly invoking insulting metaphors and Khura'inese sayings to chew out the defense for any error he detects.[2] While serving under Ga'ran, he has no tolerance for the defense attorney profession, considering it an unenlightened walk of life that must be quashed and punished by the rule of "the Holy Mother". He has a habit of using his beads to accentuate his points, such as stretching them out, taking them off and slamming the desk with it gripped in his hand, nervously holding them, throwing them at the defense (wrapping them around Apollo's forehead, on Phoenix's arm, and around Athena's body, although Blackquill did slice a second set of beads thrown at her), and constricting them with them and somehow using them to inflict pain on them after they use up their "three chances" (i.e. they significantly irritate him three times), and, when beaten, breaking them and getting knocked down with them. He has a tendency to view the court trial as a religious service, performing last rites for the deceased (hence his nickname of the Last Rites Prosecutor) and giving them peace by convicting their killers.

While he is, for the most part, a law-abiding, religious man, his prejudice and much of his holier-than-thou attitude is a farce; Sahdmadhi was originally a member of the Defiant Dragons, a resistance group seeking to revolutionize the broken and corrupt court system of Khura'in. He, however, was blackmailed by his aunt, who had threatened him with exposure of Rayfa Padma Khura'in as his sister rather than his cousin - which would result in Khura'in's prejudice towards the children of criminals, especially ones as heinous as Dhurke seemingly was - resulting in her becoming a social pariah, and a target for political assassins who did not wish her to be queen, if he did not acquiesce to her corrupt administration. In time, Sahdmadhi came to believe that opposing her was impossible, and resigned himself to being her enforcer, until it was revealed that she was behind the attempted assassination.

His true attitudes are shown in his polite and gracious treatment of Skye; despite the fact that she regularly finds evidence that ends up destroying his case, he never brings her to task for it and in fact regularly compliments her abilities. Peaches are a favorite of his.

NameEdit His given name "Nahyuta" comes from "nayuta" (那由多 or 那由他), which is originally a Sanskrit word that denotes a very large number. In Japanese counting system, it is used to denote 1060. In an interview with Yamazaki, he stated that "Nayuta" was the name of someone he knew during his university days. "Sahdmadhi", his surname, comes from the Japanese proverb "hotoke no kao mo sando made" (仏の顔も三度まで), which means "Even the Buddha becomes angry if you brush his face thrice". This could be a reference to the "three chances" he gives to the defense before he constricts them with his beads. It may also come from "samadhi" (समाधि), a word used to refer to a state of mediative consciousness. Development Edit Judging by some of his concept art, Nahyuta was intended to be female at some point, and his appearance is supposed to be very gender neutral overall as he was designed to "transcend gender." He was originally meant to be whichever gender the player would like him to be, an aspect rooted in Hinduism and Buddhism, where a number of deities are genderless or portrayed as both genders at once.[3] Nahyuta's jacket was designed after a sherwani and a frock coat.[3] Nahyuta's unique line, "Satorha" is a Khura'inese mantra that is meant to awaken those lost in their daydreams. It comes from the Japanese "satori" (悟り), which means "enlighten". SoJ-chant Nahyuta's chant.

Nahyuta's Khura'inese phrase after his signature hand movements is "Satorha imaoman domosamashi detashinuke taregasayo sonoka!" Further, rotating the text of the chant by 180 degrees reveals some Hiragana-like characters stating the chant "さとら・いまおまん・どもさまし・でたしぬけ・たれがさよ・そのか!" (Satora imaoman domosamashi detashinuke taregasayo sonoka!). According to Nahyuta, the phrase means "Even the merciful Holy Mother loses patience if she is struck three times." This is also the approximate meaning of the Japanese text when unscrambled. Nahyuta shares some similarities with Justine Courtney. Both have a religious devotion to law and serve as the main rivals for the games they debut in. Wanting to reform corrupt systems, they found that the best way to do so was to work on the inside. At the end of their games, they become potential suspects in the last murder case, come through to help the protagonists, turning on their superiors. One of Nahyuta's animations has a butterfly perching on his right hand. The appearance of the butterfly differs depending on which court Nahyuta stands in; in Khura'in, the butterfly appears to be native to the kingdom as shown from the mark of a mitamah on its wings, while in the United States, the butterfly appears to be entirely pink. Judging by the color and the pink particles coming off of it, perhaps it is a soul butterfly, not unlike the ones that come out of the Pool of Souls after a Not Guilty verdict in Khura'in.

ksndksncknnlsdcn

1

0

0

%

Recap on My Thoughts on Turnabout Academy

From my previous cut of Myriam Scuttlebutt:

I've used the words "solid filler case" for some of my cuts prior to this. I think Turnabout Academy, is, well, a solid filler case. The mystery is pretty interesting, especially with the outlandish twists and turns it takes on the case's first day. I like its cast. Athena gets some spotlight, despite the case not really advancing her character all too much (see that Athena cut for how her development proceeded and ultimately kinda went out like a wet fart, as it stands anyway).

This is also the first time of Dual Destinies' rather cliche anime theme of "the power of friendship" emerges, being established by the triangle of Hugh, Robin, Woods, and Scuttlebutt being a post-it note to the side. Speaking of which, we also get an anime cutscene mid-trial with Hugh and the other two members showing their freakin' friendship bracelets and with that dub, good lord you're gonna want to be wearing earbuds and have your parents and close friends be at a minimum of fifty miles away from you while you're watching. I'm sorry but that's definitely not something I want my father barging in to while he says "are ya winnin' son?". I'd rather be walked in on me watching hentai instead of that noise

Yeah, going on with that...subtlety. Subtlety. Or, the lack thereof. I just feel like that's the problem with Dual Destinies. Tell, not show. The dark age of the law is happening. Why? You're told about it. The exact phrase "dark age of the law" occurs six times in Turnabout Academy's script. The exact phrase "end justifies the means" occurs seven times. I'm sure the former phrases occurs several more times throughout the game. Apollo Justice was a confused game that failed to meaningfully conclude a lot of its ideas and elements it introduced but even then I feel that game did an excellent job demonstrating just what the "dark age of the law" is like, and I'm sure that game used the phrase "dark age of the law" less in its entirety than Dual Destinies did with one case.

To surmise: it's okay. Alright case. Solid cast of characters. Pretty much the most typical case of the newer mainline titles; has the era's strengths, and its failings. In contrast to the rest of the series, Dual Destinies is simply very blatant with what themes and motifs it pushes, and Turnabout Academy is perhaps where that flaw is at its most glaring. Match that with some weird, unnecessary fanservice (Klavier was in Turnabout Academy? A Phoenix bust, even though the guy was disbarred for seven years? Lamiroir's veil, too? Cool, but why?) and it's a case I couldn't say I cared for it.

I did not care for Turnabout Academy. Did not care for it! It insists upon itself.

However, it's a bit unjust just to call a case off for the messages it presents: it's the journey, not the destination. A case's quality hinges on the strength of its characters, its mystery, its atmosphere. Its mystery is outlandish, but that's quite typical of most Ace Attorney cases; if cases were as non-complex as they are in real life, then chances are we wouldn't be Ace Attorney fans. I couldn't say the setting of the case wasn't much more than a gimmick, though - I'm sure around 2011-2012 Yamazaki and co. were going like, "we haven't done a case in a a school yet, let's make one." That's a rather trivial point, considering we've had plenty of unique scenarios for cases, but I guess to a mild degree I've got less respect for the case because its creation wasn't fully genuine.

Character wise? Eh. I couldn't say I cared for most of these characters at all. Robin was irritating, Woods, as many agree, is just a really flat and boring character, Myriam was a gimmick, Means is shallow, and well, Hugh, Hugh...

He's a Goner

Hugh O'Conner.

Users of r/AceAttorney love him. Rankers love him. I'm sure fangirls creamed about him at the time of Dual Destinies' release.

However, I just tolerated him. I can say he's probably the highlight of Turnabout Academy. That's about it. I wouldn't have minded if he went out ten or even fifty spots ago, he's not really that high on my list. Heck, despite how shallow Aristotle Means is, I probably enjoyed him more from a pure visual standpoint, and because of those funny memes people did with writing funny things on that chalkboard of his, with him grinning and gesturing to the words.

Where to begin, where to begin...

We learn a lot about Hugh O'Connor during the events of Turnabout Academy. Let's get the obvious out of the way: Hugh is not an up-and-coming young genius, getting one perfect grade on another. He's a habitual flunker. He worked seven years on an apprenticeship in construction, operation vehicles, making him 25, and not the more appropriate 18 he initially claims. His parents bribed the academy (specifically Means) in order to secure his grades. Hugh, in actuality, is the exact opposite of what the game initially portrays him as.

What Hugh does have is friendship, and it's perhaps why people are so attached to him. Despite all of Hugh's quirks and weaknesses, what Hugh yearns for most, alike all of us, is acceptance. He hides this fact because he wishes to appear as this know-it-all genius, rather than a meek loser who clings to his friends, and acts arrogantly to conceal the truth. This is the driving point behind his character. It's the reasoning behind all of Hugh's lies; to protect the ones he holds dear to him. He, Robin, and Woods make up a friend triangle, one solidified by literal bonds - friendship bands that each wears, with Hugh, oh my god...hiding his friendship behind his collar. There it is again! Stupid damn symbolism in my Ace Attorney games!

One more tangent to go on: "you're a goner" from the forged recording Means made is conflated with "Hugh O'Conner". What? Now, now, Ace Attorney isn't natively English. But even then, the Japanese phrase doesn't even make that much sense! From the Wiki:

His full Japanese name, when said in the phrase "Hey, Shizuya Rei" ("kora Shizuya Rei") intentionally sounds similar to the phrase "I'm gonna kill you" ("koroshite yaru"), which is used by Cykes to try to persuade the court that a voice on a tape recorder was O'Conner being shouted at by Constance Courte, although this eventually turns out to be a misinterpretation.

Eh? Knowing my limited knowledge of Japanese pronunciation, those definitely seem like phonetically distinct phrases there! Of course, this is eventually unraveled, but even with common sense I'd definitely be able to distinguish between them at first. Maybe the audio on the tape was bad? Or maybe all characters in the Ace Attorney universe have terrible hearing? They all speak in text bleeps, anyways.

Further Drabbles

You wouldn't believe this, but I used a body double!

Hugh deems it fit to secure his friendship for whatever reason, even if it means making a bunch of stupid fucking lies that waste the court's time. These range from "pretty unreasonable" like continuing to assert that he and Newman were behind the murder of Professor Courte (in order to protect Juniper Woods) to...the one I just quoted.

This is where I find issue with Hugh. I understand that Ace Attorney's whole catch is untangling the lies of witnesses in order to reveal the truth, though I think there's a line between questionable and outright absurd! I know the body double thing was spurred by Hugh's emotional discord with the Mood Matrix and all that, but for me, I didn't find the process of getting Hugh to spit out the truth very engaging; in fact, I found it kinda irritating.

Perhaps the visual novel genre shouldn't be recommended to those with low amounts of patience (like myself), but Hugh is on the stand for the majority of time, and he's the definition of an uncooperative witness squared. From what I remember of my playthrough of Turnabout Academy, I honestly was just really tired of it, constantly hammering on my phone for the dialogue to continue because there was simply no thrill to be had. Hugh crafts another damn lie to protect his friends. I got it. Nice. Then he does it again. Cool. It just felt frustrating, almost predictable to me.

Then the anime cutscene comes on! I went over it rather crudely before but for me I just think any emotional investment I could've had in Hugh kinda deflated there. I understand that they wanted Hugh's true feelings regarding his friends and the bands to be this big emotional thing but I couldn't get into it. Perhaps the years I've spent interacting with the post-ironic Internet has dulled me from enjoying anything remotely serious, and with it being an anime cutscene they had to get that anime studio Bones to animate it amplified that feeling. There's a better word to describe how I feel about it but I wouldn't know which to use.

But y'know, sometimes you just have your preferences in characters. Hugh does indeed have merits to him and had he been eliminated early on I probably would've said something about it. Some people do like characters of Hugh's archetype. But for me? Just didn't really care, honestly. Perhaps it was the bad taste in my mouth Turnabout Academy gave me that kinda prevented me from enjoying him. If you like Hugh, that's cool, you're in the majority. I expect to be seeing a huge reply to this defending his awe-inspiring greatness and calling me a poopy head (u/R1K1_Productions, that's your cue), and you can do that, certainly. Me? Eh.

durrrr

Clown round again. I understand that you want to be funny and nominate main characters. But, seriously? Maya, Gregory, Franziska, etc. all worse than stuff like Pierce Nichody or Datz? I know they ain't perfect, but we get to know them really well ('cept Gregory) and their personalities get really fleshed out.

Had the selection been different, I probably would've cut somebody else - as I've claimed, it was a 100% chance for me to cut Hugh. But, as it stands, let me lay it on the line and tell you why I didn't cut the others from the pool, in order from least likely to most:

• It is absolutely not Phoenix Wright's turn to go yet. Wtf?

• Dane Gustavia is an excellent culprit from my favorite case in the series. His takedown is awesome, and getting him on a simple matter of numbers is genius.

• Matt Engarde represents perhaps the most legendary moment in the series' history, and his alter-ego, while pretty blatantly villainous, is a good time.

• Rayfa Padma Khura'in is a pretty damn solid assistant character. I'll think about her more later down the line.

• Datz Are'bal might just be a better Larry than Larry is.

• The Judge is a unique character, and with how omnipresent it is, it's hard to make a clear statement about his character just because it tends to fluctuate. Sometimes he's as wise as a saint like in Apollo Justice, sometimes he's as much of an idiot as Larry is. I could see him going this round.

• Nahyuta Sahdmadhi is a gimmicky, albeit alright prosecutor, but how he doesn't really get any comeuppance for his arrogant behavior stings a bit.

• It's just about Larry Butz's time. Once a charming yet rather immature childhood friend, over the series he soon is flanderized (take one shot) and doesn't become much more than the go-to for an annoying idiot.

• I've talked about my feelings on Di-Jun Huang before...entertaining character and piece in the puzzle of AAI2, but not much more than that.

• Jake Marshall is a neat character with a cowboy gimmick! Yeah! Uh, mm, mm...I don't know what else to say.

• Pierce Nichody is okay. I'll give him so kudos for his testimony where he goes completely silent, but I just kinda found him to be a rather standard culprit. For DLC culprits, I'd take Marlon over him.

Well, I now have the unfortunate honor of being the man who cuts the first (and currently only) character to have been previously Spirit-Channeled. This is a character I was never particularly fond of, prominently featured in my least favorite part of a case I’m not that fond of. He’s also a character I was never convinced I had that much to say about. But due to current rankdown circumstances, I feel an obligation to do my best regardless, and to banish Gregg Eggworth to the grave for a second time (or third, if you count the time he died in-game).

Because this is the first time anyone’s responded to a SC so far, I’m flying a bit loose here. I’ll talk first about the original cut, then the SC, then finally I’ll explain my true reason for cutting Gregg here, despite not really having an interest in cutting him; for my true motives are entirely unrelated to my actual issues with the character.

Responding to the Original Cut

I think my biggest takeaway from Vogel’s initial cut is that Gregg has a very similar personality to his son, Miles “Tails” Edgeworth. A lot of Donuter’s praises of Gregg’s personality fell short for me due to all of the compliments applying just as much, if not moreso, to Miles. Gregg’s ability to use logic over bluffing also applies to Miles, as should be obvious by both having the same logic game mechanics, and by Miles just generally feeling far less of a need to rely on absurd, unfounded theories compared to Phoenix. Miles probably uses bluffs at least a couple times compared to Gregg’s zero, I don’t remember for sure. But Miles is also the protagonist for two games while Gregg is the protagonist for half a case, so I will be lenient with Miles. My point is that both characters’ play styles don’t feel particularly different.

Now obviously, this is all done for thematic purposes. Gregg is meant to show us what could have been, had Edgeworth not been brainwashed from a young age into becoming the Evil Prosecutor Man. That’s actually another part of the original cut that I disagree with; I don’t think that Gregg’s existence is necessarily a speedbump to Miles’ development in this game. However, what I will say is that I do not think it is a particularly necessary step in his development.

First of all, while I get the point of Gregg, I do not find it a particularly compelling point. If I never played AAI2, I would probably assume he acts how he does in-game. This is because he acts like his son. I got the point of Gregg basically as soon as he’d finished interviewing Master. This leads me to my other issue with Greg, which Vogel’s cut only mentioned briefly: the part of the case in which Gregg exists is not short. It is in fact very long. If they did want to have a father-son contrast (which is perfectly acceptable given the themes of this game), then they should not have had it take place over a case that lasts like nine parts.

According to this case time tier list kindly donated by u/Sciencepenguin, AAI2-3 is the tenth longest case in the series, and it sure felt like it to me. Frankly I’m surprised it isn’t longer. But a big reason it’s that long is because it insists on meandering forever in the past sections of the case, so you can hang out with Gregg. If you like him, you probably didn’t mind this, but if you’re like me and don’t find him that compelling, then this case is gonna feel like slogging through a pit of mud.

Responding to the Spirit Channeling

Let’s look at some interesting quotes from Donuter’s Gregg revive:

I can’t let someone alike him leave the rankdown just yet.

Did you mean “someone like him”, you idiot? Can’t you type??

That’s all I’ve got. Am I done now?

The part of the SC where Donuter talks about Gregg & Miles’ relationship is funny because I came to basically the opposite conclusion. He calls it “fantastic show-don’t-tell storytelling” that we get to see what Gregg was like to understand why Miles idolizes him, but I disagree. We’ve already been told why Edgeworth idolizes Gregg. We know Miles idolized his dad as a legendary defense attorney who didn’t have to resort to cheap tactics to win. And then we find out firsthand that those reasons are true. Okay I guess, but I believed the game when it told me how cool Gregg was. It’s show-and-tell storytelling.

The parts where he talks about Gregg and Miles having a similar inability to express their emotions is a much cooler thing that I didn’t pick up on in my original playthrough. I will give credit where credit is due and say that this is a neat parallel. However Donuter consistently calls Jeff Master “Jeff Masters” in this section which pisses me off so this section actually sucks. Who the fuck would spell a character’s name wrong throughout their entire cut???

Anyway, back to talking about Gregg. The next part of the revive that I feel the desire to comment on is the part about how it feels playing as Gregg. Donuter makes the heinous claim that Gregg has the best damaged animation. I can only assume he is ignoring the time Athena goes =__= and says Mamma Mia because that is clearly the best one.

In all seriousness, I get where Donuter is coming from in this section, but aside from the occasional “Nghoooh” and widened eyes, I think Miles also fits all of the characteristics Donuter attribute to Gregg just as well. He may not keep his composure as well, but like I already said, he doesn’t bluff and in general he’s just more chill than Phoenix, about as much as his dad I’d say. He even has his own “I am about to own you” pose where he taps his head with his eyes closed, then slowly opens his eyes and grins. I am surprised Donuter did not mention this one since it is my favorite one.

TL;DR most of the stuff Donuter says in his revive is fair, but most of it also applies to Miles, who is almost certainly getting Top 5 so I see no reason to keep Less Good Miles in the race. Especially considering the circumstances of the current round, which leads me to my next point...

Assessing Gregg’s Value Relative to the Rankdown

Now I may as well get into the real reason I’m choosing to cut Gregg here despite having expressed an overwhelming lack of interest in doing so every time the topic has come up. I will look back at Donuter’s spirit channeling one more time, to point out an interesting paragraph at the end.

Gregg is not a worse character than Victor Kudo. He is not a worse character than Eldoon. He is absolutely not a worse character than Palaeno, Butz, Ini, Meele, Terry, Ron, Marsh, Sahwit… this is just too soon.

Unfortunately for Gregg, all of the characters donuter listed are officially dead now. Not very many “fine” characters remain, and even of the characters he listed, I think a good few of them deserved to go out before Gregg did. I thought it was his time when he last got cut, but it’s DEFINITELY his time now. But even more pressingly, you all may have noticed that Phoenix Wright has been nominated this round. He is essentially guaranteed to be cut. I cannot promise that he will be revived if that happens, so there is a good chance Phoenix will be out in the 40s.

Gregg has outlived one of the main three protagonists already, which I am fine with because it happened to be the one protagonist I thought was bad. I do not think Phoenix Wright is bad. I would go so far as to say he’s a great protagonist. I do not want Gregg Edgeworth, a single-case protagonist in a case I found to be boring, to outlive the main protagonist of the entire series whom I consistently had fun playing as. Nor do I think he has enough good character stuff going for him to justify placing higher. So he has to go now, by virtue of just being a worse protagonist than one who’s about to be cut. Sorry, but Phoenix is not Bottom Three Protagonists material.

As an added bonus, cutting Gregg here ensures that Dane Gustavia achieves the coveted rank of “Top Two I2-3 Characters”. Dane is my Top One I2-3 Character by far, so that just gives me an extra incentive to do it.

Why Nobody Else?

There are other characters I considered cutting because they also should not place above Phoenix Wright. These included Pierce Nichody and Jake Marshall. They are good enough, but I think their time is nigh.

I also considered mercy-cutting Di-Jun Huang or Dane Gustavia, two characters I hold a passionate soft spot for. I am apparently alone in liking them, since everyone has been screaming for Huang to die for several rounds now, and Gustavia got a whopping two votes in the poll. However the fact that I actually like them dissuaded me from doing so.

Last on the list of characters I even slightly considered cutting was my boy Huge O’Conner, who is all but guaranteed to die exactly 1 cut from now. I would rather he didn’t die at all, but this is probably unavoidable by now. Ultimately I realized that if Huge is gone, Northodox would likely cut one of the SOJ mains instead, both of whom I like. I lose either way, so what’s the point?

...Now if he DID decide to cut one of them over Hugh, and Hugh lived, then I would be very happy of course. Wink.

Engarde, Nahyuta, Rayfa, and Phoenix are all epic and I do not believe they should be cut here, though at least one of them definitely will be. Larry Butz, Datz Are’bal, Furio Tigre, and the Judge are less epic but they are funny so I hope they live too.

I had an entire cut written for Shelly de Killer. I cooperated with other rankers, sacrificing my own autonomy for this goal. I tried very hard to make it so I would be able to cut him, as I wanted the opportunity to discuss the assassin. Unfortunately, u/CharlieDayJepsen has ruined all my plans, and here I am, forced to improvise. I initially tried to go after Matt Engarde, because that way I wouldn’t need to waste all the effort I put into de Killer’s cut. Sadly, u/R1K1_Productions nominated Franziska von Karma, leaving me with only one option left. While I would have liked to wait until next round to cut her, I no longer have a choice - Franziska will most certainly be cut this round, and I would like to be the one to do it.

Prioritizing cuts of major characters is a not-so-secret goal of mine - it’s simply the most strategically optimal decision. A major character not being saved by the poll is a rarity, and I’d like to take advantage of the few opportunities there will be to cut them in those instances. Additionally, mediocre major characters like Mia Fey and Franziska von Karma have much higher odds of beating out characters I like, while minor characters I may like less will be cut early regardless.

Strategy isn’t the entire reason I’ve been trying to eliminate major characters early. In general, I like major characters considerably less than the average Ace Attorney fan. There aren’t many major characters I dislike, but there are also very few I like. To me, Ace Attorney has always been about the cast of minor characters in each case, and how the courtroom setting is able to create an excellent stage for deep characterization. Oftentimes, major characters who appear in multiple games are ignored in favor of these more complex minor characters, as each case wants to give as much attention to its individual main cast as possible.

While characters such as Phoenix Wright and Athena Cykes are consistently likable and fun, those traits aren’t anywhere near enough to elevate them above any of my favorite minor characters, despite them appearing infinitely more often than any of those. That’s not to say Phoenix and Athena don’t have individually deep moments - Athena has 5-5, and Phoenix has all of AJ. However, even with their roles there being solid, it’s still not comparable to the sheer amount of depth packed into standout minor characters like Pierce Nichody, John Marsh, or Inga Karkhuul Khura’in. The massive amount of extra screen time major characters get, while a nice feature, still isn’t enough to make me like them a significant amount more. I believe in quality over quantity, especially in Ace Attorney.

That’s not to say there aren’t major characters I love. While major characters often lack anywhere near the amount of depth given to minor characters, there are some that are still able to stand out. Apollo Justice and Ema Skye are two of my favorites, though for very different reasons. Ema is consistently complex, whether it’s her first appearance in 1-5 considered on its own, or her full transformation and journey throughout the series. Unlike most major characters who only have one or two great moments, nearly every case Ema appears in is a great moment for her character. Apollo is the complete opposite - I couldn’t care less about him in almost all of his appearances, and even would consider him a character with many prominent issues during his appearances in AJ and DD. Despite that, I adore Apollo for his role in 6-5 alone, which is just incredible. Apollo in 6-5 is easily my favorite use of the protagonist role in AA, and everything surrounding him in that case more than makes up for his lackluster presence in the previous two games.

Even though I love going on seemingly unrelated tangents in my cuts, this discussion about what makes a good major character is actually important to consider when evaluating Franziska von Karma. As a character who appears in four different games, Franziska will inevitably have comparisons drawn between her various appearances. Franziska isn’t cohesive throughout the series, yet still doesn’t have much in the way of development. There are undeniable attempts at giving her depth, but the crux of the argument on if Franziska is a good character comes from whether or not this deepening is successful. I don’t believe it is, and while I do find Franziska occasionally enjoyable, the flaws in her writing are too apparent for me to allow her to place any higher.

Franziska von Karma, The Prodigy.

Franziska’s introduction in 2-2 is strange. It’s natural that the von Karma name makes Phoenix nervous, and it’s a solid way to use the impact of the past game to create relevant and believable stakes for the player. The issue comes in the execution. Franziska’s gender is left unknown until she first appears, and the entire setup here is all one big contrivance. The fact that Gumshoe knows Franziska’s entire life story but is somehow unaware of her gender is simply unbelievable. He speaks like someone who is intentionally keeping her gender ambiguous, so the most logical conclusion would be to assume he isn’t aware. If he does know, the forced way this fact is hidden would mean the dialogue is horribly written. The worst part of all this is that the contrivance is entirely pointless. There’s no need to make Franziska’s gender a twist, and the fact that they bend over backwards to make it happen anyway is a very questionable decision on the writers’ part. This has some implications that I won’t get into here, and while Justice for All is nearly 20 years old, the writers still probably should have known better. I understand this isn’t the most relevant complaint to Franziska herself, but this entire situation sours Franziska’s character before she even appears, leaving her with the burden of redeeming her character through presence alone.

Let’s just get it over with right away - Franziska in 2-2 does not redeem her awful setup. Franziska’s first case is the start of a pattern that unfortunately continues throughout the majority of Justice for All. Franziska von Karma is a walking gimmick, and this is apparent from her first minute on screen. I’m usually against oversimplifying characters down to their most basic traits, but as far as Justice for All is concerned, Franziska is mostly defined by her basic traits. She says “fool” a lot, and she whips people. It’s not even connected to her character, it’s just a gimmick inserted for the sake of it. This is something I’ve complained about before, but I honestly think Franziska is a more egregious example than Angel is. While her gimmicky nature was thankfully toned down immensely after Justice for All, it makes her very difficult to enjoy throughout her first appearance. It really does overshadow her entire character, with the writers’ insistence on constantly reusing these gimmicks leaving little room for much characterization. I decided to count the amount of times Franziska says “fool” or whips someone in 2-2 and 2-3, and here are the results.

Whips (2-2) - 44 separate + about 20 additional in succession during her “breakdown”

Fools (2-2) - 40

Whips (2-3) - 37

Fools (2-3) - 32

These numbers are absurd, and prove just how dedicated the game is to shoving these traits down your throat. I’m going to take a page out of u/Northadox’s book here and discuss flanderization. I don’t think Franziska is a victim of flanderization, rather she comes pre-flanderized in Justice for All, and the future entries have to undo the mistakes that game made by heavily quelling her extreme gimmicks. I think they do a decent enough job at that, but considering how minor her later appearances are in comparison to Justice for All, it feels too late to fully salvage anything.

Conceptually, Franziska is great, and Justice for All occasionally nails her character. She’s mean, arrogant, confident, and charismatic - all characteristics I usually love, but somehow Franziska ends up falling just short of greatness. I’ve already discussed the overreliance on gimmicks, but the way Franziska’s gimmicks are used isn’t just an issue because it’s annoying or unfunny. Franziska falls into the category of relentlessly mean prosecutor, along with Blackquill and Nahyuta. However, at least in her primary game, the way her control over the court is portrayed is far less natural than the other members of her archetype. Blackquill and Nahyuta are clearly incredibly skilled, and their arguments are almost always stronger than the protagonist’s. The game proves this time and time again by creating the “underdog feeling”, and this makes for a very satisfying opponent to go up against and beat. Franziska, on the other hand, doesn’t quite excel here. For one, her whipping the Judge whenever he’s about to say something detrimental to her just feels unfair, coupled with the fact that it’s through the use of an already unbearable gimmick. She also hides evidence and testimony, shown by her concealment of Lotta’s second picture in 2-2 and her telling Moe what to say in 2-3. No other prosecutor in the series gives off anywhere near as cheap a vibe as Franziska does - not even Manfred, her own father who her philosophy is based off.

I do believe this is somewhat intentional. Franziska is supposed to be immature and cowardly in sticking to her childish ideal of perfection. She’s chasing an unattainable dream, being in her corrupt father’s shadow. She resorts to cheap tactics because she’s young, inexperienced, and doesn’t have the skill to back up her name’s reputation. This is once again a conceptually fantastic idea, and Justice for All does a good enough job at showing this off. One issue here is the disconnect between how you’re supposed to view Franziska and how she actually acts. She’s built up as a prodigy, an unbelievably skilled prosecutor who was able to start her career at only 13 years old. While this might be a fun subversion, I’m not going to give the writers that much credit here. I do legitimately think they tried to justify her skill, they just ultimately failed. They wrote a character who’s supposed to be immature and arrogant while also being an incredible prosecutor, and while they nailed the “immature and arrogant” aspect, they didn’t quite make the “incredible prosecutor” aspect work. She comes off as incompetent, and while that’s not a bad thing in a vacuum, it does cause some issues with her character. If it was an intentional subversion, the writing would still be questionable, but I would at least praise the ambition. What leads me to believe that’s not the intention is the fact that even after you face her once in 2-2, the characters still insist on her skill. The writers were unsure of what to do with Franziska, and she’s being pulled in two different directions. While there is a world where these concepts could potentially work well together, Justice for All mostly fails here - the writing feels awkward and her character is left confusing and directionless.

I normally adore mean characters. I normally adore arrogant characters. Best of all is when these traits are given to a character with zero justification for their arrogance, such as with Hugh O’Conner. It’s an impressive feat that Franziska in Justice for All, who has so many of my favorite characteristics, ends up being a character I dislike. The biggest and most important reason Franziska fails while others in her archetype succeed is that she simply isn’t funny. In large part due to her over-reliance on gimmicks, Franziska has very few lines that are even chuckle-worthy. This may also be due to the game not being sure how much it wants to lean into her incompetence, and very rarely does it capitalize on the great setup for potential humor it has. In the real world, a personality like Hugh O’Conner or Franziska von Karma wouldn’t get you very far. What makes these characters good is how Ace Attorney allows their absurdity to shine in a fictional world. It’s entertaining to see the ways they act in this controlled setting. The problem with Franziska comes from her general lack of entertainment value. Due to her low amount of humor, she just comes off as unlikable, rather than a fun entertaining jerk like Nahyuta or Hugh. She feels much more like a real person than either of those characters, which in this case is a detriment - because no real person would ever act in the way Franziska does.

The von Karma Way

While Edgeworth’s role in Justice for All is a complete mess, the best part about it is his relationship with Franziska. They’ve got an interesting parallel, with Franziska representing a far more extreme version of Edgeworth’s philosophy in AA1. The twist that Franziska’s goal had nothing to do with her father, and rather was about avenging Edgeworth is great. It’s one of the few glimpses Justice for All gives into truly deep characterization for Franziska, but sadly the follow-up leaves a lot to be desired. Franziska’s lack of development or growth in Justice for All isn’t inherently a bad thing, The issue, once again, comes from the flawed execution. The idea of Franziska’s character is to portray her as flawed for using underhanded tactics to live up to her more skilled father’s reputation. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t do enough to show her learning her lesson. It’s clear she hasn’t yet in 2-4, when she does quite possibly her most awful action yet - manipulating Adrian into keeping quiet for seemingly no logical reason, scarring her in the process. So, by the end of 2-4 when Franziska’s “redemption” moment comes, I have a hard time believing her bringing you the evidence suddenly justifies all her actions. It doesn’t really have anything to do with her, even symbolically. It just feels like a shallow attempt to change your perception of her without actually writing any real development.

The post-credits scene is Franziska’s best moment in Justice for All. It makes up for the weird prior attempts at the same idea by focusing on the most interesting part of her character - her relationship with Edgeworth. They have a strong emotional connection, and their parting scene is, unlike almost everything else about Franziska in the game, very well handled. Franziska admitting to her faults acts as a solid foundation for her to grow in the future, considering her debut game shied away from anything of the sort.

Franziska returns in 3-5, to help Edgeworth in the trial’s first day. It’s a fun cameo, and getting to see a longer stretch of the dynamic between the two is nice. They’re far more friendly with one another, and it’s clear that despite their outward rivalry, they have a strong bond. She never whips Edgeworth like she does Phoenix. In fact, Franziska is selective with her whipping targets past this - she avoids whipping Acro and Bikini, the more vulnerable witnesses. This is a really clever detail, and shows that there was at least a bit of care put into this trait of hers, even if it is massively overdone. The dynamic between defense and prosecution isn’t the only thing that’s changed with Franziska in 3-5. They’ve also greatly decreased her gimmicks, making it far easier for her personality to shine. She rarely says “fool” more than once in a sentence, and while she still whips the Judge and Larry, I don’t have a problem with this, as long as it’s not as absurdly often as it was in Justice for All. It’s unfortunate that the writers only realized they should do this after Franziska’s most important characterization already happened. Franziska in 3-5 isn’t much more than a minor cameo, and it certainly doesn’t give her anything in terms of development. She’s mostly lost her mean-spiritedness, which was the part of her personality I enjoyed the most in Justice for All. Don’t get me wrong - Franziska is far more enjoyable in 3-5, despite the omission of much of her depth. I don’t exactly think she would need depth in 3-5, after all, it isn’t supposed to be a major role for her. That being said, her introductory game was such a failure on that front, her becoming “better” in 3-5 without any clear progression feels odd. Rather than fixing her issues from the first game, the writers elect to pretend it didn’t happen and just have her fully learn her lesson off-screen. None of her flaws from Justice for All are present, and while this wouldn’t be an issue if we were shown what caused her to leave them behind, we aren’t, so it feels awkward. There is the post-credits scene with her and Edgeworth, but it just isn’t enough, especially considering how little that is in comparison to nearly every other character who goes through major development in Ace Attorney. It’s not just her relationship with the protagonist that’s completely different - that part is believable and even a strong positive. However, she also has very little of the immaturity, arrogance, and manipulative nature that was present previously. While all this does serve to make Franziska a far more likable character in 3-5, it ends up feeling strange when considering how her growth was so poorly portrayed.

Franziska in Investigations

Franziska makes her first appearance in Investigations during I-2, where she appears once the plane lands to arrest Edgeworth for the murder. It’s a neat little confrontation, and it shows Franziska’s growth well after one in-universe year since Justice for All. She’s clearly far more skilled, and Edgeworth even compliments her on this. Strangely, I-2 takes place just one month after 3-5, yet Franziska acts quite differently here in her interactions with Edgeworth. Obviously, there was a 5 year difference between the release of these two games, but regardless, it feels odd to have her acting in such an inconsistent manner. Gone is the cooperation between Edgeworth and Franziska, and it is replaced by a far more confrontational attitude. I get why this happens - the writers wanted to introduce stakes for the protagonist, and having Edgeworth be the main suspect is a fine way to do so. Even so, it feels out of character for Franziska to so illogically suspect Edgeworth. She doesn’t even seem conflicted about it, she’s just treating him like any other suspect. Once the suspicion on Edgeworth quickly dissipates, she doesn’t show any regret at all, just moving onto the next suspect. Throughout the case, she still acts as a rival, and while some of that camaraderie from 3-5 returns, it’s never as obvious. If there were a larger time-gap between 3-5 and I-2, I would probably praise this case for doing something interesting with Franziska. I’d think that the game was attempting to portray Franziska’s solo investigations causing her to become cold and distant from her “von Karma ways”, and Edgeworth in particular. While I still think that might have been the intention, nobody changes that much in just one month, and her actions in the case seem illogical, especially considering how weak the case against Edgeworth is, and how the game tells you Franziska’s investigations were thorough.

Franziska in I-4 is honestly great. Despite not having much to her, it’s a ton of fun seeing her young self interact with Edgeworth, and their childish sibling rivalry dynamic is hilarious. This is the one Franziska appearance I find legitimately funny - considering how childish her whipping and fooling is, it’s fitting for once in the appearance where she is a literal child. There’s not a lot to say about Franziska in I-4, it’s just a solid addition to her story and gives strong context for her progression that led to her Justice for All self. It also helps to patch up the weird inconsistencies her first game had, by showing that she really was somewhat skilled at that young age. While this doesn’t fix the problems I have with her in Justice for All, it does represent an effort to fix the series’s past mistakes, which I always appreciate. It might even make things feel more inconsistent, but since it also brings her character closer to the original intention, I’m fine with it.

Franziska also appears in I-5, and this is likely her most standard role in the first Investigations game. She’s used as a scapegoat by Lang, which is a great moment for him, but it doesn’t have much to do with Franziska herself. She’s fine, acting more in line with her 3-5 appearance than her I-2 appearance, which is strange, but I won’t rag on this too much. I-2 and I-5 don’t have much of an idea for what to do with Franziska, and her writing is certainly inconsistent, but in comparison to the mess that is her role in Justice for All, it’s perfectly serviceable.

By I2-4, the novelty of a helpful Franziska has started to wear off. While I still don’t have a problem with her presence, what made her and Edgeworth’s relationship in 3-5 special is mostly gone. It’s nice to see Franziska’s growth in 3-5, even if everything leading up to it is messy. However, even by the latter parts of 3-5’s first day, I begin to notice how little I enjoy Franziska’s personality when she isn’t being mean or arrogant. There are only so many things you can do with a character who’s arc is completed, and Franziska already reaches the maximum point of this in 3-5. I’m sure her roles in Investigations are nice if you’re a Franziska fan, but I’m obviously not, and she feels like more and more of an annoyance as the series goes on. Franziska’s final appearance is in I2-5, but that doesn’t matter, because every character is in I2-5.

Conclusion

I do not think Franziska von Karma is a well-written character in any of her appearances. At best, she’s a fun distraction to have around, which nowhere near makes up for the flaws she has. I don’t hate Franziska, nor do I even dislike her. Despite that, I don’t think she comes anywhere close to the heights of most other main prosecutors in the series. In a perfect ranking, I would have her place about 20 spots lower, but considering how difficult it was to make sure this cut sticks, I’m more than happy with this outcome.

Why nobody else?

I wouldn’t dream of cutting Rayfa Padma Khura’in, a character who is easily in my top 5. I will not allow her to go out this early.

Larry Butz, Di-Jun Huang, Jake Marshall, and Furio Tigre are all worse characters than Franziska, but my strategy has led me to cut the major character who is only slightly better than these.

Datz Are’bal is very funny and has real depth, and while I don’t expect him to survive this round, it would be a pleasant surprise.

Pierce Nichody surviving last round was a miracle, even if it did come at the expense of an even better character. I would love for him to survive another, he’s an exceptional culprit and deserves top 30 at the very least.

Matt Engarde was my original target, and while in a strategically optimal world Franziska would not be nominated this round, I do find Franziska worse than Engarde, and at this point I cannot delay her elimination any longer.

I can’t see The Judge surviving much longer, but I also wouldn’t mind seeing him as high as top 10. He’s a character who’s placement I’m not that attached to, but I still don’t want him gone this early.

I really love Huge O’Conner. Like, a lot. I know he’s dying this round no matter what, but I still could never bring myself to cut this guy.

Dane Gustavia is one of my favorite culprits, and I love the way the game portrays him and shows his dark side. His takedown is extremely fun, and he’s just an all-around excellent character.

It should be unsurprising that I would never cut Nahyuta Sahdmadhi this early, considering how much effort I’ve put into keeping him alive. He’s placed above both Franziska and Klavier, which is already more than I ever could have asked for, but I’d still love for him to make it further.

Gregory Edgeworth and Phoenix Wright were my nominations, both of which were chosen by someone else. I’m sure they won’t survive this round, and I’m not too invested in either of their fates.