[T][CE][SoJ]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Find and discuss trials made by other members and showcase your own trials.

Moderators: EN - Forum Moderators, EN - Trial Reviewers

chrissyjh
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:56 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by chrissyjh »

Spoiler : :
Could someone tell me how to beat Neela's thrid testimony? only Apollo talks during this conversation, and no matter what I do I get one of the bad endings. Maybe someone could make a guide to the true ending?
Gamer2002
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Gamer2002 »

Spoiler : :
Phoenix told you - you've already lost when she took the stand the 2nd time.

Gotta go back.
Image
Image
Image
Nit6597
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:42 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Nit6597 »

Anyone know where I can find the remix of the song "All The Things She Said"? After searching for a while, I couldn't find it myself.
chrissyjh
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:56 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by chrissyjh »

Spoiler : :
Well, I tried not mentioning Phoenix at all and that didn't work along with some other combinations of choices. I can't seem to get the correct one,
could someone give me a bigger hint to nudge me in the right direction? Because honestly, I can't think of anything.
Gamer2002
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Gamer2002 »

@Nit6597
I got it from old RPG Maker game Alter Aila (the first one, not the remake called Alter Aila Genesis). You can download the remix from my host.
Spoiler : kinda spoilerish music? :
@chrissyjh
Spoiler : :
Phoenix's hint is "Dead men tell no tales".

You must return to part 1 and call different witnesses.
Image
Image
Image
chrissyjh
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:56 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by chrissyjh »

Spoiler : :
Okay, you got me. I tried calling different witnesses and that didn't work, so... i guess i'll submit to the solution, if you want to give me it. Because i'm etiher missing something obvious, or your REALLY, really good at making secret paths. Either way, Great job on the case! :D
Gamer2002
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Gamer2002 »

Spoiler : :
Part 1

Call Phoenix to the witness stand.
- Object to the statement about it being impossible for him to testify.
- Present Mia Fey's Murder Case or Card

Call Apollo or Athena (either of them)
- Ask about called friends.

This will allow you to alter things in part 2, regarding Neela's 3rd testimony.
Image
Image
Image
chrissyjh
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:56 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by chrissyjh »

Spoiler : :
Thanks! That one really stumped me. Can't wait to see what this case holds me after this testimony.
chrissyjh
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:56 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by chrissyjh »

Spoiler : :
Okay, so I beat it without help after that point and I gotta say. Despite that ending being a little odd, I still liked it. And I love how Redd's character was wrote. He didn't necessarily break character, but just showed a better side of him. Anyways, I guess I have one final question. Does that hint Fran give you at the end mean anything, if so. Can you tell me how to achieve the path she is talking about?
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Enthalpy »

I tried playing through the game, but didn't like it at all and quit after looking up the answer for one of the puzzles.
Spoiler : :
Specifically, the whip and the lack of blood testing.
When I've disliked your previous work, your reaction was mostly to disregard my thoughts on the matter. Would there be any worth to you in posting them for this case, or not?
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
DWard14
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 7:54 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by DWard14 »

My further thoughts:
Spoiler : :
I said in my first post that I would write my full thoughts after finishing the case and getting all the endings. The closest I've gotten to the 'true ending' is the first Logic Chess sequence. I then gave up. Do you want to know why?

Well, let me get the positives out of the way first. The story's great so far. The twist with Apollo was well done. I like how you made Franziska's inner struggles playable, it really made you relate to her. I like Neela. I think she's a well portrayed multi-dimensional character that fits in with the main cast. You went down the Turnabout Proxy route but you took it in a new direction. I also like the atmosphere of the conspiracy and how it made you doubt Edgeworth just like Franziska. The story's incredible, develops Franziska more than the main series did after JFA and considering the comparisons to One Hell of a Turnabout being drawn, I can tell its only going to get better. And that's the end of the positive things I have to say about this case.

Here's my first issue: At the beginning of the Trial Latter, you have to pick one of four dialogue options, and three of them give you one piece of evidence. It's never made clear which dialogue options give you which items or which items you need. And if you get it wrong, you have to go all the way back to the start and redo the majority of what you just did, assuming you know that you don't have the piece of evidence you need and you know the way to get is to go back to the start and pick another dialogue option.

The having to present the whip thing, yeah I say why Enthalpy gave up at that part. A: How do we know that she hasn't been given a blood test? B: How do we know her blood would be on the whip? C: Why do you expect us to take note of her whipping the witness, something she does to everyone? Getting that answer requires some serious mental gymnastics that is unfair, and unfun and I have no clue how anyone worked that out beyond presenting every piece of evidence against every statement.

The third testimony makes you go against your player instinct and let your self get penalized but, since Athena tells you to trust her cluing you in to let her ask all her questions I'll let it slide. It also brings you closer to Franziska having to let your case get taken apart which would go against her prosecutor instinct and show her developing to want to pursue truth over winning every case.

The logic chess is what broke me. A: My save states don't work. The time I've spent gets stored even when I use a save state meaning I can't use any of my save states and can't progress without starting over. B: It's incredibly unintuitive. You have no idea which of the three options to pick and even if you can work out which one to pick, and even if you can get the right option (which I guess is the first one, since it's about before the trial) you then are presented with the same three options not knowing where to go with the first one again and try another option or go with the second or third option not knowing which questions you can ask about each subject. And you somehow have to find which two of nine questions (and you don't know what any of them are at the start and you can only see three at a time) will give you contradicting information. Under a very strict time limit.With no save states. No... Just no... No story's worth replaying half an entire case just to get another go at a unfair logic chess sequence.

I envy Tiagofvarela since he got to play this case with all the answers on standby and just experience the story. If you'd posted a guide for the true ending without making us go through all that I'd like this case a lot more. But right now it's just not fun. The gameplay's unique, yes, but when I play an AAO case I'm not looking for uniqueness I'm looking for fun, fair puzzles and uniqueness is just a cherry on top. I'm sorry, but I just can't take anymore, thus, I give up. And I see why Enthalpy did too. But, because of the story and unique gameplay,
I see why it won the No Pressure contest. Sort of. I mean, the case is both incredibly difficult and involves a large conspiracy so just having a bunch of characters say No Pressure in orange text doesn't really give this case the relaxing feel.
User avatar
Tiagofvarela
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:16 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, Portuguese
Location: Portugal

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Tiagofvarela »

DWard14 wrote:My further thoughts:
Spoiler : :
I envy Tiagofvarela since he got to play this case with all the answers on standby and just experience the story. If you'd posted a guide for the true ending without making us go through all that I'd like this case a lot more. But right now it's just not fun. The gameplay's unique, yes, but when I play an AAO case I'm not looking for uniqueness I'm looking for fun, fair puzzles and uniqueness is just a cherry on top. I'm sorry, but I just can't take anymore, thus, I give up. And I see why Enthalpy did too. But, because of the story and unique gameplay,
I see why it won the No Pressure contest. Sort of. I mean, the case is both incredibly difficult and involves a large conspiracy so just having a bunch of characters say No Pressure in orange text doesn't really give this case the relaxing feel.
You actually don't see why it won. You'd need to finish it in order to see it.
I agree. I said at the time that some people would find this to be the absolute best, as they replayed again and again and found out more each time... and to others it would be the zenith of frustration. I'm one of those people, actually, and would never have finished this without a walkthrough, I can pretty much guarantee.
A Laggy Turnabout ★
A Batty Turnabout ★
A Tricky Turnabout ★
Upcoming: A Worldly Turnabout, A Courtly Turnabout, A Clumsy Turnabout, A Needy Turnabout
Gamer2002
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Gamer2002 »

On popular demand I’m updating the opening post with further guides.

Anyway, I was busy, so I had decided to answer to feedback later. But since the feedback is piling up, I guess I should better start answering.

@DWaM
Spoiler : :
Nobody got kidnapped in 1-2 and frankly I can't really see there's any sort of real connection to it in that particular regard.

Let me rephrase what I meant by this case’s similarity to 1-2. Aside from the obvious similar murder taking in same place (that was also witnessed from same place as well), Edgeworth and Apollo suggest the possibility of somebody with big wealth and influence, maybe even connected to Redd White, being behind this all. Especially Apollo, who openly states that his case is Phoenix being killed by a hired assassin paid by some older enemy. He also suggests that Danielle herself sponsored the article that removed Edgeworth from the case.

The similarities to 1-2, the fact that somebody influenced the case through press leaks, lack of motive for Athena, established existence of many people that would want Phoenix dead, and the 12 years of Phoenix’s Agency defending wrongly accused – I believe that’s enough, even for Franziska, to think for a moment “maybe the police got it wrong and those foolish fools are right again”.

But if some older enemy, let’s say Bluecorp, was behind this, there’s a problem. After 3-5 (actually, even just after 1-2, but everybody was blind about Mia in Maya’s body), Bluecorp should know about Fey’s abilities. If they have really killed Wright and framed Athena, even if they had a magical assassin that doesn’t leave any traces behind, a big hole in their plan would be not taking care of Maya and Pearl.

And then both Maya and Pearl happened to be abroad, and couldn’t be contacted until it was too late for Edgeworth to postpone the case to wait for them. So Maya and Pearl could come to help only during the trial. But their plane had an emergency landing, and the information reached Apollo and Athena only after Danielle’s testimony was accepted by the court and they desperately needed to present anything, or the trial would end right away. And they couldn’t even beg Franziska into requesting recess to wait for Feys, because of the controversy about Edgeworth. And they couldn’t obtain direct confirmation from both Maya and Pearl about what happened. And actually they never had talked with Pearl, because of Maya’s supposed decision to keep Pearl out of the loop until the emergency channeling.

There are coincidences, and there is a ton of things forming a pattern. And the guy that was supposed to use his Chords of Steel to shout about this pattern seemingly noticed nothing.


And again -- I'm not really discussing whether or not it's suspicious. My problem is with the leap of logic from "this is kind of weird" to "CLEARLY it must be kidnapping" (it's phrased like "it could be" but then afterwards goes like "yeah they were kidnapped" and rolls with it which honestly felt like it came completely out of the left field.

I can rewrite things a bit and have phantom-Edgy start the argument elaborating more on too many coincidences piling up (in some way that wouldn’t give away answers to all the further questions), on the very likely scenario being somebody actively preventing Feys from showing up, and on the worst-case scenario being kidnapping to ensure they won’t ever show up. Franziska cares about Maya and Pearl (she spent a day on brutal forcing puzzle locks to save “Maya”, not to mention withholding the card that would, through Phoenix and Maya, connect DeKiller with Engarde), so them being at possible risk is enough to her seriously evaluate this possibility. And if nothing denies this possibility, she has to do something about it.

One thing to note, though. While I keep it from the player until the reveal, Franziska did hear the rumors about Neela. She was already suspecting Danielle’s true identity at the start of part 2, and all those flashbacks and visions were her seeing the obvious.


Coincidences happen. Gumshoe got into a car wreck delivering super-important evidence. A freakin' bridge was lit on fire by a lightning bolt to create a complex crime. My point is, it doesn't warrant calling it suspicious to such an extent when everything Franziska has to work with evidence-wise implies it was just a bad coincidence.

But again, it wasn’t just a one random event of that case. It was multiple, well-timed events.

If they were kidnapped, why WAS Pearl unavailable during call?

In-story reason, or in-Phoenix’s-story reason? Phoenix gave Franziska a hint that something was up with Pearl. As to why kidnapped Pearl would be unavailable, there are many possible explanations – she was a worse liar than Maya, Phoenix’s death and the kidnapping could make her unable to talk, etc…

Couldn't have Apollo simply lied about getting her on the line, especially since he was the one doing the calls in the detention center?

All the calls happened in front of Athena, so Athena could listen and wouldn’t have a reason to doubt them.

Or, couldn't have there been a much simpler explanation of "she was asleep" or "Maya intentionally didn't want her tell her until they were closer to home for whatever reason" or "Pearl's phone broke and whenever they were talking to Maya she just saw no point on putting Pearl on the line" (that last one I guess is half true anyway so).

In-Phoenix’s-story, Apollo was surprised by Athena suddenly telling Franziska that Pearl was unavailable even for the latest call. He started to panic and didn’t come up with any excuse.

Either way, going with the assumed timeline of events, Franziska could've concluded any of these things and then later just went "Maya must've just told Pearl about it and had her channel Nick later."

I’m confused about the assumed timeline. The supposed (according to Evol Apollo’s lies) timeline was:

- Maya learns she won’t make it in time to the trial
- Maya tells Pearl what really made them suddenly return to LA and asks her to channel Phoenix to talk with him
- Maya calls Apollo and Athena to tell them about what happened and what she learned from Phoenix.

This all run through Apollo’s script. But Athena asked about Pearl and Maya excused it with Pearl being too exhausted to talk. And Athena brought that up in front of Franziska, after she already started smelling a set-up.


Seems much more reasonable than going full-on conspiracy mode. If you want to claim she should've done it because of similarities to 1-2... Iunno. Especially since during 1-2 White's reach in the investigation wasn't THAT powerful. He controlled the witnesses, but investigators? Edgeworth?

White had Chief Prosecutor on his call and Udgy also was stated to be under his pressure. Edgeworth was seemingly clean, but he went full Demon Prosecutor anyway. It’s pretty hard to estimate White's actual power due to him being a dumbass and also due to the writers preferring to forget about the subject. (Don’t ask me how exactly White works with 1-5. Heck, don’t ask me how exactly White works with 1-4.)

Neela had only her father’s money to hire mercenaries to handle everything about Feys, and Apollo making Brusher write his article, plus unspecific dirt on the judge that still could be used. Though with kidnapped Feys, they also had a way to influence Edgewroth.

But for Franziska, Edgeworth was suspicious because of his last meeting with White that seemed fishy. And Edgeworth actually was hiding something about it, though the truth about it contradicted with everything Fransizka was lead to believe about her case.


Eeeehhhhhh... I wouldn't really agree. And honestly, Franziska of all people isn't one to go off making ludicrous theories over just her hunches.

I think that considering all that happened during the trial, even if Franziska didn’t know about Neela, there was enough to start noticing a possible set-up and worrying about Pearl and Maya. But again, I agree I should have Franziska be less sure about it and more worried that the kidnapping was a possibility that couldn’t be disproved.
@Blizdi
Spoiler : :
Well, “the story turns out to be a staged event to fool a character” is used a bit elsewhere. I think there is also a third case on AAO that uses it as well. Anyway, I took it in my own direction, with it not being just a prank, but also a presentation of a what-if scenario.
@ybi
Spoiler : :
Judging from the style of the bad endings, I thought this should be a, well...... "serious" case, like The Dragon's Turnabout or Turnabout for Tomorrow. I thought I could see a huge conspiracy exposed at last, such as Apollo on our stand is the true culprit yet a fake Apollo Justice. The real Apollo was kidnapped by our fake one (de Killer or somebody else) by order of Kristoph Gavin or people linked to the Phantom, who served as the real final boss. Their purpose was to doom Wright, his agency, Edgeworth and other good guys to hell, as a revenge or something. This ending is hilarious but a little...... You know, surprising but kinda unsatisfying.

Nah, that’s not what the story was about. As for unsatisfying part… Someday I may make the Perfect ending. But for now there is only a secret preview of it.


Besides, I think I have read something like "XXX (he?) is Maya Fey's" after everything is revealed, yet I am not sure what that XXX exactly is and I could not find the sentence when I read all the dialogues the second time. Is that simply my illusion or an really existing implication of Maya's involvement in the plan? (Personally I believe Phoenix and Maya should make a cute couple after all these years, when they finally become totally mature, so the handling of Maya in AA6 is actually a bit annoying for me. Sorry for this nonsense if inappropriate.)

Franziska ships Phoenix with Maya, though she has a bit of tsundere love for him ;P


@Chrissyjh
Spoiler : :
Okay, so I beat it without help after that point and I gotta say. Despite that ending being a little odd, I still liked it. And I love how Redd's character was wrote. He didn't necessarily break character, but just showed a better side of him. Anyways, I guess I have one final question. Does that hint Fran give you at the end mean anything, if so. Can you tell me how to achieve the path she is talking about?

Check guide for secret section.
@Enth
The only time you criticized my actually released work, it ended with me writing a massive changelog. As for the other situations, let’s say that I was under competition’s deadline, so I leaned towards rationalizing why I shouldn’t make changes I didn’t have time to make anyway.

But the answer depends on your definition of “worth”. For me, the sole worth of critique is to state opinion. It’s solely up to the criticized to decide whatever or not adjust own work because of said critique, or to rebuke the critique with reasons why this isn’t necessary. And it’s up to everyone else to judge the outcome of this process, and to possibly contribute with their own opinion about who is right.

Regarding your spoilered point, the next spoiler tackles it and doesn’t spoil anything to you.

@DWard14 (and Enth)
Spoiler : :
The having to present the whip thing, yeah I say why Enthalpy gave up at that part. A: How do we know that she hasn't been given a blood test?

Ema’s testimony details on exactly how they confirmed Danielle’s identity. No blood test was mentioned because none happened.

B: How do we know her blood would be on the whip?

She screams about it right after being whipped.

C: Why do you expect us to take note of her whipping the witness, something she does to everyone?

Exactly because this is something she does to everyone, but during this case she actually did it only to one person. Plus, the funny no-choice of whipping her makes it additionally memorable.

Getting that answer requires some serious mental gymnastics that is unfair, and unfun and I have no clue how anyone worked that out beyond presenting every piece of evidence against every statement.

The thing is that I do want the player to initially miss this out and get the guilty bad end after Danielle 2nd testimony. But after the negative feedback, I think Phoenix should clearly state in his hint that you already had everything you needed. To many players thought they had to do something before her testimony (aside from not making her skip the claim about confirmed identity), and that’s not what I intended.

Anyway, I also repeat my answer to DWaM about the whip thing:

With the whip I was just being nasty. But it was my intention to have this be not very obvious, not without Phoenix's hint you get from getting Athena declared guilty. DWard14 suspects that the answer is either book or family photo. Well, we'll see how he manages to solve it.

What the player has to do is to remember that Neela's blood is on the whip (and she is the only person that Franziska whipped so far), catch on the significance of Manfred telling Dahlia that you can bribe people running civilian registry, and listen to the narrative's screams about Danielle being an evil liar (her taking place of Dahlia after the flashback, Franziska seeing in her Ini and Acro, not to mention Danielle's insulting lack of subtlety in Part 2...). Bit of a long shot to present a whip, perhaps. But otherwise, it could be too easy to skip the ending with a guilty verdict.
@DWard, only
Spoiler : :
Here's my first issue: At the beginning of the Trial Latter, you have to pick one of four dialogue options, and three of them give you one piece of evidence. It's never made clear which dialogue options give you which items or which items you need. And if you get it wrong, you have to go all the way back to the start and redo the majority of what you just did, assuming you know that you don't have the piece of evidence you need and you know the way to get is to go back to the start and pick another dialogue option.

This sections is to give you one more chance to get something you already had a chance to get in part 1. Which is why it’s based on making a good blind guess.

The logic chess is what broke me. A: My save states don't work. The time I've spent gets stored even when I use a save state meaning I can't use any of my save states and can't progress without starting over.

Hm. The way it works saving during any choice is the worst thing you can do. I should warn the player about it.

B: It's incredibly unintuitive. You have no idea which of the three options to pick and even if you can work out which one to pick, and even if you can get the right option (which I guess is the first one, since it's about before the trial) you then are presented with the same three options not knowing where to go with the first one again and try another option or go with the second or third option not knowing which questions you can ask about each subject.

You can safely ask any question in any order, you are penalized only by making mistake during confronting clues.

And you somehow have to find which two of nine questions (and you don't know what any of them are at the start and you can only see three at a time) will give you contradicting information. Under a very strict time limit.With no save states. No... Just no... No story's worth replaying half an entire case just to get another go at a unfair logic chess sequence.

I would have to check how much time you have, but I’m pretty sure it around 3 minutes, and the time passes only during choices. It’s useful exploit to pick any choice and don’t proceed further, to have a time to think. And to make notes about which question gives you which clue.

I envy Tiagofvarela since he got to play this case with all the answers on standby and just experience the story. If you'd posted a guide for the true ending without making us go through all that I'd like this case a lot more. But right now it's just not fun. The gameplay's unique, yes, but when I play an AAO case I'm not looking for uniqueness I'm looking for fun, fair puzzles and uniqueness is just a cherry on top. I'm sorry, but I just can't take anymore, thus, I give up. And I see why Enthalpy did too. But, because of the story and unique gameplay,
I see why it won the No Pressure contest. Sort of. I mean, the case is both incredibly difficult and involves a large conspiracy so just having a bunch of characters say No Pressure in orange text doesn't really give this case the relaxing feel.

Well, the completion's host has already replied you to that :P
***

Anyways, looks like I have to do couple of improvements. When I’ll have time for this, no pressure :p
Image
Image
Image
DWard14
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 7:54 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by DWard14 »

Gamer2002 wrote: @DWard14 (and Enth)
Spoiler : :
The having to present the whip thing, yeah I say why Enthalpy gave up at that part. A: How do we know that she hasn't been given a blood test?

Ema’s testimony details on exactly how they confirmed Danielle’s identity. No blood test was mentioned because none happened.

I forgot about Ema's testimony. But just because it wasn't mentioned doesn't mean it never happened.

B: How do we know her blood would be on the whip?

She screams about it right after being whipped.

Sorry forgot. It's been a while since I played this case.

C: Why do you expect us to take note of her whipping the witness, something she does to everyone?

Exactly because this is something she does to everyone, but during this case she actually did it only to one person. Plus, the funny no-choice of whipping her makes it additionally memorable.

But since Franziska whipping people is something that happens quite often in the main series, when she does it here it isn't really noteworthy. I see what you tried to do with the no-choice, but it just didn't do it for me.

Getting that answer requires some serious mental gymnastics that is unfair, and unfun and I have no clue how anyone worked that out beyond presenting every piece of evidence against every statement.

The thing is that I do want the player to initially miss this out and get the guilty bad end after Danielle 2nd testimony. But after the negative feedback, I think Phoenix should clearly state in his hint that you already had everything you needed. To many players thought they had to do something before her testimony (aside from not making her skip the claim about confirmed identity), and that’s not what I intended.

This does require mental gymnastics since you have to A: assume that because no blood test was mentioned, they didn't do one. B: remember that her blood's on the whip, a pretty trivial detail. C: Remember she didn't whip anyone else, which I didn't. I just assumed she probably whipped someone else. D: Think a blood test is important enough to actually do.

Anyway, I also repeat my answer to DWaM about the whip thing:

With the whip I was just being nasty. But it was my intention to have this be not very obvious, not without Phoenix's hint you get from getting Athena declared guilty. DWard14 suspects that the answer is either book or family photo. Well, we'll see how he manages to solve it.

What the player has to do is to remember that Neela's blood is on the whip (and she is the only person that Franziska whipped so far), catch on the significance of Manfred telling Dahlia that you can bribe people running civilian registry, and listen to the narrative's screams about Danielle being an evil liar (her taking place of Dahlia after the flashback, Franziska seeing in her Ini and Acro, not to mention Danielle's insulting lack of subtlety in Part 2...). Bit of a long shot to present a whip, perhaps. But otherwise, it could be too easy to skip the ending with a guilty verdict.
You put clues in a flashback sequence! If you want back to Recess from Phoenix's clue you wouldn't even see it again!

@DWard, only
Spoiler : :
Here's my first issue: At the beginning of the Trial Latter, you have to pick one of four dialogue options, and three of them give you one piece of evidence. It's never made clear which dialogue options give you which items or which items you need. And if you get it wrong, you have to go all the way back to the start and redo the majority of what you just did, assuming you know that you don't have the piece of evidence you need and you know the way to get is to go back to the start and pick another dialogue option.

This sections is to give you one more chance to get something you already had a chance to get in part 1. Which is why it’s based on making a good blind guess.

You were able to get the evidence in Part 1?

The logic chess is what broke me. A: My save states don't work. The time I've spent gets stored even when I use a save state meaning I can't use any of my save states and can't progress without starting over.

Hm. The way it works saving during any choice is the worst thing you can do. I should warn the player about it.

B: It's incredibly unintuitive. You have no idea which of the three options to pick and even if you can work out which one to pick, and even if you can get the right option (which I guess is the first one, since it's about before the trial) you then are presented with the same three options not knowing where to go with the first one again and try another option or go with the second or third option not knowing which questions you can ask about each subject.

You can safely ask any question in any order, you are penalized only by making mistake during confronting clues.

But the time limit...

And you somehow have to find which two of nine questions (and you don't know what any of them are at the start and you can only see three at a time) will give you contradicting information. Under a very strict time limit.With no save states. No... Just no... No story's worth replaying half an entire case just to get another go at a unfair logic chess sequence.

I would have to check how much time you have, but I’m pretty sure it around 3 minutes, and the time passes only during choices. It’s useful exploit to pick any choice and don’t proceed further, to have a time to think. And to make notes about which question gives you which clue.

In my game it took time away just by asking a question. Also, it still isn't very intuitive, asking every question and writing down all the clues. In GK2 you didn't have to do that.

I envy Tiagofvarela since he got to play this case with all the answers on standby and just experience the story. If you'd posted a guide for the true ending without making us go through all that I'd like this case a lot more. But right now it's just not fun. The gameplay's unique, yes, but when I play an AAO case I'm not looking for uniqueness I'm looking for fun, fair puzzles and uniqueness is just a cherry on top. I'm sorry, but I just can't take anymore, thus, I give up. And I see why Enthalpy did too. But, because of the story and unique gameplay,
I see why it won the No Pressure contest. Sort of. I mean, the case is both incredibly difficult and involves a large conspiracy so just having a bunch of characters say No Pressure in orange text doesn't really give this case the relaxing feel.
Well, the completion's host has already replied you to that :P
The One Hell of a Turnabout comparisons and ybi calling the ending hilarious give me a pretty good picture of what's at the end.
***

Anyways, looks like I have to do couple of improvements. When I’ll have time for this, no pressure :p
Spoiler : :
Well, I'm glad you put up a guide for the other endings. I guess if I had used the links at the end instead of just using a save state to go straight back to the testimony making sequence I would have been able to get it about the whip, sort of. I'd get that the whip was what I needed but I still wouldn't have a clue what to present it on.
Last edited by DWard14 on Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Gamer2002
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:51 pm

Re: [T][CE]Turnabout Imperfect ●

Post by Gamer2002 »

Spoiler plz.
Image
Image
Image
Post Reply