[T] Game Theory Late Rebuttal Case ●

[BlueDragonCody]

Hello, everyone!

I have made a (very) late rebuttal to Game Theory's "Phoenix Wright is a CRIMINAL" theory. If you want to know why it's late, read the disclaimer at the beginning of the trial.

Also, this trial is not playable, it's just an animation. I don't know how to make a trial playable yet, but if anyone is willing to help, I'll gladly accept it in the form of a PM.

I hope you guys like the trial, but let me make one thing clear: I DON'T HATE MATPAT/GAME THEORY. If you want to accuse me of hating MatPat instead of giving me CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, then I won't be taking you seriously; instead I'll be ignoring your comment and moving on with living my life.

Trial Link: http://aaonline.fr/player.php?trial_id=106672 (IGNORE - Trial has been deleted)

[BlueDragonCody]

Hello, everyone!

It's been awhile since I posted this, but I want to know: what are your thoughts on this animation? I want to find ways for me to improve on this site.

Also, please limit the thoughts to constructive criticism, because like I said before: if you try and say hateful things to me about hating MatPat, then I won't be willing to take you seriously; instead, your comment will be ignored and I'll be moving on with my life.

Also, hateful comments such as "You suck!" or "Loser!" or other things that are hateful for the sake of being hateful will also be ignored. Not only that, but the second I see said comments, they will be reported to the moderators as troll comments. And to the trolls: stop hating on people and go get a life.

[BlueDragonCody]

So, I've noticed that I never really got ways to improve on my trials in the future. I just wanted to know, is my trial good or bad? If it is bad, how can I improve on my future trials?

I'm not trying to be rude, but like I said before, I want ways to improve on my trials in the future.

[plasmacarrot]

I'll give this my best shot.
I want to tell you a little bit about my background first, as, if you chose a random person from the forum to review this, I don't think you would have chosen me. I am not, myself, a case-maker or terribly experienced author in this genre. By and large, I've been a lurker on these forums, and I am a fan, albeit a casual one, of Game Theory. I have, however, also disagreed with him in the past. Indeed, I made a response of my own at one point to his "Why Mario is Mental" video. Mine was in a format inspired by Ace Attorney, but it was just a YouTube video. That, incidentally, is no longer publicly available. In any case, I'm not unfamiliar with trials on here, nor am I unfamiliar with responses to MatPat. I am, however, not very savvy in the trial editor, not experienced in writing trial feedback, and, perhaps especially important, I have not seen the video in question in full.

Spoiler : Lightly Edited Stream of Consciousness :

Right off the back, I don't think it's the best form to have profiles completely blank. The text under the badge and bracelet also don't feel very Ace Attorney-esque, or at least not particularly fitting to Apollo Justice. That isn't a huge deal, though, and is a relatively easy fix.
I'd advise against assuming, right off the bat, that the fanbase you're responding to is "triggered."
I have no idea who that sprite is. My memory might just be poor, but I don't remember, at the time of writing, seeing a credit for it in the credits of the trial.
Before the trial, a huge cast appears and say only a few lines. This is something I noticed immediately, the rapid-fire introductions and sheer number of them. Almost none of these characters contribute anything to the trial.
You're coming across as a bit harsh. Disagree with him though you may, you don't need to call MatPat a
"jerk," nor assume the worst of his fans. You can argue that if you support it, of course, but as is, you just read as being mean.
You used the default courtroom gif, the one with the gallery speaking and no other sprites being present. This isn't terribly notable, but if you want to brush things up, adding the other relevant sprites to that gif would be a nice touch.
The Defense gets an opening statement? That's novel. It's non-standard, but I don't disapprove.
Kudos on getting the pieces of evidence, and, more notably, the picture representing "Rise from the Ashes" in the corner.
The pieces of evidence being added to the court record does not correspond to each one's individual message saying "x piece of evidence added to the court record." They are, instead, all added at once after these messages finish.
None of your pieces of evidence have sufficient descriptions, nor do they link off to anything. The law book is a prime example of this. In "Rise from the Ashes," it could be extended to view the actual rules. Here, it just is a lawbook that has some rules, but what they are is not stated in the piece of evidence itself.
I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but in the North American localizations, these games take place in California. U.S. Law, and Californian law in particular. You do address this in the case, but it is but you more rebuff it than actually address it.
-incidentally, no defense attorney in the actual games would get to just not answer a
question. They are given a disadvantage, and Justice is being given significant
leeway and control of the direction of the case, more than the defense is ever really given in the
games. Differing from them in that regard is, of course, not banned, but it needs to be justified.
This is, overall, a relatively short case, but your pacing is pretty good. Poor pacing is, in my opinion, one of the more difficult aspects of writing and one of the more common pitfalls of sub-standard cases. You've avoided that, and I commend you for it.
Your placement of sound and music is pretty good.
I question why you actually implement the pieces of evidence or profiles at all; This is non-interactive, so you don't really need them.
Very little comes of Phoenix Wright's objection. Really, after it, Patrick gives no lengthy response, and the Judge hands the floor to Justice, much as he would if no objection were made to begin with and no question asked of Wright.
"Mr. Wright committed obstruction of justice by one way." That's a weird sentence. You could replace it with, "Mr. Wright committed Obstruction of Justice in one way," or, "Mr. Wright committed Obstruction of Justice." Given the name of the testimony and the context, though, this statement doesn't really need to be in the testimony at all.
After Apollo Justice's first objection in Matthew Patrick's second testimony, the following line of dialogue is displayed: "?!!!?!?!?!" It is not accompanied by any character name indicating who is reacting.
This case, in general, verges on being over-dramatic. Given the series, that is acceptable, but Patrick very seldom gives any meaningful response.
"...CONNECTION TO MATPAT'S LIES..." I genuinely do not think that Patrick was lying so much as making a poor case. If you want to argue that he is being dishonest, you can, but you are not supporting that case so much as the case that he has his information wrong.
To my understanding and recollection (it's been a while, honestly, since I sat down and played the first game or original trilogy), after "Rise from the Ashes," throughout the series, those case-laws are largely ignored. To my understanding, Wright's failure to follow them is one of Patrick's major charges. This does not help your argument and is a major crux of his.
I question your choice of a sprite for MatPat. That guy doesn't really much resemble him, and he doesn't have a breakdown animation, making the climax a a little weak.
Why has Patrick been arrested? Slander? If so, ironically, under at least American law, that wouldn't stand. You would need to establish dishonesty, which I do not think you have, intent to do harm, which you've failed to do, and the capability to do harm, which, usually, is one of the harder elements to prove, but in this case, I'll grant it, as charges of legal violations or ignorance would be hurtful to any private attorney.

Conclusion: I have a few complaints, but most of these are relatively small. I think you came across as a bit harsh, and I think that the huge cast before the trial hurts more than it helps. That said, you evaded, in my eyes, some of the greater pitfalls, pacing issues being one of them, and your integration of sound and music was well-done. I don't think it would win any awards, but if you touched up the profiles and evidence and you were a little less harsh, I'd give this project a pretty solid thumbs-up.

[BlueDragonCody]

To plasmacarrot,

Thank you so much for the review and critique. This helps a lot! Now, to explain why I did what I did.

Spoiler : :

Right off the back, I don't think it's the best form to have profiles completely blank. The text under the badge and bracelet also don't feel very Ace Attorney-esque, or at least not particularly fitting to Apollo Justice.

This is because of two reasons: one, I had a bit of a time constraint; and two, I wanted this trial to be released as soon as possible.

I'd advise against assuming, right off the bat, that the fanbase you're responding to is "triggered."

I don't mean to be rude, but have you seen the Game Theory fanbase? MatPat once called a user named MangaKamen a hater just because he pointed out flaws in his "Mario is Mental" theory. And the fans believed every word MatPat says, apparently. I did not want to take any chances.

I have no idea who that sprite is. My memory might just be poor, but I don't remember, at the time of writing, seeing a credit for it in the credits of the trial.

It was provided to me by the Trial Editor itself, but I have no idea who made it. Also, it's supposed to represent what my OC would look like. The sprite name it gave me was "Ranger Justice." I have no idea who that is. It sure isn't Apollo. I also said in the beginning that "all videos, games, and characters belong to their respective owners." This was including the sprite itself.

Before the trial, a huge cast appears and say only a few lines. This is something I noticed immediately, the rapid-fire introductions and sheer number of them. Almost none of these characters contribute anything to the trial.

These people were going to be either watching in the gallery or be the lead detective of the case (i.e. Detective Gumshoe/Detective Ema Skye). Plus, I think almost everyone in the Ace Attorney fanbase knows who these characters are (other than MatPat's sprite)

You're coming across as a bit harsh. Disagree with him though you may, you don't need to call MatPat a "jerk," nor assume the worst of his fans. You can argue that if you support it, of course, but as is, you just read as being mean.

Let me make this clear: I don't hate MatPat, but I basically was mad at him for just not paying more attention to the games, so that one was kind of on me. Plus, I did not intend to say it myself. I was trying to make Apollo himself call MatPat a jerk because Apollo was (understandably) mad about this too.

You used the default courtroom gif, the one with the gallery speaking and no other sprites being present. This isn't terribly notable, but if you want to brush things up, adding the other relevant sprites to that gif would be a nice touch.

I don't know how to put the sprites on the courtroom gif because I don't own Photoshop. The gif was just provided by the Trial Editor and nothing else was provided. Sorry about that.

The Defense gets an opening statement? That's novel. It's non-standard, but I don't disapprove.

In a real-life courtroom trial, both sides have an opportunity to give an opening statement. I wanted to give the Defense a chance to respond and add to the evidence the Prosecution presented in his opening statement.

Kudos on getting the pieces of evidence, and, more notably, the picture representing "Rise from the Ashes" in the corner.

Thank you, but the Trial Editor allows this very easily.

The pieces of evidence being added to the court record does not correspond to each one's individual message saying "x piece of evidence added to the court record." They are, instead, all added at once after these messages finish.

I'm not 100% familiar with the Trial Editor myself, so... sorry about that.

None of your pieces of evidence have sufficient descriptions, nor do they link off to anything. The law book is a prime example of this. In "Rise from the Ashes," it could be extended to view the actual rules. Here, it just is a lawbook that has some rules, but what they are is not stated in the piece of evidence itself.

Again, I'm not 100% familiar with the Trial Editor, but I tried my best. Plus, I don't remember a feature in the Editor that allows linking to another website.

I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but in the North American localizations, these games take place in California. U.S. Law, and Californian law in particular. You do address this in the case, but it is but you more rebuff it than actually address it.

That isn't exactly true, as I stated in the Trial. The game was originally created in Japan with Japanese law in mind. Therefore, the U.S. law doesn't really count in the games. And besides, in the localization of the games, it's an alternate-universe Los Angeles where the Japanese and Californian cultures are merged together. Therefore, it shouldn't be a surprise in the case.

incidentally, no defense attorney in the actual games would get to just not answer a question. They are given a disadvantage, and Justice is being given significant leeway and control of the direction of the case, more than the defense is ever really given in the games. Differing from them in that regard is, of course, not banned, but it needs to be justified.

Okay, this is because I think prosecutors are given too much credit, so I wanted to make sure the defense is given his chance in the spotlight.

This is, overall, a relatively short case, but your pacing is pretty good. Poor pacing is, in my opinion, one of the more difficult aspects of writing and one of the more common pitfalls of sub-standard cases. You've avoided that, and I commend you for it.

Thank you for that. I really appreciate it.

Your placement of sound and music is pretty good.

I agree, but most of the music was directly used from the Editor, with the exception of one song, which I put into the game.

I question why you actually implement the pieces of evidence or profiles at all; This is non-interactive, so you don't really need them.

Actually, my original idea was that the evidence was supposed to allow the viewer to follow along with the case. I didn't follow through with that, so that one's also on me.

Very little comes of Phoenix Wright's objection. Really, after it, Patrick gives no lengthy response, and the Judge hands the floor to Justice, much as he would if no objection were made to begin with and no question asked of Wright.

This is because in the case, MatPat had no way to respond quickly. As for the Judge, he saw that Phoenix was telling the truth, as the Judge had seen Phoenix being saved by Mia Fey, so that might be the reason.

"Mr. Wright committed obstruction of justice by one way." That's a weird sentence. You could replace it with, "Mr. Wright committed Obstruction of Justice in one way," or, "Mr. Wright committed Obstruction of Justice." Given the name of the testimony and the context, though, this statement doesn't really need to be in the testimony at all.

I'll be sure to change that when I can. That's a very easy fix.

After Apollo Justice's first objection in Matthew Patrick's second testimony, the following line of dialogue is displayed: "?!!!?!?!?!" It is not accompanied by any character name indicating who is reacting.

Darn it. Something always misses testing...

This case, in general, verges on being over-dramatic. Given the series, that is acceptable, but Patrick very seldom gives any meaningful response.

This is because at the time I made this, I was over-reacting. This is nowhere near my best case, and I am willing to acknowledge this.

"...CONNECTION TO MATPAT'S LIES..." I genuinely do not think that Patrick was lying so much as making a poor case. If you want to argue that he is being dishonest, you can, but you are not supporting that case so much as the case that he has his information wrong.

Because at the time, Apollo and Klavier thought that he was intentionally trying to ruin Phoenix's reputation further (after the whole evidence-forging scandal), so that's why they called him a liar.

To my understanding and recollection (it's been a while, honestly, since I sat down and played the first game or original trilogy), after "Rise from the Ashes," throughout the series, those case-laws are largely ignored. To my understanding, Wright's failure to follow them is one of Patrick's major charges. This does not help your argument and is a major crux of his.

In all the games that I've seen so far, "Evidence Law" is followed most of the time. In fact, I don't really remember a time where this didn't happen. You are free to correct me if I'm wrong, however.

I question your choice of a sprite for MatPat. That guy doesn't really much resemble him, and he doesn't have a breakdown animation, making the climax a a little weak.

This is because I couldn't find a sprite resembling him in the Editor, so... sorry about that.

Why has Patrick been arrested? Slander? If so, ironically, under at least American law, that wouldn't stand. You would need to establish dishonesty, which I do not think you have, intent to do harm, which you've failed to do, and the capability to do harm, which, usually, is one of the harder elements to prove, but in this case, I'll grant it, as charges of legal violations or ignorance would be hurtful to any private attorney.

You are correct that he was being arrested for slander, but he was also being dishonest to the court, which would count as perjury. These are two crimes that MatPat in the case was arrested for. And he didn't just try to slander Phoenix; in the past, MatPat had made false claims about other video game characters, such as Mario from "Super Mario," Mega Man from "Mega Man," and Link from "The Legend of Zelda."

Nevertheless, thanks for reviewing this trial. It helps to make my future trials even better!

~BDC

[BlueDragonCody]

Hello everyone,

I had to delete the trial due to a malfunction with the permalink website I used. I will give you guys the link to the YouTube video of the now-deleted trial should you want to see it again.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4Jb8A5EoGc

[Hey]

Your response to the person who played your trial should be written in a spoiler tag, btw. Will make it take up less space and avoid spoiling it to anyone who visits this thread. That, and its a spoiler.