[T][CE] Turnabout Tomorrow ★

[kwando1313]

Nope. Part 3 will brutalize you.

Have fun!~

[Ferdielance]

So...

Spoiler : SPOILER Thoughts :

I don't want to review this, because I was in a team that was competing, but one question:

Is there any way to present the tape recorder in the final confrontation between Cross and the others?

[SwagmaWampyr]

Well since I'm in a bit I can say I definitely approve of DWAM's writing style. Doesn't seem long and drawn out to me, it comes across as very clever and witty, and it makes the characters and dialogue a joy to read. Very much looking forward to how this plays out, I'm nowhere as far as the actual case goes but I'm loving the constant back-and-forth.

And DWAMMIT, you're good at getting crap by the radar.

Oh, and first testimony, needed a walkthrough. So much for my intelligence boost.

EDIT: Just beat it and... my god.

Spoiler : ending :

This case is ARTWORK. It truly is. I'll be honest, it just got to a point where I was purely using the walkthrough and wasn't even trying to figure things out on my own (I was checking my answers with it, but I only outright stopped trying on Wright's testimony) because I was just so in love with the story and dialogue I no longer CARED about solving the case. That's REALLY the drawing point to this case: THE DIALOGUE. IT'S PERFECT. In almost every conversation, the characters just ping off of each other perfectly, leading to long exchanges of dialogue filled with witty retorts... it's just... it's incredible. I've played a lot of games in my time. Most of which are story and dialogue based. Not ONCE have I seen ANYTHING that compares to the sheer wit of Tomorrow's dialect. I wish I could say I'm exaggerating here. Because it totally sounds like I am. And you can totally believe that I am, because I would say you have a good reason not to believe me from how badly it sounds like I'm blowing it up. I'M NOT. If there is better written dialogue in any form of media, then I for one have yet to see it. And DWAM isn't even getting paid for this. I almost find it insulting.

On the subject of the dialogue, I'm sure people have complained about the narrative of the case, how it constantly goes to flashbacks with Cross and the rest of the cast (Usually Masterson) Some would say disrupts the style of AA and detracts from the experiences with the crime. Well PFFFFFFTTTT to them, as in my eyes, all it's served to do is to strengthen the backstory of each and every character involved, and it manages to give the cast notable exposition without even having an investigation phase: Truly a magnificent feat. Sure, it makes this less of a pure murder mystery, but this is MORE than a murder mystery, this is more than a free to play case on a website full of supercomputers who clearly have nothing better to do in their spare time: As I stated. THIS. IS. ARTWORK.

In fact, I'd like to extend further gratitude, as if I haven't been in constant praise of your decisions with this project (Both five minutes in and before actually even PLAYING it), for including a walkthrough with this: Because EVERYONE, EVERYONE, EVERYONE deserves to be able to experience the dialogue and the story of this case, not just the supercomputers who can do this stuff like it's nothing. I know for a fact that due to my aforementioned lack of intellect, I'd have never beaten the case without it unless I cheated. But seriously EVERYONE deserves to experience this. I mean... the PC is the one behind EVERYTHING. Who would EVER think or suspect that? Even if I was actually following the logic of the case, I'd have written it off as mere coincidence more than likely, as just the very idea would have just been... absurd. But it just works so PERFECTLY, and it adds SO much depth to the conflict within the case. And the best part is? When you consider that Yalt and Cross had never met each other face to face beforehand, their dialogue doesn't contradict their little scheme, it actually fits in quite well.

You've admitted that the difficulty in Part 3 kind of borders on unfair, and some people seem to share that sentiment... maybe that's so, I for one have no right to pass judgement on the difficulty or the logic of the case as I fully admit I just plain stopped trying to beat the game the legitimate way at a certain point. Be that as it may, as I've said over and over and over again: The dialect, narrative, and story are just top-notch: You will not see anything resembling this quality ANYWHERE else. I would go as far to say I'll never see anything resembling this quality ever again (Unless DWAM writes it). I mean, as I'm stating for the third time now, this isn't just a good case, this isn't just a superb case, this isn't even a remarkable case. It's ARTWORK.

Cases like these just make me want to drop everything I'm involved in, as there is more beauty in experience than creation. And this case is the absolute testament to that.

I SALUTE YOU. Now go finish Denouncement, because I'm totally hooked now.

[DWaM]

@Ferdie:

Spoiler : :

Sadly (for you), no.

@Wampyr:
I am... Wow. I am at an honest loss for words. Thank you. It... It really means a lot to me.

I really wish I could... at least say SOMETHING to all of that, but... I really... Can't think of anything else to say. ^^" It really means a lot to me that people have enjoyed this case to the point they ended up enjoying it. I am truly stunned and honored. Never really expected this going into the competition. All I was hoping for was the title of "that one case with that ONE really cool thing in it", but you have given me so much more and... Again, thank you.

[Bad Player]

So...

Spoiler : SPOILER Thoughts :

I don't want to review this, because I was in a team that was competing, but one question:

Is there any way to present the tape recorder in the final confrontation between Cross and the others?

Lol, I tried to do the same thing.

Also,

Now go finish Denouncement, because I'm totally hooked now.

[kwando1313]

Spoiler : Ending :

The final testimony is impossible to finish.

[Ferdielance]

Okay, okay, some comments...

Spoiler : thoughts :

These cutscenes are fantastic. The clumsy opening line ("Things of the past are such fragile things") didn't fill me with confidence, but the slick presentation and elegant loading screen sure did. More cases need to go in this direction - cutscenes that are relatively brief, but integrated with the court scenes and well-directed with establishing shots and solid timing. Authors limit themselves by sticking to the format of the original games when, as this case shows, the only real limit is what the trial author can imagine.

I dislike the rising genre of nihilistic super-murderer stories, since sociopaths are boring as a rule, but Masterson's relationship to Cross is absolutely central to this case and keeps it from becoming a dull Death Note imitator. I wasn't as happy with the bizarre inclusion of Phoenix, but all anybody is going to remember - and SHOULD remember - is how this case redefined the way a PC's history with other characters can center a story.

I'd recommend playing with a walkthrough or invisiclues, at least until the ambiguities in the part 3 profile presents are hammered out and some of the solutions are scaffolded a little better, but this one's easily worth playing with a walkthrough.

Hopefully other writers will take the right lessons from this (characters should have a sense of history, and presenting that history in tantalizing pieces is more effective than throwing in giant infodumps) and not the wrong ones (that making the PC the killer was the stroke of brilliance here, rather than the elegant way that device was handled).

Edit: Final thoughts:

Spoiler : Next step :

This deserves a post-comp release with bugfixes (some of the testimonies had all sorts of weird issues), spelling fixes, and more playability testing. One beta tester really isn't enough - believe me, I tried to give TR as thorough a test as I could, and a lot slipped by even then given the deadline.

If you get these issues addressed in time for the AAO awards, you're going to walk away with a ton of them, I'll bet, even in an insanely competitive year.

Groundbreaking work.

[DWaM]

Okay, okay, some comments... And my responses in red.

Spoiler : thoughts :

These cutscenes are fantastic. The clumsy opening line ("Things of the past are such fragile things") didn't fill me with confidence, but the slick presentation and elegant loading screen sure did. I think that more cases need to go in this direction - cutscenes that are relatively brief, but integrated with the court scenes and well-directed with establishing shots and solid timing. I think people limit themselves by sticking to the format of the original games when, as this case shows, the only real limit is what the trial author can imagine.
Well, firstly, you should be able to tell I am no stranger to the chesse cake. XD It's something that I tend to do, which is... erm... awkward, at times. ^^" As for the cutscenes, to be honest, I really did like adding them as little finishing touches to the thing, especially considering that, honestly, they didn't really take that long to make and still turn out quite presentable, I'd say.

I'm not a huge fan of borderline nihilistic super-murderer stories, since sociopaths are boring as a rule, but Masterson's relationship to Cross is absolutely central to this case and keeps it from becoming a dull Death Note imitator. I wasn't as happy with the way Yalt's character was handled, or the bizarre inclusion of Phoenix, but all anybody is going to remember - and SHOULD remember - is how this case redefined the way a PC's history with other characters can center a story.
True. To be honest, Yalt was something I wanted to fix, too. The problem was, due to the limitation of the case being trial-only, I was unable to find that perfect transitioning point for her character, especially considering she didn't really appear much in Part 1 (and, as you can imagine, due to the progression of the plot, it's something that I had to do... :/) And the final reason for including Phoenix well... for the lolz, I guess? XD I really didn't see much point in brining out a whole new character with only one-two testimonies, especially considering how much suspicion would be taken off of them, anyway. So, I suppose I just decided to add the only person that can never be the actual killer. ... Well.... You know what I mean.

I'd recommend playing with a walkthrough or invisiclues or something, at least until the ambiguities in the part 3 profile presents are hammered out and some of the solutions are scaffolded a little better, but this one's easily worth playing with a walkthrough.
Well, yes, I'll have to deal with some of the more obscure presents, but in my opinion, most of the contradictions of Part 3, while extremely hard, are also quite fair, in a way. One thing that was repeating through the entire story and was a handful of Masterson's dialogue is just how much small details actually matter (as the player finds out with, what Evo calls: "the worst memory contradiction ever". XD

Hopefully other writers will take the right lessons from this (characters should have a sense of history, and presenting that history in tantalizing pieces is more effective than throwing in giant infodumps) and not the wrong ones (OMG it was cool cuz the player did it!!!). It's definitely making me rethink the way I handle backstory in All the Brooks and Soldiers.
Yes, one of the things that always bothered me in a way was how in the original AA games, the history of the characters and past cases was always sort of shoved onto you instead of unraveled as the story progressed. Not saying I'm not guilty of this, as well, but I it is something I was trying to pay attention to. And I'm definetely looking forward to AtBaS (ya know... not just because I sorta helped or anything. Nope. Not at al- *shot*)

Spoiler : Next step :

This deserves a post-comp release with bugfixes (some of the testimonies had all sorts of weird issues), spelling fixes, and more playability testing. One beta tester really isn't enough - believe me, I tried to give TR as thorough a test as I could, and a lot slipped by even then given the deadline.

If you get these issues addressed in time for the AAO awards, you're going to walk away with a ton of them, I'll bet, even in an insanely competitive year.

Groundbreaking work.

Pretty much my plans, at the moment. It's amazing just how much spelling mistakes this thing has... ^^"

[Enthalpy]

I think I found a bug in the first cross-examination of part two.

Spoiler : :

Pressing on "Just as I was about to downstairs, I bumped into three men who were going to the office in question." has a one-letter frame that leads into a penalty conversation. I'm guessing there was a merged frame error somewhere in there.

[kwando1313]

Hmm... Not sure if I've asked yet, but can we get a track list?

[eighthbit]

Spoiler : Part 3 :

It was awesome. The characters were great, especially Cross. The twist was always there, we just didn't find it. There were strong feelings of emotion everywhere. It was awesome, and I hope that this thing gets awards! I've never seen such a twist like this, ever. The characters were at worst, refreshing and at best, completely mind-blowing. The ending was definitely heart-touching. And all around it was awesome. So yeah, DWaM, I hope you can make something even better for the next comp.

[Gumpei]

Spoiler : Part 1, TSub Spoilers :

Immediate theory: Cross is both the killer and E. There's a Rhea/Erlenmeyer relationship between him and Groud. Would explain why there was no investigation. And also dat cough. IT'S SUSPICIOUS (Maybe it was raining yesterday while he was helping Groud escape? ). And the fact that he calls himself Cross in the first place. So yeah. That is my theory and I am sticking by it. I DON'T TRUST MYSELF WHO CAN I TRUST (Also his name is Moriarty and that just screams of "I wake up each morning and kick the stray puppy that comes by my house." In fact, that's why he calls himself Cross, because he doesn't want people to know how evil he is based on his surname.)

And: (As "luck" would have it, I was in the building, as well, and I volunteered to help him.)

SUSPICIOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS

EDIT: (Considering when that last trial was...)

Cross murders everybody as E, but he doesn't want anybody else to be caught for it. He's defended all the defendants in the E serial killing cases because of this. Which would also explain why he's defending Ms. Yalt now, because he's the murderer in this case, as well.

[DWaM]

Spoiler : Part 1, TSub Spoilers :

Immediate theory: Cross is both the killer and E. There's a Rhea/Erlenmeyer relationship between him and Groud. Would explain why there was no investigation. And also dat cough. IT'S SUSPICIOUS (Maybe it was raining yesterday while he was helping Groud escape? ). And the fact that he calls himself Cross in the first place. So yeah. That is my theory and I am sticking by it. I DON'T TRUST MYSELF WHO CAN I TRUST (Also his name is Moriarty and that just screams of "I wake up each morning and kick the stray puppy that comes by my house." In fact, that's why he calls himself Cross, because he doesn't want people to know how evil he is based on his surname.)

And: (As "luck" would have it, I was in the building, as well, and I volunteered to help him.)

SUSPICIOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS

EDIT: (Considering when that last trial was...)

Cross murders everybody as E, but he doesn't want anybody else to be caught for it. He's defended all the defendants in the E serial killing cases because of this. Which would also explain why he's defending Ms. Yalt now, because he's the murderer in this case, as well.

Spoiler : :

Seems legit.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

OH SNAP THIS IS FORESHADOWING THAT POLLY IS THE TRUE CULPRIT OF TREV

I KNEW IT I KNEW IT I KNEW IT I KNEW IT

[Enthalpy]

Have you looked at that possible bug that I mentioned a few posts up?

[DWaM]

Yeah, I'm looking at it now... And I don't really see anywhere it could've strayed to a fail convo... The only part that could possibly lead to that is if the script suddenly jumped to the fail press convo because the player ended up clicking too fast when the editor was supposed to jump to the last frame of the covo...

Spoiler : :

Unless you're by chance referring to the intentional penalty... Which was, well, intentional.