Phoenix Wright - Video Game Writers

Written by Brian Shea | Friday, August 5, 2011

Platforms:	Game Boy Advance, Nintendo DS
Publisher(s):	Capcom
Developer(s):	Capcom
Genre(s):	Investigative
Release Date:	October 11, 2001
ESRB Rating:	T
Buy It/Rent It/Skip It?:	Rent It

Before L.A. Noire, there was a game called Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney. While Phoenix Wright is now a recognizable character thanks to high sales and an ?OBJECTION? internet meme, the series started out as a cult classic by allowing players to get a feel for what it?s like to hunt for evidence at a crime-scene and then actually take that evidence to court to use as they see fit. While that mechanic was exponentially expanded upon for Rockstar and Team Bondi?s L.A. Noire, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney did a lot of what made L.A. Noire so innovative ten years before L.A. Noire hit shelves.

The game places you in the shoes of Phoenix Wright, a new attorney looking to break into the business of defending the accused. During the course of the game, players will take on progressively more difficult cases. As with most games, the first case sees players participating in nothing more than an interactive tutorial. During this time, players will learn the importance of paying attention to witness testimony, as well as any evidence encountered.

The learning continues into the second case, which really ups the ante in terms of story progression. In addition to giving some depth to the story and kick-starting Phoenix Wright?s career as a defense attorney,? the second case also introduces players to the recurring adversary: star prosecutor, Miles Edgeworth.

The game does an excellent job of matching you up against Edgeworth, who becomes a very strong rival. The character development is stellar in that regard, as you often are unsure as to whether or not Edgeworth is a bad guy, or simply just a strong rival. Either way, his arrogance will drive you to want to destroy him in court, and his out-of-nowhere objections will make you want to destroy him out of court.

The cast of characters are very well-written, often making the player find themselves rooting for or against certain characters. Even though all of the dialog (well, except for ?take that,? ?hold it? and ?objection?) is written, the organic way the characters progress throughout the case feels natural and rarely forced. The characters encountered in most cases are highly entertaining as well.

The gameplay certainly was revolutionary in how it was implemented to give a strong feeling of being a lawyer. The idea of finding evidence and then working hard to use that evidence in a way that is meaningful to your cause is, simply put, thrilling.

Perhaps the best idea found in Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney is in the cross-examination segments. During these segments, the player must take a metaphorical magnifying glass to a witness? testimony. These are the moments that are the most taxing in regards to using the evidence properly.

Much like L.A. Noire?s interrogation system, there are two ways to call a person?s lie. If you don?t have direct evidence, you can ?press? them, which almost serves as L.A. Noire?s ?doubt? button. If you do have direct evidence, however, you can ?present? to them, which is riskier, but yields greater rewards. Unlike L.A. Noire?s interrogation mechanic, the story does not allow for mistakes, and thus, the cases can only play out in one, exact way.

Unfortunately, these cross-examination segments bring with them insurmountable imbalances that really tarnish the overall experience of the game. There are several times where the witness will state things that so obviously contradict evidence that the game couldn?t alert you of the discrepancy any clearer without displaying an alert of ?this directly contradicts evidence!? (which it does do at times, believe it or not.)

While the obvious ones aren?t game-breaking, where the imbalances really come in to hurt the experience is on the more difficult side of the spectrum. There are times where the player will be required to make connections that aren?t just challenging, they are near impossible. The issue is the same one found in L.A. Noire?s interrogations: you can?t decide how you use the evidence, just when.

There were times when I was asked to make connections that were incredibly loose, so I presented piece of evidence after piece of evidence to no avail. Even though several pieces of evidence fit the objection better than the one the game was actually looking for, I ended up being penalized due to my ?wrong? evidence presentations.

The issue with the trial-and-error style of gameplay in some cases is that not only does it dramatically slow down the pacing of the game, but each time you present the wrong piece of evidence, you are penalized. Get penalized too much, and no matter what has transpired in the trial to that point, your client will automatically be found guilty.

In one case, I was penalized too many times, and even though I had proven the innocence of the defendant, my penalization instantly, and seemingly miraculously, was enough for the judge to convict my client of murder. I understand that you can?t just go grasping for straws and expect to win the case in a game like this, but there should?ve been some kind middle of the road point (such as the person the player was currently trying to place the charges on going free). It?s a story complaint more than anything, but it really is a valid issue when the story and gameplay go so hand-in-hand.

The worst part about the above situation is that it occurred about 45 minutes into a trial. Before each new chapter, the game prompts you to save, but those are the only times that it actually prompts you. Sure, you can save any time you want, but if you are really into a trial, you realistically won?t.

The reason this is a big deal is that if you do rack-up too many penalties, as mentioned before, your client will be found guilty. Once your client is found guilty, it?s game over for you, meaning you have to start again at your last save point. If you didn?t take it upon yourself to save in the middle of the trial somewhere, you?ll be replaying those 45 minutes, just as I had to. The game would have really benefited from an imbedded checkpoint system beyond what it does with the save-prompt at the start of each chapter.

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney is certainly a unique experience. With the complimenting field and courtroom settings, players get a good feel, in a video game sense, of what it?s like to take on a difficult case as the defense attorney. While the cross-examination sections are where the game soars the highest, it?s unfortunately also where it falls the hardest. With a few different design decisions, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney could have been one of the greatest games for the DS. Instead, it?s simply a great experience marred by some highly frustrating mechanics.

Dug This? Read These:

About the Author

Brian Shea Brian is the Associate Editor and a founding member of VideoGameWriters.com. Brian is also the Guitar Hero Lead Editor and co-founder of TheHeroFeed.com, the world's #1 independent Guitar Hero-based website. Brian has been writing for over half a decade, having gotten his start in music journalism. You can follow him on Twitter @BrianPShea.

Source: http://videogamewriters.com/project-backlog-phoenix-wright-ace-attorney-ds-review-18445

moscow dc universe online gordon brown iphone 4g iphone 4g cystic fibrosis mila kunis