Presentation & Bugs / Sprites & Graphics:
Pretty much clear! Occasionally the bench/witness stand would disappear for a frame… but this was only every once in a while, and could just be the player’s fault. If you happen to see one of these, you should fix it… but it’s minor, so don’t worry too much about it. Sprites and graphics are otherwise fine. You used mostly canon sprites, and all the custom edits were of good quality. You did a great of going further beyond the canon games when you had multiple sprites at once. You also front-facing sprites when people should be facing sideways or vice versa at appropriate times to convey physical movement.Writing & Characterization:
This was generally strong, although there are a few places that I think it needs some touch-ups.
First, Edgeworth was too informal too often. This was especially true whenever the topic of Phoenix came up… No matter what happened between them seven years ago, I don’t think Edgeworth would ever refer to Phoenix as “Just a guy who bluffs a lot.” If nothing else, he would at least use “man” instead of “guy.” (I know this line comes back later, and it’s awesome… but it’s just too OOC the first time around.) I would go through and try to tighten up Edgeworth’s dialogue a little bit. Kristoph also has a handful of lines that I think are a bit too informal, but Edgeworth is much more problematic.
Second, Trucy’s entire trial basically needs to be revised. The things everyone says are fine, they just need to be rephrased a bit. (Note that I said “revised,” not “rewritten.”) It’s just bizarre for everyone to start screaming clauses instead of speaking in sentences—especially formal, eloquent characters like Themis and Edgeworth. If you want to emphasize one or two frames by writing in that style, but it just feels weird when the whole section is written like that.
Besides that, writing was fine! All characters were within the bounds of canon characterization, even if it wasn’t always the way I interpreted them. Your ideas were punchy and witty, but they were marred by near constant typos and awkward phrasings… but we’ll get to that in a later section. Using [bracketed text] also broke the immersion a bit… but I think you went right up to the acceptable amount.
is pure genius.Case Logic:
First, random comments/nitpicks:
Couldn’t the fact that they took the victim’s locket with the picture of his daughter (which would provide an angle for police to investigate his identity) suggest Kristoph and Phoenix didn’t want the victim’s identity revealed? (If you want the player to continue on the “proper” path, you could have Themis smack this down by pointing out that the locket hasn’t been accepted as proper evidence for this appeal, and even though the court has accepted that the victim had A disappearing locket, Apollo hasn’t proven that it had a photo of Trucy or that it was Phoenix/Kristoph who took it.)
“Mr. Wright could potentially face a death sentence for Gavin's crime. He'd die for his life being saved.” Please rephrase this into an actual question or request. We can respond to questions and requests; it’s more difficult to respond to mere statements.
You should have Apollo explicitly claim/explain (even in internal monologue, to keep it from Kristoph) that’s he’s arguing that the video Phoenix is intending to present is a fake created after Zak’s death with Pearl. The way it is, it’s not totally clear, and almost sounds like it was the agreement to duel for Trucy that was done after the fact… This part needs to be clarified a bit. (I would also elaborate upon Zak’s confession a bit, since it was a relatively small plot point in AJ and players may have forgotten about it.)
You should also clarify and foreshadow the DD Act. The explanation goes by pretty quickly, and it’s not really totally clear how it’ll affect and help Trucy, so… this should be clarified a bit. As for foreshadowing, I get that it’s your tie-in to Blackquill, but it kind of comes out of nowhere and feels almost like a deus ex machina. I would bring it up when introducing Edgeworth as Chief Prosecutor and/or when Themis “threatens” Edgeworth regarding his prestige. (Additionally, when it gets mentioned the first time, you could also have Kristoph act intrigued/confused about it and Apollo NOT look confused, to further foreshadow that Apollo knows about it.)
I would also try to clarify the segment where Apollo argues that Kristoph and Phoenix were working together. In this segment Apollo is just coming up with whatever nonsense he can to continue the trial, so it’s okay if it’s a bit muddy, but I’d try to make it a shade or two clearer.
Finally, at the end, it’s a bit silly for the characters to just go “it was Polly’s first trial, we can’t hold him responsible lol.” Maybe Edgeworth (and that’s a HUGE maybe), but it seems extraordinarily unlikely for the judge. Instead, to me it makes more sense to just say that even if Polly made a mistake, that doesn’t translate into guilt for Trucy.
Now, general comments:
Turnabout Trickery is like a “case 5” for Apollo Justice that attempts to resolve some of its plot threads and plot holes while transitioning into Dual Destinies. And it does it wonderfully. You take the (now, I think, relatively popular?) fan-theory that it was Trucy who forged the ace in 4-1—and take it way farther than anyone else I’ve seen, while bringing in a bunch of other plot elements. The case builds upon and comports with the existing games in a way that is clever and adds depth.
This is a case that, at first glance, seems like it’s just going to be going over what happened in one of the canon tutorial cases—so the fact that you were able to keep what is effectively a retrial so engaging is truly impressive.Proofreading & Clarification:
This… is where you need the most work. From just the beginning:
260: dept --> debt
249: wouldn’t --> would
74: a strict --> strictly
117: I’d put quotes around “Shadi”
121: begin --> am beginning
142: disposed --> disposed of
145: tell the truth already --> just tell the truth; you’ve --> you had
148: his --> my (I think?)
152: sir --> Sir
155: resolving --> resorting
167: tell --> told; I wouldn’t get --> avoided
182: paranoic --> paranoid
206: whenever I know --> I know whenever
389: called --> called the
230: no one else, but --> none other than
390: there --> at the restaurant (right now it almost sounds like you’re talking about Phoenix’s trial)
413: four cards --> four of the cards
420: using the “proving it” card --> “prove” it with the card
424: I’ve proven --> I proved
428: also he’s --> Mr. Edgeworth himself is
442: out you --> you out
452: now it --> it now
456: testimonies --> the testimonies
464: smuck --> shmuck; a --> the
465: Just replace the first half with “That’s how you refer to your rival?”
470: chic --> chit
474: testimonies --> the testimonies
I’m not going to be pointing out the errors from here on out. Please get a proofreader and iron out the rest of the script on your own. (Including the penalty conversations!)
Also please note that the character’s name is Spark Brushel
Two other general grammar comments. First, capitalization; nicknames should be capitalized when used in place
of a name. For example, “Daddy” should be capitalized when Trucy calls Phoenix that. The rule of thumb is that it should be capitalized if you could replace it with the person’s name and the sentence would still hold. For instance, in “I think Daddy went to the store,” “Daddy” is capitalized because you could replace it with “Phoenix,” but in the sentence “I think my daddy went to the story,” “daddy” is not capitalized because you could not replace it with “Phoenix.” And second, you don’t need a space after an ellipsis when the ellipsis begins a sentence/textbox.Music & Sound Effects:
I would add sfx at frame ~3217.
I think you also need a “Take that!” sfx when you say Trucy forged the ace. (If you were trying to do something special… it fell flat. If you really want to have no sound, try adding a short pause after the present where the “Take that!” would be.)
Besides that, sfx were used appropriately and music was generally fitting. There were a couple of short segments without music that I thought could have used some, but that might have messed with the timing of the previous or subsequent tracks, so it’s not that big a deal. The only other comment I’d make is that the music for the few two testimonies might be a bit too intense for being the first two testimonies… but that’s up to you.i hope my 'check 1' didn't make you think you weren't getting a thorough review