Los casos no están al mismo nivel que el primero, la resolución de la mayoría es un poco floja y el único caso sobresaliente es el último, pero está lleno de deus ex y con un final pésimo. Irónicamente, el primero me tomo 4 años en terminarlo, este lo terminé en menos de 1 semana, lo que hace no haber pagado el internet y solo poder jugar videojuegos para pasar el rato (?

Aun así, es un juego disfrutable y no diría qué malo. Por cierto, Franziska besto wai- sería lo que diría, pero termina siendo repetitivo y cansado el chiste del látigo, así que ese puesto se lo lleva a mi andrógina favorita, Andrew.

I find the game, Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Justice for All,
DISAPPOINTING.

Justice for All or JFA for short, was a game with incredibly large shoes to fill. As the direct sequel to the acclaimed Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, JFA had to have create an overarching storyline that connected back to the first, an interesting set of cases that depending on the director's choice should be as hard or harder than the cases present in AA1, as well as new gameplay mechanics. If one or multiple of these were not present the game would undoubtably be a massive let-down... Unfortunately, Justice for All is exactly that, a let-down. The sequel responsibilities were not upheld and thus this game tumbles around like a lawyer who doesn't know how to law-yer.

If that bad joke wasn't obvious enough, let's talk case 1, the tutorial. As a direct sequel to AA1, JFA had the choice to either not have a tutorial or have one. If you add a tutorial, then the game has to be designed around potential newcomers in mind, rather than fans of the first title. To do this effectively you would need to introduce all the major players, the main mechanics, and most importantly: a overarching narrative that DOES NOT require playing AA1. Case 1 is an immediate downward dip to mediocrity as the case starts with Phoenix getting smashed on the skull into amnesia. Yes, amnesia... Because instead of showing off their narrative game design muscles again, they opted for a very safe sequel approach. If Phoenix doesn't know how to be a lawyer, guess we gotta teach him again! hardy har har! ...I would've much preferred if instead of amnesia to present a tutorial, they relied more on a gameplay driven structure. The case opens by giving most of the evidence and moving straight into a first cross-examination, it would've been far more wise to instead use the cross-examination as a means to drop the potential new player in a safe playground of sorts where mistakes aren't punished so they could begin to understand the rules that make up the game. Of course, this is assuming that the person playing is new, instead of a returning one. I would wager that if there was NO tutorial instead of one, it would've been for the game's benefit. Especially considering just how much of a sequel it is. This is showcased exceptionally well at the very end of case one where it ends in a very obvious statement that is completely pointless if you have not played AA1. With AA1 knowledge, the statement still feels off but that's by design, not an accident in writing. The game rarely pushes this overarching narrative in most of the cases, but each time it does it ultimately reflects negatively on the experience. This issue stems from a variety of places such as characters, difficulty, and player-narrative dissonance.

Let's start with difficulty, out of the four cases in JFA (compared to AA1's five), case 1 is as much a pushover as a tutorial case should be. The rest of the cases are around the difficulty of case 4 from AA1, if not slightly harder. Not a single one breaches case 5, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing or incorrect. Originally AA1 only had four cases, so being on par or slightly higher makes sense right? No, it doesn't. AA1's cases increment in difficulty as the game goes on, but never feel over-bearing in any way. JFA is the opposite, starting easy and immediately busting to levels where it is expected that one has played the original game. If that's expected, why the tutorial? I harp on this point a lot because it really sets the tone of how little thought was put into this game. With case 1 as is, case 2 should be a teaching ground for the new mechanics as well as a case to prepare players to start thinking critically, but not forcing too much effort by giving the player a nibble. That's how it was done in AA1 after all. However, it all goes down the drown from the get-go. Case 2 opens like any other Ace Attorney case, with a little nibble of plot. However, just like Cases 3 and 4 of AA1, the nibble does not give away the ending which contrasts AA1's case 2 which does. Ok, so it wants to be a sequel while baiting new players too, I will leave that book closed now. However, the game does more against it's favor when it comes to returning players as well. Case 2 introduces a brand new mechanic to the game that tries to improve on the good intentions of AA1's great game design style fusion. Psyche-locks are basically mini court-testimonies that occur when you talk to someone and they either are hiding something or lying. In this way, the continued fusion of Trial and Investigation gameplay styles is enhanced, however I believe the change to be faultily designed. One of the smallest things about a court case in AA1 is that while it had a good few testimonies to go through and much evidence to mull over, if you made it through the session, even if their was no resolution, you would get all of your mistakes gauge back... JFA FUCKED IT UP. Psyche-locks bring the courtroom-exclusive mistakes gauge into the open air, and irreversibly change how a player plays. The mistake gauge no longer refills itself for free until the very end of the case for the next one. However, with if you solve a Psyche-lock you will regain some lost parts of the gauge (I will refer to as pips). Most importantly is that you do not know how many pips you will gain from a Psyche-lock. So if you are down a lot from a trial session you might hope for big money only to be shafted with nothing. And worse is if you end an investigation with fewer pips. Any less than full is getting a court stacked against your favor. Even if this is an intended design decision to make a whole case feel like it has more weight than the prior game it does not stack up against the arguably erroneous design of the Psyche-lock minigame itself. You cannot fail a Psyche-lock by design, however, you can lose all but one pip regardless of attempts or previous pips had or whatever. The one main issue is that to solve a Psyche-lock can require evidence that you don't have. In this fashion, the game flat-out lies to you by acting like it is similar to a witness testimony in court. You can in fact show-up with not enough evidence at no fault of your own, leading to failed attempts to crack what might be the next lead in the investigation. Some Psyche-locks may even be locked behind other people's Psyche-locks, leading to more evidence based shenanigans that does nothing but bait a failing player into a warped save-scumming mindset. In this way the game is baiting the unknowing player to play like a dirty freak instead of a good, forward-thinking, puzzle-solving Samaritan.

Difficulty is of course only one facet of this game's failings, while it may be the biggest other problems seep into this grotesque boredom belly without a player's notice. Most particularly is characters and music. These critiques are perhaps a little more up to reader discretion than I would otherwise intend but I promise it is for good reason. For one, the music in Justice for All is really depressing mixed bag. There are a fair few tracks that hold water and a good amount at that, but an equal amount that range from a let-down to genuinely irritating. The same also goes for characters in all honesty. Most of the time, the two are in tandem as well. Many times an annoying character would appear with the most annoying tracks and I would immediately turn my sound off it was so bad. I literally started listening to the soundtrack of AA1 in place of JFA because I was getting so upset at the utter downgrade present in track quality. And the characters are exactly the same way with a few minor exceptions. These exceptions are of course the main characters! ...Kinda. Unlike AA1 where everyone has to be introduced, players are fully expected from the on-set to know Phoenix Wright, Miles Edgeworth, Mia and Maya Fey, and most importantly, the prosecutor of case 4 of AA1. With no knowledge of anyone before hand, the game places them in front of you and says "please clap"! Most importantly of all, is the knowledge and understanding of Phoenix Wright and Miles Edgeworth as characters. If you have digested AA1, then the story of JFA is slightly-baffling. It is partially a reminder and redo of the completed AA1 story arcs! The only part that isn't has to do with case 4's narrative and gameplay structure which is what almost elevates this game back into the limelight.

Case 4 is JFA's final case, and with it, the game's last and only trick. At the beginning of the case, the player is given what is assumed to be an obvious task with a hideously difficult mountain to overcome for it. However, as the case progresses more and more onward, things shift so much so that the characters and the player must question the game itself, the characters intentions, the overarching narrative, the end goal, and most importantly, our own client. This case uses it's pure unique story-beats ideas to drive home the main story of this entry in Ace Attorney: the goal of a trial is to find the truth, not an outcome. This is Justice for All's attempt at the AA1 case 5 game-solving pants-pissage. Unfortunately, I have to conclude that it simply does not do it like its predecessor. The main problem with this attempt is that the cases leading into case 4 simply don't offer enough unique charms on their own to be deserving of a case 5 pants-piss. Why? Because case 2 and 3 feel more like dirty rehashes of AA1 case 4 then true solid standalone cases. The pieces of this attempt almost line-up, but the game plays it way too safe and ultimately makes the cases leading into 4 feel samey rather than distinct. And when I say it's close, I really mean it!! With no spoilers I can say that most major elements are reused for the case 4 moment, but the elements themselves don't feel unique enough to properly create a moment worthy of a game-ending case.

And now the most troubling issue with Justice for All, player-character dissonance. A point I continue to pursue with my original AA1 review is that the game's intended design philosophy is that of complete player-character immersion. This is still the true goal of Ace Attorney as a game I do believe. However, I chose the word dissonance with much dismay. Many moments in this game are plagued with a such mental stretches that make me wonder if Phoenix is simply guessing like I am, or if he knows more than he is telling the player. These moments riddle cases 2 through 4 all over. Or at the least, they do in the first halves of cases. Most second-halves have an equally bad opposite problem! You know everything and now you have to work with Phoenix to play catch-up in the court! The constant mental-gymnastics required to get everyone else on the player's page diminishes any and all potential for a unique narrative gaming experience, tarnishing the great claims to fame that Ace Attorney 1 held. The absolute worst moment of complete and utter bad faith player-character dissonance in the game is in case 4's second half. Without ever explaining it as a possibility, not just in JFA but in AA1 as well, the player has to make an incredible leap in logic to re-understand how the pressing mechanic works during a testimony. For two instances in the entirety of these two games, you have to press a statement, then press the prior statement to proceed the trial. A player who fully understands what is supposed to be shown but simply is conditioned by the utter lack of feedback from all previous cases and trials and individual testimonies to continue pressing every statement will be served their greatest sense of anti-accomplishment yet. If ruining the ability to immerse as Phoenix is bad enough, then completely destroying any chance of potential character to player control is what spells disaster for this title.

All in all, Justice for All commits the cardinal sin of never ever living in a vacuum regardless of timeframe. Having to follow up AA1 is incredibly hard, especially considering the great shoes that have since been unfilled. At the core, Justice for All is not a bad game, but it is an incredibly laughable follow-up. With a complete fail at player-character immersion, a story that attempts a lot but ultimately fails to follow through, and a game that steps on the tried and true game design of the past, Justice for All is the worst sequel possible for AA1. Perhaps if valued independently of the first, Justice for All would be seen for its incredible attempts at all of these things, instead of the shattered remains of old fulfilled ones.

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney is a tough game to follow up, as it pretty much establishes a perfect formula and ends you on an incredible high. A follow-up to the game seems simple, but was probably presented a difficult issue: do we risk going back to the well too much, or do we risk turning the formula on its head? The developers chose to incorporate a little bit of both into Justice for All, and as a result ended up with the worst of both worlds.

The game follows the same formula as the previous: every case will be a new, mostly standalone mystery with a somewhat loose connecting thread between them all. The game fails to really iterate on the gameplay of the prior game, with only two new substantial mechanics (Soul Locks and profiles as evidence) being introduced so I'd recommend giving the first and second games some space between each other.

The first case is fine, albeit a little annoying. It utilizes a common video game trope that is quickly grating, although the case is fairly short so you won't have to tolerate it for much longer. The first thing you'll really notice is that the music, which was so essential to the first game, is noticeably worse. It's not a major dropoff in quality, but none of the themes hit with the same intensity as the first game.

The second case is pretty good! I had a very satisfying moment where all the pieces clicked and I understood where the case was going at exactly the same moments as the characters. That feels pretty essential for any mystery stories, and it feels like the writers did a good job at drip feeding the information to the player.

Anyone who's played this game knows about the third case. It sucks, and feels pretty throwaway (although the resolution ties pretty nicely into the overall themes of the game). The characters, the central mystery, and the resolution to the mystery all irritated me. Definitely pace yourself once you get to this case, because if you can get past this case you are golden.

Case four is a straight banger. It neatly ties together all the themes of the previous cases, including call backs to almost every case thus far. It puts the central characters in a truly difficult situation that is fantastic to watch play out, and it never is predictable. I was on the edge of my seat this entire case, and it has a truly satisfying and thrilling finale.

Justice for All had a difficult job, and it doesn't entirely succeed. The cases are uneven, the gameplay a tad stale, and it has inferior music to the predecessor game. But like the previous game, it absolutely ends on a high that pretty much makes up for any misgivings I had about the previous cases. If you like the first game, this is an ultimately worthy follow-up.

If Case 3 didnt exist (and pearl during that one part in case 2), this would have definitely been better than the first game. The first tutorial case kinda sucks here, but the second and fourth cases are really good! (other than that pearl scene). the other big new character is franziska, who does a GREAT job at replacing Edgeworth and I hope to see more of her. Pearl is great when she isnt... you know.

i still recommend this to anyone who loved the first game, but dont expect it to be as great as the first one. And good fucking luck with the third case LOL

dam this wholeheartedly is not great at all


Gameplay/Mechanics l 7/10
The gameplay actually is improved from the first one by adding presenting profiles,but the gameplay loop is getting tiresome ,i hope that they improved this on next games because its going to get bad.so i think gameplay on this one is worse than the other one,only because im getting tired of the gameplay loop though because the gameplay is a straight upgrade.

What i said for the first game still apllies:

"Pointing out contradictions and objecting to the witness bullshit is really fun,the game is not that interesting mechanicaly or that hard but the whole tension that is in the courtroom make even more satisfying catch witnesses lying

"Exploration can be a bit tiring sometimes but is generally fine."


Story:Characters/Writing/Lore l 6,5-7/10
Even though the game still has the charm in the writing of the first game,it has worse characters,i like new ones like pearls but there are another ones like franzeska that just dissapointing me or other ones like regina that just annoy me,but even the new ones dont get a lot of depth,also there isnt anything resembling a plot connecting the cases in this game and its just less interesting that the first game,again maybe this is because this is the second game with the same formula,and maybe im getting tired,but i genunly think its worse.

Part of what i said for the first game still aplies,so what i said for the first game:

"Really good,i like the characters,it has fun writing,each case has its own depth and lore,the main cast consistently get depth added along the game not making them stale,and its just entertaining"

Sound l 8,5/10
The sound is basically the same as last game except that the music is a little worse

What i said for the for the first game:

"Its not the music that makes sound in this game so special,it is its usage of the music and sound effects."

"The game knows when to stop the music and when to resume it,it does this on perfect timings to make things more intense"

"It also does this with the use of sound effects,they make every move feel more powerfull,for example the sound effect of the attorney's throwing their hands to their desk,or another example is von karma finger snap."
"It all sounds crisp and makes thing more intense"


Graphics/Aesthetics l 7,5/10

Graphics are the same from the first game

What i said for the first game:

"The graphics/aesthetics are decent but what i want to talk about is the camera use in the courtroom,since it moves not instantly (most of the time) it either manually moves to the person talking or quickly switchs between the people in the courtroom,and it all adds to the charm of the game."

Lenght of the game/Content:Cases l 4,5-5/10
Now the important part of these reviews,the case breakdown,this is the most important part of the ace attorney reviews

In question of lenght there is the tutorial case,two normal sized cases and a long case,so you are getting less bang for you buck off the back,not even starting to mention the quality of the cases that is way inferior the first game

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS IF YOU DIDNT PLAYED THE GAME OR YOU WANT TO PLAY IT DO NOT READ FURTHER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

Case rank and review:

4:Turnabout Big Top
I could talk all day about how bad is this case but im going to sum it up for you,there isnt a single good thing i can say about it apart from the usual likeable characters and there is plenty of bad points:

1:Disgusting pedo love triangle that nobody in the game says a thing against.

2:Bad and annoying new characters,seriously i couldnt care less about any of the fucks at the circus,except the poor owner guy that got killed for such a selfish reason,fuck everyone else,Max,Trilo,Regina,Moe,moe fuck moe man the game gives him so much screen time for purposfully awful and annoying jokes is not funny nor interesting,fuck Acro too,fuck ben too,i hate the whole circus so unlikeable.

3:The giant logic leap,the cape incident,it doesnt make sense and isnt satisfying at all.

4:Acro should not get sympathy for anyone and the game trying to potray him as sympathetic is just plain wrong,he killed the person he himself said owe his life too and tried to kill his daughter,and even though he said that he killed the man he owe his life too,he doesnt like fucking sad at all or even apologizes to regina for killing his dad,he doesnt seem like he gived a fuck.

5:The exploration is awful,constantly having to go and backtrack for every tiny little thing

6:The two first trials are literally useless,they boiled down two,the guy in the suit was not max and that the criminal went floating in the air,you waste hours on those two little things and is just annoying and frustrating,the rest is proven in the final trial

7:It doesnt add anything to the overall plot of the game,not any characters,not plot points not nothing,1-3 also did this but it was good,this is trash.


3:The Lost Turnabout
I dont have much to talk about here,is just a bad tutorial case with an annoying vilain,some dumb plotholes most importantly the broken neck contradiction that you cant point out,an also annoying defendant,look there isnt anything great on this case but it at least its short and has an interesting concept with the lost of memories


2:Reunion,And Turnabout
Not bad,but not great,i say its slightly worse than 1-2 and 1-3.Main good and bad points

1:You get introduced to Pearls and Franzeska,the two main new characters in this game,i like pearls she is innocent and has cute dialogue,franzeska is just kind of dissapointing,i was expecting the manfred aura,he was an amazing villain,but franzeska is just kind of annoying,even though the concept of a von karma succesor is interesting,i hope they do something more with her.Both of them dont get a lot of depth if any,especially franzeska,she basically has the same stick of beating wright the whole game and they dont add depth to her even though she has a lot of screentime,edgeworth in comparision was a much better more in depth character and prosecutor,i will get in more depth into this in 2-4 though.

2:The main antagonist,Mimi or whatever her name was interesting but i wish they wouldve explored more how she feels about her sister and that kind of thing,but i still think she is an interesting antagonist that had a twist that suprised me.

3:The other antagonist,pearls mother just kinda passed and was never talked about again,she says she is planning revenge or sum but atleast in this game she didnt do nothing

4:Its just a good case,nothing that i can i say about it is awful,good trials,decent investigation,satisfying ending,is just good


1:Farewell,My Turnabout
Amazing case,easily the best in the game and is top 3 so far (i played this one and the first game) but i still think it has its flaws.

1:Off the bat the tension is great,a lot of things happen and quickly letting you not time to think whats going on,it reminds me of ghost trick a little

2:One of my main problems with the case is franzeska,she as i said throught the game doesnt get a lot of depth and she just kind of wants revenge nothing more,and this was supposed to be the case that added depth to her,but apart from the ending,franziska is just as plain as before and edgeworth outshines her as a character and gets more depth and develoment,in the ending franziska does get an interesting scene but its too late.

3:So the first half is amazing,but the second half falls short on some parts for me,matt engarde apart from the reveal is a one dimensional villain,de killer also doesnt get a lot of depth apart from well being an assasin,also atleast for me the weight of the decision of guilty or not guilty just was not existent since i always choosed not guilty and it didnt have the emotional impact i think the game wanted to on me.

4:Andrew is a good character and she has depth,even though she doesnt have personality (at least a memorable one) she is interesting enough with the suicide incident and his relationship with the defendant,the victim and her mentor

5:Edgeworth is amazing on this chapter like always.

6:One problem that i have is more personal and maybe just a me thing but,i dont agree with the way the game potrays the court and its roles and im not really talking about phoenix because at least in my playthrough he granted matt the not guilty but he didnt want it.but im clearly seeing that the game is putting a message i dont personally agree on,i think that everyone should have a fair trial with its defense that should seek his benefit should it be full acquittal or a lower penalty,the prosecution its job its to found the defendant fully guilty and when negotiating a deal with the defense for a lower penalty for the defendant to always get the biggest sentence,the truth is to come out in the clash of these two parties,its not their job to find the truth nor should i think they should go out of their way for,because then it stops being a fair trial for one or both parties invovled (most of the time the defense),i know that is a game and they think that this way it wouldve be more interesting,but even then i dont agree,it would be really interesting be defending someone you truly dont know if it he is guilty or not.


Overall even though the last case is amazing and the second one is decent,it doesnt save it from the other two for being trash


Playability l 3/3
game works as intended


OVERALL
If this was your first ace attorney game,i see how you could give this a 7,but i know better,and this is not ideal,it does everything worse than the game before and is just not a enjoyable experience,i hope the next game really improves upon this one

5 to Light 6

After having played the first one, needless to say I was very excited to play this game. It's not...as good? But it's still pretty good.

It's pretty much the same gameplay formula, with a new game mechanic in the form of the psyche-locks. The music is still good, the writing is still solid.....for the most part.

I still love these characters and seeing them evolve. Pearl kinda reminds me of my youngest sister and Franziska is...I need someone like Franziska in my life.

The one thing that makes this game slightly worse is the inconsistency. When this game is good, it is REALLY GOOD....But when it's bad? Eh...

Yeah, the third case sucks kinda hard, and the way everything went down is just way too convenient and dumb, even for Ace Attorney standards. That and I think the tutorial case is a bit weak in this one compared to the first game.

With that said, I think this game is woth playing for the second and SPECIFICALLY the last case alone. The second case has insane repercussions in both this and the third game, and the last case will grab you by the balls and never let go. I mean this in the best possible way.

It's worth playing at least once, definitely don't skip this one.