/aog/ - Attorney Online General

>"Hurr what's wrong with the prosecution's rebuttal being wrong?"

So Yew was right.

Wrong. She proved that it was forged because the defendant was left-leaning and the diary contained right-wing text, which was never EVER disproved.

>Mad that Yew convinced the judge

That's her job senpai.

The judge stopped them because Yew was gonna take the case places instead of a 3 hour REBUTTE circle that Gick and Verin wanted.

>"Hurr what's wrong with the prosecution's rebuttal being wrong?"

You seemed to have read me wrong.
I was saying that Yew's theories were never proven right nor wrong so they couldn't be used as evidence.

>These delusional shitposters thought crashing a case with no survivors is a win.
>They don't realize that's not a good NOT-GUILTY.
>It literally defeats the purpose of 6 hours of casing for the defense to win on bullshittery and confusing a judge who even straight up said they were not paying attention.

>A case where Frenzy and Verin are pissed off and everyone else is pretty much okay with it.
>Not good.

>Wrong. She proved that it was forged because the defendant was left-leaning and the diary contained right-wing text,

The doc says something about political discussion going nowhere, so I'm not inclined to agree with you that anything was proven.

>Gick was pissed
>the peanuts were mad
>The witnesses just wanted it to end.
>The ONLY ones laughing were on defense.
>Good
Ok then

Steno here, that was a mistake to put.

>Gick the tryhard was pissed
>The peanuts thought it was funny
>The witness wanted it to end because he was nervous
>The defense were laughing at how salty Frenzy and Verin were
>Not good

>Steno here, that was a mistake to put

Yeah, I guess it was a mistake to leave out the most vital piece of information from the entire case, without which this doc is completely useless because nothing is proven within it.

ayy lmao I'm glad to see this community hasn't changed at all ever since I left (except that you guys got baited into voting yes for waifufags wewww)

I love you guys. Never change.

>Verin constantly talks about how he wants to face a crooked defense
>He finally gets to face one
>He loses and bitches about it

Gee really gets your brain kickin eh jimbo

>actual meta discussion subtly turns into a post-case shit flinging complete with namedropping and false flagging

It's almost like that one guy was right about shitposters taking over every time discussion is had OUT

Really fires those neurons

That's because every time there's a disagreement people jump to le shitposting boogeyman.

>Has said several times the only thing that upset him was gick being shat on.
>Saw him complement the defense several times
?????

>Bitched OOC before the case ended that Yew was bantering him
>Said that she should lose for being rude
>Only when the case end did he backtrack and say "I-I'm only mad for Dumbshoe!"

>Being uncivilly rude in a case
>Being too IC for what you are trying to do.
Not that guy, but if you are going to be insufferable, and more than ONE person points it out, regardless of who they are, you fucked up,
There is no excuses, no amount of legal tapdancing you can do.
If you fuck up someone elses fun by having yours, and it is obviously effecting more than half the court, yah done fucked up.

t. someone who cries at IC banter.

Banter is different from being an insufferable bitch.
And being in character is no excuse to be rude when you are obviously making others mad.
Sorry honey, but them's the breaks.
A prosecution CAN'T by all rights call you a worthless lawyer who needs to die without people pulling them aside and telling them they are being too harsh or rude, what keeps defense lawyers from being rude?
Literally nothing, and that's sad. Rules that apply to other benches should apply to you

t. someone who can't handle bantz

Try growing thicker skin, Yew didn't call anyone a name and only gloated because the prosecution were salting IC and OOC.

>A prosecution CAN'T by all rights call you a worthless lawyer who needs to die

Who is Franny?

Fuck off Names.

>Gloating because ____________
No excuse is an excuse for gloating.
Gloating is unsportsmanlike and reflects poorly on the quality of players in AO.
If someone is complaining about your win, WIN WITH HONOR.
Rubbing it in makes you look like MORE of a worthless human being.

>He can't handle IC gloating

Lmao pussy ass bitch nigga.

And why should he? Fundamentally this is a game about logic. There should be no need to "handle" any "bantz".

Fundamentally this game is about Ace Attorney

It's your local autistic divegrass manager, with some pictures of our new player models.

First is Greg, now sporting his Glasses, fedora, and most importantly, Inner Greg

Which is a game about presenting the correct evidence that contradicts the witness. The only reason the defence (mostly) always wins is because the truth is (mostly) always that the defendant didn't do it. The notable exception is of course Farewell, My Turnabout, in which the defendant really did do it. The only reason the "banter" exists in the first place is to give the characters more personality. It can be completely removed and the core gameplay won't change one bit.

Fundamentally this game is about purging degenerates.

Next we have Adachi's head and gun for Adachi-The Egocentric Police Dick.mp3

But it would be a less interesting game.

Don't try and make out that AO should be 100% logical and serious when the game it's based off isn't.

>Rude banter when it is not called for.
Wew it's like professionalism is non-exsistant.

And finally, we have my favorite new model so far, a full 3D model for Asspulls

Beautiful.

The courtroom portion of any Ace Attorney game *is* 100% logical and serious. If you present the wrong piece of evidence, the judge won't hesitate to penalise you for making a mistake. What you are thinking about is the investigation phases, which usually contain a lot of silly remarks from the characters involved. The only reason we don't know how to approach courtrooms from the prosecution's side is because there hasn't been a case yet in the main series where you play as the prosecutor *and* you go to court to prove what's happened, because right now the only thing the prosecution does is give you a theory that needs to be proved wrong because the defendant usually didn't do it.

>Case 1-2
>I CALL POLLY TO THE STAND

>100% serious

>Calling the parrot who had information RELEVANT to proving who Yanni Yogi was.
>not 100% serious.
>Parrot was named after Yannis wife who committed suicide.
Actually the entire CHARACTER of yanni is tragic, and they worked a parrot into there because in the end, it was dark.

I think you're trying to make the game out to be something it is not. The game isn't always serious and neither should AO cases be 100% serious.

It's almost like we're playing a game you bitch ass nigga.

>Only seeing the lighthearted side to everything,

I'm not, of course there are serious parts in AA.
But you're the one saying that AA is 100% logical and serious.

I'm not that guy, however.
I was just an user who can see the dark side to polly.

Good.

Better.

Best

Best

Bzzt wrong.

Is that right?

Maya
>Is Sailor Maid

Franziska
>Isn't even a sailor scout.

I'll take a "I'm right" for 400$ Jim.

Can somebody make a similar preanimation to this using this emote?

Maids are sluts.

*Athena is a slut

Is there even a player that could even possibly equal bro? Let alone outperform him.

And I'm not talking about comfy co-pro bro who jobs, I'm not talking about hilarious Greg Judge bro either.

Heck, I'm not even talking about lead defense bro that can skip to the "relevant" sections of testimony that witnesses spent time on (and already has objections and asspulls ready before the case even starts) who knows how to get Not Guilty simply by pressing every statement.

No, I'm talking about the Primal Force of Nature simply known as Bro, who forged the Investigation case format for Attorney Online using only the powers of creation and stardust, and who is responsible for making each and every single case he's participated in into a deeply emotional experience with numerous elements of comedy masterfully integrated into the plot in the most Subtle way possible, which far exceeds the quality of all of the well-known literary classics

Post your hottest memes.

Is there a player that could even possibly equal Names? Let alone outperform him.

And I'm not talking about defense Cuft, who shitposts post-case, I'm not even talking about Lead Defense Names, who gives up either.
Hell, I'm not even talking about lead prosecutor Names who cuts through defense attorney's with banter and rebutt their case (with the rebuttals already prewritten as the defense flounders through the testimony, spotting the contradiction immediately) who can make the defense flail at his will, and get a Guilty by simply looking at the Judge.

I'm not even talking about 8-Month Apollo, ending a case on the first witness by proving that the witness couldn't have been in the closet, forcing Dracula to admit to the crime, and proving that Wesley is a cuck in his very first trial.

No, I'm talking about Gina, who uses logic and mod powers to solve cases, who was able to guide the witnesses along in their roles in Attorney Online, forced Lupadim to give him mod powers after being on Attorney Online for a mere few weeks, who is responsible for diverting the shitposting in the thread towards himself, breaking down with new ideals that save cases, delivering testimony that single-handedly saves cases, subtly posting and leading AO to a new era, and hasn't given up yet.

...

When the lead prosecutor purposefully deletes half his AO character files mid case because he was running out of HDD space and didn't want to delete his anime.

...

...

...

I would like to vouch for bro and say that he is the example all AO players should look up to.

Rak go to bed.

...

>Americans think they understand banter

No.

ten

test

dead

Not allowed.

So, when are we leaving the thread die?
It's obvious not meta discussion can happen here when most players don't visit the thread and the ones who do it use the discussions to saltpost or bait saltposting.

When you let it die.
Thread has literally been useless for the past 5 months outside of maybe attracting 7 new players, and that certainly wasnt the topic of the thread's fault.

Ded

Yes, let us be.

Here's a special of some models that aren't exactly new, but were added between the previous VGL and now.

First is gloves

And then we have Turkey, a favorite of mine

youtube.com/watch?v=CT-2_wdaZd4&feature=youtu.be

Fuck off [Namefag].

Fuck off [Namefag]

>It's obvious not meta discussion can happen here when most players don't visit the thread and the ones who do it use the discussions to saltpost or bait saltposting.

So change that.
We discussed meta in the last thread before people made the mistake of responding to shitposters.

It only can't happen if you don't let it happen.

bump

hello

Ok, let's try to discuss the meta again.
If the prosecution can come with a logical explanation to explain the witness' big contradiction, should they go for it and the witness stay quiet even if that would mean stop the case of progressing?

If they can explain it and, more importantly, the judge considers it an acceptable explanation, then yes.

Witnesses are called up by the Prosecution, they should not be trying to screw them over.

Yes, except most Prosecutors think """logic""" means "bullshit roundabout conjecture that agrees with me and has no basis in evidence", so take that as you will.

I the witness has an actual observation to explain the contradiction, then let them explain. Otherwise, leave the prosecution to give explanations if the witness only has their own conjecture

I think this debate wouldn't happen if there were more cases like Farewell, My Turnabout, where the defendant actually is guilty, because then we'd have some canocial cases to analyse and have more information for people who want to play as the prosecution. As it stands now and by garnering the information from the thread, we need better judges.

It should be noted that I haven't played this ever but I'm just going with a solution that fits with the information I've been given in the thread. I'm just here to discuss the canocial games and the side games except for PLvsAA and DGS because I haven't played them due to lack of Layton knowledge and me not understanding Japanese.

>we need better judges.
Unfortunately, this has always been the case.

Speaking of DGS, is there any word on that fan translation?

Addendum: this is only my third thread that I'm participating in. When the problem is this obvious, something needs change.

Our average judge players are either passive fucks, people who doesn't really pay attention, angry fucks or memers.
And since we can't stop them from signing up the only thing we can do is hope they'll git gud and listen when they are being called out.
We can't force people to play a certain way.

A main problem comes from the general misconceptions about roles.

People think Judge is a passive, somewhat unimportant role, kind of like how people think Prosecution is nothing more than "muh relevancy".

In reality, Judge is actually a very important role as it helps keep the case on track, stops circle arguments and is necessary to consider explanations/rebuttals to determine if they're good enough to proceed.

I guess the only way to sort this out is for players to start prompting judges.

bump

help

>18 idlers but no one signs up

What's the problem, /aog/?