The Shrine

It appears that the game is somewhat similar to an old classic which got released on NES called Dejavu. To describe the genre, it was similar to the old text adventure games that Interplay made famous back in the 80's and perhaps earlier; only it uses graphics. I remember really enjoying DeJaVu, but the genre didn't really take off. They made a sequel for DeJaVu on GBC years ago, but I never did play it.

Anyways, I'm not sold on the game yet, unless it's for the right price (right now it is $29.99 in both Canada and the US), but I definitely am quite interested in trying it out. An interesting move by Capcom, taking an extinct game genre andressurecting it on handheld systems (well, obviously not extinct in Japan since there were 3 previous reeleases of the game).


http://www.capcom.com/xpml/game.xpml?gameid=800038

CAPCOM RELEASES PHOENIX WRIGHT: ACE ATTORNEY FOR NINTENDO DS

SUNNYVALE , Calif. October 11, 2005 — All rise! Capcom today announced the release of Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney for Nintendo DS, the first in the popular court room battle series from Japan to be released in the US . While the series’ previous three entries appeared on the Game Boy ® Advance system in Japan , this marks its debut on the Nintendo DS. Not everyone is innocent until proven guilty! Players star as a defense attorney, who must prove his seemingly guilty client’s innocence no matter how dire the circumstances may seem. The game presents twisting storylines and intriguing gameplay in a comical anime style. Players must collect evidence, weed through inconsistent testimonies, and overcome corrupt agendas to ensure that justice prevails. Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney is now available at retailers across North America and carries a “T” rating for teen audiences by the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board).

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney includes the following features:

· Play from the first person perspective through five intriguing cases

· Two distinct gameplay segments:

* Investigation phase – survey crime scenes, interview witnesses and gather evidence that will be used in court
* Court phase – present findings from the investigation to support your case, listen to testimonies, examine witnesses, and determine what is fact from fiction so you can prove your client’s innocence

· Colorful cast of characters

* Phoenix Wright – the game’s main character who is an accomplished defense lawyer with a keen sense for discerning fact from truth
* Maya Fey – a bright young girl that aids Phoenix in his trials; she is learning to harness her psychic powers which will prove useful in a pinch
* Mia Fey – an ace attorney who taught Phoenix everything she knows about the courtroom and continues to support him as a mentor
* Miles Edgeworth – Phoenix ’s arch rival, this slick prosecutor has never lost a case; his intense hatred for criminal behavior drives him to use any means to ensure a guilty verdict

· Touch screen interface progresses players through the game

They released that in the US???

I saw a Japanese preview for that in EGM and it immediately interested me.

Sweet! (except for the not owning a DS part )

I played Deja Vu, though I think I'd only rented it. Rather liked it I remember...of course, I was a big fan of Shadowgate on all systems it was on, and the NES versions of Deja Vu and Shadowgate used the same engine. There were old Infocom detective games as well which were quite interesting.

I'd probably take a look if I weren't working so hard. Hopefully I'll get to see it played by someone at some point, though at this point I'm not holding out too much of that hope.

The Seeker wrote:To describe the genre, it was similar to the old text adventure games that Interplay made famous back in the 80's and perhaps earlier; only it uses graphics.

What? Like the King/Space/Police Quest series?

I've seen that game pop up on the flash menu for Capcom Japan and could never figured out what it was about. Sounds like Zork with graphics? I don't think it'll work with the American audience, but who knows. Is this going to be like a Visual Novel game that is actually a game as opposed to a glorified cheesy book?

After looking at Capcom Japan's site this looks like a dating sim without the dating. My major beef with those games, and their counterparts in US such as King's Quest, is that these games are all too dependent on having a hint book. Even before hint book was integrated into the games to drive sales, games such as Space Quest had game hint hotlines and hint books because they know you can't reasonably figure the stuff out by yourself. If you didn't get the ultimate secret weapon in a RPG the enemies are harder but not impossible. If you didn't get all your extra life stuff in a 3D platformer the game is harder but not impossible. But in games such as King's Quest if you didn't choose option 2 and use item 3 then the game IS impossible. I hope games like this can figure out how to add enough gameplay so that you're not required to know the path to winning is option 1 3 2 3 then use item X Y and Z to win, especially since the right path is rarely something that can be figured out with just logic.

I mean, obviously being on the right path should be a good idea, but it shouldn't be something where if you didn't visit this guy to get this testimony which is only possible at this time of day then no matter what you do you can't possibly win.

It's been getting fairly positive reviews from the press and players.

http://www.gamespot.com/ds/adventure/ph ... id=6135422

I bought it today as well, I'll have my own thoughts on the game later. I was a bit hesitant to buy it because I have already bought like 10 games in the last month.

From the review it sounds like they went the Monkey Island/Typemoon approach where it's basically impossible to lose so you won't need a hint book. But then that begs the question what's the point of having decisions if they're all Square style 'keep asking the same question until user selects the right response' kind of choices?

I think the problem with these games is that they end up relying a lot on the strength of plot. But there is no indication that the average game plot writer is better than the average book writer. Indeed the very best book writers are definitely better than the very best game plot writers so it'd seem like the average book writer would be better than the average game plot writer. You wouldn't expect to pickup a random average book and enjoy it (at least I wouldn't) so why would you expect to pick up a random game and enjoy the plot? Obviously there are exceptions, but I find games that try to sell on the strength of plot tends to fail. A game is not a book so why not use advantages that a game has that a book does not? In a book there can only be one way to the right answer. Even a choose-your-own-adventure book has limited number of ways with no arbitrary-ness involved in general. But with a game you should be able to come up with different degrees of difficulty.

I'd grab it if I had a DS. Now somebody needs to make a Harvey Birdman game.

Don Wang wrote:After looking at Capcom Japan's site this looks like a dating sim without the dating. My major beef with those games, and their counterparts in US such as King's Quest, is that these games are all too dependent on having a hint book. Even before hint book was integrated into the games to drive sales, games such as Space Quest had game hint hotlines and hint books because they know you can't reasonably figure the stuff out by yourself. If you didn't get the ultimate secret weapon in a RPG the enemies are harder but not impossible. If you didn't get all your extra life stuff in a 3D platformer the game is harder but not impossible. But in games such as King's Quest if you didn't choose option 2 and use item 3 then the game IS impossible. I hope games like this can figure out how to add enough gameplay so that you're not required to know the path to winning is option 1 3 2 3 then use item X Y and Z to win, especially since the right path is rarely something that can be figured out with just logic.

I mean, obviously being on the right path should be a good idea, but it shouldn't be something where if you didn't visit this guy to get this testimony which is only possible at this time of day then no matter what you do you can't possibly win.

I think you're wrong there. Certainly books exist that are better written because the only thing existing to convey meaning in a book is the text; every aspect of the book is dominated by text. However, that doesn't mean they always have a better story to them. I feel that often given the other elements that make up a video game (or TV show or movie) you can come out on top with an overall more enjoyable story. Of course, it really depends on the individual as well, and what they prefer.

Also as far as a game goes, yeah, in just about every Adventure game or RPG, the gameplay revolves around something which can be described as "If option A doesn't work, try option B, or try option C" and that can take on meaning of textual options, or even decisions on which passage or room to enter, or which strategies used to fight an enemy. Personally I feel that it is not possible to lose in the majority of RPG's available given proper understanding of the often very simple game mechanics. In theory, no game (except Fantastic Four on PSX) is losable if you continuously repeat trying different options. In Ace Wright, you can lose a case if you run out of exclamation marks, for example; I am not sure if this is the only way to lose. Judging by the concluding statement, it seems that there are varying difficulties based on the case:

"Depending on your murder-mystery skills, you might find the occasional puzzle too difficult, or you might find the occasional puzzle offers you too much help. But despite being a little linear at times, it's completely satisfying. You'll get a kick out of uncovering clues, revealing different aspects of the characters' personalities, and ultimately solving each case. If Phoenix Wright starts any kind of trend, those fearing the demise of the adventure genre need not worry any longer. Adventure games are back and are hipper than ever. And they have Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney to thank for it."

I really like the idea of the two modes of gameplay, the detective stage and the court stage; kind of like that Crime Drama show on TV called Law and Order. It's a fresh new game concept using one of the original, and previously all but dead, game genres. Whether or not this genre will again take off in North America really remains to be seen, personally I do not think it will ever be anything major, but I feel it could grow to be larger than it ever was before.

Games that try to compete on strength of plot tends to lose, because that's their weak point. It's just like you wouldn't expect a movie to compete against a book on the strength of plot as well. That's not to say there aren't movies or games with good plots but that's not where you expect to find their strength. I feel that games are pretty bad at taking advantage of their advantage (multimedia, sound, graphics, etc) and try too hard on the plot.

While all games may eventually boil down to choosing option A or B or C most games there are different degrees of success. Even in something as simple as Final Fantasy where the optimal strategy would be to heal if HP < (some number) and attack otherwise, there are times where this strategy runs into more difficulty than normal (for example if the boss does anything interesting, or does a ton of damage). There are multiple strategies to defeating Sephiroth in Kingdom Hearts and each has a varying probability of success that depends on the player. If one doesn't work you try to do it better or try another one.

When you've a text adventure game there is no probability at all. The wrong choice never works and the right choice always works. There is no ambiguity and it seems like you either have something that's too easy where you can't possibly lose, or you've something that's too hard and you got to buy a hint book to find the solution that works 100% of the time. Skies of Arcadia's air battles are a step in the right direction. Make the right decision and it helps but a wrong decision doesn't mean you automatically lose (though you do pay for them).

Of course, it becomes trivial to deduce the right decisions after a few tries in the case of Skies of Arcadia. I think something akin to various Sega light gun games would work the best. For example in House of the Dead you might need to shoot X zombies in 15 seconds to get to the shortcut way, but if you mess up it's not the game of the world and you just have to take the longer path. Even the rock-paper-scissor Suikoden 1vs1 would at least give you some elements of decision-making and uncertainty, though I think ultimately decision-making cannot be turn-based, because as in the example of Suikoden people just compile a list of everything that is said in 1vs1 and what the outcome is.

Don Wang wrote:When you've a text adventure game there is no probability at all. The wrong choice never works and the right choice always works. There is no ambiguity and it seems like you either have something that's too easy where you can't possibly lose, or you've something that's too hard and you got to buy a hint book to find the solution that works 100% of the time.

This is not true. Zork I, which was one of the first text adventures ever made, had quite a number of random elements in it. Mazes were randomly generated, and one of the main adversaries, the Thief, would appear...randomly isn't the right word, but it wasn't predictable. Depending on if he managed to steal certain important items you had (which he would then either stash or discard somewhere else in the game world, depending on what they were), the route you'd take through the game could be quite different. Zork isn't the exception to the rule, either - some text adventures are completely scripted (and I hae enjoyed some of them tremendously, I ought to say), but there are many others where either elements of the plot (dream sequences in Infocom's Sorceror) or the gameplay (Beyond Zork had stats, combat, and randomly generated item locations that affected your path through the game tremendously) involved elements of chance.

Those aspects sounds more like a RPGish game then text based adventure game. I think what defines such game is that you have to make a decision whether it's pick option 1 out of 3 things or roam around the world (or consult a hint book) until you find that item X works to get you past this event. And it's not just a problem with text based game. Any game with a decision are invariably very black and white. Most of the time you don't even have a real choice (e.g. Chrono Trigger: "Do you want to save the world from Lavos? If you answer no, ask the question again you say yes.") Other times you end up doing both anyway, like 'do you want to save this village and risk letting an ancient evil get revived and blow up the world? Well don't worry because you can save this village and then save the world!"

I'd like a game where you've two choices and one would be 75% right and the other would be 60% right.

There's a starcraft campaign mission where you get to choose to either take out the nuclear silos or the shipyard and the next scenario would have no ghosts or no BCs at the start but you've to deal with at least one of them and you should pick the choice that leaves you with the units you're more comfortable dealing with. I'd like to see decisions more like that.

In Langrisser 4 there are 3 paths and C is the hardest and requires you doing some pretty wacky things to get there and it just provides a different perspective on the game compared to A and B. You can do it for the challenge if you want but it's not like you're missing out on the true and only way to play if you don't find it. Actually in most games with a choice path C would be the only correct path while A & B will be probably have stuff like "SORRY THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO WIN YOU LOSE" when you complete them since C is the hardest path to find. I remember my roommate playing La Pucelle Tactics and you'd beat a chapter and it'd display like "You screwed up and got the bad ending for chapter X" As if anyone will figure 'hey no problem I got the bad ending let's keep going', unless they're really tired of the game and just want to get it over with. So having a good and bad ending is actually having no choice at all.