• Breaking News

    Friday, April 29, 2022

    Home Unlabelled Ace Attorney maya fanart

    Ace Attorney maya fanart

    April 29, 2022

    Ace Attorney maya fanart

    maya fanart

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 01:28 AM PDT

    La Carneval

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 01:49 AM PDT

    My top 31 chars...couldn't choose only 30 haha, plus other characters I picked in my first draft (all games except PWvPL)

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 12:04 AM PDT

    TGAA2 Steam?

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 01:44 AM PDT

    It may sound stupid, but last week I finished TGAA1 from Steam, and while watching a video about it I discovered that the port included also the second game!! How can I play it? I never saw any option while playing... Am I missing something here?

    I have to say I only played the last 2 cases because I played the others on a 3ds recently, maybe it's because of that?

    submitted by /u/joeyjojosjrshabadoo
    [link] [comments]

    My character tier list cause I want to see if people share my opinions (I'm in the middle of Layton Vs. Wright, and I only just started AAI2)

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 07:21 AM PDT

    The Depp vs Heard trial in a nutshell

    Posted: 29 Apr 2022 07:51 AM PDT

    Theory on McGilded's Innocence (TGAA)

    Posted: 28 Apr 2022 11:53 PM PDT

    When I first played through the game, I assumed, probably like many, that McGilded was actually guilty in Case 3, and that we had gotten the "wrong" verdict on him. The intent here being to shock the player into thinking that not everyone we defend will actually be innocent.

    However, I think it's actually more shocking if you consider the possibility that McGilded was innocent. And after a complete a playthrough of TGAA/2, and replaying Case 3, I realized a horrifying possibility.

    Let's consider what the implications are if everything McGilded said was true. For starters, everything established pre-evdience tamper lines up. The victim was indeed stabbed from an assailant sitting next to him - not across. Although nobody actually saw the murder happen, this is what the witnesses say - and they might've been right.

    Secondly - this puts McGilded on the back seat, out of view of the skylight, as he says he was. Assuming McGilded was asleep during the murder (which is entirely possible because the victim died silently and instantly), it would've been possible for a FOURTH person to enter the Omnibus, kill the victim, and get out before he woke up.

    "But wait! What about the 20 pence!" you might be asking. I'll explain this soon, but first we need to establish who the real killer was. Of course, if you've already played both games, you have an idea of who I'm about to say already, so let's just cut to the chase:

    Mael Stronghardt.

    This makes sense for a number of reasons; For starters, McGilded was a loan shark, and ended up dying to The Reaper in the end anyways - which we later find out is Mael Stronghardt's doing. But what makes him Mason's killer?

    Firstly, Mael wanted to get rid of all the filth in the shadows of London - that includes McGilded. His usual method of doing this is setting them up to fall in court, specifically to Van Zieks, so he can perpetuate his title of The Reaper.

    Mael, of course, knew about Van Zieks' past and the upcoming travel study. Knowing Van Zieks would appear in court again (due to him presuming he would be facing a member of the Asogi clan), he took the opportunity to set McGilded up to fall.

    Secondly, as to why Mael would kill an innocent man, well... He says it himself. He sees people as sacrificial pieces, and he would kill anyone if it benefited his idea of a better London. And we already know he's not above killing innocent people to further his goals.

    Now, to explain how he perpetuated the crime and got away with it (I haven't forgotten the 20 pence issue either).

    Step 1: Mael learns about McGilded's patterns and habits. This is how he takes advantage of the fact that McGilded sleeps on carriage rides. Oh, and the bit about how McGilded should've "had his own carriage"? This is never confirmed. And if McGilded is to be believed, it would fit his philanthropic character (even if it's just a ruse) to take the public carriages.

    Step 2: Knowing McGilded and the carriages routes, get on the carriage after McGilded has boarded and fallen asleep. Now to explain the 20 pence conundrum. It's simple, really. Stronhardt bribed Beppo. Beppo actually charged 4 pence per person, but was bribed by Stronghart to lie if he were to appear in court, and say he charged 5 pence instead.

    Step 3: Stab Mason using his own dagger ('M' for Mael!), then leave. Oh, and the icing on the cake? Remember how the witnesses report a loud "THUD" sound right around the time of the murder? This easily could've been the door shutting as Mael left the carriage.

    There is 1 more little I consistency, which is that the carriage is only mentioned to have stopped once, after the victim was seen stabbed. However, it's only mentioned that Beppo stopped the cart after hearing the scream - nobody says that he didn't stop the cart before, to let Mael out.

    McGilded wouldn't have noticed the 1st time the cart stopped since he was asleep - and although the top 2 passengers might've noticed, they had no reason to bring it up in their testimonies since we never asked. Mael could've also simply bribed Beppo further to not mention his getting on and off the carriage.

    As for the forged evidence and crime scene tampering? Yeah, that surely could've been McGilded's doing. But that doesn't make him guilty of murder - it only makes him desperate. And after Mael realized that this attempt to weasel his way out of a Guilty verdict actually works, he takes matters into his own hands and... well, you know how the chapter ends.

    Is McGilded a bit evil? Sure. But we've defended our fair share of questionable - to downright criminal - clients in previous AA titles.

    I also think his maniacal laughing upon his Not Guilty verdict is a red herring - meant to make you think he was actually guilty, because... well, all AA villains do that thing. You know, where they clap and laugh maniacally. But I mean... anyone would act a little crazed, I think, if they had to go through a trial where their own defense attorney turned against them, and they still got declared Not Guilty. Can you really blame the guy...?

    Either way, I'm impressed if anyone read this whole thing. And thank you. I think this trial was meant to be ambiguous, and it's on purpose that we never really know if McGilded was innocent or not.

    What made me stop and think was that we never learned who the dagger belonged to. And that 'M'... that was really bothering me. From there I started piecing things together. And after I found out Mael was behind everything, well, I really couldn't believe McGilded was guilty!

    Lemme know what you think of this theory, if there's any plot holes or errors here. I know there's a couple leaps in logic here (like Mael bribing Beppo), but I still think it's in the realm of possibility. It's not like we'll ever know for sure, this is basically just a headcanon.

    submitted by /u/uwuGod
    [link] [comments]
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment