Post by tlittle in Mostly negative criticism of the first trail.[Spoilers of course]

Viewing post in Mostly negative criticism of the first trail.[Spoilers of course]

1: Her recollection of the moment specifically shows him rousing himself after just a few attempts. There wasn't any visual or said moment where time passed that long on her just trying to wake him up. And it just wouldn't make sense that she'd stay that long for that. After 5 minutes of being unsuccessful, any rational person would try an leave to get help, to find out the door was locked, and the entire flashback would have played out differently. Besides, if she did just stay in that room doing nothing but trying to rouse him, then she's just a moron which the story doesn't depict her as. And don't say she was panicked either cause that would imply further she'd try and go for help sooner.

2/3: Literally all of the letters are about past events. True, Tozu could have twisted the rules for that one letter, but the characters in the story wouldn't have known that. They would assume the pattern is the rule, and the pattern established is that the letters refer to past traumas. No one even knew the Racer had lithium batteries until the trial, except for Eva. Not even the Racer knew. There's no reason for the characters to assume foul play. Also, the picture thing doesn't work considering they never showed what the picture was. If the picture did indeed show where the weapons were in the room, why didn't the writers show that to the players? Don't make up fanfiction to excuse bad writing.

4: The fact they can't prove how and when she got the items means she could easily spin the narrative that someone else knew the information and got the items instead of her. Knowledge of an item doesn't mean she took it, especially without definitive proof she did. That's not how you win court cases, that's how you lose them. There needs to be definitive proof that she nabbed the items from the room, otherwise the logic feels faulty.

5: Yeah learned that myself from the comments, but that doesn't explain when or how she got the tools to turn the doorknob. Again, more faulty logic.

parece.champignon222 days ago(-1)

1. Wrong, it was already confirmed by the creators that is in fact what happened. Her memory shows him waking up after a few attempts because that is the recollection of important events... not because that is absolutely everything that happened.

2. Wrong, literally not all of the letters are past events. Tozu never said they were past events; he said they were secrets. If you want to be technical about the motive (despite the fact Tozu has already shown he is not), Desmond may have lied about not knowing the weapons were there, and it's even implied at one point by Damian. Not like it matters though, Tozu has shown to bend the truth and rules to aid the killing game. He literally said he doesn't lie then was promptly shown lying. Tozu is not a reliable narrator.

3. Wrong, courts do not require the prosecution to prove every single aspect of a case, but to prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that only the defendant could have committed that crime. That's exactly the point made by Damian: We don't know how Eva got the weapons, but we do know that no one besides her could have done it. Even then, this isn't a court case, this is a class trial with 16 students.

4. Tools to turn the doorknob? You can turn a doorknob at home with any random thing you find. It's incredibly easy. No faulty logic by the game, just a lack of manual labor by yourself 😅

tlittle222 days ago(+1)

1: So you're just proving my point. They wrote it so poorly in the actual game, they have to confirm outside of the media what actually happened. In game, she literally called his name once, and she said it snapped Wolfgang out of his delirium. That's bad writing. If she did do other things to snap him out of it, why out of the entire half hour, did she not try and get help. Granted, she'd have failed considering the door was locked, but she never mentions the door being locked until AFTER he started attacking her. Any competent person would have tried to leave much sooner, but she didn't. Again, either poor writing, or they're writing the most insufferably dumb character imaginable.

2: Literally every single note shown in game was of a past event. That's the pattern shown, and even though we as spectators know to not trust literally everything, the actual characters in game don't have that sense of dramatic irony as they are the participants. Most people, when seeing a pattern, bases logic on said pattern. It would be strange for everyone to have their letters be of past secrets, but then this random letter for some reason doesn't. As of right now, it's bad writing, but if something does happen with Desmond in a later chapter, I'll happily rescind this critique, but it's a critique nonetheless.

3: Beyond a shadow of a doubt. Never heard that term before? If at any point you believe there is any suspicion that the defendant isn't guilty, the jury issues a not-guilty verdict as there isn't enough evidence to fully pin them at the scene of a crime. If Eva was smart, she could have easily pinned the blame on Diana or Damon since there's just as much evidence that Damon knows where every tool is, or Eva could say she had shown Diana Damon's letter as well. Heck, I thought they were gonna do this as everyone tries to pin the blame on others until you come up with the correct piece of evidence showing that Eva had physically taken the items from the room. Danganronpa does this all the time since in crime solving stories, a stone unturned is a plot point unfulfilled, and I felt pretty unfulfilled.

4: A screwdriver or screwdriver esque object. Most involve at least that, but on more complicated locks, sometimes a bit more. You'd need to find evidence not only of what Eva used to turn the knob, but also a general time of when she could have done so. It would have been so easy to just point out a screwdriver in one of the storage rooms, but then during the investigation you find it missing, then find it stashed somewhere. Without it, it's just a missing piece of the puzzle. It could have also led to having more evidence against Eva, but again, it's another stone unturned.

parece.champignon221 days ago(-1)

1. Nope, because you can reason it pretty easily in-game. Poor use of context clues is not a failure of writing. She said she stayed because she didn't want to leave him alone.

2. Except Tozu never said they were past events, he said they were secrets. The students also would not assume a pattern because the notes were never shared publicly. For all we know, and they know, half the notes are not about the past. And no, it wouldn't be strange, because it happened. It has already been established Tozu cares more about furthering the game than honesty. It is perfectly reasonable to think one note would be an advantage to kickstart the killing. I have said this multiple times already.

3. No, again. Jury's are not a hivemind. There are PLENTY of occasions of innocent people being given a verdict of guilty. This is just incorrect. No one else would be capable of causing those explosions besides Eva, and no one would be able to see besides Eva, so how she got the tools doesn't matter. Beyond a reasonable doubt.

4. It takes 5 minutes to change a doorknob. Not farfetched at all.

Fallenangel700181 days ago (2 edits) (+1)

I feel like I'm watching two Danganronpa characters argue. Y'all are right and wrong about various things and are getting kinda heated over it. I just finished Trail 1 last night and want to discuss it so I'll throw in my two cents.

1. I agree with Tlittle that the time scale of Diana the Cosmetologist being in the basement doesn't make sense. Her story could have only been about 5 or 6 minutes as it currently stands. She spends a little time waiting for her eyes to adjust to the darkness before calling out to Wolfgang the Lawyer. He responds, she tries to help, and he lashes out at her. He goes on a rant for a bit before the explosion. That's not a lot of things to happen, so it could not have been long and doesn't match with the timescale of the rest of the case.

This is made somewhat worse because the story does give an explanation for why Diana was down there for so long, it's just that the explanation doesn't make any sense. The explanation given by the story is that Diana was trying to pick the lock on the door so she could escape. She was doing it blind in the dark and had no experience with lockpicking so she just kept trying til she got lucky. The explanation doesn't make sense because that would require a lot of time after the explosion and not before it. I think was some miscommunication or oversight as the rest of the writing is generally very quality.

2. I agree with Parece here. The blackmail does seem random. I think we only hear 4. Toshiko the Matchmaker's was a load of nothing from her childhood. Cassidy the Pro Gamer's was about a fear of spiders I think? (Weird that she's the spider of the cast) Desmond the Marksman's was a vague reference to that he has weapons. Lastly, Wolfgang's was a vague reference to how he's a wolf is sheep's clothing (fitting that he's the sheep of the cast). The only common thread is that they reflect poorly on the person they are tied too, and that all of them are... kinda weak? This makes sense though. Tozu admits that he got the idea from something Eva the Liar said when the cast were looking at their student profiles. Tozu handed out the blackmail the next morning so he clearly didn't put a lot of time into it. Combine this with his admission that it was hard to find actual good dirt on the characters and it only stands to reason that the blackmail is random and weak. He was probably twisting words to make mountains from molehills because he only had molehills.

3. I agree with both of you here on different parts. Parece is right that the cast had Eva dead to rights at the end of the trial. She was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. She was the only one who could have possible dropped the battery and killed Wolfgang. Everything else is practically irrelevant at that point as it doesn't matter who stole what; Eva triggered the murder mechanism and is the killer. Nothing else truly needs to be answered.

Tlittle does have a good point in that a stone unturned is a plot point unfulfilled. Especially cause this plot point has a very easy explanation. She had access to the cameras because of the Traitor Perk. She could have just seen where everyone is, seen where the objects are in the rooms, and slipped in and out of the rooms in just a minute or two. Stealing the stuff would have been extremely easy for her.

4. This is just a repeat of 3. Does it actually need to be answered? Not really. There are plenty of places to hide a screwdriver and plenty of time to flip the lock over the several days especially with the aforementioned camera access. The details don't really matter. At the same time, including those details, even just educated guesses at them, would have been quite easy and satisfying to the player.

That's that. This was fun. Trail 1 has some flaws for sure and can be a bit unsatisfactory a times. I can't believe they killed Eva, one of the more interesting characters and the probable Eve of the Garden of Eden. However, it was over all very enjoyable and I'm very much looking forward to the rest of the game and specifically how it develops from this first chapter. Here's hoping Eden's Garden is successful and doesn't peter out into nothingness like so many other Fanganronpas.

itch.io

Viewing post in Mostly negative criticism of the first trail.[Spoilers of course]