And great ace attorney is kinda stuck on trying too hard to subvert the tropes of previous games at the cost of its pacing and logic.
Not really. It subverts certain gameplay structures like 2 day trials but writing wise it's just refining and expanding on tropes. "Pacing" is a buzzword in this case, as a lot of muh pacing is actually complaining about the game taking the time to convey the setting and characters. Take the very first case for example, you get a really strong feel for the turn of the century period, Japan's politics, a strong sense of red tape railroading Ryunosuke and how desperate his situation is. While also getting a thorough illustration at how much he is dreading the court, how out of his element he is and how strong his friendship is with Asogi. It works tremendously, seeing all the period items and looking at them closer feels fun and it doesn't just feel like "stock AA intro case" that you get over with as quickly as possible.
Compare that to GAA2's first case which lacks this attention to detail and suffers greatly for it. Susato's involvement, her friendship with Rei, the setting and context for the crime are all lacking in substance because ADHD tards complained that GAA1 took too long. Here's your "pacing", it's bland and meh. Instead of a strong impression of the era left by the western style restaurant brought by a gentrifying city, the curio collector brandishing a valuable historical item and a soldier of the time period committing a crime after being left hung out to dry you get... a beach with a reed shack. Instead of curare and all it's context, you get "random poison we just made in a lab lol".
GAA2-1 is everything you claim to have wanted, and it is mediocrity carried by the novelty of Susato being the protag for a case because of it.
You have a long tutorial case where the murderer gets a away, a case with no trial because the victim died by accident, a case with no death, a case where the defendent might or might not be guilty, a case where the victim survived but there was also a different murder, etc
I used to love the game at first but in hindsight there was also some dumb bullshit, mostly on "the big twist" that was obviously written last second and the final villain.
It's more that you're overrationalizing stuff by it "obviously being last second". It's a bunch of shoulda woulda coulda + fanfiction. It's in your own head, and this is something you can do with every one of the games to then claim they're bullshit and bad. 3-5 is one of the most fondly thought of cases. It's also a collection of the dumbest people making the dumbest decisions and never getting called out for it. Why does it work though? Because it's in service of a satisfying conclusion to the Trilogy, that concludes everybodies stories.
That was clearly the plot since the first game. (Though the "resurrection" wasn't) It is literally the teaser for the sequel.
The games also kinda fumble the jury system, it had so much potential but they're all borderline supernaturally convenient (which could've been intentional but wasnt) and annoying to navigate, and they don't even appear in the second game finale.
The multiple witness system also isnt that explored, it really boilds down to you pressing until you see the [!] and ask the other witness to correct something which is just press with extra steps.
Hard disagree, the jury system was one of the highlights of the 1st game and sorely underutilized in the 2nd. Jurors tying into the cases in neat ways is just common sense writing, and the complaint is silly as you could say witnesses in other games are supernaturally convenient also. The complaint about the group testimonies is one I don't get, as it's both integrated into the basic cross-examination loop seamlessly and just a way to expand upon mechanics like pressing.
It's actually a way more refined system compared to Layton VS Ace Attorney, where all these elements first appeared.
