The game is good, but as a Hellene (Greek) person studying Philosophy I can say there are a lot of inaccuracies about the lives and philosophical views of those great Thinkers. On the other hand the game is interesting and fun.
A brilliantly executed game. It stays true to the original phoenix wright style while being elevated into its own with the whole debating philosophy premise. There wasn't a moment in the game which didn't seem to flow mostly due to the writing in general which was very interesting and compelling to hear about such views while at the same time pointing out the flaws. The best aspect for sure is the fact that the views, though flawed, were never crushed as they were all proven to be correct in their own way, just that nothing could be an all encompassing fact.
This was definitely worth the play and the time it took. The only gripe I had was more of a personal incompetence one with how sometimes it seemed more like another response would be more fitting to begin with, but in the end the number of chances was never enough to cause me to fail, despite coming close once with the start of the third guy.
I would recommend this for fans of Phoenix Wright style for sure, as it a competent and unique take on the whole courtroom debating style.
Although it was a great game and very, very well thought through philosophically, I often felt I had to figure out how this game would let me make obvious conclusions instead of simply let me draw them. Imo, the short statements you could choose to attack an argument weren't always logically connected to the sentence they had to be applied to but only triggered the counter argument that would eventually build this connection. When I got into the thought-line behind the system of counter-arguing, clarifying etc., it became more obvious but still not completely conclusive for me. I would have wished for a possibility to just state the obvious when presented with an obviously flawed argument instead of, sometimes, pick blindly between clarifying and further explanations until something triggered further hard-scripted dialogue that would finally bring up new points and allow me to proceed...so overall I found the gameplay too indirect since conclusions I already had in mind, could only be found through the development of the fixed dialogue I could only start... I also quite liked Kant actually using "your face is ugly"^^ on a technical side, this game loaded really slow at times, which was especially painful when a third character wanted to chip in only to stretch the real action even more
This is the closest I've ever seen to the perfect game. Which is unreachable of course, as supported by Socrates Jones.
This was absolutely the most amazing Puzzler I have played. Even based on Phoenix Wright, I wouldn't be surprised if this came out along side it! It kept me hooked, the music just that extra push to the edge of my seat. Truly a piece of work, and you even accurately portrayed what the Philosopher's themselves might sound like! I applaud you, good sir, and wave towards a better future of programming and life!
~Mage of Blood