Apollo Justice in 2025?Edit

I seem to get the idea that the authors meant for Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney to happen in the year 2025 and they apparently intend to keep the profiles consistent with it in the future releases, as we can conclude from Phoenix being 34 in "2027" (aging 10 years, while "11" years have passed).

"The developers of the Ace Attorney games, in particular the people in charge of putting down the ages of characters in court records, have not paid much attention to any absolute timeline." - this line is incredibly presumptuous to me. The fact that the ages don't change when a year passes in a single game, while true, I don't think can be a reason to disregard information contained there.

Given the fact that Turnabout Succession occurs in October, had it happened in 2025, 6 and a half years would have passed since Phoenix's disbarment, which then could be easily rounded up to 7. That way, all the contradictions in characters' ages would also be cleared up.

What I'd suggest is moving everything that happened in Apollo Justice and Dual Destinies a year earlier, which would clear up the inconsistency between the in-game profiles. - Sligneris (talk) 17:32, June 28, 2014 (UTC)

The game talks about "seven years ago" throughout, including in the very first case, where they seemed very particular in making Phoenix's disbarment seven years ago the same month. capefeather (talk) 02:19, June 29, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, but then it spirals into "canon information vs. canon information", like I said, moving the whole thing into 2025 and asuming that AJ is actually the start of the seventh year of Phoenix's disbarment will lead to a single semi-contradiction in this one game, while keeping it like it is, will lead to a lot of contradictions in ages in character profiles in every single game from AJ on... - Sligneris (talk) 09:52, June 29, 2014 (UTC)

While I do concede that it's hard to believe that 9 people's birthdays happen to be between October 9th-April 19th, there are inconistancy's in believing that Apollo Justice took place in 2025. Mainly some other people's profiles. Phoenix is 26 at the end of Trials and Tribulations (2019) and is 33 at the beginning of Apollo Justice (2026). Hardly inconsitant. Now that might be into doubt with the whole oh he's 24 in Ace Attorney (2016), I [resent Turnabout Samurai. This is the case in which we first hear Phoenix's age. It's 24. The important thing here is not so much the age but the date. Turnabout Samurai takes place between October 16th-20th. A little improbable but hardly impossible. Another example would be in The Stolen Turnabout when again Phoenix's age is mentioned. he's 26 but again it's not October 9th it's October 11th. Highly doubtful but again not impossible. (Who know's maybe they just forgot his birthday.)
Ok maybe Phoenix is not the best example but I bring you two other people who can disclaim it within Apollo Justice. They are Trucy and Klavier. The ages match up within their profiles for AJ era and 7 years in the past. Even if we assume they just had their birthdays immeaditly afterwards and that Apollo Justice Era takes palce in 2025 that would mean 7 birthdays inbetween! That's very inconsistant! I believe the better explanatin is just simply that Dual Destinies people messed up on some ages.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:46, June 29, 2014 (UTC)
You are wrong about T&T. That game took place in the latter half of 2018 and then, only one case occurred in Feb. 2019, which means he had his birthday before The Stolen Turnabout. He'd turn 27 that year, which contradicts the game that took place fully in "2026" - in which he aged 6 years in "7" years.
Assumimg Dual Destinies takes place in 2027 completely ruins the continuity of ages of characters such as Phoenix Wright, Miles Edgeworth or Pearl Fey. I am convinced Capcom will keep the age progress as it is, and I don't think contradictions like characters becoming one year younger at one point in time before Apollo Justice should be present on this wiki.
The solution I propose is just assuming the "seven years ago" refers to the "six and a half years" from the Mason System in Turnabout Succession. The "seven years" in Turnabout Trump could be just a build-up for this final case.
It' a somewhat loose interpretation that clears up critical contradictions in the profiles in the series that happened already and will continue to happen in future releases, unless we actually make that change in the timeline. I really prefer loose interpretations of a single game to critical contradictions in the whole series.
We also shouldn't refer strictly to the characters who made their debut in AJ, basically because... they made their debut in AJ. Their birthdates can be easily moved along with the timeline. I'll soon make a spare article on Trucy to show what I mean.
There's also another bonus: that change would allow us to narrow down the ages of the characters, like I did with Phoenix. I honestly think it's worth it. - Sligneris (talk) 20:59, June 29, 2014 (UTC)
Ok? Let's try to be reasonable.
First off, I knew the Stolen Turnabout took place in 2018 (Side note- while the murder of Glen Elg took place in December of 2018, Recipe for Turnabout took place in Janurary 2019). Also that still doesn't change Phoenix's age in that case unless he screwed up. That means practiacally 8 years has passed since the Stolen Turnabout and Turnabout Succession. If his birthday happened immeaditly afterwards (Turnabout Succession) the problem is fixed.
Second: Edgeworth was 26 in AAI (1&2) and T&T. Dual Destinies he is 34. Not the best example. I concede with Pearl, but that just pooves it wasn't Apollo Justice that made the error it was Dual Destinies.
Third: If we don't address the people who made their debut in Apollo Justice then who counts. I thought this game was the issue. That aside, if you want more proof, look no further than Ema Skye. Ema is 18 in AAI(1&2) seven years later in AJ she's 25. Makes sense. Also let's be real if what I think you are saying is right (though I'm not 100% sure, hard to tell tone) What you are saying is that Klavier and Trucy's birthday happened inbetween Turnabout Trump and Turnabout Corner. That does not make sense mister. If that were the case Klavier would be 16 in Phoenix's last case and Trucy would be 7! Explain that. (Btw please don't drag this into two talk pages, we already diescussing it on this page, let's continue). Franzyfan1998 (talk) 22:16, June 29, 2014 (UTC)
The problem is, the he couldn't have had his birthday after Turnabout Succession, because T&T clearly establishes that he had to have his birthday before The Stolen Turnabout, which occured in October, September in the Japanese version, iirc.
In AA1 (2016) Edgeworth was 24, and remained so to the Rise from the Ashes, which took place in February meaning he had his birthday before Turnabout Sisters, September. That also proves he was born in 1992, just like Phoenix. Being 24 in 2016, how old does he turn in 2019? Here's a hint - it's definitely not 26. How old should he be in December 2027? My calculations say 35, not 34.
There is literally no way for both Phoenix or Edgeworth to be 34 at the end of Turnabout for Tomorrow, December "2027". It's only possible for December 2026.
That's why you shouldn't try to use try to use AAI ages, because these are mostly extensions of the 2018 year, meaning the recurring original trilogy characters from it didn't have their birthdays yet - just that.
I'm not saying Trucy's or Klavier's birthdays happened between these 2 cases, I have yet to do the exact calculations. And even if so, that's way more reliable information than Phoenix becoming year younger during his time disbarred. - Sligneris (talk) 23:07, June 29, 2014 (UTC)
1 I strictly said it was doubtful for Phoenix's birthday to be between October 9th and October 11th (October 10th). I never said It was impossible. (Also English version will change things, this is not new)
2.  It is possible for Edgeworth to be born in 1992 and still be 26 in 2019 and 34 in 2027. It's called having your birthday. For example Jane Doe is born in 1997 and her birthday is in July. So she can be 16 right now but 17 in a few weeks. I'll concede that they totally messed up in Phoenix's and Edgeworth's age in December but for the rest of the year it's not impossible.
3. Then which ages should we focus on. If Ema in 2018 doesn't count then how about Trilogy Ema. As far as we know (though i think it's being debated still) she's 16 in early 2017. And that still matches up with with her age in 2026.
4. Then what are you saying? They went went through a time warp. Your theory has some faults. Ema, Klavier, and Trucy prove that.
5. I just thought of this but to your earlier arguement of "The solution I propose is just assuming the "seven years ago" refers to the 'six and a half years' from the Mason System in Turnabout Succession. The "seven years" in Turnabout Trump could be just a build-up for this final case." It doesn't hold a lot of water. Who in the world would say 7 years ago I lost my badge when it happened 6 years prior? That makes no sense. Even if you say it's a lead up, I pose why would you do that? It's like saying I'm 7 but I was born exactly 6 years ago but I'm rounding up because in half a year I'll be 6 1/2, it doesn't work like that! Why go through that trouble instead of just saying 6 years! Also I think Kristoph, Klavier, Apollo, or anyone with half a brain would point out it was 6 years and not 7! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 02:09, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

1. I'm pretty certain The Monstrous Turnabout made me narrow down the birthday to "before April", I'll share exact notes, when I'm back on my PC.

By the way, why are you trying to argue there aren't contradictions, when they clearly are there. The point of this is thread is not "are there contradictions or not?", because that much was astablished before we started talking about it... The point of this is thread is "Do we make a change in the timeline to fix these contradictions?" and I'm willing to say "Yes."

2. No, it is not possible for a person whose birth date is before September 1992 to be 34 in December 2027? Because someone born before September 1992 would be 35 since before September 2027? If you can't do that much math, why won't you leave it in the hands of someone who can?

3. I'm willing to focus on the ages of main characters who appear more often in the series, because these are the ones most affected by these contradictions.

4. They either went through a timewarp, or Mason System simply got the ages wrong. Well, that is a "last stand" solution, to be applied only if I won't be able to make sense of their ages. I most likely will, but just in case~

When if it does have some faults, it is way less disastrous than all of the original trilogy characters becoming a year younger after Apollo Justice.

I really prefer loose explanation of one single aspect to critical contradictions between the games in the series. That's exactly the point of this idea. Change from something that's impossible to something that's slightly unbelievable.

5. They don't have a half of a brain. This can be simply explained by writers making a mistake. It truly wouldn't be the first case of characters talking nonsense and that is the only way we can explain those contradictions.

Also, just because people don't usually round ages up, are you saying it's impossible? Weird, I'm certain I'm doing this myself sometimes and no one seems to object.

And finally, please just stop discussing for the sake of it, because I'm really get the idea you're doing just that. If you have a point, fine, bring it... Just check its validity first. Along with me being unable to access my computer for several days, you're not helping... - Sligneris (talk) 06:18, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to say this because it needs saying. I am noy arguing for arguements sake. I am discussing because what your saying does not hold as much water as you might think.
1. I am just saying Phoenix's birthday might be on October 10th prior to Dual Destnies. But that imformation in mind I guess it's in March or something.
1B. I never said there weren't any contradictions. I conceded many times that they're were faults. However, that does no automatically prove that your theoryis correct. Like I said Ema, Trucy and Klavier disprove that.
2. Thank you for belittling my math skills, I'll be sure to tell my previous math teachers what you kindly said. (BTW-I Got As and Bs all throughout the year). I never said any of those things. In fact I'll quoate exactly what I said. "I'll concede that they totally messed up in Phoenix's and Edgeworth's age in December but for the rest of the year it's not impossible." I wasn't defending the cases in Deember, I was simply defending the cases prior to December. LISTEN!
3/4. You way of thinking is not very, um what the word, fair. I totally find your motives fair. However, creating new contradictions in favor of ridding the wiki of the old ones doesn't solve anything! From what I gather, you are trying to fix the ages of, Pearl Fey, Miles Edgeworth, and Phoenix Wright, but wait. This reates time discepincies between Trucy, Klavier, Ema, Valant, and even Zak. Until you find a coherient way of proving a way for them to all have magically grown a year older I will find your theory BUSTED!
5. I think it was covered by the local news. I'll give you the quote if you want
Apollo: It was all over the news, I remember that.
I highly doubt they got the date wrong.
5B. WHAT!? They don't have half a brain? Could you be anymore insulting!? And really Klavier who graduated law school at 17, doesn't know his counting numbers?! EVEN YUMIHIKO KNOWS HIS 123s! Really no one in the courtroom thought "Hey it wasn't 7 years, it was 6" What you're saying makes absolutley no sense! You're saying that they rounded up to seven, on the 6th anniversary of the event! Wasn't there a law that said "If you're missing for 7 years, you're dead!" Why on earth would the police close off a search one year before the dealine. They may be dumb but when they search for someone they really search for someone. Won't stop until the person is found or he's considered dead!
And to that extent, Zak's property laws. If you remember correctly Valant had to wait 7 years until Zak was officially dead in order to preform some magic tricks. That was a plot point wasn't it! Again very very doubtful that the police would let him have the rights six months before they figured "eh he's probably dead!" That's not right.
Furthermore, roudning up prior to 6.5 makes no sense, even in this game. I bring you proof in a series of events.
A. In Investigations 1, before you bring it up, they do round up to seven when it was 6 1/2 years. I concede that, however, it works for Investigations a lot better than in Apollo Justice. Mainly beacuse the whole game except for the flashback case, takes place in a week. So it would make sense to round to 7 years throughout the entire game. Rather than saying 7 years on the 6th anniversary. And also-
B. Investigations 2, Red Chef dude (Yutaka Kazami) would have gotten away with the murder because the crime took place 18 years and 4 months ago. Even with the rule in which the investiagtion could be extended 3 extra years past the 15 year limit, he still had a four month saftey net. They specifically say 18 instead of rounding to 19. Gee I wonder, maybe it was because it took place 18 years prior.
C. And the most convincing, DL6! PWAA It was said time and time again it takes place 15 years prior to the game! That's not the part though. The part is in Bridge to the Turnabout and Investigations (both in 2019), they say DL6 happened 17 years ago. When it took place 17 and 2-4 months before (respectivly). They didn't round up to 18 despite the year!
It's almost like they don't round up unless it's like X.5. Oh wait that's how math works. So maybe you should go back to your math class, and not me. You failed counting and rounding. (Sorry for bashing but you did throw the first stone on that matter. Again I apologise)
Bottom line I'm making. Dual Destinies made the error in the ages. And they did because they have a phobia of birthdays. They made the mistake now we have to live with it. Unless you can provide an explanation disproving the facts the games have made as well as keep your own in check your theory is BUSTED!
BTW- Good luck convincing resturaunts, bars and the cops you're 21 when your ID says your 20.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 16:35, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, let me explain. I do have reasons to believe that writers had this image in mind:
2016 - Nick is 24 - AA1
2017 - Nick is 25 - AA2
2018 - Nick is 26 - AA3, AAI, AAI2
2025 - Nick is 33 after seven years disbarred. - AA4
2026 - Nick is 34 - AA5
Quite simple, but we are trying to read more between the lines here, which is what resulted in having this as it is in the first place.
Still, this little piece of text is why I'm certain that unless we do that change, the blatant contradictions will continue and Nick will be 35 in the next installment, which will take place 36 years after his birth and so on, and so on... That's precisely what I'm trying to avoid.
The points you make, are something I'm willing to suspend my disbelief on - because what do you think is more believable - people rounding the ages up, or Phoenix, Edgeworth and Pearl becoming a year younger over a decade? Because I'm going to say it's the former. I'm not even really sure if Valant was already performing those exact tricks either - he could have very well been just expecting to be able later in that year.
I don't see a single reason to disregard ages in Dual Destinies. I'm also certain the contradictions aren't Dual Destinies old and wrre there since the timeskip.
Unlike you, I am trying to avoid the "they messed up ages, it doesn't make sense" explanation and I am trying to analyze the canon information, including profiles and interpret it in a way that does make sense.
I also don't see how Trucy, Ema or Klavier disprove anything. If we are to make that change, all that is left to conclude is that they had their birthdays after the past section of Turnabout Succession and before Turnabout Corner (e. g. Trucy, Klavier), Turnabout Trump (e. g. Zak) or Turnabout Serenade (e. g. Valant). Just that. No new contradictions are created, like you seem to attest.
I also don't see how the last part supports anything. I suggest rounding up the gap between the trilogy and AJ, not all the gaps that ever happened.
By the way, repeatedly saying "busted" makes it seem even more than you are just arguing for the fun of it, while I'm trying to make some progress here. - Sligneris (talk) 17:32, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Ok this bears repeating as you are obviously not reading/listening to what I have to say. I am not repeat NOT arguing for the fun of it! I am discussing because your theory has faults. It does not explain everything. It may solve some but not all. Ok were now that we established that twice now, let's dive into the problems once more in your explanation.
1. Who in the world rounds up ages?! (Besides you). Maybe one but 5! I don't think so! And since they never do that at any other point in this series (agewise) your arguement is kind of weak.
1B. Once again I have proven the possibilty of Phoenix being 34 in 2027, They messed up deal with it! And to that effect, of course Trucy, Ema, and Klavier put doubt on your theory.
Ok let's assume Trucy's birthday and Klavier's brithday is right before Turnabout Corner. Oh wait, that takes place in June. In April 7 years ago they were 8 and 17 respectivly. 7 birthdays inbetween and 6 years of age. Something tells me that's not right. And Ema's birthday has to be at the end of the calendar year. It just makes no sense otherwise. Also two other character's you pushed to the side. First off Zak, it was almost exactly 7 years between his disapearence and death. 40 in 2019 47 in 2026. How do you disprove that one genius!? Answer you give new contradictions! (For someone who loves pofiles you seem to ignore them)
2. Concerning Valant and the whole "Oh he wasn't really going to do those exact tricks!" I call that one very very wrong. If he wasn't preforming the exact act or a varient of, why did he get so upset in Trucy having the rights.
3. You have yet to disprove my argement fully. If not at all. You are simply pushing it under the rug. Anyway, you have yet to disprove the whole slew of Zak being missing for 7 years and thus being declared dead. And the last arguements of Ace Attorney time and Time again not rounding up when it was less that X.5.
And to close a quote that seems to fit you more than me at the moment,
Luke Atmey
When you were in grade school, you recieved the same report card every year! "Careless, with tendency to jump to conclusions" ... Am I wrong?
Please come back when you can provide a full explanation that proves your point while explaining all of the facts of the game. Fully! (No pushing it under the rug!) Franzyfan1998 (talk) 18:28, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Well, so very sorry that I can't give full-fledged arguments from a mobile.
That, and together with soundtrack translation fixes (the old discussion I deleted before), portraits, and capitalizations (about which I have to argue with the admin and sometimes don't even get response... I can't believe it...) getting really annoyed I can't have a free hand in improving the content of this wiki.
There is no way someone with birth date before September 1992 can be 34 after September 2027 and you really should know that much. One is certsin, your skull isn't as tgin as Zak's.
Pushing under the rug? Isnt't that you? "Dual Destinies ages don't make sense so I'll disregard them" - I believe you said something similar to this a while ago. You also completely ignored the little "table" I made which displayed the method in which developers place ages in the games. I can't believe someone like you kept calling ne hypocrite.
  • sigh* With this kinda attitude of everyone around I think I'll eventually give up on trying to implement any kind of consistency and logic around here. It gets too stressful over time. - Sligneris (talk) 18:46, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Ladies, ladies, you're BOTH very pretty, and I'd happily marry either one of you, can I please go home now?
But, seriously guys, do you two get a kick out of constantly arguing with and insulting each other? Because that's all you two have been doing recently and, frankly, it's getting annoying. CrashBash (talk) 18:51, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

...I'm a guy.
Also, I would gladly focus on determining whether or not we should actually do that change. The first point is obviously the ages. Since the whole date reckoning originated in the trilogy, we should assume that the ages of characters in the trilogy should be consistent throughout the series.
That is why I was trying so hard on using two most important characters in the series, Edgeworth and Phoenix, as a reference. If these can't get consistent throughout the whole series, can we trust amy timeline information here?
Once I access my computer, I'll provide my calculations in regards to Edgeworth's and Phoenix's birth dates, and I can assure you - both of them will get broken with AJ in 2026 and DD in 2027. That is the point I'm trying to make. - Sligneris (talk) 19:08, June 30, 2014 (UTC)'ve clearly not heard of that saying before, have you? The "I'm a guy" comment says as such. CrashBash (talk) 19:13, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

I think that decisions like this should be based on what has actually occurred, rather than trying to guess writer/developer intent beyond what has occurred. I agree that the writers probably have some sort of system for determining which "year" games take place, and thus how old people are in each game. However, it's apparent that they don't have some kind of meticulous system of keeping track of exact dates and such. They've had plenty of opportunities to set birthdates straight. Other franchises have had no problem with establishing trivial biological traits, including birthdays and blood types. In contrast, the Ace Attorney franchise doesn't bother to put in such details, and apparently can't even get eye colour straight sometimes.

If anything, I suspect that this lack of (consistent) biological information is intentional. A lot of aspects of the story are intentionally left vague, like romantic pairing possibilities. Regardless of all that, I don't particularly blame them for not trying to set everything straight. So I'm still not really convinced that it's worth trying to derive a semi-consistent system for ourselves, when another game (or even another surprise deduction from known information) could easily create yet more difficulties. Are we going to keep having arguments like this every time that happens, arguments about which contradictions are the least important? I don't see the point in that.

In the end, court record profiles are trivia in all cases save for maybe JFA and T&T. People don't remember or really care about details like age. They remember and care more about phrases like SEVEN YEARS AGO that these games sometimes bludgeon us with repeatedly. I'd prefer a system that can reasonably last and that's what I was going for with my above proposal.

capefeather (talk) 19:55, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Ok I have several points to several people so bear with me
Sligneris: A) Don't drag previous arguements into this just to prove a point. If you're guilty of something then that's that. Also it was insulting. Also relax. Take a deep breath. Now calmly listen/read.
I think it's great you want some consistancy in the ages, however, there are going to be some inconsitancies no matter what.. so I think you should let it go (no pun), and let us stick to what are games say. They made a mistake. It is said and done. There is not much we can do.
I ask you unless you can fully explain everything I asked you too, then drop the matter. I provided sufficient proof that it was 7 and not 6. You on the other hand are focusing on the nittygritty and ignoring it. Bottom line: more prrof towards a 7 year difference than a 6 year difference. If you can disprove the proof then go for it. But like Franziska von Karma only perfection will sufice. And if you have a problem with your mobile, then wait until you have your computer at hand. Ok, can you do that? Me, I'm sticking to what the games say. It just seems so much simpler.
Everyone else: Again, I am sorry for hhaving you listen/read anotherspat between us, but this time i think what he said was incorrect. There was nothing flat out wrong, there were just to many holes to hold water. I purely wanted to make sure we didn't make a mistake. If I'm annoying I apologise but I had to stick up for what the games said. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 20:28, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Timeline without months Edit

Alright, I decided to drop the timeline change discussion for the moment and start something else that might be, I admit, kind of a build-up for my argument. I decided to reassume things from the very beginning.

First of all, the first game takes place 15 years after DL-6 Incident, which took place in 2001 in English localization. That means the first game took place in 2016

PW:AA - 2016

Then, let's assume the rest of the games in the trilogy take place year after year.

PW:AA  - 2016
PW:JFA - 2017
PW:T&T - 2018

Since, if I recall correctly the ages don't change between AAI and T&T let's put it under the same year. Also, since Gumshoe's age is no different from the T&T in Turnabout Succession, it will also be put under the same way.

PW:AA  - 2016
PW:JFA - 2017
PW:T&T - 2018
ME:AAI - 2018
ME:GK2 - 2018
T. Succession - 2018

AJ takes place seven years after T&T and DD year after AJ, which then would be...

PW:AA  - 2016
PW:JFA - 2017
PW:T&T - 2018
ME:AAI - 2018
ME:GK2 - 2018
T. Succession - 2018
AJ:AA  - 2025
PW:DD  - 2026

It seems like a lame build-up for my argument, doesn't it? Well, there's yet another point to this, you'll see.

Let's add flashback cases. DL-6 is known already. T. Memories is 5 years before T&T happened. T. Beginnigs, 6 years. IS-7, 18 years, etc. I'll keep these relative to the games they appeared in.

IS-7   - 2000
DL-6   - 2001
SS-5   - 2006
KG-8   - 2008
T. Reminiscence - 2011
T. Beginnings   - 2012
T. Memories     - 2013
SL-9   - 2014
PW:AA  - 2016
PW:JFA - 2017
PW:T&T - 2018
ME:AAI - 2018
ME:GK2 - 2018
T. Succession   - 2018
UR-1   - 2019
AJ:AA  - 2025
PW:DD  - 2026

Obviously, this whole reasoning is faulty, because it excludes any changes about the year in a game, thus disregards months completely. However... If you'll take a quick glance and compare this table to the in-game profiles and all in-game flashback cases, you'll see that all information about the ages, whether from PW or AJ, and all the time gaps or even things like the accurate length of Edgeworth's career is fully consistent!

Ironically, it also disproves the edit I made before to Turnabout Beginnings - it did actually take place in 2012, not 2013 like I changed it to.

This behavior of the years, age gaps and characters ages is what leads me to believe that what you see above might be a reference to how the profiles are put into the Court Record by Capcom.

Just some food for thought. - Sligneris (talk) 20:07, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I'm glad you admit what you said is faulty. And it is. But this makes even less sense. I'm sorry, i don't mean to insulte you but why?
JFA and T&T are proven to have two years mentioned in the actual game! So why are you going up against the games you wanted to keep in check!?
Please stop! This is getting out of hand! Please let's keep our timeline the way it is!Franzyfan1998 (talk) 20:28, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
It is not meant as a replacement for the current timeline. More of a reference for us to have the information narrowed down as close to the canon to avoid future inconsistencies. You cannot deny that if you temporarily forget about the months, this table is fully consistent.
What I wish to suggest is using this chart to determine birth years. The ages were always consistent with this template in the court record and the ages are our only way of determining the birth years, so why not?
I also would like to get the actual timeline as close to thials as reasonably possible. That is, like I said, changing T. Beginnings back to 2012, as well as moving AJ:AA and PW:DD to 2025 and 2026 respectively.
The contradictions about the ages of AJ characters will be solved by the suggested birth year policy right in the paragraph above and we will drop the idea of establishing birth days and months.
So... capefeather, do you approve? - Sligneris (talk) 20:50, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
I think you're forgetting about othe users again. Before Cape does provide his opinion, allow me to provide my own opinion, if you don't want to read it then let others.
Question: When did T. Beginnings have a switch in dates?
Second: I can't forget about the months. The months are our most constant thing in this unviverse don't take that away from us!
Third: Please stop. You're scaring me! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 21:12, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
No. Read my whole argument again and don't speak up, until you actually understand it. If you need help understanding it, I can offer it on my talk page. That's all. - Sligneris (talk) 21:22, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Ladies, you're BOTH pretty, I'd happily marry both of...oh, forget it, I've already done that joke. Guys, if you're just going to behave this way all the time then please take it OUTSIDE the wikia? Please? CrashBash (talk) 21:33, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Sligneris, you listen and you listen now. What you are saying makes no sense what-so-ever! You are going against the games themselves! They have months mentioned and JFA and T&T both have a Happy New Year! No matter what you say, you will never change that! Drop this whole issue! Every explanation you give makes no sense! So stop!
So I'm going to repeat myself one last time: Either provide a sane and full explanation (That explains everything above this whatever) or DROP IT!
What part of "stop arguing!" are you incapable of understanding? CrashBash (talk) 22:43, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Do you really want to know my thoughts? Well, I'll tell you. I refuse to accept EITHER of your arguments whilst you're BOTH behaving like five year old children. Either grow up or shut up! CrashBash (talk) 22:43, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
My, my, what a horrible misunderstanding. I never said "Remove the months completely". No, what I said was:
  • "Establish character birth dates from the reference Capcom seems to be using while listing ages in profiles"
  • "Try to get the timeline as reasonably close to the one consistent year reference as possible"
...which would be changimg T. Beginnings back to 2012, Apollo Justice to 2025 and Dual Destinies to 2026. Since we no longer establish ages by months, but instead use chronological reference, there should be any fatal contradictions in character birth dates for neither PW, nor AJ characters.
JFA, T&T (aside from flashback cases), AAI, GK2 and Turnabout Succession dates were to remain unchanged
I already said this much in the second message of that thread, really. That is why I asked you to comprehend what exactly is my argument before you actually speak. Not like you listened... Another section littered with spam... *sigh* - Sligneris (talk) 23:19, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Capefeather, I'd still like to hear a final word on the matter ^^; - Sligneris (talk) 23:19, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

If I understand this correctly, you're proposing to have this applied only to character ages and flashback case dates, right? If that's the case, this is similar to what I was going for, except with all the years advanced by one. My rationale for this is that only the original trilogy crosses years, but the other games are all but certainly timed relative to the "latter year". capefeather (talk) 23:50, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Still this explanation makes no sense. I'm sorry but it doesn't. I'll calmly explain
A) Again JFA and T&T have Happy New Years. This unfortunately means that this can't be. Each game covers two years. 10 months in JFA, 5 in T&T but both invlove December and Janurary. We just can't change it. I'm sorry but we can't change the years of which each case happened. It's as simple as that.
B) You want to determine birthdays yes? Well..... most of the main cast from JFA has to have the birthdays between March and June. You know Maya, Pearl, Franziska, and Gumshoe. I think we have it narrowed down for the most part. Inconsistencies we just have live with.
C) We can't determine years by age. We determine age by years.
I'm sorry, I still think it's great what you want to do, but it's just impossible to have a way without either contradicting other facts or changing a lot of other facts. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 23:55, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Well, that's the thing. I don't see the value in interpreting profile ages as absolute ages-at-the-time. Even with the double-year system that's been used thus far, there's no attempt to discuss whether or not someone's birthday has passed. Shifting all the double-year entries to the latter year is just a small adjustment of that. capefeather (talk) 00:10, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Haaangh, so we won't be changing AJ to 2025 and DD to 2026..? I really hoped I could finally go on without cringing at every single inconsistency in main original trilogy chararecters' ages in every single game from AJ on...
I mean, these two are the years we're going to use for age reference, so now even the AJ characters will be inconsistent with it... Like I said, the only thing that can solve these contradictions, like a person born in 1992 being 34 in "2027" is moving that part of the timeline.
Huh, but I guess we have the age reference now, at least. That is one step ahead. - Sligneris (talk) 00:21, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
What I'd like to point out is that age reference for AJ is 2025. That is the only way it can stay consistent with ages of both new and recurring characters.
The thing is, if we do use that reference and keep saying AJ happened in 2026, the birth years of all the characters would become inconsistent.
That is why I ask you change AJ to 2025. Characters say "7 years ago", because in Capcom's mind, they refer to the year of Trials and Tribulations, 2018...
While we will keep changing years after a year passes (e. g. Turnabout Succession in 2019), all the time gaps (e g. the "seven years ago" phrase) and ages are created with exactly the same method I used - which groups T&T, AAI and T. Succession under 2018. - I mean, that's the only assumption that seems to make everything consistent.
When you look at that it becomes quite obvious that months are the last thing put into the game - why should they be of top priority in that case? Shouldn't year consistency be more important?
While we will keep changing years after a year passes, this table from the first mess
Really, trust me. That's the only way to do it that makes sense. - Sligneris (talk) 10:53, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Ah...! It starts to get annoying.
Why does no else see it? Why does no one else seem to really understand what I wrote at the beginning of this section?
I even wrote the most important points in bold... Shouldn't the wiki aim for the information consistency..? Why do I even have to clean up this mess...?
To me, it is exactly as logical as 2+2=4 - it just is true... But supporting this solution with arguements... Am I just bad at forming them...?
Really, if I only had more of a free hand at editing this wiki... - Sligneris (talk) 12:38, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
I can't believe you! I thought we were done with this discussion! You can't change the facts of the game. T&T has the Stolen Turnabout take place in 2018. The murder of Glen Elg takes place in December 2018, Recipe for Turnabout takes place in 2019 as does everything that follows it! Stop changing the facts! In lamens terms this solution is flat out wrong! I'm sorry but those are the facts! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 14:50, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Recipe for Turnabout, Bridge to the Turnabout, Ace Attorney Investigations games being grouped under the year 2018, despite taking place in 2019 is also a fact evidenced by Gumshoe's age remaining unchanged since the start of Trials and Tribulations to the point of Turnabout Succession.
I also got admin's permission to change the birth years, if I understand capefeather's opinion correctly.
But, fine enough. This is too grand a change to be made from a mobile. Once I access my computer, I will try to write a new timeline from scratch, making deductions directly from what we have in game, complete with reasonings. It will be posted in my sandbox and then discussed.
On the other hand, I still kinda lament not having admin priviliges... I wouldn't have to discuss things as obvious as keeping the timeline consistent within itself... As well as I could prevent stubborn, meantally-challenged kids from interfering with every improvement I try to make.
But, I guess I have to deal with that. Is the solution I proposed good enough? The one with showing in my sandbox exactly what the timeline would look like, had my suggestion been accepted? - Sligneris (talk) 15:45, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
OK, I can't speak for Capefeather because I'm not Capefeather, but I don't think he gave you full on permission. He said, i think, that they take place over two calanedar years. And he said "Shifting all the double-year entries to the latter year is just a small adjustment of that" I don't know about you but does that sound like pushing everyone's age up a year or down a year. Either way, we should leave things as they are.
Also about Gumshoe, we discussed this his birthday, as of JFA takes place between March and June, now it's between April and June. Do we have to repeat the point of people can be two ages in the course of one calendar year!
You are doing extra work that is A) no one asked for. B) No one gave outright permission. C) Makes little to no sense!
Also I demand an apology on calling me mentally challenged! That's too far! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 16:03, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

A change in timeline policy?Edit

(See the first post in section above for my entire point/suggestion)

IS-7   - 2000
DL-6   - 2001
SS-5   - 2006
KG-8   - 2008
T. Reminiscence - 2011
T. Beginnings   - 2012
T. Memories     - 2013
SL-9   - 2014
PW:AA  - 2016
PW:JFA - 2017
PW:T&T - 2018
ME:AAI - 2018
ME:GK2 - 2018
T. Succession   - 2018
UR-1   - 2019
AJ:AA  - 2025
PW:DD  - 2026

I established a reference according to which the ages, flashback and time gaps are assigned too. Months are implemented after all those.

Since ages and time gaps are established using this reference, we should adjust the timeline to fit this reference as well as possible.

Ages never change in a single game, which means it's not dependant on the months - meaning, there's no way to efficiently establish birth dates. We can only establish birth years in accordance to said reference, which is what capefeather approved of.

The reference is never inconsistent with profiles, time gaps nor flashbacks. That's why it should be used. The only thing that complicates things is what is added last: months. This can be solved easily.

The fact that my suggestion provides consistency within time gaps, profiles and the often-contradictory ages proves it is correct.

Recipe for Turnabout, Bridge to the Turnabout Ace Attorney Investigations games occured in 2019 however script and profiles refer to them as a part of the main year of T&T, which is 2018. This is evident by ages of recurring characters (Edgeworth, Franziska, Gumshoe, and lots and lots of cameos).

Therefore, while the timeline will list these as occuring in 2019, for the sake of consistency when referred to from other points in time, they will be grouped under the year 2018, which will change only our treatment of their time relativity.

That way, we would go on without fatal contradictions - Sligneris (talk)

A) I'm stil waiting for that apology. I'm not dumb! I'm not retarded! This explanation is going against logic itself!
Unfortuatley for you, to me the main year of a game would be the year the majority the game takes place, which would be 2019. Why are you so persistant in changing the simplist facts. Again I must repeat, RECIPE FOR TURNABOUT, BRIDGE TO THE TURNABOUT, INVESITGATIONS 1&2, AND PHOEINX'S LAST TRIAL, took place in 2019. Nothing you propse will ever change that! Stop avoiding the facts. And with that Apollo Justice takes place in 2026 and Dual Destinies in 2027. Can we not agree on that when everyone else, including the creators of this series agrees with that! What you're saying is the eqivlilent of "Yeah I know the school year ends in 2014 qand you're graduating but we're putting you as class of 2013 because that's the year the school year started!"
And again I must say, That people can be two different ages in the course of a calander year! What I am getting from you is that people must stay one age thorughout a calander year! And most of their birthdays can take place between April and June! There's no contradiction! WE are not changing the timeline do to your nitpicking!
Franzyfan1998 (talk) 17:33, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
The main year? Oh, I established it with profiles. You know. Because I know, something is right when it's consistent. Kind of like 2+2=4. It's consistent. It's true.
They took place in 2019, but they will be grouped under 2018 when related to from other points in time, because that is literally how the game itself treats it.
In December 2016 Edgeworth is 24
In December 2027 Edgeworth is 34
Let's see you explain that one. According to you, it's a fact. Go ahead, explain.
Creators of the series agreed on nothing - to the contrary - all of the canon information fits the reference perfectly. - Sligneris (talk) 17:47, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
They made an error Sligneris, I won't disprove that! I'm not saying Edgeworth's age is not messed up. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they made a mistake and now we have to deal with it! There is no solution without contradicting previous facts.
And profiles! How many time must I repear myself. Their birthday must take place in April, May, or June. There's no contardiction there! Fully explain how on earth there could be one!
Why do we have to group the years at all!? Why can't we just admit it took place over two calander years. T&T ended in 2019, which no matter what makes Apollo Justice in 2026 and Dual Destinies in 2027! Even if we do group them it won't change the truth! So I suggest you stop with this nonsense and go back to reality!Franzyfan1998 (talk) 18:16, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
I object. My solution leaves no place for "they made an error". It matches up perfectly. Also, wasn't it you who was going on about me "ignoring the facts"? Why do you do exactly the same thing by saying "they made an error"?
My solution is the truth. These are the facts. The profiles were never assigned by months - they were assigned by years - see the table again, and it gets really clear.
The only reason this discussion continues is because you somehow assumed that an internally inconsistent solution is true. It's like saying 2+2=5 and screaming "You can't change the facts". At least from my perspective.
You also quite clearly haven't processed the numbers I provided in that reference. Try it. Let's see what happens if you assume we can group T. Succession under 2018. If you spot any contradictions with that assumption, I'll retract my thinking - Sligneris (talk) 18:38, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

NO the Truth is Apollo Justice takes place in 2026 and Dual Destinies takes place in 2027! That's the truth!

And if they are putting ages by years would it not make sense to put their ages for the game as they were at the beginning of the game rather than their ages end of the game!

Ok let's assume Phoenix's last case took place in 2018, that would mean that Bridge to the Turnabout takes palce in 2018 right? And that would mean that it doesn't take place in the middle of winter right? Oh wait it does.

And Of course the same goes Turnabout Big Top doesn't take place in December when we can clearly see the snow. Wait......... wouldn't that mean that Winter is Summer and Summer is winter? Wouldn't that put us in the Southern Hemisphere? Are we in Austrailia now? Face it even the backgrounds proves your theory is faulty!Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:00, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

I never saw it in either in these games. It never said "year 2026". Never. Therefore I don't acknowledge it as an undeniable fact.
No, that's not what I meant. Phoenix's last case took place in 2019, I said that at the very beginning. What I suggest is "grouping" it under 2018, not changing it to. That "grouping" when we are talkimg about relative changes in time counted in years. Such would be the caee with 'seven years later' phrase.
I said that much from the start. Why don't you read with understanding? That is why I insulted you in the first place...
Your objections so far stem only from you not understanding my idea fully... just that... How could I not insult you under these circumstances..? - Sligneris (talk) 19:10, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

7+2019=2026. Hmm.
What is the point in grouping. If you want to change Apollo Justice era to 2025, I'd call that a change not a grouping. Also I believe as I should have stated, if i didn't before, that I think they went  7 years after Bridge to the Turnabout and not the Stolen Turnabout. That makes the most sense. Don't you agree? You aer doing something that just doesn't need to happen just to make a change that no one wants. I proven why Apollo Justice can't be in 2025. And you still haven't disporved the majority of that.
Now I only have one question and one piece of advice
Question: What is there to gain by grouping other than saying "Oh Sligneris must be right"?
Advice: There is a simple solution to not insulting someone on the internet, it's called not insulting them on the internet. Feel free to call me whatever you want in your home/head but leave it out of the internet. Ok? And I still need an apology before I decide I simply can't forgive you.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:22, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
This is where you got it wrong. While T. Succession took place in 2019, creators still thought of it as "same year as T&T", took 2018 and then added this 7.
This clears up all contradictions with the ages that ever occured. I'll retract my suggestion only if it doesn't.
That is exactly the udea of "grouping". It keeps thins consistent and all my posts since "Timeline without months" were arguments supporting and explaining it - where have you been all that time?
Before you answer to that, please read everything wroten since the start of year listing. Please. Try to understand every single line. If you can't, contact me on my talk page.
Answer to your question: The wiki gains absolute consistency of character ages. Guaranteed for any future releases.
Please, don't continue until you fully read and understand my argumentation so far. Ok? - Sligneris (talk) 19:34, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't even know why I bother. After I try and get through to you, you both STILL continue to behave like children. CrashBash (talk) 19:36, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Haaaaaangh... To be perfectly honest, I'm tired. I can't get even get Franzyfan to understand my idea for half a day, let alone convince them...
I really wish I was an admin here, so that I could just state it (because I have no doubt it's an accurate solution) and go on...
But instead, I must constantly deal with objections of someone who doesn't even understand what they object to... Aaah, how tiresome~... - Sligneris (talk) 19:57, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
It's not like your "everyone is an idiot except for me" attitude is helping, just so you know. CrashBash (talk) 20:06, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
But this is basically my stance on life. Everyone besides me, at least of the people I get to interact with is stupid annoying trash and I myself am stupid talentless trash. And then we all get to live together in our trashy reality. Yaay~! - Sligneris (talk) 20:11, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Then the truth is, Franzyfan will never listen to you with that attitude, because they won't WANT to listen to you. Simple(s). CrashBash (talk) 20:14, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
So what you're saying is, the creators, project managers, editors and everyone who went into the production of the trilogy games, never once realised that they had 4 calander years over the course of three games. Not one person realised that Recipe for Turnabout, etc. ect. take place in a different calander year than The Stolen Turnabout. That's streaching it, and also insulting to everyone I mentioned. If so then I ask: Why did they mention New Years Eve and Day if they never counted for anything!
Ok Now I read the arguement and my understanding of it: If we ignore the facts that some new years have passed and we assume that they went through each year with no overlaps we can have no contradictions in ages. Is that correct?
The problem is: We can't! No matter what they do overlap years! You have admitted that several thousand times and you even said yourself that the explaination was faulty. Why should we consider an explanation, that even the one who made it says it's faulty, seriously? So it's not smart! And It's pathetic you're trying to make this as evidence when the actual games themselves admit they overlap years! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 20:20, July 1, 2014 (UTC)


...Haaaaaaaangh... We'll never be over this

They realized a year passed. They just didn't think twice about it and didn't bother to change the profiles.

Actually, the original AA team had 7 people in it.

Also, what you said about Dual Destinies "making an error" or what is right now on the actual article is even more disrespectful.

To be honest, having an universe listed as this inconsistent is disrespectful to this series and all its fans.

How many times do I have to tell you? These cases will be listed as occuring in 2019, due to the fact they occured after a year has passed. Therefore, years do overlap Same is true for Farewell, my Turnabout and the year 2017/2018.

We will just treat them as they are listed in the reference below whenever (and ONLY) they are referred to from other points in time.

Reference (accordingly to profiles, flashbacks and timeskips, not actual timeline):

IS-7   - 2000 (18 years before ME:GK2)
DL-6   - 2001 (original reference)
SS-5   - 2006 (12 years before ME:GK2)
KG-8   - 2008 (3 years before T. Reminiscence)
T. Reminiscence - 2011 (7 years before ME:AAI)
T. Beginnings   - 2012 (6 years before PW:T&T, 4 years before PW:AA)
T. Memories     - 2013 (5 yeara before PW:T&T)
SL-9   - 2014 (2 years before PW:AA)
PW:AA  - 2016 (15 years after DL-6)
PW:JFA - 2017 (1 year after PW:AA)
PW:T&T - 2018 (1 year after PW:JFA)
ME:AAI - 2018 (same year as PW:T&T)
ME:GK2 - 2018 (same year as PW:T&T)
T. Succession  - 2018 (same year as T&T)
UR-1   - 2019 (7 years before PW:DD)
AJ:AA  - 2025 (7 years after PW:T&T)
PW:DD  - 2026 (1 year after AJ:AA)

which will make it fully consistent with all profiles and time gaps.

Evidence supporting the reference:

  • Dick Gumshoe's age remains unchanged since the beginning of T&T and until the end of T. Succession. Same is true for whole AAI games cast.
  • Miles Edgeworth's and Phoenix's Wright's age changes exactly 10 years between PW:DD and PW:AA.
  • The profiles don't change, when a year passes, nor at any other point of they year. This is the origin of "grouping" the cases under a year that the game started with.
  • All other ages, profiles time gaps between specific points in time remain consistent with the reference.

Unless a new year comes by , the years of the cases will be listed as is in the reference.

Ah, also, I'll make clear: I won't really give up on the idea, unless contradictions within the idea itself or its evidence support are found. The contradictions won't be acknowledged if they are exposed whilst ignoring the necessary assumptions

Also... huuh. I'm also willing to hear any alternate solutions you might have, but I won't accept just anything. You should make sure that any other explanation has no inconsistencies within it. I simply won't give up on an explanation without inconsistencies for one with them.

Keep in mind that you shouldn't just ignore blatant contradictions, such as, saay... Edgeworth's or Phoenix's ages in Dual Destinies. If you are saying "they made a mistake", how can we trust that they didn't "make a mistake" in regards to the "seven years ago"?

Haaaaaaaaaaang. I hope at least I hope I made clear what this here actually is about. - Sligneris (talk) 21:02, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

I really REALLY hope you meant to say that Apollo Justice took place SEVEN years after Trials and Tribulations instead of ONE. CrashBash (talk) 21:10, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
I humiliated myself this badly? Thanks for fixing that, it was a copying error from DD. - Sligneris (talk) 21:26, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Ok Why should they change the profile just because January 1st happened? That is not how things work!

Second: I'm going to ask because I'm not understanding what you want to do? Do you want to change Apollo Justice to 2025? If not then we have nothing to discuss if so, we do.

Also if it's just a reference why even bring it up? Unless you want an actual change in the timeline drop it! Because It's a lousy reference as time and time again new years has passed. Lumping in the year to the year the game started is dumb. Again I say it's exactly like saying a graduating class of 2014 must be called class of 2013 because that's when the school year started!

And about Gumshoe: A full calendar year has not passed between The Stolen Turnabout and Phoenix Wright's last case. It wasn't even 8 months. It was, in the English version, 6 months. Hardly impossible!

And I have news for you. DL6 itself proves a flaw in the argument! Each case from Bridge to the Turnabout to the Grand Turnabout mentions DL6 happened 17 years ago. They rounded down to 17, because on December 28, 2018 17 years have passed. DL6 happened at the end of the year so unless you want to use they rounded up argument again I must ask. If we disclose the months entirely when do the cases take place. Unless they take place 6 months or less before December 2018 your theory has a serious flaw.

And also if we disregard months and determine years from ages wouldn't that discredit the one year mentioned in the entire game history?

Finally the alternate solution is the current solution, that I think everyone but you agreed on. Apollo Justice happened 7 years after Bridge to the Turnabout, 2019. Can we not agree on that fact they jammed down our throats!?Franzyfan1998 (talk) 21:38, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

OK, TBH, even I am finding it hard to get what you're trying to say in regards to DL-6.
This whole timeline thing is causing nothing but trouble. How about we just accept there ARE NO YEARS, only timespans? CrashBash (talk) 22:12, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
The profiles never change unless a "game" passes. Just like on the reference.
Also, I said this:
"Unless a new year comes by, the years of the cases will be listed as is in the reference."
Which means that the year in timeline will be listed like on the reference, aside from...
'"These cases will be listed as occuring in 2019, due to the fact they occured after a year has passed."
That does count as timeline change.
Both me and this wikia's admin also dropped the idea of establishing birth months and days - therefore, whether they had birthday or not will not be established. The point about Gumshoe might be a door to another possibility, but you didn't yet open it. It doesn't contradict my idea either.
"Again I say it's exactly like saying a graduating class of 2014 must be called class of 2013 because that's when the school year started!"
This maybe proves that my theory is 'hardly believable'. However, any other one is impossible, so that's the only remaining option. Mostly, because of the glaring inconsistencies such as...
"Finally the alternate solution is the current solution, that I think everyone but you agreed on. Apollo Justice happened 7 years after Bridge to the Turnabout, 2019."
Current solution? Fine then:
Turnabout Sisters, Sep. 2016, Edgeworth is 24
Turnabout for Tomorrow, Dec. 2027, Edgeworth is 34
As you can see, he ages 10 years, while over 11 years have passed. Notice the word "over" - there is no way he will have his birthday anytime later in that year, since 11 full calendar years have passed. That means this scenario is clearly inconsistent within itself, therefore impossible. - Sligneris (talk) 22:28, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I only deleted the rude parts of your comments, you didn't have to delete every part of my comment, especially since it wasn't even rude....and dare I say favourable to you. CrashBash (talk) 22:39, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
It was an accident, sorry. It happened because I started writing my response before you published yours - as a result, your post wasn't in my edit field and it got overwritten. It wasn't intentional by any means. - Sligneris (talk) 22:44, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
That's OK, no biggie. CrashBash (talk) 22:56, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
And ignoring obvious year changes isn't inconstent with reality! I'm not saying there's no mess ups, clearly there are but you're solution has too many flaws att it's core! We can't group years! Let's just keep it the way it was but say on their wiki pages or this one, "While this is our best timeline, there are some inconsitancies espeically ages, such as Miles Edgeworth, for the purpose of this wiki, we will have the years listed below as 'correct'" Just like we did for Ema's eye color. Bam I solved the puzzle. I must also direct you to the Timeline wiki page itself. They address the matter! It said and done. It's kind of like a school year. Over the course of two calendar years but less than 12 months.
Some questions regarding your points
"Unless a new year comes by, the years of the cases will be listed as is in the reference."
What do you mean? Like a new game or what? We've already adressed the fact that New Years exist, a lot. So elaborate? It's hard to follow.
And again with Gumshoe, while it may not disprove it, it certainly puts doubt on it! Do you expect people to believe that 6 months=1 year? I don't thnk so. It's like a clock. It's 4am 6 hours earlier it was 10 pm.  Midnight has passed, it's a new day but 6 and not 24 hours have passed. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 22:54, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
You don't negate my argument in the slightest. Article after the change will also "address the matter". Bam, problem you have with my idea solved!
We're not ignoring year passing - we just change our interpretation of people referring to that period, because they do so according to that reference. Just that.
This is less inconsistent with the facts than anything suggested so far. You have found no inconsistencies with my explanation, so for f**k's sake, stop arguing for the sake of going against me without any solid, strong argument...
Also, I have no idea what you are talking about with Gumshoe, but as long as it doesn't directly deny my argument, I don't care about that. Because whatecer you are to say here... fits right in into my reference table.
You keep throwing arguments about why my solution is hardly believable, but anything other than this solution is impossible. In short, if you have nothing at all to prove that my idea is impossible, it will stay a 'remaining unbelievable truth'
If you can't come up with solid arguments, stop coming up with arguments. "Doesn't make any progress and holds down the progress others make" is really accurate description of what you are doing here.
You don't think things over, you don't come up with solutions. You are behaving exactly like with portraits.
"I like things this way, (and oh, maybe if I repeat this over and over again, it will prove anything), so it should stay and I should make sure no progress is made".
This is literally how I see what you're doing. So, really, just stop. - Sligneris (talk) 08:50, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
No, Sligneris, YOU stop!! What part of "stop being rude, stop acting like you're the only intelligent person in the world and stop blaming everyone except yourself" are you incapable of understanding? At least FranzyFan TRIED, but you instead laid an insult crudly disguised as an apology.
I am sick to the back teeth with BOTH of you, but frankly, I'm sick of you even more so. So please, stop being so rude all the time, and behave like a respectible human being. That's all we need to do to get this sorted out and get the wikia back on track. CrashBash (talk) 12:16, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Ah, sorry!! I really didn't mean it as an insult this time, I'm just really tired of this and just can't help but express my point of view... Sorry, again. - Sligneris (talk) 13:06, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

OK, that's enough Edit

Sligneris, FranzyFan, do the world a favour, and shut up, BOTH OF YOU. You are both behaving like immature little children, throwing insults left right and centre, simply because you can't get your own way. That is not how a wikia environment should be like, and you're actually putting off other members.

Can't you behave in the manner I expect from a Wikia, being a member of quite a few myself? Trust me, if I had been a moderator, both of you would have been banned by now, for at least two weeks. CrashBash (talk) 17:39, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry CrashbashFranzyfan1998 (talk) 17:41, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
You said that ages ago, twice, and you're STILL trying to tear each others throats out. That's not good enough. CrashBash (talk) 17:42, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Yup, sorry. - Sligneris (talk) 17:48, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Oh, well done for completely missing the point of that, Sligneris. Once again, it's "everyone's wrong except me". Look at your frickin' edits. Apology certainly not accepted. And I will remove that comment, and don't you dare try and put it back. CrashBash (talk) 17:52, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
But it's true. Nah, this time I'll go with it. At least this time it wasn't a part of my point.
It's just that Franzyfan seems like a troll to me - a person who pretends to be less inteligent than they really are. These in my opinion deserve no respect. - Sligneris (talk) 17:57, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
And someone like you who constantly insults people they don't agree with DOES deserve respect? Because that's what you do all the frickin' time. Have you not once considered that part of the reason Franzyfan keeps having goes at you is BECAUSE you're so insultive and rude? CrashBash (talk) 18:00, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
What I speak is nothing but my observations. These weren't just insults. They were diagnosis of a problem. My observation was that Franzyfan clearly denies my argument without understanding it'. That is the main problem here.
And because of the nuisance they are, my suggestion got buried with their posts, and now someone who might actually get the point (not even necessarily agree, just actually adressimg my points...) won't even read it - because all they see is wall of Franzyfan's comments and my reponses. I'd archivize the discussion and start over, in order to get to the point but it won't work, because my reasoning will again get buried. - Sligneris (talk) 18:09, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
I will say this only once more! I am not dumb, not a little kid, not a troll, and not RETARDED! I demand an apology regarding that!Franzyfan1998 (talk) 18:16, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
...My observations are a little bit different. Your whole discussion felt like talking with Yumihiko... Except with in this case being forced to repeat oneself umtil he understands... and with him never stopping and stubbornly negating one's argument.
Glad Yumihiko was never like that. It would make for a horrible game. - Sligneris (talk) 18:23, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
How many times am I going to have to get this through your head, Sligneris? Stop being so rude and immature. Stop calling people "idiots", stop calling people "retarded" and STOP finishing EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POSTS with an insult. You are EQUALLY to blame for this as FranzyFan, now accept that. CrashBash (talk) 18:36, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Yup, I am guilty of being disrespectful. Let me remind you though that this place isn't about being nice to eachother - it's about establishing facts. Which is exactly what Franzyfan stops me from doing - Sligneris (talk) 18:40, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
So, once again, blaming EVERYONE except yourself. If you're going to be disrespectful all the time, can you seriously BLAME Franzyfan for refusing to listen to you? You claim this place isn't about being nice to each other, but that's, frankly, rubbish; anyone can tell you there is never NOT a time to be nice to each other. If you two were to discuss this like mature adults, without the screaming (on Franzy's part) and constant insults (on your part) then the wikia would be a nicer place. CrashBash (talk) 18:45, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Tbh, I don't care if it's a nice place or not. All I care about is the quality of this wiki.

It's like you went to the court and told everyone to be nice to each other during a trial - but it isn't the point. The point is establishing defendant's innocence or guilt.

On the wikia, it's about improving the quality of articles and consistency of information contained on them.

To be perfectly honest, I'm sick of Franzyfan's reactions to my attempts at improvement. I don't see a single reason for not expressing my disapproval.

I didn't do it in a nice way. What does it matter? - Sligneris (talk) 18:51, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

All I can say is I'm sorry Crashbash! I really am but he's going to far on something already disproved, several times!
And Sligneris. I never thought I'd say this but what I'm getting from you is this. "The Ends Justifies the Means" Please apologise, if not for me then those who were also insulted by your insult bezuse the know someone who is or are that word.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:00, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
You did not disprove my idea in the slightest..? All you did was literally just shouting around...
...What? I don't get that last sentence at all...
Still, I don't see the point in apologizing when I don't actually have any regrets. My only regret is that I can't be more efficient about the improvements on this wiki, like I said. - Sligneris (talk) 19:21, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Well, Sligneris, you obviously DON'T care about the quality of this wiki, because people who would otherwise want to contribute are being put off by this argument, which YOU contributed to. You can bleat or whine or pass the blame however you want to, but you cannot change the fact that you were JUST AS responsible for this whole outbreak as FranzyFan was, and it could have been avoided if BOTH OF YOU had acted more maturely.
To put it in a way you can understand, people are not going to listen to you if you continually insult them, call them names, act better than them, so on and so forth. This was a problem faced with another wikia I am currently part of, where the former administrator behaved EXACTLY like you...continually insulting people who didn't agree with him, refusing to listen to constructive criticism...heck, he even BANNED people when he didn't get his way. Luckily, he's no longer the administrator, but the point I'm trying to make here is, acting that way is not the way to go, regardless of where you are.
The same holds true for you, FranzyFan. Throwing tantrums, regardless as to whether you're on a wikia or in the real world, is a big no-no. CrashBash (talk) 19:16, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
I don't see how quality of the wiki is determined by anything else than accuracy of the information on it. - Sligneris (talk) 19:21, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
And I don't care how much of a special snowflake your mother claims you are, but being insultive and impolite is not the answer. Let me repeat that. Not. The. Answer. CrashBash (talk) 19:24, July 1, 2014 (UTC)
Ok just Sligneris:
What I meant in apologising for other people's sake is that other people unfortunatley are that word that you insulted me with. Imagine what they would go through if they hear someone say it as an insult to someone who isn't. I fully admit I'm not mature all the time, that comes with age and wisdom, something few people my age can accomplish. So I'm sorry, and frankly that's all I can say about this. I'm sorry for my actions past present and future! Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:28, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

Holy crap, 87 posts since I was here... capefeather (talk) 23:51, July 1, 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I tried, but neither will take the hint. CrashBash (talk) 12:19, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

And now back to our regularly scheduled programEdit

Ok well... First of all, Wikia should be warning people if they're editing over another edit. So I don't know if people were being really hasty in trying to post on this page, but in the future, if Wikia warns you about edits that others have snuck in, please heed it. I've accidentally overridden edits, too, so I know it's easy to get carried away. Just, please be more careful.

Second of all, I don't think that having an admin rank has anything to do with this. Over time, I've made a lot of choices unilaterally, and a lot pretty much bilaterally with Strabo, but that was mostly because usually we're the only people who talk about stuff like this. A discussion between multiple users like this should give everyone pause, whether they're admin or not. I was actually slowly getting into the process of implementing the timeline adjustment that I proposed in May, but I'm holding off because of this discussion.

For the topic at hand: if I'm reading all this correctly, the current main disagreement between me and Sligneris boils down to whether it's important to try to make everything consistent with DL-6 taking place in 2001. Sure, every event, including births, can be consistently denoted as taking place X years after or before DL-6. However, I don't think that the actual year of DL-6 is all that important. The 2001 date serves no purpose other than as a placeholder that happens to coincide with the release year of the original game.

Let's consider this:

  • PW:AA has 4/5 cases taking place in 2016, 1/5 in 2017. DL-6 takes place on Dec. 28, really close to the new year.
  • JFA has 3/4 cases taking place in 2017, 1/4 in 2018, though the third case is very close to the new year.
  • T&T has 1/3 "present-day" cases taking place in 2018, 2/3 in 2019. Both AAI games take place entirely in 2019 save for the flashback cases.

Sure, the first two games mostly happen before the new year. However, the present-day portions of T&T and the AAIs have mostly happened after the new year. This means that this is a trend that began in 2004 (ten years ago, wow...). Add a literal seven year time gap to that and the trend is completely consistent. I guess you could say that this is the wave of the future, except it was set in motion before the vast majority of us had even heard of Ace Attorney. DL-6 is almost 2002, anyway.

Lastly, I take issue with this comment: "To be honest, having an universe listed as this inconsistent is disrespectful to this series and all its fans." I don't think that that's true at all. This seems to imply that either the universe creator has an obligation to keep his/her facts straight, or the fans have an obligation to interpret the works in their most favourable light. Neither is true.

This series is 13 years old, so it's going to have issues in the canon caused by newer content. Before 2005, Ema Skye didn't exist, and Miles Edgeworth "chose death" solely because of what Phoenix did for him. The fact that these two statements are now officially wrong causes minor problems with the other games in the trilogy. There's no really satisfying way around that, other than to smooth things over as best we can, while acknowledging the change in canon that has occurred.

Anyway, I think that it would be best for everyone to take this debate a bit less seriously. I think that the most important thing should be to minimize the confusion over what's ultimately fan-made trivia trying to make sense of in-game information. Well, I suppose it's a bit more "important" than the average trivia (whatever that means), but still.

capefeather (talk) 03:56, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

Well, technically, should I be completely honest about this...? I really do think your status as an admin keeps things like lowercase names in several articles, hahah... I can't really argue that much, because I said what I had to say then already... Like the points about the green-text part of the script at the start of each scene, buttons, gameplay mechanics or organization/location names... Well, neither was really paid any heed...
Also, my point here is pretty well-explained already, I think. Like I said, it's an attempt to clear up all contradictions in the characters of the original trilogy. Since Capcom has been always consistent with this reference, whenever it comes to referring to ages and time gaps, it's reasonable to assume Capcom will stay consistent with it.
That means, this solution will work throughout the whole series - because the issue is caused by AJ, and each new game will use the format I re-created.
I honestly care about that and would like some support on that... - Sligneris (talk) 08:28, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
And yet you clearly DON'T because otherwise, you and FranzyFan wouldn't be tearing out each other's throats all the time. Also, an important rule....never assume. CrashBash (talk) 12:19, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
"Never assume" doesn't apply here... because this assumption is logically derived from usual habits. It's like assuming that Godot keeps drinkimg coffee, or that Trucy is still a magician after GS5 - or like assuming that since 2+2=4, then 2+(2+1)=4+1. That is an assumption literally on this level., and surprisingly accurate to the math example. And actually, in my mind it's actually just as simple... The fact no one really seems to understand my point hurts... - Sligneris (talk) 13:12, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
I'll be blunt here, you claim it to be simple, and yet I have no idea what you're talking about, other than stating obvious maths sums. Frankly, I don't understand anything you or FranzyFan are saying, because neither of you make any sense anymore. It got lost in that whirlwind of insults and/or temper tantrums back there. CrashBash (talk) 13:28, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I'll try to explain. You know what my year reference in that table is, right? - Sligneris (talk) 13:30, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Unless you're talking about DL-6, then no, I don't. But if you are, then yes. CrashBash (talk) 16:09, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

This thing here is the "year reference", I am talking about. Capcom follows this when establishing time gaps and ages in profiles. It has been consistent across the series, but assumption that AJ takes place in 2026 breaks that consistency.

I literally extracted it from said profiles, time skips and flashbacks. Do you follow so far? - Sligneris (talk) 16:19, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

Well, no, because it's all over the place. CrashBash (talk) 16:23, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

Another explanationEdit

Haaaaaangh... I wanted to save this for my sandbox, but alright... First, lets establish how the time works in Ace Attorney.

Capcom, when establishing how many years pass between games uses the refeces below. Like I said already, all ages and time gaps are insterted accordingly to said reference.

The game also doesn't establish "birth dates", like Franzyfan believes - developers don't have any specific birth days ib mind, meaning they count the ages exactly like on the reference below.

That way, any reasoning on whether or not characters had birthday, doesn't apply.

(18 years before '"Gyakuten Kenji 2)
(original reference)
(12 years before
Gyakuten Kenji 2)
(3 years before
T. Reminiscence)
(7 years before
Ace Attorney Investigations)
(6 years before
Trials and Tribulations)
(5 years before
Trials and Tribulations)
(2 years before
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney)
(15 years after DL-6 Incident)
(1 year after
Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney)
(1 year after
Justice For All)
(same year as
Trials and Tribulations)
(same year as
Trials and Tribulations)
(same year as
Trials and Tribulations)
(7 years before
Dual Destinies)
(7 years after
T. Succession)
(1 year after
Apollo Justice)

The mouse-over text is the relation between the years as said in the script. The profiles of all games are fully consistent at all times.

Take a look at Dick Gumshoe - since the developers don't take months into consideration, they put 32 as his age into all games listed under "2018". All that, despite most of these cases taking part in 2019.

The point is, while T. Succession takes place in 2019, the game treats all the cases I listed under "2018" like this as part of 2018 "year".

The solution I proposed all that time is interpreting the time gaps counted in years exactly like game does - just as the game, going back to 2018 and count it as well, by interpreting the year gaps, like "seven years ago" or the length of character's lives, like on this reference.

That way, since on the reference T. Succession is listed under 2018, we just add 7 years to 2018, since this is how the game handles time gaps. After we're done with time gaps, then we deduce that T. Succession takes place in April the following year, so we list it under.

The result is something like this

2016, Nick - 24
+1 year
2017, Nick - 25
+1 year
2018, Nick - 26 (He is also 26 during part of 2019, so it won't hurt to include that period of time here)
+7 years
2025, Nick - 33
+1 year
2026, Nick - 34

See? Everything nice and simple. That is why I compared it to 2+2=4... Because it is simple...

But the timeline currently used is different. The timeline Franzyfan defends is...

2016, Nick - 24
+1 year
2017, Nick - 25
+1 year
2018, Nick - 26
+1 year
2019, Nick - 26?
+7 years
2026, Nick - 33??

Okay, something went wrong. Let's go back where we started and compare it with the end result.

2016, Nick - 24
+10 years
2026, Nick - 33!?!

This is literally why my method is way better. It is consistent within itself. All that is required to do is go back to the sources and keep a mind open for the new solutions - Sligneris (talk) 17:48, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

That's still stupidly hard to follow. I don't see how you can't see how some people can't get what what you're trying to say, and to that extent, I do understand why FranzyFan didn't like it. Also, crucially....that's a fan theory. It is as official as Raymond Shields and Sebastian Debeste. The difference being I can put up with those, due to me not being great at remembering Japanese names. CrashBash (talk) 18:06, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
As I tried to explain to you before you deleted it (I understand it was an accident, but it was a massive pain trying to get it back considering you were in the middle of a bitch-fest), the only thing that's really consistent is timespans. Not months, and not years. Timespans. DL-6 occured 15 years prior to Ace Attorney. Trials and Tribulations had two cases that occured five and six years before the rest of the game, respectively. Seven years had passed since Wright's final trial and Apollo's first. We can throw theories left and right, but they are still just theories. CrashBash (talk) 18:06, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Oh, and please, stop editing whilst I'm trying to post. CrashBash (talk) 18:06, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. I tried to make it easier to follow. Also, it is just as much of fan theory as the current article... with the only difference that my fan theory actually makes canon material consistent... Not to mention that I'm certain I managed to got the reference right, because it matches canon material. - Sligneris (talk) 18:31, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
How does it match canon material when it ignores common sense? And, again, why do YOU have to get your own way all the time, with no disrespect to other users? I'm counting at least three people who are struggling to fully comprehend what you're trying to say and you're being disrespectful to all of them. CrashBash (talk) 19:41, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Why did you restore discussion about my stupid idea no one is going to agree with either way?
That is pointless. - Sligneris (talk) 19:58, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
In your own words, removing other people's posts is vandalism. You constantly have goes at ME for doing the exact same thing, back with the whole Reminisicing discussion. This is a "Practise what you Preach" thing. CrashBash (talk) 20:12, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
But that is discussion about my worthless stupid idea. That means that discussion is worthless as well. It's not like my stupid ideas matter on this wiki.
...To be honest, I'm just tired. My computer broke down, which limited me to my smartphone with a ridiculously small screen, which makes my head and eyes hurt, and I'm forced to repeat my argument at leas 20 fucking times over and over again, each time in different words for full three days, if my count is correct.
I'm just fucking done with this shitty community. Franzyfan did nothing for this wiki but undo other's hard work. Coming up with consistent solution wasn't easy, you know. But this wiki won't accept a consistent solution even when being thrown with one in the face, because everyone is so closed on on this shitty timeline with blatant contradictions.
What hurts even more, is that it's just because some other guy was first. Had I came up with this back in 2007/8, it would be accepted and never changed or questioned, just like this.
I think you remember the soundtrack affair I had with you? You were just so closed on on these incorrect fan names that you kept undoing names I was checking for hours with all kinds of Japanese dictionaries.
I'm not always right, but really, I know when I am. This time and that time are no different. Again, the correct information I try to insert on the wiki is blocked by some kid, who just doesn't understand simple explanations.
Oh, you'll again see more importance in whether I'm nice than in whether I'm right. Actually, you might have good intentions, sure, but honestly, you too are kinda annoying...
I was respectably discussing. 20 explanations of my idea ago. I'm just so done with it. Good night. My head hurts. I'm going to sleep. - Sligneris (talk) 20:42, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not the one acting like he can do and behave however he wants but everyone else HAS to stick by the rules. You have to stick to the same rules we do. And, frankly, you're now coming across as the same douchebag who nearly ruined my experience on the other know, the one who insisted everything had to be done HIS way and who threw a temper tantrum whenever he didn't get it? Yeah, that last comment is making you sound exactly like him.
You seriously think you being right is more important than you actually trying to get along with the other members of the community, being respectable and working together on it? Well....OK, lets imagine for a moment, that someone wrote this comment.
Souan Soe
Sligneris was fat and ugly, and really really stupid. He probably only got onto the wikia because of a family connection, that's how stupid he is. That, or with drug money. Also, the DL-6 incident occured 15 years prior to the start of the original game
Based on a quote from The Stanley Parable
As you can see, that quote would be extremely insultive to you...oh, but wait, there's a factual piece of information there, so we HAVE to include it.
No, it doesn't work like that. You can throw the blame ball in any direction, but your attitude is equally as inexcusable as FranzyFan's, and I find it impossible to understand how you can't see that. CrashBash (talk) 21:11, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Huuh... Do you think I'd include my criticism on Franzyfan on the article? Please. I am rude, but something like this is below me.
As I said, I got really pissed by having to repeatedly explain the same stuff. Everything needed to understand what I suggest is on this page. No inconsistencies within my idea have been found.
I also provided evidence as to why the current timeline is faulty (such as Edgeworth's or Phoenix's ages) as well as why the year reference I made true, as it's derived from official material. (such as every time gap and profile being consistent with it)
What is left to explain? Why in the world there are still objections? That is something I can't comprehend. - Sligneris (talk) 21:38, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Well then, there's your problem...DON'T be rude and then people will WANT to listen to you. And there are objections because the months are wrong, and however you go about bleating that there are "no months", you can't change that fact.
Like I said before, the only way we can get around this is if we assume there are no months OR years, meerly timespans. CrashBash (talk) 22:04, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, what is wrong about months? Please articulate the contradiction. "Months are wrong" doesn't tell me a whole lot. - Sligneris (talk) 22:14, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
We already have. Again, it's not fair that no one else is allowed to "feign ignorance" yet you supposedly are. We wouldn't have this problem if we just stuck to timespans. CrashBash (talk) 22:22, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
Articulate. Your. Objection. I can't answer you until you fully state your point... - Sligneris (talk) 22:26, July 2, 2014 (UTC)
I have already articulated my objections, countless times. It is as Franzy said, the months don't work. It is also as you state, the years don't work. NOTHING works except simple timespans. CrashBash (talk) 00:09, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Why won't you just give a specific example of what doesn't work in my idea? Really, examples don't hurt. - Sligneris (talk) 00:27, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Why should I when FranzyFan has given you plenty and you've ignored every single one of them? CrashBash (talk) 06:34, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Because Franzyfan didn't point out anything that in any way concerned my proposal. He just kept screaming around about the old timeline ignoring the obvious mistakes and accusimg of doing that, really.
Why should you? Because you are trying to prove a theory wrong. When you prove a theory wrong, you don't just say "it's wrong" and when asked for evidence respond "why should I?
And you kept hurling insults again and again. And don't tell lies, I don't need to explain what's already been said. Neither claim of the both of you works. And I explained below. CrashBash (talk) 09:12, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, you objected to my theory and say that "it's already been said", but can't even repeat it? Then, I might very well say that my rebutall to your objection was already said. - Sligneris (talk) 09:27, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
That last statement was stupid and pointless. Cut it out. And besides, I already GAVE you an example, and you saw it, right at the bottom of the page. Do you not remember? CrashBash (talk) 12:19, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the basic idea behind the current timeline is pretty much the same as Sligneris's, and just as internally consistent. It's just that it wasn't implemented completely consistently in practice. If the double-year concept were taken to its full conclusion, this is how the timeline would have looked:

  • IS-7 - 2000-2001
  • DL-6 - 2001-2002
  • SS-5 - 2006-2007
  • KG-8 - 2008-2009
  • T. Reminiscence - 2011-2012
  • T. Beginnings - 2012-2013
  • T. Memories - 2013-2014
  • SL-9 - 2014-2015
  • PW:AA - 2016-2017
  • PW:JFA - 2017-2018
  • PW:T&T - 2018-2019
  • ME:AAI - 2018-2019
  • ME:GK2 - 2018-2019
  • T. Succession - 2018-2019
  • UR-1 - 2019-2020
  • AJ:AA - 2025-2026
  • PW:DD - 2026-2027

The birthday contradictions only existed under the assumption that character profiles show real ages that are incremented by real birthdays. The double-year system, when taken to its full conclusion, is actually a bit more generous than Sligneris's proposal, in that it accounts for more possibilities as to how the writers think about an absolute timeline (assuming they do think about it seriously). The reasons the double-year system wasn't implemented to this extent ultimately boil down to the fact that some games don't cross into new year's. I figured it was a bit of a headache to have double-year birth year entries on every character.

To be honest, no matter how I look at it, it seems to me that I preempted Sligneris in making these considerations. And now here I am, having questioned my own system in terms of absolute years displayed, and having proposed using the years on the right from now on (back in May). Sligneris's proposal essentially uses the years on the left. But no matter which we do (the left, the right, or both), the internal logic is the same. The disagreement is not in the logic, but purely in opinion. Which is more important: dating DL-6 strictly as 2001, or pegging Trump as seven years after Succession (past) like everybody keeps implying it is? Or are both equally important?

I don't feel confident in declaring and acting on a decision on this when it seems like nobody actually fully understands what's going on here. It's apparent to me that the internal logic in my proposal, Sligneris's proposal, and the current system is exactly the same, and only the proposed number displays are different. I want to be sure that everybody who's arguing so passionately about this actually knows what's going on and what's being proposed, and how it might be different (or not-so-different) from what we're doing right now. Meta-arguments about each other's character aren't going to accomplish anything, and will only drive potential quality editors away.

As a bit of an aside, this discussion has made me seriously consider the modified timeline-splitting suggestion I made. To quote exactly what I'm talking about: "We could even make an 'old' timeline solely concerning the events and characters of the original GBA trilogy, from the perspective of the original GBA trilogy (so Phoenix Wright is born in 1992)." Basically, the "old" timeline would only contain events specific to the original trilogy, and use the left-side years.

capefeather (talk) 02:34, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Huh... Actually, I'm not sure what to think of what you posted here. It's basically that "year reference" I kept referring to, but applied to 2 different timelines, both completely fitting with the in-game profiles, which is important to me.
On the other hand, aren't we going against canon information in saying DL-6 took place in 2002? I mean, it is the only year dste we are given in-game and it spells out "2001".
Apollo Justice would take place 7 years after 2018 and a part if 2019, and I actually think that keeping profiles in check with the timeline, by using an interpretation of the time gaps that fits in with the in-game content would be an improvement - Sligneris (talk) 08:46, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Bleh, formatting. capefeather (talk) 02:46, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

For old times' sake, I revisited the timelines on Court Records. The me of six years ago was pretty excited about the prospect of breaking away from how Court Records handled things, and subsuming everything into one timeline. At the time, there was a problem with articles on this wiki copy-pasting information straight from Court Records, and the timeline was just a natural extension of the effort to remove the dependency on the fan logic of another site. For posterity, the PW and AAI timelines uses the left-side years, while the AJ timeline uses the right-side years. Hopefully this assessment of Court Records's timelines helps people understand what's going on in this discussion. capefeather (talk) 03:00, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
This is more or less the problem I've had since this argument started. FranzyFan has been defending the months, Sligneris has been defending the years, but in reality, both are flawed.
FranzyFan's idea is that we follow it exactly to the month, which means that Bridge to the Turnabout ends in 2019. However, as has been pointed out, this creates conflict with the "seven years later" games where the characters haven't aged enough. Sligneris' idea is to have it so that it only goes by the main year, which eliminates that problem, but the fact of the matter is that it misses vital details (including months). We know that the Investigations sub-series takes place after BTTT, but that means it has to take place in 2019, not 2018.
Basically, as it stands, neither suggestion works properly. CrashBash (talk) 06:34, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Actually, Bridge to the T., T. Succession and Ace Attorney Investigations games will be listed as taking place in 2019. That much doesn't change. A callendar year passes and I'm not changing that fact.
The only thing that changes about them is them being treated as taking place in 2018, when characters refer to that point in time.
I already also presented evidence supporting that this is how Capcom handles time, which I'm willing to present again if asked, really. - Sligneris (talk) 08:46, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Well, you should have said that. But you didn't. CrashBash (talk) 09:12, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
...Huh? I should have said what? That these cases will still be listed as taking place in 2019? I think I did. In bold letters no less. - Sligneris (talk) 09:27, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
You were insistent on it being in 2018, and constantly had goes at Franzyfan for saying otherwise. This is why neither of your (as in, you and FF) claims works. The months are wrong and the years are wrong. CrashBash (talk) 12:29, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
No, I kept saying it will be listed as 2019, but treated as 2018 when referred to. Exactly this. 20 times. That's why I got pissed. Franzyfan objected to something I didn't claim
Also instead of constantly saying "you are wrong"/"years are wrong", please, start finally telling me what is wrong in my suggestion. Specific examples.
I referred to a "penalty", because you keep objecting without presenting evidence. - Sligneris (talk) 12:37, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
20 times and yet nobody actually saw you say that. You should have been clearer. Although you'll have to excuse me, I probably missed it over the "insult, insult, rage, rage"-fest you two were having, so that's my excuse. Although I admit I STILL don't see where it clearly says that. Also, I gave you a specific example, the EXACT one we're talking about right now, don't ignore it. CrashBash (talk) 13:08, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Okay. I'm glad that this much is clear now - then, do you now understand what my idea is about? If so, do you agree with it, or not? Also, can you find any problems with it? - Sligneris (talk)

What is your obsession with interupting me? And yes, I find it too confusing to follow. CrashBash (talk) 13:21, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

OK, Sligneris, let me make this clear to you. The reason I said that the years don't work was because, as has been stated several times by both myself AND FranzyFan, it appeared as if you were saying that Trials and Tribulations, as well as the Ace Attorney Investigations sub-series was taking place entirely in 2018, which was impossible because by Bridge to the Turnabout, it was already 2019, and Investigations 1/2 occured afterwards. That is the problem we had, because we thought you were ignoring the obvious. That's why I said it wouldn't work, because no matter what it had to take place in 2019 either way. If you had maybe been a little clearer with what you said, this wouldn't have happened. CrashBash (talk) 13:21, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I will try to explain, so that it's easier to follow.
Now, that it is established that we both always conceded that BttT, AAI1+2 and TSuc all took place in 2019, do you want to know why I put it under 2018?
That part is a crucial element of my argument. - Sligneris (talk) 14:18, July 3, 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, yes AND no. I sort of understand why but at the same time I don't. Frankly for me it's all too confusing. And please, don't ask what it is...I'll only be able to give you the answer of "it just is". CrashBash (talk) 17:09, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Revival, againEdit

This affair bears way too many similarities to the soundtrack translation correction, really. In both cases at first I tried doing it at the wiki, but the edits were undone and objected to with little argumentation by a single, under-informed user...

And then, I go to the Court Records... And voila! Civil discussion solid arguments. I was never so happy to be actually proven wrong before.

I wonder, would it be fine, if, just like in the Soundtrack Translation Thread's case, we came to the conclusion there and then just implement the results here? It is the only place where I believe we might avoid "you are wrong, because I say so" thing... - Sligneris (talk) 21:11, July 4, 2014 (UTC)

Also, coincidentally, on my wiki of a sandbox (I like that phrase), I explained the matter in more detail. - Sligneris (talk) 13:42, July 5, 2014 (UTC)

Is that it...? Edit


...How many years has it been
now? Six?
In exactly three days from
now, it will be seven.
Once a person is classified
missing for a certain period
of time...
...they're considered legally
deceased, correct?
...In all absoluteness. Those
rolled-up sleeves conceal your
competence well, young man!
That "certain period of time"
of which you speak... is
seven years.
Yes, Miss Trucy... Though it
pains me to say it.
This past Spring... April
to be precise, was the time.
Your father was legally
declared deceased.

Script from Jozerick's post on CR... Makes things horribly complicated, as what is stated here directly contradicts, well, literally everything else...

I won't push it anymore, I guess. I still think my idea is at the very least... something that somehow works as a consistent timeline, if this was to be assumed to be an error in the script... But the way writers handle things like this... Hopeless, just hopeless. - Sligneris (talk) 22:38, August 5, 2014 (UTC)

Lying Court Record!? Edit

I have a theory that the Court Record is a BIG FAT LIAR when dealing with character's ages, and that Wright and Edgeworth are indeed 34 in GS4 (Apollo Justice) and 35 in GS5 (Dual Destinies). This also solves pretty much every other age inconsistency, such as Pearl Fey's (8 in 2017 and 17 in 2027) and Winston Payne's (52 in 2016 and 61 in 2026). 15:29, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, except exactly the same could be applied the other way around, such as saying everyone lying about seven years passing instead of six, and problem is also solved, in a different way.

That's the problem here, which is more important here, which should be prioritized and how to handle repeating errors. Are you saying that the authors purposefully lie in every single new release, because I relly doubt that. - Sligneris (talk) 20:11, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, maybe the Court Record's not intentionally lying, it just made a few mistakes. I don't think the developers intentionally put wrong ages in the Court Record, but they don't pay too much attention to the timeline and from time to time accidentally put the wrong age. 23:37, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

PS. Whoever made the comment about everyone lying about the year gap, you forgot to sign your comment. 23:40, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.