surely something will be here eventually

I don't know if this will pan out, obviously, but I have a hunch about the overall structure for of the Devil's Episodes. Namely that they seem to have increasingly "guilty" clients.

Episode 0 has Carlos Flatt. Carlos is not only innocent of the specific crime he has been accused of, he is innocent of any crime at all. He's a down on his luck, working class guy who is justifiably angry about his situation. Clean as the driven snow. Won't even touch lootboxes.

Episode 1 has David and Serra Ashur. Technically, Morgan is defending herself when she's defending Serra, but the point stands that Serra is the one in the hot seat during the latter half Episode 1. We'll tackle them seperately.

David is innocent of the specific crime he has been accused of, namely suicide, but he is, in fact, guilty of a crime. Creating each of those 300+ AIs was a crime, according to the law as written. But it is not a crime the audience is likely to recognize as either criminal or immoral, although it was extremely reckless.

Serra is, possibly, by technicality, not guilty of being an AI. Possibly. But even if she was, the audience is absolutely going to see that law as unjust in the extreme, because it criminalizes Serra's very existence. So, she wasn't programmed, and therefore is technically innocent, but even then, any legal system that would prosecute her for being an AI will not be seen as legitimate by the audience.

Episode 2 has Sosuke Ikariya, who is innocent of the five murders he is accused of comitting, but is guilty of quite a lot of murder in general. But there are some mitigating factors, to wit: 1, he is murdering nouveau riche assholes. 2, at the end of the Episode, we are assured that he will not be comitting any more murders (at least, none which are not comitted in direct defense of Makoto). Thus, Morgan, Serra, and the player are not indirectly responsible for any future murders he commits.

Episode 3 seems to be setting the next client as a radical activist, the sort the State would probably label a terrorist instead. If it is instead the case that Episode 3's client has been dragged in as a scapegoat, my theory may not hold. But if this is someone like the Witch of the West, or some figure we've yet to hear about, then that person would, unequivocally, be guilty of the crime they've been accused of.

And for the first time, Serra, and the player, would have to confront the idea of defending someone who has comitted a crime, potentially a quite serious crime like arson, and will do so again if let free. In this case, we are left with only mitigating factors, namely the motive: resisting tyrrany, which is a very noble end.

All this would indicate a trend, of increasingly "guilty" clients, from fully innocent, to innocent*, to complicated, to guilty-but-have-you-considered-the-implications, all the way to...

The guiltiest of guilties, of course.

Evangeline Morgan. Who is guilty of all this and more, who will kill if let free, who will revel in evil and bloodshed until the day she is caught and sentenced. (Right?)

The structure is building Serra, and indirectly the audience, up to the point where she can accept defending someone who has done wrong, with no caveats, asterisks, or mitigation.

Until she can defend the Devil herself.

Because that is what a defense attourney does. They are not called, as almost always happens in Ace Attourney, to defend the innocent. Often, they defend the guilty. And, this is the key, they are right to do so. Even monsters need someone to fight for them. That is the adverserial process. Without that, without a defender, the product is unjust. You need someone who can stand up and...

(Forgive the pun.)

Probably a fairly obvious list, but I'll still take the time to justify it. This isn't necessarily my preference, it's more of an attempt to predict the priorities of the writing room.

None of the four non-Hajime Survivors are making it out, of course. If I had to pick one of them who I think might survive, though, it would be Sonia, but even that is doubtful. The only way I can really see one of these four making it is if Hajime doesn't, but I'll say more about that later.

Mikan is going out again, although it'll be nothing like the Despair Disease, obviously. Honestly, she could be a Case 3 victim, but her autopsies are too useful to allow her to stick around for the whole game, even though she didn't really get all that much screentime.

Nagito didn't make it the first time, but even if he isn't the first victim or something close to that, going out in a blaze of glory is still this guy's best trick. He's as doomed as ever.

Gundham had a fairly deep run and ended as a culprit. He's gotten plenty already.

Ibuki hasn't but I think they'll kill her off later, to mark the turning point where the plot becomes more serious. She's a fairly pure comic relief character, so they won't lose much by offing her. Only way they could surprise me is if she's a culprit. Maybe she'll get the Despair Disease this time?

Hajime is probably safe, but I'm placing him slightly higher than that because killing off and replacing him as the protagonist is a good and intuitive way to differentiate SDR2 from 2x2, and that might get him knocked out. But if he survives the first case, he's surviving the whole game.

Chiaki went out toward the end as a culprit, but she didn't mean to do that. Honestly, she might be too low on this list. Her placement could just be wishful thinking, but as a core cast member who, nevertheless, didn't survive, they might let her live just to please the fans. Or kill her off again to hurt even more.

I'm so fucking scared Teruteru is going to survive. Please just let him be Case 2's victim. Please.

Ultimate Impostor could go far, honestly. If they weren't an impostor and therefore inherently duplicitous, and if there wasn't the risk that they're somehow Case 1's victim again, I'd rank them lower.

Nekomaru went pretty far, but he was still only in 2 cases, which is pretty low considering he made it to Chapter 4. I give him decent odds, there's plenty to build on.

Peko is surviving to invert what happened with her and Fuyuhiko in the original Case 2. This is so obvious I might actually get mad if they don't do this.

Mahiru may be the new Chiaki. She may be the new protagonist, even. Either way, she's basically perfect as a new survivor.

Computer Chess

Emma's is, as you can probably tell, a chess game - the white queen, representing Emma, has just put the red king, representing Morgan, in check.

In chess, for clarity's sake, a "check" happens when a piece is in a position to capture the opposing king. In this case, the white queen threatens the red king along the left-down diagonal line.

When the king is in put in check, that king's player is compelled by the rules to make a move which will take the king out of check. In this case, the king can move left, right, up... basically anywhere that is not on that particular diagonal.

That's all fairly basic - Emma has put Morgan in check, and now Morgan must respond, but there are plenty of opportunities to do so. Where it gets interesting is when we consider this position not only in terms of the next move, but also how it would develop. Which is to say, it wouldn't.

You see, the white queen cannot put the red king in checkmate and win the game, because if the queen literally corners the red king, cutting off all avenues of escape, it is still legal for the red king to capture the piece that put it in check - but likewise, the red king will never be able to capture the white queen, because that would require the white queen to move next to the red king, which is obviously suicidal.

This position leads to perpetual check, with neither player able to finish the game. Emma cannot checkmate Morgan without getting too close and getting killed - Morgan can't kill Emma because she's smart enough to keep her distance.

However, there is a scenario in which it would be possible for white to checkmate red. It is illegal to move your king into check. Therefore, if another white piece threatened the square where the white queen is standing, the red king cannot capture it, and red would lose.

So it sure is a good thing for Morgan that Emma is working on Heartbreak all by her lonesome. Would be terribly inconvenient if she acquired a partner of some kind.

"Check" in poker means something different than in chess. In chess, allowing for a bit of simplification, it's a threat. In poker, more specifically Texas Hold 'Em as is being played here, to "check" means to pass on betting anything for the round, without folding. If all players check during a round, then the next card will be revealed - in this case, the fourth card, the "turn".

In this game, something extraordinary has happened: the "flop", that is, the three cards revealed after the initial round of betting, when players only know the two cards they themselves have been dealt, contains three of the four queens in the deck.

This means that there are very few hands that are any good - really, it's only the four-of-a-kind with queens that's important. This is because any player can use the cards in the flop (and beyond) to construct their hand, therefore all hands this ante are at least three-of-a-kind. Pairs become full houses, but no flushes, straights, or three- or four-of-a-kind hands that are not queens can be constructed.

So the game is on, and the question is this: who, if anyone, has the queen?

Morgan checks. She does not raise the bet. Does this mean she doesn't have it? Surely if not, she would've folded, right? Or does she just want you to think that? But if she had it, she'd have raised, right? Or is that too obvious?

And there's nothing to prevent her opponent, Emma, from doing the same. A sort of... perpetual checking. (In this case, slightly less perpetual - the game will end after the final card, the river, has been revealed.)

Oh, would you look at that. She did have it. Hope you didn't bet against her.

In this case, the check represents Morgan being put in a dangerous situation, and allowing Emma to gauge how lucky she thinks Morgan is. There's only one way out - for both of them. Whoever has the queen wins - and maybe neither of them do. If Morgan is lucky, she's toying with Emma. If not, she's trying to expose her to the other players by tricking her into betting. Either way, she's given Emma just enough rope to hang herself with. It's a move that cannot be outsmarted, because the intention behind it hinges entirely on something random and unknowable - what card Morgan is holding.

As a final note, we can consider these two checks in concert. Both revolve around a single queen threatening to steal the game, while in actuality provoking repetitive gameplay.

But in chess, the queen belongs to Emma. And the flop doesn't "belong" to Morgan - as I said, it can be used by any player at the table. And we don't see Morgan's two hole cards; it's only when she has a winning hand that we see the queen. It's entirely possible she won't have it. So in chess Emma always "has the queen" and can win, if she knew to play with the flop. In poker, Morgan might have the last of four queens, and wins instead.

Only if Emma learns to play Morgan's game can she win on her own.