約 1,937,317 件
https://w.atwiki.jp/mousouyomi/pages/2467.html
【名前】ULTIMATEハニワ 【属性】ハニワ第三世代 【大きさ】一般的なハニワ並。 【攻撃力】【防御力】 空間操作が可能。故に、空間をずらしてあらゆる物を切断しあらゆる攻撃を防ぐ。また別宇宙に移動することも出来る。 時間操作が可能。故に、時間を操作してあらゆる物とあらゆる攻撃を消滅させる。 さらに、単一宇宙全能を持つ。 【素早さ】光速の約480。反応も同等。時間停止することで擬似的∞速度を得る。 866 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/10/31(火) 23 34 56 480なんだよ? 869 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/10/31(火) 23 36 01 480倍なんだよな？ 870 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/10/31(火) 23 37 38 869 あ、すまん。後ろの二つ何故か消えてるが480倍でヨロ。 197 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 24 28 ULTIMATEハニワをちゃんと書いておこう 68-69より シオ・ベルスーズ＞ULTIMATEハニワ＞TIMEMASTERハニワ＞ハニワMAXIMUM 199 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 28 17 197 ULTIMATEハニワは防御が全能レベルだからもっと上じゃね？ 200 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 34 00 199 常時と書いてないから任意全能。 反応がベルスーズは光速500万倍以上、ハニワは480倍。 攻撃速度も同じだから何もできずに一撃で終わる。 201 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 34 40 200 そうじゃなくて、防御力が全能並だからベルスーズとかの攻撃も効かないってこと 203 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 37 14 201 全能なみじゃなく全能持ちだから反応できなきゃ防御できない。 他の防御手段も任意っぽいので同じ。 第3世代ハニワは素の防御力が書いてないのでハニワなみ。 205 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 38 46 203 じゃあ単一宇宙全能氏も全能並じゃなくて全能だから最低値は全能持ちになって下がるな。 207 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 40 19 203 攻撃力だけならそれでいいが防御力として「全能の防御」を持つんだから防御力は全能だろ 209 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 56 48 207 素早さに全能ってないから任意全能っぽいのに 素の防御も上がるんだろうか 210 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 00 59 13 209 それを言うなら単一宇宙全能氏、東の神、正俊なども防御が怪しくなる。 防御が全能なら単一宇宙全能レベルでいいんじゃないか？ 211 名前：格無しさん 投稿日：2006/11/04(土) 01 07 02 210 なら遅いから真・ゴオレンマまでか。 計測不能速度の方が速いかな？と思うので 真・ゴオレンマ◆JEhW0nJ.FE＞ULTIMATEハニワ＞
https://w.atwiki.jp/toho/pages/4861.html
Alternative201005 サークル：SYNC.ART S Number Track Name Arranger Lyrics Vocal Original Works Original Tune Length 01 カザミドリ 五条下位 小田 ユウ 小田 ユウ オリジナル [4 40] 02 ツキヨニサラバ 五条下位 黒岩 サトシ 仲村 芽衣子 東方永夜抄 千年幻想郷 ～ History of the Moon [04 47] 詳細 M3-2010春(2010/5/5)にてイベント限定頒布 イベント価格：300円 ショップ価格：なし レビュー 名前 コメント
https://w.atwiki.jp/inaba2009/pages/14.html
IJD 1.1.1 Iurisprudentiae vox duplicem involvit conceptum, unum prudentiae, alterum iuris. IJD 1.1.2 Prudentia quid sit non melius nosse poterimus, quam si divisionem habituum paulo altius repetierimus. IJD 1.1.3 Uti vero per habitum hic intelligimus conceptum aliquem philosophicum, ita quae alii in hac doctrina de habitibus infusis (a) disserere solent, eoque v. g. donum linguarum in Apostolis referunt, nos non turbarunt, qui circulos luminis naturae revelationis turbare nolumus. (a) Mutavi in hac editione §. 3. 4. In praecedenti siquidem editione secutus eram adhuc communem doctrinam libellorum logicorum in capite de qualitate, atque adeo distinxeram inter habitus infusos acquisitos, hos in eos, qui viribus supernaturalibus naturalibus acquiruntur. Et in posterioribus perrexeram. Sed hic malui plane istas duas priores divisiones seponere ob rationes in thesibus dictas. IJD 1.1.4 Eadem observatio est, dum fides, spes, charitas, ipsa theologia ad classem habituum referuntur ab aliis, quod nihil aliud est, quam mysteria fidei metiri velle modulo inepto rationis. IJD 1.1.5 Nos ita procedemus; habitus est vel intellectualis, qui in intellectu residet, acquiritur actibus intellectus, qui sunt affirmare negare, vel voluntarius, qui residet in voluntate, acquiritur actibus voluntatis. Per actus autem voluntatis hic non solum intellige internos, scilicet appetere, aversari, sed externos, videlicet actus locomotivae, quatenus a prioribus diriguntur. IJD 1.1.6 Habitus intellectualis vel pro obiecto habet principia (b) tam theoretica quam practica, vocatur intelligentia, vel principiata. (c) (b) Scilicet complexa seu propositiones. (c) i. e. conculsiones ex istis primis principiis ortas, seu principia incomplexa, seu cognitionem rerum, de quibus propositiones formantur. IJD 1.1.7 Posterior est vel theoreticus, qui pro obiecto habet cognitionem Creatoris creaturae, vel practicus, qui pro obiecto habet cognitionem actionum humanarum. IJD 1.1.8 Theoreticus vel considerat ens in genere, qui dicitur ontologia, (d) hodie vulgariter metaphysica, (e) vel certas entis species. (d) Ita Claubergius scripsit Ontologiam, ante eum alii. (e) Vide quae hac de re eleganter disserit B. Pater in Historia metaphysica subiuncta eius Quaestionibus metaphysicis. IJD 1.1.9 Et quidem vel Creatorem, qui vocatur sapientia, (f) olim etiam metaphysica, (g) hodie \ prima pars pneumaticae, (h) vel creaturas corporeas, (i) appellatur scientia. (l) (f) Unde sapientiae imperium tribui\-tur inter habitus intellectuales. Quamvis ineptissime eundem titulum hodie multi tribuant metaphysicae, quatenus est simplex ontologia. (g) Dicebatur autem olim metaphysica, quod post physicam tractari debebat, quia cognitio creaturarum ducit ad cognitionem creatoris, Cartesiani ergo cum methodum inversam sequantur, suam doctrinam de Deo metaphysicae nomine insignire non possunt. De ontologia Peripateticorum pariter inepte metaphysicae nomen retinet. (h) Nam tractatur in pneumatica 1. de Deo, 2. de angelis, 3. de anima separata. Ignorat vero pneumaticam philosophia vetus, cum sit novum inventum Scholasticorum, ut ostendit Pater in Historia Metaphysices. (i) Quia spiritus creatos separatim, existentes ignorat ratio sibi relicta. (l) Unde Aristotelis tot sunt scientiae, quot substantiae sunt autem substantiae tres Deus, unde metaphysica, caelum, unde astronomia, corpus naturale, unde physica. Sub se enim in lata acceptatione scientia comprehendit sapientiam. IJD 1.1.10 Scientia vero contemplatur creaturas corporeas, vel ratione essentiae qualitatum, quod facere debet physica, vel ratione quantitatis, quod facit mathesis. IJD 1.1.11 Sequitur habitus practicus. Atqui hic (m) vel occupatur circa actiones hominum honestas, appellatur prudentia, vel turpes, dicitur astutia, vel indifferentes, vocatur solertia. (m) Varia mutavi a §. 11. ad 20. quae aliter extant aut ordinata erant in prima editione, quae inde provenerant, quod, quia observaveram artem non posse ad habitus intellectuales referri, prudentiam solam in classe habitum [habituum?] practicorum retinueram, eamque feceram synonyumum habitus practici. IJD 1.1.12 Qui vero in his omnibus ingenio caret, stupidus imprudens dicitur. IJD 1.1.13 Dum vero prudentia versatur circa actiones honestas, ita circa eas occupata est, ut non excludatur earum iucunditas utilitas, sed ut ea honestati subordinetur. Nam honestum vel maxime iucundum est utile. IJD 1.1.14 Quatenus autem magis ab utilitate iucunditate abstrahit, honestatem actionum, seu earum convenientiam cum lege prae oculis habet, eatenus ad differentiam prioris, cum additamento iurisprudentia dicitur late accepta. IJD 1.1.15 Porro homines, quorum actiones dirigit prudentia, vivunt vel in societate civili, tum dicitur prudentia politica, vel in societate domestica, vocatur prudentia oeconomica.
https://w.atwiki.jp/gyakusai/pages/79.html
When You Play “Phoenix Wright,” Are You Really Phoenix Wright? Capcom Talks About About Gaming’s Top Courtroom Drama http //multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2007/10/31/when-you-play-phoenix-wright-are-you-really-phoenix-wright-capcom-talks-about-about-gamings-top-courtroom-drama/ October 31, 2007 When You Play “Phoenix Wright,” Are You Really Phoenix Wright? Capcom Talks About About Gaming’s Top Courtroom Drama 日本語要約 If you’re played the “Phoenix Wright” Nintendo DS games you may have noticed that they’re a little different. Part throw-back to text-adventure games, part shining beacon of how funny games can still intentionally be. Part rare video game coutroom drama, part case study in just how non-interactive a game can be. Last week I e-mailed Capcom a bunch of questions about the series How do these games get made? How do they get so funny? Would they designers ever make a law game in which you only defend guilty people? What have lawyers said to you about these games? And so on… I wrote up some of the answers in my MTV News GameFile column yesterday, but I found the interview so interesting that I’m posting the whole thing here. Some of the answers were quite brainy, much to my delight. Two things jumped out at me in the interview. The first is series producer Minae Matsukawa’s description of the relationship between the player and Phoenix Wright, the character they control. We also wanted to betray the player’s feelings. The player may want Phoenix to do one thing, but he’ll do another, even after the player knows what’s really going on. Playing through an Ace Attorney game, you can see that Phoenix is one part the player, and one part his own character, Phoenix Wright. And when the player walks around, they solve the case both with and as Phoenix at the same time. In a way, this case set out to betray not only the player, but also the character Phoenix himself. The other ties into a comment made by gamer Calvin Smith on a “Zelda” post I published yesterday. He lamented that “a lot of developers and gamers claim open-endedness as a virtue.” When I asked Matsukawa about the common critique that the gameplay in “Phoenix Wright” is too linear, she said If we were to give players any more leeway … the structure of the game would fundamentally change. We wouldn’t be able to tell a single story anymore if there were too many paths. Also, what we want the players to enjoy is not so much the solving of each riddle they come across them one at a time, but rather, the ability to use their logic to put together what happened as they collect the pieces of the larger puzzle, as it were, and that’s something that we feel is an important aspect of the game. Food for thought. The full interview is below. Multiplayer There are many TV shows and movies that are all about legal trials, but very few games. Why do you think that is? Do you think there should be more? Or does the genre have limited appeal as a video game? Minae Matsukawa, Capcom producer I think it’s because there is a certain level of difficulty in making a game based on court proceedings. Back in 2001 when we, Capcom, were making the first “Gyakuten Saiban” (which later became “Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney” overseas) game for GameBoy Advance (GBA), we were the only ones making a courtroom-based game. Now, the number of games in this genre is increasing, for example, the “Harvey Birdman” game being made overseas. To be honest, though, I’m not sure the base idea of a law game is inherently interesting on its own to most people, although I really can’t speak for the rest of the team. I believe that more than wanting to create a courtroom game, the original director and creator, Mr. Shuu Takumi, had wanted to make a game where the player would find the lies and contradictions in statements when he set out to make the first GBA “Gyakuten Saiban” (”Ace Attorney”) game, and it was from that single gameplay concept that he realized the perfect setting would be in the courtroom, or so I’ve heard. If it wasn’t for this, we might not have ended up with that as our setting, and that would’ve been a shame since the “courtroom” is right there in the title. (The literal translation of the Japanese title, “Gyakuten Saiban,” is “Comeback Court.”) But in the end, I think with the increase in the number of trial-based games being made nowadays, the genre will become increasingly popular. Multiplayer The “Phoenix Wright” games are very funny, but as far as I know are not at all accurate to the way the legal system works. How did you decide upon the legal system in “Phoenix Wright”? Is it based on any real-world legal system? Or is it just designed to be one that simply works well as a game? Matsukawa Well, going back to how the game system was conceived, the team didn’t think of the court idea first, and instead was focused on the idea of uncovering lies and contradictions. Actually, what’s funny is when the Japanese press asks us about this same issue, they usually think we based the game’s system off of the American judicial system! But if we really had based the game off of a real court system, it might not be quite as interesting as a game, simply because court proceedings usually aren’t interesting, right? I think that more than the setting, the game itself has to be interesting. The system in the game is really, at its core, about chasing down witnesses and trying to catch them in the act of lying, so keeping this as the most important aspect of the game and gameplay in mind, we didn’t base the judicial system in “Ace Attorney” off of any real systems, but instead created something unique to the “Ace Attorney” world. Multiplayer Do you know if the series has any fans who work as lawyers or judges? If so, have you ever heard feedback from anyone in those professions? If so, can you tell me an anecdote about that? Matsukawa Sure! I remember when I made my first trip to [the San Diego] Comic-Con 2 years ago, before any of the “Ace Attorney” games had been released or was as well known as it is now, there was a young man, about 17 or 18 years old, and he told me that his father is a lawyer. Even now, I distinctly remember him telling me that he and his father were greatly anticipating this game, and that he hoped that we wouldn’t let him down. I remember being very happy to hear him say that since the game hadn’t even been released yet back then. Fast forward to a few months ago in July. I went back to Comic-Con for the first time in 2 years, and this time, a gentleman came up to me and said that he was a professor at a law school! He told me that as an educator of lawyers-to-be, he highly recommended the “Ace Attorney” games to his students. We ended up talking for a little while as I signed his poster, and he told me such things as, “Americans really love all things law,” and that he thought it was amazing that he could teach his students through a good video game, which was great to hear from a law professor. While he wasn’t trying to teach the law system in the game, since as I just mentioned, the game system is purely fictional, I think the basic ideas that a lawyer should trust their client, and to expose lies to find the truth – those are things that are pretty universal, and things we can all learn about. I hope on my next visit, I can hear from even more fans, whether they’re related to the law or not. I’m really looking forward to hearing everyone’s stories. [SKIP THE NEXT QUESTION TO AVOID A MILD SPOILER ABOUT THE SECOND “PHOENIX WRIGHT” GAME, “…AND JUSTICE FOR ALL”] Multiplayer There was a really interesting case in the second “Phoenix Wright” game, during which Phoenix is forced to defend a man he knows is actually guilty. I really liked this case, because it made me play the role of someone who knew he was doing something wrong. Very few video games have ever put me in that situation before. To what extent has the development team wanted to put players in unusual situations like that? Would you be interested in making a game like “Phoenix Wright” where you were always defending people who were guilty? It could be fascinating. Matsukawa One thing you often hear when you talk with the team is “we want to betray the player’s expectations,” and that’s usually the starting point when they write the scenario. Now, by the time you get to that particular episode, it’s become pretty standard that whoever Phoenix defends is always innocent, so the player’s expectation will lead them to believe that their client this time will be innocent as well. And it was this expectation, this belief in the innocence of Phoenix’s client that the team set out to overturn by constructing the case in such a way that the true nature of your client and the truth behind the murder will only be revealed ever so slowly to the player. We also wanted to betray the player’s feelings. The player may want Phoenix to do one thing, but he’ll do another, even after the player knows what’s really going on. Playing through an Ace Attorney game, you can see that Phoenix is one part the player, and one part his own character, Phoenix Wright. And when the player walks around, they solve the case both with and as Phoenix at the same time. In a way, this case set out to betray not only the player, but also the character Phoenix himself. The fact that we were able to put players in such an “unusual situation” is in itself praise enough for us that we were able to accomplish what we had set to do, and we are very grateful for this. As for if we would be interested in making a game where the defendant was always guilty, if the demand is there, we will think about it. But knowing the team, I suspect that if the game was to be about always defending guilty clients, they would throw an innocent one in there somewhere in their attempt to betray the player’s expectations. Multiplayer I mentioned that the game is funny. Very few video games actually make me laugh, but the “PW” series does. How does your team go about making sure the game is funny? Is the game designed without humor first and then the jokes are added in? Is it funny right from the start? Matsukawa The game starts out as a collection of ideas and concepts, such as, “Let’s use this trick,” “This is where the contradiction should be,” “We should betray the player here,” or “Let’s put a misleading lie here”, and is centered on the idea of the case. The team then uses these ideas to construct an outline of the cases. After that, Mr. Takumi comes up with what kinds of characters should appear in the story, and the team works to bring each one to life. Then all of these various building blocks are brought together to create a rough draft of the scenario. “Ace Attorney” games are at their most basic, text dialogue pieces, so like any piece of writing, there are 3 phases, or “drafts” of any particular case – the outline, the rough draft, and the polished version. After the initial outline and rough draft, the team then sits down to really evaluate the pacing of the game, or how interesting a particular section is, or maybe what sections need more explanation. They write many, many drafts during this polishing phase to really bring the story together. The story is interesting right from the start, but sometimes, even though it looks good on paper, and this has happened to me before too, by the time it’s implemented in the game, you realize that maybe the timing or the pacing is not as good as you thought it would be. It’s a bit disappointing sometimes, but in order to give players a smooth, fun experience, these various interim steps where you are constantly adjusting and readjusting things, such as where to drop hints, must be taken. So even though the initial draft may have been interesting, it’s important that the end version is the best it can be in the game itself, and I think the team feels fortunate that they have been able to bring the variety of stories that they have to the fans. As for when the humor is added, it’s there from the very beginning, but the majority of the humor is written into the scenario during the second phase when the characters are inserted into the skeleton of the story. When you see the characters and how they behave in the story, then you can do things with them and create situations and humorous lines that fit well within the context of the story. Multiplayer Some fans of the “Ace Attorney” games have said that they would like to have more flexibility in arguing court cases. The games currently only give you choices of when to press a witness for more information, when to yell “Objection” and when to present evidence. The player can’t really make their own arguments. Has the development team considered giving players more abilities to argue the case as they wish? Matsukawa Ah, this is something we get asked a lot, but I have to say that the “Ace Attorney” games are, while on the one hand, interactive, they are also on the other, very heavily story oriented. If we were to give players any more leeway, I’m afraid the amount of text the team would have to write would increase by three, four, or even five times the amount they have to write now. That’s not to say we don’t want to, but the structure of the game would fundamentally change. We wouldn’t be able to tell a single story anymore if there were too many paths. Also, what we want the players to enjoy is not so much the solving of each riddle they come across them one at a time, but rather, the ability to use their logic to put together what happened as they collect the pieces of the larger puzzle, as it were, and that’s something that we feel is an important aspect of the game. If we were to give players a bit more freedom, we might have to hide the pieces a bit better, or make the contradictions even harder to find, and in the end, the cases might become too hard or even impossible for people to solve. But we are always open to ideas and suggestions. Multiplayer What’s the most notable feature in “Phoenix Wright 3″ that you would like players to appreciate? Matsukawa I think the one thing I hope players will enjoy is the ending itself. For those who have played the first and second games, I think they will find that the ending is even more involved and deeper than the previous. Also, the ending of “Trials and Tribulations” is the climax and culmination of the Phoenix arc, so it has even more mysteries and puzzles to figure out than its predecessors. There may be times when they may feel frustrated, or think they have no chance of winning, but “Ace Attorney” games are always about happy endings, so I hope players will be able to enjoy it in the end. It’s really hard to talk about the game, and especially the ending, without spoiling anything, but I sincerely hope everyone who plays “Trials and Tribulations” will be able to enjoy the ending, despite any frustrations they may encounter along the way. Multiplayer Finally, can you explain your role on the game and let us know how many people worked on it? Matsukawa The original team that created the game was around 10 or so people, and there were about another 10 people who worked on the localization, so in the end, a little over 20 people worked in total on this game. As for myself, my role is to keep everyone on track, arrange the production schedule, watch out for the production costs, and of course, my main job, to manage the promotion of the “Ace Attorney” games, which includes attending events, such as Comic-Con back in July, where I hand-signed over 2,000 posters! I was really moved to see all those people waiting sometimes over an hour and a half at the Capcom booth just to see the new “Ace Attorney” game. When I compare that to what I experienced two years ago where I was handing out postcards to passer-bys and trying to promote the game in my limited English, I am in awe of how much the series has grown in two short years, and am extremely grateful for the support and love the North American fans have shown the Ace Attorney series. I hope everyone will continue to support the franchise and will look forward to upcoming games in the series. Thank you very much. 日本語要約 Q テレビ番組と映画には法廷ものがたくさんあるのに、ゲームには極めて少ないのは何故だと思いますか？ ゲームで法廷ものを扱う場合の制限はありますか？ 松川 ゲームに法廷ものが少ないのは、裁判に基づくようにするのが難しいからだと思います。2001年に最初の逆転裁判を作っていたころは、このゲームだけが裁判を扱う唯一のゲームでした。そもそもディレクターの巧舟の考えは、法廷ものを創ろうということではなく、嘘や矛盾を暴くゲームを創ったら法廷ものになったのです。現在は裁判に関するゲームも増えて、このジャンルも人気があるように思えます。 Q Phoenix Wrightシリーズは面白いのですが、法律や制度が正確に表現されていません。どのように法制度を決めたのですか？ それらは、現実の法制度に基づいていますか？ ゲーム内で都合のよいように設計されているのですか？ 松川 開発チームは最初、法廷については考えておらず、「嘘と矛盾を暴く」というアイディアに集中していました。面白い話ですが、日本のプレスもこの質問をしてくるのですが、彼らはアメリカの司法制度を基礎にしたと思っているのです。本当の法制度でゲームを創ったら、面白くはならないと思います。本当の裁判はたいてい面白さとはかけ離れているので。ですので、ゲームを面白くするためにゲーム内での法制度を決めたのです。 Q 弁護士や裁判官のPhoenix Wrightファンは居ますか？ もし居るのなら、それらの職業の人からの感想を聞きましたか？ 松川 居ます！ 私が2年前、サンディエゴのComic-Conに初めて行った時、まだAce Attorneyシリーズが発売される前でしたが、父が弁護士であるという17、8歳の男性に会いました。私は今でも、彼と彼の父親が、このゲームを待っていた、期待しているよ、と言ってくれたのを覚えています。 そして今年の7月、2年振りにComic-Conに行った時は、ロースクールの教師をしているという紳士が来たのです。彼は、法曹界の教育者として、Ace Attorneyシリーズを学生に推薦したと私に話しました。ゲーム内の法律は虚構ですが、弁護士が依頼人を信用し、真実を見つけることは私たち一般の人間でも学ぶことができるものです。 私は次のアメリカを訪問する機会を楽しみにしています。 Q 2作目では、実は有罪である人物を弁護しなければならなくなりますが、このエピソードは非常に魅力的でした。開発チームはこのような、プレイヤーを変わった状況にすることが好きなのですか？ 松川 開発チームがよく言うことの一つが、「プレイヤーの予想を裏切りたい」ということです。そのエピソードにおいては、今までは無実の人のみを弁護してきたので、今回も無実だろうというプレイヤーの予想をひっくりかえずことが目的でした。 プレイヤーは事実を知ったあともPhoenixが逆のことをしようとしているのを見ることになります。プレイヤーだけでなくPhoenixをもひっくり返したのがこのエピソードでした。 Q ユニークで笑える部分が多いのがAce Attorneyシリーズですが、どのように創っているのですか？ 最初はストーリーのみを創って、後からジョークなどを入れるのですか？ 松川 まず、「このトリックを使おう」、「ここは矛盾が必要」、「ここでプレイヤーを裏切ろう」、「まぎらわしい嘘をここに置こう」といった骨子から作り始めます。その後に、その物語から必要とされる人物を巧氏が考えて、それらのキャラクターを生き生きとさせていきます。Ace Attorneyはテキスト量が多く、どんな場合でも概略、下書き、推敲されたバージョンの3つが存在します。また、紙の上の文章とゲームにしたときでは変わるので絶えず調整をします。 ユーモアが加わる段階は、最初からある場合もありますが、多くは第二段階の下書きの時です。 Q Ace Attorneyの一部のファンは、もっとゲームに柔軟性が欲しいと言っています。今はいつ異議をとなえるか、何の証拠品を出すかをプレイヤーに選択させるだけで、プレイヤー自身の議論を本当にできるわけではありません。そのあたりを検討したことはありますか？ 松川 その質問はよくあるのですが、もしそうすれば、開発チームが書かなくてはならないテキストの量が3倍にも4倍にも、それ以上にも増えてしまうでしょう。それができないということではないのですが、それによりゲームの構造自体も変わってしまいます。ストーリーを分岐させるよりも、ひとつの流れの中でバラバラだった謎が集約させるのがこのゲームの重要な点です。 Q アメリカでの最新作のPhoenix Wright 3について。 松川 楽しんで欲しい点のひとつは結末そのものです。1、2作目をプレイした人なら深い結末を味わうことができます。 ネタバレなしでゲームについて話すのは難しいですが、途中に困難があったとしても最後にはハッピーエンドを楽しむことができるでしょう。 Q 最後に、ゲームを開発しているチームが何人なのか、あなたの役割は何なのかを教えてください。 松川 最初のチームは10人ほどで、翻訳スタッフがもう10人ほどいたので、トータルで20人くらいです。私自身の仕事は、開発の計画の準備、生産コストの注意、そして主要な仕事としてComic-Conのような所での宣伝があります。Comic-Conでは2,000枚以上のポスターにサインをしました！ アメリカのファンがAce Attorneyシリーズに見せた支持と愛にとても感謝します。 ▲ページ上へ▲
https://w.atwiki.jp/expande/pages/26.html
独断と偏見で世界の強豪といえるチームのリストを作成してみた。 TOP CLASS Fnatic - GameGune 2010 1st Natus Vincere - WCG 2010 1st mTw - WCG 2010 2nd Frag eXecutors - e-Stars Seoul 2010 1st SK Gaming - WCG2010 Sumsung Euro Championship 1st MIDDLE CLASS Mousesports - Arbalet Cup Dallas 2nd Evil Geniuses - MSI BEAT IT 1st H2k Gaming - ASUS Summer 2010 1st WeMade Fox - e-Stars Seoul 2010 2nd k23 - ASUS Summer 2010 2nd FireGamers - WCG Pan-American Championship 2010 1st Tyloo - WCG 2010 4th Sweden Fnatic (Get_Right dsn cArn f0rest Gux) SK Gaming (RobbaN allen walle face moddii) H2K Gaming → Lions (niko Xizt FYRR73 threat kHRYSTAL) EX-MYM → RAGE (pop Zyppe pita lidde pronax) Ukraine Natus Vincere (esenin starix markeloff Edward Zeus) PinG → ARENA (strike ANGE1 xaoc kucher craft1k) Denmark mTw (ave trace zonic Sunde minet) Poland AGAIN → Frag eXecutors (Neo TaZ kuben pasha Loord) Germany mousesports (Blizzard roman gob b Tixo Kapio) Alternate (approx mooN seraph KenaN Roman R.) Afghanistan k23 (N1ck3L AdreN BeAst MihaO Nur1k) USA Evil Geniuses (Storm fRoD lurppis dboorN n0thing) Brazil FireGamers → compLexity (nak bruno bit fnx FalleN) Made in Brazil (mch Maluk3 viol bt0 adr) Korea WeMade Fox (peri bail termi solo glow) China Tyloo (karl alex tb GoodRifle xf) wNv (bigun aska enter xpy space) Rosia MYM (hooch Xoma ROMJkE mAger xek) forZe (OverDrive Fox Dosia HEL1 Dober) France Millenium (drizzer MaT mSx ioRek HaRts) Finland Playzone (spin aslak Freon allu VIDI)
https://w.atwiki.jp/perltips/pages/14.html
my ($sec,$min,$hour,$mday,$mon,$year,$wno) = localtime(time); $year+=1900; $mon++; my $current_datetime = sprintf("%04d/%02d/%02d %02d %02d %02d", $year, $mon, $mday, $hour, $min, $sec); 注 localtimeで返ってくる値は、年が1900、月は0から始まるため、通常の表記に戻すには定数を加算すればよい。 参考 http //perldoc.perl.org/functions/localtime.html
https://w.atwiki.jp/macinakapiano/pages/440.html
AQUARIUM DINING RINO 写真未入手 演奏可能時間 設置期間 2020年1月25日 - 現在 設置場所 沖縄県那覇市前島1-13-10、AQUARIUM DINING RINO アクセス ゆいレール 美栄橋駅から徒歩7分 那覇空港から 那覇市街から 設置ピアノ ヤマハ アップライト。 設置環境 屋内 近隣のまちなかピアノ 鹿児島空港： 電車・飛行機で2時間10分（美栄橋→那覇空港→鹿児島）、鹿児島空港で降りる。 NAVITIME検索結果はこちら 。 その他 関連リンク
https://w.atwiki.jp/twitterbot/pages/337.html
yajiuma_watcher / やじうまWatch観測ボット Web 自己紹介 やじうまWatchさん (http //internet.watch.impress.co.jp/static/yajiuma/) の記事タイトルをお昼と夕方につぶやくボットです。このボットは非公式で@ma_koが作成・設置しています。 最近のつぶやき 新着記事は見つかりませんでした。
https://w.atwiki.jp/vipkotei-j/pages/609.html
be コテ雑！みて冷やし中華始めました 18 名前：よっぴいの妹 ◆miumiu/Am. [] 投稿日：2009/06/28(日) 23 03 09.23 桜 ID z7IWCQLe0 ?DIA(102261) sssp //img.2ch.net/ico/anime_onigiri02.gif →17 え、それだけ？え、それだけ？謝礼は？ 名前 コメント すべてのコメントを見る もどる
https://w.atwiki.jp/vocaloidchly/pages/7395.html
作詞：keeno 作曲：keeno 編曲：keeno 歌：初音ミクDark 翻譯：kyroslee alternate 一直裝作若無其事的我 就連心碎的聲音亦聽不到 雖然強顏歡笑裝作依然心心相連 尋找着你的所在之地 但在你的心中探索前進後 卻找到了某個別人的微笑 吶。你已經深深愛上了她了吧？ 愛她愛得連我的眼淚都看不見 明明我像是發了狂似的不斷呼喊 你是因為聽不到才跟我在一起的吧 太狡猾了啊 在你身後低着頭的我 即使已不合拍的步速追趕着你 不要離開我，靠近我吧。 明明只是想要觸碰到你的心聲而已，但卻是遙不可及啊 該要怎樣抱緊你才可留着你呢 零散的聲音微微震抖 那只不過是心裹作痛而已 傳來的那份溫暖依然是只屬於我的 你說對吧？ 降下的夜幕依然掩蓋着明天 再這樣下去一會兒吧 吶。我已經愛你愛得不能自拔了啊 愛得不惜藏起淚水強顏歡笑 心裹痛苦得很，再這樣一定會崩潰掉的吧 那也沒關係呢 因為我正戀愛着啊 你的呼吸也好身體也好都就在這裹 就像是從我心中流露出來似的 儘管試着不斷高聲呼喊 亦無法傳達給你 但我仍在這裹啊 就在你身邊啊 直到你放手那天為止