Aegis

I think Mira would have the best chances of working alone in a game. Mandalore (aka. you-know-who) might as well. HK would be fun, but neither he nor any of the other characters strikes me as a strong solo character.

Doh, voted Mira because I misread and thought the poll was the other way around (i.e. who *would* you turn into a jedi). Anyway, I think the disciple would be my real vote for various reasons, some mentioned above.

I found her rather annoying with all the nagging, but she grew on me and was a lot better once she had lightened up a bit. I may not have liked it, but it fit the character and I'd rather have a realistic character than one I like (for example, I really dislike Kreia, but she's still one of my all-time favourites just because she was written well enough to make me dislike her). Overall, I think Bastila's a well-written character. Oh, and you can't go wrong with Jennifer Hale. Great VA.

Last time I checked, the Chronicles seems to have been written by someone who haven't actually played the KotOR games, just heard the plots described vaguely. I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in them.

My main problem is that I really don't know what happened in the game. I mean, sure, I got theories (several), but I'm the one doing most of the writing there. I shouldn't have to. KotOR1 had a fairly generic plot, bad guy wants to rule universe, hero stop him (or replace him as may be the case), end of story. Not very original perhaps, but it was a clear and acceptable plot and stories like that have been told and will continue to be told for a long time, simply because it works. KotOR2 had more potential to be interesting, but it wasn't really used. Alright, so (at least, I think that's it. It's not 100% certain, and how it would be done and its implications are far from clear). The thing is, I have no idea why. I haven't played it in a while now, so to be fair, I might've forgotten or missed it, but I can't remember anything like that and the game is in a pretty sad state if the main plot doesn't stand out at all. The same goes for most characters, why do they even follow you around? Something about force bonds is mentioned, but that really just seems like a poor excuse so they won't have to bother comming up with some proper reasons. When the game was over, I had more questions than when I started. Not to mention that the ending would've been frustrating enough even if the main plot had been resolved due to the rushed feeling and complete lack of anything involving the other characters. Sorry, but I'm not satisfied when a game leaves me thinking "what the hell? Is that it?".

The HK-47 voice acting in K2 was better (it had a more... condescending tone that fit the character better). But apart from that and a few priceless lines, I liked the orginal one better.

Kreia = Kae? Could be, could not. There's only implications, however, so I'll have to go with no for the moment.

Yay, a conservative pope. Everyone knows that what the catholic church needs is to be more conservative, right? And aged 78, no less. But at least he can stand up and raise his arms, judging from the pictures I've seen, and that's always something.

You really want to know?

This?

You can delete it. Check the listbox in the bottom left corner and there should be something mentioning moderation options. Select delete the thread and it should be gone.

You were offended by it? How is that even possible? The history of philosophy is filled with people who think they know a whole lot more than they actually do, and if you want to debate that, I'd first like to see you prove any of the philosophical theories we've seen in, oh, let's say, the last 2000 years. That should keep you busy for a while (2000 years so far and counting). Unless you can manage to do that, what we have here is a case of 2000 years worth of people who come up with wild guesses and elevate them into facts. I don't know about you, but that is close enough to being full of crap as far as I'm concerned. I have no problem with philosophy, but the minute you start turning it into science or using it to prove a scientific theory, you're treading on thin ice indeed.

Oh, and: "They call them fingers, but I never see them fing... Oh, there they go."

Depending on how you look at it, pretty much everything comes from philosophy. Math and logic, which in turn resulted in science. The difference here is that philosophy deals with, basically, the nature of reality. Science deals with reality as we perceive it. Science isn't wrong because it never claimed to be right, whereas philosophy really doesn't have a clue what it's talking about. How, exactly, does this relate to anything regarding dreams and alarm clocks? I don't have a closed mind, I merely think it's pointless to go make up a theory about how you dream because a clock is ringing when there is scientific evidence that suggest that it's not so. The study of our perceived reality should be left to science, philosophy can get anything else.

Philosophers are generally full of crap. I've read philosophy, I should know. A more scientific approach; we dream all the time when we sleep. Several dreams per night usually. The reason we *remember* the dream is because it was interrupted by a clock or whatever. Dreams are forgotten very quickly, and if you're not pulled out of your sleep, you'll forget it before you wake up. Even after you've woken up in the middle of a dream, it's often very hard to remember even if it felt very vivid.