Cerebus

I believe "Shogun" features such puzzles. It's an oldish Infocom/Legend adventure (written by the author of the novel) that involves figuring out Japanese grammar. I never played it but www.theunderdogs.org gave it a very good review.

Perhaps not the top choice, but I think that Kreia was masterfully sarcastic.

No, you won't. You are far to fond of your own words to delete a single one of them, regardless of how irrelevant they might be. Although I agree with Aegis (whose "attacks" where more than fair, by the way, and didn't deserve such a hot-tempered defense on your part), I think I will stay out of this one. That is because this is clearly a monologue thread, not a discussion.

Personal Crystal? How the hell did I miss that? I read the faq posted above and saw that you are supposed to find it in the Cave on Dantooine. Problem is: I didn't! Is it only in the X-Box version perchance? Or am I simply blind, daft and dumb?

I see that you have got a point but I also see that I don't see it ... ehm, if that makes any sense (in my defence, I am a linguist) This interests me. If you can provide a step-by-step explanation for dummies, I would apreciate it.

But assuming he had always lied before: Then the statement would be "the truth" and therefore a paradox because it disqualifies its own content. S: "This (S) true statement is false." Assuming he had never lied before, or only ocasionally: Then the statement would be false and still be a paradox: S:"This (S) false statement is false". Because the statement is refering to itself in an incorrect way.

But don't we have to assume that a statement is valid for it to be a possible paradox? And isn't "I always lie" basically the same as "This statement is false"? Since, if the speaker always lies, as he claims, then this particular statement would be lie, too. Ergo: "This statement is false." If we discard them as meaningless/false to begin with, then none of the alternatives above would qualify as paradoxes, if I understand you correctly. We would simply assume them to be lies.

Where is the problem with that, by the way? In my oppinion, it would only be a paradox if it were phrased: "Is 'no' the answer to this question?"

Hmm, I guess that's about all the 'Dark Side' runs up to: Domination. As for ruling the galaxy: Palpatine managed to accomplish this "implausible" task, after all. I wouldn't doubt that the "untold adventures of DS Revan" could lead to the same result, especially because he/she has a "Death Star" from the very beginning. Me neither. There will be lots of stories left to be told. But again, the task of showing these further developments in this particular medium, without breaking its very foundations, is too daunting. Both LS and DS main characters would do lots of things in the future, but their futures would look so differently that they couldn't be put into the same frame. At least not without forcibly blending them together, which can be done, occasionally, but only as an exception from the rule. I'm just not happy that this solution was chosen for the first follow-up, because it sets a questionable precedent. That's only if you feel the unconditional need to see them as connected. But you are probably right: I concede that the project can't change its direction in mid-flight. My point is more about future games of the Kotor-kind than Kotor 3.

But they would have to if they continue in this way.

Thanks. I should try it out. After all, playing Ultima was so important to me back then that I nearly had a hard attack when I found out that VII (1) was bugged and couldn't be finished without a patch. Yes, that was before the internet. IV was still the best, though. Completely unique. But perhaps we should start an off-topic thread for this one. Have to go now. See you around, guys

And I loved Ultima! (Until I finished VIII, that is ) . But Ultima was not a multi-path game. It was as single-path as can be imagined. You are the Avatar, the incarnation of Virtue in a Fantasy world and you return again and again and again to finish a given plot with a fixed ending. Of course you can write great sequels to that. And, in this case, breaking with continuity would be a mistake, since the whole Avatar-theme is what made the series. Kotor, however, is something completely different. And concerning "variations of the same theme": Star Wars itself is as "variation of the same theme" as it can get. "Aproaching Star Forge!" "Ready, Gold Leader" "Oh man, look at the size of that thing"

I'm confused... doesn't it have an effect on the storyline when a bad Revan burns the galaxy with his massive fleet and a good Revan builds a lot of petting zoos? I mean, after only five years and with many of the old crew still hanging around, it would be strange to find no trace of the rather extreme endings of Kotor 1 - unless one made them completely irrelevant. And I don't know how that is to be considered satisfying. So people would rather have inconsequential endless continuity than one good and final ending? Because they "want to know what happens to their characters"? That's weird. A story is finished when it is finished. Take Highlander (as an example how a decent story can be ruined by a sequel). Take Apocalypse Now. Nobody cares what Willard does after he returns from Kurtz's compound. "See Lawrence of Arabia: The Indian adventures this Saturday on Fox". Sometimes, the more you get, the less you have. There are types of stories that are designed for a long run of add-ons, and some of them are great. But (and I repeat myself here) open-ended ones can not belong to that category without breaking down in the long run (much, much sooner in most cases). I don't want to know what Luke Skywalker does after RotJ. Because they couldn't find a better place to finish his story (yeah, yeah, I know, he's surrounded by Ewoks, but you get the idea). To proof my point: Somebody on this Forum mentioned that Han Solo becomes a Force Sensitive after the films. How lame is that? Even if the creators do a good job (!) of dealing with the impossible task of providing successive continuity to a free-choice-ending, as Obsidian did(!) imagine what would happen if that tradition would continue. With every new sequel you would be told: Oh, by the way: Your actions made no difference whatsoever. Wow. That's satisfying closure. Has TSL more than one ending, by the way? Played only LS myself. I could imagine that Obsidian would evade one of the traps that Kotor 1's multiple endings had posed by simply fixing the outcome in Kotor II while making it as indefinite as possible at the same time. However, I think I need not point out how dissatisfying such an approach is! Case closed, for now.

So? That makes me a second level whiner while you are still a first-class imbecile. Anyway, you should give progress a shot. In your case, it would be called "evolution". And before you trouble yourself with looking it up: I mean that strange power that might present your line with opposable thumbs one glorious day. As for continuing this little exchange, lets do it via PM. I hope to hear from you soon, since I have so little opportunity to whine about monosyllabic gibberish where I live. Oh, and by the way: It's not called "whining" but "insulting", and I enjoy it quite a bit in your case. )

Actually, that reminds Most Holy of a fitting parable. Fetch a pen, Boobah! What Most Holy is trying to say is: Giving people a cameo of Revan is a little like throwing him from a rooftop. As for your point about the title, Most Holy will take the liberty to quote himself, because Most Holy is above shame: