Chris Avellone

Computer Games as a medium - I think it will absolutely enter into the world of art, and I think it already has, whether people realize it or not. I think the primary role of comic books, for example, were to be solely commercial entertainment, but I think a number of them have easily transcended into an art form. Artist or craftsman - it depends on the stage of the product cycle. At the beginning, definitely more an artist, then when the hardcore implementation begins, it's time to craft away (although there's also an argument for artistically crafting something, but that gets more complicated and makes my tiny monkey brain hurt).

I guess it's much the same question you would put on characters and character exploration in a PG-13 movie vs. an R-rated movie. Sometimes to explore some characters in a certain genre ("true crime," survival horror, or otherwise) requires you have access to a toolbox of taboo subjects to reinforce the ambiance you're trying to create. Game mechanics are generally more impeded than most character development (mostly combat mechanics, for obvious reasons), but numerous topics in today's culture with character development also get the hamstring with the ESRB. This includes mature sexual content and commentary, strong profanity as a character's ego signature, intense drug addiction themes, and even more potentially taboo topics (religion, abortion, interrogation/torture). I guess I mostly chafe under these restrictions because some characters and locations in a game have a certain "voice" when you create them, and to hamstring that diminishes the creative edge to those areas. I'm not saying that there should be blood and gore covering the walls followed by a parade of orgies, but sometimes elements of a character or location arc take on a certain strength when you are allowed to use these elements.

I'll do companion NPC characters because I understand them the best: They need understandable motivations (or hidden, but understandable motivations), unpredictability, some element of mystery, effective in the game, and a good voice actor. (Note that I have generated this list in five minutes, so it's possibly I have forgotten something. Anyway.) Motivations: People like characters they can understand or sympathize with. Part of my love of Hellboy and Robot Man in Grant Morrison's Doom Patrol is that when they are confronted with a weird situation, they go "hunh?" and then they punch it repeatedly. This is an understandable, sympathetic motivation. Unpredictable: Cliches being what they are, familiarity breeds contempt. If you come across a character archetype you immediately recognize and know exactly what his personality and character arc is going to be, he immediately becomes less compelling. Mystery: Characters become more interesting when there is an element of mystery about their personality or motivations - then they become a mini-game that you want to unlock and find out why they are doing the things they do. The more these mysterious agendas revolve or focus around your player character, the better. Effective in the Game: Any character that does not perform an effective support role in the game is pretty much doomed by any non-roleplayer, which you should assume is everyone. Myron from Fallout 2 - ineffective. Cassidy and Bonenose from Fallout 2 - effective. I sometimes call this the "Final Fantasy III Test" - every character in Final Fantasy III had a different, yet very effective combat ability, which made them all worthwhile to use in the game. Voice Actor: Poor voice acting can breed hatred faster than anything, especially if their combat lines or selection lines are annoying or shrill. One last thing - any NPC who disparages your character or doesn't acknowledge that the main player is super cool on some level, even if it's grudgingly, is generally not as well liked as other companion characters. Sorry for the delay on this, we were in Dallas showing Neverwinter Nights 2 at A-Kon. Expect pix soon. If you want to see informal pix, go to: Informal A-Kon pix.

Rebelling against the ESRB - Yeah, I feel that way much of the time, and the rest of the time I am sleeping. It's hard to make a game that's meaningful when there's certain modern-day subjects (and age-old dawn-of-time subjects) that you can't bring up without getting the ratings slash. I do want freedom to create with as few restrictions as possible, and sometimes having to fight for a mature-rated game (and not for the sake of simply being immature and painting blood and sex everywhere, but for other topics) is a pain in the ****ing ass. Not to be totally one-sided about it, though - I do think there should be some information on the package that lets the buyer know what they're in for, since I think folks deserve to be informed, but the restrictions are chafing at times. (BTW, I just previewed this and noticed ****ing gotting censored. See? They're everywhere).

No, but it's not the team's fault, since they were in an unusual situation all around. That was actually the second project I was drafted on to, and then I asked Ferg if I could leave and work full time on Planescape (I think this was a year before DTU finally shipped). He agreed, since at the time, I didn't ask for much. Not long before that, I actually was asked to leave DTU to work on Fallout by Tim Cain, but I felt bad, so I didn't. Huge mistake. Torment's the game I'm most proud of. I feel like it said a lot of what I wanted to say about how role-playing games could be - and the setting just encouraged it. We also had a great team, TSR was pretty happy with what we were doing, and even if the hours sucked, everyone really pushed hard to make the game what it was. I still thank Eric Campanella daily for actually reading our design documentation and actually coming back to us with suggestions for how to improve the ambiance, character look, etc, based on the personality of a character he read (all of the character designs he took from 2-3 paragraphs of description and then he fleshed them out). I do see a lot of the flaws with it as well which comes from having worked on it so closely (pacing problems, combat issues, and balance issues), and I was pretty terrified it would crash and burn once people got their hands on it, but it was encouraging to hear the feedback on it.

Modern engines do provide some limitations - I would disagree that modern engines couldn't pull off the Planescape universe, though (and I think they could do it better with a 3D engine), a claim of which was basically the fault of my seven year old designer brain back in '99 being incapable of wrapping itself where modern technology would go. In terms of character interaction, that's a little of a thornier issue, since getting that facial and animation complexity in some of our current games has been tough, resource wise (it can require a lot of animators and modelers to get it right) - it is much easier to describe it than show it, but our goal should ultimately be to always show it rather than tell the player what's happening. So basically, I think as far as environments go - no, as far as complex character interactions - yes, you can't really have as many with that depth of character movement and facial expression as we did in Planescape, but the fewer that you can pull off with the tools provided (Half-Life 2) I think are more than worthwhile. With these limitations, however, come other advantages. When you have a fully or mostly voice acted game, the information the NPCs (and CNPCs) are conveying comes off stronger and it's easier for people to be immersed in what's going on. Also, there's things voice actors can do with lines that will add far more emotion and drama than anything you could write. Anyway, hope that answers the question.

Probably about half of PST, and roughly the same as K2. That's more of a gut instinct answer, since I don't have the word counts in front of me. I will say it's much harder in today's development cycle to write a lot for games whether dialogue or otherwise, just because of the localization and audio costs of having to do voice acting. Bonus Answer from Original Thread: (Fenghuang) Do I still have a passion for blonde European women? Sure, if they're cool and won't steal my car or cyberstalk me. I'm cool with physical stalkers, though.

Just wanted to warn you guys that my answers may trickle in slowly, since there's been a marketing flood this week in addition to the Neverwinter Nights 2 standard work load. Influence System - I realize that happened in K2. Still, if at least one of those people stopped for a moment to consider the role-playing opportunity as well (so that's why Kreia's such a cranky witch), then perhaps it was a good thing in the end. I don't know if there's anything wrong with it either - if that's how folks want to play, that's totally fine with me, we just provide the option to roleplay if they want. I guess I consider the XP and Jedifying a bribe, saying "hey, there's tangible benefits to role-playing with these CNPCs." Also, being a roleplayer I enjoy getting tangible benefits for interacting more with my companions - and because I have no real friends of my own. In NWN2, however, it does work differently - we don't award experience points or stat bonuses, although it may affect class switching in rare cases and who stays/who leaves at certain key moments in the game. The results are more role-playing based as a result than in K2, but ideally we like to do both when we can (both tangible gameplay benefits and more role-playing opportunities). BTW, to answer Baley's question from the original thread, yeah, I liked Amelie a lot. I didn't want to go see it when it came out, but I was dragged there because I was dating one of our super cute Titus French interns, but I was pretty fascinated five minutes in. It's one of the few DVDs I own because I've liked Jean-Pierre Jeunet ever since City of Lost Children (I didn't realize Amelie had the same director) - and I liked a Very Long Engagement, too.

If we gave our prizes, you would get one. Ran across that in one of the Jedi Quest children's books, and for some reason, it stuck. Chris

Please examine the K1 Republic battle fleet and see if what you say truly violates K1 and Kotor-era continuity, or whether it is a convention.

Uh... huh? All right, it's a poor fighter - where did that come from? But are we talking about the (now-christened) stealth basilisk in K2 or the Viraga/Virago? What? Oh, are we still talking about this? So you support this particular stealth revision mentioned in the article - excellent. Then it all comes down to aesthetics, and again, this thread has been a colossal waste of time. To re-iterate, if you are seeking psychological security in sci fi continuinity, then you are bound to be sorely disappointed. We proposed it, they agreed on the first pass, it's done, nothing will ever change it... oh, except a revision later on, which will, of course, again invalidate continuity - but that's only comforting or not depending on how you personally stand on the decision, as you've just proved. So if you want to argue LucasArts aesthetics vs. the old LucasArts aesthetics, go ahead. Call them about K1. Call them about K2. Do not hesitate. Tell them of the horrible, bloody crimes being committed in their backyard, which they have seen, yet somehow must be mistaken in their decisions. Tell them what fools they are for making that decision and how Star Wars historical accuracy has been ruined for you, sullied, dragged through the dirt. Tell them how it has crippled their reputation in your eyes for centuries, and how it has left a wound in the Force - a wound that echoes still. I think that only then will they see that what they have done is wrong... and that the balance in the Force must be rectified.

Wait, so you (and the article) are admitting that the one in K2 isn't the same as TOJ? That there ARE multiple versions? Then why are we even talking about this? You're right, "enough of Basilisk." What a colossal waste of time. Also, if the insider article came out in 2005, then any changes they placed there will most likely overwrite anything that was already established in K1 or K2 (which was finished in 2004) - which I guess was your problem with K1 and K2 in the first place and means it may happen again in the future. But if you support that revision this time, hey, more power to you. Chris

Really? Well, okay, if you say so. I really wouldn't feel comfortable making that kind of assumption myself. Yeah, I think the Basilisk (10+ years before K2, if I recall correctly, I may be wrong) didn't look very good, along with certain other elements and design elements that were presented during that time period (mystical power amulets, the pace and reasons for Ulic's fall, huge insect ships, etc, etc). Warb Null, in particular, was a huge favorite around the office, and I can show you the cartoons at some point if you'd like. In any event, there's probably hundreds of variations of the basilisk over the centuries. And if you have a problem with the Valley of the Sith Lords, well, I don't know what to tell you. I noticed the discrepancy, and didn't really care - it would have been nice if they could have somehow crammed the TOJ version into the X-Box (because I thought the TOJ was a good depiction, actually), but it was still beautiful to go down that valley in K1, see the sunset, and see the statues off in the distance. So just relax. Enjoy the view. Let Korriban seep into your veins and calm you. My opinion is this: If you need the security a strong continuity provides, you may not want to seek psychological security in Star Wars, Star Trek, or any other science fiction series (or computer game continuity). There's holes, gaps, and other problems - my suggestion to you would be to just try to relax a little and enjoy the escapism. When escapism becomes work, an obssession, or is just stressing you out in general, then it's not doing its job and you need to take a step back and take a breather.

The patch is on the way, but still being tested. We won't have a list of all the fixes until it's ready to be downloaded. I don't have an ETA on it yet, but it shouldn't be too much longer.

LA's agrees to everything when it comes to continuity. Proven because they in the Mandalorian Article in issue 80 of insider, sets in stone that the Basilisk is a beast. The Mandalorians Basilisk in TOTJ might look stupid, but regardless it is a Basilisk War Droid. That Virago,which I think looks stupid, isn't a Basilisk. That thing would be destroyed in seconds by the stupid kind. Even from Canderous discription in KOTOR he speaks of the Beast. I don't like that just because YOU THINK something looks stupid, you feel the right to change it. Of course in the end you didnt' change anything, the Basilisk is still the beast as it should. I would hope that IF you are making KOTOR 3, you put the ACTUAL Basilisk into the game. "Regardless, I am certain there are other mistakes. It's a big universe and a big game, you'll find them. I did try to read, play, and watch every piece of Star Wars source material I could find, but I freely admit I make mistakes. " And the Basilisk was one of them, intentional or not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmmm. Okay, I think you're making a mistake here, but no harm done. Basically, I think you missed what I said in the previous post - the right to change something never rests with me, it rests with LucasArts and Lucasfilm. I suppose you could blame LucasArts if you want, but I think that would be unfair and frankly, another mistake - as I said in the previous post, please keep in mind that everything goes to Lucasfilm for approval. Everything. I would strongly suggest that if you have a problem with the basilisk war droid, you don't have to stand for it - contact Lucasfilm, they run the show. Maybe they chose unwisely during the approval process when they saw the concepts. I seriously doubt it, but who knows? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And I'm saying that they agree to everything. KOTOR 2 made the Basilisk the wrong way. Approved or not, LFL went back and approved the Beast in the Mandalorian Article. Definded,pictured, and everthing. Yet you say LFL changed it, but it was you people who made the concept of the WRONG Basilisk. Either way there are TWO basilisk now. The Stupid mighty version, and the Virago Star fighter. I'm sorry you don't like something, but I don't think that gives you the right to remake anything. I hope whoever Makes KOTOR 3, will put the Stupid mighty version back in. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No actually what you said is LA agrees to everything, but if you meant to include Lucasfilm, that's fine - no problem with retrocontinuity in posts. Oh, and well, not to point out another mistake - we actually, strangely enough, DON'T have the right to remake everything (as I said before). And I never said Lucasfilm changed it, they approved it on the first pass - again, I hate to refer back to previous posts, but it's difficult to argue a point with you when you keep making mistakes in something I've said, it casts doubt on everything you're arguing. If your argument is "both you and Lucasfilm were wrong to change something mentioned in TOJ and have a different-looking basilisk," well, you're mistaken. It worked for K1 - they redesigned much of the look of the Republic fighters and ships from TOJ, and in my opinion, they were right to do so.

LA's agrees to everything when it comes to continuity. Proven because they in the Mandalorian Article in issue 80 of insider, sets in stone that the Basilisk is a beast. The Mandalorians Basilisk in TOTJ might look stupid, but regardless it is a Basilisk War Droid. That Virago,which I think looks stupid, isn't a Basilisk. That thing would be destroyed in seconds by the stupid kind. Even from Canderous discription in KOTOR he speaks of the Beast. I don't like that just because YOU THINK something looks stupid, you feel the right to change it. Of course in the end you didnt' change anything, the Basilisk is still the beast as it should. I would hope that IF you are making KOTOR 3, you put the ACTUAL Basilisk into the game. "Regardless, I am certain there are other mistakes. It's a big universe and a big game, you'll find them. I did try to read, play, and watch every piece of Star Wars source material I could find, but I freely admit I make mistakes. " And the Basilisk was one of them, intentional or not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hmmm. Okay, I think you're making a mistake here, but no harm done. Basically, I think you missed what I said in the previous post - the right to change something never rests with me, it rests with LucasArts and Lucasfilm. I suppose you could blame LucasArts if you want, but I think that would be unfair and frankly, another mistake - as I said in the previous post, please keep in mind that everything goes to Lucasfilm for approval. Everything. I would strongly suggest that if you have a problem with the basilisk war droid, you don't have to stand for it - contact Lucasfilm, they run the show. Maybe they chose unwisely during the approval process when they saw the concepts. I seriously doubt it, but who knows?

Vima was supposed to be Bastila in K1 (seriously), but there are legal issues with using the name "sunrider" so we were not allowed to use it in K2. You'll notice Jolee mentions it in K1, however, but that was an oversight.

We kept the valley the way it was in K1. Considering memory constraints, I completely understand why it was modeled the way it was. The purpose of the ritual and Freedon Nadd was already explained by another poster (thanks, Ulicis). As to whether he was "wiped off the Force map," I have no idea, and no argument you could present to me from Tales of the Jedi would ever make me think that the evil that took place in that location couldn't still be harnessed for further acts of destruction. The basilisk war droid version presented in K2 was an intentional departure from the ones presented in Tales of the Jedi, and we are happy, because frankly, those look really stupid. This is much the same reason that many of the designs in K1 are a departure from the ship designs in TOJ, and with good reason. So yes, the basilisk droid version was an intentional depature from the older models, and we take full responsibility. It is noteworthy that LucasArts and LucasFilm agreed with our decision on the first pass, much as they agreed with the decisions made with K1's look. Oh, and someone mentioned Sith holocrons (Radnor?) - Exar Kun did not destroy the last holocron. Sith Holocrons show up repeatedly in the Expanded Universe after the events of the Sith War, and they are Sith holocrons that contain knowledge of Sith - Quinlan Vos retrieves one for Dooku in Star Wars: Republic, they show up repeatedly in the Jedi Quest series, etc, etc. Regardless, I am certain there are other mistakes. It's a big universe and a big game, you'll find them. I did try to read, play, and watch every piece of Star Wars source material I could find, but I freely admit I make mistakes.

Not only was the Sith War was already taken by the Expanded Universe (Exar Kun, Ulic Qel-Droma), the Jedi Civil War made sense to us and in our opinion, the Republic as a whole. Many Jedi defected to Malak and Revan's side during the war (text crawl), and it doesn't feel like much of a stretch to see why the galaxy would call it that - Atton pretty much sums up the everyman view, despite his bias, but people in K2 aren't really happy about Jedi as a whole. Plus, when you hear "Jedi Civil War," it makes you stop and think about WHY people would call it that, and I think that's equally important in the context of the game. It's worth noting that both LucasArts and Lucas Film didn't have a problem with the name, they approved it on the first pass.

Hypothetically, that may have been the intention, yes. Palpatine has always been my favorite Sith Lord because (at least in Episode 1 and 2) he's... well, subtle, and watching him pull strings is a lot of fun, both in the movies and in the books and comics. Chris

Thanks - but between Michael Chu, Kevin Saunders, Ferret Baudoin, Tony Evans and John Morgan, we all deserve credit. I suspect Paper Mario will steal the crown, though.

You cannot have a romance with Mira, although it's pretty obvious she thinks a male PC is hot - she just won't do anything about it. And before we corrected various scripting bugs, she used to have the same opinion of female PCs, which sparked furious debates here at work as to whether we should fix it or not.

In the Expanded Universe, it's shown in several instances that using the Jedi to wage war frequently causes them to question the Jedi code and their duty to an ailing Republic (which is the state of the Republic during the Mandalorian Wars) - and many of these doubts result in Jedi deaths or their fall to the dark side. Many of the Clone Wars graphic novels deal with this, notably the one-shot "Jedi" issues with Yoda, Mace, Count Dooku, and Quinlan Vos. And even those who remain on the path of the light side still find their faith tested when the pressures of war begin to weigh down on them (Shaak Ti). Since TSL takes place in the EU, we felt that was a fair take if we wanted to explore the effect of war on the Jedi. But you're right, it's not movie canon - still, we take Yoda and Mace Windu's view on war: it is not the Jedi's place to wage war, it's to prevent it in the first place, as Mace says, to be "keepers of the peace." Yoda realizes the Republic (and the Jedi) have already lost when he says the Clone Wars have begun in Episode 2, and he knows nothing good will come of it. We felt this was an interesting aspect to try and examine in the Sith Lords. From our standpoint, anyone in touch with life and harmony around them (as Jedi are) who are thrust into a battlefield environment are going to meet some tough challenges, both physically and psychically (as Aton and HK-47 suggest in their backstories). A true Jedi can pull through... but much like the Clone Wars, perhaps it will end up that only two Jedi will survive the entire conflict (Yoda and Obi-Wan), and the rest will die or be corrupted as Vader was. It may be that war itself isn't to blame - it's just a crucible where it's easier for one in touch with the Force to fall to the dark side. Just some thoughts.