GhostofAnakin

Again with the miscontrued facts. I'm not a fanboy. I know there are things wrong with KOTOR and there are things about the game that frustrated me to no end as well. Apparently anyone who disagrees with your point of view is a)wrong and B)a fanboy. That's exactly what I'm talking about with your arrogant assumptions. There are dozens of games that scored high ratings that I didn't like when I played them, but the difference is I'm not so arrogant that I'd paint them all as "sucky" or "hyped up" just because I personally didn't enjoy them.

Nope, I mean all gaming press. PC Gamer named it game of the year, Computer Gaming World did likewise. Listen, I don't have a problem with people stating their opinion and whatnot. But you're coming across as arrogant by making it sound like it's a FACT that KOTOR sucked or wasn't a good game. It's not a fact. It's your opinion.

That's your opinion, and that's perfectly fine for YOU. You expect the game to play out a certain way and that's fine. But to suggest the game is flawed because it doesn't match YOUR view is rather arrogant. But apparently KOTOR wasn't so bad, otherwise it wouldn't have gotten all the recognition it did in the gaming press. But I suppose your opinion is worth more than the entire gaming press huh?

I meant KOTOR 2, since you're already slamming the game before it's released. It's stated quite clearly that you're a vet of the mandalore wars and that you follow a specific path.

So does KOTOR. They plainly advertise that you will be a specific character who is involved in a specific timeline of events.

Of course any thing is technically possible, but I suppose I should have said REALISTICALLY, what are the chances of it happening. I think your view is distorted because you adhere to the d20 system more than you do to the films and novels (which, btw, the movies are CANON and the d20 isn't), so therefore you have an overvalued view of non-Jedi classes since the d20 system seems to want to balance things out for "fairness" issues.

I never once said that Jedi are gods. But even an average Jedi would give the best non-Jedi a run for his/her money, and that's my point. Can you honestly say that a non-Jedi could have defeated the Emperor or Darth Maul in combat? If you say yes, then I think you have a destorted view of the Star Wars universe.

Yes, because a fully trained Jedi Master/Sith Lord would be dumb enough to just walk through a minefield or stand there while you toss a thermal detonator at them. I reiterate; you underestimate what a Jedi can do against a non-Jedi and overestimate what a non-Jedi can do.

Not true. I've had this computer for 3 years now and the only upgrade I had to get (which was well overdue anyways) was getting a better graphics card, which cost barely over $100. Compare that to the fact that in the past 3 years, I've spent more than that upgrading from a PS to a PS2, and I'd say that it's not any more expensive to own and upgrade your computer as compared to having to dish out $200 or $300 on a new gaming console when they come out, what seems like every 3 or 4 years.

I think the best visual explanation of how a non-Jedi would do against a Jedi/Sith is Jango Fett vs. Mace Windu. By all accounts, Jango Fett could be argued as the best and most lethal non-Jedi character in the SW universe, in terms of fighting ability. Yet when he came up against Windu one on one, he got his head chopped off with ease. So with that in mind, how would a non-Jedi take on hordes of Dark Jedi and Sith Lords if they have trouble with one single Jedi Master? Anyone who believes that a non-Jedi would have a chance defeating powerful Sith Lords clearly doesn't understand the Star Wars universe.

A lightsaber medpac would be cool. Think about it, it can sense whether you are friend or foe, so if you are a friend it'll heal you, if you're a foe it'll cut you up.

Umm? Has nothing to do with because the "fanbase" says so. Look at the movies, which is where the game draws it's inspiration. And again, you're suggesting reasons from a GAMING point of view. I said look at the Star Wars movies and universe. There aren't ways to "pause while i'm fighting so i can use a medpac" in the movies.

Well for starters, the whole idea of a lightsaber is, as Obi-Wan stated, an elogant weapon, not as clumsy as a blaster. It's also used for defense. I don't see how you're going to deflect blaster bolts when you're shooting the damn thing at your enemy.

No offense, but how can you think that a lightsaber gun would provoke "intellectual discussion"? This has seriously got to be the worst idea ever, and the fact that you're serious about it and didn't post it as a joke makes me worried.

I agree. I hope that you get asked more questions than just whether Revan was male or female. IMO, that's a pretty shallow representation of the events of the last game, and in all honesty, one of the LAST things I really care about.

I don't think it was possible at all in KOTOR 1. Remember the game is trying to re-create the Star Wars universe seen in the movies. So how would it have been anywhere near realistic for a non-Jedi to take on and defeat not only a DS Bastila, but a Sith Lord like Malak? Han Solo was one of the best non-Jedi characters in terms of fighting ability and whatnot, but do you remember what happened the only time he faced Vader on Cloud City? Yeah, Vader just deflected his blaster bolts then used the Force to pull the gun from his grasp. The ONLY character that could face Vader and the Emperor was the only other Force user. That is why I don't think it's realistic or feasible in the KOTOR story, to have the PC as a non-Jedi, especially when the "end boss" is supposedly a powerful Sith Lord.

You seem to miss the point that we're not suggesting your cristisisms aren't warranted. They are, indeed, very valid. The point is you didn't SUGGEST any alternatives. If these elements are taken out of the game, the game then needs other items to fill in the gaps. You never bothered to implement new ideas. So basically, the game isn't improved, it's just shortened if they use your "suggestion". Basically, this is what's missing from your original post: What do you suggest they do instead then, to make the game better, assuming they removed the things you listed?

Now you're just posting topics for the sake of being an idiot about it, after your last topic got closed down due to redundancy.

Remind me never to put my life in your hands.

Gee, I would have thought it was obvious... don't hurt your head trying to figure it out or anything. HINT: Read the title of the topic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What you posted was basically a complaint, not a suggestion. Suggestion implies you "suggest" an alternative route they should have taken, or alternative solutions they didn't think of. You just pointed out what you felt they did wrong, but didn't provide examples/theories about what you think they should have done. Simply saying "don't recycle" doesn't exactly add any suggestions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure it does. "Don't do something" is a perfectly valid suggestion. There is nothing wrong with giving negative examples to avoid. If I got food poisoning at an Italian restaurant, I am perfectly justified in telling you to NOT eat there, even if I don't have a suggestion for a better Italian restaurant to eat at instead. Saying otherwise is just being silly. Your argument is basically that I should shut up and let you go get food poisoning because I don't have a catalog of Italian restaurants handy. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, using your example, you telling me not to eat at an Italian restaurant would stop there without an explanation or reason WHY I shouldn't eat there. Your first post just said "don't do that" without giving a reason why or a viable alternative. So that would be like you telling me not to eat at an Italian restaurant and me asking why not, so your response is "just don't eat there". That doesn't tell me why I shouldn't eat there, and also doesn't give me an alternative place to eat since I will need to find food elsewhere.

Aren't the supposedly "leveling up" when you do, increasing in difficulty as you get more powerful?

I like this idea. It would have been neat to see the Sith and Republic soldiers on Manaan start fighting and allow you to choose which factions to side with or to join in and start killing both sides.

Gee, I would have thought it was obvious... don't hurt your head trying to figure it out or anything. HINT: Read the title of the topic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What you posted was basically a complaint, not a suggestion. Suggestion implies you "suggest" an alternative route they should have taken, or alternative solutions they didn't think of. You just pointed out what you felt they did wrong, but didn't provide examples/theories about what you think they should have done. Simply saying "don't recycle" doesn't exactly add any suggestions.

I'm thinking it might be Tales of the Jedi, but I'm not sure, which is why I asked.

The problem is you're expecting too much of a divergence from the story that Bioware wanted to tell. The story breaks down in simplistic terms to either 1)redemption or 2)conquest. Think of it in terms of Return of the Jedi. Luke had two options; (LS) defeat the Emperor and turn his father back to the light or (DS)go over to the darkside and defeat his father, taking his place at the Emperor's side. In your post, you bring up the fact that regardless of whether we go LS or DS, we have to fight Malak. That's exactly what happens in RotJ. Regardless of whether Luke fell to the darkside or remained a lightside Jedi, he would have had to face the same bad guy (or in his case, 2). It might not be what you're actually suggesting, but bringing up the fact you have to fight Malak regardless of alignment suggests that you want there to be a completely different "enemy" for each alignment. That'd be like suggesting that if Luke remains a LS Jedi, he faces Vader and the Emperor. But if he goes to the DS, all of a sudden Vader and the Emperor aren't there anymore and instead he has to face some new Jedi. I don't necessarily disagree that we should have had our choices affect the game world more than they did, but I definitely disagree with your comment about having to face Malak either way as a negative thing.