[PS: Bastila's Dead]

Bastila as end boss(i.e. evil again) is just as much of a cop out as some random death pre TSL. I already redeemed her once, having her go DS again would just be silly. It would hardly constitute a cameo either.

 

I think there could very well be different end bosses depending on alignment, though.

 

Optimism is a subjective thing.

Which is all the more reason to not have her (or Revan) as a focal point of the story, but rather have them both a)ALIVE and b)serving as "secondary" background characters, sort of like the wise Jedi you meet after you win the game or something, and they tell you what a good job you did.

[PS: Bastila's Dead]

In addition, as far as happy endings, who says she's alive to help you out? YOU could be the one to finally kill Bastila Shan in KoTOR II.

For me (I can't speak for anyone else), if Bastila WAS to die in KOTOR2, I'd rather it was by my (the PC) hand, rather than just some offscreen death.

 

I guess I'm not so opposed to her dying per se, but rather I just don't want it to be a "cheap" death, such as just some little comment by one of the NPCs you come across that tells you she died by trying to defeat Revan (all happening off-screen, between KOTOR1 and KOTOR2).

[PS: Bastila's Dead]

Weird...I could have sworn I wrote a long post...but it seems to have disappeared.

 

Regardless, I hope your assumptions are correct about what he meant in the interview.

[PS: Bastila's Dead]

Well I certainly hope so, having the Jedi Order retreating from the Rim worlds and concentrate into the Core worlds makes far more sense that the "the Jedi Order is disbanded" idiocy.

Speaking of the Jedi Council, wouldn't it still be alive and strong even after the events of KOTOR1? I mean, the Jedi Academy on Dantooine was a training academy, and those 4 Jedi Masters were the Academy's Council. The real Council was on Coruscant (even said so in one of the dialogue trees). So even with the destruction of Dantooine, there should have been 12 Jedi Masters (or however many they had back then, they had 12 in the movies)still alive and well.

[Basic Plot Discussion]

In any cases, Revan should be dead. There's no way they could bring him/her back in the flesh that wouldn't anger at least a few people for walking all over their internal conception of who Revan really was. Plus, confronting your new PC with your old PC is just awkward. Kinda like introducing a current paramour to your ex. Not to be attempted unless there's no way of avoiding it.

I'd actually be more upset if they did kill him off. There's plenty of ways they can remove him from the foreground of the storyline without having to actually kill him off.

 

Just as my response in the Bastila thread, I'd be upset if the time and effort I went through in the first game was all for nothing by having my main character and his love interest just "erased" for convenience sake. To me, it would be like making a movie right after Return of the Jedi, but having Luke Skywalker killed off just because the writer wants a new star.

[PS: Bastila's Dead]

I don't think there's any plausible way she can be in the sequel alive. Besides the practical difficulties of her being a ridiculously high level, there've got to be some difficult storyline concerns (i.e. reconciling the game between those who killed her, redeemed but didn't romance her, romanced and redeemed her, took her as a non-romantic apprentice, and took her as an apprentice and lover). Plus, from what we've heard about TSL, there aren't any other Jedi around.

 

The best way to solve the problem is to tie her fate to Revan's. Stipulate that both of them died under mysterious circumstances (if the player indicates that she survived KotOR I). Let us discover the real sequence of events, and maybe avenge their deaths (even though such thoughts lead to the Dark Side). Yeah, it's still an off-screen event, but the player can feel some involvement in the story by solving the mystery.

I think there's easily a plausible way she can be in the sequel alive.

 

For starters, Obsidian's whole idea with this "PC will tell the game what they believe happened in KOTOR1 through various conversations..." could easily accomplish this regardless of whether Bastila died or survived the first game.

 

If she was redeemed or if she was at your side when you reclaimed your Dark Lord status, the game then ties her fate and whereabouts to Revan's in the Unknown regions. If she died, then Revan's out in the Unknown's alone. But either way, all they have to do is ask the PC which scenario took place in the first game.

 

The main reason why I think just killing her off is dumb is because, as has been stated, you (the PC) is not Revan this time, therefore from a character point of view, there's no emotional attachment to Bastila, and thus killing her off won't envoke a passionate response from the PC. And because the PC won't care whether she is dead or not, then killing her doesn't make the storyline more intense or sad, but rather just makes the previous game's decisions obsolete and unimportant, IMO.

[PS: Bastila's Dead]

I agree with those who say that killing Bastila off "offscreen" would be a huge mistake. As the original poster stated, a lot of people put forth a lot of effort into redeeming Bastila (those who didn't kill her), and our effort would seem wasted if we find out that KOTOR2 just decided to do away with her with some lame excuse for her death. The only time she should die is if the PC in the first game killed her and thus told the game that she had died. But for those of us that either redeemed her or had her join us in the DS, it would seem like such a brutal and disappointing way to connect KOTOR1 and KOTOR2.

 

I'd rather it if her destiny matches whatever is planned for Revan's, in that whatever fate Obsidian has in store for Revan, that Bastila is at his side for it (unless, as I said, you killed her in KOTOR1).

[What do you think the twist(s) will be in KOTOR II]

Some interesting speculation so far. One thing I'd like to comment on though. I hope Obsidian really takes care in not diminishing the events at the end of KOTOR1. In that, I mean I hope they're careful about how they explain the events that took place during the 5 years since the end of KOTOR1 and the beginning of KOTOR2.

 

For instance, the LS ending made it seem like Revan saved the day. He won the battle, and everything in the Republic was just peachy. I hope Obsidian comes up with a viable reason why, 5 years later, this peace and harmony supposedly brought on by Revan being redeemed and destroying Malak and the Star Forge is suddenly in chaos again. Yes, 5 years is a long time, but the image I got of the victory at the end of KOTOR was akin to the Allies victory at WWII. So unless it's explained carefully how the Republic went into shambles in 5 years, it'd be like the Germans just recovered for a couple of years, then 5 years after the end of WWII they took over the world. So hopefully the in-game explanation is a valid one so that it doesn't completely disregard everything you accomplished if you won the game as a LS player.

 

Now the DS ending can be just as difficult to explain, and hopefully will be done just a thoroughly. At the end of KOTOR, Revan was basically "the man". He reclaimed his spot as the Sith Lord, and judging by the ending, the Sith seemed to follow him. So now Obsidian has the task of explaining why, 5 years later, apparently Revan's hold on the title of Sith Lord has disappeared, and in his place there are Sith Lord(s), and Revan has gone off to the Unknown Regions. Perhaps he and Malak left an armada of ships out there when they first disappeared? Who knows. I just hope it's explained well in KOTOR2.

 

In my opinion, how Obsidian (in-game of course) explains the events of the 5 years between the two games is actually MORE important than much of the actual storyline of the second game, in that the 5 year gap is what will determine whether continuity is either maintained or completely screwed up.

[What do you think the twist(s) will be in KOTOR II]

You can keep on building and building on top of other people's methods, but you're putting a method to a method which doesn't actually work, because a method is immaterial and a method has to be applied to something material. A method can ADD to a method, but never take another method into account.

 

Myself, I've played many games I didn't particularly care for in a lot of ways, as games are rarely any good in plot, voice acting, or in any way except that they're an advanced (and somewhat more fun) way to twiddle your thumbs.

 

That said, anything you put your mind to has flaws, and many (good) things have a lot of flaws; this is fact. Pointing out many flaws gives the impression of a negative impression, but it doesn't inherently MEAN a negative impression. That's what Maria was saying.

Really, you could go on and on about the good things too in order to give a more quote-unquote "accurate" portrayal, but really the only person who takes all these flaws to mean, inherently (which it doesn't) a negative view, is the person who fails to see that the other person is actually just criticizing the good thing in all it's flaws.

 

Basically, this would be a better way to say what Maria originally intended:

 

People are criticizing the game. People, who obviously enjoyed the first and are looking forward to the second, to whatever extent they enjoy/look forward to said game, criticize the game. The flaws are not self-evident in the game being a bad thing, even if they flaws themselves are bad. Thus, saying that people are contradicting themselves by critiquing the game and at the same time looking forward to it is false.

 

And yes, I read your full post, but I was also responding to the discussion that was going on after your initial post, anikin.

Apparently you misunderstood the "people" I'm referring to in my initial post. As I stated (or alluded to), I am NOT commenting on those who offer critisisms towards aspects of the game they feel is flawed, but overall thought it was a good gaming experience. I was directing my comment towards those on this board (not necesarily in this thread) who seem to actually HATE the game (and have said so endlessly), yet still seem to lurk around on these forums, and also seem to be looking forward to KOTOR2. My only point was I find it rather rediculous to stick around a forum, and continually discuss a game that you dislike (you, being a general you, and not YOU).

 

Example: I absolutely hated Star Wars: Rebellion. So therefore, you won't find me on their message boards posting continuously about how terrible the game was, or how it's the biggest pile of garbage I've ever played. I also wouldn't be on a message board commenting on the release of a sequel for that game. But that seems to be what certain posters do on here. They hate the game, but yet they seem to troll just to add a "see, such and such aspect of the game sucks. it'll never change. it sucked in the first game, it sucks now."

 

Summary: constructive critisism and critique of certain aspects of the game seem logical, and those who ENJOYED the game would like to see their ideas implemented, or their dislikes aired. moaning and whining because the game was absolute crap, yet posting constantly about it on the message board is pointless.

[The Secret of the Sith Lords]

I don't mind the idea itself, but I REALLY hope that if you're anywhere near being correct, that your assumption about Revan isn't right. If he falls to the DS AGAIN, and it's the PC's job to destroy him, it'll make the events of the first game seem a waste of time.

[What do you think the twist(s) will be in KOTOR II]

Ghost of Anikan:

" It's amazing how many people seem to whine about the twist in KOTOR being terrible. It's amazing that these same people, for some inexplicable reason, keep posting and playing said "crappy" game and are eagerly awaiting the sequel to said crappy game."

 

Let me get this straight: if you think one part of a game boring, you must automatically think the game is crappy and not look forward to its sequel? Even if that part is several hours into gameplay? Which would suggest you enjoyed the parts before it.

 

Is this really a logical conclusion to make?

Sorry I didn't type out a 2 page essay on exactly what I meant.

 

All I was eluding to is I find it extremely frustrating/annoying/partly strange that certain posters insist on doing nothing but bitching about how certain aspects of the game "ruined" it for them and in effect, made the game terrible (their words, not my own interpretation of their words) keep coming back here to post over and over about it.

 

Constructive critisism is one thing. But that's not what these people do. They just bitch and moan about how crappy the game was and how they don't understand how people can actually call it a great game. So my rhetorical question to them was then why keep coming back to a message board dedicated to that game.

 

My intent was not directed at those who maybe felt the graphics could have been better, but enjoyed the game none the less. Or those who think the combat wasn't as good as it could have been, but played through the game countless times. Rather, it was directed at those who have nothing good to say about the game, yet constantly return to post on this (and other KOTOR message boards) about how much they thought the game sucked because of the various aspects of the game (ie. storyline, twist, combat, graphics, etc.).

[What do you think the twist(s) will be in KOTOR II]

It's amazing how many people seem to whine about the twist in KOTOR being terrible. It's amazing that these same people, for some inexplicable reason, keep posting and playing said "crappy" game and are eagerly awaiting the sequel to said crappy game.

 

As for the twist, I'll bet it'll have to do with some line of dialogue from the previous game that you wouldn't pick up on until it happened (sort of like the twist in KOTOR when you play through again and think "oh man, now i see it").

 

I just hope that the twist doesn't have to do with Revan or Bastila. It'd make the game seem kinda cheesy if the twist was to do with them.

[Questions the the Devs - Take 2]

Excellent idea. The other thread was getting pretty bogged down with pointless chatter/off topic stuff.

 

I'm wondering how often little tidbits of information will be released. I'm assuming that we'll know more as the time grows nearer, or atleast I hope so.

[Post your ideas as to what the 'twist' will be!]

Whatever they decide the plot twist to be, I just hope it isn't just a rehash of KOTOR1 with you suddenly being told you're [enter main bad guy's name] and had your memory altered.

 

My guess is that you actually DON'T have the use of the Force, and that Krea chick is using the Force through you, making you believe you have it, for some unknown reason.

[GameSpy preview]

Interesting read. With each additional tidbit of info on the game that's released, it makes me more and more anxious to play it. Too bad it's still a good 9 months away