Zane0

'Tis not really trolling, if you must know- only in the loosest sense of the word. Here's a fair explanation of what the term really means.

You can download the trailer on fileplanet too. It's a very long wait, though.

I think that a female lead (protagonist/antagonist) in a KOTOR game would be a pleasant change. However, I don't think it would be a very good idea for KOTOR 2 in particular, since female Revan's relationship with the supporting characters are a good deal weaker then those as a male. In my opinion, male Revan would have a more interesting continuation story then female Revan. This is biased of course by being male myself.

I imagine Obsidian will have something up their sleeve with Revan. I don't really think we will see him/her, though.

It's too late to change the main direction of the game, so why bother? You can either work with the system and maybe get somewhere, or work against the system and go nowhere. That being said, I believe there'll be some more romancin' in KOTOR 2. It isn't immediately evident I suppose, but a lot of the original trilogy is influenced by love, camaraderie, & romance and things like that, so it fits.

Yes, s'true. My point is, you only have to code a random encounter's location and information once, and there you go- infinite encounters for that area, basically. Without random encounters, every single enemy will have been individually coded in, and will not reappear after death. One still has to insert random encounters into the game in the first place, but if the PC hits a certain random encounter four times- that's theoretically three encounters that the dev team won't have to code. Perhaps the time saved seems negligible, but this stuff adds up when going through the entire game.

Opus still has a good point. If there are no respawnable enemies, the devs will be able to know exactly how much experience your character could possibly gain, in total. If the amount is too much and would lead to unbalanced combat, they can take off like, 50 XP from every encounter or whatever. The only problem is that since every encounter would have to be individually inserted, and the game would be shorter content-wise.

I don't know the system that the Sith used at that time, but there sure were a lot more apprentices then masters on the Star Forge. I do know that more than one Jedi was Yoda's apprentice. Still, that's Yoda, and I'm not sure if they were all apprentices to Yoda at once. My guess is that lots of force sensitive individuals are taught by multiple masters at the same time. Those who show more potential than the others (DS), or appear to require additional guidance/are of interest (LS), are taken up as apprentices to a single master.

That's a point, yes. I'm pretty sure that if you reach a certain level of good or evil in KOTOR II, some characters will leave your party due to being incompatible with your views. Still, I know that's not exactly what you're referring to. It'd be good to see more alignment-appropriate dialogue, and to have casual remarks from people like, "What the heck's wrong with your skin?" in the case of DS or, "Wow, are you glowing?" in the case of LS.

Improper RPG design is when you have players going through the game with the primary drive being to level. Leveling is to show that your character gets more skilled as he works through important events, and it should not be the focus of the game. The ideal RPG has an interested enough plot to get players to proceed through the game for the plot only, and to see leveling as a nice bonus along the way. Leveling should not be the focus of the game; we have enough products which do exactly that already, and guess what? It's boring after a while. If the game is designed well enough, level caps will be irrelevant- Everyone will just want to proceed through the story, and won't be driven to buff up their characters to the point where every encounter is too easy. Even if there is no level cap, this problem can be easily remedied with code that increases the strength of enemies relative to your level. Level caps aren't a big deal if you design the game properly.

Don't contribute to the problem.

You have some good points. I hope you don't mind if I comment, I feel like a good blathering. From what I see, it seems that combat-oriented RPGs are more popular than story-oriented RPGs. This is likely because many gamers don't care too much about the ultimate roleplaying experience, and would rather enjoy killing stuff because it looks cool. This is becoming a problem with the industry; developers are often forced into compromising with their vision of a great game with the publisher, in order to make the game more accessible for the casual player. (More $$) KOTOR itself was originally slated for the PC only, but LucasArts pushed the dev team into making it an X-Box product too, and certain compromises had to be made in order for the game to work with an X-Box audience. Tons of combat, and a consolized interface at the expense of depth, are examples. PS:T was a brilliant RPG, but it wasn't a huge seller. Garbage like Deer Hunter, and depthless click-fests like Diablo II, sell millions on the other hand. Gamers don't necessarily appreciate depth and good design, which can sometimes really suck. :[ Anyways, with this in mind, KOTOR 2 is in a similar predicament as KOTOR 1 was. Ideas that would make KOTOR 2 a masterpiece of storywork and depth for roleplaying & story diehards can only go so far without sacrificing the more-profitable casual audience, and thereby possibly angering the folks who gave you rights to make the game in the first place.. (Lucasarts) Finally, Combat also serves as a time-sink in addition to appealing to the casual audience. You don't need to create dialogue or develop the story in a dungeon crawl- combat allows the developers to stretch content out. In combat's favor though, it does make certain accomplishments feel more powerful when you have to personally fight through several waves of enemies that block your way. Now Obsidian has a lot of designers that were credited with the creation PS:T, which I imagine will lead to more depth and less combat then expected in itself. Still, I think Obsidian can only go so far with the legacy of KOTOR 1 casting its shadow over the project. I must oppose this example on grounds of it being technically incorrect! As Revan, you can ask Malak to surrender and return to the light several times, but Malak proclaims that he would rather die. Yes though, semantics aside, you technically have no choice in the matter of fighting or not. With all of that said, I still support your idea that there should be more options for avoiding combat. I'm just not sure how effective these suggestions can be when aimed towards a sequel where the devs often mention that it will be quite similar to the first game in many ways. My best wishes on the eternal quest for RPG perfection though. Perhaps some day, it will be reached.

I can think of a possible LS continuation. After destroying the Star Forge, Revan is trapped in a continuous struggle against his dark taint and former past. Interaction with people only brings him closer to darkness, so he decides to become a hermit/wanderer of the outer worlds where it is isolated enough to bring some peace of mind. Revan's departure hurts Bastila and shifts her to the DS again, and she proves instrumental in bringing the Sith back into power before she too is usurped and flees. Broken, she desperately goes out in search for Revan- the only thing she feels she can do. Just making a pure guess though.

Yes, that's a point. If several characters came back that I as Revan had previously killed, I'd be more inclined to accept it instead of saying, "Bah, that's stupid." Why? Force Sensitive individuals tend to be pretty good at beating the odds and cheating death somehow.

Even though the players aren't Revan, they're still looking out for him in the sequel. It would probably be a good idea to see some continuity and respect for the original main char's accomplishments. If these accomplishments are ignored, then the story's overall strength will likely suffer. Why bother getting involved with the story and attaching yourself to characters if they seem to be casually swept away in the next game, anyways? Bah, my point is that continuity = good if the devs pull it off right!