Zane0

CRPG 1 and 2 are what one would call hypothetical. They are imaginary, and exist only to prove a point. CRPG 1 is the first one that I mentioned: No real interactivity with characters, and plays down a completely linear path. CRPG 2 is the second: With a branching plot and a story that can be changed by your actions. CRPG 1 is a game like the Final Fantasy series. CRPG 2 is a game like Placescape: Torment, KOTOR, or even Deus Ex. Now, when you read a book, you're an observer of events. You have no way to influence the story in any way. You're just along for the ride. If you don't like it, you have to get off. Books are much like CRPG 1 in the sense that you are along for the ride in both cases. There is no possible way to influence the actions of the main character or the caste in either CRPG 1 or in any book. CRPG 2 on the other hand, gives you choices ranging from how the main character will react to situations, to his/her gender, to how the story ends. Books don't give you anything like this; they're completely linear. In my opinion, CRPG 2 is a superior game to CRPG 1. If I wanted, I could read a book and wouldn't miss much of what CRPG 1 has to offer other then shiny things and explosions, which I could enjoy in any movie. However, CRPG 2 is quite different from books, movies, or any other kind of media because you have choices within a story. I could not read a book or watch a movie and get an experience similar to playing CRPG 2. *Gasp* That is my point!

Yeah, that's definitely what I'm trying to say. Let me attempt to clarify. If a CRPG is released that has no real interactivity with characters, and plays down a completely linear path, I will enjoy it less then a CRPG with a branching plot and a story that can be changed by your actions. In other words, CRPG #1 could be matched by a good novel while CRPG #2 is fundamentally different from any book that I could find. It's my hope that you understand my point a little better now.

I guess the trick is to make something with as great a story and atmosphere as Torment, but also as popular as KOTOR. I don't believe PS:T had very good sales, which is a damn shame. All a balancing act, I guess.

I strongly agree with Chi`ara's comments on the importance of having two-way meaningful dialogue with the characters that you meet, and being able to shift their personality depending on your choices. The special advantage that CRPGs possess over say, novels, is that with good design you can enjoy a good plot and also make changes to the story and the characters as you please. If devs don't really take advantage of this, then.. novels are cheaper then computer games! I think KOTOR II is aiming for more character depth and interaction, because I've heard bits of talk about being able to change your companions' alignments. That is good!

I am pleased to say that Jedi Knight II has 0 tatooine!

I think you could call the Sith a little anarchistic too. Main Entry: an

Don't forget Luke fetish! Really though, it wouldn't be a terrible idea to have someone (You or a party member) lose a limb, and then work through the um, problems that result from such things. Perhaps if it was the main char, you could have a choice of getting a replacement, or simply adapting to your loss. Losing a limb would give dex/str penalties but you'd earn major LS points/boosted force powers as a reward. Or whatever. All hypothetical(s).

I don't suppose you can carry these pockets of Dark or Light stuff around with you, so I guess they'll serve as indicators for important battles. If a smart opponent is going to face you, they'd likely do it on one of those pocket things. I guess it'd be neat to use the terrain to your advantage, and lure people into pockets of your own alignment too.

Sure, romance has been in a good few FF games. Perhaps I haven't been specific enough, FF games never have the player in charge of developing or influencing the characters. The player's job is to just make sure that the characters stay alive against the baddies, and listens to what they have to say during lapses in the baddie killing. You can't add much flexibility with character interactions in this style of RPG.. When it comes to the concept of the player interacting with characters and developing a "romance" from these interactions, games haven't really gone very far. BGII is probably the best example of interactive romance in RPGs, and I think this did a good job adding depth to the characters and the game. Sure, you didn't even have to get involved with anyone, but the fact that these extra interactions with certain characters existed, gave good reason to play through the game again. That's a big sign of a good RPG I believe; there being enough depth to motivate you enough to play the game several times over. Lastly, these choices made BGII feel less like "just another computer game", and more like an epic story with believable people. Even BGII didn't cover nearly every romance-RPG concept though. As I recall, after falling in love with an NPC, you HAD to break it off for whatever reason, regardless of who the NPC was. In future games, it would be interesting for instance, to have two characters fall in love mid-way through, and then seeing if the relationship actually holds strong right up to the end of the game through further interaction and events. You're correct about the depth/choice problem, though. I imagine the only real way to work around this is to just spend tons of time creating tons of different possible interactions and relationships to cater to everyone. Still, there's no need to go backwards and have no romances at all. I think that's my point. Maybe not, who cares!

You guys have to keep in mind that KOTOR is an RPG at heart, and the sequel will be too.. It's not an RPG in the sense of Diablo- the game's driving force isn't getting an Ub3r Char with all the lootz. No, KOTOR's greatest strength are the character interactions, really. The deeper you can interact with characters, the better the game will be, I think. I hate it when people get all queasy at the thought of games experimenting with new concepts. Romance in RPGs for instance, hasn't really been explored very much. The damn industry is full enough with gimmicks as it is.. This is my opinion, anyways.

I agree with the idea that the combat was one of the worst parts of the game. Most of my enjoyment of KOTOR came from accomplishing quests and interacting with characters. Yeah, there was a bit of power-leveling fun, but that was quite lackluster in comparison. I could mow through most opponents in two hits half way through the game anyways. Does anyone else think that the haste force power is just slightly overpowered? Any character with third-tier haste and a bit of strength can waste just about any encounter. My Scoundrel/Consular could one-hit rancors on the unknown planet, for god's sake! This kind of one-sided combat can impact the atmosphere and feeling of important battles. One-hitting Bastila three times in a row; all the while hearing her heckle and gloat about her power was an interesting experience indeed. Malak was better, but only because he basically cheated the KOTOR rules. If Malak didn't have his Jedi potions around, the final showdown would just been a little bit longer then the standard 5-10 second encounters that I had been pulling off with his hench-men. With a bit of good redesign though, I don't think the final boss in KOTOR 2 has to cheat. What's my recommendation for combat system redesign? I agree with making it more cinematic, which means more combat moves and cool jedi stuff. I'm a fan of Starwars combat because of the sword-fights and the shiny, I think others are too. I strongly recommend making combat between Jedi much longer then in the first.. Force-adept warriors aren't exactly very common, so fighting them should be more of an ordeal, which would be a departure from what it usually was in KOTOR 1. I think damage exchanged between force adept should either be made very small, or possibly made to have deflection/resistance being very easy, with successful hits having damage being pretty high. Combat against normal folks with blasters should be pretty rapid though; that's the pace in the Star Wars movies, anyways. Um, I'm getting carried away. I just think that the dev staff should match the combat to the movies. There's no need for futuristic "dungeon crawls" like in the first. Tactics are difficult with this engine too, there's rarely much space between characters. Just make it look cool and true to the movies, guys! Focus the rest of your resources on the story/character interactions. That was the primary success of KOTOR!