[Questions to the Devs]

You guys seem to be evading the question asked so many times. At least the answers I've seen are far too vague and lack and substance.

 

Are we going to be able to mod this game (like other LucasArts Star Wars titles) with a developer created tool, or are we going to have to resort to hacking into the thing like with KoTOR 1?

Thay have answered this though. I recall a dev saying KotOR2 won't be any more moddable out of the box than KotOR1 was.

[Questions to the Devs]

will there be a demo?

I hope so.

I think not.

There already is one.

 

It's called KotOR1

 

[what are you doing with your free time?]

If Fallout 2 had had the same amount of content as Fallout, after using the exact same engine, character models, even music, people would have been annoyed. Myself included. The same applies here.

There is a huge difference though. Fallout was too short.

 

KotOR on the other hand I felt was perfect in length. Any longer and it would risk getting tedious.

 

I for one would actually like it to be similar in length but with higher replay value.

[Who on your Art Team did this Excellent Picture??]

Hah!

 

I knew they weren't the same...

[Characters from KOTOR1]

He usually is, but in this case I think he's wrong.

[Is she or is she not]

I suppose I allowed my imagination to run wild earlier.

 

I did notice a few of the changes you wrote. But I figured they were very slight cosmetic alterations. For the most part I decided they were side effects of becoming a Dark Jedi. After the veiny protagonist in KotOR, and all the sickly looking Sith, my assumption was that the portrait showed a dark side incarnation of the same character. Only time will tell I guess.

1 and 4 can be explained by turning darkside. As can the shape of the eyes. But the longer distance between jaw and nose and eyes can't.

 

It's still possible that they're the same, there could be other factors and I am far from an art expert.

[Characters from KOTOR1]

Oh yeah, I also have a hard time to see either Revan or Bastila as dark side characters in KotOR2. This is one of those things that could change depending on how you answer things in the beginning though.

 

But there is no way Bastila or Revan would fall to the dark side AGAIN if it's based on a LS game. In Star Wars mythos, I think it's unprecedented for a jedi that has fallen and been turned back to the light side to fall a second time. It just isn't done.

[Is she or is she not]

Regardless of who she is, I'm very pleased with the character concept art we've seen thus far. I felt it was really quite lacking in KotOR1, with many characters being rather physically indistinct. I'm hoping to see Torment-quality character designs.

I disagree. I have the pictures side by side and there are many dissimilarities.

 

1: The nose isn't very similar at all. The dark side one is more "uppity" and shows more of a nostril flare.

 

2: The nose is further away from the jaw in the dark side one.

 

3: The eyes are also further away from the jaw and appears to be more round.

 

4: The dark side face seems to be more slim compared to the fairly round on in the lightside one.

 

Now, I wouldn't bs completely surprised if the are one and the same, but if it was only based on these images I wouldn't bet on it (or maybe the artist was careless with proportions).

[Characters from KOTOR1]

I don't think there will be characters included that by their inclusion alone completely invalidates any of the paths in KotOR 1. Even with the questions asked in the beginning, I think that will more affect dialogue options and how characters think of you when you meet them rather than what characters will actually be in the game.

 

That more or less rules out Mission and Juhani since both of those could be killed by the hands of the player (more or less at least). I don't recall any other characters you could kill other than Bastila (at least I think you could kill her, personally I either turned her or had her join me on my path to be the dark lord) but there is likely an exception made for her (since she is already presumed dead, there will be an explanation why she isn't either way).

 

I don't think Zaalbar will be in the game either for similar reasons (and the fact that without Mission he'd be completely boring).

 

Every other character is fair game though and I think they will make a cameo appearance at least.

[The simultanius Xbox and PC release...]

The only problem I had with KotOR in terms of bugs was that it refused to load when I first installed due to incompability with my drivers. But once I got newer drivers and turned on hardware mouse I had no problems at all and I finished it before the official patch was released.

[Characters from KOTOR1]

It would be hard to add Mission if they are keeping true to both paths through the first game...

[it's nice to see a release date for a change]

For the most part yes.

 

 

TripleRRR

Funny that.

 

I don't remember a single game going out on time from BIS. The only games I know for sure about though are PS:T which was delayed some six months from the original estimation and IWD2 that was also delayed quite a bit (though that was to work in a new ruleset and stuff like that).

 

So in my experience, timeliness was never a BIS-trait. Making good games, however, was.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

I didn't say you would miss 25% of the time with a consular/sentinel.  I said the +5 to BAB means the guardian has 25% more of a chance to hit.

You said it's make him hit +25% of the time. Regardless, you don't get a +25% chance to hit either, since it's not a scale to 20. ACs in the end game would be somewhere areound 35, right?

 

I'm just saying I didn't notice my character missing much without that bonus, so I don't know how important it is.

 

I don't  know how you can say 2 additional damage a round is useless... especially since if you're only making 1 attack a round I cannot see you beating uber-cheesed Malak.  Its +2 damage per ATTACK.  If you have a double-bladed saber, 2 weapons you have 2 attacks.  If you use flurry, you get another, at an expense to attack rolls(where the +5 BAB helps).  If you use speed, you get an additional attack(or is it 2, at master speed?  I forget).  If you're using all of those, you would have 4-5 attacks, which is 8-10 additional damage a round, not 2.

 

I never said 2 damage per round, I said 2 damage per hit. And I still feel it's a pretty small amount when you do something like 15-20 (or more) damage per hit anyway.

 

Anyway, I never had a character with only 1 attack when facing Malak. Don't you get additional attacks when your BAB increases? Regardless, I always dual-wielded and had speed so it doesn't matter.

 

But I could definitely beat Malak without anything that gives me more attacks. Just use dark Jedi Powers such as Drain Life on the guys replenishing Malak and he won't be able to. He's not so tough when you only have to kill him once.

 

Assuming that the consular cannot/won't use the same console to the same effect.  Besides, the sentinel only gets 1 point more per level, and since computer use isn't a class skill(unless I'm mistaken), the difference is neglible.  It goes back to, the fact that skills are not necessary, while combat IS, and force powers are(if you beat the game without a single force power, I  am very, very, very, very impressed, I could never have beaten Malak without force speed.).

 

I said other skills than hacking were helpful to. So the additional skillpoint IS significant.

 

The only thing that is necessary in the game is combat and all classes can fight. You don't NEED the bonuses from being a guardian as much as they help in the same way you don't NEED extra skillpoints. Nor do you NEED additional force points because guess what? The other classes can still use theirs. Having more force points makes the game easier, but so does having more skill points. I really don't see the difference here.

 

To prove the point I really don't have to beat Malak using no force powers I only have to do it without using the extra force points a consular has and no powers that require a save. Which I have done. Twice. So the bonuses a Consular gets are obviously UNNECESSARY since I can beat the game without them.

 

But to hammer the point down even further I'm 100% convinced I could beat Malak without suing force powers at all. I would too if I didn't have to play through the entire game to do it which I'm not inclined to do.

 

The character would be something like this:

 

Scoundrel 6/Consular (to prove the point even further) 14

 

High Strength and Con (like 20 and 16 or so), 10 in all mental stats and as much dex as you can get after that.

 

As good armor as you can get.

 

Feats like lightsabre proficiency, dual wield, flurry, implants (to get even higher strength) etc etc...

 

Once you reach Malak you just take pretty much every drug you can get your hands on (the battle drugs that give bonus to hit and damage, +4 strength, +4 con, +4 dex) and the most powerful shield that protects against energy.

 

Then just kick Malak's ass and once he runs to heal, you heal yourself as well. The shield will need to be renewed every time he runs off and the drugs about every other time, so try and take up a position that will make him run as far as possible between ecah round.

 

An optimized version of this build would of course be Soldier/Guardian, but it shouldn't be necessary.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

The consular's strength is that its force powers can be very, very difficult to resist, and used more often. Since it hits as often as the sentinel, it is as good in combat as the sentinel. What makes the sentinel poorly balanced is the reliance on the skill point for balance, and that its immunities stop growing at 12, for the most part(saves till grow).

If you can finish the game without using a force power(which is an improper test), I'de be surprised.

My first playthrough I didn't use any forcepowers during the last fight because I didn't have any that would matter. Maybe I had Speed when I think about it, but with a better built character I could do without it.

 

There is more to the guardian then the bonus feats.  It stregth is combat, not the 2 extra feats it gets, alone.  It can deal 2 more damage per hit, and hit 25% more of the time.

 

Well, I can't very well make a character that goes through the game without fighting since that isn't an option in the game and I can't very well make the other bonuses go away, so I used the possible example.

 

BTW, your math is way off. +5 BAB does NOT translate into hitting 25% more of the time. I don't know how far BAB goes for different characters nor do I know the AC for late game enemies, but I do know my Sentinel didn't miss 1 of every 4 attacks (except maybe vs Malak, but I wouldn't even bet on that). Also the two extra damage per hit is fairly useless in the late game.

 

The consular's strength is that its force powers can be very, very difficult to resist, and used more often.  Since it hits as often as the sentinel, it is as good in combat as the sentinel.  What makes the sentinel poorly balanced is the reliance on the skill point for balance, and that its immunities stop growing at 12, for the most part(saves till grow).

 

Here's the kicker: You can use your force powers more often and they are more effective which makes combat easier. With a lot of skills you can often find a way around combat (and not only by hacking) which also makes the game easier. That's called balance...

 

Now in a character on character fight I guess the consular may have the edge, but the immunities could very well make it the other way around depending on what force powers the consular uses.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

Sentinel is not balanced because it relied on skill points to balance out itself with the other jedi classes. Since the skills system is unecessary, skills are not balanced. Forcepowers are necessary to win(consular), and combat is necessary to win(guardian), skills are not(sentinel). Not balanced. Not opinion.

I'm pretty certain I can make a consular that won't use it's force powers and still beat the game. So that would make that class unbalanced as well.

 

I also think I can make a guardian without using any of the additional feats it gets and still beat the game, so by your definition that class would also be unbalanced.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

Now then, is the Sentinel unbalanced? I actually don't think so.

 

I don't understand how you can say this, then say this:

 

Maybe the consulars are more powerful though since force powers really is what it's all about and more force points do help quite a lot. More force points makes battles easier but on the other hand skills allows you to avoid a lot of battles so it evens out a little. In the end I like skills because they give you options. And they're fun.

It WOULD make sense, IF there weren't enough computer spikes in game to have 0 ranks in the skill, and still "hack da gibson" and avoid battles. If the consular has advantages, and access to the Sentinel's ability to avoid battles, hows it balanced?

 

Because there are more skills than hacking and because I didn't find that many spikes. Comparing my first playthrough with my second I found that computer made a HUGE difference (I maxed it the second time). And I picked up every spike I could find.

 

Anyway, it's all pretty moot since even if there were enough spikes in the game it doesn't necessary mean it's the Sentinel that's unbalanced, I'd rather argue that it's the consular that is unbalanced (as in overpowered, my definition). Comparing the three classes I'd say the Sentinel is the norm (ie balanced), the guardian is underpowered (my definition) and the consular is MAYBE slightly overpowered (again, my definition).

 

As for balance vs power, I think the two terms are fairly interchangeable (in the context of a computer game). But it's already been established we have different definitions of what underpowered means so arguing about it is fairly moot.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

OK, admittedly, useless was not the best term. I should've said, unnecesary.

 

As for unbalanced and underpowered, its fairly simple. Underpowered means it does not have sufficient power to win. Unbalanced means it is not equal/balanced with the other like classes.

 

Straight melee, is what I found to be the least effective. Since Sentinels have more force points, I found them more effective. Thats opinion, but I already said that. Least powerful, because the major draw of the sentinel is its skills. Since skills are unnecessary, the draw of the sentinel is decreased, and less powerful.

 

You can have something VERY powerful, but not at all effective. Likewise, you can have something VERY effective, but not all that powerful.

Unnecessary I can agree with. But as I said, that is true for most options in the game. The fact of the matter is the game isn't all that difficult and you can probably create a pretty nerfed character and still beat it.

 

Your definition of underpowered (I saw the post containing it after I made mine) is quite different to mine. To me underpowered means less powerful than the norm. Unbalanced means either more or less powerful than the norm depending on context. In this context oviosly less powerful. So to me underpowered and unbalanced is the same.

 

Debating is useless unless everyone uses the same definitions. So I won't use underpowered anymore.

 

Now then, is the Sentinel unbalanced? I actually don't think so. My first playthrough was as a Scoundrel going Sentinel and while I kinda messed up some when choosing levels (didn't realize how useless ranged weapons would be for instance) had I planned the character a bit better I would have gotten all the feats and forcepowers I needed. Having more than one feat that increases your damage potential is rather redundant anyways. In my mind redundant feats < skills.

 

Maybe the consulars are more powerful though since force powers really is what it's all about and more force points do help quite a lot. More force points makes battles easier but on the other hand skills allows you to avoid a lot of battles so it evens out a little. In the end I like skills because they give you options. And they're fun.

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

Spider wins. (it's too bad he's a BIO fanboy and he useless silly logic).

BIO fanboy? I'm almost insulted. I'm a BIS fanboy dammit!

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

Thirdly, it is not opinion that skills are almost useless in KotOR, its fact.  If you choose to use them, it doesn't change the fact that they're almost useless.  The fact that you don't need to use skills to succesfully play through KotOR is what makes them useless.  Just because  you say it is opinion doesn't make it so.

From Dictionary.com:

 

Useless

1: Being or having no beneficial use; futile or ineffective.

2: Incapable of functioning or assisting; ineffectual: He panics easily and is useless in an emergency.

 

Funny, none of these applies to skills in KotOR. Maybe they weren't NEEDED to complete the game, but they were far from useless. In fact through the two times I played the game I used pretty much all the skills several times. So much for that fact.

 

Go ahead, try to play KotOR without spending any of your skill points.  You don't need skills, therefore, they're useless.  Not opinion, FACT.

 

If everything you don't NEED to beat the game is useless there are a LOT of things in the game that are useless. I'm pretty sure I can make a character that won't use a single force power nor a lightsabre throughout the entire game and still beat it. Does that make lightsabres or force powers useless?

 

Fourthly, who said Sentinels were underpowered?  I said they weren't balanced.  That is also fact.

What's the difference between unbalanced (in a negative fashion) and underpowered? To me they mean the exact same thing, ie less powerful than the norm. So what am I missing?

 

Actually, it is my opinion that the guardian is the least effective.  Nice assumption, though.  I think the sentinel is just the least powerful, not the least effective.

 

Now I'm curious. The sentinel is the least powerful class, but not the least effective. In my mind the character that has the easiest time beating the game would also be the most powerful. So to me effectiveness = power. Obviously not to you, so would you care to enlighten me what your definition of powerful vs effective is?

[What Does It Take To Make Game?]

Yes, QA is VERY important!

Given the state some recent RPGs have been released in, obviously not as important as you'd think...

[The Little Things That Got "lost In Translation"]

Inventory management definiteky needs improving.

 

As well as the controls (for PC). It was so obvious they were designed for the X-box and then ported over.

[Should KOTOR 2 have muliplayer?]

Multi-player is definitely NOT necessary. Wether or not it's a good thing can be debated though (but I'm not going to, that horse has been beaten to death a few times).

 

Examples of good RPGs without multiplayer includes: Fallout 1 & 2 and Planescape: Torment.

[In Need Of Forum Moderators?]

*trying to shake off the arguing*

 

If we're still nominating mods, I'd suggest Kumquatq3, Sammael and Ewen Brown for consideration.

 

If they want to and have the time that is.

[IGN's Take On What Obsidian's Up To]

Combat in KotOR wasn't bad... Combat in KotOR was cool. It had lightsabres for crying out loud...

 

I do agree it didn't have a wealth of tactical options to it, but it really REALLY didn't need it. The combat in KotOR, in fact the entire game, accomplished exactly what it set out to accomplish. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Now, a sequel needs to improve in may areas and adding complexity to combat could be one, but it isn't necessarilly so. KotOR was a very streamlined game and complex combat could disrupt that which in turn really could make the game stutter.