Plano Skywalker

I agree that it is generally better to let it build up. However, they will not be able to do that with K3. In fact, they did not do it in K1 or K2, either. K1, as you will recall, started off with the Endar Spire being borded by Sith! in K2, you see very early on. they will not be able to let it build up but they could catch us up via dialogue and not be quite as forceful in the beginning. that would be a nice change.

you are correct...the latest word is that they are working on 2 story-oriented games: the Indiana Jones game and a title they don't want to discuss just yet. that is the latest info.

Game of Year kinda stuff for the other games of that title.

I don't know when the release date is but the president of LA recently said in an interview that they are looking forward to two story-oriented games: the Indiana Jones game and a "Holy Grail" project (which is presumably already under way). I think the Holy Grail is K3.

true, KOTOR is a time period...not just the Revan saga. IMO, the Revan saga needs to be wrapped up first and then we can talk about prequels. I personally would not mind a prequel trilogy based on Exar Kun and the Sith War (which is only a few decades before the time of Revan). Basically, you play a padawan to Nomi Sunrider.

[spoiler ALERT] I'm sure that was intentional. The background was there to build on if you allow the player to do that you cant simply come along and destroy whatever carefully crafted background they created. While you had the framework of being a general and being cut off from the force as story hooks. It never implied what sort of general you were, whether or not you fell to the darkside or stayed true to the code.Those were very much your choices (as part of the conversation with Atton on the ship) Background has to be their because everyone has a background, it's what makes us who we are and determines the choices we make. Thats why removing a characters memory is such a cheap trick in RPG terms. If you played KOTOR first you may well have approached it with the I dont really need to create a character since I'm probably playing one thats going to get revealed in the game anyway. In which case I would imagine the game felt a bit empty. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with SP that, truth be told, the Revan amnesiac thing in K1 was a really cheap trick. They got away with it because Revan is just so cool . But, from a storyteller's perspective, it was really cheap. The Exile character draws upon the "hidden past" device but tries to open it up a little bit: to allow you to "fill in the gaps" of the story. In that sense, I do feel more attached to the character because there is more for me to fill in. The main problem was not the "wound" gobbledeguck or the exile bit but it was the lack of de facto choices...your mentor, the DARK LORD OF THE SITH, is using you to wipe out the Jedi and the Revan/Malak Sith for some highly dubious reasons. As I said, this is a textbook case of a "filler" story. Had anyone but Obsidian worked on it, it wouldn't have worked at all. But Obsidian was able to hide the weaker parts and play up the more interesting parts with their presentation skills and they were able to create an illusion of ownership by having a half-baked backstory, introducing an influence system and giving you the ability to train Jedi. None of those devices were what they should have been, but they do represent a step forward in these games, IMO. And for those who complain about the lack of romance in K2 versus K1, I would remind that the K1 romance (especially if you were playing a male) was there as a tragic storytelling device...nothing more.

the KOTOR games are helping to resurrect the cRPG. many people give them a pass on the weaker points just because there is not alot to choose from right now. the fact is, both games are extremely linear and straightjacketed. good and evil choices have only cosmetic impact on the story, etc. there are certain things that they could do to help give the gamer more of sense of *ownership* of the story: * if they must use backstories, give us more than one to choose from. * do not give us "fake padawans"...give us one or two and make that relationship dialogue-heavy and storyline intense. * give the PC the ability to join factions...joining a faction opens up new missions and party members. * give us more than one way to complete the game....there might only be one way to *win* but there needs to be more than one way to complete it. * and, my favorite, more PARTY MANAGEMENT options....give us what you gave us in Balder's Gate: the ability to weed out party members that are incompatible and take on ones that are more to our liking.

Oh, I agree. I would prefer not to have to use backstories. But we have to for the reasons you have indicated: * LA wants a Jedi * Jedis normally get trained as kids so, we either need to have the PC grow up in real time (like in Fable) or have canned backstories...

we call it BACKSTORY....you can always become someone different but I believe in allowing your backstory to define alot of what will happen to you. I just think it is more realistic. again, with several backstories to choose from, it is not going to be a simple Mira/Hanharr choice anyway....each backstory will have a slightly different default party composition.

hey, I'm all about that. whether they sell it as one shrinkwrap or two, we essentially need two paths....which translates into two seperate games. the DS guy is not fighting the Sith, etc. this would be cool: 2 LS backstories to choose from 2 DS backstories to choose from 2 N backstories to choose from and then, your political views in dialogue: "I want the Sith Empire to conquer the Republic" "I want the Republic to prevail against the Sith" notice that, while there might be neutral alignment, there is no neutral politics. it is your STATED POLITICAL VIEWS, not alignment, that determines the progression of your story. backstory affects who mentors you, who you meet, etc. alignment primarily affects your access to various Force powers....and IMO the crossover penalties need to be alot more severe than they are now.

my point is that you really have NO CHOICE as to who your party members are. most are predefined. true, there is one based on alignment but what if you just don't like the character? we need to have more in the way of party management, IMO.

well, ideally, the PC would be able to choose between Mira and Hanharr...maybe you want Hanharr on your ship just so you can keep an eye on him..that sort of thing... I am all about giving the PC much more say in party management...but then, I suspect you already know that. It's just that if you chose a DS backstory, you would have already met Hanharr whereas if you chose a LS backstory, you would have already met Mira. Something like that...there are many ways they could implement it.

I also think that different people follow you for different reasons: * some follow because of your views on good and evil (Alignment) * some follow because of your Reputation (cautious, daring, clever, etc) * some follow because of your faction affiliation (Czerka Corp, Exchange, etc) * and, of course, female PCs get certain hunks that us men don't need

right....basically, the way I see it is that questions such as whether you are going to get Hanharr or Mira...these kinds of things are determined by your chosen backstory and/or the statements your PC makes within the first hour of the game. they are not determined by whether you are 29% DS or 30% DS at a certain time in the game...no way is that a good idea, IMO.

excellent point...that is going to be a persistent issue with these games. I think a good solution is to have a "canned character" in a sense but to be able to choose between 4 or 5 different backstories...that would be cool. it would also helpful if we could, early on, express a preference for a pro-Jedi path or a pro-Sith path...you could still stray from your path but it would be nice to get that going very early in the game.

******OMG SPOILER ALERT!!!****** >was KotOR II's story weak or epic? comparing K1 and K2 is comparing apples and oranges (I realize that was not your question). K1 was a complete story with a romance and with resolution. That is what K1 was supposed to be. K2 was never intended to be that. That is why it cannot be compared to K1 in that sense. K2 does have the ability to stand on its own feet but it is obviously a lead-in to something else. >The Exile's past and future: >Elaboration is made about what happened to him that led up to the events >of KotOR II, his choices about saving individual Republic worlds, his >influence over the other character's, his choices concerning what to do >with his knowledge of the Jedi Master's. All of that? Wow. What, exactly, >IS the driving motive of the story? What does it have to do with what actually occurred in the game? OK, why do we hear about him being exiled? The exile thing was nothing more than a device to explain how some big Force baddie could avoid taking sides in the Jedi Civil War and just basically materialize out of nowhere when the story needed him. Nothing more than a storytelling device. >What occurred in the game: >The Exile hunted down Jedi Master's; to kill them, to gather them, or to question them. >The exile had a good and evil path, more or less, on Nar Shadaa, Dantooine, and Onderon. >You end up fighting the Sith Lords. Yes, instead of looking for 4 Star Maps, you are looking for 4 people. Why? Ostensible reason: To learn more about your past and why they exiled you and/or for revenge. Real reason: Your "teacher" wants to kill every last Force Sensitive in Known Space. She is using you to find the last of them. >The nature of development: >Question's asked of each of the Jedi Master's were almost exactly the same in each instance. >Motive for killing the Jedi Master's is unclear, except, perhaps, for revenge. Why not become a great Sith? >Why not for power and glory? But these really weren't clear options that were presented in the game. >The motive of the main character was NOT portrayed adequately; there were maybe three lines to show the Exile's motivations. >The player is, thus, not really as involved with this possible motive as they could be. Why do you tolerate your "teacher"...you know there is something fishy going on, right? Well, it just so happens that there is a Lethal Force Bond between the two of you. If you want to get strong enough to sever the bond, you need her teaching. You are her poodle. You can kill the Jedi or let her do it...as long as you find them, that is the thing. >Getting the Jedi together seemed like a good idea, but those efforts were completely destroyed anyway - and the player is >truly no closer to their goal, which also lowers involvement. This wouldn't be so bad, except that the "Wound in the Force" >motivation is a little unclear. Interesting, but unclear. What I mean is: why did the Jedi Master's decide to Exile, and >eventually truly, cut you from the Force? The reasoning seemed a little obscure. the idea of the Force being wounded at Malachor was a stretch for Star Wars...the whole "anamoly" thing is actually more of a Star Trek device. again, it was there as a way to help justify all the talk about you being exiled and how you cut yourself off from the Force. There is no way the Force was in any danger whatsoever...heck, the timeline alone tells us that. >It's just that the whole concept on which the story is based is sedentary; a plot, in order to technically exist, needs a >beginning, a middle, and an end. TSL seems to be a reminscience, a description of the Force, using the happenings of the >game as an example. The beginning middle and end almost don't exist, because when it gets down to it, the center isn't the >beginning, the middle, or the end - usually, it's only an essay or philosophical paper that turns out like this. It would be >fun if it were the other way around, that the action drove the philosophy. Anyone agree with me, or at least see what I mean >in those last last few sentences? this is because this game was supposed to be "filler" and somewhat tie in to K3 (without giving anything away). Obsidian did an admirable job giving us a filler story but it does not take a phd to see that that is all this was. I don't even want to think about what another company would have done with such marching orders. IMO, K2 is a weak story but presented masterfully. K1 was a more complete story presented in a highly predictable way.

for as long as we are in the Revan saga, anyway.

I believe I have advanced certain ideas. But I would be happy to answer any remaining questions you may have.

It's all about supply and demand. Right now, you need them more than they need you. I'm suggesting that this dynamic be altered in favor of the PC. As many others have stated on this board: influence, as it is now, is about the PC being influenced by the NPC. The pendulum needs to swing a bit in the other direction.

you have explained how influence works and I agree that that is how it works. I am addressing how I would prefer it to work.

it is one thing to have to haggle with someone on a planet. it is one thing to try to convince your mentor that he is wrong. but if you are eating and sleeping on my ship, you are going to answer my questions. for me, this issue would be solved largely by having an NPC pool greater than the passenger slots on the ship and being able to release passengers that you don't like. The Balder's Gate series gave us that (even though it was land-based). It really is not too much to ask, I think.

I would prefer it not be that way. If I want to learn about what the person did when he was 5 years old, then fine. If I want to learn about what Revan told someone who is a passenger on the Ebon Hawk to do 5 years ago, I, the Captain of the Ebon Hawk, want to hear about it. Don't want to tell me? Then get off my ship (don't EVEN get me started on that one)! OK, I'll calm down. Essential main story clues should not be locked in this way. Training, side quests, and fluff dialogue should be unlocked in this way. Anyway, it seems we have hijacked this man's thread but I think the DS path in general needs alot of work and I think the influence system needs a whole lot of work.

The non-bully DS path is better defined in K2. However, my biggest beef with it is not whether I can reach DS Mastery that way but with how INFLUENCE is implemented. For instance, my point is not that you can't reach DS Mastery with this path. my point is, if you do, you miss out on alot of extra stuff. I'd like to see that fixed in the next installment.

question though:

it is correct that there is no proper DS path in these games. in these games good and evil are nothing more than mirror images of each other. obviously, this has to change at some point in these games. but, all-in-all, the idea of being able to play the same game two different ways was an ambitious undertaking...they just haven't quite captured it yet.