Vanarion

I'll keep a simple point of view. Fact is that I paid 44 Euros for my copy of the game. Did I get what I expected for my money (in general and not based on my expactations after Kotor1)? Speaking only for me it's clearly: No In my opinion the endgame is rushed and unrewarding and doesn't much reflect my actions throughout the game. For me that's an KO criterion for a game like this. I don't say the entire game is bad. I just say I don't see that the game is worth the money I payed. If this won't be changed (and I don't care about the internal franchise/LA/Obidian stuff, that's their problem) I've got to except this. They have my money, ok. Do I think they deserve it? No. So what am I going to do in the future? The next Obsidian/LA game I buy will be for no more than 20 Euros, more likely below 10 Euros, no matter how good the game will be. That'll cover my losses. I can only judge if a game is worth my money after I've bought it. I can't return it for my money. Kotor2 is a game I have trusted to meet my expactations, so I bought it. I've learned my lesson now . No more trust in the future. I can wait " and read what others say about a game before I buy it. And then lets just wait a little longer to get it for a lower price with a final patch available, hardware requirements that are easy to meet and so on. And imagine I can minimize the money they get even further by buying a used copy of a game instead of a new one. That way I can possibly help a poor bloke that payed the full price :D. If devs and publishers out there want *me* to buy a fresh and new game in the future, they'll have to do a very very good job. And don't expect me to ever take into account any circumstances under wich a release had to suffer. I don't care any more, because I can't expect any other than technical and bug fixes.

Couldn't care less what the game magazines write nowadays... Should've known better than to buy a game just because it's a sequel to a great title. Just my 2 cents...

I totally feel the same Tarelius. Comparing this game to Planescape: Torment, I came to the personal conclusion, that this game leaves you with a set of tiles of a puzzle that won't fit together. In a well designed story based RPG you should be able to have an influence on the picture you get at the end. Here I don't even get a picture, only fragments. I want the plot to follow the path of my descisions. Isn't that basic to roleplaying? I don't want decisive story aspects to be unsolved or to just make no sense. As for the exiles companions, they just don't develop much depth. Oh yes, we're told that they have their background, but do they act accordingly? *spoilers* - GoTo: - Atton: - Mira: - Deciple: - Visas: - Bao-Dur: I could go on about this, but it wouldn't lead to any new insights. The game doesn't much take into account what path you take. Does it make any sense to be a "hole in the force" if playing strictly LS? Wouldn't it be more consistent if There could have been a consitant background for Kreia. Lets take a look at her: So what would be her actions after Malachor V? - The exile Enough said. The actual plot doesn't work for me and that's it after all. So why do I still care? It's because I don't understand how they could ship this game in this state. I got the impressions that there were ambitions for a sophisticated plot with side aspects and all. But it has all been given up. From an artists point of view, shouldn't this be disappointing? Imagine to have all the elements for a good book and then write a dime novel. Sad, isn't it?

In response to tenuveins post and for more insight into my point of view: You really found it sufficient to know that the exile was involved as a general in the battle of Malachor IV with no further info? That's what I knew at the beginning after all. Or did I miss something? How to handle the choices like the following scheme with that info? NPC states something about the PCs role in the war and or how he/she did not follow Revan after that. Choices are something like this: A. "My decision was right. There was no other way." B. "I regret what I've done. The council was right in it's judgement." C. "The council was weak. I should have followed Revan." Not an exact dialog, but you get the idea. Choice 3 is crystal clear like the most dark path choices (dark path could be more subtle if you ask me, cause other wise it would nor lead to the fall of so many with good intentions but wrong methods). Playing a light side char first time 1 and 2 gave me a headache - remember the game gives you the impression that your answers will have a great impact on what follows up (witch is - at many points- not the case). For me answer one would have meant that the exile just took part in the war to save the civilians of the outer rim and did nothing he would have to regret light side wise. Answer two indicates that even with best intentions the exile set something of he regret afterwards. That would be ok if game would once and for all base all that

I don't feel like writing lots of text right now. Otherwise I would write in detail about what this games lacks to make it up with Kotor 1 and games like planescape tourment, Fallout 1&2 or Baldurs Gate 1 & 2, wich are only a small part of the rpgs i've played . So I'll focus on what for me (yep it's just a personal opinion) is the greatest flaw in the game, namely the bad character introduction. It seems to me that the rpgs i liked best for their story had on thing in common. They all carefully introuced the player into the story. The player always knows enough of the backgrounds to make decisions the way he likes to play and develop his character. It's no problem if there are some secrets in the characters past, as long as the player isn't forced to make decisions on the base of his own unknown past. Kotor 1 handled this very well. You did not know about being Revan. You had to solve the mystery and you where getting the idea that there is a dark secret while story developed. In Kotor2 the situation is extremly different. Many times I had to choose dialog options without the slightest idea of what would be the right answer for my style of developing the char, because I had no basis of information about the background. Everything is set up in the charcters past and everybody is talking to my alter ego as if I should know whats it all about from nearly the begining of the game. That's what demotivated me in many occasions. Back in planscape tourment i could keep up with things even though much only unfolded late game and in many dialogs with the nameless companions. And i could see if they had something new to say, without trying every single dialog option again and again. If the exiles past had been introduced at the very beginning of the game, giving the player an idea of the frustration of the exile after the descesion he had to make in the mandalorian war, the entire following game would be much clearer and better imho. The consequences would have been the riddle the player had to solve. Why was he cut of the force? Was it the councel? An so on. In the following events the player would get to know that the decision that looked inevitable in the past has something to do with what happens in the game. And he could make decisions on the base of that past, either tending to a dark or a light path. I actually want to "live" my rpg chars when playing a story based rpg. In this case I just couldn't, because i could not understand his situation throughout more then half of the game.