poll: chance of Bastila returning take II

[Fighter]

Don't you guys remember your first impression of Bastila. Dammit she was annoying: "As far as rescues go, this is a preety poor example." BLA BLA BLA YAKKITTIYAK!  :angry:

I thought it was humorous. I knew I could make fun of her for that later. You are easy to annoy, aren't you?

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

Mayby. But i tried to make her see that it was ME that rescued her. But she would't admit it. BUHUHUHU!

[Fighter]

She does if you talk about it later. But not fully, the way she sais it, is not convincing...

[EnderAndrew]

Bastilla wasn't perfect. She had her good moments, and her bad moments. I don't think she deserves the extreme favor or criticism she receives.

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

Why not! She's my little shnukkabunns! :D

[Bokishi]

My theory is that all of her critics are actually Carth Fanboys!

 

Har! Har! Har!

[Whitemithrandir]

My theory is that all of her critics are actually Carth Fanboys!

 

Har! Har! Har!

Hey, it's not my fault Carth's groin bulges every time I walk by him on the ebon hawk.

[Fighter]

Bastilla wasn't perfect. She had her good moments, and her bad moments. I don't think she deserves the extreme favor or criticism she receives.

I know, her imperfections is exactly what made her believable and great character overall. Besides I am just trying to balance some of the other people out.

[Phoenix19-15-5]

Actually, despite what I've said in the past, when playing as a fem Carth was rather enjoyable...but as a Male I just f*cking wanted to kill him, and the idiot Biopeople made it so that only a fem could kill him! :angry:

[icebox15]

what can you say, it's Bioware, they try their very best (Which isn't thatgood). But no matter what gender I played I wanted to tell carth to take a long walk on a short pier.

[SilverSun]

I think that the comment was not based on individual choices, but the choices that individuals that played the game made. I would think that many smaller choices could and would be omitted.

 

 

The choices the player made in the gamer were individual choices. Not everyone played the game the same way. Not everyone killed her and not everyone let her live. Not everyone killed Juhani in the groove and some people did. All those things are personal and individual choices that change the way the game was played and turned out based on the individual playing and how they played. And with all the effort being put into the Sith Lords to take that kind of thing into account I don't see them simply sticking the players with one answer for something like Bas. I could be wrong,I'm not a dev nor am in their heads but going off what I've seen so far simply making up one answer for something like the life or death of a character would go against most of what has been said about not wanting to step on anyone's choices from Knights.

 

If the one answer is:

 

She's dead-Then you've gone and stepped on the choice of everyone who put the effort into saving her.

 

She's alive-You've stepped on the choices of everyone who killed her.

 

They've obviously have different story trees based on what on choices the player makes in the conversations early on. I don't see it as being that difficult to have a branch of that being with her alive and one with her dead. It would go right along with the comments that have been made by the Devs. Not only about the choices but also on who you run into being based off a number of factors.

[EnderAndrew]

Let's say you've got this big scene, and plot twist that involves Bastilla. So half the people miss out? Or do you substitute someone else? And then does the twist have the same relevance? And if it can be someone else, then why use Bastilla in the first place and create the extra work?

 

You can't hang much plotwise on characters that are possibly dead.

[SilverSun]

Bloody Hell...deleted my last responce.... <_<

 

Try this again.

 

Okay I never said she had a major role in the game first off.

 

Second,you could end up with a situation where you have a few possible endings and then a number of different paths to reach the ends. Each path being different and giving a different experience but still have it conect to the over all plot of the game. The last game had its limits to how it could work things because of your character being Revan. But with how they're doing things in this game it gives them a little more room to move and play with different story branches and what not.

 

And extra work? Effort? Isn't it their job to create the game? So if they planned on not stepping on people's choices and wanted to take every step to do so then adding different branches that still apply to the over all plot it wouldn't be extra work or effort but instead simply sticking with their original plan.

 

But again I'm not a dev and could be way the hell off on how I'm taking the things I've seen said. Time will tell one way or the other.

[alanschu]

I think that the comment was not based on individual choices, but the choices that individuals that played the game made. I would think that many smaller choices could and would be omitted.

 

 

The choices the player made in the gamer were individual choices. Not everyone played the game the same way. Not everyone killed her and not everyone let her live. Not everyone killed Juhani in the groove and some people did. All those things are personal and individual choices that change the way the game was played and turned out based on the individual playing and how they played. And with all the effort being put into the Sith Lords to take that kind of thing into account I don't see them simply sticking the players with one answer for something like Bas. I could be wrong,I'm not a dev nor am in their heads but going off what I've seen so far simply making up one answer for something like the life or death of a character would go against most of what has been said about not wanting to step on anyone's choices from Knights.

 

If the one answer is:

 

She's dead-Then you've gone and stepped on the choice of everyone who put the effort into saving her.

 

She's alive-You've stepped on the choices of everyone who killed her.

 

They've obviously have different story trees based on what on choices the player makes in the conversations early on. I don't see it as being that difficult to have a branch of that being with her alive and one with her dead. It would go right along with the comments that have been made by the Devs. Not only about the choices but also on who you run into being based off a number of factors.

My comment was made more in relation to your paraphrasing of individual choices...not Bastila.

 

If they considered every single individual choice in the game, you would spend the entire game telling the game what you did last game. They have to draw the line somewhere, lest the actual story of the game becoming too convoluted.

 

You can still have the choice for Bastila without it being very complex (which it shouldn't be, otherwise you put in too much effort that not everyone is going to see). And it's been five years....if they wanted her dead, they could still make her dead regardless of what you said without stepping on any of the choices.

 

The bulk of the different story trees most likely has more to do with the large choices in the game (Bastilla's may have been considered a large choice, although I would say her being LS/DS would be a more significant one), particularly what happened to Revan. I highly doubt the story is going to be any different with the exception of missing cameo appearances if the player killed Juhani at the grove or temple, marooned Carth, or whatever. It's so much work for little gain IMO.

 

If we see Bastila in the game (or anyone else that could potentially be dead), it will likely be someone we just bump into, briefly talk to, and go about our business. Building giant plot structures around characters that might possibly be dead is just a waste of time, because if they are dead, what then.....a whole different story? It would be cool, but it would stretch out development time. It would basically be two games in one.

[SilverSun]

If they considered every single individual choice in the game, you would spend the entire game telling the game what you did last game. They have to draw the line somewhere, lest the actual story of the game becoming too convoluted.

 

Where I agree,if you did or did not kill a character from the first game is a big choice. It's not on the same level of-did you or did you not steal the W. plate from the woman on Tat. Yes obviouly a choice like that is not something to really bother with but killing bas or not is a little different.

 

You can still have the choice for Bastila without it being very complex (which it shouldn't be, otherwise you put in too much effort that not everyone is going to see). And it's been five years....if they wanted her dead, they could still make her dead regardless of what you said without stepping on any of the choices.

bulk of the different story trees most likely has more to do with the large choices in the game (Bastilla's may have been considered a large choice, although I would say her being LS/DS would be a more significant one), particularly what happened to Revan. I highly doubt the story is going to be any different with the exception of missing cameo appearances if the player killed Juhani at the grove or temple, marooned Carth, or whatever. It's so much work for little gain IMO.

 

Yes her being dark or light is a bigger choice but did Revan kill her or not is not a little a choice because of it. And if they killed her in between the two games that's a whole different story. But simply picking for the player that yes she died on SF or no she lived is stepping on a rather large individual choice made the player.

 

If we see Bastila in the game (or anyone else that could potentially be dead), it will likely be someone we just bump into, briefly talk to, and go about our business. Building giant plot structures around characters that might possibly be dead is just a waste of time, because if they are dead, what then.....a whole different story? It would be cool, but it would stretch out development time. It would basically be two games in one.

 

I never stated that she had to be a major point in the plot.

 

And the over plot of the game is the same no matter what. Your character is a Jedi that followed Revan into the war. They were exiled because of their actions and have lost touch with the force. The sith for whatever reason feel your character is the last Jedi and important enough to devote a hell of a lot of time into trying to kill you. That is the over all basic story and plot of the game and no matter plot trees are in there that won't change. Finding out why they're trying to kill you is one of the main objects of the game and pry won't change much no matter what plot trees are placed in the game. What the plot trees could do is simply give a number of different paths to which discover this and how you do so. It wouldn't be two different stories. Just more then one path to take in the over all story. Who you run into and what they do in the path may be different from path to path. It's still over all one story and plot.

 

I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying that by adding more paths it equals making two different stories. And wouldn't by that line of thinking they have all ready done that by making both the light and dark side endings possible? That's not two different stories,it's two different paths in which to experience the over all story on.

[alanschu]

And the over plot of the game is the same no matter what. Your character is a Jedi that followed Revan into the war. They were exiled because of their actions and have lost touch with the force. The sith for whatever reason feel your character is the last Jedi and important enough to devote a hell of a lot of time into trying to kill you. That is the over all basic story and plot of the game and no matter plot trees are in there that won't change. Finding out why they're trying to kill you is one of the main objects of the game and pry won't change much no matter what plot trees are placed in the game. What the plot trees could do is simply give a number of different paths to which discover this and how you do so. It wouldn't be two different stories. Just more then one path to take in the over all story. Who you run into and what they do in the path may be different from path to path. It's still over all one story and plot.

 

I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying that by adding more paths it equals making two different stories. And wouldn't by that line of thinking they have all ready done that by making both the light and dark side endings possible? That's not two different stories,it's two different paths in which to experience the over all story on.

Yes there is the overall plot. But in terms of programming, different branches need to still be related enough, otherwise a lot of work goes into stuff that people may never see. I'm not saying that this is a good thing, I'm just telling it like it is.

 

Warren Spector made comments similar to how people wished the could have joined up with UNATCO and perhaps other stuff in Deus Ex, but he said that in doing so would require the developers to basically code in two different games, one for people that sided with UNATCO and one for those who didn't. As much as he would like to do that, it would never be approved.

 

You mention different paths, but these different paths cannot be too different, otherwise it is like programming another game. If a decision about who is dead or not causes a branch, it could very likely mean that huge chunks of the game could be very different. When large parts of the game become very different and not very related (in otherwords, truly becoming a separate branch), then you end up coding a lot of material that can only be seen from that one perspective.

 

I would bet that despite there being two different endings to KOTOR, the path taken in KOTOR 2 will be virtually identical, barring changes in NPC banter and an overall atmosphere to the planets, but the quests and planets and the order you do them in and all that will probably be pretty much identical. Any differences will probably only occur at the beginning of the game. If this is not the case, than I will be impressed and very happy, but I doubt it.

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

Wow, lot of long replies here. You guys are very serious aren't you. Well, im not.

 

 

icebox15 Posted on Jul 5 2004, 05:52 PM

 

[Bokishi]

what can you say, it's Bioware, they try their very best (Which isn't thatgood).

Icebox is just mad because BioWare banned him for spamming.

 

Back on topic, Bastila is still the deepest. Yes she is! Don't argue with me!

[icebox15]

Bastila=deepest character

HK-47=funniest character

Jolee=oldest character

Juhani=ugliest character

T3-M4=shortest character

Mission=youngest character

Zalbaar=most hated character (except mabey for Carth)

Carth=biggest whiner

Canderous=Mandalorian, nuff said

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

Zalbaar=most hated character (except mabey for Carth)

Carth=biggest whiner

 

Actually i think Zaalbar was the most whiny character.

[Fighter]

Zaalbar never had anything to say.... I talked to him maybe twice excluding Kashyyk...

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

He always wanted to eat!

[Rayne-RF1]

Zaalbar never had anything to say.... I talked to him maybe twice excluding Kashyyk...

I think the few times that he actually had something to say were enough to last throughout the whole game,considering that it took 5 hours of groaning and growling (most irritating) to say 3 words in Wookie language.

[Fighter]

Yeah! That goes for all aliens in the game. I just read the subtitles and click through all those repeating, annoying sounds.

[The_Prodigal_Knight]

OHHH I thought i was the only one