There goes 35 hours....

[NeverwinterKnight]

Notice how I said they needed a LIE option?  Do you think Palpatine was telling everyone the truth when he was expressing his care for others?  The game punishes you as a DS character if you trying to "turn" LS characters to your cause, since you are forced to gain LS points, even though you're just wanting to manipulate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

thats true. i think that the influence system could use some improvements. im mainly talking about how, in theory, it works how it should in that your character is 'pretending' to agree with the thoughts and views of his companions in order to gain influence and slowly take them over.

 

theres a lot of room for improvement, but at the same time i dont think that means the system is flawed. this is not necessarily directed at you, but at anyone who says the influence system is 'broken'. its not broken, it just needed more fine tuning.

[Epiphany]

thats true.  i think that the influence system could use some improvements.  im mainly talking about how, in theory, it works how it should in that your character is 'pretending' to agree with the thoughts and views of his companions in order to gain influence and slowly take them over.

 

theres a lot of room for improvement, but at the same time i dont think that means the system is flawed.  this is not necessarily directed at you, but at anyone who says the influence system is 'broken'.  its not broken, it just needed more fine tuning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Only you can't "pretend", which to me, is the broken part, well that and the fact that they only change on their alignment bar, and not their actual personality...

 

I mean, what's the purpose of the influence system as it stands now, versus what people *thought* it was going to be like. I'm not sure about you, or anyone else, but I'd be shocked if someone said they actually expected the influence system to only change the character portrait and nothing else...

 

I was expecting at least a dialog change in behavior, but that didn't even happen. The only thing that works in the whole system is the fact that they visually change in appearance, which to me, doesn't make up for the fact that the handmaiden still cries when I do things that she, as a darksider, shouldn't be bothered with.

 

I've got a quick fix for it all, that can't possibly be added, but can at least show people it wouldn't have been hard to fix this "broken" system.

 

Add a "lie" option to every verbal influence conversation.

Turn OFF the whines and cries from NPC's, if you do something against their alignment if they're influenced to your cause.

 

It wouldn't have been perfect, but it wouldn't have been so "in your face wrong" either.

[drcloak]

Notice how I said they needed a LIE option?  Do you think Palpatine was telling everyone the truth when he was expressing his care for others?  The game punishes you as a DS character if you trying to "turn" LS characters to your cause, since you are forced to gain LS points, even though you're just wanting to manipulate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

thats true. i think that the influence system could use some improvements. im mainly talking about how, in theory, it works how it should in that your character is 'pretending' to agree with the thoughts and views of his companions in order to gain influence and slowly take them over.

 

theres a lot of room for improvement, but at the same time i dont think that means the system is flawed. this is not necessarily directed at you, but at anyone who says the influence system is 'broken'. its not broken, it just needed more fine tuning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cleary its flawed. How can you sit there and honestly say it's working as intended?

 

- dr cloak

[NeverwinterKnight]

Cleary its flawed.  How can you sit there and honestly say it's working as intended?

 

- dr cloak

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

because it works as was intended, but as with much of the rest of the game, it doesnt feel 'complete'. that doesnt necessarily mean the system is flawed, but more the way the system was fleshed out wasnt as thorough as it should have been.

 

besides, a better description would be it 'has flaws' than it 'is flawed'. one implies that the theory of it works, but the presentation and depth doesnt meet its potential, the other implies that it just does not work at all(ie broken) which isnt the case.

[Epiphany]

because it works as was intended, but as with much of the rest of the game, it doesnt feel 'complete'.  that doesnt necessarily mean the system is flawed, but more the way the system was fleshed out wasnt as thorough as it should have been.

 

besides, a better description would be it 'has flaws' than it 'is flawed'.  one implies that the theory of it works, but the presentation and depth doesnt meet its potential, the other implies that it just does not work at all(ie broken) which isnt the case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How does it work as intended if it doesn't WORK to begin with? Unless of course, their goal was to make people think we could influence our party memebers, when in reality, all we could do was bend to their will so that we could change their alignment so that their portrait would look different... There is no benefit from the influence system, nothing is gained or earned, except sith masters having to go against their manipulating tendancies.

[NeverwinterKnight]

How does it work as intended if it doesn't WORK to begin with?  Unless of course, their goal was to make people think we could influence our party memebers, when in reality, all we could do was bend to their will so that we could change their alignment so that their portrait would look different...  There is no benefit from the influence system, nothing is gained or earned, except sith masters having to go against their manipulating tendancies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

what youre suggesting is an example of how the current influence system should be improved upon. but like i said, it does work. its just that it seems it only works as a bare bones of what we thought it would. saying it 'doesnt' work' implies that regardless of what you say or do, your companions dont change alignment or dont start opening up to you (btw, thats another aspect of the influence system that 'works'. the more influence you gain, the more they tell you their backstory), and thats not the case.

 

ive already stated that i feel the influence system could do with a lot of improvements, but the idea behind it and the bare-bones implementation of it actually works like it should (ie. you give dialogue choices that will appease your party members so that theyll slowly start to align themselves with you).

[Epiphany]

what youre suggesting is an example of how the current influence system should be improved upon.  but like i said, it does work.  its just that it seems it only works as a bare bones of what we thought it would.  saying it 'doesnt' work' implies that regardless of what you say or do, your companions dont change alignment or dont start opening up to you (btw, thats another aspect of the influence system that 'works'.  the more influence you gain, the more they tell you their backstory), and thats not the case.

 

ive already stated that i feel the influence system could do with a lot of improvements, but the idea behind it and the bare-bones implementation of it actually works like it should (ie. you give dialogue choices that will appease your party members so that theyll slowly start to align themselves with you).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bah... The way it's implemented now, is not an influence system like the game portrays it, nor as the developers portrayed it prior to release. You're supposed to be influencing THEM, not the other way around, that's why it fundementally doesn't work. The heart of the matter is that YOU have to bend to THEIR will, which shows that you aren't influencing them, rather just kissing their ass and becoming their pawn. It wouldn't be as blatantly incorrect had the game not made mention of how the exile naturally influences those around him.

 

Debating this is pointless because you see the end result as a working "core" system, and I see the path to the end result as being completely flawed and broken, making the end result moot.

[NeverwinterKnight]

Bah...  The way it's implemented now, is not an influence system like the game portrays it, nor as the developers portrayed it prior to release.  You're supposed to be influencing THEM, not the other way around, that's why it fundementally doesn't work.  The heart of the matter is that YOU have to bend to THEIR will, which shows that you aren't influencing them, rather just kissing their ass and becoming their pawn.  It wouldn't be as blatantly incorrect had the game not made mention of how the exile naturally influences those around him.

 

Debating this is pointless because you see the end result as a working "core" system, and I see the path to the end result as being completely flawed and broken, making the end result moot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

id be curious to hear (read) how you think it should have been implemented then. if youve already posted a detailed example, then ill do a search for that topic instead, but im trying to get an idea of exactly how you want it to work. right now i can only debate on the premise that you think this system doesnt work, but i cant really comment on how (in terms of an example during gameplay or dialogue) you think the 'perfect' system would work. is it just the lack of many [lie] dialogue options available? because i dont see how you can influence a npc without actually first gaining their trust. and i dont see any other way, other than pacifying them by agreeing with them, to gain their trust other than the [lie] option.

[Epiphany]

This post will have spoilers to some degree, i'm not going to black it all out, so stop reading now if you haven't completed the game.

 

id be curious to hear (read) how you think it should have been implemented then.  if youve already posted a detailed example, then ill do a search for that topic instead, but im trying to get an idea of exactly how you want it to work.  right now i can only debate on the premise that you think this system doesnt work, but i cant really comment on how (in terms of an example during gameplay or dialogue) you think the 'perfect' system would work.  is it just the lack of many [lie] dialogue options available?  because i dont see how you can influence a npc without actually first gaining their trust.  and i dont see any other way, other than pacifying them by agreeing with them, to gain their trust other than the [lie] option.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Due to the game talking about how the exile naturally influences those around him perhaps it should have worked differently:

 

Say for instance, you're playing dark side. You slaughter an innocent, or commit and evil act. In the beginning, characters like Atton will say "wow I don't know what came over me", rather than having to kiss his butt right then, *THAT* should have been an influencing moment. You've just swayed him to the dark side a little. There should have been more than just that instance though, because to me, that's how the exile is described to have influenced people. There shouldn't be a focus on "trust" as you call it, rather a control over their actions, as shown in the tomb on Korriban. Only, you aren't sending your party out to be cannon fodder, you're instead, warping them down the path of the dark side, only you can't do that without gaining several light side points.

 

It doesn't allow for a "roleplaying" opportunity, since you are forced to go out of "character" if you're an evil manipulating sith master, and legitimately care about their feelings.

 

Another example would be beating the handmaiden into submission. Sure, you gain "influence" by knocking her around, but there should have been some sort of mental manipulation afterwards. Instead, if you took the conversation down that path, you lost in the influence you just gained. You show her the power of the DS, and then you can't lie to her, so if you remain "in character" you lose what you gain.

 

Visas actually has influence options that can only be gained by aquiring LS points. Unfortunately, you can't unlock all her dialog without doing so, you have to show weakness by caring about her feelings, which, when you first meet, she claims will be the death of you if you do. Way to go consistancy...

 

Is there really a way to make it perfect, and reasonable? No. But the fact they don't allow you to LIE to party members pretty much breaks the whole system in half right from the start.

 

It's like they gave you a spoon and a can of soup and said open the can with it. Sure, it can be done, but it's a completely flawed way of doing it, despite the fact you'll eventually get the can open. All I'm asking for is a can opener...

[NeverwinterKnight]

i understand the dialogue part, but in terms of your example about atton, if your party members just automatically shift to the alignment you are without it being difficult, then isnt that another reason to not even bother with the influence system?

 

i figured the whole reason for it was because there was actually a chance that you would NOT gain influence with them and theyd pretty much ignore you. with your atton example, where every act you commit means they slip to your alignment without much prodding, its as if you dont even have to try and basically its kotor1 all over again.

 

unless im misreading your explanation, your basically saying that if you play as a darksider and slaughter innocents throughout the game, then everyone in your party should automatically go over to the darkside, one moment at a time, with them slowly commenting less and less about the atrocious acts. thats not really much of an influence system then, if there is no possible way for your character to actually fail at influencing someone.

[Epiphany]

That's why I said there was no way to make it perfect and reasonable. The game makes you think the exile has some unnatural control over the people he's with, making them bend to his will.

 

In reality, you don't, you bend to theirs in order to gain an alignment shift, that in the end has no benefits.

 

If the end result is pointless, then why bother making it difficult? They apparently had this idea when they programed the AI for combat, so why couldn't they continue the theme in the influence system?

 

Regardless, a lie option for every influence system, and turning of whines if they alignment shift would have been perfectly fine. As it is, we're left with a spoon and a can of soup, hell, I'd go so far as to say it's a plastic spoon.

[NeverwinterKnight]

That's why I said there was no way to make it perfect and reasonable.  The game makes you think the exile has some unnatural control over the people he's with, making them bend to his will.

 

In reality, you don't, you bend to theirs in order to gain an alignment shift, that in the end has no benefits.

 

If the end result is pointless, then why bother making it difficult?  They apparently had this idea when they programed the AI for combat, so why couldn't they continue the theme in the influence system?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

the bolded part is one thing i am a bit disappointed in.

 

however, i keep going back to the example of senator/chancelor palpatine. id say his 'influence scheme' was probably the best and most pronounced in the movies. he did his influencing by 'kissing up' (as you put it) to those around him so that theyd believe he was their friend. thats how it is implemented in tsl and i think that portion of it (or the base idea, anyways) works. i think, as you suggested, there should have been much more [Lie] options, especially for a darksider, so that it would seem as if youre only picking those dialogue options to sucker in your companions and that you dont actually believe in those options.

 

i think the trouble stems from once you have gained influence on them, they still resort to bitching and moaning about you doing acts that are opposite to their original alignment. in that sense, the influence system could be tweaked.

[Epiphany]

however, i keep going back to the example of senator/chancelor palpatine.  id say his 'influence scheme' was probably the best and most pronounced in the movies.  he did his influencing by 'kissing up' (as you put it) to those around him so that theyd believe he was their friend.  thats how it is implemented in tsl and i think that portion of it (or the base idea, anyways) works.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But he's not telling the truth, and most definately not gaining "light side points". Hell, he starts working his lies on Anakin right away, and you KNOW he's not gaining LS points for that either. That's the problem with this system, and why I think it's flawed/broken. It doesn't allow for roleplaying.

[NeverwinterKnight]

But he's not telling the truth, and most definately not gaining "light side points".  Hell, he starts working his lies on Anakin right away, and you KNOW he's not gaining LS points for that either.  That's the problem with this system, and why I think it's flawed/broken.  It doesn't allow for roleplaying.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

i do agree with that part. i found it annoying when id agree (lie) to one of my lightside party members, hoping that it would pacify them, but then netted me lightside points. i think in hindsight, this could have been rectified by obsidian adding a [Lie] option to each dialogue choice, wherein that implied it was by definition a darkside choice.

[EnderAndrew]

I have to echo the sentiments that Bioware is FAR from being the master of single player RPG storyline.

 

Name 3 characters in KOTOR:1 who have better dialogue and storylines than characters from KOTOR:2.

[Leferd]

I have to echo the sentiments that Bioware is FAR from being the master of single player RPG storyline.

 

Name 3 characters in KOTOR:1 who have better dialogue and storylines than characters from KOTOR:2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1) Jolee Bindo

2) Yuthara Ban

3) HK-47

 

Jolee is as deep a video game character as any that has existed. Period. You can name Dakkon, or any other Torment character, and I

[OremLittleKing]

I have to echo the sentiments that Bioware is FAR from being the master of single player RPG storyline.

 

Name 3 characters in KOTOR:1 who have better dialogue and storylines than characters from KOTOR:2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Frankly, with the possible exception of Mira, not one of the characters in KotOR II caught my interest the way the ones in KotOR did. Sure, if you qualify them as "better" based on how detailed/conflicted/morally ambiguous they are, then I guess you're right, but I don't qualify characters that way. The first step for me is to like them as people. I rarely liked the KotOR II characters--I was intrigued by them at times, but I didn't like them. Most of the KotOR characters had a very Star Wars-like magnetism that just made them likeable and often humorous from the moment they showed up until the end of the game.

 

By the way, Orson Scott Card fan? Then you know that good storytelling has clarity and purpose.

[EnderAndrew]

I the exact opposite experience. I couldn't like any of the KOTOR:1 characters.

 

Jolee was the only likable one in my opinion. Carth was annoying. Mission was annoying. Bastilla was annoying. T3 and the Wookie were set pieces with no dialogue what-so-ever. Juhani was somewhat interesting except that she was annoying as well.

 

What about character growth? Mission grew up a bit. Canderous threw his beliefs out the window for no particular reason. Jolee never changed. Bastilla was overtly emotional and denial about it the whole game. That never changed. Carth never really changed.

 

By hitting arbitraty experience points, people would trust me more.

 

"You killed random critters on Dantooine. Now I can emotionally unload on you."

 

In KOTOR:2, the character's revelations are more tied to plot events, and the way that you interact with them.

 

HK-47 is in KOTOR:2, and I dare say the HK line if FAR more interesting the second time around. Tricking HK-50 into saying things he doesn't want to is priceless.

 

In the first game, the concept was new. But all we got was "meat bag". In the second game, we get far more sarcastic supplication.

 

We get truly moving, personal moments that KOTOR:1 lacked.

[deganawida]

Have to agree with OremLittleKing, here, on virtually every point. Though these characters were arguably better written than the characters of KotOR1, I never once grew attached to them (though I came close with Mira, it's just too bad her story is dropped). There was just something...missing from them, something that kept them from being characters that I loved or hated. Instead, I was mostly apathetic to them. Though I maxed out influence with almost all of them, this was done more out of some feeling of duty rather than desire.

 

In fact, much of the story of the game was like this for me, in that after Telos I found that I had little to no emotional involvement in the plot. Was it well-written? Yeah, those bits that were actually written and not left for the player to infer what is going on. However, the story-telling flat-out sucked. KotOR1 was not that well-written; it had 2-dimensional characters (with a couple of exceptions, such as Jolee), a very simple plot (rescue the princess and defeat the evil king), and a "twist" that was telegraphed as soon as you reached Taris. However, the presentation of KotOR1 was far superior to that in KotOR2; it got you emotionally involved, and made you feel as though you were swept up in events beyond your normal world. KotOR2, though, didn't have this; it had the plot points, but none of the details to really make it a story. It felt more like a story outline, where all the important plot points are pegged, but none of the details as to why these plot points are important.

Perhaps the best example of this is Malachor V. For such an important detail of the story, what happened at Malachor V and the Exile's role in the battle are woefully underdeveloped. With the exception of the loading screen comments at Trayus Academy, the only info that I had on Malachor V was some vague comments by important NPCs and one dialogue that I had with Bao-Dur shortly before I converted him into a Jedi (and which should not count, as it is completely optional and difficult to achieve). Why was this ignored to such an extent? Yes, what happened to the Exile at Malachor V is very important to the plot, but without a thorough grounding in exactly what happened (which, of course, s/he should know) it was completely meaningless to me. In the beginning it was kind of cool that the Exile knew what happened and I didn't, but as the game progressed it became more and more artificial how he wouldn't talk about it. At some point in the story, he should have had to confront the past in a more literal sense, thus allowing the player to understand what happened there and why the Exile is the way s/he is.

. This game had real potential, and though I enjoyed it my feelings on the game can be best summed up as "empty" (ever notice how small the worlds are, and how few people are in them?) and "bare-bones".

[OremLittleKing]

I the exact opposite experience.  I couldn't like any of the KOTOR:1 characters.

 

Jolee was the only likable one in my opinion.  Carth was annoying.  Mission was annoying.  Bastilla was annoying.  T3 and the Wookie were set pieces with no dialogue what-so-ever.  Juhani was somewhat interesting except that she was annoying as well.

 

What about character growth?  Mission grew up a bit.  Canderous threw his beliefs out the window for no particular reason.  Jolee never changed.  Bastilla was overtly emotional and denial about it the whole game.  That never changed.  Carth never really changed.

 

By hitting arbitraty experience points, people would trust me more.

 

"You killed random critters on Dantooine.  Now I can emotionally unload on you."

 

In KOTOR:2, the character's revelations is more tied to plot events, and the way that you interact with them.

 

HK-47 is in KOTOR:2, and I dare say the HK line if FAR more interesting the second time around.  Tricking HK-50 into saying things he doesn't want to is priceless.

 

In the first game, the concept was new.  But all we got was "meat bag".  In the second game, we get far more sarcastic supplication.

 

We get truly moving, personal moments that KOTOR:1 lacked.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To each his own, I suppose--personally, I didn't have the problems with the original game's characters that you did. The KotOR II characters didn't catch my interest because, frankly, they were too introspective. Too, dare I say it, bland. The reason I liked Mira best was because she was the most "outward" of the bunch, and even though she had a little depth in her own right, she had immediate flair and magnetism that the others mostly lacked. But that's Star Wars. Arrogant smugglers, naiieve kids, and snotty princesses. Star Wars characters are supposed to be cartoonish.

 

It's not that I have a problem with subtle characters. But with subtle characters, I still need to be quickly shown something that tells me who they are. They can't stay cloaked the entire game, because when the "truly moving, personal moments" come, I won't care about them.

 

Which I suppose was basically my entire problem with KotOR II's story. The whole time I had a sense of "why should I care?". I didn't care about the characters because I never liked the characters, and I was never given enough information to understand what was happening with the plot and therefore care about it.

 

But, everyone gets something different out of a story. I mean, I'm always right, but you're still entitled to your opinion.