TSL Story From a Writers Perspective

[Cerebus]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Kid, could you step outside with me for a minute? I would like to have a word with you in your little kennel. Thank you.

[Gromnir]

doesn't change anything.  past or future, you run into same problem.  you write a protagonist focused story where the protagonist can choose to be good or bad or diplomatic or sneaky and you is gonna always have problems.  how you write A story for an infinite variety of characters?

 

yeah, if you got a story of self-discovery where the protagonist is special, then the past will always be a factor... will always be prophecies or some other such nonsense, but the problem remains with or without the issues of the past recollection.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, that is the challenge of making good multi-path games. And it can be done. Fallout 2, for example, lets you choose many different paths, not one of them containing an amnesiac, if memory doesn't fail me. Of course, I don't know if you would describe FO2 as a protagonist focused story, so maybe I might be writing this without knowing the proper context ...

 

But multi-pathing has been achieved in the past, and in a more complex way than KOTOR. It certainly involves a L O T of work and might not be the most profitable endeavour for a software company, but it is possible to provide different layers of story for different player reactions. I just don't see why it is necessary to complicate things by always giving the Main Character a complex past in addition to a complex future.

 

Your Shaw signature, by the way: Is that from Man and Superman?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

the protagonist's story is pretty weak in fo2, and in point of fact, there is not much real multi-pathing of the protagonist's story in fo2. fo2 is able to create the illusion of non-linearity by having very few essential plot advancing points in the game... which is not a criticism on Gromnir's part. we happen to think that such an approach is viable if done well. we just not happen to think that Most of the writing in fo2 was particularly compelling... and the core story writing were typically kinda disappointing.

 

fo2 is not a good example of how you can makes a great story

[Abbadon74]

So, I don't really buy the argument it was too difficult to mesh the end of the first with the start of the second.  It could have been done.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course it could have been done. But it would have made the workload even heavier! To really "get" the ending of Kotor 1, you would have to ask for more variables than "light/dark" - "male/female". And it is hard enough to design a branching future without having to worry about a branching past.

Personally, I liked the in-game questions as a measure to define Revan a little bit. And it also made possible that new players with no idea of game one's content could make a choice, even if they didn't really understand what it referred to. Better than being confronted with it at the beginning:

 

"Welcome, new player:"

"1) Should your 'Revan' be : a) male b) female

"2) Would you like him/her to be a) light side b) dark side"

"3) If you don't know what a 'Revan' is, then LA strongly suggests buying KOTOR 1 (available through mail order)

And now, enjoy the show!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Use some imagination. It doesn't have to be a barrage of questions at the beginning. Geeze, just off the top of my head, I think it could have very easily been the T3-M4 mission., or at least his prequel to the Ebon Hawk repairs. The game could have opend as he comes on-line, severely damaged, memory with huge gaps. He would have to run an, I don't know, self-repair system to fill in the gaps, to learn who he was, and what he was to do. This is just something off the top of my head, but I still think it would have worked. And, personally, I don't think it would have been too daunting to fill in those gaps.

 

And if it made the workload heavier, well, to an extent, again that's their job. Ultimately, as a consumer, I am concnerned more about the quality of the end product, rather than the workload of the developers. I know that may seem uncaring of me, but I'm willing to pay my hard-earned money to buy their product. I certainly don't believe in pirating it, so they get their payment, and I'll get to appreciate their efforts.

 

-B

[SteveThaiBinh]

... when (the Exile's) past isn't made immediately available to the reader, it becomes something that must be solved over the course of the game.  But all this does is  prevent us from truly connecting withthe character. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It was an issue, I agree. When the Exile's attitude to the past was being discussed, I could choose one option (agressive, regretful, ambivalent etc.), and begin to construct an image of the Exile, as I saw him, in my head. But then another dialogue would take place which didn't fit with either my own image of the Exile or my earlier dialogue choices. This was fine for a while, but continuing it throughout the game may have been too much.

 

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine. Some people will value this as being very open-ended, but for me it meant that the game wasn't responding to my choices, and therefore my choices didn't mean that much.

 

So what's the alternative? You could have a single conversation at the beginning that fixes one of three/four possible backstories, then allow the game to reveal details of chosen backstory slowly over the course of the game (similar to the Revan DS/LS/M/F conversation with Atton). All possible dialogue options could remain, just some of them would have [lie] in front. This method adds to replay value, but isn't very 'non-linear' in spirit. Some sort of balance between the two extremes might be better, where you have several chances to decide and alter the Exile's backstory in the first third of the game, and then the game will flesh it out in more detail later.

 

As I don't play games so much, I don't know a lot of the classic RPGs that are referred to on this forum, so my suggestions may already have been tried and failed. I really did appreciate the fact that Kotor 2 handled my character's backstory in a way that seemed very new and original to me.

[kbned]

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine.

i think they did that to allow you to be able to turn either way, light or dark even later into the game. playing darkside i noticed how many times some of the other characters are trying to convince the exile not to fall to the darkside and was tempted to back to being lightside. i only stuck with being a sith because i had already finished the game as a lightside character.

[Fionavar]

I have received a few PMs in regard to this thread. I must admit that a majority of the posts in this discussions are great and well indicate - to me at least - a deep passion from the fans of this franchise - thank you! I am reluctant to close this as the recent additions have been a continuation of the articulate manner in which a majority of this discussion has evolved. With that in mind, I hope this insertion will remind people to post constructively. If, however, the thread continues to degrade, I will have to close this discussion. Thanks for you passion!

 

respectfully,

 

Fionavar

[Haitoku]

2) Most of The Party Members Have No Motivation to Join You and Vice Versa

 

 

Well, A lot of this is explained through.

 

 

<<<< MAJOR SPOILER ALERT >>>>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A lot are explained right before you turn them into Jedi. I should also mention these are from light side point of few. Imagine the dark side versions are just the exile abusing the force bond ^_^. I always believe that the exiles special power was different depending on your side... dark to control, light to inspire. But thats just my opinion. :D

 

When you talk to Atton about his past, towards the very end (right before you can make him a jedi), He tells you about the Women who let him feel the force (right before he killed her). He also tells you that Revan was taking people to a special place to "break" those who were force sensitive. Atto realized that once the sith found out about him, they would take him there... and there would be no turning back. So he left the sith. He always considered what the jedi had done for him a waste... Until he meets the Exile on the Mining station. He believes this is the reason the jedi saved him, so he could help the exile.

 

Like Atton, Bao-dur explains his reasons before becoming a Jedi aswell. He thinks about what he did on Malachor (spelled wrong probably) a lot... as he explains in several conversations you have with. Before you turn him into a Jedi he tells you, that with you (the exile) he feels he might be able to make a difference, and maybe, just maybe he will be able to gain redemption.

 

Mira... Well, to be honest... I never did quiet understand anything about her. I didn't like the character very much, so I kinda ignored her ^^. But she does mention, that she no longer wants to feel alone. She is the most reluctant to become a jedi, but the exile reasures her that if she becomes one, she will never be alone.

 

Visas. Well, other then showing her complete kindness after defeating her. She tells you that there is a greatness in the exile, something that does not come from the force, but from who he is. She also seeks to understand (like krea, and the jedi masters) how the exile managed to live without the force. She describes living without the force as... "being abondoned by life itself..." And, towards the very end, she says she is in love with the exile. Because the both of them, have been horribly scared from so many deaths happening around them. Also, that in the exile, she sees that that living without the force, might not be as horrible as everyone thinks.

 

As for Handmaiden, I didn't use her too much. Her reasons were the most unclear to me. She has a lot of respect for the exile, despite what Atris had told her about him. As you defeat her in the duals, she begins to question the exile (about the force). And as you gain influence to her, you find out that her Mother was a Jedi Knight. As far as I can tell.... She wants to learn the way so the jedi... I really didn't pay much attention, so I can't offer any more info ; ;

- Also didn't atris send her to spy on the exile? or did i just missunderstand?

 

HK-47 Likes to fight. He also needs you to hunt down the HK clones, though this was cut.

 

T3-M4. This is a special droid. Even Bao-Dur mentions how he acts strangely, even for a droid... He also lies... To help his friends ofcourse . It's very possible that Carth or Bastilla sent the droid to help the exile. Carth known about the exiles presents from the very begining, so it's possible thats why t3 is onboard.

 

And now Kreia... Unlike what a lot of you think... I don't believe she is evil, and I didn't see her as the obvious sith lord. Would you not trust someone who teaches you? Protects you? Shows you the path to your destiny? Kreia wanted to understand how the exile lived without the force. As she metions, the Jedi Masters could never accept that fact, because them to them, living without the force is death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

<<<< END SPOILERS >>>>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Once again, people fill in the details I was too lazy to type out. I will elaborate on the Handmaiden and Kreia for you.

 

The Handmaiden was the daughter of and Echani warrior 'king' and his affair with a Jedi woman. That is why she is different from her sisters. She joins the Exile for many reasons: She sees in the Exile what she saw in her father after the Mandalorian Wars, and she is curious. She wants to preserve the Jedi teachings, and the Exile can teach her. She also is obviously attracted to the Exile, but Force Bonds may help this. At least with Visas, she assures you that it is her choice to follow you. The Handmaiden only assures you that it is her choice that she breaks her oath and becomes a Jedi, not that she follows you ENTIRELY out of her own will.

 

Kreia is more of a Dark Jedi Witch. She does not follow the traditional Sith search for power, but is more cautious and manipulative. Her goal is not power, but the Death of the Force, and all that feel it. This would end up disastrous, and in the end, suicidal. She is odd... She wants to destroy the Force because of the fact that it is 'controlling' people, and causing their deaths. BUT: Handmaiden and Visas tell you, when asked, that there is ALWAYS choice. (Underline the ALWAYS).

In the end, Kreia is technically insane. She may have started off right, and trying to demonstrate the fact that the Jedi Council prevents people from being Human, which both the Exile and Revan comment on at one point or another.

 

I think that the point of Malachor V was, in the end, served. Probably a little too well, in fact. It created Echoes, and all affected by it did as well. It may be Kreia's fault if the 'True Sith' decide to attack, because of the massive beacon she helped create. We'll just have to wait to find out, won't we? <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

well said. I forgot to add those points about Kreia because I was heading to work . Thanks for the handmaiden info btw, I had forgot about her father.

[SteveThaiBinh]

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine.

i think they did that to allow you to be able to turn either way, light or dark even later into the game. playing darkside i noticed how many times some of the other characters are trying to convince the exile not to fall to the darkside and was tempted to back to being lightside. i only stuck with being a sith because i had already finished the game as a lightside character.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a fair point, and I'll rephrase what I said. I didn't like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile had been at Malachor 5. I would have liked to fix his past motivations and behaviour earlier on, in order to develop a better understanding of the character, while keeping his future path completely open.

[Abbadon74]

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine.

i think they did that to allow you to be able to turn either way, light or dark even later into the game. playing darkside i noticed how many times some of the other characters are trying to convince the exile not to fall to the darkside and was tempted to back to being lightside. i only stuck with being a sith because i had already finished the game as a lightside character.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a fair point, and I'll rephrase what I said. I didn't like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile had been at Malachor 5. I would have liked to fix his past motivations and behaviour earlier on, in order to develop a better understanding of the character, while keeping his future path completely open.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Truly couldn't agree more. I think this would have vastly improved my abilty to "access " the game and the PC.

 

-B

[Tanuvein]

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine.

i think they did that to allow you to be able to turn either way, light or dark even later into the game. playing darkside i noticed how many times some of the other characters are trying to convince the exile not to fall to the darkside and was tempted to back to being lightside. i only stuck with being a sith because i had already finished the game as a lightside character.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a fair point, and I'll rephrase what I said. I didn't like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile had been at Malachor 5. I would have liked to fix his past motivations and behaviour earlier on, in order to develop a better understanding of the character, while keeping his future path completely open.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I have to disagree. I think it allows you to change your characters perception on the past. It seems to indicate that, at that point, you and Revan were on the verge of falling, but still not embraced by the dark side. This also fits with the fact that no Force user has returned from the darkside except that one fellow from the movies, since you can still be a non-dark side Force user.

 

Whether you went for murder, for adventure, because you thought it was right or just because you loved Revan, is largely effected by your current perceptions. If you fall to the dark side, maybe things would seem a little different... sure, you went to stop the Mandalorians... but it was a jolly good time killing them all!

 

Also, you could have gone for more than one reason.

[Zilod]

I didn't really like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile was. You could tell one person "I went to Malachor 5 to butcher all my enemies", and the next time say "I feel so sorry for all the deaths", and this was fine.

i think they did that to allow you to be able to turn either way, light or dark even later into the game. playing darkside i noticed how many times some of the other characters are trying to convince the exile not to fall to the darkside and was tempted to back to being lightside. i only stuck with being a sith because i had already finished the game as a lightside character.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's a fair point, and I'll rephrase what I said. I didn't like the fact that I was constantly having to tell the game what kind of person the Exile had been at Malachor 5. I would have liked to fix his past motivations and behaviour earlier on, in order to develop a better understanding of the character, while keeping his future path completely open.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

the problem with that is at the beginning the player doesn't know too much about malachor V, for this reason will be problematic to chose a satisfying past.

The way it is now as you slowly put together the pieces of your past you get the options to chose what happened.

 

If you condensate all the questions about the exile past in the beginning you have to give to the players a lot of infos (lines to read) to understand what happened and then you have to ask them a lot of question to define their past.

Thi could also end to be boring if the process takes to long and also consider that even later in the game is it possible that npcs will ask you similar questions, as maybe they don't know what happened you.

 

I'm not saying that this kind of approach is worse or wrong, it will give to the player a good understanding of his past keeping intact the possibility to chose it as he likes, but as said above it could have some cons too.

[jedipodo]

It's all a matter of taste (or point of view or whatever you'd like to call it). Nothing to argue about.

[Saberist]

>>

1) Your Character Does Not Have Amnesia

 

This is one of the major problems with TSL from the start because while the Exile doesn't have amnesia... You, as the player, are forced to play the game as if you did and that, right there, is why this game feels disjointed because I don't think Obsidian properly balanced discovering your past with living in your present.

>>

 

This would be impossible (as is most of the KOTOR epic) without understanding more about how the Jedi fit into the Republic chain of command ethic and political system and thus WHAT their 'true role' in the government/defense forces is.

 

IMO, there is too much of Exile which is akin to Revan for them not to BOTH be 'known factors' in both everyday life and to each other. This also suggests an intraJedi faction which _never develops_ because the core character modes are too alike ('unnatural' leader etc.).

 

While the two diametrically opposed fates (punishment and unchallenged redemption) are too unjustified by their relevant actions. One killed in war. The other killed outside it. One returned to face judgment. The other ran (for /whatever/ motive) and only 'redeemed' himself by a few callous miniquests.

 

In this, Exile is closer to being what Revan should have been. And thus the dichotomy comes off as an attempt to put lipstick on the pig of K1. By linking it 'fait de accompli' with K2.

 

Given we have NO real idea what went on during the Mandalorian Wars, it hardly makes sense.

 

I find it particularly eggregioius that Kreia judges Mandalore for his dreams while replicating them 'augmented X10 by The Force' in her own scheming. And yet, that amplificiation of Revan's song is all that exists to justify Exiles own plotline in 'becoming worthy' of joining him in the 'True Sith Empire' (which she herself must have known only fragments of given the time she could have spent there).

 

>>

The best example of this is the fact that the Exile, in no uncertain terms, has PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) that is amplified 10 fold because of his/her Force Bonds to living beings and what he did on Malachor V... Yet it is as if he has completely forogtten everything when we meet him when in reality that is the one few things he would still be aware of and desparately tryhing to forget more than anything else.

 

The fact that the gamer has to suspend their disbelief that he/she has already forgotten such life altering events is such an illogical and weak assumption on the storytellers part and is not one that the foundation, the player's suspension of disbelief, the game should soley rely on in my book.

>>

 

Which can be summed up as the most basic of Sun Tzu's 'know thine enemy'.

 

You can't do that if there is NO CONTEXT to place him in. And a failure to WANT TO KNOW is a failure of leadership talent (or strategic insight in Revan's case) at the most basic level of competency.

 

Which is where /formerly/ 'good drama' got away with (Canderous' presence for instance) the "Tell don't show..." rule. To let an audience make their own intuitive leaps. Unfortunately, imagination is (rightly or wrongly) devalued relative to making moral judgments of death and battle on this scale. Narrative Only doesn't cut it. If only because 'The Roman In Us' instinctively recognizes that the spectacle of a Colliseum fight is greater than the assumption of the dreary (too personal) journey-quests which have little or nothing to say relevant to the WAR AT HAND as much as the 'personal redemption' justification of emotional debt.

 

In this at least, K2 is indeed better than K1 because it shies away from the notion of a demigod /wanting/ to rule cattle. And instead offers us a satanic theme by which 'power is it's own consumptive death'.

 

Of course the effiminization of BOTH Revan AND Exile makes this unlikely (gender neutralizing a storyline is one of The Worst 'ideas' they have come up with as a demographic sales tool). Given the instinctive responses from a male vs. female perspectives do NOT 'equalize' towards a balanced analytic:emotive perspective.

 

But shift irrevocably female in circular logic which justifies what is based on instinctive 'it is because that is the way the outcome meant it to be'. (intellect justifies instinct, post causal).

 

Rather than exploring what a _refusal_ to engage at the most basic of [male] 'risk is a physical choice' options would dictate. i.e. Would the Republic have lost out if Revan had simply set about reengineering it from the INSIDE? Again, until we know of the restrictions placed on Force Sensitivies (using Kreia's clairvoyant telepathy as a model of the capabilities, not the reasoning behind them) in everyday Republic rule. And particularly within the conclave of Jedi Order (telling your fellow Jedi what you SEE doesn't increase the likelihood that they will at least perceive it's existance as a threat?)

 

We will never know.

 

>>

This flaw is compounded in that the Exile has no "visions" or nightmares (flashbacks) of what he did during the war like Revan did in the original KOTOR. This only makes this assumption even harder to swallow as the main player character.

>>

 

I made some arguments over on the KOTOR/Bioware boards for a lot of what 'showed up' in K2. But my ideals always were PROCESS based. You see X. You get Y. THEN you make a choice.

 

Again, if you wanted to have something like the Mandalorian Wars as some kind of justification for a Jedi 'losing his religion' in a literal sense. You needed to show a heckuva lot more than Taris as an example of what could happen. And what it could MEAN to a Jedi to feel all that 'ebb and flow'.

 

As a million sentient screams.

 

>>

Also, where this is really evident is when you finally reach Malachor V late in the game.

>>

 

Another of 'my' suggestions on Bioware's boards was to have a character BE a Jedi.

 

In real world terms, this is because you cannot 'learn combat on the fly'. No matter how good you once were, you are only as good as the last (replicatively accurate to threat) training you underwent. And more cherry soldiers die in their first battle than ever fall in their 20th.

 

In dramatic story telling ones, it allows you to skip a lot of the 'redevelopment of character/building of party' nonsense. And CONCENTRATE on pulling apart the politics and commercial/criminal profiteering to see the 'real threat' (K2). As an alternative to 'tagging along' while Bastilla employs her Battle Meditation and you basically see Star Wars Galaxies fought out via RPG in Force Construct fashion (a cutscene movie whose outcome is dependent on the /process/ of successfully 'linking up the netcentric combatants' to fight for you). It just depends on whether you are trying to make a movie with player intervention. Or a slash and hack game for which (IMO) the RPG stat-based 'accurate combat modelling' is entirely demographic WRONG for the market group.

 

From a PLOT standpoint, coming into a story as a fully fledged hero also /encourages/ the view that Battle is something reserved for 'special occasions' so that when you engage a Sith Warrior, you're blood runs cold at your first crossing of the blade. Rather than being a mere extention of "Well, I've been swinging D&D swords for the last 10 hours of game play, what's so special about a blade of living energy that can't cut any better than they do?"

 

In this I perhaps show a hint of my own bias for I will _never_ forgive Bioware for making such a /clumsy/ combat system based on their 'core games' like BG and NWN fantasy:melee combat.

 

>>

You have no recollection of the Shadow Generator... Which is highly illogical as that probably is the source of your PTSD and guilt for all the lives that were lost becuase you gave the order to fire it... Yet this is the first time in the game it is brought up AND you still didn't remember this through out your whole journey?!

 

This is what I meant when I mentioned earlier that having such illogical assumptions and sloppy executions makes revelations like the SG look amateurish and "Deus Ex Machina" and it detracts from the immersiveness and overall quality of the story being told.

>>

 

The SG is just another in a long line of 'machines substituting as real (quantifiable) threats to allow the player to ignore reducing the psychology concepts to a more "He's wrong, she's right but only in this one, NARROW, viewpoint context."

 

Such is where the 'hollowness' factor comes into the game for me. For Kreia acts like one continuous (Campbellian) Goddess Encounter frame of reference and all the other female archetypes (lawful evil) Visas and (lawful good) HM characters come off as being dominant-submissive slaves with either NOTHING in their vacant skulls. Or too much 'affectation of aestheticism' to be believable as protagonists for their own views.

 

The end result is mystic blah-blah without justification because Kreia's views contravene her driving dogma. And she is ultimately a coward who doesn't -acknowledge- those views. As a function of allowing true competition of viewpoint beyond power to give _FREEDOM OF CHOICE_.

 

/Given/ that Kreia is a apocryphal example of the man driving a cart pulled by a pair of wildcats being whipped by rattlesnakes out of Kentucky because "They warned the weak ones we had better get out quick!" It is ludicrous to assume that any person with LESS Force Power than she did would be MORE useful to Revan. Nor that an awareness of The Force as making you the result of your choices (Nihilous as a bottomless vampiric hunger) would necessarily make you 'stronger' for want of being morally separated from it's influence.

 

Force Power (as interpreted by Kotor in which Jedi 'fear' to become too associated with any given DS emotion or physical vergence such as the Star Forge and hence 'don't look for it' as the most obvious alternative to using Revan as a mine-probe) tends to flow like a current, wiping away resistance as a function of REQUIRED action. And making that action be a function of direct combattancy (finding the monster underneath the bed by checking every bed) implies not that the Force User is going to be more restrained or 'untouchable' by Force Influence. But merely that he is going to overamp his line to The Force until 'all resistance is driven away by circumstantial necessity'.

 

In this, Revan made his MOST POWERFUL 'moral statement' by electing to chance the powers of the Star Forge. A -machine- intellect which created purely inanimate Force Icons to do it's fighting. And IMO, this choice has nothing whatsoever to do with the Mandalorian Wars or 'defeating the Republic quickly to unite it against the Sith'. It was instead based purely on the need to find a method which could combat the 'deeper evil' of The Sith. Without ANY intervention by Republic or Jedi elements, at all.

 

Again, this makes a hash of Kreia's endorsement of abandoning The Force as a crutch which cripples the cripple through reliant use. But merely highlights her own pretentiousness in taking a view of one machination of power as being unlike another for it's effect on the individual when, in point of truth, BOTH are based on, not an understanding of what past drives the present moment. But rather the deliberate incitation of an unnecessary future _inherent to fear of an existing present_. i.e. Revan 'sought out' that which made him want to use the Star Forge. Whether it be The True Sith or some other thing. And in his actions (defeating the Mandalorians) he butchered Billions with a B. As a PREQUEL to introducing a threat which not even the Star Forge could match for pure brutality: Destruction of an entire world's life without even a cosmetic defacement of it's surface.

 

i.e. At this point, one has to question the wisdom of the Jedi. Not in failing to see that 'better to be bitten by a chigger than to kick a hybernating bear in the nuts'. But in failing to prevent Revan, a VERY young Jedi from leaving to fight a battle in which he would effectively be both an FDR and a Chester Nimitz. Without oversight and mentoring. IOW: They were right. But damn careless as parents to children they take from the cradle before they can have a developed socialization POV.

 

This brings in all kinds of timeline and technology contraventions between the Sith Empire and the Infinite Empire. In the breeding of 'different species' to achieve viable offspring. And generally in the lapsing of societal growth beyond war as a means of 'more than Darwinistic mimicry' of deliberate evolution as a culture.

 

And thus spoils the simple sense of 'adventure' which the movies (bad or good) tried to 'don't look too far up the magicians sleeve' preserve.

 

Short Form (since I seemed to have digressively meandered a bit): Power is leverage like a boulder being held from rolling down a slope by a bunch of little rocks. The intuit is that the little rocks 'hold the real power'. But in point of truth, they only /hold the real power back/. And if you pull those rocks for no cause, your power is gone. But if you pull the boulder. Your potential to /have/ power is gone. This argument was never effectively made or argued against. And it makes Kreia look like an angst serving soap operatic fool.

 

 

>>

2) Most of The Party Members Have No Motivation to Join You and Vice Versa

 

I realize that this is an RPG and you have to make some sacrifices in order to have a game...

 

But I found that almost everyone aside from Kriea, Goto and Visis... Had no real incentive or motives to want to tag along with you. Let alone, the fact the Exile is trying to forget and realistically, a lot of war veterans who would be as severly troubled as the Exile do not go seeking out others because they need the isolation (the stories of Vietnam and Middle-East vets living in the middle of deserts like Wyoming and the forests of the Pacific Northwest aren't made up; they feel at home in these places as long as none one is around because they are ultra-paranoid).

>>

 

Forget 'motivation'. My disappointment is that you don't have enough reasons to make you believe that these ARE CONTRIBUTORY characters. As the opening with T3M4 promised. A scoundrel is worthless if he cannot be set loose to gather intel from the barlife and underworld scum only he has the contacts to 'know' (and be trusted by). Again, if they were to do this, the notion that /however strong/ individual elements of society are. Their very disparatism of motive and perspective tends to _isolate_ any tendency towards absolutism. On a cultural 'leveling' basis on interactive but not additive (certainly not synergistic) self limitation.

 

OTOH, the truism of great story telling is that there can _only be one hero_. And if you have too many cooks you spoil the broth trying to justify everyone's presence on a more than 'certain skills' optional employment basis. This is what makes the notion of a party-based RPG particularly deadly to a _JEDI_ based game. Jedi being the 'one ranger, one riot' type tools which ENCOMPASS (or would in a real world environment) almost all the specialist skills that are class-isolated in this game. Just think about today's special forces. Do you /really believe/ that they are jungle squatting gun bunnies ONLY? No. Especially today, they are as apt to know a bit about electronics, medicine, languages, politics, and a whole host of other skills. And Jedi being sent in to achieve 'engagement' with otherwise unacknowledgeable diplomatic contacts are far more apt to be similarly skilled.

 

However; it is that history that you bear which makes you useful in a given context and so here too, it is FAR more likely that Jedi would run field operatives rather than try to run everything themselves. And that is what is (largely) missing from their assumption of being negotiators and adjudicators 'trusted throughout the Galaxy' in the KOTOR say-not-do assumption of why Kreia's view of their existence is outdated. And why, by the time of the PT/OT, Jedi are not even what I would call terribly powerful Psi-Mages either. Ever see Yoda heal someone? Ever see Anakin throw a 'Death Field'?

 

ALL because KOTOR is inherently (faultily) based on an RPG type _combat_ system wherein a plethora of 'statistics modifiers' renders combat into a combined-arms type layered system of D&D melee resolutions. Rather than showing JEDI AS THEY ARE. Which /must/ be more efficient than what is shown in the Movies. Yet cannot be so singlemindedly STUPID in the games.

 

As to need to share the heroic status.

 

>>

Again, my suspension of disbelief as a gamer was stretched very thin in this respect because it just does not make a lot of sense to the point you can't just consciously overlook it to some degree.

 

Atton: Who is similar to the Exile in trying to forget his past... Would not just automatically ally himself with two Jedi considering he was a Sith Assassin.

>>

 

The Obsidian writers are playing out of Campbell's playbook like dog-faithful fools. In that Atton is both Herald and Shape Shifter. The man who 'announces by circumstance' the nature of the tale: That the player is trapped within a cage of preconditional perceptions from which the game designers allow no escape into true enlightenment. And that the nature of himself is to 'be not what is expected' in terms of conditional outcomes. Of course this diminishes the player experience on all levels in that Atton 'makes more progress' (in a definitive ending sense) than you do. Even as his -existing- personality is both more vividly sardonic (Carth is /such/ a whiner) and physically appealing than ANY of the hero-type 'portraits' you can adopt.

 

Such breaks, not merely the SOD rule but the 'care about my character' one. i.e. In a game designed to illustrate hopelessness as a function of growth towards any but a non definitive outcome; the process of 'spiritual disenfranchisement' (believe in something with all your heart simply because nothing else seems workable then watch your rug of substantive role-placement be pulled out, a common mass marketing and military psyops technique used to demoralize and control people) is rendered complete when the 'costar' is made to achieve more than you do. While acting less as your foil OR protagonistic representative.

 

IMO, this kind of Eastern Influence will ALWAYS be alien and snide as much as superficial to those brought up on Western Ideals of 'try hard, do well, be rewarded'. Wherein only our ability to be entertained by _dreams_ (true 'role playing' games of the mind, in which we are dominantly successful) keeps us from rejecting the hardships of a real life.

 

>>

You can argue it was because he had no choice and wanted to get off Peragus... But realistically, he probably would ditch you and Kriea the first chance he got... Let alone probably try and sell you to the Exchange because that is who he is. His "redemption" (if you play LS) comes out of nowhere and feels incredibly forced and cliched. Even his explanation as to who he was (Sith Assassin) gives no real motivation as to why he wants to all of a sudden become a "good guy" and become a Jedi if you have enough influence in him.

>>

 

If Kreia were a male, there would 'be no mystery'. She would lock him down and, whether by overt resistance to her probes. Or by invasive 'Forcing' of his mind (ahhhh, the contempt for such a useful _tool_ again...). Discover his true identity. After which, Atton would be dead meat. Again, this is the MALE /solution/ to threats.

 

Simplification By Reduction To Lowest Common Denominator.

 

Only a girl with a severe case of Cleopatra Syndrome would sleep with an asp on the 'off chance' it /wouldn't/ bite her. A guy would make the assumption that it would and proceed to beat it to deat with a stick before buying a bunch of dogs to keep the house clear. Degenderization produces the moronic 'mixed perspective = unbelievable pseudo reality' again.

 

>>

It is really a shame because I think OE could have avoided the cliched "troubled soul who only needs to see the light" storyline and actually had Atton be the betrayer, or just stay covertly "evil". I think that would have actually been a more fresh and unexpected approach in my opinion. It would be great if he was actually a Sith Lord and his whole "brooding boy who wants to make amends" act was just that: An act, so that he could get closer to the Exile and Kriea and either turn them on each other and or kill both of them...

>>

 

Only if you truly wish to have the Ninja be more powerful than the Samurai. When THE KEY to understanding the dramatic basis of Jedi 'eliteness' is that they are in fact BOTH iconic representations: few in number and 'not well known' (underdog and enigma). AND that they are masters of combat -thru- insight.

 

In this, KOTOR has violated /so many/ rules. From giving cloaking as a technical rather than Force based (restricted) ability. To making the Jedi 'senses' (as shown by Kreia) have little or no DRIVING motive when compared to the clumsy and brutal 'RPG' (rocket propelled grenade...;-) combat elements of their actions.

 

Samurai were just as mystical as Ninja. Just as 'in tune' with the ebb and flow of things. They simply were a known factor and so not magnified (outside the Japanese culture with all it's Shinto demonic-overworld 'tints') as the latter who basically had ONLY their underdog status and the isolative geography of Japan's various mountain valleys to keep themselves safely-unknown with.

 

If you are going to make heroes of a 'class' you need to do so fully. And if you are going to make a game a STORY rather than a slugfest, you need to follow the ONE HERO RULE.

 

In this, being careful to never allow the Jedi to be _stupid_ is critical to endorsing the 'background emotive response' that is _dominant competence_ on his part. Again, only an idiot, realizing he was being faced with deliberately shielded surface thoughts, would fail to make the connective leap to "Hmmmm, trained in Jedi deception. Trained deception towards lawful-good authority = unresolved threat."

 

>>

And what would be even better and add more depth to gameplay is if Kriea *knew* Atton was a Sith Lord in hiding and she tried to counter his manipulations with her own. You'd basically have a struggle for the Exile's "soul" going on between these two characters and I think that could have been a much more interesting take the light and dark sides of the force as well as the gray area in between that this game seems to want to address, but just doesn't really get into for some reason.

>>

 

Kreia's corruption was assured from the moment she had her Peragus talk with Sleeps With Vibroblades. IMO, that was a mistake because it made a Granny a bigger threat and a _more open one_ than the player or his direct opposition. Without giving enough 'alternative reasoning' (counter influence) upon his behavior to make the Columbo Like clue in to her motives more real.

 

Of course the ending was a gip anyway given that the other characters had basically no 'real' outcomes either (One of the BIG drawbacks to giving the heroic PC no Voice. No likeable Face. And no sense of Self through other-characters VIEW of his struggle as dialogue or observed action is that you inevitably start to identify more with them than him. This being basic Psychology as much as Storytelling 101...).

 

>>

I think if OE had gone with a more unorthodox storyline like this that it would have made the Influence system even more important since there would be more at stake when the revelation is made that Atton is in fact a Sith Lord because then the way you influenced your party members would determine who stands with or against Atton, Kriea and yourself.

 

As far as the other party members... Mira has almost no point (or even backstory) and is just there to give the Exile another soldier (LS); Harrar if you go DS... The Handmaiden (m) and Disciple (fm) are the same way. Their only real purpose is to give you more "followers" and to try and get the point across that you are a natural born leader.

>>

 

K2's big mistake was in repeating Revan's 'little boy lost' tale. A man who somehow regains competencies lost over years of (apparently) self imposed denial of who he is for 'half a game'. And then gets dumped on by a plot that has no sympathy for even an /apparent/ dominance of even an assumed competence a driving moral view "What I always was, comes out as what The Force needed me to become once more...".

 

Exile is a figurehead for everyone elses' philosophy. And a vacant Phantom for all that.

 

That said, you _don't need_ to flesh out the other characters IF this is a properly told 'story in three parts'. Because a proper tale would have seen that this is the midpoint in the trilogy by which the characters change their motivation rather than repeating a past existence 'with classier dialogue'.

 

Under such circumstances, it is only necessary that the Shapeshifter, Herald and Fool characters have enough independent (value adding) _scenic_ portrayal as to fulfill their roles without making the PC look like a git for being surrounded by morons (i.e. no 3P0/R2 Laurel and Hardyism). And that CAN HAPPEN in scenarios for which a 'field operative hires among the locals' those sheep who have just enough horn to be believable as top-ram in their particular setting. Socialized History is THE NUMBER ONE determinator of operator competence to a task and ability to achieve same 'at minimal exposure risk'. And that can only be had by detailed knowledge of and acceptance by ones geographic/social proximity as to lull suspicions.

 

Mira was Atton on Nar Shadaa etc..

 

The ONLY alternative to his is to dehumanize the perspective directly with the 'slaves and lepers' perspective of a droid whose presence is as much environmental as sentient assumed. And of course they screwed the pooch on this as well (though Telos tried, they should have used T3 or HK-47, not a 'stranger'). Ironically you can give dramatic-sacrifice options to ALL these kinds of characters vastly more readily than you can someone who is doomed to stick by you once they have fulfilled their discovery as encounter-mode drama role (yawn).

 

And this furthers both the sense of 'Jedi being special' because only they have the moxy to survive dangers which slay their companions. AND the sense of 'alone and persecuted, just BEING 'special' is it's own burden'.

 

>>

As I said, only Kreia, Goto and Visas have any real motivations (and backstory) as to why they would consciously want to seek you out and tag along as each has their own agenda... And are even up front about those agendas in a lot of ways... And are just using the Exile to further those goals.

>>

 

Agreed. To which I would add that it took me /waaay/ to long to find any action on Nar Shadaa and this made me feel dumb and 'uninterested' in terms of not knowing who I hadn't talked to (the Red Eclipse slaver team encounter basically sets you back into motion but you get the Vision of their presence almost as soon as you step off the ship so there is no sense of urgency in returning to it).

 

>>

3) Darker Do Not Mean No Emotionally Satisfying Endings

 

It is an unfortunate staple in the entertainment industry that whenever a story is reported to be darker, it usually means the producers are going to use this as an excuse to cocentrate more on addressing issues and themes that are mostly overlooked by other stories... But it also means the emphasis is more on mood and atmosphere and little details (dialogue; setting; actions) and not the overall story as a whole. TSL continues this trend, unfortunately.

 

Yes. The game is more ambiguous than the first. The tone is much more gray in terms of the LS and DS of the force than KOTOR.

 

However, being ambiguous is not an excuse for not delivering a solid and emotionally satisfying ending.

 

This is the trap that TSL has fallen into because while the Exile acts more like a normal person in terms of his responses to some of the NPC dialogues... The actual ending of the game is where it all falls apart and the player is left with a sense of emptiness and disappointment as if the journey they just went on (storywise) was for nothing.

>>

 

Depends. There are three primary modes of acting:

 

1. Method.

You find an identity based on stereotype of response to a given scenario and passionately impart it to an audience for all you're hystrionically worth. It derives from times out of mind when actors played out dramas on a smokey stage (Or castle great room. Or cave.) and their responses had to be exaggerated for them to be SEEN AT ALL. It is the traditional 'sidekick' response.

 

2. Character.

Find a 'curve of expectation' and watch them grow along it. In this, you have to be _very careful_ not to reveal too much of the characters motivation at any one time lest the jaded audience 'guess ahead'. But. You have the assurance of always being 'loyal' (in role) towards a given situation because the nature of the encounter is itself predictated and the psychology of the response can be 'scripted yet pseudo random' without worry over becoming blatantly overstated.

 

3. Natural.

This is a more recent invention and is evolutionarily derived from Character mode in that you have a baseline bible of 'how I am now' (at start). But can push back the limiters of preexisting plotline in response to the interactive/interrogative responses of an outside source (multiple dialogue options in this case). The problem is of course that SOMEBODY ELSE has to agree to play off of your lines and this means both careful balancing of the character types (nobody chews the scenery) and a dedication to supporting each other at an 'interpersonal=close' sense of empathy. Otherwise Natural ends up riding somebodies skirts in a fashion that is not all that different (entirely reactive) to Method and just looks...pathetic.

 

THE ONE THING you must /never/ do is try and mix these three modes among a 'central cast' character mix. Because you are guaranteed to break the 'Only One Hero' baseline by which a given character (the hero, expected to be so) is restricted from responding to something dynamically. And when he goes off the deep end or 'sits there' (strong silent type) like a dimestore indian. He loses sympathy at the same time characters you DON'T care about become overly dominant without having a point in the endgame.

 

It is, to use a recent example, a pure "Dawson vs. Joey vs. Pacey" type problem.

 

Invest in that, expecting to see -an explanation- for the angst. And you end up losing value-trust for any of the characters as the moral struggle to determine 'rights of ownership' (to Hero status as much as female meat) overrides any sense of them being 'good people' at all.

 

This is particularly dangerous (using another Campbellian model) for Mentor/Guardian types like Kreia because if THEY 'fall'. Then all's you are left with is a doofus central character who looks double-dumb for taking advice from Hitler.

 

>>

This is bad if a movie, or novel has this kind of ending, but inexplicably bad for an RPG where the emotional satisfaction at the end for the player having done everything is the overall goal of the game from the very start.

 

TSL fails miserably in this regard and it is the worst possible failure it can have among the others I've already listed. This is the main reason why a lot of people don't "get" or flat out don't like the ending. There is no emotional closure, nor any emotional satisfaction for completing the game.

 

In addition, I realize that the original ending(s) were cut.

>>

 

Haven't seen those. Don't really care. I don't like TSL for a lot of reasons. But I know it is 'better baited' than K1 for the simple reason of having dialogue that makes you want to hear more (first order 'cue of suspicion' towards a spiritual disenfranchisement manipulation is pure sophistry of empty interaction for it's own warped sake) rather than less of 'what the plot is about'.

 

And it is hard to deny that darker stories tend to have better windups BECAUSE their ending is so hollow for it's largely unnecessary outcome.

 

>>

However, at the same time, after reading the cut material... I still think TSL suffers from not having any real focus (for the player) and that even if the cut content was put back in... The *main narrative of the game is still lacking in terms of having any real emotional core and forces the player to make illogical leaps to enjoy the game and give any real meaning why you are doing any of the things you have been doing up until the end.

>>

 

Ah yes. The second rule of good storytelling is that it MUST make sense in it's own mileu. If gravity falls up, characters hair must stand on end on a CONTINUAL as much as regular basis. Or else the shark jumps. And SOD is ruined.

 

>>

*Only the subplots would have been nicely wrapped up. For example, the Goto-Remote stand off would have been resolved when HK-47 bursts in and kicks Goto ass... But this is reliant on the Droid Factory and M3_47(?) planet being put back into the game since this severs Gotos link over all of his HK droids.

 

So, there is my take on things.

 

Like I said, you can completely disregard what I have to say, call me a "whiner" or whatever you want.

 

But I think these are the main reasons you are seeing a lot of posts that are confused about the ending, other plot shortcomings and storytelling flaws that crop up through out the game regardless of what content was cut to meet the ship deadline.

>>

 

Well stated. I hope I added a little meat to your bones from the method of philosophy end of things. It's better that a critique do so by example AND baseline method illustration. Otherwise you get stuck in a battle of 'suggestive supposition' by which negative opinion validity is determined by depth of 'earnest sincerity' if not vituperancy of opinion.

 

 

Saberist Out.

[metadigital]

I write too, and as a writer found the story well done and interesting, especially as it is a video game and not literature.  The characters were finely drawn, the dialogue superb.  If I'd come up with Kreia I'd be patting myself on the back, let me tell you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would have like more dialogue options; I found myself continually saying (interior monolgue, of course) "But I wouldn't say any of those things!", which resulted in the failure for me to suspend disbelief in the story.

... Mira definitely needed a stronger motivation to tag along. "Oh, you're my bounty" got silly, as she didn't seem like the kind of person to lie to herself so much. Hanharr's joining up just to watch you didn't feel strong enough, either. I didn't see a real reason why Mandalore needed to travel with you.

 

3) Totally agreed about the darkness. This is a huge problem for many beginning/intermediate writers: they think that piling on misery after misery makes their story better. Reviewing clumsily-written drug addiction/rape/abortion/breakup stories is... not one of the best ways to spend one's time.

 

I think it was handled moderately well in some areas of the game: I understood that a big part of it was how the wars had touched everyone, had hurt them. But still, I wanted some kind of character like Mission: someone who wasn't going to be a total **** to me at some point, someone who wasn't completely scarred and (at least!) half-broken inside because of their past. Even *T3,* the sweet innocent little droid, is depressed because he was abandoned and is hiding things from the player.

 

As for the endings themselves: the scrapped endings fill me with mixed feelings. They're well-written technically, but there really doesn't seem to be much point to killing everyone off (except Atton, to a certain extent) aside from "yup. Everyone's dead. DRAMA." And either way, ending as-is or ending cut-out, the Exile has no ultimate choice about their fate: sorry, you're going to do this and there's nothing you can do about it.

 

The theme of KOTOR1 was redemption. The theme of KOTOR2 leans more towards sacrifice - but, as it is (cut and included material both), it feels like pointless, empty sacrifice. ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I concur with you as well. The sub plots were non-existent: Mandalore tags along because why? Oh, we never find out and there is no logical reason. Ok.

 

Again, the end was just clumsy and rushed. And not just technically, the narrative went nowhere. The game could have ended at any point after the Confrontation with the Jedi Council at Dantooine -- there was no narrative to impel the PC onwards. Strewth, Atris even says that Kreia could have destroyed the Force all along, and will do so whether the Exile goes to M5 or not. So why, exactly have we spent 20 hours running about like a decapitated chicken?

1) Your Character Does Not Have Amnesia

This is one of the major problems with TSL from the start because while the Exile doesn't have amnesia... You, as the player, are forced to play the game as if you did and that, right there, is why this game feels disjointed because I don't think Obsidian properly balanced discovering your past with living in your present.

I partially agree. ... Determining the past with dialogue options is actually one of the better ideas I can think of.

 

The problem is that this is not done very well in TSL. You simply don't get large portions of the game's story unless you have high Influence with your companions. And here is the really bad part: if you roleplay certain kinds of characters (e.g. a fully LS Jedi) and you roleplay them without metagaming for Influence, you will miss out on a lot. There is no option to be persuasive while sticking to your ideals; you have to say what the characters want to hear (even if it contradicts your character's personality) or you might not know what's going on.

 

(Aside: Personally, I am growing very, very tired of "I have a dark past, but you don't know that" and, more specifically, "In the past, thousands have died due to my actions, but you don't know that either." PS:T, KotOR, TSL... enough is enough. Think of something new.)

However, being ambiguous is not an excuse for not delivering a solid and emotionally satisfying ending.

And that is the real problem. ... I agree with you here. The ending was simply not of the same quality as the rest of the game. The cut bits and pieces... well, for one thing it is not absolutely clear what they intended and for another, perhaps there was more that simply wasn't included. Also, it might be that they realized killing everyone off was not the best of ideas.

 

A lot is missing from this game and while it is not bad, it is far from being great. Too bad... it had potential.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The ending has just not been worked on enough to create closure. It just needs more time, whether that is because Obsidian ran out of time or didn't schedule time to work on the ending is irrelevant. It is bad. Needs more work.