Focus of the Story

[nightcleaver]

Ok, I had an idea about what I was trying to say at the beginning of the thread:

 

Discussions about KotOR II's plot invariably seem to fall apart. Sometimes the focus is this, sometimes it's that; mirrored in our reactions, I think, is the completeness, or perhaps lack of completeness, of KotOR II's story. No one path of the story seems complete enough to say, "Hey, this is what KotOR II was about." Without being able to really say that, any medium of fiction is lacking.

 

Perhaps the most fundamental focus of the story, the driving motive, was the Exile's pain, and the pain of Malachor.

 

There was a vague plotline encasing everything that happened.... except for the end, in which we found out that plotline didn't actually mean anything, didn't have anything to do with the "real" conflict of the story, being the Exile's pain. Do we share the Exile's pain, though? Do we understand his pain? No. The only way they attempted to show the conflict within the Exile, show us what we were supposed to feel, was incomplete. Perhaps they could've avoided backstory altogether.

 

Actually, I just remembered something about LA's decisions about the story. No flashbacks. And yet, the focus of the story was the echoes of the past. The player is always drawn to ask, "what past?" i mean, sure, I'll take their word that there was one, it's just that I'm not emotionally involved in that aspect, the central aspect of the story.

 

See what I'm saying, everyone? Logically, the story works; but the emotional and/or intellectual involvement, the most important aspect(s) of any work of fiction, video game or novella, are lacking.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Actually, I just remembered something about LA's  decisions about the story.  No flashbacks.  And yet, the focus of the story was the echoes of the past.  The player is always drawn to ask, "what past?"  i mean, sure, I'll take their word that there was one, it's just that I'm not emotionally involved in that aspect, the central aspect of the story.

 

See what I'm saying, everyone?  Logically, the story works; but the emotional and/or intellectual involvement, the most important aspect(s) of any work of fiction, video game or novella, are lacking.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That was for you the player to think about. Your supposed to invent it within the framework given. Thats what traditional roleplaying is all about.

 

Actually for me it was that much more intense since I had played a much bigger role in the creation of the character.

[nightcleaver]

Well, they didn't give me enough chances to show the game what my character was about then. I would assume that in traditional roleplaying, there would be more. I can pretend I have certain motivations, but without a way to show it to the world, even if it's just my character talking to itself, it seems really silly. It's like, "I want to do this for that reason, but I can't, because the game won't let me." The player really wasn't given enough clay, so to speak, to give the story it's structure, and form the central plotline. That's how I feel about it.

 

Anyway, I don't understand why it is that people seem to dislike the idea of creating their own, not the Developer's, story, in a game?

 

I really liked what little control over the plot I had, and it really got me involved. There just wasn't enough of that, and in so many ways, I was detached from what was happening.

[DaylightX]

Well, they didn't give me enough chances to show the game what my character was about then.  I would assume that in traditional roleplaying, there would be more.  I can pretend I have certain motivations, but without a way to show it to the world, even if it's just my character talking to itself, it seems really silly.  It's like, "I want to do this for that reason, but I can't, because the game won't let me."  The player really wasn't given enough clay, so to speak, to give the story it's structure, and form the central plotline.  That's how I feel about it.

 

Anyway, I don't understand why it is that people seem to dislike the idea of creating their own, not the Developer's, story, in a game?

 

I really liked what little control over the plot I had, and it really got me involved.  There just wasn't enough of that, and in so many ways, I was detached from what was happening.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

signed and agreed.

 

for me, it was like, spending the game doing this one thing just to find out that it actually doesnt have much to do with the story (if at all). was a case of, "what?? was that the credits? is this a joke?". I felt like I've only read half of the story, and still waiting for the climax. or simply the chance to work my character a little more.

[Plano Skywalker]

Well, they didn't give me enough chances to show the game what my character was about then.  I would assume that in traditional roleplaying, there would be more.  I can pretend I have certain motivations, but without a way to show it to the world, even if it's just my character talking to itself, it seems really silly.  It's like, "I want to do this for that reason, but I can't, because the game won't let me."  The player really wasn't given enough clay, so to speak, to give the story it's structure, and form the central plotline.  That's how I feel about it.

 

Anyway, I don't understand why it is that people seem to dislike the idea of creating their own, not the Developer's, story, in a game?

 

I really liked what little control over the plot I had, and it really got me involved.  There just wasn't enough of that, and in so many ways, I was detached from what was happening.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

the KOTOR games are helping to resurrect the cRPG. many people give them a pass on the weaker points just because there is not alot to choose from right now.

 

the fact is, both games are extremely linear and straightjacketed. good and evil choices have only cosmetic impact on the story, etc.

 

there are certain things that they could do to help give the gamer more of sense of *ownership* of the story:

 

* if they must use backstories, give us more than one to choose from.

 

* do not give us "fake padawans"...give us one or two and make that relationship dialogue-heavy and storyline intense.

 

* give the PC the ability to join factions...joining a faction opens up new missions and party members.

 

* give us more than one way to complete the game....there might only be one way to *win* but there needs to be more than one way to complete it.

 

* and, my favorite, more PARTY MANAGEMENT options....give us what you gave us in Balder's Gate: the ability to weed out party members that are incompatible and take on ones that are more to our liking.

[Plano Skywalker]

[spoiler ALERT]

 

Skywalker:

I felt the referrences to the exile's past were a little weak; I appreciate the attempt to make the Exile a deeper character, it just wasn't done well.  I would've liked more, or none at all.  I realize the Exile's past was perhaps just background story, and didn't even need to be there. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm sure that was intentional. The background was there to build on if you allow the player to do that you cant simply come along and destroy whatever carefully crafted background they created.

 

While you had the framework of being a general and being cut off from the force as story hooks. It never implied what sort of general you were, whether or not you fell to the darkside or stayed true to the code.Those were very much your choices (as part of the conversation with Atton on the ship)

Background has to be their because everyone has a background, it's what makes us who we are and determines the choices we make. Thats why removing a characters memory is such a cheap trick in RPG terms.

 

If you played KOTOR first you may well have approached it with the I dont really need to create a character since I'm probably playing one thats going to get revealed in the game anyway. In which case I would imagine the game felt a bit empty.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree with SP that, truth be told, the Revan amnesiac thing in K1 was a really cheap trick. They got away with it because Revan is just so cool . But, from a storyteller's perspective, it was really cheap.

 

The Exile character draws upon the "hidden past" device but tries to open it up a little bit: to allow you to "fill in the gaps" of the story. In that sense, I do feel more attached to the character because there is more for me to fill in.

 

The main problem was not the "wound" gobbledeguck or the exile bit but it was the lack of de facto choices...your mentor, the DARK LORD OF THE SITH, is using you to wipe out the Jedi and the Revan/Malak Sith for some highly dubious reasons.

 

As I said, this is a textbook case of a "filler" story. Had anyone but Obsidian worked on it, it wouldn't have worked at all. But Obsidian was able to hide the weaker parts and play up the more interesting parts with their presentation skills and they were able to create an illusion of ownership by having a half-baked backstory, introducing an influence system and giving you the ability to train Jedi. None of those devices were what they should have been, but they do represent a step forward in these games, IMO.

 

And for those who complain about the lack of romance in K2 versus K1, I would remind that the K1 romance (especially if you were playing a male) was there as a tragic storytelling device...nothing more.

[nightcleaver]

What do mean by a lack of choices? I felt like I had enough choices... there just wasn't a lot of reason to care about them.

 

Does that have anything to do with what you were talking about?

 

ah, but how what they DID make makes you wish for more...

[ncr]

As far as choices go, I never really cared about them either. I think part of the reason for that was because I never really felt "connected" to any of my party members. (or the world itself for that matter) I think in creating a darker world, they were trying to make a more exciting ride. (this was accomplished) However, it should have been balanced with less intense moments for pacing. The story felt like it was coming at me so fast, I didn't have time to care.

[Plano Skywalker]

As far as choices go, I never really cared about them either.  I think part of the reason for that was because I never really felt "connected" to any of my party members.  (or the world itself for that matter)  I'm not entirely certain as to why.

 

Edit:  I know why.  I think in creating a darker world, they were trying to make a more exciting ride.  (this was accomplished)  However, it should have been balanced with less intense moments for pacing.  The story felt like it was coming at me so fast, I didn't have time to care.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you said it just as well or better than I could...yes, there were choices but they "threw" so much stuff at you that you (I) did not really feel in control much of the time.

 

the fact that there was no way to get rid of

THE DARK LORD OF THE SITH

that is joyriding on your ship is, I think, an excellent illustration of this.

[nightcleaver]

The only reason I disagree, plano, is that I didn't want to get rid of Kreia, and found her an interesting character. Why did I find her interesting, and not just evil? She was suspicious, I'll grant you... although most of her suspicious activities were behind Exile's back.

 

 

When it comes to manipulation, all she did is tell you the situation. In my DS and my LS game, she never said you should do anything... until the end, when she told you to go visit with the Jedi.

 

 

But yeah. To a certain extent, there will always be a lack of choice in games like this, as long as they try to tell a certain story, I think.

 

I also agree about the choices. The thing is, and this is why I push it about "focus of the story," it wouldn't matter how many choices you had to make, if only they all fit together and made something you could fairly well generalize, or perhaps just organize in your mind so that you could make sense of it, emotionally.

 

But that's just another way to look at it. Either cut out a lot of that excess stuff you bombard the player with, or fit it together so that it makes sense.

 

The thing is, you're right - it was too much in too little space. And they neglected to put much of anything in that you could establish as reference points for the plot.

[Plano Skywalker]

The only reason I disagree, plano, is that I didn't want to get rid of Kreia, and found her an interesting character.  Why did I find her interesting, and not just evil?  She was suspicious, I'll grant you... although most of her suspicious activities were behind Exile's back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I see your point. I just hope next time that they don't force a party member on you like that. Main story clues and triggers can come through radio transmissions, hologram messages, ghost visitations, etc...you should have some say in who is mentoring you, IMO...it should not just be one person that is available for that.

And your mentor should not be the primary vehicle for story clues.

 

By depending on one person for both Force training and main story clues, that just makes that person too powerful in your universe, IMO.

 

And the PC needs to be the top dog on his own ship.

[nightcleaver]

The thing is, she was the ONLY character for story clues. That was a weakness, yes.

 

I didn't really get the feeling that she was the one with all the power, though. The PC was the one with all the power... she was just along for the ride, and put her hopes in you that you would do what she needed you to do.

 

I guess the irony of showing her to be the manipulative "witch" she is, outside of the player's in-character knowledge, separated you more from what happened to the main character.

 

If there hadn't been any actual hints, do you think you wouldn't have had so much trouble with her? After all, there weren't any other party members you could just cast out.

 

Come to think of it, I didn't really like Goto tagging along. He did provide some amusement, but whatever.

[ncr]

"One of the main themes of the game is the player basically learning how to reestablish his connection to the force and what that means. I wanted the player's experience in this game to be a very personal one." - Chris Avellone

 

The quote seems to support the idea that there are at least two major focuses.

 

1. The loss of Force connection

a. how to get it back

b. why you lost it in the first place

c. what that means to your character

 

2. The personal journey

a. remembering and coming to terms with your past

b. finding out your purpose in the grand scheme of things

c. deciding which path you will follow from now on

[the khanster]

What do mean by a lack of choices?  I felt like I had enough choices... there just wasn't a lot of reason to care about them.

 

Does that have anything to do with what you were talking about?

 

ah, but how what they DID make makes you wish for more...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

And therein lies the limits of this game.

[Plano Skywalker]

Come to think of it, I didn't really like Goto tagging along.  He did provide some amusement, but whatever.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

GoT0 is another good example of being "stuck" with someone.

If you talk to him, he actually

states in dialogue that

if you try to alter his programming or release him, he will self-destruct.

 

...(not sure of the exact quote but that is pretty much it).

 

this is not so much complaining as it is establishing a baseline of the limitations of the game....for me, having almost no party management abilities and having to try to unlock clues that are out of my reach because of alignment, are things that I would really like to see improved upon in the next installment.

 

going forward, sentient droids should be purchasable AND SELLABLE, IMO....get their backstory and then give them a memory wipe and then sell them

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Regardless of whether I played Sith or Jedi I needed Kreia, as a mentor(the game makes that quite clear and without her you would never complete your quest since you would choke to death on Nar Shada).

 

No other character has ever managed to make me doubt what I was doing was the right thing (playing LS) which makes her unique in the annals of RPG history.

 

GOTO on the other hand could have kicked him into deep space he had little function (though on the droid planet he proably would have been a star).

 

KOTOR II follows the KOTOR model, cant kick people out therer either unless their part in the story is over and they are then obsolete. Different games, different design especially when your talking full VO it's not particularly feasable to have 20 NPCs 11 of which most people will never use (research shows that most people never finish games let along replay them).

[Plano Skywalker]

>Regardless of whether I played Sith or Jedi I needed Kreia,

>as a mentor(the game makes that quite clear and without her

>you would never complete your quest since you would choke

>to death on Nar Shada).

 

I normally just equip a breath mask and I'm good to go.

The

2 powers she teaches empathically are next to useless

as many others have pointed out on other threads

.

 

>No other character has ever managed to make me doubt what

>I was doing was the right thing (playing LS) which makes her

>unique in the annals of RPG history.

 

I agree. As I have stated, Obsidian pulled out all the stops and turned a

mediocre filler story into a really interesting one. Most of this was

done via the Kreia character.

 

 

>KOTOR II follows the KOTOR model, cant kick people out therer

>either unless their part in the story is over and they are then obsolete.

 

when do you HAVE to use HK? when to HAVE to use Disciple? when to HAVE to use Bao-Dur? Never. I do see your point, though....UNLIKE K1 in which all but Carth and Bastilla were surperfluous to the main story, K2 tries hard to give a greater number of characters main story significance...sometimes this is done via the multithreaded elements (i.e. the T3 quest, Mandalore on the Ravager, etc).

 

I think there should be two types of NPCs: inner circle and outer circle.

You can't replace the inner circle ones but you can replace the outer circle ones.

Basically, your pilot, your astromech droid and possibly one other person should be all that comprises the "inner circle", non-replacables.

 

 

>Different games, different design especially when your talking full VO it's

>not particularly feasable to have 20 NPCs 11 of which most people will never

>use (research shows that most people never finish games let along replay them).

 

well, Oblivion is going to have voice acting and there are going to be a number of NPCs in that game, let me tell you....I think the KOTOR franchise can afford a few more NPCs in there....I would prefer 10 extra but it does not have to be that many.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

well, Oblivion is going to have voice acting and there are going to be a number of NPCs in that game, let me tell you....I think the KOTOR franchise can afford a few more NPCs in there....I would prefer 10 extra but it does not have to be that many.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bethesda tends to take a minimalistic approach, now whether or not that changes with Oblivion remains to be seen. However if you have 500 NPCs voiced by 20 actors it's going to be no better than having 500 NPCs with only 20 shared faces (another general problem in games).

 

It's not so much about number , but rather about lines of dialogue. Yes you could double the number of NPCs but you would have to half the ammount of dialoge each gets to keep things balanced (and likely have the same people voice them).

 

Personally I'd rather less NPCs with more to say, but some people would rather it the other way around.

[Plano Skywalker]

Personally I'd rather less NPCs with more to say, but some people would rather it the other way around.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In a sense I agree. However, I think we really need to see more aliens on the ship....and all different kinds....some alien combinations would not be plausible so you would need a larger pool than the number of slots on the ship.

 

Plus, they need to give some NPCs really strong personalities and certain combinations of those would not match. Plus, the stronger someone's personality, the more you may just not like them...think of the enjoyment of leaving that person on Nar Shadda. :D

[EnderAndrew]

ANH was also a complete movie, where as Empire Strikes Back only served to set up RotJ. Which of the three movies is remembered as the best today?

 

I think KOTOR:2 was intended to set up KOTOR:3. Yet, despite lacking real closure, it offered far more depth than the first game and a more serious tone.

 

With closure, we might come to apprecaite the game far more.

[ncr]

ESB is my least favorite of the OT.

With closure, we might come to apprecaite the game far more.

...or less.

[EnderAndrew]

Trolls don't get a rise out of me. If you sincerely hated ESB, you're entitled to your opinion, and I won't try to shake you from it. However, judging from your other posts you are simply a troll.

 

Don't expect any more responses from me.

[dufflover]

ESB wasn't some Matrix BS like KotOR II was.

(Well Matrix and KotOR II were great games, but I didn't like their general story basis)

[EnderAndrew]

How do you relate KOTOR II to the Matrix? Color me lost.

[ncr]

ESB was boring. For a large portion of the film, Luke was stuck on "swamp world" with a muppet. As I've said before, KOTOR II is poorly paced. The story comes at the player so fast, that it prevents him or her from developing emotional involvement with the characters or the world itself. So why do I like KOTOR II better than the first? I think it's more entertaining in spite of all that.