I don't think Kreia was ever meant to fool you into thinking that she was actually a good gal. I thought the cutscene with the nameless one, err, Sion and her general attitute towards meci and compassion made it pretty clear. The search for her motives was the driving force behind the game.

 

And we will never know about the game's full potential. But many sources like deleted files and general interviews and posts by developers hint that they would have liked to do much more with the game like completely overhauling the ruleset (or rather its implementation). But many people consider KotOR 2 superior to 1 in terms of story and NPCs.

 

And I really don't understand how you can say that the Exile was less developed ? Obsidian gave you (pseudo-)choice about the characters background and motivation while Bioware simply took your character away from you after Taris and at the latest after the "big" revelation.

The thing is also that if you take a closer look at the two titles, they aren't so different. In KotOR it is "do a few things to gain exp and you'll unlock some information on your NPCs". In KotOR2 we have "do or say something in the presence of character 1 to gain some influence points to unlock some information on said character 1".

KOTOR and KOTOR II are very different. While KOTOR II didnt reach it's full potential because of a tight schedule and "other factors" KOTOR didnt have much to begin with, 2d NPCs a paper thin story and a "plot twist" that borded on embaressing in it's obviousness.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1. The "full potential" argument has been said over and over. I don't think that the result would have been as good as most people imagine it.

 

2. I think that main character development is more important than NPC development. I don't know about you but the Exile seemed less developed than the NPCs to me. (I finished the game -in DS- without knowing who cut me off from the Force!!)

 

3. So you didn't like the Revan twist? Don't tell me that Kreia fooled you......

 

EDIT: Not to mention the fact that K2 is the first game that required a fan-made "restoration" project to fill it's plot gaps..... Thank you LA....

 

In my mind K2 will be a reference point to poor game design....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1. Much as I don't think people should JUST give KotOR II's failure over to a time limit, and thus give them credit for something they don't deserve credit for, it certainly would've been a lot better. It's better to just overlook possibilities, and examine the actual real world product. Maybe I misunderstood this point.

 

2. No one cut you off from the Force. That you couldn't see that, though, probably is a bad on Obsidian's part. Kreia tried to explain after the confrontation in the Jedi Enclave.

 

3. Don't tell me you thought Kreia WASN'T supposed to be obvious, to some degree.

It's really FAR too easy to attribute disagreements over what plot twists were inadequate to the irrational dislike of "predictability" in a given story. I don't think anyone, when they are inspired to say a story was predictable, means that the story just wasn't new enough. Frankly, it's all been done - what matters is the unique quality of a story that gives it it's character. And really, it's the experience of the story that makes the story unique to a persons mind. If they didn't like it... they probably won't find it unique, that it stands out in their mind.

1. The "full potential" argument has been said over and over. I don't think that the result would have been as good as most people imagine it.

 

2. I think that main character development is more important than NPC development. I don't know about you but the Exile seemed less developed than the NPCs to me. (I finished the game -in DS- without knowing who cut me off from the Force!!)

 

3. So you didn't like the Revan twist? Don't tell me that Kreia fooled you......

 

EDIT: Not to mention the fact that K2 is the first game that required a fan-made "restoration" project to fill it's plot gaps..... Thank you LA....

 

In my mind K2 will be a reference point to poor game design....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1. Never know will we.

 

2. Then thats your fault for not developing him. KOTORII requires more input on your part where as in KOTOR regardless of how much effort you put in you still end up with the pregen character.

 

3. Kreia never tried to fool anyone.Not sure how anyone could think otherwise.

 

Except it dosnt require a fan made restoration project, thats just something that people are doing. The game plays fine without it and I understood the plot with a little effort.

I basically agree with ShadowPaladin. However, people really do feel cheated, out there, and upset that the game's experience wasn't developed fully - which is definitely something that should be addresssed for the future.

just look at KOTOR 1: The game's release date was changed like 3 times and they werre developing it for like what,  2 years? And the result was:  the best game ever!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only way anyone could think KOTOR was the best game ever was if they played very few games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

actually, I played a lot of games. I like KOTOR because it's Star Wars, yes, but also because it's my kind of game. It's real. You don't go walking in dark places killing beasts like in Doom 3... There are all kinds of environments and that's what I like about games.

 

And that someone who thinks that KOTOR is the best game ever just has her opinion about the game. I didn't think I wasn't allowed to say what I think.

Your more than welcome to think it. I thought you were stating it as a matter of fact.

Having finished the game several times, and spent some time looking through the "unlocked" movies, I'm beginning to change my views on the question posed in this topic, "Why was KOTOR2 rushed?"

 

Don't know whether this has been discussed here but I found that the official "trailer" included with the game announced that the game would be released in "Winter 2004", which can only mean one thing, late December, 2004.

 

I then looked at the date of the "trailer" file, and found that its July, 2004. This means that at least as early as July 2004, both LA and Obsidian were agreed on a December 2004 release date. From these forums, I had gotten the impression that LA pushed Obsidian, at the last minute, to release the game early. But the "trailer" really undercuts all of that.

 

Anyone know anything more about this?

I don't think the publisher and the developer "agree" per se; I think it's rather a case of LucasArts saying "Have it done by Christmas", and Obsidian reply something along the lines of "Yes, my Lord".

Don't know whether this has been discussed here but I found that the official "trailer" included with the game announced that the game would be released in "Winter 2004", which can only mean one thing, late December, 2004. 

 

It has been much discussed here. Winter lasts till the middle of March. Thus February is a winter month, too.

It has been much discussed here. Winter lasts till the middle of March. Thus February is a winter month, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But if "Winter" was meant to include Febuary or March, then the trailer would have been announcing a release date of "February or March 2004", a date 5 to 6 months prior to the release of the trailer, which makes absolutely no sense.

It has been much discussed here. Winter lasts till the middle of March. Thus February is a winter month, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But if "Winter" was meant to include Febuary or March, then the trailer would have been announcing a release date of "February or March 2004", a date 5 to 6 months prior to the release of the trailer, which makes absolutely no sense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Following the amazing reception it got at E3 (may) they decided to push for a holiday release.

 

I'll tell you something interesting, at least in the UK the game went back into the charts for a bit following EP III's release although EPIII is still up on top (along with lego SW).

It has been much discussed here. Winter lasts till the middle of March. Thus February is a winter month, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But if "Winter" was meant to include Febuary or March, then the trailer would have been announcing a release date of "February or March 2004", a date 5 to 6 months prior to the release of the trailer, which makes absolutely no sense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry, I forgot to mention that a LucasArts rep told Gamespot that their "Winter 2004" extends to February 2005.

Sorry, I forgot to mention that a LucasArts rep told Gamespot that their "Winter 2004" extends to February 2005.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Incredible ... Thanks.

Getting back to the topic at hand; the gaming business is run by one thing: money.

 

The development time of a software product is directly related to the amount of money the developer receives/allocates. So long as the money is there, the developer may continue to pay their employees to work on the project. In the case of KotOR2 LucasArts felt that the Christmas release would yield higher and/or quicker profits than the original February release date. This means that in addition to supplementing revenue on 2nd quarter financial statements (quarter ends December 31st), it eliminates an "accounts payable" entry.

 

LucasArts also has a track record of 1-year development cycles. The majority of developers in the gaming industry cringe at that number. It is a very short time period. Developers are free to try to get extensions on development time but this costs the publisher (additional) money. Bioware has the clout to request such extensions without too much trouble. Smaller companies like Obsidian often do not. This also works in reverse when the publisher decides move forward the date of release.

 

There may also be something to be said for QA. QA isn't exactly looked upon as a glamorous position. But ultimately they determine if a product is to be given the green light to ship. In the case of KotOR1 QA was handled internally by Bioware. For KotOR2 it was handled by LucasArts. Feargus made a point to mention that QA is internal at Obsidian for NWN2.

 

Regardless it all comes back to money. Money is time. Time is Money.

Battlefront 2 was cranked out really quickly after Battlefront 1.

 

LucasArts has often done that with sequels.

The problem with QA for a game of this size is that it isn't until the final third of the game that you start feeling cheated (except for the bugs you encounter). That's the kinda thing that can screw up.

I don't understand why the PC version is so buggy. The XBox version ran great as soon as I installed it on the HDD.

I don't understand why the PC version is so buggy.  The XBox version ran great as soon as I installed it on the HDD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You have a chipped Xbox ?

 

The reason why the PC version is buggy, is probably the same as why every other crossplatform PC/console game is buggy.

I love my modded XBox. It does everything. I won't advocate piracy, though that is the motivation for most people to mod their XBoxes.

 

I got tons of new functionality. My Thompson DVD drive worked rather poorly, and now I don't have to read off discs. Games and levels load much faster, and more reliably.

 

I have a fully functional Media Center, tons of emulators, web browser, all kinds of things.

 

Our Tivo was full of CSI, Alias and Lost, so my wife downloaded some episodes of House from bitTorrent. But watching the episodes on her laptop wasn't that great. So we wirelessly streamed the video files to the XBox, and watched the episodes on the TV. They looked great.

 

I have all kinds of python scripts that do very specific tasks as well, such as pull movie trailers or game trailers. Oddly enough, movie trailers look better on my TV and load faster than on the PC.

I also think they're slightly more complacent towards bug-testing for PC (not saying they'd ever admit to such a statement), since that can be amended much easier afterwards (not that they do it).

Well, again, I chalk that up to LA. Generally the budget for bugtesting and patches is at the discretion of the publisher.

 

But the coding for the two versions shouldn't be so drastically different that plot triggers are broken in the PC version when they worked in the XBox version.

I don't see what's so great about the influence system. It just forces you to do and say exactly the same things in connection to your NPC every time you play the game. And once you've done that, they have nothing more to say for the rest of the game. I must say I prefer experience to unlock the backstory of a character, and that doesn't need to have anything to do with characters changing or being dynamic. You can have dynamic characters without having to cuddle them everytime you speak to them. For instance if I want to keep a good relation with Kreia and still be a Good Guy, I know that I can't bring her to the Refugee Sector on Nar Shaddaa. Then again if I'm a Bad Guy, there is much temptation in her tagging along to that place for some easy influence points. I say flush that system down where it belongs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't think it should be flushed, but agree with some of your points. It would be nice if you could do the influence and still backstory in lvlups.

 

Another thing about influence, is turning ls member's dark/dark members light is they still talk the way they were designed from the getgo. Nothing you do really matters anyhow...oh well

I think it'd make sense to get the PC out first then the console... you can always patch the bugs on the PC. With consoles that's not always an option.

Another thing about influence, is turning ls member's dark/dark members light is they still talk the way they were designed from the getgo. Nothing you do really matters anyhow...oh well

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

now that IS a gaping hole....at the very least, they need to fix that