Finally, my opinions/suggestions of KOTOR 2

[GhostofAnakin]

You make this comment:

 

Are you serious?  Malak had a huge role in K1!  The story was tied to him in a ton of ways.  He was also, of course, the main bad guy.  Without his character, or someone to fill his place, the story would never have happened.  Your character would never have been betrayed in the first place, and the rest of everything in K1 would not have happened.

 

Then follow with this:

 

As for Sion, look at his character and the part he played.  He betrayed Kreia, but so did Nihilus.  He was not unique in that aspect, either.  If you look at his character and all his contributions, they really don't matter that much.  If you had 2 Sith Lords instead of three, the story would have still worked out.  Why?  Nihilus would have betrayed Kreia anyway, and almost everything that happened could have been done without him.  Because he really didn't contribute that much.  He's really not unique in any way.  I stand by what I said: his character was just there to fill up space and look mean. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So in K1's case, if Malak had not betrayed Revan the story wouldn't have taken place. But in K2's case, if Sion (and Nihilus, another guy you said had no real point) didn't betray Kreia, then the story would have still gone on? You contradict yourself so bad in that explanation.

 

The entire reason for the events of K2 is because of Kreia and her goals. She's the one that wanted the Exile back in known space, she's the one that wanted the Exile to draw out those who hurt/betrayed her. If it weren't for Sion (and Nihilus), then Kreia wouldn't have been betrayed, thus Kreia wouldn't have sought out the Exile to do her dirty work, and thus the entire story wouldn't have happened.

 

It seems to me you're downplaying Sion's part and glorifying Malak's part (btw, I do believe BOTH were necessary and integral to each plot) because you liked K1, but disliked K2.

[Krookie]

I've think we've all seen one to many on these things. <_< "

[thepixiesrock]

I've think we've all seen one to many on these things. <_<  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

 

 

By the way...use proper english <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Dark Moth]

Nihilus would have betrayed Kreia anyway, and almost everything that happened could have been done without him.  Because he really didn't contribute that much.  He's really not unique in any way.  I stand by what I said: his character was just there to fill up space and look mean. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I *really* think you're overlooking Nihilus' special ties to the Exile... Yes, he may have been a pushover in combat, but plotwise he is a central character, and he scared the living **** out of me when I confronted him... Until the actual fight began, that is

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was referring to Sion, not Nihilus. I should have phrased it like: "Nihilus would have betrayed Kreia anyway, and because of this almost everything could have happened without Sion."

 

You make this comment:

 

Are you serious?  Malak had a huge role in K1!  The story was tied to him in a ton of ways.  He was also, of course, the main bad guy.  Without his character, or someone to fill his place, the story would never have happened.  Your character would never have been betrayed in the first place, and the rest of everything in K1 would not have happened.

 

Then follow with this:

 

As for Sion, look at his character and the part he played.  He betrayed Kreia, but so did Nihilus.  He was not unique in that aspect, either.  If you look at his character and all his contributions, they really don't matter that much.  If you had 2 Sith Lords instead of three, the story would have still worked out.  Why?  Nihilus would have betrayed Kreia anyway, and almost everything that happened could have been done without him.  Because he really didn't contribute that much.  He's really not unique in any way.  I stand by what I said: his character was just there to fill up space and look mean. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So in K1's case, if Malak had not betrayed Revan the story wouldn't have taken place. But in K2's case, if Sion (and Nihilus, another guy you said had no real point) didn't betray Kreia, then the story would have still gone on? You contradict yourself so bad in that explanation.

 

The entire reason for the events of K2 is because of Kreia and her goals. She's the one that wanted the Exile back in known space, she's the one that wanted the Exile to draw out those who hurt/betrayed her. If it weren't for Sion (and Nihilus), then Kreia wouldn't have been betrayed, thus Kreia wouldn't have sought out the Exile to do her dirty work, and thus the entire story wouldn't have happened.

 

It seems to me you're downplaying Sion's part and glorifying Malak's part (btw, I do believe BOTH were necessary and integral to each plot) because you liked K1, but disliked K2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My point is, you had to have a "Malak" in K1 for the story to work. He was pivotal to the plot. But you didn't need a "Sion" character for the K2 story to work. Nihilus could have handled the rest on his own. And I never said Nihilus was pointless (correct me if I'm wrong), I was just talking about Sion. Nihilus and Kreia were both very important characters, but with both of them in the mix Sion's character did not contribute much to the overall story. I didn't contradict myself at all. And while I liked K1, I'm not speaking just because I thought it was better. I'm just saying that with both Kreia and Nihilus, you didn't really *need* a Sion. In K1, however, you *needed* a Malak character for it to work.

[GhostofAnakin]

My point is, you had to have a "Malak" in K1 for the story to work.  He was pivotal to the plot.  But you didn't need a "Sion" character for the K2 story to work.  Nihilus could have handled the rest on his own.  And I never said Nihilus was pointless (correct me if I'm wrong), I was just talking about Sion.  Nihilus and Kreia were both very important characters, but with both of them in the mix Sion's character did not contribute much to the overall story.    I didn't contradict myself at all.  And while I liked K1, I'm not speaking just because I thought it was better.  I'm just saying that with both Kreia and Nihilus, you didn't really *need* a Sion.  In K1, however, you *needed* a Malak character for it to work. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, you did need Sion because he was Traya's apprentice, the one that she "failed" with. He was the reason she wanted the Exile to succeed to prove that her teachings weren't a failure. Nihilus wasn't. So without Sion, a lot of Kreia's motivations wouldn't have been there.

[BattleCookiee]

Well, they could just have scrapped Sion and gave Nihilus this role. Gave him a bit more hard-needed play-time too...

[GhostofAnakin]

Well, they could just have scrapped Sion and gave Nihilus this role. Gave him a bit more hard-needed play-time too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Same can be said for Malak. They could have just had him betray Revan, but get killed as he was fleeing and have a Sith Lord rise to take over the Star Forge.

 

The point is the character DID do those things. Malak DID betray Revan, just as Sion DID betray Kreia. Both are responsible for setting the events in motion, so that's why I think it's silly to say one was not even needed for one story, but the other was vital.

[Dark Moth]

Well, they could just have scrapped Sion and gave Nihilus this role. Gave him a bit more hard-needed play-time too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Same can be said for Malak. They could have just had him betray Revan, but get killed as he was fleeing and have a Sith Lord rise to take over the Star Forge.

 

The point is the character DID do those things. Malak DID betray Revan, just as Sion DID betray Kreia. Both are responsible for setting the events in motion, so that's why I think it's silly to say one was not even needed for one story, but the other was vital.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, it wouldn't have been pointless. Malak was the only other one other than Revan able to wield the Star Forge, in fact he eventually discovered more of its power than Revan did. Him being your former apprentice and best friend made it all the more personal. It added to the overall drama. Regardless, you needed a "Malak" character to get it done.

 

And it just would have been pointless to have a Sith kill Malak and take his place before your character did. What would it have added to the story? Nothing. Just the same way Sion contributed nothing to the story. They could have easily given his part to Nihilus. As I said, Nihilus betrayed Kreia also, and that was the real motivation for her training the exile. She couldn't do it herself, so she had to train the exile to get revenge on the Jedi and Sith for her. She tells you that in the end.

[GhostofAnakin]

You're missing the point. The point is you say Sion wasn't necessary to the story, but fully acknowledge that his PART (ie the things he did) were. Who cares if someone else could have done them? Han Solo was then unnecessary to ANH. He could have just been replaced by any other smuggler, he just happened to be the one. So using your reasoning, he really wasn't important.

 

You've completely gone full circle from your stance because now you're no longer arguing against Sion's actions being unnecessary to Sion himself being unecessary, but if that's the case then 99% of the characters in both games were unnecessary.

 

What was the point of Handmaiden? What was the point of Jolee? What was the point of HK-47? All unnecessary since their parts could easily have been performed by anyone else.

 

In other words, if you're going to start arguing about a character being easily replaced, then name 99% of characters and they become unnecessary. But your first argument was what Sion brought to the game (ie. his part in the betrayal) was unnecessary, which is untrue. SOMEONE had to betray Traya. SOMEONE had to be that antagonist that chased after the Exile. SOMEONE had to be the failed student.

[alanschu]

Malak was a boring bad guy.

[BattleCookiee]

SOMEONE had to betray Traya.  SOMEONE had to be that antagonist that chased after the Exile.  SOMEONE had to be the failed student.

 

Nihilus Betrayed. Nihilus hunted for you (atleast that's what supposed to be, if the actual action wasn't cut), Nihilus also failed her...

[Lord Kil]

Nihilus would have betrayed Kreia anyway, and almost everything that happened could have been done without him.  Because he really didn't contribute that much.  He's really not unique in any way.  I stand by what I said: his character was just there to fill up space and look mean. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I *really* think you're overlooking Nihilus' special ties to the Exile... Yes, he may have been a pushover in combat, but plotwise he is a central character, and he scared the living **** out of me when I confronted him... Until the actual fight began, that is

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I've completed the game twice, and I'm usually pretty good at unraveling the plot, and I didn't notice any "special" connection between the Exile and Nihilus. We "share" an apprentice, but if he's my long lost brother or something, I missed that dialog line/cutscene. (I don't mind if you tell me what I missed!)

 

It's not that Nihilus and Scion aren't "important", it's just that they aren't fleshed out very well as characters. Even worse, most of the main plot of the game ignores them. You spend your time trying to find lost jedi, not being bothered by or even mentioning these two figures.

 

So basically, they strut around in a few cutscenes, you kill them, then you forget them. Even if Scion gets long winded at the end, it's just not enough to call him a real "main villian".

[Dark Moth]

You're missing the point.  The point is you say Sion wasn't necessary to the story, but fully acknowledge that his PART (ie the things he did) were.  Who cares if someone else could have done them?  Han Solo was then unnecessary to ANH.  He could have just been replaced by any other smuggler, he just happened to be the one.  So using your reasoning, he really wasn't important.

 

You've completely gone full circle from your stance because now you're no longer arguing against Sion's actions being unnecessary to Sion himself being unecessary, but if that's the case then 99% of the characters in both games were unnecessary.

 

What was the point of Handmaiden?  What was the point of Jolee?  What was the point of HK-47?  All unnecessary since their parts could easily have been performed by anyone else.

 

In other words, if you're going to start arguing about a character being easily replaced, then name 99% of characters and they become unnecessary.  But your first argument was what Sion brought to the game (ie. his part in the betrayal) was unnecessary, which is untrue.  SOMEONE had to betray Traya.  SOMEONE had to be that antagonist that chased after the Exile.  SOMEONE had to be the failed student.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think you mistunderstood me when I said that Nihilus could have had his part. I meant that Nihilus could have been just the single main Sith Lord out there. I still stand by that Sion's actions were not important. At least, not important enough to be essential to the story. Sure you could have replaced Han with another smuggler, but the smuggler role had to be filled. Sion's role could have been left empty and the story would still have worked.

 

And Nihilus DID betray Kreia. Nihilus WAS in himself a failed student. He already fulfilled the role of student and traitor. Nihilus WAS chasing after the exile. It was betrayal that motivated Kreia's actions for the most part, not just because Sion was a 'failed student'. Kreia wanted revenge on him for his betrayal. But Nihilus did all that himself and much more, so Sion was NOT important to the story in the long run. All I'm saying is that with Nihilus there, you did not need a 'Sion character'.

 

The only reason I'm making a big deal is that Sion was hyped, but in the end was not that important to the story. Nihilus was hyped, but he contributed far more to the story than Sion.

[Calax]

ultimatly if you combined Nihilus and Sion into one Sith you'd get the same effect as having two underdevloped ones.

 

And to answer Kil, Nihilus's powers were similar in nature to Exile's. Difference being Exile hadn't used his and had no desire to until he was attacked.

[Jediphile]

I think you mistunderstood me when I said that Nihilus could have had his part.  I meant that Nihilus could have been just the single main Sith Lord out there.  I still stand by that Sion's actions were not important.  At least, not important enough to be essential to the story.  Sure you could have replaced Han with another smuggler, but the smuggler role had to be filled.  Sion's role could have been left empty and the story would still have worked. 

 

And Nihilus DID betray Kreia.  Nihilus WAS in himself a failed student.  He already fulfilled the role of student and traitor.  Nihilus WAS chasing after the exile.  It was betrayal that motivated Kreia's actions for the most part, not just because Sion was a 'failed student'.  Kreia wanted revenge on him for his betrayal.  But Nihilus did all that himself and much more, so Sion was NOT important to the story in the long run.  All I'm saying is that with Nihilus there, you did not need a 'Sion character'.

 

The only reason I'm making a big deal is that Sion was hyped, but in the end was not that important to the story.  Nihilus was hyped, but he contributed far more to the story than Sion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I couldn't possibly disagree more, and I think you're completely missing the signicance of the various Sith Lords in the game. Kreia is a teacher and manipulator. If she is to serve her function in the game, then she *must* know secrets and lore that is unknown to everyone else - she *has* to know more than her student does.

 

Her student, Sion, wants power, however, and he doesn't want to wait for it. He is the failed student, because he does betray her rather than learn from her. But if he is to do that, then he has to make an alliance because - as I said above for Kreia - he does know less than she does. For Sion to be able to effectively betray her, he has to make allegiance with somone else, someone who is more powerful than Kreia. Yet it must also be someone who knows "less", in a sense, than Kreia does, because otherwise her role in the plot is again compromised.

 

Nihilus is power, power greater than Kreia's. But he is uncontrolled power - power without will or intelligence. Note what Kreia says of Nihilus: "Power? Do you think so? You would be wrong. There is no strength in the hunger he possesses... and the will behind his power is a primal thing. And it devours him as he devours others - his mere presence kills all around him, slowly, feeding him. He is already dead, it is simply a question of how many he kills before he falls."

 

Nihilus is stronger than Kreia, but he has no sense of control over his powers and no ambition or intellect. He could never have been Kreia's apprentice, because she would never have accepted him - he lacks the very characteristics that she most respects, such as ambition, will, determination, intelligence, analytical sense, subtlety and, of course, manipulation. Nihilus is brute force or just plain brawn, but he has little brain, and that's the only thing that Kreia respects.

 

Note also the Kreia and Sion discussion when the fight on Peragus:

 

Kreia [to Exile and Atton]: "He cannot kill what he cannot see, and power has blinded him long ago. Run. I shall be along shortly."

 

Sion: "I sense you, my master. Faint... weak.

 

Kreia: "Your senses betray you. As you betrayed me.

 

Sion: "After all that has happened, still you live. You are difficult to kill. For one as limited as you, perhaps. To have fallen so far and learned nothing - that is your failing. The failure is yours. No longer do your whispers crawl within my skull. No longer do I suffer beneath teachings that weaken us. And now you run in search of the Jedi. They are all dead, save one - and one broken Jedi cannot stop the darkness that is to come."

 

Kreia: "Perhaps. We shall see."

 

 

If you remove any of these three characters, then you destroy the plot, because they each serve important functions. Also, if you remove one, then the plot is also the lost on the basis of a struggle of among the Sith Lords (of the title) because it then becomes a more internal struggle between who should be master and who should be apprentice - who would Sion betray Kreia for if not Nihilus?

[Calax]

I didn't get the sense that Sion was working for Nihilus. It seemed like all three sith lords were operating independantly until Kreia returned to her academy and forced sion into submission.

[Dark Moth]

Sion wasn't working for Nihilus. The two of them got tired of Kreia/Traya and cast her out. Since Nihilus was stronger than Kreia anyway, he could have done it himself. Thinking about it, Kreia got beaten pretty easily in that cutscene between the three Sith Lords. Sure, I guess you had to make a third Sith Lord, but he didn't contribute enough to be nearly as important as the other two.

 

Kreia I don't think submitted Sion to her will, it was an alliance forged out of 'hatred', as Kreia put it. But Sion and Nihilus eventually betrayed Kreia/Traya and exiled her. That is why Kreia wanted revenge in the first place.

[GhostofAnakin]

Sion wasn't working for Nihilus.  The two of them got tired of Kreia/Traya and cast her out.  Since Nihilus was stronger than Kreia anyway, he could have done it himself.  Thinking about it, Kreia got beaten pretty easily in that cutscene between the three Sith Lords.  Sure, I guess you had to make a third Sith Lord, but he didn't contribute enough to be nearly as important as the other two. 

 

Kreia I don't think submitted Sion to her will, it was an alliance forged out of 'hatred', as Kreia put it.  But Sion and Nihilus eventually betrayed Kreia/Traya and exiled her.  That is why Kreia wanted revenge in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nihilus wasn't stronger than Kreia. It's just that his specific "power" was to suck the life out of Force sensitives, weakening them. On Malachor, where the DS is especially strong, that was too much of a combination for Kreia to handle. However, Nihilus wouldn't have been able to cast Kreia out without Sion's "muscle". If you'll notice in the cutscene, Nihilus is the one that drains the Force from Kreia and blocks her Force useage, but it's Sion who actually physically "finishes her off".

 

I'm not sure why you insist on diminishing Sion's part in the story, despite the fact that he was *needed* for the betrayal and Kreia's motivations for training the Exile to make sense. You keep saying they could have just made Nihilus take Sion's roles, but then you're changing what the story is about.

[vaxen83]

Well, if power is not seen to be controllable, how can it be power?

[Slipstreme]

An alliance based on vengance is a fragile alliance at best

[vaxen83]

Genuine power comes from within.