One thing I hated about the LS/DS issues in KOTOR

[Darque]

Don't try to find some cheap way to get out of this. When they meant actions they meant the decisions you make in the game, not one final decision. You are just trying to look too much into it to find a way to find me wrong.

LOL...omg...

 

Unless you work for Bioware, only THEY know what THEY meant by "actions".

 

I don't think I'm the one trying "too hard" here.

[Volourn]

Ahh.. The old 'I knew what they meant' argument'. LOL I love Intenet Geek Message Boards tm.

[Darque]

One thing I'd like to address.

 

While I do think "one" action can have a pivitol affect, either for light or dark... I do also think that your prior actions or path could make that choice easier or harder.

 

/geekshield on

 

If you note in the original movies, I guess that's 4 5 and 6... Darth Vader (who goes Lightside again and redeems himself) didn't just make "one" choice.

 

I mean he stopped Boba Fett from shooting the heros in the back as they fled.

 

He seemed to want to talk to luke more than fight, etc.

 

There was definite hesitation there (all very minor actions)... so each hesitation would have made him less "dark" right? And since he kept hesitating on the darkside path... wouldn't all these minor actions make the "one" BIG choice easier (where he throws Emperor Ugly down that shaft)?

[nightcleaver]

Here's what I'm thinking: One side is seeing a problem with having a temple choice, the other with not having it. However, the side that want's no temple choice is going about it the wrong way, I think. They think it's because of that choice that your previous choices don't matter. That's wrong. There are ways to make your choices matter, and in fact they do matter - just not for the ending. I, personally, really REALLY wish they had done something like fallout and HotU where there was a monologue at the end explaining what happens to the characters/ places, but I understand that's not very star wars. I don't see why that matters, as it would make everyone happy and this argument wouldn't be an issue right now. It's a game - in the star wars movies, the viewer's choice didn't matter, but in a gamethe PLAYER's choice does.

 

You have a right to voice your opinion, but it's offensive when that opinion overrides all other opinions. I see no problem with the temple choice, especially considering the time and resource constraints they were dealing with, to limit the amount of video they'd have to record. It did make it feel like your choices didn't matter before that point, but they DID - it's just that you didn't get any feedback is the problem.

I know people might be bothered by this, but so what: essentially, after each stated their own opinion, their "supporting facts" were BS to make people understand. The only thing it succeeded in doing, though was to make a stupid argument. I hope you see that.

[Gorth]

There was definite hesitation there (all very minor actions)... so each hesitation would have made him less "dark" right? And since he kept hesitating on the darkside path... wouldn't all these minor actions make the "one" BIG choice easier (where he throws Emperor Ugly down that shaft)?

Agree.

 

In the start of the movies (I refuse to acknowledge the existance of episdes I-III), Darth Vader shows typical Sith casual brutally when dealing with minions. Once the heroes enters the picture, his motivations becomes less clear. Some ambiguity as to why he keeps the "good guys" alive. Is it truly just because he wants to oust Palpatine or is it something deeper like family ties that he can't bring himself to sever ?

 

Ah well, once The Emperor gets "shafted", there is little doubt about his loyalties, but his actions over all three movies could be interpreted as a gradual slide from DS to LS

[nightcleaver]

Ermm... cause and effect is pretty much impossible to discern here. You're saying it's because of his actions, but I would suspect it's more along the lines of that there's some good in him all along that creates hesitations. However, there's the issue of people defining themselves according to their actions - Bastila, Star Forge, having trouble accepting her redemption. I'm not sure really if anyone could pin point that because he did minor things, it made the choice easier.

[Darque]

Persactly Gorth.

 

 

So basically what this means (if we transplant it to KotOR) is that KotOR failed this kind of thing by making things too centered on a single action at the temple...

 

...though you "could" look at it that since "you" roleplay your character, any action you take should mirror the prior choices you made if you're really roleplaying.

 

If you master Lightside and then choose to flip to the dark for no real reason, then that's the fault of the player, not the game design.

 

Basically the way they connected the game to the ending (the temple "choice) more or less puts the fault on the player.

 

If you have a male character and were pure lightside and choose to follow Bastila to the darkside out of love(as someone else presented)... then you have that choice as a player... and that's your roleplayed choice.

 

That's hardly a fault of the game design, if anything I think that's a GOOD design to allow the player to make that roleplayed choice.

 

If someone makes the choice "just because", then that is the players fault in my opinion.

 

What they should have done (and would make more sense) is keep the "temple choice", but cut off dialogue options based on where you stood on the Light/Dark side meter... or at least alter how you'd make a full flip based on that. (i.e make you work for it if you really "want" to flip)

 

That way they could have kept the illusion that "all your choices" actually had an affect, while at the same time allowing this kind of "choose your path" freedom.

[Darque]

Ermm... cause and effect is pretty much impossible to discern here. You're saying it's because of his actions, but I would suspect it's more along the lines of that there's some good in him all along that creates hesitations. However, there's the issue of people defining themselves according to their actions - Bastila, Star Forge, having trouble accepting her redemption. I'm not sure really if anyone could pin point that because he did minor things, it made the choice easier.

Why not? It made his fall easier.

 

Or are you going to say he was always evil?

 

Catch 22 and all that

[nightcleaver]

What do you mean it made his fall easier? Who's fall? I was talking about someone saying the little LS things would make the Light side choice easier.

[Darque]

Who do you think? Given that you tried to expand on my example <_<

[Jaesun]

So in other words, ALL of the choices you made during the game to be on LS/DS didn't matter. What really mattered was what your decision was on the top of that Temple.

Well said. That was my biggest problem with KotOR.

 

That any anything you did in game effected nothing or anything at all.

[Tyrell]

So in other words, ALL of the choices you made during the game to be on LS/DS didn't matter. What really mattered was what your decision was on the top of that Temple.

Well said. That was my biggest problem with KotOR.

 

That any anything you did in game effected nothing or anything at all.

Thanks, that makes atleast 2 people who see things my way.

[Shdy314]

So in other words, ALL of the choices you made during the game to be on LS/DS didn't matter. What really mattered was what your decision was on the top of that Temple.

Well said. That was my biggest problem with KotOR.

 

That any anything you did in game effected nothing or anything at all.

It's already been shown that having a moment of truth does not make your choices through the rest of the game unimportant. At least if you RP. If you are just a powergamer running through the game with no concept of your character (which is fine it is your game) then why complain about any dialogue options. You may as well play an FPS. Why not just choose at the beginning lightside or dark? Play Jedi Academy. Oh but wait they also had a moment of truth when you can kill whats his name or let him live.

[nightcleaver]

I think people are totally ignoring one of my points. Note, I only suspect.

 

If they had done something as in Fallout or HotU, and said what happened because of your choices, this wouldn't be a problem now. Use your imagination; imagine if it would be different if they had done that. If you still feel unsatisfied, then I don't understand what the problem is, and that's MY problem... but the mechanics of communication and psychology would say it's your problem too, as your arguments are hitting a brick wall with me and anyone else with my perspective.

[Gorth]

The problem with the choice on the templetop (at least my problem with it), is that it is too cheap and easy. So people say, sure the Star Wars movies are all about lure, fall and redemption ? Blah, sure they are lured by power all the way, but in the two cases I remember, Vader/Anakin paid with his life (Poof, game over) and Calrissian paid with all his worldly possession (and I bet Bespin represented substantial value). In Kotor ? It was a joke. A few unimportant (for an evil player) NPC's was what you had to give up. That was a choice with kindergarten difficulty and makes previous gameplay a joke (from a roleplaying perspective). I tried it once (choosing opposite of my "alignment") and was appalled at how easy it was. Reloaded a previously saved game and continued as Goody the Jedi.

[Shdy314]

What do you think should have happened? They aren't going to strip you of all your items or give you an instant game over ya know.

[Gorth]

What do you think should have happened? They aren't going to strip you of all your items or give you an instant game over ya know.

It appeared as if the designers were afraid of forcing the player to take a stand and face the consequences of moral decisions too early in the game (nobody ever blamed Kotor of being a hard/difficult game). They could have done it a bit more elegantly, simply by removing that silly choice on the temple top. Only thing you really should have been able to decide at that point was whether you wanted Bastila as an ally or an enemy

 

I still stand by that oppinion. It should just have been about whether Bastila was against you are supporting you in the end game. Not about doing moral acrobatics B)

[Shdy314]

Choosing Bastila as an ally or an enemy is exactly what you do on the rooftop.

[MaximusRex]

Ok, we're getting way to serious with the Star Wars mythology here, from a game-mechanical reasons i disagree with having "the choice". Simple cause and consequense.

Uh Hello. KOTOR is a game set in the SW universe. That means it has the same rules that have been established in a million and one sources. Otherwise it isn't SW anymore.

Again, i guess i'm not into SW enough to care about the lure of the darkside all the time. My judgement was strictly based on that when you're playing an RPG, there should be a time when you "suffer" from your choices you done in the past, this shouldn't be restricted to SW universe but to games in general.

There is a penalty for switching sides at the temple. Assuming you are playing DS or LS then you have chosen the powers that complement the side you are playing. By switing sides you have made those powers weak, and have made your journey through the rest of the game more difficult. Maybe this pentaly needs to be made steeper, but the choice should remain.

[Gorth]

Problem is, you can bend your own morals with the choice. I would have preferred to bend hers, to match my morals, as they had been defined by the way I played 90% of the game. Heck, they could even had Charisma bonuses count for something to sway her to your side, if you were a light sider. If you were a Dark sider, It would just be a question of persuading her to turn against Malak, because you are bigger, meaner and more suited for leadership than he. Instead it became you, Revan, who adjusted your own morals to whatever endgame you wanted to play. As I said, all question of oppinion, I didn't like the way they did it.

[newc0253]

why do some people seem to think that all choices in a game should have equal weight?

 

many things come down to a single choice, despite everything that has gone before. the final countdown. crunch time. the moment of truth. whatever you call it, everyone's familiar with the concept.

 

so why is it so hard for some people to grasp that KoTOR was set up that way?

[Shdy314]

Gorth you persuade her to turn against Malak by beating her in combat. Then she recognizes your strength. You aren't bending to her morals (unless you want to RP a Jedi that falls then because he loves her) and besides SW is all about falling to the dark side. Which is normally a sudden departure from your previous morals. And you can eventually turn her back to the lightside.

[Gorth]

Which is normally a sudden departure from your previous morals.

 

I'm not sure about my previous morals, if any

 

Right, you can actually spank some sense into her, if you are a darksider. Forgot about that. I still felt cheated as a lightsider though, as she just runs off (like that whimp Carth when you are a darksider :angry:). I would have preferred to kill her off there and then, feeling the loss if she was your romance option, or persuading her to stay out of the conflict, persuade her to join you for the end game, pretty much anything but the way it was implemented. Similar for darkside option, kill her if she will not follow you instead of Malak or have your new apprenctice at your side, helping you to kill off the other party members. In the end, it was a yes/no thing that determined whether or not you ended up being good or bad... I heven't explored all the options in the game yet, so I might be overlooking something... Just didn't like that particular part, it felt "wrong" for some reason.

[nightcleaver]

Problem is, you can bend your own morals with the choice. I would have preferred to bend hers, to match my morals, as they had been defined by the way I played 90% of the game. Heck, they could even had Charisma bonuses count for something to sway her to your side, if you were a light sider. If you were a Dark sider, It would just be a question of persuading her to turn against Malak, because you are bigger, meaner and more suited for leadership than he. Instead it became you, Revan, who adjusted your own morals to whatever endgame you wanted to play. As I said, all question of oppinion, I didn't like the way they did it.

I agree with that point. I mean seriously, you can't even beat her around a bit with the Force, or stop her with force push/pull? No, I think that's purely based on time constraints and such. These aren't amateur writer's here.

 

Still, I can see where you're going. Is it just the inconsistency that bothers you, or do you really dislike the choice?

Would it have worked better for you if there was struggle for choosing the opposite path? Inward struggle, and maybe you talk to whatever henchman are alive and with you?

 

If you're dark side, it's possible that you have absolute loyalty to the republic, as the former revan did, regardless of the costs. If you're lightside, you might have grown absolute loyalty to Bastila, and/or the temptation and struggle against the darkside finally faltered near the star forge, which is part of what, according to jolee, probably contributed largely to Bastila's own fall.

Would you have preferred there wasn't any excuse for that, even?

[Shdy314]

Which is normally a sudden departure from your previous morals.

 

I'm not sure about my previous morals, if any

 

Right, you can actually spank some sense into her, if you are a darksider. Forgot about that. I still felt cheated as a lightsider though, as she just runs off (like that whimp Carth when you are a darksider :angry:). I would have preferred to kill her off there and then, feeling the loss if she was your romance option, or persuading her to stay out of the conflict, persuade her to join you for the end game, pretty much anything but the way it was implemented. Similar for darkside option, kill her if she will not follow you instead of Malak or have your new apprenctice at your side, helping you to kill off the other party members. In the end, it was a yes/no thing that determined whether or not you ended up being good or bad... I heven't explored all the options in the game yet, so I might be overlooking something... Just didn't like that particular part, it felt "wrong" for some reason.

Look at Return of the Jedi. Luke has the option there to kill Vader and take his place. Of course it's a movie so he doesn't. But even there we see the moment of truth. Just like in KOTOR there is one defining moment that makes the character good or bad. Not coincidentally it is also the LAST decision they make. This doesn't make all the good stuff Luke did before any less important. Nor does it make the quests you did before less important. If he had taken Vader's role then people might feel gyped that the entire two movies before it were a total waste of time. That's why people seem to be bothered by the choice in KOTOR because some people did choose then to go down the dark path. But we must remember unlike a movie this is a single player game that affects only the person playing it. Don't worry about how other people played it. That is why its optional. Choose whatever you like. You aren't penalized either way. Except in the force points department. There are a lot of RP ways to justify falling to the dark side at that point and we have to remember this is a game. Not everyone wants to play it 10 or 12 times. Some people want to play it once but do want to see the DS ending.