Jump to content

Home

Who expects a KotOR announcement at E3 2007?


Char Ell
 Share

Do you expect a KotOR announcement at E3 2007?  

64 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you expect a KotOR announcement at E3 2007?

    • Yes! KotOR fans will at long last hear the long awaited news
      19
    • Nope. We'll just have to keep waiting and hoping.
      37
    • Meh. I really don't care if there is a KotOR announcement.
      8


Recommended Posts

Trailers usually go for maximum "wow!" factor with lots of flashy effects and interesting things crammed into a short clip. Showing the player repeatedly getting overpowered and killed wouldn't be very effective marketing for most prospective players. :)

 

Oddly enough, I'm so desperate for a "new" game I'd be first in line for whatever game pulled this off :lol:

 

But yeah, I definitely agree with you stoffe, trailers should never be used to argument, justify or rate a game... trailers are the Honey Pot for the disposable cash crowd. Lure the "flies" to the goods... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ALL part of the marketing ploy. Plus, it's called "The Force 'UNLEASHED'". Its about a B.A. Apprentice of Darth Vader. Of course he's gonna do something like take out a Star Destroyer by using the force to pull it down from the sky.(If anyone saw that E3 trailer, AWESOME) And besides if you saw anything else about the development of the game, it looks worth buying. All-in-all, just do some research on the game before you buy it. Commercials today are still somewhat like subliminal messages, you show someone a Cheeseburger 20 times a day, eventually they'll want a bite. Stupid loop holes.*man this Big Mac is good*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what? i just asked a legit question, whats wrong with that?

huh? :confused:

 

Was I slamming you for asking it? Not that I'm aware of... it was a comment directed towards tk's post ;)

 

Edit, tk102: My post continues to spread confusion and discord. :devsmoke: bwahaha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atm, I don't care if The Force Unleashed would be a bit too easy (though like other said, don't judge games on trailers). It seems to have a story, and maybe even a decent story. I'll be keeping an eye out for this one.

 

As for K3, there have been hints that there are plans for it, but I'm not going to sit in front of my PC all day long waiting for any news. There are enough games to enjoy. Like Darca Lar, I'm impressed by Assassin's Creed. I've got that one on my list! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't expect much more out of Halo anymore, it's a good franchise and I like their games, but the hype for Halo 3 doesn't mean so much to me. But I am still gonna buy it, when the price drops.

 

And the continuing wait for K3 is beginning to bore me, so I wouldn't doubt it if the game didn't announce for another 1-2 years, and release in 2010 or something. You make someone wait too long, then they're just not gonna care to wait anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I'm blaming Obisidan here. Obisidan is the one to blame. Not for the ending, I am the lone person who like it. But for the "True Sith" storyline.

 

Why, oh why, did they have to let Kreia say the True Sith are responsible? Why do they tease? Thanks to this teasing, people want to wait for K3, but don't they know the cliffhanger ending is what H2 used, and that what caused people to scream?

 

Why can't they just have it end how it did, without mentioning the True Sith, and just showing the new Sith/Jedi Acadmcy? Then we wouldn't even need specualtion on when KOTOR3 would come out, because, quite frankly enough, just like K1 didn't need K2, K2 doesn't need K3.

 

Personally, I was not a fan of Obsidian's entire plotline, and I know that there are several here whom would violently disagree with me. It just did not appeal to me. The whole 'Mass Shadow Generator', or whatever ridiculous device, and the 'True Sith', which effectively made the enemies I've considered to be compelling (Malak and his followers) toothless children being manipulated.

 

There are certain particular juicy bits and bites I liked.

 

Kreia was an interesting and highly compelling character, but the overall plot to me was lackluster, and underwhelming compared to the original game. I'm not enthusiastic for a linear third game, since it must logically adhere to the plotline that I so disliked. Although I'd keep an eye on it all the same if it was announced. My emotional attachment and devotion to the first game makes it so.

 

I'm much more interested in a potential MMORPG, but that is just speculation at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not enthusiastic for a linear third game, since it must logically adhere to the plotline that I so disliked. Although I'd keep an eye on it all the same if it was announced. My emotional attachment and devotion to the first game makes it so.

There's always a chance the 3rd one could be a prequel. :o

 

I'm much more interested in a potential MMORPG, but that is just speculation at the moment.
Blasphemy! :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I was not a fan of Obsidian's entire plotline, and I know that there are several here whom would violently disagree with me.

 

Have I become that well-known? :D

 

and the 'True Sith', which effectively made the enemies I've considered to be compelling (Malak and his followers) toothless children being manipulated.

 

He's not a child but he's at least half-toothless, what with having lost his jaw and all. :p

 

IMO they're probably the second best thing in KotOR, after Kreia. The whole storyline for both games is much more interesting knowing that Revan tried to overthrow the Republic and do all the things he did to avert a greater evil rather than because he was (yet another) Sith Lord who wanted to rule the galaxy with an iron first. It really casts all the evil he did in a new light and makes you wonder how much the ends really do justify the means. Was it wrong and hypocritical for him to become the thing he was fighting to stop it? Or is such pondering irrelevant as long as less people die under Revan's Sith than the true ones? Moral ambiguity FTW!

 

I think it's more interesting than how he just wanted power, anyway. :p

 

Why can't they just have it end how it did, without mentioning the True Sith, and just showing the new Sith/Jedi Acadmcy?

 

Well, the true Sith do set the backdrop for the series and give the whole thing a purpose. The Mandalorian and Jedi Civil Wars don't have quite as much of a point if they weren't both orchestrated by/to fight the true Sith, and I liked the way how the stories of both games were all wrapped up and tied together to focus on one central thing.

 

I'm feeling less worried about KotOR III not coming out, though... We already know the ending, the good guys are going to win and the true Sith are going to lose. :p

 

And just so I can claim some semblance of being on-topic in case this post is snipped for actually not being: On E3, I'm still cheerfully pessimistic we'll hear nothing. :p

 

There's always a chance the 3rd one could be a prequel. :o

 

That wouldn't exactly be KotOR III, would it? :p

 

I'm much more interested in a potential MMORPG

 

I hear Galaxies and WoW are pretty fun as far as those go. ;P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling less worried about KotOR III not coming out, though... We already know the ending, the good guys are going to win and the true Sith are going to lose.

 

It's quite obivous that is true and canonical, but what about the DS ending to K3? Are you going to be still battling the True Sith while turning the Republic into a "False" Sith Empire? Are you going to ally with the True Sith?

 

For us Dark Siders, how will the designers of K3 let you destroy the galaxy? :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't they just have it end how it did, without mentioning the True Sith, and just showing the new Sith/Jedi Acadmcy?

 

Don't shoot me or anything but I very much felt that the whole idea of TSL's plot was that there is something larger at work and that what's going on in the galaxy is but a symptom of that problem. I guess it peeved a lot of people but I liked it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have I become that well-known? :D

 

 

 

He's not a child but he's at least half-toothless, what with having lost his jaw and all. :p

 

IMO they're probably the second best thing in KotOR, after Kreia. The whole storyline for both games is much more interesting knowing that Revan tried to overthrow the Republic and do all the things he did to avert a greater evil rather than because he was (yet another) Sith Lord who wanted to rule the galaxy with an iron first. It really casts all the evil he did in a new light and makes you wonder how much the ends really do justify the means. Was it wrong and hypocritical for him to become the thing he was fighting to stop it? Or is such pondering irrelevant as long as less people die under Revan's Sith than the true ones? Moral ambiguity FTW!

 

I think it's more interesting than how he just wanted power, anyway. :p

 

 

 

Well, the true Sith do set the backdrop for the series and give the whole thing a purpose. The Mandalorian and Jedi Civil Wars don't have quite as much of a point if they weren't both orchestrated by/to fight the true Sith, and I liked the way how the stories of both games were all wrapped up and tied together to focus on one central thing.

 

I must respectfully disagree.

 

Although, we do have much in common. I am a staunch adherent and avid follower to stories with moral ambiguity, focusing on the actual characters involved, with a drastic de-emphasis on technology or magic. Some of my favorite series include the 2003 version of Battlestar Galactica, as well as HBO’s Rome. I sense that you would agree that it is characters that drive a good story, rather than the setting or tools that the characters use.

 

Our difference of opinion may originate in that I had several conceptions of Revan at the end of the first game that I became infatuated with – and have stubbornly refused to alter or add to. I saw the second game’s addition of Malachor’s ‘corrupting influence’, the ‘true sith’, and a ‘larger military threat’, as corruptions of my original conceptions – and therefore rejected them. As I saw it – and still see it – such additions took Revan’s motivations from being psychological in nature and added magical elements to it. Revan’s fall, to me, was his passionate and overly emotional sense of justice.

 

Revan’s descent into evil was not a simple affair – such as some theoretical single corruption, like a ‘true sith’ phantom, or encounter, would be. It was a long, drawn out and slow process – a first step of defiance, then a hardening from war, and then an acquired arrogance. Then it was the Star Maps, and the allure of a weapon to end all wars that infatuated him – or so I saw it. By then, he must have had a warped conception of the galaxy, and thought perhaps that if he was in charge all along, the Mandalorian War would never have happened (that it would have been cut off or responded to before it became a catastrophe), and that if he was in charge henceforth, such carnage would not happen again. That is just a paraphrase of what must have been passing through his mind. Of course, as time went on, and he descended further in his acquisition of each Star Map – and eventually the Star Forge – the influence of the Sith teachings distorted this original goal as time went on, and he degenerated into a blunt quest for power.

 

That, to me, was Revan.

 

I did not like the notion that he was faced with a threat of fighting a greater military threat that was behind the Mandalorians, whereby he succumbed on the spot and turned against everything he ever knew and launched a war against those he just defended – all in order to unite them against this threat, knowing millions would die in his takeover. It is unrealistic. Even a hardened Revan would not make such a drastic and militarily unsound decision, as it is against the idea that he was a brilliant tactician. He must have known his seizure of the Republic would be no pushover, even with his considerable backing – its just too vast a territory. The threat of being gridlocked, and the inevitable destabilizing of the galaxy would weaken resistance to such an 'unseen threat'.

 

Then add in all of the references to the ‘power’ of Malachor, and that its surface corrupted those whom walked on it. It takes away from the psychological rationale for Revan’s fall that I hold onto so strongly. This is part of a consistent pattern with the game – as several intangible and ‘magical’ elements are brought on by Obsidian to use as plot catalysts. One such example is that these ‘true sith’ somehow ‘fed’ on force users, or whatever that means – the ‘mass shadow generator’ – the ‘living wound in the force’ – Darth Nihilus and his ‘hunger’ and ‘consuming the galaxy’ – so on, it sounds too ridiculous to me.

 

Although that is just my personal taste, others have much different tastes - and diversity cannot be considered in any manner to be a fault. To me, the second game is too much heavy science fiction, and too little character driven storyline. Character driven stories have psychological motivations and interactions determining paths. Some science fiction driving a plot is perfectly fine, and fun, but the game goes too far to me, and peppers it in too generously.

 

Further, the entire plot arc does not compute for me as far as being a legitimate continuation of the first game. It makes the first game’s outcome irrelevant. If the first game ended with a dark side ending, Revan is strategically inconsistent and unsound in abandoning his acquired title and empire – which (if there was a ‘true sith’) he intended all along to consolidate and use to fight the ‘greater threat’. Instead, he disappeared into the wilderness, and let his empire disintegrate in an almost inevitable civil war for power. Why did he not resume his original plan and conquer the Republic, upon ‘remembering the true sith’, and turn this new empire upon the ‘unseen enemy’? All that information aside, Sith never surrender power, which is what Revan would essentially do by vanishing. In fact, they hunger for it, and it distracts them from their original goals (such as Yuthura Ban gives an example of).

 

If the first game ended with a light side ending, it seems illogical that Revan would not warn the Republic of the nature of the far greater threat. Instead, he vanished into the very regions that ‘corrupted’ him and ‘so many others’, and as such, abandoned the galaxy. He simply let the ‘feeding sith’ utterly render the Jedi Order extinct, and therefore lost any possible strong pillar of support in defending the galaxy. The second game makes clear that the Republic’s fate is 'up in the air' (even if we know the ultimate outcome), and it is dying from its wounds. I don’t believe Revan would abandon such a situation, and then go unilaterally to a place where he must be impossibly outnumbered.

 

It may be apologetically tied into the first game, but to me, it is quite far from how logically things would have turned out. Just my small view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not like the notion that he was faced with a threat of fighting a greater military threat that was behind the Mandalorians

 

But we do know through Canderous that there were some Sith behind the Mandalorian Wars. Whether if these Sith are the "True Sith" or the Sith from Exar Kun's time remains speculative, but it's certain that there was something else behind it.

 

Then add in all of the references to the ‘power’ of Malachor, and that its surface corrupted those whom walked on it. It takes away from the psychological rationale for Revan’s fall that I hold onto so strongly. This is part of a consistent pattern with the game – as several intangible and ‘magical’ elements are brought on by Obsidian to use as plot catalysts

 

But, Revan's "fall" is never acredited to the influence of Malachor. As the Chronicles explicitly state:

 

"Early in the war, at some point in the year 3,963 BBY, Revan visited the ancient Sith world of Malachor V, while scouting for new outposts along the embattled Outer Rim. Word had reached him that Malachor was anathema to the Mandalorians and he wished to know the reason why. Upon landing on the planet's surface, he was nearly destroyed by the resonance of ancient Sith power and he only managed to survive the encounter through sheer force of will. He fed upon the power of the dark side of the Force, and in so doing, avoided being utterly corrupted by it."

 

One such example is that these ‘true sith’ somehow ‘fed’ on force users

 

Uh? We are never told that the True Sith have such ability

 

the ‘mass shadow generator’

 

There was nothing "magic" about it. The MSG was simply a superweapon, just like the Star Forge was

 

If the first game ended with a dark side ending, Revan is strategically inconsistent and unsound in abandoning his acquired title and empire – which (if there was a ‘true sith’) he intended all along to consolidate and use to fight the ‘greater threat’. Instead, he disappeared into the wilderness, and let his empire disintegrate in an almost inevitable civil war for power. Why did he not resume his original plan and conquer the Republic, upon ‘remembering the true sith’, and turn this new empire upon the ‘unseen enemy’?

 

Because this enemy may not be beatable by conventional means, and instead, Revan decides to destroy them from the inside. Like Kreia said at the end of the game: "He left all his machines behind, for he knew he would not need them"

 

If the first game ended with a light side ending, it seems illogical that Revan would not warn the Republic of the nature of the far greater threat.

 

That's because warning others would mean that he'd be followed by those who care about him. Again, Kreia explains at the end of TSL that "He knew he must leave all loves behind, no matter how deeply one cares for them"

 

He simply let the ‘feeding sith’ utterly render the Jedi Order extinct

 

No. He had no knowledge that Sion and Nihilus would rise after his departure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It may be apologetically tied into the first game, but to me, it is quite far from how logically things would have turned out. Just my small view.

 

QFT (IMO). I completely agree, especially with this true Sith stuff, To tell you the truth I initially disregarded there existence as Kreias ramblings, (at that point I'd stopped listening to her) then I became a member of LF and realized that a majority of the fan-base had elevated this story as the central story to any possible sequel. I play TSL because I love Star Wars and RPG's, but like you say, it's not quite right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Revan’s descent into evil was not a simple affair – such as some theoretical single corruption, like a ‘true sith’ phantom, or encounter, would be. It was a long, drawn out and slow process – a first step of defiance, then a hardening from war, and then an acquired arrogance. Then it was the Star Maps, and the allure of a weapon to end all wars that infatuated him – or so I saw it. By then, he must have had a warped conception of the galaxy, and thought perhaps that if he was in charge all along, the Mandalorian War would never have happened (that it would have been cut off or responded to before it became a catastrophe), and that if he was in charge henceforth, such carnage would not happen again. That is just a paraphrase of what must have been passing through his mind. Of course, as time went on, and he descended further in his acquisition of each Star Map – and eventually the Star Forge – the influence of the Sith teachings distorted this original goal as time went on, and he degenerated into a blunt quest for power.

 

But exactly how unique is that?

 

I mean, I didn't feel as though Revan felt corrupted by power. In fact, we got no indicitation that Revan wanted to stop the Mandolrian Wars in K1. It was in TSL that an actual justification was made, but in K1, there was no justification. In fact, many people actually thought Revan as a cold, heartless bastard who actually disobeyed the Jedi Council because he WANTED to become a Sith Lord. Even Vrook implied Revan did some Sith alchmey. Not something of a guy who slowly fell, sounds like a power-hungry evil genius with an ego the size of Malak's Levithan.

 

I mean, that story isn't unique. I could say Palpatine really wanted to save the Republic but got corrupted by his Sith training. In fact, even Count Dooku did as such. He wanted to find a way to save the Jedi order by learning the Dark Side, and that why he slowly fell.

 

I mean, it's a semi-good story, but it's not unique, and most people don't share your views. At least in TSL, it was made canon that Revan was actually a good guy at heart, who then got corrupted, rather than letting players think Revan is good versus Revan is bad.

===

I personally feel that in the end, I guess people are upset that their preceptions of Revan is being upset by what other people say. Bah, I say. Revan isn't even a real guy. Neither is the Star Wars universe. If I want to change the universe, I will. I could easily rule TSL uncanon and say that Revan, after uniting the galaxy in a Sith Empire, destroyed the True Sith, got murdered by Bastila, and saw the entire Sith Empire collaspe and a brand new Republic formed with a new Jedi Order led by the Exile. No canon problems at all, and makes people happy.

 

And by canon, I mean movie canon, the actual canon that truly matters and not this EU stuff. If you guys start treating all the games and all the books as Fan Ficition, inspired by George Lucas' ramblings, but not really related or important or even good writing at all, then all will be fine. If you don't like the Ewoks comic books or the YV, then alright, disregard them. They are still "canon" according to LF, but it's really what you WANT, not what some fan fic writer wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we do know through Canderous that there were some Sith behind the Mandalorian Wars. Whether if these Sith are the "True Sith" or the Sith from Exar Kun's time remains speculative, but it's certain that there was something else behind it.

 

 

 

But, Revan's "fall" is never acredited to the influence of Malachor. As the Chronicles explicitly state:

 

"Early in the war, at some point in the year 3,963 BBY, Revan visited the ancient Sith world of Malachor V, while scouting for new outposts along the embattled Outer Rim. Word had reached him that Malachor was anathema to the Mandalorians and he wished to know the reason why. Upon landing on the planet's surface, he was nearly destroyed by the resonance of ancient Sith power and he only managed to survive the encounter through sheer force of will. He fed upon the power of the dark side of the Force, and in so doing, avoided being utterly corrupted by it."

 

 

 

Uh? We are never told that the True Sith have such ability

 

 

 

There was nothing "magic" about it. The MSG was simply a superweapon, just like the Star Forge was

 

 

 

Because this enemy may not be beatable by conventional means, and instead, Revan decides to destroy them from the inside. Like Kreia said at the end of the game: "He left all his machines behind, for he knew he would not need them"

 

 

 

That's because warning others would mean that he'd be followed by those who care about him. Again, Kreia explains at the end of TSL that "He knew he must leave all loves behind, no matter how deeply one cares for them"

 

 

 

No. He had no knowledge that Sion and Nihilus would rise after his departure

 

My good friend, truth be told, I’m rather not willing to invest time arguing on here.

 

Internet arguments: it is a road with no destination, and just uses up time and effort. It is an argument of one person’s mental perception of a story opposed to a different person’s perception of a story – both people will defend their view to the bitter end of wearing the other person down. Both people have preconceptions and mental walls that cannot be torn down with simple quote-format style rebuttals.

 

I gave a short, succinct – and by no means comprehensive – view of why I found the second game unsettling, and I stand by it. Nor do I expect the opinions of particular crowds to change.

 

It just won’t happen. I respect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave a short, succinct – and by no means comprehensive – view of why I found the second game unsettling, and I stand by it. Nor do I expect the opinions of particular crowds to change.

 

Indeed. That's why i limited my response to answer some things that were clarified in other sources (or even the game itself), and denoted some possibilities as of how the next game could explain the others. I agree with plenty of your points, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...