Ignite your sabers

[Hannibal]

Just in case you thought posting on the official forums accomplishing nothing. Manually igniting the lightsabers(as oppose to it automatically igniting) has been implemented.

 

Someone asked a question about this on the Official forums and were told by a Dev that it wasn't implemented but that he would pass it on to the other Devs to see what they thought of it.

They liked it and so we have it.

[Havoc Stryphe]

Sweet! That alone will make my gameplay experience that much more pleasurable!

 

 

I can see it now...

 

 

click

*Saber on*

click

*saber off*

click

*saber on*

click

*saber off*

 

Muwhahahaha!!!

 

[Taos]

All of the begging and whining......looks like it was good for something.

 

I wonder how many other aspects of the game were put in because of people demanding it......

[Burrie]

I just hope that they won't listen to the folks who whine and demand a JEDI-OUTCAST-LIEK-BATTLE-SYSTEM.

[Esan Pelpat]

Apparently we can ignite sabers manually Burrie found a great video that shows the main character turning on and off his sabers with no hostiles in sight! It might be automatic when hostiles are about though, just have to wait more.

[Burrie]

I must say that I'm actually a bit dissapointed with this new option to ignite and de-ignite the sabers on our whim... why would a Jedi simply walk around with his saber(s) activated when there is no reason to? From the video, there didn't seem to be that much of a reaction to see a Dark Jedi walk around with his sabers ignited.

 

I liked the original approach, that the sabers would automatically ignite whenever combat was about to happen. Much more realistic and all that.

[Esan Pelpat]

Well one way to look at it is that you can just leave your sabers off when your walking around town. I think it doesnt make a huge difference, lets people decide if they want to show sabers to their friends or play the role a bit more.

[Burrie]

Well said, Pelpat. I suppose I could look at it like that.

[Jedi Apprentice]

Originally posted by Burrie

I liked the original approach, that the sabers would automatically ignite whenever combat was about to happen. Much more realistic and all that.

 

Same here, Burrie.

 

But I have a sad feeling I will spend many hours of my life igniting and de-igniting my saber.

 

I also agree Pelpat. It lets you be a true Jedi or just run around and be a show off. It kind've adds to the role-playing in a way.

[ultimaster]

I'm glad that's been added to the game. There were a few times when I was playing JKII (Xbox) and I wished I could switch it off but still be carrying it out. It wasn't a big deal, but it shouldn't have been too much trouble...

 

Anyways, I'm glad they take community suggestions into account.

[Swat]

would we burn people if we just run into them with our lightsaber ignited?

[Burrie]

Oh, please no....

[Jedi Apprentice]

Originally posted by Swat

would we burn people if we just run into them with our lightsaber ignited?

 

Kind've like in JO when you would walk up to someone with the dismemberment cheat on and poke them with you saber and their head would fly off?

 

 

The saber just being out could do some damage, but this is a RPG so we shouldn't just be able to touch people with it. That's more of a Action game type of thing. I hope they did some good work on clipping since we can always have our saber out now.

 

Maybe it will be a feat to walk up to someone and poke them.

 

(yes that was sarcasm)

[Esan Pelpat]

In a video preview I saw, Bioware said you can only engage in combat w/ hostiles as to not acidentally kill a story-required NPC and get stuck. So I dont think we have to worry about that too much.

[Jedi Apprentice]

But they also used to have it where your saber would only ignite around hostile people/creatures.

 

It might've changed by now. Which would really up the role-playing and the chances of being evil.

 

Not that I would do it though......

[Frosty_V2.1]

Great news IMO about the on/off for lightsabers. I'm kinda surprised they hadn't already thought of it actually:confused:

 

I think they would make plot required NPCs invincible so you couldn't make them hostile and break the game. But not being able to attack some guy on the street, for absolutely no reason? That would be a bit forced, besides it would be part of my rights as a Dark Jedi! Ah yes, I will make examples of them all:evil5:

[Burrie]

[murmurs bad thoughts about big brothers shutting down the browser whilst you're typing a huge post]

 

I, for one, agree with Bioware's decision for not allowing the PC to mindlessly kill civilians without a good reason. In the end, such actions have never really been fully explored in CRPGs. (as far as I know). Plus, it'll give you more problems than benefits in the end, I think...

 

For example, Fallout, an incredible RPG, allows you to kill civilians just because they breathe in way you don't like. The result is almost always the same... guards will close in to attack you, whilst civilians will run away and won't speak with you. As you might see, this effectively would kill certain quests and stories. Now, Fallout was developed so that you could still complete the game even though you were an enemy at every place you visit. But I think this really wouldn't work with KotOR. Fallout was incredible in its open-endness, but the story and its characters really lacked. Knights of the Old Republic tries to tell a more vast story than Fallout.

 

Now, to make important NPCs invincible would still throw you out of the gameworld at any given moment. Say, I have just completed an important mission for the Republic and returned to Dantooine to receive my rewards. Just as I approach master Vrook, I suddenly notice a student walking along with a double-bladed lightsaber. Being the powergamer/munchkin that players can be in CRPGs, I immediately activate my saber and strike the student down without any remorse. Score one new lightsaber. Then, I approach master Vrook and he immediately showers me with praise and gleefully begins to call me the Hero of the Republic, totally ignoring the act I just did.

 

Granted, Bioware could script it that he would react, but that would result in another long delay, I think. Plus, the actors would have to do extra voicework for all those scenes...

 

In the end, this is why I think it's a good decision why they didn't incorporate it. Plus, I personally have yet to see any Dark Jedi simply walk around, slaughtering civilians when he feels like it... can you honestly picture Darth Maul, Darth Tyrannus, Darth Vader or Darth Sidious doing that? They tend to be a bit more subtle than that.

[Pad]

i agree with you burrie. killing someone would always have a certain change in the storyline and also i see no point why we need it. show you´re a real jedi by showin your sabre fighting when your approached by 3 scoundrels. much much cooler

[Taos]

The thing I like about being able to ingnite the saber is just the control factor. It's more 'jedi like' to be able to control what actions you are taking.....well IMO anyways.

[Guest Jed]

*sides with Burrie*

 

Sorry, I dunn like it.

 

It's true, walking around with your saber ignited just sounds ridiculous. You shouldn't be killing random civilians, only people that will impact the game.

 

I wanted a game less like JO, damnit! X.X

[Jedi Apprentice]

Originally posted by Jedi220

It's true, walking around with your saber ignited just sounds ridiculous. You shouldn't be killing random civilians, only people that will impact the game.

 

Think about it though. It could possibly make more options for the game.

 

Walk up to an NPC and see what they say when you don't have your saber ignited. Now do it again with your saber ignited. (*hopes it matters like that*)

 

See what I mean? Like Leemu said, I think it will add to the control factor, which is always a good thing. I don't think Bioware would add this stupidly or without putting much thought into it. They probabaly have a way that they did it that will fit into the game well.

 

It won't ever be another JO however.

 

Not until they tell us that pressing X, B, and Y at the same time does a swirl attack.

 

 

[Frosty_V2.1]

Well, I see what you mean but all of Bioware's previous CRPGs and CRPGs made on their engine(e.g. Icewind Dale series, dunno about Planescape: Torment though, haven't tried this in Neverwinter Nights either but I'm confident that you can) have allowed you to kill civilians, this caused you to loose reputation, cause nearby guards, any NPCs etc.. to go hostile and if you really got a bad reputation they would have a sort of bounty put on your head causing you to not really be able to go anywhere civilised because you would be killed(that thing about the bounty is from Baldur's Gate II). Doing that sort of thing closes off quests and things like that, and they have gone as far as to set check ups in scripts, ..If you actually did go around killing guys for absolutely no reason I would expect the same sort of thing to happen just as it would if some crazy Jedi actually did it in the StarWars universe(I would think).

About essential NPCs being made invincible, they did this in Neverwinter Nights so you couldn't screw up the story, I think it says this somewhere in the manual, but I know that Aribeth is indeed made so you can't hurt her at least in the first chapter/module of the game.

 

I'm with Leemu and JA on this. The fact that you have these options is in my mind the same as adding a new skill into the game..just because you have this new skill available to you, it doesn't mean you HAVE to use it..that is what makes RPGs enjoyable to me. The fact that you can choose what skills to upgrade and use when you play, choose if you want to be a jerk to the waitress, choose if you want to walk around with your lightsaber on(possibly makibng you look like a bit of a showboat), choose if you want to be a bad guy and dig yourself into a big hole full of trouble. I do agree though that they should make it much more difficult (or not possible) to get your character to a stage where the story is screwed.

 

That's the world as I see it today...

 

btw have they really confirmed that they are going to make civilians not-attackable or err killable..or whatever:D ?

[Burrie]

Well, I see what you mean but all of Bioware's previous CRPGs and CRPGs made on their engine(e.g. Icewind Dale series, dunno about Planescape: Torment though, haven't tried this in Neverwinter Nights either but I'm confident that you can) have allowed you to kill civilians, this caused you to loose reputation, cause nearby guards, any NPCs etc.. to go hostile and if you really got a bad reputation they would have a sort of bounty put on your head causing you to not really be able to go anywhere civilised because you would be killed(that thing about the bounty is from Baldur's Gate II). Doing that sort of thing closes off quests and things like that, and they have gone as far as to set check ups in scripts

 

Now honestly, this is where some of the problems lie. If it could close off quests and storylines, it could come to the point that you actually wouldn't be able to finish the game. That you're practically stuck without knowing it, which would cause frustration. I've heard that the much-praised Morrowind(I still wish that they'd release a demo) offers the option to kill every civilian, and apparantly notifies you when you've killed someone which will shut down the main quest for you. This latter feature, however, is apparantly rather buggy, and would often not even show up. Mind you, I haven't played the game, I'm merely quoting some complaints I've read.

 

And even if they did make it so that the main NPCs would always respond to you, it still would look silly... the Republic won't trust their most important mission to a madman, and I even doubt wether the Sith would. Plus, what if I suddenly decide that Bastilla is a mindless killer? What if I let her run around and kill civilians without a reason? This wouldn't tarnish my personal reputation, so when I talk to master Vrook, he'd still shower me with praise, and probably compliment my allies as well. Afterwards, I'll receive a new quest, even though Bastilla Shan the Psycho is in my team.

 

To be honest, that's still where my troubles lie. There's too big of a chance that it could totally throw you out of the gameworld due to the illogical reactions from the NPCs. And if they did want to add it, it would probably result in more delays. Extra dialogue options, testing, scripting...

 

btw have they really confirmed that they are going to make civilians not-attackable or err killable..or whatever ?

 

I believe it is.

 

See what I mean? Like Leemu said, I think it will add to the control factor, which is always a good thing. I don't think Bioware would add this stupidly or without putting much thought into it. They probabaly have a way that they did it that will fit into the game well.

 

Now here are some rather good points considering the new activation option that I hadn't considered. Has Bioware said that activating your saber has any reprecussions at all? Say, I walk up to a cowering mercenary with my sabers activated, he'll be more liable to help me? Quite frankly, if the activation is in there for more reasons, other than to "look cool and Jedi-like"(which I think sound rather silly... did you see Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan & co. walk around with their sabers activated and in a combat pose, practically shouting "LOOK EVERYONE, I AM A JEDI!"), then I fully support this new feature.

[Frosty_V2.1]

Well, I see what you mean but all of Bioware's previous CRPGs and CRPGs made on their engine(e.g. Icewind Dale series, dunno about Planescape: Torment though, haven't tried this in Neverwinter Nights either but I'm confident that you can) have allowed you to kill civilians, this caused you to loose reputation, cause nearby guards, any NPCs etc.. to go hostile and if you really got a bad reputation they would have a sort of bounty put on your head causing you to not really be able to go anywhere civilised because you would be killed(that thing about the bounty is from Baldur's Gate II). Doing that sort of thing closes off quests and things like that, and they have gone as far as to set check ups in scripts

 

Now honestly, this is where some of the problems lie. If it could close off quests and storylines, it could come to the point that you actually wouldn't be able to finish the game. That you're practically stuck without knowing it, which would cause frustration. I've heard that the much-praised Morrowind(I still wish that they'd release a demo) offers the option to kill every civilian, and apparantly notifies you when you've killed someone which will shut down the main quest for you.

Quite frankly I wouldn't expect them to close off the main plot or large sub quests because obviously that would kill the game.

The effects of getting a low reputation score is what could close off subquests and their related plots.

They didn't completely close off plots(subquests) so much as penalise you for being a bad person, making it more difficult, you could always raise your reputation to be good enough again with either gold or good deeds(in BG II I mean).

And even if they did make it so that the main NPCs would always respond to you, it still would look silly... the Republic won't trust their most important mission to a madman, and I even doubt wether the Sith would. Plus, what if I suddenly decide that Bastilla is a mindless killer? What if I let her run around and kill civilians without a reason? This wouldn't tarnish my personal reputation, so when I talk to master Vrook, he'd still shower me with praise, and probably compliment my allies as well. Afterwards, I'll receive a new quest, even though Bastilla Shan the Psycho is in my team.

(Refering to BG II)When I mentioned the checks in scripting I was meaning your reputation score, killing civilians didn't have a direct effect on other NPCs, rather it lowered your Party's reputation score significantly so you might not be "good" enough to do a quest.

You raise a good point there about sending Bastilla off to go crazy. Somehow, I don't think they will go so far as to have a seperate reputation/force alignment thing for every character, or record "number of civilians killed" in your stats that would be a bit overkill, although very thorough too. Besides, it is actually you telling Bastilla to go kill them, not her acting on her own.

If they have it so your party has an overall reputation which was effected by the actions of your party as a whole ie. You send Bastilla off to kill a bunch of civilians -> Party reputation lowers..again I am basing this off of their previous games.

To be honest, that's still where my troubles lie. There's too big of a chance that it could totally throw you out of the gameworld due to the illogical reactions from the NPCs. And if they did want to add it, it would probably result in more delays. Extra dialogue options, testing, scripting...

Also some good stuff to think about you mention about talking to Master Vrook and the Republic and the above quote-consider this situation->If you play the game fully on a the Dark path(without doing anything 'artificial' to get ur rep/force align.. low and toward the Dark side [ie. kill civilians to go toward the Dark side]) so that your Force alignment is..well..dark, then why would Master Vrook or the Republic trust any missions to you anyway, if you are so dangerously on the Dark side..that has got me wondering how they will handle it..maybe your character is really one of the only ones that can help them after all??

(phew..I hope that all came out readable:))

 

Back to the stuff on turning lightsaber on and off:

In combat it is cool to be able to turn your saber on and off, makes you feel more involved in it...now when just plain walking around I probably wouldn't have it on because as some have said, it would be kinda goofy and usually Jedi don't do that...and I won't because I don't have to, if you want to walk around with it on you can, seeing as it appears to be put in the game already.

Walk up to an NPC and see what they say when you don't have your saber ignited. Now do it again with your saber ignited. (*hopes it matters like that*)

Now that would be cool, probably would take a bit of work tho. I would be happy to see an option like that in the conversation options along with force choke that was mentioned

[Burrie]

Quite frankly I wouldn't expect them to close off the main plot or large sub quests because obviously that would kill the game.

The effects of getting a low reputation score is what could close off subquests and their related plots.

 

Mmm, that's an interesting thought with only subquests being closed off. From what I've heard, certain subquests will only be open to those who are Light Side users and those who use the Dark Side.

 

They didn't completely close off plots(subquests) so much as penalise you for being a bad person, making it more difficult, you could always raise your reputation to be good enough again with either gold or good deeds(in BG II I mean).

 

Having only played Baldur's Gate I for a short while, I am not familiar with either game. In that case, I am curious, who exactly does it work with the main plot? Is it set up in a way that no matter what you do, you'll always be on the road towards the end game? Or could you really get into situations in which it would be impossible to finish the game?

 

 

(Refering to BG II)When I mentioned the checks in scripting I was meaning your reputation score, killing civilians didn't have a direct effect on other NPCs, rather it lowered your Party's reputation score significantly so you might not be "good" enough to do a quest.

 

As, I think I see what you mean now. So basically, the important NPCs would rather entrust you with a quest rather than ignore you for it? I suppose it could work, seeing as how there are lots of "neutral" characters in these kind of worlds. Mayhaps it'll work the same in Knights of the Old Republic. Still, I wonder if it really works... in SW, there tend to be two sides "Good/Light" and "Bad/Dark".

 

You raise a good point there about sending Bastilla off to go crazy. Somehow, I don't think they will go so far as to have a seperate reputation/force alignment thing for every character, or record "number of civilians killed" in your stats that would be a bit overkill, although very thorough too. Besides, it is actually you telling Bastilla to go kill them, not her acting on her own.

 

Actually, the recent demo showed that each character(or Jedi, I'm not sure) has an alignment of his own. Bastilla was shown to be of the Light Side, whilst the main PC was obviously Dark. I disagree on the "telling Bastilla to go kill them", because in essence, you are actually RPing 10 different characters. Mind you, you won't have complete control of 9 of them. The video already showed that you can only speak as your own character(probably the reason why he's the only one whom can have Persuasion as a Force Power), and the other PCs can sometimes interact. In any case, to get back to my original point, you are responsible for RPing each of the characters, I don't really see your main PC as leading them.

 

If they have it so your party has an overall reputation which was effected by the actions of your party as a whole ie. You send Bastilla off to kill a bunch of civilians -> Party reputation lowers..again I am basing this off of their previous games.

 

I suppose a party reputation would work.

 

A quick note on something that I recently learned. Apparantly, your alignment will *NOT* be based on the Force Powers you use during combat. Your Force Alignment will only shift due to your actions in certain event(the often-mentioned poisining the waters method), and the conversation choses you make.