[QUOTE=mrthingyx]Another key issue for me was how charismatic Revan appeared to be: his dialogue options had me rolling on the floor on many occasions, as did the other NPC interactions with each other - something that KoTOR II missed out on completely. The Exile is very, very dry by comparison - nothing remotely witty, comic or anything but what would be expected from the 'silent, stoic type:' "I was hoping for something a little more intimate," was the best he could do with Mira. I mean, really.[/QUOTE]
There are a couple things the exile will say that could be considered less dry. I started playing yet another game of KotOR II (god knows why), but this time as a female.
Atton: So, what's it like being a Jedi? Must be tough, not having any family or friends.
female Exile: Not as tough as enduring your false sympathy while you stare at my chest.
Atton: Hey! I wasn't tr--
Kreia: Beware the seer... Do not seek to mate with her.
male Exile: Just because I saved her doesn't mean I'm going to charge up her boarding ramp.
I'm writing these from memory; if they're incorrect, sue me.
KOTOR vs. KOTOR 2 (SPOILERS)
-
Chimaera182
- Posts: 2723
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:00 am
- Contact:
LOL @ Chimaera! 
I've never played either game as a woman, so I didn't know about that... hehehehe - funny.
The second one is pretty good ('tis "loading ramp" IIRC) but there just aren't enough of them compared to the first one - no references to anything like "cat woman" or "walking carpet" in the second. Alas. HK-47 seemed to come to prominence in the Sith Lords, however - conversations with him were awesome and had me cackling like a loon.
As a game, KOTOR II was probably better. As a complete experience, the first KOTOR was and is unparalleled by anything I've ever played.
I've never played either game as a woman, so I didn't know about that... hehehehe - funny.
The second one is pretty good ('tis "loading ramp" IIRC) but there just aren't enough of them compared to the first one - no references to anything like "cat woman" or "walking carpet" in the second. Alas. HK-47 seemed to come to prominence in the Sith Lords, however - conversations with him were awesome and had me cackling like a loon.
As a game, KOTOR II was probably better. As a complete experience, the first KOTOR was and is unparalleled by anything I've ever played.
-
Jedi Thomas
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:57 am
- Contact:
I think Kotor II had the possibility of being better than Kotor
I think Kotor II could have been. I honestly liked being able to start off as a jedi although I didnt really like Kreia it was fun. I also liked becoming a jedi master although there wasnt much added by doing so. I have never chosen a different path so I do not know if you are able to make your companions jedi without being one.
I just felt the crew in Kotor was better. I felt it almost reflected a family. Where as in Kotor II I felt everyone hated each other and getting close to one upset the rest of the crew.
I liked the game right until just before running into the Sith Lord aboard the harbinger. I felt that part wasnt put together right. Why would a Sith Lord that can destroy an entire planet with the force not be able to just take the life from you, Visa and mandalore.
I didnt like that but then it dropped in quality greatly. The next part travelling to that planets core was horrible. I saved the game right at the start of that level and stopped playing for about a month and then I finally finished it.
I hated how they never explained much about Revan. Obviously he followed that path of light or the galaxy would be controlled by the sith. But what happened. Did they go on a rampage defeating the rest of the sith. Did carth ever meet up with his kid. Did mission ever meet his brother again.
Now one thing I did like about Kotor II among what I said already was when you were on Nar Shadaa being able to make those thugs jump of the platform that made me laugh so hard. Evil though it may be.
Now in conclusion yes I do think Kotor II had the possibility of being a better game if the developers spent a little more time on it. But they didnt so Kotor II is what it is. I do think Kotor was a better game. The levels were longer and with more detail. And had alot more funny parts. But it is hard to ask that a sequal live up to its pretacessor (I know its spelt wrong).
Kotor will for ever be a epic Star Wars game. I hope they come out with a third so than we can have another session on how the sequall didnt live up to what we expected.
I think Kotor II could have been. I honestly liked being able to start off as a jedi although I didnt really like Kreia it was fun. I also liked becoming a jedi master although there wasnt much added by doing so. I have never chosen a different path so I do not know if you are able to make your companions jedi without being one.
I just felt the crew in Kotor was better. I felt it almost reflected a family. Where as in Kotor II I felt everyone hated each other and getting close to one upset the rest of the crew.
I liked the game right until just before running into the Sith Lord aboard the harbinger. I felt that part wasnt put together right. Why would a Sith Lord that can destroy an entire planet with the force not be able to just take the life from you, Visa and mandalore.
I didnt like that but then it dropped in quality greatly. The next part travelling to that planets core was horrible. I saved the game right at the start of that level and stopped playing for about a month and then I finally finished it.
I hated how they never explained much about Revan. Obviously he followed that path of light or the galaxy would be controlled by the sith. But what happened. Did they go on a rampage defeating the rest of the sith. Did carth ever meet up with his kid. Did mission ever meet his brother again.
Now one thing I did like about Kotor II among what I said already was when you were on Nar Shadaa being able to make those thugs jump of the platform that made me laugh so hard. Evil though it may be.
Now in conclusion yes I do think Kotor II had the possibility of being a better game if the developers spent a little more time on it. But they didnt so Kotor II is what it is. I do think Kotor was a better game. The levels were longer and with more detail. And had alot more funny parts. But it is hard to ask that a sequal live up to its pretacessor (I know its spelt wrong).
Kotor will for ever be a epic Star Wars game. I hope they come out with a third so than we can have another session on how the sequall didnt live up to what we expected.
Spam? :d
Hmmm... just playing KOTOR II a fifth time around as a Jedi Weapon Master and willing to accept a few DS points to get some more background to the story and I've come up with the following:
As an exercise in gaming, KOTOR II is much better than its predecessor: the story seems to be a lot less linear, the characters do appear to have a lot more depth to them (even Bao-Dur... but I'll let you find out what he says); the gameplay is dramatically improved over the first installment and the way to game seems to weave around subjects and the storyline in general is very clever.
As such, I think part of the problem with the Sith Lords is expectation: people expected it to be very similar to the first one but it is a different beast altogether. Yes, it can be played straight down the line as a mythical hero would do but it become MUCH more interesting when a lightsider decides to 'take one for the team,' as such... holes in the story are filled in by Kreia i na way that I hadn't even considered when playing the game the first, second, third and fourth time around: it seems the developers almost wanted the game to be played by somebody hovering between LS and DS and not quite convinced by either.
However, this is also a problem for the developers: having created an effective pivot for the whole game, many things seem to have been forgotten: character interaction with anybody other than Kreia can lead to dead or repetative ends rather rapidly, the odd side-quest is impossible to complete, etc. that spank of a serious rush to roll the game out. What could have been a potentially brilliant game was reduced to being a very, very good one.
Hmmm... just playing KOTOR II a fifth time around as a Jedi Weapon Master and willing to accept a few DS points to get some more background to the story and I've come up with the following:
As an exercise in gaming, KOTOR II is much better than its predecessor: the story seems to be a lot less linear, the characters do appear to have a lot more depth to them (even Bao-Dur... but I'll let you find out what he says); the gameplay is dramatically improved over the first installment and the way to game seems to weave around subjects and the storyline in general is very clever.
As such, I think part of the problem with the Sith Lords is expectation: people expected it to be very similar to the first one but it is a different beast altogether. Yes, it can be played straight down the line as a mythical hero would do but it become MUCH more interesting when a lightsider decides to 'take one for the team,' as such... holes in the story are filled in by Kreia i na way that I hadn't even considered when playing the game the first, second, third and fourth time around: it seems the developers almost wanted the game to be played by somebody hovering between LS and DS and not quite convinced by either.
However, this is also a problem for the developers: having created an effective pivot for the whole game, many things seem to have been forgotten: character interaction with anybody other than Kreia can lead to dead or repetative ends rather rapidly, the odd side-quest is impossible to complete, etc. that spank of a serious rush to roll the game out. What could have been a potentially brilliant game was reduced to being a very, very good one.
-
Hill-Shatar
- Posts: 7724
- Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 1:41 am
- Location: Hell Freezing Over
- Contact:
The majority of people seem to think that the first was better cause it gave you more closure, and the charatcers were more intereactive with each other, and each had there nuances that people rarely notice but enjoy having. I think that just most people became attatched to the players in the first game, which makes sense. I found myself sympathizing with carth and stuff, but you had personality in the first one. I think people just find that there are things missing in the party charatcers, and in the NPCs. Bao-Dur sounded far off, and anyone who carried a blaster in the second one talked mostly of war and nothing else. Charatcers in the first one seemed real. the voice acting was brillant, and charatcers flowed together. The second one had few people who I was interested in. to tell you the truth, the second time through I almost ignored the charatcer I had made, since The female jedi or those whop could become Jedi seemed much more interesting.
On the side of KOTOR 2, we have some different planets, some unique problems and some good humour. (HK on love, and the loading ramp, but I never heard the chest one...heh heh heh). The new abiltiies seemed amazing too. Im impresses with what obsidian did, but not overly. They simply could not fill the shoes left behind by Bioware.
In any case, I find that KOTOR, the original, was much better than KOTOR II.
On the side of KOTOR 2, we have some different planets, some unique problems and some good humour. (HK on love, and the loading ramp, but I never heard the chest one...heh heh heh). The new abiltiies seemed amazing too. Im impresses with what obsidian did, but not overly. They simply could not fill the shoes left behind by Bioware.
In any case, I find that KOTOR, the original, was much better than KOTOR II.
Buy a GameBanshee T-Shirt [url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68975"]HERE[/url]! Sabre's [url="http://www.users.bigpond.com/qtnt/index.htm"]site[/url] for Baldur's Gate series' patches and items. This has been a Drive-by Hilling.
-
fable
- Posts: 30676
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
- Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
- Contact:
The majority of people seem to think that the first was better cause it gave you more closure, and the charatcers were more intereactive with each other,
There's far more interactive dialog between party members in KotoR2, than in the first game, and between the party NPCs and the PC. Simple fact.
There's far more interactive dialog between party members in KotoR2, than in the first game, and between the party NPCs and the PC. Simple fact.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
-
bishop_2005
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:45 am
- Contact:
I honestly think the storyline and that one twist in KOTOR were great, but other then that, the game wasn't as good as II. A lot of you were saying how the interaction in I was better and had more closure etc, but how could it possibly be better. All Bastilla did was complain about the dark side and talk about her battle meditation. Carth only spoke about revenge and how he got betrayed. Zalbaar said NOTHING to you. Canderous ranted on and on about stories no one would care about. He's like a a senile old grandpa trying to relive his glory days. Mission was the stereotypical annoying street kid. Juhani was a stupid character altogether (oh. you said 3 words to me, now im going to join the light again, although a minute ago, i was wallowing in evil... yeahhh right...). HK47 was funny, but due to that little stupid bolt, he could not tell you about his history unless you get 17 repair, which is kinda pointless. Jolee was a funny old man, but all he did was *****, and his history was never discussed at all. I did like the humourous remarks the PC made though. "i'm a wookie! can't you tell!?!"
As for II, the powers were better, the feats were better, the graphics as well as the overall feel for the battle system was better in my opinion. The characters were deep, and as in real life, you have to gain their trust before you can get their little secrets. All the characters are different from eachother, because as you could see, any action you did could gain or lose influence from one character.
And maybe they left some loose ends to link up to KOTOR III?
As for II, the powers were better, the feats were better, the graphics as well as the overall feel for the battle system was better in my opinion. The characters were deep, and as in real life, you have to gain their trust before you can get their little secrets. All the characters are different from eachother, because as you could see, any action you did could gain or lose influence from one character.
And maybe they left some loose ends to link up to KOTOR III?
The gameplay of the second is better hands down. Better interaction with party characters, more replay value, powers, etc. Very good. BUT, I do enjoy the first one better. Building your character was muc heasier to do, and everything tied in rather well, giving you an all out satisfied experience.
KoToR II went overboard with complexity and couldnt put a whole story together, all we can do is speculate and PRAY KoToR III comes out for Xbox 360 and ties in the two stories. Also, MY biggest issue with KoToR II, it makes the first one seem inconsequential, and it is VERY depressing. We need a superhero myth once in awhile that's why we like Star Wars to begin with. The depression of too-real life characters and everyday life is too overboard on this one. Everything just seems evil and nothing can come out right, whether you're bad or good. Everything leads to death and pain. ANd you just feel bad every time you think about the story. That doesn't do it for me, sorry. I feel if loose ends were tied up and if they tried to make it a bit more LIKE Star Wars and have it seem more like a heroic epic (or villainic epic), with some real life modifications, it could have been better.
thats my take.
KoToR II went overboard with complexity and couldnt put a whole story together, all we can do is speculate and PRAY KoToR III comes out for Xbox 360 and ties in the two stories. Also, MY biggest issue with KoToR II, it makes the first one seem inconsequential, and it is VERY depressing. We need a superhero myth once in awhile that's why we like Star Wars to begin with. The depression of too-real life characters and everyday life is too overboard on this one. Everything just seems evil and nothing can come out right, whether you're bad or good. Everything leads to death and pain. ANd you just feel bad every time you think about the story. That doesn't do it for me, sorry. I feel if loose ends were tied up and if they tried to make it a bit more LIKE Star Wars and have it seem more like a heroic epic (or villainic epic), with some real life modifications, it could have been better.
thats my take.
-
Hill-Shatar
- Posts: 7724
- Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 1:41 am
- Location: Hell Freezing Over
- Contact:
I noticed that the first one seemed much more cleaner. The second one it always seemed like there should be more to it, but there never was (actually, theres more truth in that then i originally thought), but in the first one, you can see the bright, clean lines of all your party members. People found it easier to relate to (apparently, but i kind of did to), and form connection with certain charatcers, and as someone in this thread mentioned, it seemed like a family. Plus, there were some interactions in the second one, but half of them were two second long movies of GOTO and the remote fighting it out, Bao-Dur making repairs, and the Handmaiden talking to Visas, Mira and Atton. In the first one, you leanred more about peoples backgrounds in the speeches, from Canderous and Carth arguing about the war, to Mission and Bastila talking about how Bastila uses her force powers. They even comment behind you immediately, usually both party members, whenever you do a charitable or more evil act, in extremely usique and complex ways. In the second one, half the charatcers seemed to say the same thing with the same set of words. Handmaiden, Mira and Bao-Dur commenting about how nice it was to help the diseases man, that there may have been danger to themselves, Bao-Dur mentions the War, and the same conclusion. In the first one, everyone had a different point of perspective, from Carths sense of helping others to Missionsm more profitable ventures, to Zaalbars Virtues of Value, to Canderous way of the strong beat the weak and war honour, to Juhani and her constant battle with the dark side, ect. ect. It is something that you rarely see in the second one. It doesnt matter there personaities, most are either blindly faithful or backstabbing and answer as such. The first one was also more gratifying and more impressive when you FINALLY wheedle out tere secrets. the first one you learn some minor dirty secret that you dont really care about (other than atton).
Buy a GameBanshee T-Shirt [url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68975"]HERE[/url]! Sabre's [url="http://www.users.bigpond.com/qtnt/index.htm"]site[/url] for Baldur's Gate series' patches and items. This has been a Drive-by Hilling.
-
Macen Press
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 7:24 am
- Location: ENGLAND , plymouth
- Contact:
i havent played kotor 1 for nearly a year now and cant remember hardly anything but i can remember it was alot better and a lot less repititive then kotor 2. the only thing better about kotor 2 is the powers. I liked it in kotor 1 when you could wear costumes that hid ur face like the sith armour and the raiders costume which it doesnt do in kotor 2.
"Fear attracts the fearful, the strong, the weak, the innocent, the corrupt. Fear, fear is my ally."
-
Dart_Xerpoth
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 2:07 pm
- Location: in a galaxy not very far away at all (turn a right
- Contact:
KOTOR 1 all the way. 2's storyline is like a force sensitive monkey wrote it and if you dont haven't played the first game the bonus info doesn't make sence.
I do like some things about KOTOR 2 though; the powers, feats and items, but with such a rubbish storyline it doesn't improve it much
Well done to KOTOR 1 for coming 70-80 (cant remember exactly but I think it was 71) in BT yahoos 100 best ever games (from all platforms)
KOTOR 2 wasn't on the list, I wonder were it came?
I do like some things about KOTOR 2 though; the powers, feats and items, but with such a rubbish storyline it doesn't improve it much
Well done to KOTOR 1 for coming 70-80 (cant remember exactly but I think it was 71) in BT yahoos 100 best ever games (from all platforms)
KOTOR 2 wasn't on the list, I wonder were it came?
Mahahaha dark side will always win
-
Mandalorianx
- Posts: 463
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:41 am
- Contact:
oki kotor 1 is better than kotor 2.
the story of kotor 1 is better, the maps are better, the charecters are better.
just the story of kotor 1 gut me in the game, of malak turned on hes master revan (our you), your quest to defeat malak and take back your titel as dark lord or as a member of the jedi order defeating malak to save the galaxy.
on kotor 2 your just a jedi who folowd malak and revan.and your quest is to find 3 jedi master to stop the sith or become one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Mandalore
the story of kotor 1 is better, the maps are better, the charecters are better.
just the story of kotor 1 gut me in the game, of malak turned on hes master revan (our you), your quest to defeat malak and take back your titel as dark lord or as a member of the jedi order defeating malak to save the galaxy.
on kotor 2 your just a jedi who folowd malak and revan.and your quest is to find 3 jedi master to stop the sith or become one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Mandalore
Zabuza Momochi: Your words cut deep....Deeper than any blade.
-
Revan Reborn
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:10 pm
- Location: Somewhere in a galaxy far far away
- Contact:
Kotor is the better of the two, no contest.
I found Kotor 2 much more frustrating. Kotor kept me entertained, where as Kotor 2 made me want to shoot the Xbox.
In addition, I think that Kotor had a better plot.
Granted, Kotor 2 had better graphics, feats, and force powers, but even with that, Kotor still comes out on top. This is just my opinion, however.
I found Kotor 2 much more frustrating. Kotor kept me entertained, where as Kotor 2 made me want to shoot the Xbox.
In addition, I think that Kotor had a better plot.
Granted, Kotor 2 had better graphics, feats, and force powers, but even with that, Kotor still comes out on top. This is just my opinion, however.
Peace is a lie; there is only passion
Through passion; I gain strength
Through strength; I gain power
Through power; I gain victory
Through victory, my chains are broken
The force shall free me...
[url="http://www.thecantina.us"]Visit The Cantina!![/url]
Through passion; I gain strength
Through strength; I gain power
Through power; I gain victory
Through victory, my chains are broken
The force shall free me...
[url="http://www.thecantina.us"]Visit The Cantina!![/url]
I'm casting my vote (and bumping this thread) for Kotor2.
I found the story in Kotor1 way to predictable and simplistic. Come on - it was hardly a surprise with all the "hints" (read clues) being dropped all the time, and how most RPGs turn out
The story in Kotor2 was better, because it was more unclear what went on, you had to pull together pieces of a puzzle trying to figure out (specific) peoples motivations - and you pretty much (until the end) had to do it yourself and not get it served on a silver platter. Sure there were still all the cliche characters included in the game, but the "grey" ones did their best to confuse you.
And then add to it the more usage of skills and upgrade possibilities as well, compared to the first.
So despite the bugs in the second, I'm going with that, because the first feels to simplistic and predictable for my liking.
I found the story in Kotor1 way to predictable and simplistic. Come on - it was hardly a surprise with all the "hints" (read clues) being dropped all the time, and how most RPGs turn out
The story in Kotor2 was better, because it was more unclear what went on, you had to pull together pieces of a puzzle trying to figure out (specific) peoples motivations - and you pretty much (until the end) had to do it yourself and not get it served on a silver platter. Sure there were still all the cliche characters included in the game, but the "grey" ones did their best to confuse you.
And then add to it the more usage of skills and upgrade possibilities as well, compared to the first.
So despite the bugs in the second, I'm going with that, because the first feels to simplistic and predictable for my liking.
Insert signature here.
-
The Reaper
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:02 pm
- Contact:
I couldn't vote...
I like both games - they were and still are equally good. But I am able to share my opinions on the two games...
KotOR I
I think the twist in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic I was great. I would have never suspected. I also enjoyed KotOR I because it was the first Star Wars game I had played where you could actually choose how you act and what you do...
KotOR II
I was surprised when I first got the game, normally when one creates a sequal to a award winning game it usually loses it's touch... But when I played KotOR II I had found it had been improved and the story line again was unpredictable. I had especially liked the mystery on Peragus with all the dead minners, HK-50 was the last one I'd expect.
The two games have been good for me, they're definatly ones that won't be going back to the store for trading.
Kotor I for me all the way.
Kotor II wasn't a terrible game or anything, but it just felt rushed (particularly towards the end). Most of the good parts that came out of it (party interaction, powers, etc) just struck me as being improvements on areas that fans liked from the first one. They weren't original ideas, the developers just said, "the fans liked this part, so let's make it a bit better," "the fans wanted to make Carth a dark jedi, let's do something like that," "the fans want this, the fans want that..." Unfortunately the fans apparently didn't want a well thought out, finished plot.
Kotor I might have been shallow in some areas, the graphics weren't as good as Kotor II (not that this is a fair comparison since one was made later), and a lot of the little stuff (feats, powers, party interaction) is clearly better in Kotor II (again having the advantage of hindsight), but I still enjoy Kotor I much more. I honestly think Kotor II could have been The Empire Strikes Back to Kotor's A New Hope, but it just didn't didn't deliver. With a bit more time and effort, it could have been great, but they didn't get that extra time and instead we have a game that has improvements, but just doesn't feel as good as the product it's improving upon.
The best way I think I could compare these two games is by using the first three movies compared to the latest three. The prequel trilogy has better special effects, lightsaber fights, and debatably better acting (Hayden Christensen vs. Mark Hamill... can I pick 'neither'?) but that doesn't make it better than the original. I think the same holds true with Kotor I and II.
Kotor II wasn't a terrible game or anything, but it just felt rushed (particularly towards the end). Most of the good parts that came out of it (party interaction, powers, etc) just struck me as being improvements on areas that fans liked from the first one. They weren't original ideas, the developers just said, "the fans liked this part, so let's make it a bit better," "the fans wanted to make Carth a dark jedi, let's do something like that," "the fans want this, the fans want that..." Unfortunately the fans apparently didn't want a well thought out, finished plot.
Kotor I might have been shallow in some areas, the graphics weren't as good as Kotor II (not that this is a fair comparison since one was made later), and a lot of the little stuff (feats, powers, party interaction) is clearly better in Kotor II (again having the advantage of hindsight), but I still enjoy Kotor I much more. I honestly think Kotor II could have been The Empire Strikes Back to Kotor's A New Hope, but it just didn't didn't deliver. With a bit more time and effort, it could have been great, but they didn't get that extra time and instead we have a game that has improvements, but just doesn't feel as good as the product it's improving upon.
The best way I think I could compare these two games is by using the first three movies compared to the latest three. The prequel trilogy has better special effects, lightsaber fights, and debatably better acting (Hayden Christensen vs. Mark Hamill... can I pick 'neither'?) but that doesn't make it better than the original. I think the same holds true with Kotor I and II.
My vote is (just) for KOTOR2. My opinion my be skewed because I played KOTOR2 first, though.
Nevertheless, I love the whole influence thing. It's marvellous trying to plot a path through the game that maximises your influence with everyone AND doesn't throw your alignment out of the window.
I like the way many items are randomised, so you have a chance of finding some really cool gear (though there are times when you get sick of the sight of a verpine shield or a ls-pack, which seem to come up 90 per cent of the time once you reach about level 35...)
I like the way you can create upgrades, and I like the range of upgrades.
I like the fact you don't have to scroll down a list of 200+ saved games to find the one you just saved!!!! I like the way there's a lot more gear that improves stats.
I also feel that the imbalance bwetween LS and DS has been adjusted; in KOTOR1 Darksiders seemed to get a lot more good gear, as well as more money and experience points and 6 side-quests. In KOTOR2 this has been partially addressed; LS choices often give you as much XP as DS ones, and sometimes the same gear etc. as well, and there are a number of LS only side-quests.
However, there's a lot of stuff I don't like. Above all, I don't like the way it's possible to play the game through and never find out what is going on, as vital plot info is obtained from optional conversation with NPCs. The first 2 times through I didn't think of having long chats with them, and never worked out what was happening. Also, I didn't like the way the ending was unrelated to your alignment; whereas the final cut scenes of KOTOR1 involved me emotionally (yay! My side won!!! or boo!! my side lost), the ending was pretty pointless. I also don't like where the series seems to be tending, shifting the emphasis away from the battle between Light and Dark towards something else entirely, and if my guesses about the hints for the plot of KOTOR3 are right, the next one will be worse.
Oh, and of course there's the fact that I fancy Malak like crazy, whereas there's no character who has that effect on me in KOTOR2
Nevertheless, I love the whole influence thing. It's marvellous trying to plot a path through the game that maximises your influence with everyone AND doesn't throw your alignment out of the window.
I like the way many items are randomised, so you have a chance of finding some really cool gear (though there are times when you get sick of the sight of a verpine shield or a ls-pack, which seem to come up 90 per cent of the time once you reach about level 35...)
I like the way you can create upgrades, and I like the range of upgrades.
I like the fact you don't have to scroll down a list of 200+ saved games to find the one you just saved!!!! I like the way there's a lot more gear that improves stats.
I also feel that the imbalance bwetween LS and DS has been adjusted; in KOTOR1 Darksiders seemed to get a lot more good gear, as well as more money and experience points and 6 side-quests. In KOTOR2 this has been partially addressed; LS choices often give you as much XP as DS ones, and sometimes the same gear etc. as well, and there are a number of LS only side-quests.
However, there's a lot of stuff I don't like. Above all, I don't like the way it's possible to play the game through and never find out what is going on, as vital plot info is obtained from optional conversation with NPCs. The first 2 times through I didn't think of having long chats with them, and never worked out what was happening. Also, I didn't like the way the ending was unrelated to your alignment; whereas the final cut scenes of KOTOR1 involved me emotionally (yay! My side won!!! or boo!! my side lost), the ending was pretty pointless. I also don't like where the series seems to be tending, shifting the emphasis away from the battle between Light and Dark towards something else entirely, and if my guesses about the hints for the plot of KOTOR3 are right, the next one will be worse.
Oh, and of course there's the fact that I fancy Malak like crazy, whereas there's no character who has that effect on me in KOTOR2
-
Mandalorianx
- Posts: 463
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:41 am
- Contact:
-
The Reaper
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Well funny enough Mandalorianx. I didn't like that much. I usually go for the Dark path in games like this and even up until the very end of the game I was considered Jedi. I wish there were an earlier time where you could be looked at differently, like when you slayed the first of the Jedi Masters. NO Jedi would do that. But still the Masters and everyone else consider you Jedi, friendly.
But I did enjoy all the info you can score about the time of Revan and Malak and the Madalorian wars.