It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
arrow-down2arrowcart2close4fat-arrow-leftfat-arrow-rightfeedbackfriends2happy-facelogo-gognotificationnotifications-emptyownedremove-menusad-facesearch2wishlist-menuwishlisted2own_thingsheartstartick
avatar
PeterScott: Well, thanks to endless rain (40 year river levels and floods here), I finished Kotor II.

Not as good as KOTOR 1. Too much feels like filler meant to pad length, which increases frustration level.

Peragus and Telos are major joy killers right off the start.

I really didn't like the times it forces you to play as different characters. I don't want to play the other characters... Especially the damn droid sequence on Nar Shaddaa. Maybe do this once for novelty factor. But it was overdone.

I never encountered the Droid factory. Also don't blame the game for including that crappy content. That was a fan decision, and thus shows my problem with using fan content. I played KOTOR 2 the first time without fan content. I think I had more problems this time using TSLRCM.
I had the same impressions about TSLRCM. While some additions are nice, others really killed the pacing and made it quite boring. The prime example in Nar Shaddaa where you have to fight way more than previously, and the fights are mostly really tedious.

But I also think that KOTOR 2 loses a lot of its appeal on repeated playthroughs. I loved it when I played it the first time, but enjoyed it significantly less each time I replayed it.
avatar
Lebesgue: I had the same impressions about TSLRCM. While some additions are nice, others really killed the pacing and made it quite boring. The prime example in Nar Shaddaa where you have to fight way more than previously, and the fights are mostly really tedious.

But I also think that KOTOR 2 loses a lot of its appeal on repeated playthroughs. I loved it when I played it the first time, but enjoyed it significantly less each time I replayed it.
I agree. I am actually messing around in a second play of KOTOR 1. It drags a bit on a second play, but I can't imagine another play of Kotor 2, until MANY years in future, when I mostly forget it. IMO it's replay value is close to zero.

Neither of these has the replay of something like NWN 1. As maligned as the NWN 1 original campaign was, I think I played it 5 or 6 times to say nothing of all the community Mods. I have more than 1000 hours spent playing NWN 1.
I never once blamed the game, at all. In fact I'm glad that was a thing Obsidian didn't finish it, if what was put in was the intended product. It was terribly balanced, especially until you get the super duper droid armour before the god awful 300 on 1 battle near the end.

That should have been optional.

Oh and I enjoy a good in game yakkity schmackity as much as any RPG player but it seemed entirely focused on Kreia. Nobody else had anything worth saying. It took long enough to get Mira to say more than two sentences.

Yeah, Nar Shadaa had way too many trash mob battles. Then of course you build a lightsaber and everything falls over way quicker.

I thank them for making the content, especially for picking it up after the Team Gizka incident (an adventure itself) but in future I'll just play vanilla.........eventually.
I just found this topic, and I have decided to share some of my thoughts. Disclaimer: I have not actually played either KOTOR game, and therefore will not make judgements about the game itself.
avatar
LePeureux: wow so rpg, very realism
To me, realism is not one of the defining aspects of an RPG. In fact, too much realism is not a good thing in any but the most hardcore simulationist of games. For example, Ultima 7 requires that you feed your characters manually, and that ends up being needless busywork that makes the game less fun (especially when combined with the horrible inventory system).
avatar
Urnoev: First of all, from your examples I assume you never got off the first planet, Taris, which would mean you've never seen more than the looong introduction to the world and story, so I don't see how you could judge the story yet.
I am of the opinion that, if the game isn't good in the first half hour or so, then the game is flawed.

I could point out that, for example, a semi-decent player could beat the original Super Mario Bros. within a half hour (with warps). If it takes more than that time to get to the meat of the game, then I would argue that the game is flawed because of it. Remember, a player's first impression of the game is important.
avatar
LePeureux: Imagine if you could smash down brick walls with a mace in baldurs gate/skyrim/dragon age (games i enjoy with their flaws) with that kind of realism they might as well have made a 3rd person adventure/fighting game.
Again, I don't see how the genre really matters here; there's no reason an RPG should necessarily be more realistic than an action game.

Also, assuming 2e AD&D rules, a character with 25 strength wielding a mace *should* be able to bash down a wall; it seems perfectly sensible that someone who is as strong, or stronger, than a giant should be able to destroy a wall this way.
Post edited May 15, 2017 by dtgreene
avatar
LePeureux: [ Theres a difference between role playing a character and giving him a tactical order. Currently the party control is a huge mess.
avatar
PeterScott: KOTOR is an RPG, Role Playing Game, and not a tactical combat game. Like most of the Aurora games, it is about Playing your character, not controlling your sidekicks.
Computer RPGs, from the very beginning (in particular, games like Wizardry, Bard's Tale, Might and Magic, and (classic) Final Fantasy), have been about tactical control. This is actually the sort of thing that got me into RPGs in the first place; the fact that you could give characters commands, and then they would be carried out, without the player's twitch reflexes coming into play.

avatar
PeterScott: RPGs have Long since moved beyond the tedium of turn based control of the minutia of combat into a telling a great story where you get to roll play a central roll, and combat is meant to be fun and dynamic (though you can still pause and switch control to a different character if there is a need).

It's a move for the better, for most people.
To me, this sounds like "RPGs have long since moved away from being RPGs in the first place". To me, strategic combat is part of what makes an RPG an RPG. It actually even bothers me how some RPGs, by allowing characters to attack without being given an explicit command (but not applying it to other actions, like casting spells), have favored the use of boring physical attacks over interesting spells; Baldur's Gate and Wizardry 8 are both guilty of this (though the problem is worse in BG than W8).

(In the KOTOR games, can you set a character to automatically use the same offensive force power until told otherwise or unable to do so?)

avatar
PeterScott: "Char1: Attack enemy 4 with longbow, Char2: Move 4 spaces toward Enemy 3, Char3: cast fireball on enemies 1,2,3 .... etc ad nauseam.
This is actually the sort of gameplay that I enjoy in RPGs (though I could do without the "move 4 spaces toward enemy 3; I prefer positioning to be abstracted like in games like older Wizardries).

(Also, I noticed that you have an unterminated quotation; please remember to close your quotes.)
Post edited May 15, 2017 by dtgreene
avatar
PeterScott: I never encountered the Droid factory. Also don't blame the game for including that crappy content. That was a fan decision, and thus shows my problem with using fan content. I played KOTOR 2 the first time without fan content. I think I had more problems this time using TSLRCM.
avatar
Lebesgue: I had the same impressions about TSLRCM. While some additions are nice, others really killed the pacing and made it quite boring. The prime example in Nar Shaddaa where you have to fight way more than previously, and the fights are mostly really tedious.
Perhaps there is a good reason why some of the content was cut in the first place? (If playtesters found part of the game to not be fun, then it's a perfectly reasonable decision to remove that content from the game.)
avatar
dtgreene: (Also, I noticed that you have an unterminated quotation; please remember to close your quotes.)
+1 for that

Well... I thought that RPG stands for Role-Playing Game (or Rocked-Propelled Grenade...) and thus it should be focused on playing a role, by making decisions, talking with characters etc, and not be a tactical battle simulator...
Still better than every new Star Wars film since the 90s
It actually gives a shit by going deeper than paperthin "evul!" with the whole sith ideology and its anchorage in lust and such.
And also that every pure jedi is basically a nun lol
Star Wars is not logical? No shit sherlock, it's a medieval children story with a scifi coat. If you want a realistic world and a coherent story watch Babylon 5 instead.
Post edited July 31, 2017 by AlienMind