Some people say JA is not JK3 I think that is not true. They are the same thing what is the diffrence? Plus it says on the cover of JA Jedi Knight Jedi Acadamy! It is not JA 1 or 2 nor 4 so that leaves us with one choice JK3!
Long story short: yes.:rolleyes:
Technically, wouldn't it be DF 4 and not JK 3?
Originally posted by Amidala from Chop Shop
Dark Forces, Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast, Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy, ay caramba!
So maybe you could help explain this one:
First there was this:
http://ai.pricegrabber.com/muze_images/Video/DVD/33/135133_118x160.jpg)
Then this:
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0784011389.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)
Then this:
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0784011397.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif)
So shouldn't Rambo III actually be called Rambo II, or First Blood III: Rambo II?
Raven said that Jedi Academy is not Jedi Knight III...end of story.
Originally posted by Gabrobot
Raven said that Jedi Academy is not Jedi Knight III...end of story. Not that it matters, but you are right - and they explained it pretty clearly, too.
Mike
And yet I emailed them and they said while they chose not to call it 3, it is by rights 3, it is only not 3 if you define a series by the leading character and in the Star Wars universe that is simply now true, the leading character can change.
So long story short, it is, not by label but by simple fact. We all know that if someone says JK3 they mean JA so when it boils down to it, it is.
If you look at Raven's history they have NEVER released a '3', they always change the name by the third release of a genre.
Raven said it isn't JK3, it is JA. Enough said. If you say JK3, people will either agree with you or disagree. If people start disagreeing the whole community will be in confusion. And if the whole community if in confusion, we would have to post some thing on the forum boards. And if you post something on the forum boards, you will get more people disagreeing... But if you say JA, everyone knows what you are talking about :D
Damn..... Because of the "Jedi Knight" now everyone belives that JA is JK3.
Why cant they just call it "Star Wars Jedi Academy" or "Star Wars Jedi Master Jedi Academy"? :D
Lol, It's just a jo extension, just like mots to jk.
Originally posted by |GG|Crow_Nest
Damn..... Because of the "Jedi Knight" now everyone belives that JA is JK3.
Why cant they just call it "Star Wars Jedi Academy" or "Star Wars Jedi Master Jedi Academy"? :D Because they also wanted to be sure it was appropriately associated with the Jedi Knight brand.
Mike
All these people who say it isn't JK3 because it doesn't say 3 on the box...is that it? You say Raven said it isn't 3, after a fashion they did, after all it's not 3 on the box!...but it ends there, the engine is JO with extensions, the lead character of JO is in JA taking one of the leading roles and it is the 3rd Jedi Knight game to come out. And for the second time, I emailed Raven and got a reply saying 'many people define a series by the lead character so in essence it isn't JK3, but by all other respects, yes, this is JK3, the third in the series".
The shame is people are hoping for this mysterious JK3 game to be announced over the next year or so and because of that they have their JA is not JK3 argument...of course this hasn't been even unofficially announced. It's just people are let down by JA so want a true JK3. Let it go!
Next you'll be telling me Jurassic Park: The Lost World isn't Jurassic Park 2 :rolleyes:
Wow, this is silly. I mean, really silly. This is like arguing if it is dark at night, or how much red can you add to a shade of yellow before it becomes orange. This is about as silly as Darth Maul prancing around the X-Men mansion, singing preschool songs and giggling like a 14 year old girl.
Raven has stated that JK:JA is not JK3. Jedi Knight 1 and 2 were a branch off of the original Dark Forces, which followed Kyle Katarn. Raven has basically stated that the main 'JK' franchise will be based around the adventures of said Mr. Katarn.
Jedi Academy, while not technically an expansion like Mysteries of the Sith, is set in Raven's JK world, but does not follow Mr. Katarn and his wacky adventures. Instead it's something of a side story following an up and coming young Jedi named Jaden.
JK3 was apparently it's production name, and many gaming publications hyped it as JK3, this lead to the confusion.
Personally, I do not believe the next Kyle Katarn game will have JK3 as it's primary title. It will probably appear in smaller text at the top of the box, with another 'Jedi' title in much larger letters beneath it.
Without knowing all of this, even I would consider JA to be JK3, but it is not. Arguing otherwise just makes you look like a fool that refuses to admit he is wrong.
Arguing that "Well, it has Jedi Knight in the title, and it's not 2 or 4, that leaves us with 3!" as very much akin to saying that The Phantom Menace is really Star Wars 4. Creators are very much entitled to branch out their worlds created in one story, and give the side stories another title to differentiate them from the main franchise.
I apologize if this sounds harsh, I really do not intend to insult anyone who believes otherwise, but arguments stating that 'even though Raven said it was not JK3, it is' is just...well...I am without words for it. Sure, it is the third Jedi Knight game, but that also makes it the what? Fifth Dark Forces game?
I do agree with WadeV1589 on a few things though. Holding your breath for a 'true JK3' is probably a waste of time. Even if there is an official JK3, it will probably have another title to go with it, and it will be sold under that title. Like JK:Revenge of Kyle's Beard, but on the other hand it will probably have a brand spankin' new 'JKIII' logo on the front of the box.
Originally posted by WadeV1589
Next you'll be telling me Jurassic Park: The Lost World isn't Jurassic Park 2 :rolleyes:
Why would it be it isn't even on the same island.:rolleyes:
Seriously, back to JK"3". It's really different on how you view it. If you want to get technical, it's really another JK, as said on the CD case. STAR WARS JEDI KNIGHT: JEDI ACADEMY. But this *is* the next game in Raven's Kyle Katarn games, even if you don't ever play as Kyle, he's still a very important role.
Originally posted by TK-8252
Seriously, back to JK"3". It's really different on how you view it. If you want to get technical, it's really another JK, as said on the CD case. STAR WARS JEDI KNIGHT: JEDI ACADEMY. But this *is* the next game in Raven's Kyle Katarn games, even if you don't ever play as Kyle, he's still a very important role. Wich is my point JK3 is JA so don't say it is not it is look on the cd if you think it is not then you will see the trueth.
No, the CD case does not say JK3 anywhere on it. It says STAR WARS JEDI KNIGHT: JEDI ACADEMY. Which is why I said that it's technically a whole new Jedi Knight series.
Let's look at this in a far simpler way:
Some of us say JA is JK3, some of us say it isn't...until there is another Jedi Knight game released with Kyle as the main character why not just go along with JA=JK3 to stop the argument? True this could be argued to the converse...but until another JK is announced it is a stalemate and you CANNOT stop people saying JK3 while you CAN stop replying saying "IT IS NOT JK3"...once JK3 is said, that's it...why reply to say it is not, it's a pointless post to continue this debate in threads where it is not warranted.
While you may be right and JA may not be JK3, you who say it isn't and post in threads where someone said JK3 are doing the most wrong. You're making pointless unrelated posts, hold back.
Now that is harsh and very true, anyone care to argue against pointless posts in threads? I hope not...
Originally posted by WadeV1589
yes, this is JK3, the third in the series
One small flaw in the logic there. It's NOT the third in the series. Bzzt.
lets see, we get JK...then we get JK2 (JO) then we get JK3 (JO)...hmm...seems the third to me, but of course that doesn't matter.
What does matter is my previous post pointing out the total stupidity of this argument on forums. Try reading it.
Originally posted by WadeV1589
What does matter is my previous post pointing out the total stupidity of this argument on forums. Try reading it.
Nah. I'd rather waste people's time and ask how to make a Swiffer saber skin. :D
"I'm a Jedi with a broom and I'm cleaning up this galaxy!"
There "is no JK3" in the same way that there is "no DF3."
However, for all intents and purposes "DF3" is JK2 (because that was an in production title before it was released) and "JK3" is JA for similar reasons.
Who knows what the next game will be titled, that's totally up to the folks at LucasArts and their advisers.
On the 'net, those referring to "JK3" primarily are those from old articles talking about JA before it was released and the warez community (take heed).
JA is a direct sequel to JK2, not an expansion pack, so for all the world it's "JK3," despite the similar logo. ; )
Amidala's example is a good one. ; )
The confusion arises because of the original game in the series "Dark Forces" which added it's subtitle to the second game (Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight) and the expansion pack that followed that many fans considered "almost a sequel" at which point the "Dark Forces moniker was dropped entirely.
I think we should just drop the numbers entirely and stick to JO and JA, then we can't ever get into this damned argument at all.
Originally posted by WadeV1589
lets see, we get JK...then we get JK2 (JO) then we get JK3 (JO)...hmm...seems the third to me, but of course that doesn't matter.
What does matter is my previous post pointing out the total stupidity of this argument on forums. Try reading it.
Hey, look what I found!
http://www.lucasarts.com/products/sith/images/subpage/art.jpg)
Almost exactly the same properties as JA. The only difference is that MotS requires your JK CD to play. It's a completely different game though--all you need to do is get a crack and you can play it without JK.
And if you find this debate stupid, don't participate in it.
I find the argument stupid, as in people replying to threads where someone mentioned JK3 once, "hey I can't get a map to work in JK3" then you get some smart git who replies "first of all IT'S NOT JK3", then you get a thread about the JA/JK3 debate instead of helping to fix the problem...
...as for not participating, I want to, plain and simple.