Yeah it looks awesome don't it! welcome to the Forums starwarz24 :)
I'm guessing you can go light, dark, or neutral, Check this thread, I posted some bigger pictures of the Hasbro toy versions...
Post #23:
http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=185721)
I think the proper term for the Apprentice being redeemed is "absolute rubbish".
I don't think we can call it that, we virtually know nothing about him, his past or anything like that. I like all these features of the game that give it an rpg feel to it.
I don't think we can call it that, we virtually know nothing about him, his past or anything like that. I like all these features of the game that give it an rpg feel to it.
Me too.
A redeemed SA was to be expected, IMO. A lot of games do it nowadays, giving the player the choice to be the good or the bad guy. And this is Star Wars, of course. :)
How much would a game appeal if the character you play as was a heartless ****? I think a few people would be put off by it.
How much would a game appeal if the character you play as was a heartless ****? I think a few people would be put off by it.
I wouldn't mind. It'd be something different from the usual nice guys. :) Besides, if you've played KotOR or TSL, you know you can do just that: be completely heartless.
How much would a game appeal if the character you play as was a heartless ****?
Ever hear of the Hitman series? Or Jedi Knight, Jedi Academy, or KOTOR, or KOTOR 2? Or hell, ever hear of TIE Fighter, for that matter?
How much would a game appeal if the character you play as was a heartless ****? I think a few people would be put off by it.
GTA series... manhunt... etc...
I somehow get the feeling that once again LS will be the canon ending...
I don't have a problem with it, but IMO a DS ending being canon would make for an interesting change.
Here is a action figure of the Redeemed apprentice (
http://www.starwars.com/gaming/other/rpg/news20080222.html). I think that that would be cool to choose you side. :)
EDIT: The picture is kinda in the middle/the end of the page.
You guys bring up Knights and you guys bring up Jedi Academy, Grand Theft Auto, I feel those games give you a choice. You can be as bad or what not as you want to be. A game where you had to kill Jedi children to proceed, for example, there was no option to avoid doing so. This is just me but I don't think that'd be cool and I think a number of other people wouldn't like the idea either.
Cool your jets okay. Listen, shhh, listen. I looked up Tie Fighter and as the name indicates you serve as an Imperial pilot against Rebel terrorists. The game does have you fighting the good guys, sure. They're also a military force. Nowhere in my research into the game was there a part where you had to bomb a civilian colony or eliminate every man woman and child in a settlement. People might be craving this sort of game, but I think people would be turned off the game if they learnt that you had to commit such acts to play through.
I believe that having a redeemable protagonist in TFU would be a good idea to the plot
DAWUSS: The reason most SW games have LS cannons is because the majority of fans like to play the LS cannon more then the DS cannon since they project their own mortality on their characters and do not choose the DS ending as much as the LS.
I recall that every transport-full of anything you capture in TIE Fighter is delivered for interrogation (and we all know how nice Imperials are in interrogations). That's just off the top of my head.
"They didn't even ask me any questions" :p
I believe that having a redeemable protagonist in TFU would be a good idea to the plot
DAWUSS: The reason most SW games have LS cannons is because the majority of fans like to play the LS cannon more then the DS cannon since they project their own mortality on their characters and do not choose the DS ending as much as the LS.
So you mean its LS ending Canon for that Anakin game?
Well, I think its good to be bad sometime, but thats just me.
On the Tie Fighter game: There is actually some choice you can make in the story I think. You get to choose to work on the special objectives from the Emperor's Secret Service, and get to be the Emperor's Hand/Eye/Spleen/etc
The freighters you scan are dealt with by Imperial torture? Yeah, and while you're on the front lines in America's Army or something your buddies are abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib, go figure.
No relevence you say? You want to say Tie Fighter has you evil because of what who you work for does. In America Army, in Kuma War, who you fight for do evil. Depending on your point of view, invading Iraq, or Abu Ghraib, or Guantamano. In Generals, who you fight for do many evil things, what USA is attacked for, GLA modelled after Al Qaeda. In Red Alert, Soviets do many of the same atrocities as Empire. How is it not relevent?
No relation between the two situations.
I just explained how they are related. You can't just say they're not, you have to prove there's no relation.
Why do you get to decide the "rules" of a debate?
Because we need more than your say so that something is accurate. Can you prove these are not related?
Point: There is quite some difference between being evil, or an ordinary joe making a living via being a gear in a evil organization.
Its like saying that the janitor working in Black Maza is evil cause his work involve in improving the condition of a evil company.
And for the record, NO THE COMPANION CUBE IS NEVER EVER EVIL, AND NEVAR WILL BE.
Abu Ghraib and Gitmo have absolutely zilch to do with this game. Stay on topic, please.
millenium: That's a trifle extreme and I'd be careful tying fictional examples to something quite that contemporary as people get pretty worked up when you talk about currently ongoing world events.
If you do stand by your statement about bad organizations and bad people in them, then in the x-wing rogue squadron comic series, wedge's brother in law would have changed from evil to good simply by a change in employer because of who he loved.
Not that his motivations changed that greatly, he was doing the same job for both empire and rebellion, and in both cases seeking to serve a greater good as he understood it. But who he was attached to and who mattered to him changed what side he was fighting for, not a deep seated belief that one was wrong and the other right.
The same could be said with Mara Jade being an emperor's hand, and the pilot in Tie Fighter hunting down rebels. Any "state" brings peace that probably saves a lot more lives than the anarchy that would take place if nothing were there. Is this an arguement against atttempting to reform the system, or replace it with somethign better? No. But you can't necessarily condemn someone to the same extent for playing a small part if they are concerned with the alternative being worse. There are definitely mitigating circumstances.
There can be honorable (if wrong headed) people fighting for a dishonorable cause. Example: Erwin Romel's leadership in WW2. He was known for treating his soldiers and the natives where he fought with courtesy and equality, not showing any sign of partiality or discrimination, but he fought for an army that was the anti - thesis of this and were bringing about the holocaust while he was serving his country. Was Rommel evil? Would a tie pilot & officer automatically be evil in Star Wars if their concerns were preservation of the lives of their soldiers, to get through the battles with the least casualties on both sides and treated P.O.W.s with respect and dignity, even if the empire as a whole did not?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel)
That's the point I'm trying to make. You brought up Mara Jade, there was a quote on Wookiepedia I think, I tried looking it up to no avail, where she explains how as the Emperor's Hand she was used to assassinate people, thinking whether or not they deserved it and rationalizing that most of them did. I don't think she had ever been portrayed as a killer, certainly not a concienseless murderer at any rate. But i that was the way the Secret Apprentice is, not just having the ability to mass murder as a result of the free form style of game (aka GTA) but it was part of what you had to do, I think people won't like it.
Actually, I expect the game to be somewhat like the sims or KOTOR in that regard, and wide open with directions you can dake it.
Actually, I expect the game to be somewhat like the sims or KOTOR in that regard, and wide open with directions you can dake it.
NO. Probably no where near the seams... there is a plot, and the aim of your game is not killing your character in a cooking accident.
Kotor would be closer, though I doubt there would be as much flexability. Its probably like the JK series when it comes to flexability to explore, with maybe a slightly more advanced system on determining your ending.
I think this game is going to be majorly complex. General Kota, a Jedi, seems to have a major role in this game. especially after reading the plot on the site (
http://www.lucasarts.com/games/theforceunleashed/#/story/plot/) So redemption seems highly probable. I agree that it'll probably be similar to JK flexibility. But I really believe this game is going to have a bad ending b/c if he goes good, vader will be after him and if he stays dark, we have an interesting story to go with for the next JK game
I'm pretty sure the Dark Forces series is kaput.
TKA-001 wrote:
I'm pretty sure the Dark Forces series is kaput.
Could you please make some longer posts? For me it's quit hard to find out what you mean with your short posts...which results into strange reactions and stuff...
@Topic:
Juedging by the toys, there's a light, dark and 'normal' ending. Why couldn't the canon one be normal or dark for a change? We know the actor who portrays the apprentice has expressed interest in actin in the upcoming television series. Which we know of, will be a bit dark and harder then the movies...so a dark side or 'normal' ending of this game doesn't sound wrong or unbelievable to me :)
My guess would be this having a "normal" ending as canon. It would be really cliche if its a canon LS again. But then again GL is starting to be filled with cliche himself anyways, too keen on lightsideing the heros.
^
Is it even possible to have a Dark Side hero? :xp:
i guess technically that depends on how you percieve hero. A guy who saves the lives of innocents... then no. But a man with great skill, that is honored by his people for courage and valor type stuff... yes a dark side hero is possible
I think the proper term for a dark side hero would be an anti-hero, one who does the right thing (fight the bad guys) for the wrong reasons (such as revenge or some other sort of personal vendetta).
I think there was something about mutiple endings said near when it was first reveled but im not sure if its been scraped or not
Talking about heroes and anti-heroes, anyone else develop an instant dislike of Shaak Ti after finding out she survived? Probably something about running away from the temple and leaving all those kids to die.....
It's certainly not her fault.
Temple got attacked and she ran away. Big hero.
Yeah I'm with Henz on this one. Maybe we'll find out more during TFU, but based on what we know so far, she seems like a coward for fleeing the temple and leaving the younglings defenseless against Vader.
As the Jedi Temple's commander and defender,[1] Shaak Ti was present during the fall of the Jedi Temple, during which Darth Vader himself set out to kill the Jedi Master. Knowing she would not be able to defeat Skywalker and the 501st Legion, she fled Coruscant and went into self-imposed exile on Felucia, where fellow Jedi Knights Aayla Secura and Bariss Offee were shot down. Some time later she met Jedi Maris Brood, who was bent on revenge against Vader. Shaak Ti convinced her to go into hiding on the planet Felucia, where she was training the Force sensitive natives for an eventual conflict with Vader and his secret apprentice.
What was she supposed to do otherwise? Die heroically but stupidly?
Now she can spread (and judging buy the teaser screens she does it very well) her knowledge of the Force and keep the Order alive. Kruhk did the same, for 'Dark Times' readers, although he DID save younglings.
But saying she's a 'real hero' would mean Obi-Wan and Yoda were real heroes too! They fled the Temple as well, and Yoda even ran away from Palpatine. Although they weren't there wen the real order 66 occured, they certainly didn't try to secure the temple, bury the dead or anything 'hero-like.' :)
What was she supposed to do otherwise? Die heroically but stupidly?
Was it a guarantee she was going to lose? Was she not a renowned and battle-tested Jedi Master? It seems cowardly for a Jedi Master to run away from a fight, especially when it results in the inevitable deaths of all of the younglings. For someone worried about spreading her teaching/knowlege of the force, you would think the lives of the younglings would matter to her enough to try and protect them.
Ehm...I think you are mixing some canon material up here.... :xp:
Example:
Ki Adi Mundi deflected 2-3 blaster bolts before dying. And he's a high council member. Obi-Wan Kenobi survived Order 66 by sheer luck. Quinlan Vos was mortally wounded.
And this was against teams of 3-4 Clone Troopers. A Jedi has a maximum of blaster bolts he/she can deflect. Did you see the mass of soldiers PLUS Darth Vader enetering the temple? There is NOTHING to gain against that army.
Suppose the Temple is a big place. Who says she didn't try to fight her way through a few waves but was simply too late? Remember, the one who actually KILLED the younglings was DARTH VADER. Brought to their chambers by at least a platoon of troopers. A Sith Lord and an army? Good luck with your little laser sword. No Yoda or Luke would have made it.
In the comics and cartoons, Jedi can deflect a million blaster bolts. In the movies (which are higher in canon) they can't. And we are talking movies here, where people die when gunned at by 10 troopers. Anyone would. :)