View Single Post

Default 

November 8th, 2013, 08:02
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'm not saying the "naive romance" is the best part about Star Wars - but that it's an integral part of it. I liked all those things you liked as well, but to change the fundamentals is to betray the source - which I don't think is appropriate.

Then again, I see Star Wars as a "fun" setting - kinda like a comic book setting. It's made up of random ideas put together by a complete hack called George Lucas. But it's his creation and his setting - and I'm the sort of person who respects the creator.
I see your point, but can't it be both though? "Fun" without the naivety/good vs. evil focus? What I picture - just as an example - is this: What if Han Solo was the main character instead of Luke Skywalker? Solo is a very "fun" character, but part of what would make a tale surrounding him enjoyable is that he is complex and flawed in addition to being a humorous, witty character. Replacing Skywalker with Solo and giving him the force and training would be a very interesting path to follow - without the obvious good vs. evil thing.

That's just a basic example, but I absolutely believe that you can have a "fun" story that still has depth and complexity, getting rid of the dreadfully predictable "good vs. evil" (gee, I wonder who will win?) without going all Christopher Nolan about it.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
KotOR did it in the right way - because it keeps the naive romance and the blatant good/bad guy style - it doesn't try to make it grim and dark. Actually, I think KotOR is the perfect Star Wars story - made in the spirit of Lucas, only with more talent behind the writing.
I don't think you're giving Kotor 1 enough credit . I mean, you're right to an extent, but Kotor also did a great job in adding some complexity to the morality and also presented surprisingly heady philosophical musings. I'll put this in spoilers for those that haven't played Kotor 1 yet:

Spoiler – Spoiler


So did he really belong to the "dark side?" Or was he actually saving the weakening Jedi and the stagnant Republic from themselves? There are other examples of complex morality and "Deeper than the surface" philosophy as well, and this made the setting feel more "grown up" compared to the films. (But your right, there was still the old alluring "charm" as well).

As for Kotor 2, well, that's going to be subjective of course. For me, it didn't go too "dark and gritty" - it just explored the setting from a different angle. As long as this approach doesn't betray the source material, I think this can be quite refreshing. My only complaint is the lack of humor, particular when it comes to party banter - that's one area Obsidian definitely missed on. So I'll give you this: Kotor 2's characters were too serious all the time.

Now, I would have preferred Kotor 2 to be a side-story instead of a sequel - after all, it took a tidy ending from Kotor 1, unraveled it, and left a bunch of questions unanswered by the end (thanks Lucasarts for not giving a greenlight for a Kotor 3!) - but it doesn't feel out of place in Star Wars to me. There are so many places in the setting to explore, some more lighthearted and adventurous, others more introspective, but there's plenty of room for Obsidian's approach.
Nerevarine is online now

Nerevarine

Nerevarine's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#26

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 853