SW The Old Republic: Sith Inquisitor

[SabreMau]

Where I feel it falls down is the villain. Thanaton isn't particularly memorable. Maybe it's because he doesn't interact with you that much, or he sounds almost exactly like my old Geography teacher but when he's finally defeated it doesn't feel like some kind of epic revenge has been settled. It felt like Random Authority Figure B has been removed from obstructing you.

Yeah, come to think of it, I didn't even remember Thanaton was the big villain for this until watching this review series. I mean, I think I remember that he was involved in the story (there was a brief mention of him during Rex-Dart's video when he's on Corellia) but I didn't remember fighting him. Zash was memorable, but I also still knew she wasn't the final boss of the story campaign. The Warrior's endgame nemesis combines partial aspects of both Darths into a single character but still stood out.

I've always said that it felt like in every story Act 1 was done by one, extremely talented writing team, and Acts 2 and 3 by the B-Squad. The exception to this was the Sith Warrior, whose tale is the only one that felt to me like one cohesive story from beginning to end. The main villain is someone you meet and interact with in Act 1 and everything that happens there is paid off down the road. Also helping is that he also manages to deliver some of the most consistently well-written lines in the game, making him probably the most memorable antagonist in the game.

Haven't played the game, but from this review it looked more like there was no Act 3 for the Inquisitor- the problem with Thanaton is that he felt like an Act 2 villain, with Zash as the Act 1 villain.

I get that the actual Act 2 ending was probably fighting Thanaton only to be overwhelmed by your ghostly companions, but the fact that you would have won had this not happened only made Thanaton look even more pathetic an adversary, especially for a Dark Council member (none of whom are particularly memorable either- too bad this is after Darth Jadus faked his death, especially since he and the Inquisitor has somewhat similar goals).

Yeah, the finales for each part according to official blog is:

Prologue - becoming Zash's apprentice
Act 1 - defeating Zash
Act 2 - fighting Thanaton the first time and ghost indigestion
Act 3 - defeating Thanaton and claiming his ergonomic chair

For reference, the Agent's were:

Prologue - finishing the Nem'ro/Fa’athra assignment on Hutta
Act 1 - defeating Jadus
Act 2 - defeating Kothe, Hunter escapes
Act 3 - defeating Hunter

And if these are meant to be KOTOR 3-10, then KOTOR got progressively worse and less impressive with each sequel.

Not necessarily. Just rearrange the individual stories of 3-10 so the worst is first and best is last, whichever order that turns out to be. They all take place in parallel.

[Madner Kami]

Not necessarily. Just rearrange the individual stories of 3-10 so the worst is first and best is last, whichever order that turns out to be. They all take place in parallel.

Hmnot exactly. The Agent's storyline is argueably the last, as it references happenings of the other storylines frequently, so they must've happened (at least shortly) before. It is kind of the best storyline though, so this isn't a detriment.

[SabreMau]

Not necessarily. Just rearrange the individual stories of 3-10 so the worst is first and best is last, whichever order that turns out to be. They all take place in parallel.

Hmnot exactly. The Agent's storyline is argueably the last, as it references happenings of the other storylines frequently, so they must've happened (at least shortly) before. It is kind of the best storyline though, so this isn't a detriment.

Parts of Agent may be happening ahead of or alongside parts of other stories, but all storylines begin during the uneasy truce and complete after the point of war were declared, so they're all overlapping to a large extent, with none completely ending before a different one starts fresh.

[Madner Kami]

Not necessarily. Just rearrange the individual stories of 3-10 so the worst is first and best is last, whichever order that turns out to be. They all take place in parallel.

Hmnot exactly. The Agent's storyline is argueably the last, as it references happenings of the other storylines frequently, so they must've happened (at least shortly) before. It is kind of the best storyline though, so this isn't a detriment.

Parts of Agent may be happening ahead of or alongside parts of other stories, but all storylines begin during the uneasy truce and complete after the point of war were declared, so they're all overlapping to a large extent, with none completely ending before a different one starts fresh.

They do overlap and happen in parallel, I did not argue that. However, there are key happenings in various storylines that put them in order at varying points. For example, when you finish the Warrior storyline, Thanaton is still alive. The Trooper can't end his storyline before anyone except the Agent, because his triumph decisively ends the Empire's presence on Corellia, as he destroys the Citadel. A small remark about a high level traitor telling the Jedi about the Children of the Emperor in the Warrior's storyline puts the Knight's story squarely before almost everyone else's and the Agent's 3rd Act is choke full of references to what happened in everyone else's storyline. Argueably, the Smugglers storyline is the most independent and the Bounty Hunter's starts before everyone else's with it ending somewhere close before or after what happens to the Knight.

[Karha of Honor]

Coordinatinmg all of that must have been insane.

[Wargriffin]

Coordinatinmg all of that must have been insane.

Its generally why the slimmed it all down to the Outlander...

Granted I almost think the Outlander would have worked as a brand new character

[Jonathan101]

If the Agent was last that means the ultimate villain of "KOTOR 10" was a generic shady evil illuminati who were pitting the Sith and Republic against each other in a very unconvincing and pointless manner.

Which, again, leads us to the problem of weak villains undermining the storylines. KOTOR 1 had Revan and Malak; KOTOR 2 had Nihilus, Sion and Traya...and KOTOR 3-10 had a bunch of C-listers.

Of course, creating 8 separate storylines was no mean feat, and they are to be commended for that, but selling them as "KOTOR 3-10" is overhyping them and just covering the fact that they never made a KOTOR 3 like everyone wanted. Shame.

[Wargriffin]

Essentially all the character stories suffer the structure problem

The Acts tend to be self contained arcs and any overarching is mostly contained to one character or trying to hot glue them together.

Lets be blunt

Bioware just SUCKS at villains cause it plays against their strength, Unless a character is gonna join your party.


Bioware is all about the player empowerment fantasy, and having competent villain well runs counter to that. BW likes to let the player either back sass or pwn their opponents

[Jonathan101]

Except it is even MORE empowering to take on a competent, interesting, three-dimensional villain and overcome the odds with my character to defeat them.

You had me at "Bioware just SUCKS at villains".

But I'll be charitable and concede that writing so many storylines meant certain things were going to be rushed anyway.

[Karha of Honor]

Essentially all the character stories suffer the structure problem

The Acts tend to be self contained arcs and any overarching is mostly contained to one character or trying to hot glue them together.

Lets be blunt

Bioware just SUCKS at villains cause it plays against their strength, Unless a character is gonna join your party.


Bioware is all about the player empowerment fantasy, and having competent villain well runs counter to that. BW likes to let the player either back sass or pwn their opponents

KOTOR 1 and 2 main bads were scary and competent.