Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic Remake

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
So you are saying that having an SJW writer, who makes a point of being an SJW is not cause to think that the game will be full of politics?

Hate to break this to you, but Star Wars has ALWAYS been political. Lucas is a liberal democrat and his politics are all over Star Wars, along with his Buddhist beliefs. The guy literally compared Bush Jr and Cheny to Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
32,567
It always has been injected into video games now for decades. It's just now for some reason people all of a sudden care lol.

Either way I either will enjoy a game or a won't. Someones political views don't concern me at all because you can believe in whatever you want.
no, not like it is now. allusion to issues is one thing, this new jam it down your throat, take it you -ist -phobe garbage is another. its gone from 2 to 11. sjw garbage does not belong in anything, its garbage that they dont even buy.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
28,066
It always has been injected into video games now for decades. It's just now for some reason people all of a sudden care lol.

Either way I either will enjoy a game or a won't. Someones political views don't concern me at all because you can believe in whatever you want.
It's one thing if it's completely new, but this is a remake of a game with a story that is already established and respected. Changing it to favor the sensibilities of a small select group of people is nonsense.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,866
no, not like it is now. allusion to issues is one thing, this new jam it down your throat, take it you -ist -phobe garbage is another. its gone from 2 to 11. sjw garbage does not belong in anything, its garbage that they dont even buy.
Well then speak with your wallet. You don't have to buy it if you don't like the political view of the developer. But if you ask me its the same today as it was 20 years ago. The difference is nowadays its way easier to find someones political views and complain on facebook or twitter etc.

Back in the mid 80's and even the 90's there was no avenue for people to find out the information they can today. Anyway I am going off topic now, but either way lets hope the game is gud! They have a lot to live up too!
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,866
It's one thing if it's completely new, but this is a remake of a game with a story that is already established and respected. Changing it to favor the sensibilities of a small select group of people is nonsense.
I totally agree, when someones makes a remake i expect it to be the same game just updated. We shall see when the game comes out....whenever the hell that is.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
no, not like it is now. allusion to issues is one thing, this new jam it down your throat, take it you -ist -phobe garbage is another. its gone from 2 to 11. sjw garbage does not belong in anything, its garbage that they dont even buy.

Bullshit, absolute bullshit. The only difference between now and then is that the internet is filled with alt-right grifters selling a narrative to idiots willing to believe anything that strokes their frail egos.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
32,567
compared Bush Jr and Cheny to Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine
thats a quote from a "Bush/Cheney hater extraordinaire" with no actual confirmation to if its true and the timing is off, bush jr was still in oil and gas in '77..

Bullshit, absolute bullshit. The only difference between now and then is that the internet is filled with alt-right grifters selling a narrative to idiots willing to believe anything that strokes their frail egos.
nah
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,269
Hate to break this to you, but Star Wars has ALWAYS been political. Lucas is a liberal democrat and his politics are all over Star Wars, along with his Buddhist beliefs. The guy literally compared Bush Jr and Cheny to Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine.
That excuse is as old as woke culture is. And it was never true. Active daily political issues were never directly inserted into fiction. Bush JR was president in the 2000s, how would palpatine and vader be based on the Bush / Cheney presidency? Is Lucas a time traveller?
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
thats a quote from a "Bush/Cheney hater extraordinaire" with no actual confirmation to if its true and the timing is off, bush jr was still in oil and gas in '77..


nah

It should be noted that the comparison was relating to the prequel trilogy. I was using the quote as an example of Lucas' political views.

That excuse is as old as woke culture is. And it was never true. Active daily political issues were never directly inserted into fiction. Bush JR was president in the 2000s, how would palpatine and vader be based on the Bush / Cheney presidency? Is Lucas a time traveller?

You've never actually thought about the media you consume, have you?
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
4,833
I don't think they can use the dialog wheel. Bioware patented that. And this remake isn't a Bioware game.

I would have liked it if they turned to Final Fantasy 12 for the combat system.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,269
Bullshit, absolute bullshit. The only difference between now and then is that the internet is filled with alt-right grifters selling a narrative to idiots willing to believe anything that strokes their frail egos.
Yeah we know. Everything has always been political, and if you disagree you are alt-right. Yawn You bring the laziest talking points.

You've never actually thought about the media you consume, have you?
Those goalposts are firmly in place, it's no use trying to move them now.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
32,567
It should be noted that the comparison was relating to the prequel trilogy. I was using the quote as an example of Lucas' political views.
my point still stands, no verifiable proof of that quote from a " "Bush/Cheney hater extraordinaire""
 

Bowman15

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2015
Messages
1,752
Bullshit, absolute bullshit. The only difference between now and then is that the internet is filled with alt-right grifters selling a narrative to idiots willing to believe anything that strokes their frail egos.

LOL...reality really grinds on some people when others don't think exactly like them.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
544
Why would this story line need to be rewritten in any form? There isn’t any possible way to improve on the story, so why even attempt it? It’s a guaranteed failure.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
It always has been injected into video games now for decades. It's just now for some reason people all of a sudden care lol.

Either way I either will enjoy a game or a won't. Someones political views don't concern me at all because you can believe in whatever you want.
Yeah, because Doom and Descent were so political. Quake was obviously a game about taking down the patriarchy. Give me a break with that nonsense.

I couldn't give two squirts of piss about what content creators believe or what color they are or what they choose to do in the bedroom. Sure, some games have had progressive themes in them but that's not the same as being woke and the presentation of themes or even ideology wasn't so heavy handed, preachy or at the expense of story or gameplay. Themes are being prioritized over substance and story telling. The stories we get now a days are usually bad. They aren't well crafted because politics is job #1. These SJW types are basically modern televangelists. They are annoying busy bodies that think everyone should think as they do.

Stories are all allegorical to "orange man bad", or everything is racist. These people think syrup is racist for fucks sake. Every story modified for modern sensibilities is low quality because it's not done with subtlety or skill. They pick the themes they want and craft the story around them while being as on the nose as possible. Name one property that has remotely benefitted from being "reimagined for modern audiences." I'll wait.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
Yeah we know. Everything has always been political, and if you disagree you are alt-right. Yawn You bring the laziest talking points.


Those goalposts are firmly in place, it's no use trying to move them now.

Art is often political as art often comments on the real world. For example: It is impossible to create an a-political dystopia or utopia as they require the creator to explain, in their minds, what would cause the world to collapse into a dystopia state or what they believe would be a "perfect" world. Science-Fiction is especially filled with work that examines political issues of the era they were created in, as it's a genre that allows freedom to explore those problems in different ways. Media is not created in a vacuum, free of outside influences or the beliefs and ideals of the creator(s).

Since you're oblivious let me enlighten you a bit:

Damn near every sci-fi movie of the 50s was a commentary on the red scare. Some were fairly pro McCarthy-ism, while others were against. Regardless, they were all directly talking about real-world politics of their era.

M.A.S.H, one of the most popular US TV shows of all time, used the thinnest possible veil of the Korean War to critique the Vietnam War, which was happening while the show was airing (at least for some of the series).

In a similar vein, Rambo (both the book and the first movie) was staunchly anti-Vietnam war and was a commentary on the treatment of Vietnam vets post-war.

Let's not even get into the amount of media from the 80s that commented on the excess of the era.

It's easy to look at older media and miss the influence the era it was created in had on it, simply because not all of us were alive/old enough during those times to have knowledge of what is being talked about and even for those that were, it's still decades removed. Conversely, it's easy to look at media now and think it's somehow different from the past. That we're seeing political issues being brought up more. Because we're living in the now, we're old enough to understand and we've been living in a connected world where all of this is feed to us daily for a while now. In the past, unless you were involved in academia or part of groups of people that would sit around all day and analyze media, you were never exposed to these kinds of discussions. Now it's all over. We're seeing it from every corner and are constantly being told what this piece of media represents, what that creator believes, and so on. Combine that with the grifters and now it feels like the sky is falling. Then we have the mega-corps telling us to "just buy" and "don't think", trying to convince people that art is meaningless and should only be mindlessly consumed.

I've said many times before, and will continue to say, the problem with a lot of modern fiction isn't that it's highly political; the problem is the quality of the writing. Companies are desperately trying to appeal to a new generation and are grabbing anyone that is able to string two sentences together. You throw a good writer (or writing team) at a work and it doesn't matter how politically charged the story is, they're still going to produce something decent and worth remembering (for the right reasons, at least). On the subject of KOTOR: Sam Maggs seems like a decent writer. I looked a couple of her non-game stuff (an issue of her Marvel Action: Captain Marvel series and the free preview of her book Wonder Women: 25 Innovators, Inventors, and Trailblazers Who Changed History) and they were decent. She leans a bit too heavy on modern internet slang for my liking at times, but that's just personal preference and not a reflection of her skill. Her comic actually did something that a lot of writers struggle with, she made Carol actual likable and gave her a personality. Give her a good team to work with and there's a chance they can do something good with KOTOR. Maybe they'll make Bastilla a tolerable character and not make her fall to the Dark side one of the weakest parts of the story.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,866
Yeah, because Doom and Descent were so political. Quake was obviously a game about taking down the patriarchy. Give me a break with that nonsense.

I couldn't give two squirts of piss about what content creators believe or what color they are or what they choose to do in the bedroom. Sure, some games have had progressive themes in them but that's not the same as being woke and the presentation of themes or even ideology wasn't so heavy handed, preachy or at the expense of story or gameplay. Themes are being prioritized over substance and story telling. The stories we get now a days are usually bad. They aren't well crafted because politics is job #1. These SJW types are basically modern televangelists. They are annoying busy bodies that think everyone should think as they do.

Stories are all allegorical to "orange man bad", or everything is racist. These people think syrup is racist for fucks sake. Every story modified for modern sensibilities is low quality because it's not done with subtlety or skill. They pick the themes they want and craft the story around them while being as on the nose as possible. Name one property that has remotely benefitted from being "reimagined for modern audiences." I'll wait.
Look I can sit here and nit pick your post, but I won't because I do not want to go off topic at all because if you don't agree with your views or other peoples views on this forum, you get an infraction or banned.

But I will say I am in agreement that they better leave the story alone because there is nothing wrong with it.
 

CptCabbit

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
262
Yeah, because Doom and Descent were so political. Quake was obviously a game about taking down the patriarchy. Give me a break with that nonsense.

I couldn't give two squirts of piss about what content creators believe or what color they are or what they choose to do in the bedroom. Sure, some games have had progressive themes in them but that's not the same as being woke and the presentation of themes or even ideology wasn't so heavy handed, preachy or at the expense of story or gameplay. Themes are being prioritized over substance and story telling. The stories we get now a days are usually bad. They aren't well crafted because politics is job #1. These SJW types are basically modern televangelists. They are annoying busy bodies that think everyone should think as they do.

Stories are all allegorical to "orange man bad", or everything is racist. These people think syrup is racist for fucks sake. Every story modified for modern sensibilities is low quality because it's not done with subtlety or skill. They pick the themes they want and craft the story around them while being as on the nose as possible. Name one property that has remotely benefitted from being "reimagined for modern audiences." I'll wait.
Dredd
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
Art is often political as art often comments on the real world. For example: It is impossible to create an a-political dystopia or utopia as they require the creator to explain, in their minds, what would cause the world to collapse into a dystopia state or what they believe would be a "perfect" world. Science-Fiction is especially filled with work that examines political issues of the era they were created in, as it's a genre that allows freedom to explore those problems in different ways. Media is not created in a vacuum, free of outside influences or the beliefs and ideals of the creator(s).

Since you're oblivious let me enlighten you a bit:

Damn near every sci-fi movie of the 50s was a commentary on the red scare. Some were fairly pro McCarthy-ism, while others were against. Regardless, they were all directly talking about real-world politics of their era.

M.A.S.H, one of the most popular US TV shows of all time, used the thinnest possible veil of the Korean War to critique the Vietnam War, which was happening while the show was airing (at least for some of the series).

In a similar vein, Rambo (both the book and the first movie) was staunchly anti-Vietnam war and was a commentary on the treatment of Vietnam vets post-war.

Let's not even get into the amount of media from the 80s that commented on the excess of the era.

It's easy to look at older media and miss the influence the era it was created in had on it, simply because not all of us were alive/old enough during those times to have knowledge of what is being talked about and even for those that were, it's still decades removed. Conversely, it's easy to look at media now and think it's somehow different from the past. That we're seeing political issues being brought up more. Because we're living in the now, we're old enough to understand and we've been living in a connected world where all of this is feed to us daily for a while now. In the past, unless you were involved in academia or part of groups of people that would sit around all day and analyze media, you were never exposed to these kinds of discussions. Now it's all over. We're seeing it from every corner and are constantly being told what this piece of media represents, what that creator believes, and so on. Combine that with the grifters and now it feels like the sky is falling. Then we have the mega-corps telling us to "just buy" and "don't think", trying to convince people that art is meaningless and should only be mindlessly consumed.

I've said many times before, and will continue to say, the problem with a lot of modern fiction isn't that it's highly political; the problem is the quality of the writing. Companies are desperately trying to appeal to a new generation and are grabbing anyone that is able to string two sentences together. You throw a good writer (or writing team) at a work and it doesn't matter how politically charged the story is, they're still going to produce something decent and worth remembering (for the right reasons, at least). On the subject of KOTOR: Sam Maggs seems like a decent writer. I looked a couple of her non-game stuff (an issue of her Marvel Action: Captain Marvel series and the free preview of her book Wonder Women: 25 Innovators, Inventors, and Trailblazers Who Changed History) and they were decent. She leans a bit too heavy on modern internet slang for my liking at times, but that's just personal preference and not a reflection of her skill. Her comic actually did something that a lot of writers struggle with, she made Carol actual likable and gave her a personality. Give her a good team to work with and there's a chance they can do something good with KOTOR. Maybe they'll make Bastilla a tolerable character and not make her fall to the Dark side one of the weakest parts of the story.
I agree in that you are absolutely correct on the quality of writing. Hollywood and creative types in general tend to lean towards more liberal belief systems. That said, the goal used to be to create a piece of entertainment first and include the author or writers political beliefs in subtle ways through subtext. Most people completely missed that subtext but were still entertained creating a commercial success. If you were smart enough or perceptive enough to catch the subtext, then you could pat yourself on the back for being able to catch something few others did.

No, the issue isn't necessarily the themes presented or even the overrepresentation of groups that make up the smallest fraction of the population. It's that these things are done by writers who lack the skill to do it in a way that's not condescending, patronizing and preachy and just annoying. I'm not sure if they think their work has to draw controversy in that "there is no such thing as bad press" sort of way or if they feel that their messaging doesn't work unless it's so blatant that everyone can see it. I'm not really sure. Perhaps a bit of both. I do not know.

I would really have to go back and re-watch that movie to have it fresh enough in my mind to comment on that. I vaguely recall the film and I don't really recall anything that could be remotely considered SJW about it. I just recall it being less satirical than the original film and much grittier and violent. I don't recall the story being particularly good, just serviceable. And if there are properties that have benefited from being "adjusted for modern audiences" I'd be surprised but I think the point would still stand. It's much easier to think of IP's, films, TV shows and games that were absolutely ruined by political pandering. Star Trek, Star Wars, He-Man, and Doctor Who certainly didn't benefit from these changes. Just to name a few.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
But I will say I am in agreement that they better leave the story alone because there is nothing wrong with it.

I disagree with that. I think the story is great and still holds up pretty well, but there are definitely some weak points. Bastilla as a character, for a good part of the game, her fall to the dark side, and the writing around her turn back to the light (if you chose to go that route). A lot of that could do with some reworking.

see the common word there, not "smash you over the head over and over until you fall in line" like it is now.

None of my examples were exactly subtle about their message. Commentary and critique can still include bashing people repeatedly until the idea sinks in. A good writer just adds a little padding to the hammer to make the beating less painful.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
32,567
None of my examples were exactly subtle about their message. Commentary and critique can still include bashing people repeatedly until the idea sinks in. A good writer just adds a little padding to the hammer to make the beating less painful.
i am familiar with them all, none of them come even close to the bullshit released today.
this really should be in the get woke thread...
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,741
I agree in that you are absolutely correct on the quality of writing. Hollywood and creative types in general tend to lean towards more liberal belief systems. That said, the goal used to be to create a piece of entertainment first and include the author or writers political beliefs in subtle ways through subtext. Most people completely missed that subtext but were still entertained creating a commercial success. If you were smart enough or perceptive enough to catch the subtext, then you could pat yourself on the back for being able to catch something few others did.

No, the issue isn't necessarily the themes presented or even the overrepresentation of groups that make up the smallest fraction of the population. It's that these things are done by writers who lack the skill to do it in a way that's not condescending, patronizing and preachy and just annoying. I'm not sure if they think their work has to draw controversy in that "there is no such thing as bad press" sort of way or if they feel that their messaging doesn't work unless it's so blatant that everyone can see it. I'm not really sure. Perhaps a bit of both. I do not know.

Like I said, the big difference between then and now is the internet. Any time we're engaging online we're often beat over the head, continuously, with analysis of media. With people talking about what it means and how wrong we are for not seeing something, etc. Before you might have run across news articles talking about the meaning of a movie or you could have subscribed to magazines that went in-depth on the creation process, but you had to actively look for that. It seems impossible to hide from it these days. Combine that with quality issues and the sheer amount of idiots going "if you don't like this thing you're [insert term here]" and we're left feeling like everything is so much worse.

I think a bit of both. Bad writers often believe they need to spell everything out as painfully obviously as possible or else the audience won't understand their "genius". And there's a constant positive feedback loop for hacks that create waves by saying something "controversial" or playing to the Twitter brigade.
 

CptCabbit

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
262
I would really have to go back and re-watch that movie to have it fresh enough in my mind to comment on that. I vaguely recall the film and I don't really recall anything that could be remotely considered SJW about it. I just recall it being less satirical than the original film and much grittier and violent. I don't recall the story being particularly good, just serviceable. And if there are properties that have benefited from being "adjusted for modern audiences" I'd be surprised but I think the point would still stand. It's much easier to think of IP's, films, TV shows and games that were absolutely ruined by political pandering. Star Trek, Star Wars, He-Man, and Doctor Who certainly didn't benefit from these changes. Just to name a few.
Which is a bit of what i was getting at. It was a remake made for modern audiences relative to the '95 film. Saying that something is "remade for modern audiences" is just as likely to be jargon fluff as it is to be substantial insinuation.

Your point literally doesn't stand when you ask someone to "name one, i'll wait" and they name one and your response is "yeah but more are worse off." However I admit that's more semantics on my part.

As an aside, I dont think Doctor Who has gotten worse because of political pandering, but rather because they've reached the point in the circle where they need to change everything regardless of how it affects the show's legend which is what always happens with a time travel series after a point. That being said, the 13th doctor's stories have easily been the weakest.
 
Last edited:

jerry8169

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2020
Messages
247
So, if this is going full SJW, will the choice to send the robot back to the woman who is in love with it after her husband died going to become a light side choice, since you are being accepting of her lifestyle?
 

Blade-Runner

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
3,709
1631321794670.png
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
Which is a bit of what i was getting at. It was a remake made for modern audiences relative to the '95 film. Saying that something is "remade for modern audiences" is just as likely to be jargon fluff as it is to be substantial insinuation.

Your point literally doesn't stand when you ask someone to "name one, i'll wait" and they name one and your response is "yeah but more are worse off." However I admit that's more semantics on my part.

As an aside, I dont think Doctor Who has gotten worse because of political pandering, but rather because they've reached the point in the circle where they need to change everything regardless of how it affects the show's legend which is what always happens with a time travel series after a point. That being said, the 13th doctor's stories have easily been the weakest.
Fair enough. What I mean is I don't know if your comment is accurate or not. I don't know that movie well enough. However, I see your point. Not all remakes are necessarily bad and pretty much all remakes have been made to modernize a story for the current time. That's a good point. However, I think it's fair to say none have benefitted from the injection of identity politics and hiring writers for reasons other than their experience as writers is a bad idea. I understand some will just take any job but the fact is that a property with decades of history behind it needs to be handled with care. Cobra Kai is how its done. Most of what's come out of the Star Wars brand since Disney took over is a prime example of how not to do it.

As for Doctor Who, it is the quality of the writing that is the problem. It's always been a left leaning show as the BBC has been that way since at least the 1960's or even its inception. So it isn't the injection of identity politics into the show that's caused the problem. I will say that once again, it beats you over the head with it. Even rewatching the classic show it was guilty of leaning on progressive themes, but again there was some subtlety to it. However, the show is particularly weak due to the poor quality writing. Excluding Chris Chibnall, none of the writers had any science fiction writing experience before being hired to write for the show. Most of them didn't even have any significant writing credits to their names either.

Chris Chibnall himself had only written five episodes of Doctor Who during the Moffat and Russel T. Davies eras. All of which were bad to mediocre. I think one of those is actually decent, but hardly on the level of what we've seen from the shows long history of very capable writers. They've shaken it up narratively, but not in a good way. The Timeless child is the Last Jedi of the franchise and arguably worse because it's even more nonsensical and created more narrative issues than even Rian Johnson could manage in an entire trilogy. But, that's veering off topic. I just use it as an example of how the quality of writing has gone down. The problem is only amplified when a TV show, film or video game is too on the nose with its political messaging.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
As is everything these days. I really don't care if people aren't going to buy the game because of their fear of SJW.
Anyways, I never played the original, was it similar to Mass Effect as in a shooter/RPG? If so, I am going to pick it up.
The original was nothing like that. It was the precursor to modern BioWare titles. You had choice in conversations but the protagonist didn't have a voice. You had a light side and dark side path as well as two different endings. The combat was sort of a real time combat system but it was really D&D based. When you went into combat the game automatically paused and you could queue up your actions like a traditional RPG from back in the day and then see what happened. But you could take some real time control of it. It's hard to explain. I'm sure there are videos of it out there. But it was a unique experience and not like the action RPG's of today at all. It was most certainly not a shooter either.
 

Vegas P11

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
1,424
The original was nothing like that. It was the precursor to modern BioWare titles. You had choice in conversations but the protagonist didn't have a voice. You had a light side and dark side path as well as two different endings. The combat was sort of a real time combat system but it was really D&D based. When you went into combat the game automatically paused and you could queue up your actions like a traditional RPG from back in the day and then see what happened. But you could take some real time control of it. It's hard to explain. I'm sure there are videos of it out there. But it was a unique experience and not like the action RPG's of today at all. It was most certainly not a shooter either.
Sounds like something I would like then. Thanks Dan.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
Sounds like something I would like then. Thanks Dan.
The original game received tons of praise for its story and characters. Really, the things BioWare was known for back in the day. That's part of why there is so much fear about any changes being made to it. I wouldn't call it perfect story wise, but it was damn close.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,806
Well you won't get your wish. This one will be infused with identity politics. I won't be buying it. The person hired to re-write the game is a rabid SJW:
https://twitter.com/Dataracer117/status/1436168804191531010

I'm somewhat being sarcastic, but none of the above would surprise me when you read the tweets from the intolerant jackass who is re-writing the game for "modern audiences."

Oh well, there goes my hope. Getting that soy-bitch to re-write it, is like asking China to write a movie about the origins of Taiwan.

Great youtube comment on this:
Not inclusive enough? I don't know how anyone could say that with a straight face.
Revan could be male or female, Caucasian, Black or Asian. Your companions included a wise man of color, a teenage girl who knew her way around the seedy underbelly of her home and a lesbian alien woman. NPCs were also varied (as in skin color, not actual head models) and you could find women in powerful positions in Tatooine, Korriban and at the end of the game were a woman Admiral is leading the Republic fleet.

You're talking about actual wokeness, legitimate egalitarianism.
What SJWs want is their specific style of wokeness. A guilt infested, virtue signalling, self proclaimed enlightenment that must eclipse all others lest it become invalidated by logic.


edit: Ladies and Gentlemen, the final boss has been found already:

'Knights of The Woke Republic'
 
Last edited:

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,269
The original game received tons of praise for its story and characters. Really, the things BioWare was known for back in the day. That's part of why there is so much fear about any changes being made to it. I wouldn't call it perfect story wise, but it was damn close.
It actually makes me think of Mafia Definitive edition. Where the re-writing can't even be considered political. But it is there, and serves no purpose. These "re-writers" are egotistic and they are not content with leaving anything as is, they try to fix it. Suggesting that the original writers were bad at their jobs. And at best we get Mafia Definitive Edition, at worst a woke nightmare. It's actually kind of amazing, because I don't think a single line is left as original in Mafia. If you allow me to quote myself from my review:
It's not just that they changed a few narrative elements, that would not have made the game bad in of itself. They really did not understand or respect any of the characters of the game.

I was constantly facepalming while watching the cutscenes, because almost all the witty scenes I remembered had either been cut, replaced with a less classy version with unnecessary swearing, or simply was missing the punchline or the setup for it.
I was even at the point of gaslighting myself, where I wasn't sure if I remembered the original incorrectly and it was like this, but then I watched the original cutscenes on youtube which confirmed I'm not crazy. So even "subtle" rewriting in the wrong hands can result in the falling apart of the narrative. So our worries are perfectly warranted seeing who is doing the rewriting.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,269
Art is often political as art often comments on the real world. For example: It is impossible to create an a-political dystopia or utopia as they require the creator to explain, in their minds, what would cause the world to collapse into a dystopia state or what they believe would be a "perfect" world. Science-Fiction is especially filled with work that examines political issues of the era they were created in, as it's a genre that allows freedom to explore those problems in different ways. Media is not created in a vacuum, free of outside influences or the beliefs and ideals of the creator(s).
And you have the original "progressive" flaw. You cannot differentiate between subtle influences from real world events, and direct insertion of real world politics. Wokeness knows no subtlety they want to drill in points, and hammer you in the head with them, not elude to them.
Whenever a pro-SJW is arguing with me the conversation inevitably leads to this impasse.
Since you're oblivious let me enlighten you a bit:
What you percieve is your own inability to notice the differences between being hammered in the head with something, and being based around a theme inspired by the real world political climate.
Damn near every sci-fi movie of the 50s was a commentary on the red scare. Some were fairly pro McCarthy-ism, while others were against. Regardless, they were all directly talking about real-world politics of their era.
You are trying to prove something that was never questioned, then equate that to direct insertion of politics that have nothing to do with or even antithetic to the established lore and characters.
And then you leap to "everything always been political" No, everything has always been influenced by real world politics, but it wasn't political activism.
People cannot create anything from scratch, so it is inevitable that fiction will be based on some derivation of reality, that is not the issue.
It's easy to look at older media and miss the influence the era it was created in had on it, simply because not all of us were alive/old enough during those times to have knowledge of what is being talked about and even for those that were, it's still decades removed. Conversely, it's easy to look at media now and think it's somehow different from the past. That we're seeing political issues being brought up more. Because we're living in the now, we're old enough to understand and we've been living in a connected world where all of this is feed to us daily for a while now. In the past, unless you were involved in academia or part of groups of people that would sit around all day and analyze media, you were never exposed to these kinds of discussions. Now it's all over. We're seeing it from every corner and are constantly being told what this piece of media represents, what that creator believes, and so on. Combine that with the grifters and now it feels like the sky is falling. Then we have the mega-corps telling us to "just buy" and "don't think", trying to convince people that art is meaningless and should only be mindlessly consumed.
You might have missed the political references in Rambo or the numerous films about the vietnam era , but I certainly caught a lot of it. The difference is that old media has never openly taken sides. They presented a narrative, and it was up to the viewer to draw their own conclusions from it. Some movies were pro-war others anti-war, but it was never in your face. Modern "SJW" narrative is different. They do not just present a story, they tell you who is in the right, and who needs to be condemned, and you have to nod in agreement or else. I agree that sometimes this difference goes way over the head of the anti-sjw crowd, but that doesn't invalidate the problem modern fiction has.
I've said many times before, and will continue to say, the problem with a lot of modern fiction isn't that it's highly political; the problem is the quality of the writing.
When the two goes hand in hand is there really a need to be distinction between them? You are either an activist or a writer. How is having captain america say "the flag does not represent me" not direct political activism?
Companies are desperately trying to appeal to a new generation and are grabbing anyone that is able to string two sentences together. You throw a good writer (or writing team) at a work and it doesn't matter how politically charged the story is, they're still going to produce something decent and worth remembering (for the right reasons, at least). On the subject of KOTOR: Sam Maggs seems like a decent writer. I looked a couple of her non-game stuff (an issue of her Marvel Action: Captain Marvel series and the free preview of her book Wonder Women: 25 Innovators, Inventors, and Trailblazers Who Changed History) and they were decent. She leans a bit too heavy on modern internet slang for my liking at times, but that's just personal preference and not a reflection of her skill. Her comic actually did something that a lot of writers struggle with, she made Carol actual likable and gave her a personality. Give her a good team to work with and there's a chance they can do something good with KOTOR. Maybe they'll make Bastilla a tolerable character and not make her fall to the Dark side one of the weakest parts of the story.
The only way the story can be good, if she leaves her activism at the door when writing. But I see no chance of that. Leaning on internet slang is a clear indicator of who she thinks her audience is: Fellow couch "smash the patriarchy" activists on twitter. I expect all female characters in the game to be infused with a doze of the ugly (to defeat the evil male gaze) and instantly masters at everything they do, never failing, never getting the short end of the stick, and as such being completely unrelateable. And I expect every male in the game to be fumbling dudebros who can't do or achieve anything on their own, and constantly humbled by superior females. I also hope to be wrong.
 

Pringle

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
3,685
Why the fuck do they need to rewrite anything?! Take the god damn plot and dialogue and stick it into a fancier engine for fuck sake.
This. Granted, it's been a bit since I've played the originals, but if they're changing anything it should be tweaking the combat. Everything else was simply perfect. That story and journey blew me away, and if they're fucking with it they might as well call it a sequel and slap a Disney logo on it.
 

Dan_D

Extremely [H]
Joined
Feb 9, 2002
Messages
58,913
And you have the original "progressive" flaw. You cannot differentiate between subtle influences from real world events, and direct insertion of real world politics. Wokeness knows no subtlety they want to drill in points, and hammer you in the head with them, not elude to them.
Whenever a pro-SJW is arguing with me the conversation inevitably leads to this impasse.

What you percieve is your own inability to notice the differences between being hammered in the head with something, and being based around a theme inspired by the real world political climate.

You are trying to prove something that was never questioned, then equate that to direct insertion of politics that have nothing to do with or even antithetic to the established lore and characters.
And then you leap to "everything always been political" No, everything has always been influenced by real world politics, but it wasn't political activism.
People cannot create anything from scratch, so it is inevitable that fiction will be based on some derivation of reality, that is not the issue.

You might have missed the political references in Rambo or the numerous films about the vietnam era , but I certainly caught a lot of it. The difference is that old media has never openly taken sides. They presented a narrative, and it was up to the viewer to draw their own conclusions from it. Some movies were pro-war others anti-war, but it was never in your face. Modern "SJW" narrative is different. They do not just present a story, they tell you who is in the right, and who needs to be condemned, and you have to nod in agreement or else. I agree that sometimes this difference goes way over the head of the anti-sjw crowd, but that doesn't invalidate the problem modern fiction has.

When the two goes hand in hand is there really a need to be distinction between them? You are either an activist or a writer. How is having captain america say "the flag does not represent me" not direct political activism?

The only way the story can be good, if she leaves her activism at the door when writing. But I see no chance of that. Leaning on internet slang is a clear indicator of who she thinks her audience is: Fellow couch "smash the patriarchy" activists on twitter. I expect all female characters in the game to be infused with a doze of the ugly (to defeat the evil male gaze) and instantly masters at everything they do, never failing, never getting the short end of the stick, and as such being completely unrelateable. And I expect every male in the game to be fumbling dudebros who can't do or achieve anything on their own, and constantly humbled by superior females. I also hope to be wrong.
We aren't always in agreement, but well said. I agree 100% with everything said here. I would add an example of what you are talking about while using it to expand on said point.
Modern "SJW" narrative is different. They do not just present a story, they tell you who is in the right, and who needs to be condemned, and you have to nod in agreement or else. I agree that sometimes this difference goes way over the head of the anti-sjw crowd, but that doesn't invalidate the problem modern fiction has.
In many of these modern narratives, they'll tell you who is right and what point of view is the correct one even if it's totally at odds with logic. The best example of this is the utterly awful "Arachnids in the UK" episode of Doctor Who's series 11. In the episode the Trump stand in is basically made to sound like a raving lunatic even though most of the character's arguments are 100% rational and arguably, the only correct ones. The character's rational views are basically buried behind the rantings of a mad man. The writers obviously didn't consider this when writing the episode. In the scene in question, he talks about getting a stash of weapons to kill a bunch of giant spiders that are hyper aggressive and killing humans. The Doctor (the main character of the show for those who don't know), takes issue with guns being used and says something to the effect of "you aren't going to kill them. They are innocent and should be treated with kindness, dignity, and respect" or something like that.

So, Doctor Karen devises a plan where the spiders are lured into a panic room and sealed in so they can suffocate or die of starvation which inevitably would lead to cannibalism. Despite how unfortunate it is in the story that the spiders mutated into giant sized and hyper-aggressive through no fault of their own, shooting them to defend human life makes sense. Afterall they aren't sentient beings or anything. Certainly not on par with human life anyway. The show implies the right course of action is letting them kill and eat each other until they suffocate. Instead of the Trump stand in making a rational argument for why they need to arm themselves and kill the creatures, he says: "Why can't you people be normal and shoot things?" He's correct but made to sound like a moron because of the argument he uses to defend his position is moronic. Yet, his position is by most standards the correct one.

Because the story is literally allegory for "orange man bad" it descends into farce. This is often because it's virtually impossible to write a good story and craft one around such extremist viewpoints that are illogical in the first place. My point being that most often, extremist political views being woven into the core of a narrative are incompatible with making the story into a good one. This is why (in my opinion) the SJW politics and poor quality writing seem inextricably linked. To be clear, it would be just as bad on the extreme opposite of the spectrum where everything would be allegory to "Hillary bad" and 9/11 being an inside job or that everything was a conspiracy to normalize pedophilia and that scientists are turning the frogs gay or whatever. You wouldn't want to see narratives woven around that stuff with it being so on the nose. Extremist viewpoints are usually irrational and narratives that are based around such illogical and insane viewpoints are going to be bad in either case.
 
Last edited:

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,269
In many of these modern narratives, they'll tell you who is right and what point of view is the correct one even if it's totally at odds with logic. The best example of this is the utterly awful "Arachnids in the UK" episode of Doctor Who's series 11. In the episode the Trump stand in is basically made to sound like a raving lunatic even though most of the character's arguments are 100% rational and arguably, the only correct ones. However, he's made to sound completely irrational and insane which is in direct contrast to the reasonable course of action the character suggests in the episode. In the scene in question, he talks about getting a stash of weapons to kill a bunch of giant spiders that are hyper aggressive and killing humans. The Doctor (the main character of the show for those who don't know), takes issue with guns being used and says something to the effect of "you aren't going to kill them. They are innocent and should be treated with kindness, dignity, and respect" or something like that.
That is very similar to my first shocking introduction to SJW storytelling and writing. Namely the Mass Effect Andromeda Uprising novel. It is eerily similar. I don't remember the exact words, but the Salarian survivor who is the highest ranking survivor and as such the temporary person in charge, makes perfectly sane and valid arguments on what they should do (like fix life support first) and so on. But it is being presented as if it's a completely unreasonable stance to have and he is an incompetent leader, because the first agenda should be comforting the survivors and collecting the dead. You know before fixing life support and regaining some control over the drifting ark ship. And the biggest issue that keeps coming back every two pages is how much the female heroes foot hurts because she accidentally kicked a bulkhead. Literally while they are surrounded by burn victims and people with life changing injuries, not to mention the dead. But who you should be feeling sorry for is not them, but the poor female hero and her sore foot.
 
Top