156: A Creative Force

A Creative Force

"The Star Wars movies are rarity when it comes to sci-fi; not only do they appeal to the hardcore geeks of the world, they've also managed to make hardcore fans out of many a skeptic (myself among them) through their combination of strong stories, powerful visuals, and a romantic sense of adventure.

"For those in the creative industry, however, the Star Wars films offer something more. Science fiction authors from around the world struggle for the honor of contributing to the Star Wars Expanded Universe; and those who work in the games industry try to leave their own mark, often creating critically acclaimed, best-selling games in the process - which brings us to Drew Karpyshyn."

Read Full Article

Great read, although it took me awhile to realize that the article wasn't done by "the" Tim Sweeney. :P It seemed like too unique of a name to be a coincidence.

A big salute to Mr Karpyshyn, Kotor has a better story then everything else "Star Wars" that I have ever seen or read.

KotOR had the best story I've ever experienced in a game and it had everything to do with that "twist." Ohlen may have had the original idea, but I'm sure everybody had their hand in how it was revealed. The result was something unforgettable.

One thing that caught my interest in the article was when Karpyshyn said "...because the player is in control of major sections of the story, a game is forced to deal with things on a more superficial level." This statement caught me a little off guard. I understand his reasoning and "current evidence" does support his claim, but I can't help but feel that games can reach that deeper level in empathizing with the characters and such. Of course, in my utopian gaming world, writers would be afforded a much larger chunk of the development costs than they currently have. ;-)

Anyway, great article. I really appreciated the way the interview was conveyed by Sweeney. Great job, Tim.

Echolocating:

One thing that caught my interest in the article was when Karpyshyn said "...because the player is in control of major sections of the story, a game is forced to deal with things on a more superficial level." This statement caught me a little off guard. I understand his reasoning and "current evidence" does support his claim, but I can't help but feel that games can reach that deeper level in empathizing with the characters and such. Of course, in my utopian gaming world, writers would be afforded a much larger chunk of the development costs than they currently have. ;-)

I think he was talking about more open-ended games, such as Mass Effect or KotOR, where the player has so much freedom that side plots have to be more self-contained and have to be consistent no matter what path the player decides to take.

In a more linear game, like Call of Duty 4, the player is guided very strictly along a linear path and is not granted much freedom at all in how the story plays out. In this situation, a writer would be able to have a more intricate story without worrying about the player "messing it up" somehow.

I'm not saying Call of Duty 4 had an deep story with intricate details and a bazillion side-plots or anything; I just think it would be easier for a writer to craft a more compelling, perhaps "deeper" story in a more linear-style game.

Side-note: To be honest, though, I thought Call of Duty 4 had a very well thought-out story, and I was involved in the characters through and through. The ending even made me feel kind of sad, which was weird, because game endings don't usually cause me to feel anything at all.

zoozilla:
I think he was talking about more open-ended games, such as Mass Effect or KotOR, where the player has so much freedom that side plots have to be more self-contained and have to be consistent no matter what path the player decides to take.

Ah, good catch. I didn't realize that he may have been talking about open-ended games versus linear.

Still though, the only thing holding back those side-quests from affecting how characters react to you and affect the story later on is time and money. Then again, I'm the type of gamer that could be entertained by a good text adventure. ;-)

Can someone explain to me how the Sith increase their numbers while sticking to the "rule of two"?

sharp_as_a_cork:
Can someone explain to me how the Sith increase their numbers while sticking to the "rule of two"?

The answer is George Lucas. ;-)

This might answer your question...
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Rule_of_Two
...but in all honesty, it doesn't make much sense at all to me. Then again, if we are to believe in a mystical force, why not other leaps of faith? You know, like breaking the restrictive boundary of common sense and simple logic? ;-)

sharp_as_a_cork:
Can someone explain to me how the Sith increase their numbers while sticking to the "rule of two"?

If the apprentice dies, the master gets a new one.

If the master dies, the apprentice takes his place, and gets an acolyte of his own.

As for KOTOR... amazing. Absolutely stunning.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
If the apprentice dies, the master gets a new one.

If the master dies, the apprentice takes his place, and gets an acolyte of his own.

What happens when both die?

Echolocating:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
If the apprentice dies, the master gets a new one.

If the master dies, the apprentice takes his place, and gets an acolyte of his own.

What happens when both die?

Some obscure line of Sith comes out of nowhere, claiming he was there the entire time.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here