No reason not to create a Kotor 3 to go alongside swtor

[Kunda]

That sounds like it was posted on a fan site. Proof? That employee probably doesn't work for EA or Bioware anymore.

 

The quote gets pulled out of context, it was made prior to SWTOR's release. The quote was that this game had enough content to be KOTOR 3-10, not that it was necessarily a direct sequel.

[DomiSotto]

But on Kotor 3, I don't really care. I might be signing my death warrant by saying this, but I didn't really care for Kotor, and I never played Kotor 2. I also don't really care for Revan.

 

I played both, loved the second, liked the first, and I still don't care for Rewhine.

 

One day you might consider jumping through the hoops, though, install KOTOR2 and Restored Content - the Exile's story is far superior to Revan's and the cast is much better. You could well experience the best 50 hours of your gaming time. A Consular that slashes with a sabre and packs the Force punch, WOOT!

 

Story in KOTOR 3 can be about Revan right after first game, and continue with SWTOR story... Can be interesting to see, how he found Sith Empire... He didnt died in swtor anyway...

 

Regrettably.

Edited July 8, 2014 by DomiSotto

[Heal-To-Full]

You should put it in a Cartel Market Suggestion Box.

 

"Please sell KOTOR 3 in CM!"

[Darth_Wicked]

You should put it in a Cartel Market Suggestion Box.

 

"Please sell KOTOR 3 in CM!"

 

Would it be a Super-Rare drop? What about the Unlock price?

[hunterraaze]

So I would play Kinect SW, The Clone wars adventure game, and lego SW just because its SW? OK....

 

Hey! The Lego SW games were fun... (Okay, maybe not the Clone Wars one)

[JimG]

Not sure how many times and how many different ways they can tell people this, but there will be no KOTOR 3. This game is considered by them to be KOTOR 3++++.

[Vandicus]

Well first off:

 

What would KoToR 3 be?

 

And if the answer is: "Something even more unrelated to Revan than KoToR2 was"

 

Then why should it be called KoToR 3?

 

I'm not objecting to the idea of Bioware producing another Star Wars single player story rpg, I just don't think there's much more to do with Revan and this iteration of the Sith Empire when it inevitably falls.

 

Then there's the whole issue with Disney non-canonizing a lot of the materials from which SWTOR and a KoTOR 3 would draw.

 

I mean, according to their statements, KoToR3 would be canon(should it be made). But if it had a basis in KoToR 1 and 2, does that make that content canon?

 

It would seem they'd be best off staying away from previous Star Wars content to make things easier to write.

[Nickious]

Hey! The Lego SW games were fun... (Okay, maybe not the Clone Wars one)

 

Ok you may have got me there. I have 1 and 2 on my ps2 and played them for a while. I was more referring to more mature SW game series though.

[Heal-To-Full]

Then there's the whole issue with Disney non-canonizing a lot of the materials from which SWTOR and a KoTOR 3 would draw.

As far as I'm concerned, nothing Mickey Mouse touches will be canon.

Yeah, I guess that since he owns it now, he can legally set what's canon... oh wait, there's no laws and regulations on canon. It's just traditional that whoever bought it last holds the "canon" stamp.

 

But just as there is that tradition, there's plenty of precedents of canon splitting in two, a franchise holder version no one cares about and a version accepted by everyone else. In fact, for franchises that change ownership a lot, it's more common than not for accepted canon to settle at one of these multiple owners' versions and whatever comes next to be held as supplementary.

 

It's a good bet that Star Wars will undergo such a split, the accepted canon settling at C+L, and disney version... going the way of Jar Jar Binks. Three movies, in all likelihood hollow flicks, won't be enough to abandon the whole Expanded Universe.

 

Unless they realize it too and simply refrain from doing anything significant to rewrite any significant canon, just slap a tie-in into the older films.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Heal-To-Full

[hunterraaze]

Ok you may have got me there. I have 1 and 2 on my ps2 and played them for a while. I was more referring to more mature SW game series though.

 

Alright, I understand what you are saying. Heh, they were pretty amusing though.

[Vandicus]

As far as I'm concerned, nothing Mickey Mouse touches will be canon, ever.

 

Yeah, I guess that since he owns it now, he can legally set what's canon and what isn't... oh wait, there's no laws and regulations on canon - it's all in our heads - just traditional that whoever bought it last holds the "canon" stamp.

 

But just as there is that tradition, there's plenty of precedents of canon splitting in two, a franchise holder version no one cares about and a version accepted by everyone else. In fact, for franchises that change ownership a lot, it's more common than not for accepted canon to settle at one of these multiple owners' versions and whatever comes next to be held as supplementary.

 

It's a good bet that Star Wars will undergo such a split, the accepted canon settling at around now, and disney version... go the way of Jar Jar Binks. Three movies, in all likelihood hollow flicks, won't be enough to abandon the whole Expanded Universe.

 

That depends on how tightly Disney wants to hold the reins for games with the Star Wars IP, and the degree of freedom which EA was entitled to from their previous contract regarding development of future Star Wars games.

 

If Disney really wants to push their new canon hard, they can simply keep developers from releasing new games related to old canon and publishers from publishing books related to the old canon.

[Heal-To-Full]

If Disney really wants to push their new canon hard, they can simply keep developers from releasing new games related to old canon and publishers from publishing books related to the old canon.

Can't do that.

Well, legally they can go crazy and forbid anyone from using the trademarks and sue around, but it will break so many pre-existing agreements, including very profitable ones, for no real gain, and it will break what's been already established.

 

And what's established is that old canon will have "Legends" added after "Star Wars".

That's it. Add the magic word and you're legally in the clear.

 

As far as fans are concerned, I strongly suspect that "star wars legends" will be just Star Wars and whatever's added by Disney's treated as a separate spin-off.

[Vandicus]

Can't do that.

Well, legally they can go crazy and forbid anyone from using the trademarks and sue around, but it will break so many pre-existing agreements, including very profitable ones, for no real gain, and it will break what's been already established.

 

And what's established is that old canon will have "Legends" added after "Star Wars".

That's it. Add the magic word and you're legally in the clear.

 

As far as fans are concerned, I strongly suspect that "star wars legends" will be just Star Wars and whatever's added by Disney's treated as a separate spin-off.

 

AFAIK only EA has any sort of significant pre-existing contract allowing them to produce Star Wars products. And that contract in all likelihood afforded LucasArts some degree of control over what they could do with the lore(as LucasArts contracts of the time typically did), which may carry over to Disney depending on what kind of protective clauses EA had.

 

Disney doesn't need to forbid the use of their IP, they simply need to not license it out. You can't just write and publish a Star Wars book without Disney's approval.

[theUndead]

The story has nothing to do with it....The story is the ONLY reason I play swtor. But there are differences between MMO's and single player RPG. Things you can't do in an MMO......things like save game, pause, cheat codes, etc. So maybe it IS the hardware....it still doesn't change the way I feel. And I feel that this game is a good SW game, But the SW game I'M waiting for will be an open world single player RPG that I can play on my PS4.

 

I highly doubt this whatever SW game will be for PS4. I am much more inclined to think it will be for PC.

[Heal-To-Full]

Disney doesn't need to forbid the use of their IP, they simply need to not license it out. You can't just write and publish a Star Wars book without Disney's approval.

No, of course you can't, you have to pay them off, the name ain't free. But they don't care about what's inside the book, as long as it's PG13 or whatever and has "legends" on the cover.

 

That's the current and future arrangement. Slap a label and work within the good old EU, or whatever you want. They don't regulate what you write, what Clone Wars shows, what Bioware makes in the game, don't even want to know, they just want the money.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Heal-To-Full

[Master_Hitsugaya]

Even bethesda is going to make another elder scrolls single player to go alongside their ESO

 

Give the people what they want

At the time swtor was made there were only 2 kotor games and it is hard to call 2 games a series. But elder scrolls is not a series it is a franchise, the only thing that will stop new ESO games comming out would be for Beth to go out of business or for Elder Scrolls to loss a lot of popularity. While as there was never a promise of a kotor 3.

[well]

I played both, loved the second, liked the first, and I still don't care for Rewhine.

 

One day you might consider jumping through the hoops, though, install KOTOR2 and Restored Content - the Exile's story is far superior to Revan's and the cast is much better. You could well experience the best 50 hours of your gaming time. A Consular that slashes with a sabre and packs the Force punch, WOOT!

 

 

 

Regrettably.

 

I agree K2 was far better than K1.Too short though. When I played K1 I rpged it. Revan got sucked down the toilet after a explosion. The KP on the ship(Dish washer for you civilian minded folks) took his place. Yeah it was a stretch but wth. Still K2 I think the VOs sold the story. Every time I hear the Kotor music I want to run back and play the game.

[Master_Hitsugaya]

As far as I'm concerned, nothing Mickey Mouse touches will be canon.

Yeah, I guess that since he owns it now, he can legally set what's canon... oh wait, there's no laws and regulations on canon. It's just traditional that whoever bought it last holds the "canon" stamp.

 

But just as there is that tradition, there's plenty of precedents of canon splitting in two, a franchise holder version no one cares about and a version accepted by everyone else. In fact, for franchises that change ownership a lot, it's more common than not for accepted canon to settle at one of these multiple owners' versions and whatever comes next to be held as supplementary.

 

It's a good bet that Star Wars will undergo such a split, the accepted canon settling at C+L, and disney version... going the way of Jar Jar Binks. Three movies, in all likelihood hollow flicks, won't be enough to abandon the whole Expanded Universe.

 

Unless they realize it too and simply refrain from doing anything significant to rewrite any significant canon, just slap a tie-in into the older films.

The way I understood it the only canon really being changed were things after star wars ep 6, that part of EU is filled with so much crap( and I mean crap) that there is no way for Disney to make eps 7-9 without trampling all over the existing canon. And as to Disney making EPs 7-9 well disney makes a lot of good movies so while I think that Disney has the potential to make awesome star wars movies. I personally liked Jar Jar Binks so there.

[RandomXChance]

No, of course you can't, you have to pay them off, the name ain't free. But they don't care about what's inside the book, as long as it's PG13 or whatever and has "legends" on the cover.

 

That's the current and future arrangement. Slap a label and work within the good old EU, or whatever you want. They don't regulate what you write, what Clone Wars shows, what Bioware makes in the game, don't even want to know, they just want the money.

 

Actually they can and frequently do. Whenever you license someone elses IP you cannot just do whatever you want with it. Just about any book/game/movie etc has to get final approval from the actual IP holder.

 

If you let people produce whatever garbage they want with your IP for some quick cash, it will devalue the IP and bring less money in the long run. Since people bring up Bethesda there is an example right there. They had licensed Interplay to make a Fallout MMO but pulled the plug when it did not look good. The original Fallout game used a different character system, but the IP holder did not like the violence and withdrew the license.

Edited July 8, 2014 by RandomXChance

[Jrr_hypernova]

Even bethesda is going to make another elder scrolls single player to go alongside their ESO

 

Give the people what they want

 

bethesda isnt the ones who made TESO. why cant people figure that out?

[Heal-To-Full]

Actually they can and frequently do. Whenever you license someone elses IP you cannot just do whatever you want with it. Just about any book/game/movie etc has to get final approval from the actual IP holder.

This applies when there is 1, 2 or a whole 3 books/games/movies/toys related to the IP.

 

When there's 100,000 things to license, policies are put in place and mass licensing for whole lines of products is sold.

The IP holder doesn't check out every Lego toy and read out every story, he releases a set of policies and licensing options. The money's paid first, the work is produced second, contracts are binding and the original IP holder doesn't go reviewing a work after it's been paid for, unless the contract explicitly provide something to that extent. Star Wars has a very extensive framework of licensing policies and agreements.

 

Bioware doesn't run everything they do by Lucasfilms. Unless EA's agreement forbids them from doing so, they could put in a Darth Vader mount along with a Palpatine pet. They probably don't have a license for movie material, though, in which case they can't use it. But they can certainly make a Darth Revan mount and miniature Jedi pets and no one can do a thing about it. The original IP holder can't turn back on a licensing contract and say "no, I don't like it, it's disrespectful, don't publish", unless their contract explicitly includes review; they give up that right when they take the money.

 

If you let people produce whatever garbage they want with your IP for some quick cash, it will devalue the IP and bring less money in the long run.

Practice shows the exact opposite: the more garbage, the more profit.

Even Jar Jar Binks has its fans and people who don't like that garbage just skip it.

[Heal-To-Full]

Since people bring up Bethesda there is an example right there. They had licensed Interplay to make a Fallout MMO but pulled the plug when it did not look good. The original Fallout game used a different character system, but the IP holder did not like the violence and withdrew the license.

You have your facts wrong. Horribly wrong.

Fallout MMO license wasn't pulled from Interplay because Bethesda didn't like the game. There was no game and nothing to look good or bad.

 

Bethesda didn't even license Interplay to do anything.

Rather, when Interplay sold the rights to Bethesda, part of the deal was that Interplay would retain the rights to a possible Fallout MMO if they put it in full development by April 2009.

They lost these rights because there was no game, not even partial work, nothing aside from a few ideas and sketches.

 

It was never about what Bethesda liked and they wouldn't have the right to restrict the game in any way, no matter how much violence was in, how much they hated it or whatever other reason they had. Interplay's rights were contingent on one condition only: game in development by April 2009 with $30 million in funding.

[RandomXChance]

This applies when there is 1, 2 or a whole 3 books/games/movies/toys related to the IP.

.

 

It applies 100% of the time. How much control the IP holder has is determined by the agreement and hwo tightly they want to watch things. As in my examples (that you so nicely ignored) If the contract states it, the license can and sometimes is withdrawn due to not matching the IP holders vision.

 

You are partly correct about greed though. Lucas used to be very tight about controlling things, but I guess as the money came easier and easier he loosened up. So, yes, as an IP grows in popularity control over the content tends to get looser. Do not kid yourself though, books/games/movies/tv shows run into problems when IP holders get unhappy with how their works get treated.

 

Back to the subject though. I cannot imagine them producing a stand alone single player KOTOR continuation. The money is in the MMO side and a single player version would cannibalize the MMO.

[RandomXChance]

You have your facts wrong. Horribly wrong.

Fallout MMO license wasn't pulled from Interplay because Bethesda didn't like the game. There was no game and nothing to look good or bad.

.

 

Look it up. They licensed a game engine and produced some in game assets. Bethesda was unimpressed with the progress and as per the agreement pulled the plug (although it took years of litigation).

 

Missing the point anyway. The IP holder was unhappy with the content or progress and pulled the plug. Your point that IP holders just care about a cash grab is what I was refuting.

Edited July 9, 2014 by RandomXChance

[Heal-To-Full]

Look it up.

I have. I have been tracking the story and I specifically looked it up just before posting in case I missed anything.

 

Can you provide any source for your version of the events?

 

I can provide plenty, this is a detailed one.

http://kotaku.com/5874561/the-great-fallout-legal-battle-ends-without-a-fallout-mmo

 

No source, nothing trustworthy ever states that this had anything to do with any planned violence in the game. Whether there was or not, Bethesda had no rights for approving or disapproving the game. Interplay could do whatever they wanted as long as they actually did it. Which they didn't.

 

Bethesda was unimpressed with the progress ...

The IP holder was unhappy with the content or progress and pulled the plug...

No.

It never mattered if the Bethesda was "happy" or "unhappy", or if it was "impressed" or "unimpressed".

It only mattered if Interplay had $30 million raised for the development and if the game was in full-scale development as of April 2009.

 

Had the game actually been funded and in full-scale development, Bethesda had no "plug-pulling rights", whatever the game was, however happy or unhappy, impressed or unimpressed they were, no discretion and no control. A Fallout MMO would be Interplay property in full.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Heal-To-Full