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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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-...-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.

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.