Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Something against dual-wielding in the movies?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > STAR WARS Discussion
Something against dual-wielding in the movies?

Hellbring's Avatar


Hellbring
01.29.2012 , 11:09 PM | #11
because very few people are skilled enough with both hands to effectively fight, you see Anakin do it in the end of AotC and is easily over powered by his opponent and ends up losing a hand as a result. Theatricwise because the lightsaber has no actual blade and is just a hilt with a CGI blade it makes it harder to use with both hands and not have to cut out a scene of them cutting a limb off motionwise
Emotion, yet peace. Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity. Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force.

BrandonSM's Avatar


BrandonSM
01.29.2012 , 11:14 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Verrell View Post
Why is it that in the films there is hardly no Jedi/Sith dual-wielding? Or was it just a rare form of combat?


Yes, I know of Anakin dual-wielding for a few seconds, but other than that I mean primarily Jedi/Sith using two lightsabers by default.
Its one of those things where it was seen in the movie 2-3 times only and everybody went insane about it. But there really was no more need for it in the films.


Like Maul's Double-Bladed Lightsabers. After that we got famous EU characters like Kun and Shan.

Hell, even Maul himself. He was just a nobody villain that looked cool until there was a huge outbreak on him and thats why we now have novels on him.
Hapan: "This creature has information that could lead us to a woman who has been kidnapped. We will get that information."
Luke: "This woman is a citizen of the New Republic, and if you do not take your hands off her, I will take your hands off you."

Kaskava's Avatar


Kaskava
01.29.2012 , 11:55 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by Hellbring View Post
because very few people are skilled enough with both hands to effectively fight, you see Anakin do it in the end of AotC and is easily over powered by his opponent and ends up losing a hand as a result. Theatricwise because the lightsaber has no actual blade and is just a hilt with a CGI blade it makes it harder to use with both hands and not have to cut out a scene of them cutting a limb off motionwise
If you watch the Making Ofs, they actually do have a 'blade' in them, it's a dull plastic the same color as the actual blade.

That said, yes, the style is harder to master, decreases your defensive capabilities, and effectively cuts your strike strength and precision in half.

That also means that it's harder to choreograph, which means more money. It's cheaper to just keep it simple.
This just in: Expanding on an ending no one likes is not improving said ending. A polished turd is still a turd.

Hellbring's Avatar


Hellbring
01.30.2012 , 12:39 AM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Kaskava View Post
If you watch the Making Ofs, they actually do have a 'blade' in them, it's a dull plastic the same color as the actual blade.

That said, yes, the style is harder to master, decreases your defensive capabilities, and effectively cuts your strike strength and precision in half.

That also means that it's harder to choreograph, which means more money. It's cheaper to just keep it simple.
That I didn't know but yes it is a difficult style to master. If you look at games like KotR 2 they have a short saber to use as an off hand lightsaber which is easier to use and functions similar to holding a shorter lighter blade as a second weapon.
Emotion, yet peace. Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity. Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force.

PeepsMcJuggs's Avatar


PeepsMcJuggs
01.30.2012 , 12:48 AM | #15
Because dual-wielding is for morons that think moar blades gives you a combat advantage.
"Making the internet a happier place, one infraction at a time."

Kaskava's Avatar


Kaskava
01.30.2012 , 01:06 AM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by PeepsMcJuggs View Post
Because dual-wielding is for morons that think moar blades gives you a combat advantage.
Kreia's four blades could be a royal pain.
This just in: Expanding on an ending no one likes is not improving said ending. A polished turd is still a turd.

PeepsMcJuggs's Avatar


PeepsMcJuggs
01.30.2012 , 01:23 AM | #17
Quote: Originally Posted by Kaskava View Post
Kreia's four blades could be a royal pain.
Kreia's four blades were the most disappointing battle in either game.
"Making the internet a happier place, one infraction at a time."

Riggnas's Avatar


Riggnas
01.30.2012 , 02:28 AM | #18
I Might be wrong here. But when you look at Escrima/Kali they fight dual wielding and single weapon. It seems that dual wielding is effecitve in group Warfarre while single weapon seems to have the best effect in dueling 1 on 1.

PeepsMcJuggs's Avatar


PeepsMcJuggs
01.30.2012 , 02:46 AM | #19
Quote: Originally Posted by Riggnas View Post
I Might be wrong here. But when you look at Escrima/Kali they fight dual wielding and single weapon. It seems that dual wielding is effecitve in group Warfarre while single weapon seems to have the best effect in dueling 1 on 1.
In group warfare, blaster wins every time.
"Making the internet a happier place, one infraction at a time."

Nihra's Avatar


Nihra
01.30.2012 , 03:59 AM | #20
Wouldn't using a lightsaber in each hand limit them in using the force? I have no lore (that I know of) to back this statement up, but as far as I have seen whenever someone uses the force they almost always use their hands in some way and this is especially true whenever they battle.

It might just be pointless gestures for all I know, but I still think it might be viable that by occupying both your hands with lightsabers you are limiting your manipulation of the Force.