The point being, though, that Bethesda can construe their dragons however they want. I doubt the traditional dragon-mold encompasses Dragons being the jill-servants of a super-hungry Time-God, assisting him in eating the world and beginning it anew.

i think I have watched the trailer more then I need to now. I can't get enough of it!

At first I was like " whoa" :mellow:, then i was like "WHOA!" :drool:

I just cant stop watching, its so faking EPIC :shocking: :shocking:

:bowdown: Bethesda, you've out done yourselves once again, thank you.


I gota say my favorite part was when the dragon breathed(or shouted) fire. Something about the sound it makes is just freaking awesume!

PS: O and my brain exploded into my headphones when the music really kicked it in lol :rock:

I dont get all the butt hurt over the dragon issue.

Like someone said, they're a mystical creature that has never existed in real life before so you can view a dragon which ever way you please.

Vertebrates, generally, have four limbs... BGS went with realistic dragons. Yes they are dragons, if dragons were real they would look like that.

Just because Bethesda can construe what ever they want, doesn't mean it's correct. Established fluff for 100s of years is what most people go on. That is why alot of people have trouble with glittering vampires. People don't like things breaking from tradition or fluff.

Bah! It just looks like Fallout 3 with swords!

This is... I have Goosebumps :woot:

In the scene with the pc shooting the staff who is he shooting at? There's no one else in that cave?

I thought the saying was. Fallout 3 with Magic.

I don't think it looks like Fallout 3 at all. So much better, so much more, how can I say it, Alive. I wouldn't compare this with Fallout 3 or New Vegas at all. So different.

Now I wonder if Fallout 4 will be using the same engine that Skyrim uses.

Its a joke dude. The saying when Fallout 3 was coming out was that it was Oblivion with guns.

I can't believe I'm going to get involved in this, but there's a big difference between the 'fluff' surrounding dragons having a certain number of legs (that most would not have known unless told), and vampires not exploding on contact with sunlight and instead looking like a glitter ball with mascara. Or being suddenly made of magic stone or whatever they were supposed to be made of.

I wanna cast...Magic missile!
Why do you want to cast magic missile, there's nothing to attack here.
I...I'm attacking the darkness!

Sure it does. If that is what dragons are in TES, then that is what they are. One might use your argument to say that, since TES stars are literally giant gaping holes to Aetherius, that they are incorrect because REAL stars are balls of gas.

Twilight is an example, not of being wrong for misconstruing what vampires actually ARE, but construing them in a way that is Boring and Therefore Wrong. If Twilight had redefined vampires in an interesting way, then there would be few problems.
And considering that Beth's dragons have a whole lot more going for them than their rigid lock-step with the physical dragon stereotype, they can hardly be called Boring and Therefore Wrong on account of their legging.

Am I just not seeing an enemy?

Dunno, maybe its not an attack spell? Maybe a light spell?

I think it was more to show off the ball being a light emitting source. Watch the walls as it travels.

Am I missing something? What's wrong with the dragons?

calm down with the dragons, they said there would be different types of them i'm sure there are four-legged ones