I took note of it all, Baldur′s Gate goes under the D&D category So it is there, and I put the how to train your dragon thing under disney/pixar that had an equal ratio of good and bad, but it′s good that someone clarifies it to me, I′ve not really seen the movie, I′ve just heard about how this boy befriends a dragon and in the end all dragons are good.

Dragons are the antagonists but they are not necessarily evil by nature. They just happen to have a neutral goal that conflicts with just about everyone in Tamriel.

Just because they don't like/often kill humans doesn't mean they are evil.

I'll skip the voting part, didn't like any of the options. I dont't think it will be a cliche, and I do think it will be tremedously mind-blowing, indeed.

To me, cliche is when dragons are treated as "animals" or the grand "evil" that you must vanquish in the end. That's been done over and over in many games/rpgs in general.

However having dragons, which are treated as VERY intelligent beings and are capable of being both good and bad, depending on the story, how you play the game, etc is something that is not that cliche in gaming.

Dragons, to me, in TES lore seemed like very capable beings who were complex, like humans or even more so, and could therefore be individually good or bad, depending on the circumstances and your own character.

In TES lore dragons in the past have helped humans, and humans have helped them. There were also those that died by the hands of either. So when we hear about dragons being the big evil/baddies, yes, it seems cliche to me and goes back on what could have been a far more unique handling of dragons in Skyrim, where they could be less "Evil/good" and more shades of grey, where the dragons could become a main character int he story and some could end up being friend or foe along with the twists and turns of the plot. I am hoping it turns out more like this.

I don't know, but how about we wait for 11-11-11 to speculate.

I'd personally prefer it if they didn't conform to good and evil. They should just have their own morals. Why should they submit to our idea of ownership? I'd like it if they thought of themselves as completely superior to us, to the extent that we're little more than a vermin that happens to be able to talk. A weak, but abundant competitor for their food supply that occasionally needs to be put in their place. A farmer will quite happily shoot a fox on his land to stop it from preying on his chickens. If I get too close to goats in the wild, I want to be a bit worried that a Dragon might think I'm 'stealing' his food if he spots me. Speaking of which, I'd love to see a Dragon swoop down and snatch up an animal in his claws before soaring away back to the mountains and it's cave/wherever dragons will live. Even as a set-piece near the start of the game.

EDIT: That's not to say they shouldn't want to communicate with us, or even become friends or allies. There are probably things we can do for them that they can't do themselves. Such as investigating a cave where their *something* was hidden, but they can't fit.

I'd just like to point out that the dragons in Tolkien's mythos are not directly evil. They are just a force of nature, that happens to have a natural obsession with treasure. They also eat humans and dwarves, in a very predatory fashion, much like the "stupid" dragons in Harry Potter.
I really don't remember everything about all the dragons in the so-called LOTR mythos (it's been a while since I ready any of the books. I don't even remember how many were mentioned) but as far as I can remember, the truly evil ones were those that had been swayed to the dark side by an external power, like Morgoth.

Also, the Dragons in Skyrim aren't evil either. They are just doing what they're supposed to do. The world is created, the world ends. Akatosh is both the Alpha and Omega, and now he has "decided" that it's time for this cykle to reach its end, and for another one to begin.

On a smaller note, I don't like the fact that you indirectly called wolves and foxes stupid. They are animals dammit. Quite intelligent ones as well.

Dragons are cliche. It's in their very nature, considering how huge a staple they are in fantasy.

That being said, I am looking forward to fighting them in Skyrim. It's rare to see dragons done well in video game fantasy, so it should be a good experience.

I think dragons should be viewed as a force of nature, rather something that's good or evil.

Not true. Do some research on how the Chinese view dragons. Half the time they're being destructive, the other half they're the wise man on the mountain that may offer the hero a slice of their wisdom.

Dragons arent a cliche. A cliche is generally when it has been overused, worn out and has become lame. Dragons, if done right are anything BUT lame. They are just classic, not cliched.

Well, financially speaking, dragons are a boon to any RPG game. I bought Dragon Age just because of the name without thinking about it too much, but then found out I disliked that game immensely. My hope was that if the name on the box said "dragon" that they might have spent a lot of time making the game really cool, and especially the dragons really cool. With that kind of impression lying around latently in the back of my mind (and many others' mind), can't you see why a game COMPANY would want to entice you with the fear and awe that dragons inspire?

I mean, if they didn't announce dragons in the game, what would be our first question, but who is the bad guy? And if it's just some dude, that's infinitely more boring innately than the idea of dragons, cliches or no cliches. From a monetary stand-point, it makes a lot of darn sense to promote the fiersome monsters and, if you are going to be a next-gen gaming company and are adding dragons to your game, you damned-well better spend 2 years on developing them to be more substantial than have been seen in any other game before, or why waste your (or our) time?

I think the decision comes down to pure psychological attraction of RPG gamers with dragons, and the fact that it's a lot easier to sell dragons to us than some unknown bad guy with a funny name that we think (dividly) sounds stupid or cool depending on your ear for it. I think if they had yet another bad guy named "Mehrunes Dagon", I will just want to vomit. I hated that name and that affected my ability to play the main quest. I would rather wander in the wild and play all the side quests rather than hear the name Mehrunes over and over again. So I never finished the main plot and never saw more than 4 hours of that, yet I played for 50-60 hours and had a great time.

But now DRAGONS, those inspire me. I want to go and find out everything about those, and learn their language, and be abel to read the runes on the walls, and chase down all the mysteries surrounding them. So yeah, I think it was genius, and whether or not its cliche, won't matter a damn to their SALES.

Hahaha, way to go Bethesda, this time you are genius!

Other. Specifically: I DON'T CARE ABOUT CLICHES

But that's just me

Dragons are anything but cliche,.

It's hardly cliché considering dragons done right well, I haven't really seen that happen in a video game yet.

I smell an INDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIE! :swear:

Alduin destroys the world to remake anew... This reminds me of a very similar concept from a very popular book....

I'm sure that alot of people on this forum wouldn't call that destroyer/creater evil.

It's to my understanding that the continent of Akavir is so incredibly dangerous and savage few actually survived. I remember reading a book in Oblivion about the four races and how the tiger dragon will invade Tamriel after dealing with the vampire snakes. I'm expecting all Akaviri dragons to be against us, but not necessarily "good" or "evil"

That seems like an interesting place to visit.

I hope in Skyrim, the dragons are considered to be a terrifying opponent to confront even at higher levels, and you would only try to escape and hide from them until you are high level enough to have a chance against them, and even them you have to use your Dragon Shouts to be able to defeat them.

Although there should be different dragon types and levels, so that we can find some relatively lower level dragons and kill them to be able to acquire new types of shouts, but the higher level ones should remain until you are really high level to defeat.

As for Alduin, as the other side of Akatosh, the first god that appeared, and the most powerful one, should be impossible to defeat by normal actions and should require completion of some tasks and chores to make it possible to defeat him, in the course of the main quest.

They are cliche, but a classic cliche. Except for Asian mythologies where they are symbols of good luck, almost all dragon legends portrayed them as evil, and after the advent of Christianity, literal incarnations of the devil. And think we can agree that these dragons are most definitely European-inspired.

"Good dragons" ala puff, Pete's Dragon, Eragon, Pern or Perth or whatever that series was, Dragonlance, Dragonheart...these are all truly cliche because they are modern reimaginings which have been done to death. So while the idea of a non-human, unquestionably evil antagonist IS cliche, I'm glad that the dragons are portrayed that way as opposed to our winged and scale-ed friends.

One we don't actually know if they are evil with the only true evil in TES being Mehrunes Dagon, and we don't even know if that is true.
Two dragons aren't even evil in many modern mediums.
Three honestly so few (recent enough as in 3D) video games have ever had evil dragons and most of those that have didn't even make them seem like an major part of the story. Most dragons are just thrown in as one time bosses with a few mentions earlier on or a totally random boss that seems to come from no where and has no purpose there besides being a dragon.
Four most people have probably seen dragons as cliché since the middle ages. They stick around cause they embody fears or aspects of change and those are the only true universals of humanity that I can think of.

Grey-beards

All dragons are draging a cliche truck a mile long.
I've seen evil dragons, good, bad, noble, honourable, stupid beastial, loyal, trecherous, undead, spirit, human shaped, half breed dragons..
Different colours, mannerisms, voices, temperment.. the list goes on, dragons are a cliche.

The last truely unique view on dragons I read was Terry Pratchetts discworld series, where they grew too big and placed themselves elsewhere.
If called by a summoner they take on his personalities and vices, while draining him of life.
Thus they're not good or bad, they just are.

However wyrms and worms are a huge part of norse and british folk lore, so there's a lot that Beth could do with them.

I don′t really think those people have read the book, it seems to be the case that those that do call that destroyer/evil have read it while other have not.

I think that you don′t have to think something is evil to be evil, if we look at Adolf Hitler he did not consider himself evil and neither did many of his subjects, but no one is going to argue that he was evil. So the concepts of good and evil do persist even if a person does not personally believe in them like many seem to do.

No one really thinks of himself as evil.