lore is important. to me at least. gameplay is important too.

I like the lore, and it should be followed if possible. Although if the lore gets in the way of a good gameplay mechanic, then it must be changed.

Lore (And capitalization) is very important to me. But I don't want it to take away from the gameplay.

Like how there is five Elder Scrolls. I don't want that to edit their decision on making a Elder Scrolls VI.

Lore>Gameplay, always. I'd prefer an original Elder Scrolls Universe with poor gameplay than a generic fantasy land with AMAZING gameplay.

Gameplay > Lore to me. I don't want a pretentious story getting in the way of my fun!

What's with the 'noob' bit? Every devoted fan of the Elder Scrolls lore is a noob who fell in love with it.

Voted option 3.

i dont want this

me: i think i will rp
game: NOOOOOO STICK TO LORE NA0 PL0X

lore stops at good game play for me,

so its important

These guys wrote this Lore, isn't it their job to make a fantastic game with an involving plot, that follows it.

The one person who voted screw lore please leave the forum at once

AKA Oblivion

Lore is great, but when it gets in the way of good gameplay or gets used as a justifier of complaints by fans, it gets rather annoying, especially when said fans don't even know what they're talking about. For example:

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Starlover%27s_Log

The good thing about most of the TES lore is that it's written in such a way that it can be reinterpreted easily to suit the needs of whatever BGS is working on.

This is the Skyrim section of the forums. :stare:



I still thin that a Dragonborn that rides dragons doesnt make sense. Dovahkiin's DESTINY is to kill Dragons. If it were implemented in another game that went far far into the past when the Dragons were rather peaceful then i would not mind it due to that scrap of lore there.

One thing that was said regarding the lore I rather liked was that all lore is written from an ingame perspective. That means that all lore is subjective. That also means that it can easily bend to fit with better gameplay without breaking.

Yes but this is extremely rare, especially considering that your a dragonborn. They may slip it in with the dragon that helps you with a shout. But I doubt you will be able to. But lore shouldn't be compromised to get things like magical jumping that is corny/ridiculous and the sorts, especially not only are they breaking lore but are easily exploitable. In the end, Lore should never be compromised for features that aren't mandatory to making the game entertaining, otherwise why have a story to the game? It wouldn't be an RPG if it didn't have a solid story behind it.

The Nerevarine was an outlander, an enemy of the people whose hero he/she had become. Generalizations are bad simply because all members of a genetic group, ethnic group, or other various groups do not all share the same goals and values. For one thing, we know nearly nothing about the game's plot or dragon involvement. For another thing, being physically similar to something else doesn't equal sharing the same mindset and values. For another thing, we already know we can summon a dragon.

I like the lore, but in the end it's the actual gameplay that matters.

Breaking the lore, breaking the lore!
Breaking the lore, breaking the lore!
:rock:

THERE ARENT JUST 5 SCROLLS FFS...........

I was happy to read that was their attitude in the article. Even "real" history is never 100% accurate, there is always bias. And there's so much lore, much of it written en masse, not all of it is very good.

I just don't tweak on ES lore the way most people do. I like the practical approach to history the series has, as opposed to the "epic legendry" that makes up the whole of other fantasy series; and it provides a great backdrop. But if the games didn't offer the choice and style of play that they do, I wouldn't play it purely for the story lines or the books or the specific races etc.

i play for balance. Elder Scrolls tends to make for grand games that do not just fall into a single category. they are usually balanced well with gameplay and story, and you usually get the best of both worlds. the same should be said for skyrim.

however if they scrapped the story for gameplay they would just end up like two worlds 2.
anyone remember 2 worlds 1? yeah me either.

and vice versa.

if they scrapped the intricate core game mechanics just to buff the story then i might feel let down
and wouldn't feel like skyrim was as genuine of an roleplay world as the previous games.

well i can only imagine that bethesda loves us enough to keep it balanced
so heres to all of us shutting the ____ up and hoping for the best :foodndrink:

There are ALOT more than five Elder Scrolls. Did you not see how many there were in the Thief's Guild in Oblivion?

I think todd said that not all details of lore are confirmed some people in the game just said. So some of it will be changed with gameplay.

Actually that was more Morrowind. Oblivion had good gameplay but was lacking in the main quest line. Morrowind had a stellar main quest line and had meh gameplay. Frankly, I haven't found a TES game that wasn't a great play. I don't see why people need to rank them. In fact, I'm changing my sig because frankly, I think people shouldn't rank the TES games against each other and only rank if they are great games, which they all are.



Where did this only five elder scrolls idea come from? I see it everywhere but it isn't true. There are innumerable Elder Scrolls that chronicle the world from beginning to end. Trust me, there is room for thousands of Elder Scrolls games.