I think I see your point now. I believe you seem to be saying that some Bioware games focus on the extremes to which you can go with your actions to a silly extent in some cases. However, what this thread is arguing would actually favor not only more of those extremes in TES, but more gray options as well. Both areas I personally believe games ranging from KOTOR, to Jade Empire, to both Mass Effect games excel at.

My major point here: As I stated above, the TES games are great at letting you do whatever you want.....in the open game world. Unfortunately, that mindset hasn't exactly extended into the actual questlines of TES titles.

It seems as though Bethesda is saying "Oh yeah, you guys can run out of the prison and spend an in-game year hunting trolls as a "ranger" for the Empire, and roleplay living out in the woods at a bandit camp. But when you guys want to finally go back to the main quest, you'll do it exactly how we say, in this order, fighting these guys, and ending the story this way. Every time."

See the difference there? In Mass Effect for instance, there is a huge decision at the end of the game that is either good or evil, and you get to make one of those choices no matter what. Even though Bioware makes you face the boss and "save the day" at the end, there is still a huge choice that you get to make based on how you want your version of the story to be. This just hasn't happened (so far) in TES games for the main quest line, or for any but a few lesser quests.

Ahahaha thank you for reminding me about those. Those options may be out of character but they are hilarious. My favorite evil Bioware moment is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR4_P_IsXpQ&feature=related.

Yeah, sorry, but I found Bioware's games to be lacking, too many whiny characters and not enough ways to get rid of them (you even install such whiny Luke Skywalker clone to king-hood in DA:O) and I found ME to be too much of Starwars clone, random cliche generating machine to really enjoy it. All it was missing was light sabers and it'd be KOTOR.

Err, sorry, off topic.

IMO I think there shouldn't be more evil choices but more morally obscure choices in Skyrim and any future games of the TES series.

It's fun being evil in an RPG, because I don't get to be in RL! :tongue: No, but seriously, more options to be on the "dark side" would be great--like, if I can choose to side with the enemy in the quests instead, just to mix it up a little--more playing options altogether... (for example, I would have liked to be able to join the Mythic Dawn every once in awhile, just for a different feel... And in the Shivering Isles main quest, most of the time, I hated playing Sheogorath's lapdog and being party to what I feel was an injustice to Thadon and Syl...maybe I'm biased, but hey, I would have loved to see what it was like to join Order, even if it did end with me laying in a puddle of my own blood... :violin: )

You may want to take another look at my post above. You'll see both my points about Bioware games, and my more important OT point about how TES should incorporate branching decision making (black, white, and gray) in the main quest and side quests, without having to change the overarching story.

Also, to Gelert's responding post: KOTOR 2 was not made by Bioware. And you can tell very easily..... :yucky:

I agree.

While it's true that we had Dark Brotherhood, they were only part in the game that could actually be called evil.
For starters, I would like if we could get Necromancer's Guild (with ability to become a lich).

Also, I think that there should be no restrictions on who we want to kill at all!
It shouldn't matter what gender, age, race or importance to the quest that NPC is, I want to be able to kill it.

^there could even be three or four resolutions to this, that all have their own real world effects:

• Kill the target
  
• convince the target to leave town "speechcraft"
  
• Intimidate the target to leave town "beat him up, but have mercy"
  
• break into his house while he's sleeping, steal his ring, and report him dead.

The latter could have repercussions with the guild however (if they see he's still alive), so i don't know how that would work

Which makes me think "well, have the ES games ever really been 'choose your alignment', or is that more of a Fallout & Bioware kind of thing?"


Lots of people have been saying "there really hasn't been that much opportunity to be bad in previous ES games." Well, maybe it's meant to be that way?


Just a different point of view. :shrug:



(Given that the ES plots tend to be kind of "destined hero", perhaps something more like Mass Effect's choice between Shiny Hero & Jerkass Hero would be a better option than Good/Evil....)

Just read up to that, and I know which instance you are talking about. I wouldn't exactly call either choice good or evil to be completely honest. They were both morally ambiguous at best and had their pitfalls.

And I would like to take this moment say that I'd rather play ME or even KOTOR than I would DA:O (strictly by game play alone).


Didn't play much of KOTOR II to be honest, but at least I gave it a chance.

I can see in this pool three options. Oblivion has not enough evil quests, Oblivion has enough evil quests and I don't mind if Oblivion has more or the same amount of evil quests. Well, what about the option of Oblivion has TOO MANY evil quests?

Dark brotherhood quests, some daedric quests, even a mage guild quest, the shivering isles main quest (the torturing part). And this is only what I know. As I prefer free roaming I mostly played mages guild and the beginning of the main quest.

An evil character can do good things just for fun, or out of boredom, but a good character is not supposed to do evil things just for the lulz.

If your character is not evil, you will not obtain some daedric artefacts and won't be able to finishing shivering isles unless you use mods changing this.

If my character is an evil vampire warlord, he can help someone if he pleases without remorse. But if it's a good-hearted person, how could he live after ruining someone life only to make a daedric prince laugh?

Adding the option to make devil things? Sure. But it shouldn't be the only option to finish the quest.

This is why I think that Oblivion has too many evil quests. An I think they shouldn't be evil quests in Skyrim. Just the option to do quests the evil way. Or at least I hope they don't make you decide between your character continuing being a good person or finishing a main quest.

I agree, but it shouldn't be a black-and-white type of situation like most people seem to focus on. Those options should exist, but they should just be decisions. If I want to make a ruthless character that kills everyone and shows no mercy or sympathy, that's fine, but I don't want some overhanging idea that I'm evil attached to it. If the player thinks his/her character is evil, that's fine, if some of the in-game characters think your character is evil, great, but the game should not make any assumptions about your character.

If that makes sense.

That makes perfect sense. Its this kind of sense that more game developers should have.

sounds good to me, as long as they are not cutting something else out to make room for it... bump up that budget guys! we know your good for it.

Agreed, there should definitely be some time and resources devoted to development on this. At the VERY LEAST on the MQ. That's all I would ask for, because otherwise I'm fine with TES core quest gameplay.

I would have liked to be able to play as a necromancer against the mage's guild, so I guess I'm thinking that some more quest options would be nice.

Killing the quest-giver and getting what they would give you if you finished the quest, or stealing their reward should result in a "quest completed"

That being said, if a character is gonna give you an item for completing a quest it should always be on the character or in a nearby locked container beforehand. The item shouldn't just magically appear on the quest-giver after the quest is done. Daedric shrines giving you Daedric artifacts can still magically appear however, because that makes sense (in the world of TES).

^actually, in retrospect. I'm not sure about this. My evil characters might be able to complete lot's of the quests real easy. They'd have to make some tough locks, or make the quest-giver pretty formidable.

I like this idea very much, that there could be multiple ways to complete any given quest, not just "evil" or "good" but as you described, you could steal the item or kill the person... it would even be cool if in some cases you could "fake" having completed your task (lie) and the NPC would believe you were telling the truth in some instances. In each circumstance, something different could take place as a result. With Radiant Story, hopefully Bethesda will do a lot with this, if not, at least I'm sure the groundwork will be there for people with lots of smarts and time to make systems where this is possible. Also, as far as morally ambiguous goes, sticking your nose into other people's business may end you in various situations where there really isn't a "good" or "evil" choice, but you must act and people's dispositoin toward you will change as a result in different ways.

Imagine, poor Igna tells you her husband Sorkvild is being threatened and strong-armed by Honthjolf Stone-heart. She will give you a precious heirloom in return for you keeping her husband safe from this man, and hints at you needing to kill to accomplish this.

1. You can confront Honthjolf and get him angry enough to challenge you in a duel and then kill him. -- Igna is forced to give you the heirloom but seems very unhappy for some reason, and later turns up dead, murdered by Honthjolf's brother Vled, who figures out via overhearing the dialogue spoken just before the duel that she must have asked you to kill Honthjolf, and Vled then informs you of the truth and attacks you on sight if not caught by the guards first for Igna's murder.
2, You can just murder Honthjolf outright. -- Igna reports you to the guards and runs from you, not giving you the heirloom after all, and Igna and Vled attack you on sight from then on if you elude prison time for your crime. No one involved will speak to you anymore about it and you never learn more about the mystery.
3. You can talk to Sorkvild and find out that Honthjolf is extorting him, but learn in this conversation that Sorkvild isn't actually Igna's man, Honthjolf is, but Igna lied to you to kill him because she seemingly wants her no-good thug of a man gotten rid of (but has sudden remorse for going through with it if you accomplish the task). You can then give Sorkvild the money or pay Honthjolf on Sorkvild's behalf. If you give Sorkvlid the money, he tries to skip town but is waylaid by Honthjolf and slain. If you try to pay Honthjolf on Sorkvlid's behalf, Honthjolf challenges you to a duel, but the dialogue is different in that duel, and Vled never finds out about Igna's plot, leaving you with Igna giving you the heirloom and no consequences other than in her sadness, Igna takes her own life.
4. You can sneak into Honthjolf's place and discover for yourself via some clue that Igna is Honthjolf's woman, and find evidence that Honthjolf is extorting Sorkvlid. You can then either use this information in the same way as in option 3, or you you can go to the guards with this evidence, and the guards will arrest Honthjolf, Igna gives you the heirloom, and Vled and Igna both are happy Honthjolf is not dead, but no longer being a thug and ruining their lives.

Maybe I'm not the best writer in the world, but If all quests had this general level of options, then you'd have a real "shades of gray" type of world.

I RPed Greyland that way. Lonovo is J-T's homeboy.

Also I like the idea for multiple ways to end a quest. I wanted a way to research on my own who was the traitor in the DB quest. I remember going straight from the sewers to Kvatch, attacking Martin so he followed me all the way to Chorrol, going back to Kvatch to close the gate, then going back to Chorrol to deliver the Amulet and then walking over to Martin to get him to follow me, and walking over to Jauffre. I don't even remember exactly what happened, but it didn't stop the Mythic Dawn from stealing the Amulet and continuing the MQ how it usually goes. It would have been better if it just skipped most of the MQ and went straight to the final battle.

If they do make more shades of gray and moral choices, and they should, they should make it effect how different factions and groups see you and SHOULD NOT be shown on some linear, arbitrary Good-Evil bar.

I agree.

The more options the better for immersion I suppose. Im more of a neutral player myself but why not.

I'm also really hoping that they add the Fallout 3 system, where you get hunted down by different groups of people depending on your Karma. And the only way to avoid it is to be that sort of "Grey Badass" as they described it in one of the Fallout videos. I normally slaughter NPC’s who had rude dialogue towards me, so I would find it fun to get hunted by the Good guys, whoever they may be in Skyrim.

This.

I think blowing up Megaton was a good act, not an evil one.

Exactly. Ugh, Fallout 3 is a prime example of the game forcing "good" and "evil" on the player. The "evil" ending even sat there and told me that my character "succumbed to the vices of greed and blah blah blah" I was so angry.

Blowing up Megaton benefited some people and hurt others, it is not up to the game to decide whether or not it's evil. The option should certainly be there, the options to be cruel and ruthless and just generally mean should be an option but not under the guise of being "evil." I'll decide if my character is good or evil or somewhere in between, the game shouldn't decide that for me.

Adding a good/evil bar would be a step back for TES IMO. if they add one i'll be devastated.

actions should just have consequences, there shouldn't be some all-knowing all-powerful "karma".