[Noely Ulloa]

Edit: found one more relatively new trademark listed to Zenimax:
Deathmark
77820738 IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer game software for use with computers and video game consoles; downloadable computer game software offered via the internet and wireless devices
Standard Characters Claimed.

It has been filed on September 4th, 2009 and has been given a Notice of Allowance on April 27th 2010.
We still need to keep in mind that the name "Oblivion" wasn't referring to any of the provinces either...

Having said all this I suddenly realise that if Deathmark is a new TES game, we will still have to wait a long time for it.
For the first time I hope I'm wrong...

Deathmark is a terrible name for a game, let alone a TES game. It wont be the name for the game, I'm confident of that. Keep in mind that "Oblivion" actually makes sense for a TES game, because part of the game took place in Oblivion. That's not the case with Deathmark.

[louise tagg]

Deathmark is a terrible name for a game, let alone a TES game. It wont be the name for the game, I'm confident of that. Keep in mind that "Oblivion" actually makes sense for a TES game, because part of the game took place in Oblivion. That's not the case with Deathmark.

Maybe it'd be only about the various assasins guilds.

[Anne marie]

Deathmark is a terrible name for a game, let alone a TES game. It wont be the name for the game, I'm confident of that. Keep in mind that "Oblivion" actually makes sense for a TES game, because part of the game took place in Oblivion. That's not the case with Deathmark.

Also, if you play Magic The Gathering, they have a pretty firm grasp on Deathmark, and since there have been failed attempts at making Magic a viable video game (Xbox Live Arcade/PSN Network; and a few other titles), it makes sense to put that type of game in the hands of someone new to try and spin that profit. I would venture it is for this.

[Sara Lee]

Also, if you play Magic The Gathering, they have a pretty firm grasp on Deathmark, and since there have been failed attempts at making Magic a viable video game (Xbox Live Arcade/PSN Network; and a few other titles), it makes sense to put that type of game in the hands of someone new to try and spin that profit. I would venture it is for this.

That's really, really stretching it, considering Deathmark is simply the name of a single, 1 mana black card (albeit, a totally freaking awesome card with plenty of white/green hate. Which is awesome, because, as a black player, I looooove putting all my hate on white).

[Marcia Renton]

There is a fifth even more unlikely option. Next to the three Skyrim trademarks listed to Zenimax, there is a fourth one:

IC 038. US 100 101 104. G & S: Providing a high speed access to area networks and a global computer information network; Providing telecommunications connections to a global computer network; Telecommunications services, namely, personal communication services; Wireless broadband communication services; Wireless electronic transmission of voice signals, data, facsimiles, images and informations. FIRST USE: 20060324. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20060324

This trademark has been listed to the Skyrim Corporation in Florida.
Theoretically Zenimax could have filed their trademark just to prevent the Skyrim Corporation from using the name of one of Tamriel's provinces any more than they already do, but as I said, this is highly unlikely and I think we would have seen another TES related name pop up in Zenimax's trademark list by now.

Unless this 'Skyrim Corporation' (which has no game experience) was intending to make a video game this is not even a possibility. Their trademark has nothing to do with video games, and therefore poses no conflict with Zenimax Media.

[JaNnatul Naimah]

Heh, I already knew about both of those....

That really is a let down.

Aye, I thought they were going to give us information we didn't know, and tell us why they didn't put Sutch in, etc.

[Latino HeaT]

Of course, I'll toss out the idea that "Deathmark" is in fact the first DLC for Skyrim, working from Infernal City remarks about assassins and Skyrim.

[Louise]

Of course, I'll toss out the idea that "Deathmark" is in fact the first DLC for Skyrim, working from Infernal City remarks about assassins and Skyrim.

That would be the most reasonable interpretation of this Deathmark trademark.
I think that you might be right about this.
But if that is the case. the game (Tes V) must be released before march 2011.
Someone alse has just mentioned the deathmarkt trademakr has to be used for mach 2011, so that means that TES V has to be releashed before that.

Would be great if it was.

[Avril Churchill]

They can't be making something new because they don't have the legal trademark for it.

Like I said, we're not sure anything. They have also a 'Deathmark' trademark that was registered September 4th, 2009.


And what second concerns me is the fact that Quakecon is (maybe im wrong) not a good place to announce a Role-Playing Game

[Carlos Rojas]

That would be the most reasonable interpretation of this Deathmark trademark.
I think that you might be right about this.
But if that is the case. the game (Tes V) must be released before march 2011.
Someone alse has just mentioned the deathmarkt trademakr has to be used for mach 2011, so that means that TES V has to be releashed before that.

Would be great if it was.

That's not what he said at all. He said that March 2011 would be a common turnaround time from trademarking to release, based on previous Bethesda trademarks (excluding Skyrim). They can of course renew 'Deathmark' every 6 months, 5 times in a row, if they wished. Just like they have done with Skyrim.

And what second concerns me is the fact that Quakecon is (maybe im wrong) not a good place to announce a Role-Playing Game

Now that Bethesda (or Zenimax at least) practically owns QuakeCon, I imagine this is the general view of QuakeCon that they would like to change. What better way to start that change than with a TES:V showcase?

[April]

Like I said, we're not sure anything.

Exactly. It could be anything, but my guess is that it's something they're publishing and not necessarily a new game. Let us now cease our fruitless ramblings about "Deathmark".

[CxvIII]

Edit: found one more relatively new trademark listed to Zenimax:
Deathmark
77820738 IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer game software for use with computers and video game consoles; downloadable computer game software offered via the internet and wireless devices
Standard Characters Claimed.

It has been filed on September 4th, 2009 and has been given a Notice of Allowance on April 27th 2010.
We still need to keep in mind that the name "Oblivion" wasn't referring to any of the provinces either...

Having said all this I suddenly realise that if Deathmark is a new TES game, we will still have to wait a long time for it.
For the first time I hope I'm wrong...

Deathmark would make sense a game name, a 'mark' was a magic item in TES1: Arena, so if they bring back the item of the 'mark' then the idea of a MQ revolving around the central idea of a powerful and deadly mark makes total sense.

[R.I.p MOmmy]

I agree that another Elder Scrolls game will come to us. However, Bethesda needs to multitask more efficiently. They need a larger development team, because waiting 4+ years for just an announcement when less than four years was previously enough for the whole game to be released is ridiculous.

This......

[Laurenn Doylee]

I'm a big Elder Scrolls fan and have been following their website since they've had one. I do not recall a period of time where we have had to wait this long for an announcement. When I say that I mean an announcement of any kind. Not necessarily Elder Scrolls. The last Bethesda developed title was Fallout 3 if I'm not mistaken, and that was announced way back around the time Oblivion was released because they bought the rights to it and there was no sense in keeping up a pretense. It's now May, 2010, and they have not announced a new title since this time 2006? Is that right? I know that Bethesda publishing pumps out games on a pretty regular basis (usually very, very bad games), but their software development wing has been extremely quiet. Fortunately I'm just finished MassEffect, and have yet to play ME2 or DA:O... but those kinds of games just don't compare to a good 1st person RPG of which there is a dearth. Well, anyway, this post amounted to nothing. I guess I'll come back in another month and see what's up.

[Alkira rose Nankivell]

Deathmark sounds to me like a published game, or maybe an expansion for that Hunted thing. That's my hunch anyway.

I think we've fully absorbed all the new info about E3 and the trademark. Back to silence and stewing, guys?

[CRuzIta LUVz grlz]

After further consideration I'm pretty sure what's going to happen is this:

1. No announcement at E3, QuakeCon or any other such event.
2. Teaser announcement/advertisemant circa second TES novel (either an ad in the back of the book or something). (prob late 2010)
3. Teaser trailer/announcement soon after.
4. TESV out by E3 2011 or at least showcased.

Basically the novels are to tide us over till the game is done, explain various changes to the gaming world (post Oblivion crisis), and act as a platform to launch TESV. I'm almost certain TESV will -not- be set 200 years after TESIV and that Attrebus will be the "Uriel Septim VII" of the next few games. The first four games all took place during the reign of USVII and I expect the next set to take place under Attrebus' reign - or possibly his son's: we are meant to feel a connection with Attrebus, and thereby, his offspring.

This is all supposition, of course. Destroy as you will.

[phil walsh]

After further consideration I'm pretty sure what's going to happen is this:

1. No announcement at E3, QuakeCon or any other such event.
2. Teaser announcement/advertisemant circa second TES novel (either an ad in the back of the book or something). (prob late 2010)
3. Teaser trailer/announcement soon after.
4. TESV out by E3 2011 or at least showcased.

Basically the novels are to tide us over till the game is done, explain various changes to the gaming world (post Oblivion crisis), and act as a platform to launch TESV. I'm almost certain TESV will -not- be set 200 years after TESIV and that Attrebus will be the "Uriel Septim VII" of the next few games. The first four games all took place during the reign of USVII and I expect the next set to take place under Attrebus' reign - or possibly his son's: we are meant to feel a connection with Attrebus, and thereby, his offspring.

This is all supposition, of course. Destroy as you will.

I won't destroy it, it does have a sort of sense to it, just not my own. It doesn't factor in the trademark is why.

[Jesus Lopez]

I won't destroy it, it does have a sort of sense to it, just not my own. It doesn't factor in the trademark is why.

Probably because the poster is either:
A. Unaware of the ongoing trademark debate or
B. One of the many subscribers to the theory that the trademark does not necessarily pertain to TESV

Please remember that all we know about the trademark is when it was applied for, what category the product will be, and when the extension expires. None of these known items can be proven to be a connection to TESV and therefore it cannot be ruled out that "Skyrim" refers to a separate game, or that they do not intend to use it.

Eliminate the possible, and whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

[Facebook me]

Probably because the poster is either:
A. Unaware of the ongoing trademark debate or
B. One of the many subscribers to the theory that the trademark does not necessarily pertain to TESV

Please remember that all we know about the trademark is when it was applied for, what category the product will be, and when the extension expires. None of these known items can be proven to be a connection to TESV and therefore it cannot be ruled out that "Skyrim" refers to a separate game, or that they do not intend to use it.

Eliminate the possible, and whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.

The thing is, we have no idea what a game with the name "Skyrim" attached to it and created by Bethesda could be if not an ES title. This is an issue of no known relavent alternative.

[Ashley Tamen]

The thing is, we have no idea what a game with the name "Skyrim" attached to it and created by Bethesda could be if not an ES title. This is an issue of no known relavent alternative.

It could be used for the MMO or another handheld. Or possibly even a completely new genre set in the TES universe. Zenimax is the parent company, not the developer, therefore anything they trademark has an equal chance of being developed by any of their subsidiary developers.
We also do not know that they are working on TESV, so it also is not a known relevant alternative.

I'm just playing the role of the Devil's Advocare, primarily because I see a lot of people beating down other's theories using the trademark argument without actually having any real basis to do so.

[Cathrine Jack]

I'm just playing the role of the Devil's Advocare, primarily because I see a lot of people beating down other's theories using the trademark argument without actually having any real basis to do so.

I think it's pretty obvious. They trademarked "Skyrim". It's the name of one of the provinces of Tamriel. They've reached the max ammount of extensions. Time to official announce TESV. End of story. Not trying to shoot down anyone elses theory, but this is the only one that shows any kind of promise at this point.

[Tinkerbells]

It could be used for the MMO or another handheld. Or possibly even a completely new genre set in the TES universe. Zenimax is the parent company, not the developer, therefore anything they trademark has an equal chance of being developed by any of their subsidiary developers.
We also do not know that they are working on TESV, so it also is not a known relevant alternative.

I'm just playing the role of the Devil's Advocare, primarily because I see a lot of people beating down other's theories using the trademark argument without actually having any real basis to do so.

You are correct about those things, and particularly that Zenimax is the one who does all the trademarks, which is my primary concern. Some sort of TES: Travels game could happen, the trademark could be for the MMO, or any other idea that Zenimax wishes to indulge in.

Of course, there is still the very likely possibility that it is a Bethesda game, as it is within their territory (as mentioned, the only other possibilities are a Travels game or the MMO).

[Emily Rose]

Understand that the reason that this is the longest period of time Bethesda hasn't announced anything, is because they've had to make Fallout 3 and revamp the game engine for ESV, just as Todd Howard said. Remember that for every Elder Scrolls game, they rebuild from the ground up. That's pretty much what they're doing again, except this time they have more developers.

[Avril Louise]

Remember that for every Elder Scrolls game, they rebuild from the ground up.

Hopefully they won't build something we'll be disappointed in...

It just seems to me like rebuilding everything for each game is getting a bit time consuming, which is probably why they did Fallout 3 (in addition to really wanting to do it). It's more cost effective to use the same engine to build 2 games than to build 1 then scrap the engine and modify a new one for a new game and then do it all over again for the next game.

[Jaki Birch]

It just seems to me like rebuilding everything for each game is getting a bit time consuming, which is probably why they did Fallout 3 (in addition to really wanting to do it). It's more cost effective to use the same engine to build 2 games than to build 1 then scrap the engine and modify a new one for a new game and then do it all over again for the next game.

Though, I doubt they are doing a revamp as big as from Morrowind to Oblivion, but you know... Todd Howard still said they're changing their basic technology.