If you expect Infernal City to compare well with literary classics, you'll be disappointed. But it would be silly to expect that, now wouldn't it?

Now, if you enjoy the elder scrolls' universe and want a fun way to kill a weekend, then by all means read the book. The writing is fine. It's not a masterpiece of the english language, but it works.

I've had my hands on the physical book and read a chapter - the one where the prince is sleeping with a [censored]. What I read was uninspired. It's what you'd expect from a video game spinoff book, which was written by a man unfamiliar with Tamriel. It's not Chekhov

I am not expecting Tolstoy, but I am just wondering if it is better than such novels as The Twilight Series, The Vampire Diaries etc...

Actually, I'm curious about what how much Keyes read as preparation for the book, and how much he understood. He doesn't exactly delve into the more interesting aspects of the lore (though that probably wouldn't be appropriate for a book of this sort), but he says certain thing which hint at a (at least) superficial awareness of some of those issues. I wouldn't mind learning about his preparation.

Sorry I can't offer passages to back this up. I don't own the book - read it at Barnes and Noble.

Not saying that gives it literary merit; but he isn't completely ignorant of Tamriel.

Honestly, probably the only person who could write a novel based in Tamriel that would have genuine literary merit I would prefer to see write a novel that wasn't set in a video game world.

Different strokes for different folks.

Not everyone likes the same type of story, which is why I can't stand discussions about whether or not The Infernal City is good. All you have to do, is go to Amazon.com, download the preview (or if it's available in a bookstore near you, read it), and make up your own mind. http://www.amazon.com/reader/0345508017?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=sib_dp_bod_ex&page=14#reader-link a link.

I mean unfamiliar, as in not nearly as steeped as someone like Khulman or Kirkbride. Ok, he had knowledge of lore we obviously didn't. Obviously. The lore isn't his creation, though. But I suppose that's my point, it ain't his baby. He didn't briastfeed it.

Twilight, yes, definitely. Haven't read the Vampire Diaries. As others have said, its a nice weekend read, especially if you can get it for free (i.e. library).

I will take your word for it, when I have the oppurtunity I will read it.

To me, some of the better moments were

Compared to the "classics," everything is golden.

It isn't poorly-written, though. Some of the prose is a bit clunky and the metaphors are wierd, but the events are good enough and the setting (being Tamriel) is worthwhile. It's not great, but it's good.

I was going to get The Infernal City, but I figured that I could always get it later, so I probably will.

Poor Vvardenfell. At least the Nerevarine escaped, so that is one good thing.

@ the people who mentioned Sword of Truth- I hate that series. I started out by watching the TV show that takes some stuff from the novels. I liked that, so I figured I would read the books. They were interesting up until the fourth one, and then it was basically the same thing for each book. And, very pretentiously, the main character is actually God. Now, I hate everything to do with that series.

Everything in the world is better than that garbage, so of course it is.

I don't, because it's a fake compromise. Much like a lot in the novel, it is all too convenient design that effects, abilities and equipment are just what are needed, not what's a logical conclusion. But hey, maybe the Argonians built another kind of energy wall that's even higher to make sure they're protected even from fallout coming via the stratosphere...

It may well be that the impact was foreseeable, it's effects, however, are the product of poor - extremely poor - writing.

Well, a lot of the people who DID read them probably focused more on Vivec and Molag Bal's little "spear comparing" session than anything else.

Really, though, with those books, it's hard to say how much is meant to be taken literally, and how much is weird metaphors, how much is truth, and how much isn't, or even how much is actually supposed to be taken seriously at all and not just the writer trying to mess with our head.

Personally, I mostly just read it to laugh at the weirdness of the whole thing.

But while I've not read the novel, I'd say that yes, it's canon, after all, why would Bethesda have someone write a book about their setting if they didn't mean for the content of the book to be taken as canon? I would say that unless Bethesda comes out and tells us that the novels are not canon, or the next game to be released takes place after them and completely pretends nothing in them actually happens, we can probably presume that they're meant to be considered canon.

Anything is better than Twilight....

The book was ok. I enjoyed it simply for the new lore. It is by far no masterpiece.

I just got the book a few days ago. and almost done. it doesn't grab ya. but it's not too godawful bad. i have read a whole lot worse. but it isn't worth the price charged for it. will have to wait for the second book to see if the story is all good. honestly, both books together will probably make one good book. but right now....eh

I personally loved the book. It's short, but I thought that for a novel based off of a video game it was very well written.

Considering the infernal city left a few "maybe" questions, as in Vivec died or maybe left for somewhere else.
It read a little like the author was given a list of leave it vague topics by Bethesda to put in the novel imo, so I would say yes its canon and most likely setting up future big name npc's for a future TES release.

I should say that may sound like I did not like the book, nothing could be more wrong I liked it, just a few sentences left me with the above doubts.
As well as thinking I bet this is going to be another trilogy fantasy series.

They've said that there would only be two. Though I guess they could change their minds.