I think it should be similar to Dragon Age where you're fighting an enemy that you can't negotiate with they are going to destroy everything if you don't stop them. Your character will have to defeat the enemy whatever happens but you should have the ability to decide how you defeat them. That way they would still fulfill the Elder Scroll prophecy

To many people, reading is part of a gameplay experience.
Daggerfall is a good example of multiple endings, which from your answers, was something you apparently agreed to be positive. How long ago a game was designed has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of a concept.

You fail to grasp very simple ideas that are clearly explicit here and sometimes your tone is that of an arrogant [censored].

The only sensible option available seems to be DELETE vote and leave this pamper-kiddish bs to those who enjoy it.

And once again, I decide to jump into a thread without reading the whole (seven page) thing. Hopefully don't go making myself look ridiculous, it's just that there's only one thing I actually feel like I need to respond to.


This is simply. not. true. Obviously it is impossible for a game to function exactly like a dungeon master... but he didn't say he wants it to work exactly like that, and the context of his posts makes it pretty clear that that's not what he's asking for. What he wants is a game world that reacts on a significant basis to the actions of the player and to most everything that the player does to it, which is more or less the role that a DM takes. That's doable, and even practical. It would just require that the game be practically built around it, and would require a lot of clever scripting and programming for it to work efficiently. There are already games that do most of the individual things this would require though, and implementing it on a larger scale would just involve bringing those things together.


This is also untrue. There are a lot of CRPGs that have little to no story, especially the older ones. The almost universal focus on plot in them is more of a recent fad for them than a fundamental element of their design.

Haha, The Warp II?

Would definitely be cool, and rather expected now days, but they do gotta be careful about the lore for the next game.

I think they could do it.

For the love of...right, I've repeatedly read Jimis saying that the story can easily have different endings...I shall do my best to simplify this as much as possible...

The Story of a TES game is alot like the passing of a day, the end of a day is set in stone, it will take 24 hours after the day has begun, and it will be night time, but within those 24 hours, damn near anything can happen...so the end of the story will always be the same, but how you get to it can be however you wish within the games limitations...plus, once the main story is complete, you can continue to forge your Character's story...

I hope that helped you, I honestly do...

Poll and OP is sort of vague.

If you mean different endings depending on your actions, yes.

If you mean different endings depending on your race or class, hell to the no.

so your saying that the land of the nords would accept a dunmer into their clans and readily as a fellow nord?
no, im sorry but your equality ideals are epic failz in a game like TES where race is a major factor.

There are plenty of great games and even RPGs that provide alternate endings and keep the lore intact just fine.

It’s called good writing.

on topic - i agree, you want full controll, go into the CS, load the skyrim.bsa and add/delete what ever the hell you want

Look at the poll. The more than one ending is winning

I don't understand one thing...what is wrong with choosing your ending? What if I want to help Dagoth?

There wouldn't be any more games , I personally don't see the point in creating an ending that would just be "and an evil blanketed Tamriel for the rest of it's days"

In TES the MQ usually involves something that destroys Tamriel

Jagar Tharn- No good would come from him being emperor and you siding with him. Tamriel loses
Daggerfall- Resulted in a Dragon break so can't relly comment
Dagoth Ur- Isn't going to welcome people with open arms into his soceity. Tamriel loses
Mehrunes Dagon- Would just destroy Tamriel, the mythic dawn think they're safe, but Dagon would just kill them in the end. Tamriel loses

but that's just me

YES!

That would be a breath of fresh air. Elder Scrolls is supposed to be a game where you are completely free, but in the story you have been completely railroaded in the past two games (and in Oblivion, the railroad story svcked). It sure would be nice to actually have choices that impact the game world, so you aren't just running from one story point to another and actually have to think about your actions and their consequences.

Of course, thinking might be something the target audience (ten to fifteen year old console users) might object to. So I don't expect any freedom or choices to actually be present. It's a shame, really.

Well if they do different endings they probably wont allow play after beating the main quest (like in NV) because scripting all the events so you can see how your choices change stuff is hard work. If I had to choose between multiple endings, or one ending, but you can play on and see the effects, I would rather have one, like in Oblvion. That story was linear, but you could play after you beat it, and I have no complaints there.

I think it could be done, but certain things will have to be set in stone. The Elder Scrolls universe is based on a fairly linear lore, multiple endings means multiple timelines, which means one ending would have to be the "real" ending (like, if you played star wars: the force unleashed, there were multiple endings, but only one that fit according to lore) and I think that would just be a bad turn in the series. The bad guy will die, but maybe changing the way the main character goes about killing him could be interesting. Maybe, instead of multiple endings, there should be multiple paths to the one ending.

I prefer multiple paths to come to different endings. Sometimes choosing a path unlocks a new ending possibility, sometimes it blocks an ending, sometimes it doesn't have an effect at all, sometimes a path may open up interesting side quests, sometimes certain side quests are blocked . Having a complex path to reach some goal adds tremendous replayability value to a game.

i wish they implements that!

I don't care. But you want a yes or no, so I say no. Multiple endings aren't important to me, and an ending isn't interactive in any way. Once I've completed the main quest once, I'll skip everything I can anyway, cutscene-wise. I'm not gonna keep changing the way I play so I can see them all. Most people will only see the most common ending or two. The rest they'll just look up on youtube and that'll be that. It's a pointless bit of fluff that I can definitely do without.

I would like to see Skyrim not just have different endings, but allow you to by, race, birthsign, fame, ordinary choices, and succes in other mainquests... allow you to stand on different sides of battles, of course your side should not change who wins and the main questline should always regardless of your fighting merunes dagon or helping him have the same important charecters die and it should always end up with you killing the final boss.
And it would be boring for evil charecters to help "the empire find a new hair to the throne."

I dont believe you have the ability to get it, but keep your concerns about whether the developers can make it or not, my question at least was simple and of course i have wasted my time too answering to you, so Bye Bye

Ok, if you dont have the ability to read all that i ve wrote on the description of the poll, then please dont vote and please dont tell me what you think about it, i said, your choices have a total impact to the whole gameplay and of course the endiings,

No more Dragon Breaks. One was enough.