they should do a totally choices and consequences ending, like in Daggerfall.

(where even evil could win)

Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at....a true RPG would allow "evil" endings....

IMO, a true RPG would not have evil endings, because morality would not be so polarized to make a faction uniformly and obviously "evil."



While I'd like to avoid retcons if at all possible, if they are going to do them, then they have to at least abide by the general rule of thumb: If something has to be inexplicably changed, at least make the changing process and the final product so cool that we forget we ever cared about the original.

Generic fantasy Dwarves becoming Dwemer? Cool change.
Talos's cosmic bulldozer? Not so much.

Sure, go right ahead and patch Oblivion's ending. It's not like the book's 40 + year time jump and complete overhaul of Tamrielic society would take care of any lore changes Bethesda had in mind...

Dark Brotherhood not evil.......?! So murdering someone is OK then? How can morality not be polarizing? The whole idea of morality is that some things are considered by society to be "good" and other things "evil". Not that I'm trying to hijack my own thread........ :blush:

Life and actions within, at least within the scope of the Elder Scrolls, are nothing more than myriad perspectives and which one is taken by the player. There is no true archimedian grounding point by which to claim universal right and wrong. It's difficult to make a case for the Oblivion DB as they were designed with sadistic-nonsensical-evil in mind, but if we start from the premise that everyone has their own subjective definition of "good" and "evil," and no-one considers themselves evil (in order to remain logically consistent with their own subjective definitions), then it follows that the DB must have intelligible premises and philosophies by which their actions are subjectively justified. Just like the rest of society has intelligible premises and philosophies by which their actions are subjectively justified. Simply because one has more public support does not make it uniformly right and the other wrong.

The player may not agree with the underpinning reasons, but that doesn't mean they're not understandable or even potentially valid.
And it's not like murder is devoid of benefits by necessity. Assassination can knock off the socially beneficial and the socially oppressive alike.

Consider the Telvanni and Hlaalu and Redoran. All of them had their benefits and all of them had their dirt under the fingernails. While the player could most certainly make a subjective decision that they felt one or more houses were evil, the game was not the one that applied that label. Instead, the game portrayed all sides as fairly and evenly as possible, leaving the player to choose whatever perspective pleased them.

Your premise is interesting but you draw a long bow. Society as a whole (including the tamrelian one) has decided which actions constitute good and evil. Hence the punishment for murder. Although there are grey areas of what consitutes good and evil, broadly speaking, most people would agree as to what is evil and what is not. How many times on this forum have you read a post about someone "..wanting to play Oblivion again, but as an evil character." I have seen it quite a bit, and noone asks the poster what they mean by "evil". Broadly speaking, the meaning is implied and accepted.



So a great RP opportunity would be for a morally "good" character to eradicate the DB.



True, and I would venture that that perspective would have been based upon the moral/value compass of the character being roleplayed.

Well, I won't go too in depth, as this thread truly is getting hijacked, but it a society's belief and general agreement on right and wrong is the indicator of right and wrong, then does that mean each society has different moral truths? Is that not a contradiction? Is murder in Morrowind not morally evil because of the widespread acceptance of the Morag Tong, yet murder anywhere else morally evil? Or if society as a whole believes something right, yet 50 years later they believe the exact opposite, does moral truth change? Public opinion cannot and is not the gauge by which moral truth is discovered. Especially in the ES universe.

There actually was at least one memorable thread in the Oblivion section where the OP polled alignment in the traditional DnD fashion, and it turned into a great debate over the merits of things in the game meriting "evil." Sadly, it's been lost to the forum culling.

And that's all I'm gonna take this thread off course for. :laugh:

If they allowed 2 endings, completely different, how would you make the lore for that? How would the next game begin? How would the NPCs know what to talk about, kind of like the NPCs in OB talked about the neravarine from Morrowind, if they gave you the choice to actually JOIN dagoth ur and become a god, that would kind of mess the entire system up of making a new game. It works for games like Fable sure, but not games like TES.

Not bothered. The ending to Oblivion svcked so bad, it's a 50/50 chance a retcon will be better than the original (which isn't saying much).

I think it'd be kind of cool! For those of you who have played and beaten Portal, you may have heard that Valve recently added a short segment onto the original ending to help in their ruthless viral advertising for the sequel. Cliffhangers galore! The thing is, each TES game's setting is usually so detached (regionally and politically) from the previous that I don't see how Bethesda could arrange one that's actually helpful in hinting at the next game or anything of the sort. Especially with The Infernal City setting some events in stone *decades* after Oblivion.

Still, it'd be cool if they could find a way to expertly do it.

i dunno, worked pretty well in Daggerfall, where you could give the Mantella to like 10 different people some "evil" as [censored] (God of Worms) to Good (the Empire) to neutral (Gortwog, King of Orcs), and Morrowind lore didnt really die because of it.

but of course, maybe you guys cant handle any other game ending then the Disney one...*shrugs*

Don't knock Disney endings.



If all paths lead to Rome, Rome is still a big city. And in our case Rome is a city that is not dead and can be expanded upon.

Edit: even rebuilt

That honestly has nothing to do with what I said. :shrug:
I'm talking a massive change. Not martin going to a different place, or martin turning into akitosh and killing mehrunes dagon differently. I'm talking..what if they decided to change the ending so that martin didnt even DIE, and he's still the emperor. That's the type of different ending i'm talking about. You can't really do that, and have the option for that to happen, or for him to die. The next game wouldn't know where to begin after that, especially a game like TES where the games heavily play off the predecessor.

I understand what you are saying and it makes sense.
But..martin could re-incarnate the same way the nerevarine did and with a few tweaks it would be like he didn't die. But that then falls under the same scrutiny of the believability of re-incarnation in TES.
Bethesda has created a world which allows weird change like that, and in the end if they did it its done.

Edit: I would just go with it, and hopefully the next ES lore will make sense of the changes. I mean, for me TES is a game first and a world second, and to clarify it is a game with a amazing world.

you on crack? it got lots to to with what you said. Daggerfall had lots of different endings, and that didnt [censored] Morrowind up, you still with me now?

so why the [censored] would 10 different endings in Oblivion [censored] up the next TES if it didnt [censored] up Daggerfall --> Morrowind?

and as far as i know Daggerfall is still counted into the lore in Oblivion, heck even Arena is.

However, the only way they got Daggerfall's multiple endings to work in a lore friendly way without picking one of them (which would have made the whole multiple ending thing moot) is with the Dragon Break. And even THAT made some people unhappy.

Multiple endings just don't work that well in a universe that has continuity like TES without having between game continuity like Mass Effect does.

could be done with "small" connected (not in a straight line though) endings,

endings that dont change alot on the big scale or right away, like offing entire Empires or murdering emperors (which would be noticable), but change things on the small scale with slow unfolding of the events that connect later along the line in time for the next big game.

but the only good way to pull it off is to have importable savegames, like in the good old days.

Daggerfall is very much a part of Oblivion's lore. Several things in Oblivion seemed to be made with Daggerfall lore in mind, such as and Arena's lore is also considered(). Several different endings for Oblivion would have been interesting. The only problem with such a drastic change(Martin being emperor or not) would be how to decide which is canon. Having another Dragon Break happen wouldn't be right as the fate of the Empire would depend upon Martin's survival(which outcome would be taken into consideration for the future?), unless Martin turned out to be a horrible emperor(not a shock) and the Empire Still, without a Dragon Break(recycling old material doesn't sound interesting), how would we get two canon endings? They would have to pick one canon ending and Bethesda doesn't like to change their games after they made them, anyway(Broken Steel is an exception).

I just watch the last battle with, the daedra prince that I don't actually remember the name of...anyway. Here is a thought

Martin has had past dealings with the Daedra and in that experience he had many meetings with Boethia(sp?). Also, knowing he was of royal descent, Martin understood the power that lie with his possession of the amulet of kings. He and Boethia conspired to tempt other said Deadra prince to the end that the line of emperors would be broken. From this story, things could have gotten out of hand and Martin could have died, and even this could have been according to boethia's plan, who did not want the chance for martin to become king again. Or Martin could have done whatever he did with the amulet just before, what looks like some sort of mysticism/teleportation, took him to safety where he and Boethia completed their deal and an age where the potential of political backstabbing would be ripe in the seize of the emperors old power.
Try using your own imaginations.

And on this note anyone who negatively criticizes someone else's work must be prepared to exchange it completely for their own, because otherwise you are talking directly from your ass.




Edit: @ seti18
That is unless you wanted 2 complete endings, and the only option for that would be the Dragon Break. And I agree that Dragon Break's cheapen the endings.

Edit: moved a comma. And to be clear there is personal anger in the post. And I'm sorry I had to take it out on this thread.