lore vs gameplay vs noobs : V - Skyrim

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:31 pm

What's funny is that Cyrodiil was originally a forest. The Pocket Guide changed the lore and Oblivion only changed Cyrodiil back into its original incarnation.

The Pocket Guide invented Cyrodiil. What you had before was a name, two lines on a map, and a bunch of RPG.net name generator cities. And that's pretty much the state of Cyrodiil's lore once again, in my opinion.

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:24 am

you know even in the real world lore is subject to change and as the saying goes history is decided by the victor so all of the books and stories can be subject to change if one day we find a level 100 lich who tells us that the dragons originally started war to free them selves or to stop their own extinction and now they are back for revenge or maybe the tried to say hi but where attacked by the blades or grey beards and then started to fight again or maybe they are being controlled or something similar tho that. What I mean that is that there are a millions things that could have actually happened and thus the lore (apart from being imaginary) Is subject to the creative change that is bethesda. or something like that.

» Sat May 28, 2011 12:41 pm

you know even in the real world lore is subject to change and as the saying goes history is decided by the victor so all of the books and stories can be subject to change if one day we find a level 100 lich who tells us that the dragons originally started war to free them selves or to stop their own extinction and now they are back for revenge or maybe the tried to say hi but where attacked by the blades or grey beards and then started to fight again or maybe they are being controlled or something similar tho that. What I mean that is that there are a millions things that could have actually happened and thus the lore (apart from being imaginary) Is subject to the creative change that is bethesda. or something like that.

If Bethesda wants to make creative decisions, that's fine. If they want to make [censored] copout decisions to justify their two-bit quests and gameplay tweaks, that's different.

» Sat May 28, 2011 1:44 pm

The compan write the Lore, they also make the game. You should never have to sacrifice one for the other. The Lore was written to create a great game, and plus, it is kept just vague enough to allow for movement. Much of the Lore is also written as words spoken by someone, or actually spoken by someone in game. This allows Beth to change things slightly should they need to, as it simply comes down to mis quotations as what happens in real life as we all know.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:50 pm

This is a fantasy game, what we do in the real world doesn't need to be mimicked in order to help progression.

This is a fantasy game works as an excuse for why there is magic and dragons. It does not work as an excuse for ignoring basic tenets of reality that help tie us to a world. The idea that knowledge in books is set in stone and can never be changed because it is always right is counter intuitive to a real breathing world. It breaks verisimilitude. But hey if you want a static, unchangeable, boring world more power to you.

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:42 pm

The compan write the Lore, they also make the game. You should never have to sacrifice one for the other. The Lore was written to create a great game, and plus, it is kept just vague enough to allow for movement. Much of the Lore is also written as words spoken by someone, or actually spoken by someone in game. This allows Beth to change things slightly should they need to, as it simply comes down to mis quotations as what happens in real life as we all know.

Well said lore is subject to change in a game just as in real life, when things change does it break the experiance of living no, so why should making a small change where something could change in game break the lore, it changed it it just did not break it.

» Sat May 28, 2011 11:38 am

As lore-correct as possible.

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:48 am

Well said lore is subject to change in a game just as in real life, when things change does it break the experiance of living no, so why should making a small change where something could change in game break the lore, it changed it it just did not break it.

Lore isn't an encyclopedia, it's a story. What happens to Lord of the Rings if Frodo becomes an elf all of a sudden.

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:17 am

Lore isn't an encyclopedia, it's a story. What happens to Lord of the Rings if Frodo becomes an elf all of a sudden.

I never said change the formula of races or major changes, dont make assumptions, history changes things so why could history not change an element of the game. I know lore is the story I think the story is the best part of a game which is why I love RPG's in general. Some small changes could get changed to suit the current nature of things during this time period and yes it is a story things change, we cant reasonably get angry if something is redone to outfit the current state of things in game if by some intervention the Aedra or some other force chooses to change something. Lore or the story is not set in stone and small parts of it can be changed.

» Sat May 28, 2011 1:00 pm

It is unclear how lore is supposed to be "affecting gameplay". In what ways can lore affect a game that devs can develop as they want, and refine as they want? is it gonna ruin gameplay mechanics? No. So?

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:02 pm

It is unclear how lore is supposed to be "affecting gameplay". In what ways can lore affect a game that devs can develop as they want, and refine as they want? is it gonna ruin gameplay mechanics? No. So?

Alot of people are concerned about adding and taking things away, I guess. I am with you it shoud really not affect gameplay at all but I mean if they want to change something tiny let them change it its not a big deal.

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:13 am

I never said change the formula of races or major changes, dont make assumptions, history changes things so why could history not change an element of the game. I know lore is the story I think the story is the best part of a game which is why I love RPG's in general. Some small changes could get changed to suit the current nature of things during this time period and yes it is a story things change, we cant reasonably get angry if something is redone to outfit the current state of things in game if by some intervention the Aedra or some other force chooses to change something. Lore or the story is not set in stone and small parts of it can be changed.

Bethesda can include flying saucers if they want to. That's a separate topic from whether it's a good idea. And no one in these threads ever gets around to discussing that.

Every change should bring more depth, because every change is a creative opportunity. Most people act like change is a question of how much continuity shenanigans you can get away with.

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:03 pm

I like the lore, and it should be followed if possible. Although if the lore gets in the way of a good gameplay mechanic, then it must be changed.

I agree with this completely.

I think that Lore and Gameplay are both equally important. However if Lore needs to be ever so slightly changed to make the Gameplay immaculate, then I think that the not-so-concrete details are the ones that should be changed. I do also think that the Games dictate the canon, but I don't see why Gameplay and Book lore can't be co-mingled to create that absolute definition of canon that cannot be argued.

But other than that, very minor changes to established lore are good to keep the series I love good and fresh.

bliviongate:

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:34 am

Bethesda can include flying saucers if they want to. That's a separate topic from whether it's a good idea. And no one in these threads ever gets around to discussing that.

Every change should bring more depth, because every change is a creative opportunity. Most people act like change is a question of how much continuity shenanigans you can get away with.

Now this I agree with, yes every change should bring depth and add something to game to deepen the story and the gameplay: it is also good to add more creative thinking to whats already existing and spice things up with small changes as the games story is not set in stone. Continuity is always a good thing I think to continue something thats good there is no fault in that what-so-ever. As for flying saucers The Elder Scrolls is there baby they could do that if they wish if they choose to add that to the world of Nirn then they can I agee there with you as well, that probably not be a good idea, but its a matter of opinion. :dance:

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:12 am

It is unclear how lore is supposed to be "affecting gameplay". In what ways can lore affect a game that devs can develop as they want, and refine as they want? is it gonna ruin gameplay mechanics? No. So?

The only things I can think of is stuff like half-races, liches, guns, or other silly things.

» Sat May 28, 2011 7:25 pm

The only things I can think of is stuff like half-races, liches, guns, or other silly things.

Half races would be a lore change that effected game play. Liches exist, and their power level has varied in each game so I don't see any lore changes unless they make them alive and not undead or something, guns while it would be a bad game play decision I am unsure how it breaks lore. They have cannons already, in 200 years they could invent guns if they wanted to and it would be lore consistent. I think people throw around break/change lore way too easily.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:18 pm

1. Can't choose between one or the other. If a game is boring or unplayable, I will drop it in both cases. It's a bit like asking whether I prefer the devs to focus on NPCs or on landscape : they have to do both. Gameplay is what makes a game good ; Lore, something that will make a good game unique.

2. Lore can't possibly affect gameplay : it's not set in stone. Todd gives a rather good explanation for that : the Lore is seen from an in-game perspective ; things believed by NPCs can be proved wrong. Sounds like a trick, but it works. So, whatever alteration devs need to do to the Lore becomes the Lore. They're smart enough to keep it coherent.

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:20 pm

Made by gods? Those little dragonlings I was hacking to pieces in Daggerfall the other day sure weren't exactly godly. Where in lore has it even been stated that mages can create dragons? Mages don't create what they summon, they summon them from the planes of Oblivion and the article didn't mention anything about summoning, anyway. How much do we even know about Elder Scrolls dragons? Dragons have been intelligent, flying, town-wrecking reptiles in most forms of fiction, and from what we know, it's no different in TES universe. It's never even been said that dragons are created by gods, which, again, leads me to wonder what people are talking about. There was a Smaug-like dragon mentioned in Arena that took over a Dwarven lair. In Daggerfall, little dragonlings were a common enemy. In Battlespire, a dragon was mentioned as having been ridden. In Redguard, the main character killed a dragon used as a tool by the Imperial Empire (there's a dragon following orders). A book from Knights of the Nine mentions some wyrm guarding a relic in a ruin. Skyrim has firebreathing monstrosities. In the end, it's also still a dragon being ridden.

The thing is that dragonlings aren't dragons cubs or something like that... they are completely different creatures. Dragons disappeared long time ago.

The only things I can think of is stuff like half-races, liches, guns, or other silly things.

With half-races... do you mean hybrids? Because they already exist, just look ar Agronak gro-Malog. Well, they are possible between mer (orcs included) and men, and they are basically like their mother's race, with just some atributtes from the father.