Morrowind made it unique. Your foes weren't "EVILDEMONZ!!!11!1"

Pretty well made point there.

Off of that, I feel that it should be pointed out that http://www.cold-moon.com/images/Motivators/Alignments/GoodVsEvil.jpg.

Edit: And the Oblivion invasion was foreshadowed in both Tribunal and Bloodmoon.

You were fighting to save the kingdom from the rule of one of the Emperor's most trusted advisors, who had betrayed him and taken his place as ruler. To beat him, you have to travel to eight uniquely themed dungeons scattered across the world to find the pieces of a MacGuffin, the only item powerful enough to defeat him. On doing so, you need to go to the palace and use its power to defeat him, thus destroying Tharn and bringing everything back to exactly the way it was before.

Let's set aside the fact that "advisor betrays emperor and takes his place, lowly nobody has to stop him" is an astoundingly old plot and one that's arguably more common than "demons are escaping from hell, drive them back". Let's also ignore the fact that you represented Oblivion's plot as "save the world from demons", which is a decent enough description of the basic plot, but Arena's plot as "save the emperor, because he was betrayed", which is a bit of a side point to the actual plot (which is "save the world from pure evil villain"). Hell, let's even ignore the fact that technically, you aren't the one saving the world from demons in Oblivion. Even with all that aside, there's no comparing Oblivion to Arena in terms of clichés. Oblivion's plot is fairly unoriginal but has a few major departures from your prototypical fantasy story, while Arena's plot is your prototypical fantasy story. Arena's main quest (again, eight dungeons with each a piece of an ancient relic that can defeat the powerful evil you're facing), its villain (Mehrunes Dagon is a being whose very essence drives him to wanting the destruction of all things, Jagar Tharn is evil just because he is), even its world (a very standard high fantasy setting), visual design (Oblivion at least has the Ayelid ruins and occasional roman influences, whereas Arena is high fantasy right through), and most of its gameplay (Arena's stat system, races, and actually most everything about it is lifted directly from earlier versions of D&D, the absolute basis for every fantasy RPG, and changed only just enough to avoid a lawsuit... and I do mean lifted directly, given that Arena is based on the D&D sessions its developers used to have) are all literally entirely clichéd, without a shred of originality about them. I like Arena more than I like Oblivion, but while Oblivion has a lot of unoriginal elements Arena is one of the most wholly unoriginal RPGs I've ever played, bar none.

If you don't like Oblivion then that's fine, but don't exaggerate how bad it is or how good the older games are just as an excuse to rip into it. Claiming that Oblivion's story (or really, most anything about Oblivion) is more clichéd than Arena's is like claiming that eating a hamburger in one sitting is more unhealthy than eating twenty pounds of raw ground beef in one sitting - the two just aren't on the same level at all.



Except Tyrael isn't the big hero the entire way through. I wouldn't even say he's a hero in any of it, until the very end of the expansion (and even then I still wouldn't go anywhere near that far). He plays a supporting role in the overall story, while the character you play is far more important to very nearly everything involved.

Oblivion is very different. Martin is the main character. Not a supporting character but the most important character in the story. The comparison to Diablo 2 really doesn't work, because you're saying "well, Tyrael was kind of important at the end" and saying that makes him equivalent to a character who was clearly the most significant one in a story right from its very beginning.


Again, you're stretching things. "Delivery boy" is a given in any RPG in that you're expected to go doing fetch/delivery quests. That's not the kind of delivery boy we're talking about here. We're talking about the character you play as being a delivery boy for the actual, main hero of the story. The fact that the rest of the plot is very clichéd doesn't make that any less original.


The only especially original way it goes about it is the point about the reincarnation business actually being untrue, but even that it undermines a lot nearer to the end when a lot of the dialogue and events really tilt things in favor of all the babble about Lord Nerevar and prophecies being entirely true and accurate (especially when you go screw up the Tribunal afterwards).


Except that most of them were, with the exception of Dagoth Ur. There's not a single antagonistic character in that game who's in any way sympathetic or good except Dagoth Ur, and Dagoth Ur's motivations don't change the fact that what he was doing (spreading blight to innocent people) was just undeniably bad in pretty much every possible way.


This is the main point, and this is what I'm trying to make people understand. Every game in this series is unashamedly clichéd and absolutely stuffed to the brim with entirely unoriginal content. No exceptions. None. Except maybe Battlespire... maybe. Some of them (Morrowind and Daggerfall) develop a lot of their unoriginal content more than others (Oblivion and Arena). That does not make them stop being unoriginal, it only means that they put more explanation into the ideas they've taken. It doesn't matter, because (except in Arena's case, where we're talking about the absolute extreme) a game doing something that's been done before, taken alone, shouldn't be a criticism. Ever. EVER.

A lot of games lift a lot of ideas from a lot of places. They lift those ideas because those ideas work. The concern should be over how well the individual games handle and develop what they do have, not where what they have came from.

No game is original, it's all about being as unoriginal as possible.

Well except fact that there are still demons running around and people are "panicking" while the hero of both games end up going through hell and back just so that hell cannot control/destroy the said invaded place. Heck, it is worth mentioning the whole event of Diablo 2 practically goes back to Tyrael and the soulstone and how this would cause the Prime Evil to walk on Sanctuary to start the said Chaos. Tyrael is definitely important in the story, despite his lack of screentime, and in the end, he end up the one destroying the World Stone just to cover up his whole mess/stop the invasion, which may also made human becoming more powerful in the next generation and afterward. So much similarity with Sean Bean, in a way.


And thats that the thing though. The PC of Oblivion is just "Delivery boy" and thats about it. The only person that at least know ya did something is Martin but pretty much taken the credit of what the PC did at the end. At least both Daggerfall and Morrowind knows that the PC in their game is significant in the framework and their doing is known and acknowledge, whether its handing the Totem of Septim/Megatron to a party or just stopping bad dreams.


I dunno, I am one of those group that falls along with force the Mantle into the story rather than being a reincarnation of some Chimer, not to mention I would assume that being puppet or not, this is all Azura plan in starting what is now the Oblivion Event, though I forget exactly where I read that, something along with destroying one instrument that act like a barrier that prevent the demonic invasion in the first place.

As for all this "cliche" business, "cliche" is not bad, but as Kalarn said it, its about being as unoriginal as possible. Oblivion kind of broke the gray area and nearly went all out white and black. Shivering Isle just went back with gray but in Madness vs Order with a strange twist of becoming a god in the process.

Black and White and Black and Gray aren't any less original than Gray and Gray.

When I played Oblivion I didn't for one second think "hey, this is kind of like D2's plot" maybe it's the fact that in D2 I'm the one killing all the final bosses, while in Oblivion Martin is the only one capable at all. From the very beginning Tyrael is a freakin high ranking Angel of the High Heavens, while Martin is a bastard child who you basically has to tell what to do in the beginning before he pulls himself together.



We didn't do anything near the end, other than get the person that could do something to a place where he then could do his thing. I'm pretty sure I have a statue in Bruma which tells me that a lot of people know what I did. I wasn't just a "Delivery Boy" when I was the one sent in to close the Great Gate, that was all me, and consequently I'm recognized for that achievement, not Martin.

Tyrael's important to the story. I didn't say otherwise. It doesn't change the fact that your character is the hero of Diablo 2's story. Before the expansion's release, this wasn't even an arguable point - you fend off the forces of evil when no one else can and you destroy two of the Prime Evils. Other people mostly just help you. Is Tyrael still involved in the plot? Hell yes, but he's nowhere near being as important to it as you are, and he's certainly not the hero of it. Even in the expansion... yes, he destroys the world stone, but this is after you've single-handedly dealt with all three Prime Evils. Even the destruction of the world stone is mainly because you didn't quite manage to deal with the Prime Evils well/fast enough - he has to destroy it because you, the hero, didn't quite manage what you were aiming for, not because you aren't the hero at all.

Your argument seems to be "all these other things are similar to Oblivion's plot and Tyrael's important, so this is the same as in Oblivion's plot and Tyrael is Martin in this case". That just doesn't work. Tyrael isn't nearly as important or significant in Diablo 2's story as Martin is in Oblivion's, and the player character in Diablo 2 is FAR more relevant (we're talking powers of ten here) to the events of Diablo 2 than Oblivion's player character is to its events.



Which... more or less proves exactly what I've been saying this entire time?

Whether or not the "delivery boy" approach is good is irrelevant. I'd argue that it isn't - there's a reason most games have you play the hero - but when we're talking about whether or not it's a cliche that doesn't matter. All that matters is whether or not it's a common plot thread. And even on that point, not whether or not it's a common plot in general, but whether or not playing a character who has barely any relevance within the actual plot is a clichéd idea. It's not, and it's not something that I can think of happening in any other fantasy RPG (and again, Diablo 2 really doesn't fit the bill).


Given what Azura is, the relationship she has with Mehrunes Dagon, and the structure of the entire realm of Oblivion that makes absolutely no sense.


And as I've said, Oblivion very definitely isn't as unoriginal as possible. It takes a very standard fantasy plot and approaches it from a somewhat non-standard direction. Whether or not you're willing to acknowledge it, that's exactly what it does.

rabish12, I wish I could give you some forum rep, or a virtual hug. I think you make some excellent points. A lot of TES-fans have their lovechild of a game, usually - as others have said - the one that introduced us to the series. Such a nostalgia filter can be a very strong thing, something I know myself very well. An example of that is shown in this thread - first Oblivion is criticized for being too cliche and "standard fantasy", then the one thing that is actually slightly original - you are not the main hero of the game - becomes criticized too, while not being recognized as more original than Morrowind's "Chosen One"-plot.

I was introduced to the series with Oblivion. After that, I've spent loads of hours in Morrowind and some amount of hours in Daggerfall. And I've learned to love each game for what it is, instead of looking down on one game becuase it doesn't have X or Y that my favourite game in the series have. Actually, I've come to realise that Morrowind probably is the best game in the series, yet I still personally prefer Oblivion. Because of the more standard fantasy setting. See, RPG-games, espcially TES-games, I play to immerse myself in a great world. And what makes me love a game even more, is if I find a world that I would myself like to live in. Then the game become true escapism for me. And as much as Morrowind is a great game, I would not want to live in Vvardenfell. The place is too alien, dark and barren for me to ever feel comfortable there. But Oblivion, on the other hand. Cyrodiil is a world that I can understand and fully enjoy. It reminds me of a fantasy-version of mediveal Europe, and that is not a bad thing in my book. I would love to live in Cyrodiil, I would never want to live in Vvardenfell. That alone makes Oblivion my preferred game.

Criticizing aspects of a game is one thing. Doing it with nostalgia goggles on is something else. Then you go from: "I prefer Morrowind because I think it had richer lore than Oblivion" too "Morrowind is God's gift to mankind, and Oblivion is a dung of bile not worth the case it came in". Big difference. And as I've mentioned before - I love Morrowind, but the blind praising of the game and the constant belittling of Oblivion is wearing, and makes me sick of hearing about Morrowind overall. I daren't think what will happen when people get another game in the series to either a) whine about because it lacked X and Y that their favourite game had or b ) use it as another excuse to compare it to the least favourite game, and whine about that some more.

Lol. Guess who cares? Not me.

Then I can't imagine you'll be here much longer, but it was nice knowing you.

Wish I could say the same.

I'm quoting this because I think it's the most thoughtful, intelligent post in this thread. I'm envious. I wish I could say I'd written it myself. :bowdown:

But usually Gray and Gray is what base on the main plot of idea of the Elder Scroll series.


I play Diablo 2 after Oblivion but I notice some similarity in the plot of invasion. Obviously, the gameplay, the character, and their approach is different, thus the feel for the game is different for each game.

As for the statue in Bruma, I would assume that they would forgot who was that on the statue within the next 2 generation. If we ganna revisit Bruma in the future, this is a have too. Then there the fact that Martin's fame would completely overshadow all ya doing simply because he "singlehandedly" stop the Oblivion Crisis.


I would not denies that the hero of Diablo 2 of their deed (they are fun to play with and the mere fact they step beyond epic when they kill the Prime Evil, something the PC of Elder Scroll, save the battlemage of Battlespire, could ever dream of), but we are looking at Tyrael and Sean Bean. I would still consider that Tyrael is still important to the story. Without the Expansion, his overall story and the fact he ask as a beacon for questgiver is sure suffient enough. With Expansion, he went all hero destorying the World Stone, which would have doom the PC hero that just killed Baal, namely a completed demon invasion, pratically if not idnetical to Martin attack to Dagon. And this is in comparison to a bastard son that only has a history involves on shenanigans with daedric rituals and just stay in the Temple acting only as a quest giver until he "battle" and "Crown" emperor and taken all credit of hero from the "Delivery Boy".


But whether or not, it does "fit" the bill toward Diablo 2. Again, I can say that without Tyrael, the hero is screw. With Tyrael, I would assume some of the hero would go crazy from the experience but nonetheless, action is identical, destroy big thing to end invasion of things. Even before that, the common plot is the same with the whole invasion, cult that follows, with the bind of good and evil. Doesn't help that the "cliche" of Oblivion is alot more open in comparison with Morrowind and Daggerfall and the Hero of Oblivion is still a "Delivery Boy" to this day. If ya unhappy with the Diablo 2 example, I can bring the whole Guild Wars Trilogy and how each plots can fit into this idea quite well as well.


I recall reading such theory and how that they both are in lead with each other; I really, really wish I can find taht thread again but ya, Azura isn't the nicely goodie two shoes that it show us.


I would only acknowledge that Oblivion took approach to get much BROADER audiences and literally steamline it with action just to make all the Morrowind's complaint "happy". On the other hand, I think I spent more time on Oblivion because I find their Modding Community freaken awesome and I would recommend Oblivion for the PC for that alone.

No insult intended. When I said "you", I meant that as a general "people." My statement was about fact that most of Oblivion's depth isn't immediately noticeable because of its fast travel and quest arrow, so people who rely on those heavily will miss out on a lot of it. In general, my post wasn't targeted at you, I only quoted your post because it provided a convenient checklist of grievances.

We weren't talking about Tyrael and Martin, though. We were specifically talking about whether or not the hero of Oblivion being someone other than the main character is original. Your best example of another fantasy RPG where that happens is Diablo 2, where... the main character is the hero of the game, meaning that isn't an example of it at all. Tyrael's importance to the story and arguments about whether or not he's similar to Martin don't change that at all on any level - the player character in Diablo 2 is still far more important to what happens in it than Tyrael is, and Martin is still far more important than the player character in Oblivion. You seem to be trying to deflect or distract from that point without really addressing it, but the point remains: the main hero of Diablo 2 is the player character, and the main hero of Oblivion isn't.


Again, you're deflecting from the actual point I'm making. None of this matters because this simply has nothing to do with the point I was making.


I don't really care that you read a theory like that. People write theories on a lot of things, and most of them are wrong. That one would be one of them. Azura is the closest thing to a benevolent god within the Daedra, and she certainly lands more on the "good" side of things than the "evil" side. She's manipulative, but nothing I've ever seen about her character in any of the games or any of the texts in them implies that she's bad in any significant way (and there's a lot of evidence to the contrary). And even with all that aside, the Daedric Princes rarely (never, as far as I know) actually consort with each other in any meaningful way, and certainly not Azura and Mehrunes Dagon. Azura's sphere isn't really compatible with Dagon's, her goals don't really mesh with his, and (again) the structure of Oblivion means that letting Mehrunes Dagon run rampant does literally nothing to help her - Mehrunes Dagon's plane of Oblivion is separate from Azura's and she would never (and possibly can't ever) pass through it, so opening gates to Dagon's place doesn't help her in the slightest.

Whether or not you read a thread where someone said the two are in cahoots doesn't really matter, because nothing about the lore or the plots of either game even approaches supporting that idea. It's really just entirely wrong.


And once again, this really doesn't respond to what I've been arguing this entire time. This whole argument seems to be going like this:

"Having you play a mostly unimportant character and making the main character someone else is original for a fantasy RPG."

"Oblivion is totally unoriginal!"

"Mostly, but having you play a mostly unimportant character is still pretty original."

"Oblivion's a lot like Diablo 2!"

"Okay... but having you play a mostly unimportant character is still pretty original."

"But there's a guy in Diablo 2 who's important to the plot there!"

"Right, but you still play the main character in Diablo 2 and you don't in Oblivion."

"Oblivion made changes to try and sell to a BROADER audience!"

"Bleh."

Notice how I'm sticking to pretty much a single point, and nearly everything you're saying A) doesn't respond to that point and B) has nothing to do with that point. It makes it kind of hard to carry out any sort of actual discussion when you handle it like that.

Oh that the point? In all serious, the player in Oblivion is the hero and without the player, everyone dies. I emphasize "Deliver Boy" simply because despite how much deed s/he done, it would be overshadow on Sean Bean's action and stolen the title hero along with it. The fact that I mention Tyrael's importance with Sean Bean's important is simply this; there no story without them and both are living plot device in the framework. Without them, there is no game, there is no hero to call up, and most importantly, there is no hope.


All I getting is that Martin is the Hero and that not clique. That is only like what, the last part of the game? The overall story is still about demonic invasion by a cult with a mix of good vs evil.


Oh ho ho ho, to me there is more than meets the eye when we are talking about Azura, and if any Daedra fit the bill as "benevolent god", that would be Namira. Azura isn't as nice as she appears, but of course it manipulative, which I would cut that part out and say other things. Daggerfall shows us that it is really full of itself and anyone that talk smack about it are kill. Reject the killing contract and it shows Azura badside. Than Morrowind shows us that it forsaken a follower just to prove the Madgod a point. In a bigger sight of the whole main quest, its just revenge as the worship was shifted from Azura to the Tribunal, not to mention that it got petty and turn all the Chimers in to Dunmers. I would not be surprises that Azura was in league with Dagon, intentionally or not, as the Heart of Lorkhan was destroy and it may or may not make the barrier weaken as it was already. Then we got the case where many Khajiit are subjected to changing form thank to the moonphase, all thanks to Azura. Heck, even her artifact, Azura's Star, is really consideration of something that if its the borderline of taboo when it comes to messing around with a soul. Her title Dusk and Dawn fit her perfectly as she change from "motherly" love to a childish god.

As for "consorting" with each other, I am pretty sure that with all the talk of parties from the Madgod or history of them walking in Tamriel, I would not be surprise if they met up and call out old time. Hell, I would not be surprise if they use avatar to do so, and if not, they are gods; they can, and will, make it work.


Or I am sticking to the point but not understanding how I am presenting the point, not to mention it sound like ya twisting my word to make it work for ya. Point along with the whole clique thing and how it was in common with another game. And put on that "Oblivion made changes to try and sell to a BROADER audience!" hoping I say the line just to make a point.

My bad then.

The player in Oblivion really, really isn't the hero though. Yes, they're important to the story. They still aren't the person who saves the kingdom and fends off the big bads.


It's pretty much the entire game. The entire game is about helping Martin save the day. Literally from the first moment of the game



Can, and will, make what work? A theory someone made up with no real basis that's completely unsupported by the actual games? I think the Daedra have better things to do than make those work.

But really... you've gone this entire time saying that you saw a theory at some point saying that Azura and Dagon were in cahoots and that she did what she did in Morrowind so that Oblivion could happen, even though the two stories and the acts of Azura and Dagon in the two games are unrelated in pretty much every conceivable way. Not once have you explained this theory. Not once have you given any real reason why this theory is plausible. You've basically just tried to argue that Azura is secretly evil (she's not) and therefore the entire thing is plausible (even if she was, it isn't).

And as for specific points: Azura's quest in Daggerfall seems pretty clearly retconned just by nature of the fact that her personality in both Morrowind and Oblivion is more or less a polar opposite of what it was in the game (not to mention that quests in the games outside of the main quests generally aren't "lore" to begin with, especially not in the first two games). If you reject the deal with her, she gets a bit angry and tells you to leave. That's not a particularly bad side. She didn't curse the Chimer to be petty, she cursed them because she had given them vast things already and, in response, they... killed Lord Nerevar (who was more or less the hero of their entire race, and in a sense a physical representation of everything Azura had given them), supposedly http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Chimer - it wasn't petty at all. Khajiit don't change shape according to lunar phases, there are different kinds of Khajiit depending on which phase of the moon they are born in. This isn't something that changes - a Khajiit born an Ohmes is an Ohmes for life. This is not a curse, it isn't seen as a bad thing in any sense by the Khajiit. They worship Azura. Finally, soul-trapping isn't a "borderline taboo". I don't really think it's any sort of taboo at all, especially since the creation of enchanted... well, anything, requires the use of a soul.

If you're going to try and make a lore-based argument on this against me, you're going to need to brush up on it. As it is, you're in well over your head.


No, you're avoiding the point entirely by constantly making completely unrelated points. "Oblivion was trying to sell to a broader audience" is an unrelated point. "Oblivion is clichéd" is an unrelated point. They aren't what I was trying to explain to you, they still aren't what I was trying to explain to you, and they will never be what I was trying to explain to you.

And the game took pride of having Sean Bean stealing the glory in with a "cutscence" at the end of the game, not to mention they have some contribution of "preventing" hell on the World. The hero is there to make it happen, and strip of his/her birthright when we get to that point.


The Main Quest is pretty much stopping the whole demonic invasion while getting Sean Bean's asses crown to close the barrier. Of course, something bad has to happen and this causes Sean Bean to go all glory in the end.


Bingo, I found one of the thread. Red Mountain is Red Tower, one of the towers that bound the barriers of Nirn to the other realms. From this thread (http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1069259-towers-are-now-useless) and from the http://www.imperial-library.info/content/nu-mantia-intercept.

There is no way in hell that the event of what the Nerevarine did in Red Mountain and the start of the Oblivion Crisis coincidental. This is all the action of both Daedric Princes that fill the hole between Morrowind and Oblivion, just like Warp in the West.

Also, if ya want to deny that Azura is actually a female dog, but the truth is right in front of ya, all its action, but if ya wanna get formal, lets call this in "different" perspective. Azura tend to fit her title "Dusk and Dawn" of hiding her face of her true deviant scheme, which she would not show her nature unless she does not get what she wanted. Daggerfall shows us her true face and many book say so as well, even if its jsut a small fit, acting all "lady-like". As for what happens to Chimer, I am quite aware that killing Lord Nerevar is ganna piss off Azura, but the following fact that the Tribunal made themselves gods in the process which lead to them being worship rather than Azura would be breaking the boiling point to cause the change of the Chimer to the Dunmers. This lead more pettiness in the Morrowind's Main Quest. As for the Khajiit, I would consider that the fact that the moons causes such changes that I would question that this is even a "blessing" but rather a curse of Azura being a child playing with dolls and changing it to Azura's liking. The Khajiit are better off worshiping something else. As for Soul Trapping, one is trapping a soul in a gem/weapon to do the wielder its bidding, whether the soul want to or not, its pretty much slavery/"unnatural" order of the stream that all soul go back to when they are dead. Recycling soul with these enchantment? Maybe. Charitable act? Not so. Using the power against the soul's will? Very.


I am not avoiding the point but rather going right dead center of the points that are made, its just sound like ya not accepting the answer I am giving here, which happens to me many, many time.

I don't think you guys have read enough books if you think that the CoC wasn't the main hero of the game. It's the CoC whose role it is to battle the dagonites, Martin simply sacrifices his life to seal the gate. Martin at the end becomes a living plot device, not the main hero.

Examples; in American Gods the main character Shadow doesn't battle the bad guy at the end its his dead zombie wife that throws the spanner into their plans, she makes the crtitical move. In a book called Traitor it's a side character at the end who single handedly battles the bad guys, and the main character functions as a "delivery boy" at the end.

I mean damn Luke Skywalker is the perfect example of the CoC. He's the main hero of the Original Star Wars trilogy but it's a bad guy, Vader, that stops the evil ugly emperor. Just because Martin sacrifices himself to stop Dagon doesn't mean he was the main hero. Who sacked Sance Tore? Infiltrated the Mythic Dawn? Defeated Mankar Camoran in his throne in paradise? Virtually single handedly stopped the invasion of Bruma? Liberated Kvatch? etc etc

It's an uncommon story for video games (your character for one doesn't get showered with prophecies) but it's hardly something unusual for literature. I can think of half a dozen books off the top of my head where the main character of the story didn't play hero at the end and a side character or supporting character stole the show.

Lord of the Rings, Neverwhere, American Gods, Traitor, Shardik etc etc are all grand stories (especially Lotr and Shardik) off the top of my head where the main character and hero didn't save the day at the end. Just because games don't employ these kinds of endings doesn't mean the main character suddenly stoppped being the main hero. A plot device is a plot device whether it's living or inanimate.