My god... there isn't even a point to argue...

LoL as a person with a deep love of sociology and history that sort of comment WAS very cringe worthy.

And some potions can be made with human parts. Does this mean all alchemists are cannibals?

Fairly baseless assumption. Backed up by no evidence, whether material, anecdotal, or hearsay.

Most of the Companions want nothing to do with that.

I could see a hint of good in each of these.

The Dark Brotherhood as described by the guild leader is a place where outcasts from society congregate. These people were not accepted by society, just look at Veeras the Argonian. The guild leader had a terrible childhood that lead her down this path. The Dark Brotherhood is the only group that accepts people for who they are and doesn't discriminate amongst the racist population of Skyrim. The fact that the DB are the only non-racists make them somewhat good.

The Theives Guild doesn't kill people. They specifically tell you to refrain from killing. They just steal to make a living in a poor economy. Sure, they live a little more lavishly than a homeless man, but they would be fools to live a poor, degenerate life when they can take advantage of the Thieves Guild to have a good life.





Yeah, that's nice, except the part where you forgot to explain why. (Turning into a Werewolf doesn't make you automatically bad, especially when you have it under control and refrain from killing people. Some even are trying to get rid of it.)





Again. The Dragonborn is good and so are the Companions, Bards college, and Mages guild. The Khajiits are also good fellows who travel in their caravans selling things for survival (supposedly a few bad ones ruined it for the bunch and got them a bad reputation). I believe the Argonians are good as well.





.

I would have to agree with you on that. Agree or disagree, the point of the social contract is a fairly significant.

My question goes out to all the religious and even spiritual persons playing the game. A thought is positive or negative by nature. The intent only focuses the nature of the thought. The act solidifies the intent making the thought a reality. So... by killing an innocent in a virtual world do you create a sin (negative act) in reality? I doubt any can answer honestly as the filter of the modern social contract allows for so much negativity. bliviongate:

Look for some "light" from time to time.

The part I think is missed on some people is that there a vast gulf between measuring the moral merits of events in the game based on modern real world moral structures(and there's obviously a TON of variation right there) and measuring the moral merits of events in the game world with the game world's moral structures. Lots of variation there too but there's going to be a disconnect if you attempt to apply the former and try to use it to make sense of some things.

I don't want to turn this into a religious discussion, but I think this comment nails down where the crossed wires are coming from. It appears you have an ethics issue with the setting of skyrim, which makes the opening of this thread more coherent. If you're going to assume actions in a video game have real-world ethical consequences, I have to wonder why you're playing modern video games at all. :whistling: The contradictions hurt my head a little a bit. If you are interested in making a "Lighter' Skyrim, the mods forum is a good place to start.

But I guess, to answer your opening question, yes, Skyrim is a dark morass of negative energy. When measured against modern society, the setting is dark and negative, with a great deal of adversity and gray-to-black choices available, and that's what many of us wanted when we purchased this game. Real life is already a balancing act of gray areas and unpleasant choices. In Skyrim, the setting makes the choices easier and the results more entertaining.

It depends on whether or not you think it does. if you think it does, it does; if you really don't care, it doesn't

This game is gloomy. the other two TES games I played were gloomy to a significant extent too (3&4), but I still played em cause I like em, and I'm a very spiritual person (though I have been known to go on a few killing sprees back in the Imperial City). Bottom line, if you think it's creating negative impacts on your life, don't play it. Simple as that

Whether you think is does is a filter of the modern social contract. I am not saying you are going to hell/purgatory/whatever for doing bad things in a virtual world, I am not even religious. But the overall intent combined with the act adds to your psyche as a whole. By eliminating the , let's say less evil" choices; Bethesda has in effect only allowed a negative path. Self justification only white washes the underlying truth of an action.

So once again, where are the "make it better" quests? :wink_smile:

I didn't say that either. Now why did you go and make a contradictory statement to what I said, even though I was answering your question?

EDIT: I apologize. I should have paid closer attention to your post.



Again, if you don't like it, don't play it.

Saving the world tends to fall into the category of make it better to me...

There's nothing wrong with your English which is perfectly fine

I totally agree with what you've said. I think Skyrim reasonably captures the grim and desolate environment of Viking Scandanavia. It's also done a good job of capturing the harsh life of these denizens (from a historic perspective). Old Norse settlements had sparse populations that were few and far in between. They ranged in size from major towns (best case) to tiny village hamlets (worst case). I think environment wise, Skyrim captures this best with major holds like Riften and small villages like Riverwood. I think that Mara priest in Riften captures this dark, grim existence best, when he explains the basic reason for marriage in Skyrim.

Quite a few folks have complained about the settlement and population sizes. The biggest difference between Skyrim and Cyrodil is that in Cyrodil, you could do a LOT more open sandbox game play at the surface. In Skyrim, the extent of city exploration you can do is significantly reduced. Much of the open sandbox surface game is restricted to crafting, hunting etc. Any significant surface exploration is now limited to traveling to locations to do dungeon crawling associated with the main line and side quests. But that is simply becuase the surface environment is so sparse and devoid of human settlement in order to remain canon with the game environment.

Same thing with the Imperial influence Cyrodil and Skyrim. For me, the best historic anology is the decline of Ancient Rome vs the Barbarians. In the Oblivion era, the Imperial culture was at its zenith. The game environment in Cyrodil illustrated this---huge immersive cities with comparable dugeons to boot. But in the Skyrim era--just like Ancient Rome vs the Barbarians---Cyrodil is in decline. Some of the Nord natives sense this and are exploiting the weaknesses in the empire's presence for all it's worth. So you would expect the extension of the Imperial's culture to be weaker in outlying provinces like Skyrim. You immediately get that sense when you enter major Stormcloak holds like Winterhold (completely run down) or Riften (where Imperial architecture is completely absent). So I think Bethesda did a fairly decent job of capturing this conflict in both architecture and NPCs types.

A religious viewpoint?

From a religious viewpoint (presuming the Western Judeo-Christian tradition), Skyrim is all flowers and butterflies.

If there were to be a videogame based on the Old & New Testament, you'd be sent on quests by God to slaughter, maim, and pillage entire tribes and villages (Deuteronomy 20:17).

You'd be scrambling to build a ship to try and survive God's global hydro-genocide of the entire world. The sidequests would include stoning people to death for working on Sardas (Numbers 15:35,36)

Matter of fact, that might make for a fun videogame, but it'd have to be rated advlts Only. It'd by far he the most brutal and violent videogame ever made. Global genocide and baby killing definitely takes the cake over the invincible children of Skyrim.


.

I've been contemplating making this game for a long time, but it'd likely be killed for it.

This, is the best comment ever written.
I just wanted to say that.

Goodbye, and carry on your philisophic and angry debate.

If I was going to go religious story video game I'd probably go with something from Hindu beliefs or something very very much like Okami.

+1

Oh so you mean Star Wars. :bolt:

For the most part I agree, theres enough misery in real life and many other forms of "entertainment", even what used to have happy stories have been reduce to negative after negative. It'd be nice not to lose all joy in games. New vegas got me, even with all the dlc endings no matter what you do more or less everyone is screwed, the story is rail roaded into that one point and you don't make a bit of difference.

But let's not label a group of people evil and monsters cause they look different from you, theres far more evil and monstrous behaviour in the empire which you'll only label grey with thier backs turned to the torture and murder of innocent people, even aiding it at times, then there is at the companions. I haven't noticed any Whiterun people being dragged off in the middle of the night to become a snack for these "monsters" or dissappearing for some other purpose and way to die.

Nope.

Actually very little anger or flaming here. Making for a decent thread.

The first post definitely sounded quite angry with "the game being aimed at emo's" and the occasional all-caps word.

Yet the landscape is littered with bodies and skeletons. I think no one talks about it.

The Companions describe feeding on the fallen as part of your overall intro. Eating people, whether in a sashimi form or as Soylent Green, is just evil.

what about Temple Quests? Need Divines Quests.

It's "not letting anything go to waste". It's also how tribals honor their prey, by using all the parts.

You seem really bent on using the word "evil".
There's no real "evil" in the world. Just actions and decisions generally frowned upon or shunned. I'm not saying everyone can do just what they want, it's just that I'm not one to say who or what is really evil. No one can.