There's a piece of concept art showing the same shrine, and it's labeled as "Shrine of Talos" or something to that effect, so I don't see any doubt that it's a shrine of Talos, on the other hand, there's absolutely no indication that the snake on it is supposed to be a Tsaesci, since we've never seen them before and don't know what they look like. What little lore we have on them identifies them as snake people, but that does not automatically mean that anything that looks like a snake is automatically a Tsaesci, and in fact I highly doubt that snake is a Tsaesci, or if it's meant to represent them, it's not a literal indication of what they look like, because it is in no way humanoid and does not even have any arms, which is pretty impractical for an intelligent race commonly attributed to have provided the origins of things like katanas, which would be hard to use without arms, I think, unless all Tsaesci are telekinetic.
In any case, I'm guessing that if Akaviri races were to play any important part in Skyrim, we'd have heard of it by now, that doesn't mean we can't have a few quests or locations where Akavir-related things play some degree of role, I mean, I don't recall hearing that we'd see a quest where we had to go to a fort once occupied by Akaviri invaders to retrieve an Akaviri amulet in Oblivion, but we got it anyway. However, I think having Akaviri races playing any sort of important role in the game would be something Bethesda would feel is worth mentioning.
Well it could very well be a metaphor or they could be young Tsaesci or a form that the Tsaesci can take. We know that they hate a humanoid enough form to rule over the empire for centuries but what exactly they could do or what their young looked like we don't know. The thing is that we have seen these snake like beings that look like that would be parasitic (vampiric) and one of them was being killed by Talos, which doesn't match up to the time line but it could just be metaphorical to show Talos as such a great hero killing a great enemy of Skyrim even if he never fought one (or maybe he did and like I said, some Tsaesci could've held out in Skyrim.)
But mainly, I'm not saying Akavir will have a part in attacking Skyrim, just that some Tsaesci could have been left behind or that worm/snake thing could be some really dangerous creature we have never seen before. We of course just won't know and this is just a speculation thread of course :biggrin:
Don't expect fans to be capable of grasping that. If they see anything that isn't EXACTLY like how they imagined it to be, it's automatically "not accurate", which makes absolutely no sense when you consider that the "not accurate" lore comes from the people who create the lore, and therefore define what is and is not lore correct, and thus it cannot be inaccurate unless the creators actually recognize it as non-canon, which they clearly don't (Yes, I know that the elitist fans here hate to admit it, but it's the creators of a setting who decide what is and isn't correct in the lore, not the fans, but I know that's extremely difficult for some people to grasp.) never mind that the original account which what we're shown is percieved to contradict is both old, vague, and from the source of an in-game book which may not be completely accurate to begin with.
I'm okay with people interpreting things only if it says it exactly because eventually it will come to light if it's right or not in one of the games but what gets me is when people interpret things in the lore that aren't actually there. Every time I see someone do that I remember the South Park episode where Butters wrote the book "The poop that made a pee" and it was just a random assortment of what Butters thought were bad words and then those that read it saw it as some deep metaphor on life and so on