In all the Elder Scrolls games you are pretty much forced into being the grand hero that does absolutely everything that there is to be done. Would you prefer to be a more anonymous hero who does their part to save the world. I love being a part of the picture rather than being the picture, i want to be part of the world rather than having the world revolve around my actions.
Basically, do you like being the sole solution to the entire world's problems?

I prefer to do my part, but not have the plot focused on me. Oblivion did a good job with that, imo. Sure, the character did all the work, but in the end Martin defeated Dagon and in the mind of the people, it's because of him that Tamriel is safe, not because of the CoC.

No, not really. Well. Okay, yes, I like being super-human, and I do like being able to accomplish feats beyond the capabilities of most mortals, or enduring events that most mortals don't get to experience/witness. While TESIII allowed me to choose my own motives for defeating Dagoth Ur and how I view myself, in TESIV I felt as though I was forced to benefit the Empire. What if I wanted to stop the invasion a different way? What if I didn't want to help the Empire, but help some other political faction?

If I do have to defeat a threat, I'd rather not have the MQ automatically force my character to assume altruistic motives.

I do like being the sole solution... but there should be more than one solution (path) to arrive at the destination. Sadly, in TESIV, I did not feel like I was the savior of the world - rather, I felt like an errand-girl, an attache to Martin, his right-hand lackey and side-kick, second fiddle.

Like in Bloodmoon, it could be possible to 'join the bad guy' - but, in the end, you had to defeat Hircine to save your own skin.

There was TES:II where you could be selfish...but you ended up with a robot stepping on you. Otherwise, you could pick the side you liked the most or the one who offers the best benefits . And in that game, you were the Emperor's lackey to quell the constant bickering in the bay area. Now how you do it is up to you.

That also makes the experience more personal, by having the choice to do things for personal gain. For example you could help the Empire defeat a rebellion, but only for the land they promise to give you.

I will put in three category:

Daggerfall: I pretty much like the fact that the PC is a PC and not really consider a hero. The ending pretty much pick which side the player like best rather then there a good guy or bad guy.

Morrowind: Again, Hero is not really well define here and I like it that as well. As Alaisiagae mention, one could even choose their motive at the end of the game when facing Dagoth Ur.

Oblivion: Pretty much a force-thing-down-ya-thoat errand boy which all choices been chosen for you and made ya some sort of Hero, ya like it or not. I did not like this one bit.

It would be good to choose a certain background for your character that gives him or her a certain amount of influence that could move the plot along, it would then be up to the player to decide which direction he or she wants the plot to move in. For example the player is the Lord of a fort that houses a company of mercenaries, he can then choose does he/she help people for money, for power, for hatred of another faction or for good?

Not to mention, QA, is that the former two don't force complete urgency down upon you, as the latter, OB, does.
DF: Took about a decade in canon. So in that time, you played the political game and did things to keep food on your table. To everyone, you were some regular guy. To the royalty, you were a pawn for them to play with.
MW: Shorter canon-wise, but your commander would tell you to occasionally do some of the MQ and keep your profile clear by adventuring, climbing the guilds and factions, and things other than MQ. It was pretty much "okay, I need this book. *days later* Thanks for the book, here's some money. Now buy yourself some nice things, and keep your cover; it'll be a while before before I digest all this information." You were an undercover agent, who job didn't require them to do everything immediately.
OB: ZOMG! GET THE AMULET, SAVE THE WORLD, MADMAN ON THE LOOSE AAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! You had to save the world, or else everyone dies. No room for fun time, daedra were knocking on the city gates.

Except I did take my sweet time, and the world was fine up until I gave the Amulet to Jauffre. Would've been better for all involved if I tossed the Amulet in Lake Rumare. But, that's a gameplay problem - no time constraints (thank goodness), but the plot was developed to give a sense of urgency.

There was no real urgency in Oblivion, even though Tamriel was experiencing a daedra apocalypse, the daedra would just sit around their gates and not really do anything. Although it would be awful if the game suddenly ended if you took too long.

Yes.

I would actually consider myself a Sentinel Champion for all the stuff I did for them, though I did not give them the Totem.


I dunno, people are always talking that the world is coming to an end, portal are popup everywhere (despite the fact the foe just stand next to it but will attack anything they do not like), provinces been reported for being attack, not to mention Kvatch been besiege and ruin. The urgency is there, but all in a sad "pause" and cannot go further unless PC does something.

I like being the hero.

I don't like the game assuming why I'm doing what I'm doing. That stupid quest updates and the journal entries always assumed the PC to be some kind of noble knight errant.

I thinks it is funny that after doing all the work while Martin was just reading at Cloud Ruler Temple I just got a lousy armor for my efforts... It would have been better to get a T-shirt with "I've been in Oblivion and only brought back this lousy shirt" written on it...

No, I really don't. It's such a cliche and old device. I'd rather do my part with others. A single man does not win a war. A single man does not run a country. A single man certainly doesn't save the world.

I like how it is in Morrowind, where it's not really been told that you are doing the right thing. You can believe that you are, and therefore making you a hero in your own eyes.

You are fighting a war you don't really understand. Is the the tribunal a wrong religion? Was Dagoth Ur evil? Are you really the Nerevarine?

no, i've never liked being a hero, i've personnaly wanted to be a driving force, but not a hero. i have my motives, and not all of them are pure.

But a married man doesn't even run his own house.

I think that I l;ove being the hero, but I can see why others may not. I think it may be cool to have people choose to be an overt hero or to subtly manipulate events and let other people take the glory.

This

though I don't feel like it was forced on me

The main character in Oblivion isn't much of a hero. S/he is Martin's sidekick. Martin is the guy who fight the bad guy while the main character do nothing.

However, I do prefer it like in Daggerfall where the character is much more anonymous, and isn't greeted as the Hero of Cyrodiil or The Neveraine by everyone. Anonymous is good

This is also why I prefer the original Half-Life over Half-Life 2. Sure, it's a shooter, but in Half-Life one is some unknown scientist and in the sequel everyone knows you and wants to kiss your feet and behaves like one is superman. It's annoying :meh:

I like to play the mini hero...the fixer of problems. You can do that in Oblivion to some degree, if you don't really pay attention to the main quest. The thing is, the more good you do for individuals, the more people end up knowing you as the hero you are. Fame might be an undesired consequence of being a good samaritan, but that's true IRL as well. I remember being embarrassed when they built a statue of me.

Honestly i hate being the hero, i mean seriously who is like that? While i enjoy being the 'good guy' i dont enjoy being the unbelievable knight in white armor who can never do wrong and can never lie or be a bad person. Seriously :facepalm:

I hate being the hero, I wish the eldor scrolls was not so linear in its game play. Something like fable, but in a way that I can't put my finger on, Fable is more linear then eldor scrolls.... in a way...

"The main character in Oblivion isn't much of a hero. S/he is Martin's sidekick. Martin is the guy who fight the bad guy while the main character do nothing."

Is that so? And I suppose martin was the one that could not get off his lazy ass to collect his crap for himself? Was he the one that got through 100 caves of pain for his random crap? Was he the one that had to do it again just to kill an purpubed tart who thinks he can build a new era? I think not.... :rolleyes: