187 replies to this topic

[StayFrosty05]

It is black and white, but I'm not about to spend 50 pages over exaggerating. If you can't see things for what they are, too bad for you.

If you can't or won't defend your position on an issue you shouldn't state it. This is a forum, it's primary purpose is discourse between individuals interested in the topic at hand.

If you actually think the conflict is black and white present an argument to that effect, because this entire thread is filled with arguments counter to that and I have no intention of summarizing them as a rebuttal to a non-argument.

If you don't like reading too deeply into the story of the game and prefer to just enjoy the game-play mechanics that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't mean the story isn't there. The Elder Scrolls games are one of the few series that actually have a good complex narrative in a rich and detailed game world that allows complex analysis in the same way one might analyze a book.

If you actually have an argument to make, if you actually can point something out that all of us doing a detailed analysis have missed and that can actually reduce this to a black and white argument then please (pretty please) do so, I'd absolutely love to hear it. Nobody is asking for fifty pages, how about a few paragraphs? That should take what, fifteen minutes?

I second ClonePatrol...I'm curious as well as to how you see this as a black and white issue?

[SFBryan18]

It is black and white, but I'm not about to spend 50 pages over exaggerating. If you can't see things for what they are, too bad for you.

If you can't or won't defend your position on an issue you shouldn't state it. This is a forum, it's primary purpose is discourse between individuals interested in the topic at hand.

If you actually think the conflict is black and white present an argument to that effect, because this entire thread is filled with arguments counter to that and I have no intention of summarizing them as a rebuttal to a non-argument.

If you don't like reading too deeply into the story of the game and prefer to just enjoy the game-play mechanics that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't mean the story isn't there. The Elder Scrolls games are one of the few series that actually have a good complex narrative in a rich and detailed game world that allows complex analysis in the same way one might analyze a book.

If you actually have an argument to make, if you actually can point something out that all of us doing a detailed analysis have missed and that can actually reduce this to a black and white argument then please (pretty please) do so, I'd absolutely love to hear it. Nobody is asking for fifty pages, how about a few paragraphs? That should take what, fifteen minutes?

I second ClonePatrol...I'm curious as well as to how you see this as a black and white issue?

No thank you. My days of proving something over the internet are over. It's a waste of time. I made my statements, and I really don't have to prove anything to you or anything else. This discussion gets annoying when you tune in and everyone is multiquoting like ten different quotes at a time, like anyone really cares. The reason I don't read these threads anymore, is because I find that forum debates are not only very over exaggerated, but they just ruin the feel of the game. You'll spend more time trying to pull rabbits out of your hat then playing, and anything you say will just get ignored and buried by the next 30 pages. People don't ever admit when someone else has proven anything... it's a waste of time. Anyways, I'm out. I don't want to get accused of trolling.

[ClonePatrol]

Spoiler

It is black and white, but I'm not about to spend 50 pages over exaggerating. If you can't see things for what they are, too bad for you.

If you can't or won't defend your position on an issue you shouldn't state it. This is a forum, it's primary purpose is discourse between individuals interested in the topic at hand.

If you actually think the conflict is black and white present an argument to that effect, because this entire thread is filled with arguments counter to that and I have no intention of summarizing them as a rebuttal to a non-argument.

If you don't like reading too deeply into the story of the game and prefer to just enjoy the game-play mechanics that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't mean the story isn't there. The Elder Scrolls games are one of the few series that actually have a good complex narrative in a rich and detailed game world that allows complex analysis in the same way one might analyze a book.

If you actually have an argument to make, if you actually can point something out that all of us doing a detailed analysis have missed and that can actually reduce this to a black and white argument then please (pretty please) do so, I'd absolutely love to hear it. Nobody is asking for fifty pages, how about a few paragraphs? That should take what, fifteen minutes?

I second ClonePatrol...I'm curious as well as to how you see this as a black and white issue?

No thank you. My days of proving something over the internet are over. It's a waste of time. I made my statements, and I really don't have to prove anything to you or anything else. This discussion gets annoying when you tune in and everyone is multiquoting like ten different quotes at a time, like anyone really cares. The reason I don't read these threads anymore, is because I find that forum debates are not only very over exaggerated, but they just ruin the feel of the game. You'll spend more time trying to pull rabbits out of your hat then playing, and anything you say will just get ignored and buried by the next 30 pages. People don't ever admit when someone else has proven anything... it's a waste of time. Anyways, I'm out. I don't want to get accused of trolling.

Then unfortunately you just failed at what you intend. It's true, you don't have to prove anything to anybody over the internet. You say you don't read these threads anymore but clearly you do. If you're unwilling to actually participate in the discussion, you're wasting our time, not yours.

I care more about the story of the game than the game itself, as I'm sure many do who have been playing RPGs since all they had access to were MUDs (or whatever their reasons). Having spent some of my free time on forums for years (including as a moderator on some, though not this one), I can sympathize with what you've said about not actually being listened to, but it's taken me a long time to learn there are those who will listen (even if they aren't inclined to reply) and your words if true are always valued. It's not those people that refuse to listen that keep me posting, but those rare people who actually do. If you could make an argument I promise you I would listen.

It's unfortunate if you actually have some insight that we lack, but honestly I doubt you actually do. To quote one of my favourite movies, "You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. Come back when you're worthy".

If you actually do have something to say that could actually end this conversation once and for all by reducing it to a black and white argument, it's unfortunate that others have affected you such that you aren't inclined to share it with us. Regardless of what you think we might think of whatever you say, there's no way to know for sure until you say it. Maybe your argument if actually presented can change our opinions, or vice versa (after we have an opportunity to rebut it).

Let's try and get back on the topic this thread is about though, if you'd like to continue discussing this further please private-message me (anybody else can too) or start a new thread in the appropriate forum. If not, I'd like to continue discussing the war between the Imperials and the Stormcloaks.

Edited by ClonePatrol, 22 July 2012 - 04:16 PM.

[fraquar]

I agree in-part with SFBryan18 in that the whole multi-quoting goes beyond a simple conversation - it's sole intent is to prove someone wrong - hopefully by making the other person tap out. It's obsessive.

I seriously doubt most of us on the board are going to change their opinions in that regard - simply because the guy wielding the sabre (multi-quoting) is only seeing what he wants to see anyway.

[Bhanqwa]

I agree in-part with SFBryan18 in that the whole multi-quoting goes beyond a simple conversation - it's sole intent is to prove someone wrong - hopefully by making the other person tap out. It's obsessive.I seriously doubt most of us on the board are going to change their opinions in that regard - simply because the guy wielding the sabre (multi-quoting) is only seeing what he wants to see anyway.

There's truth in this, but the way SFBryan18 worded his statement, adding "if you can't see things for what they are, too bad for you", it is provocative. It sounds like he's saying "you're wrong" as opposed to "well I see it this way", so it seems fair to me that the others request elaboration on that rebuttal.

[MacSuibhne]

To some this is a black and white issue. And yes, there are a lot of ambiguities and a lot of contradictory cues, esp. if you give weight to unwarranted hearsay and discount the Lore and the history.

But those who tend to see the world in greyscale are, in my opinion, more likely to dismiss or minimize the importance or the impact of people dying at the hands of the Thalmor. Or the fact that the mindset (attitude/policy) that allows the Empire to look the other way when Thalmor execute people without trial is not significantly different than the mindset that informs the star chamber executions at the very beginning of the game--mortis omnia solvit.

Time and again we see folks justifying those deaths "for the greater good." Nevermind that in effect, the Thalmor are already waging war...with attendant casualties...against a portion of the Empire, ie., Skyrim. While the Empire does nothing for the citizens who rightfully look to it for protection.

This is pretty black and white in my book...no excuse, no rationale can confer legitimacy on a government that will not stand for its people. In that context, there really is no Empire...only a functionary for the Thalmor and the AD. In other words, the Thalmor are in charge, and for all intents and purposes, are the government of Skyrim...and of Cyrodiil. When the Thalmor say "jump," the Empire asks "how high?" Skyrim owes no allegiance to the Thalmor (despite Imperial claims to the contrary) nor to a government that is unwilling (as well as incapable) of protecting its citizens.

In that sense, it is really the treatment (or mistreatment) of Hammerfell, and its abandonment by the Empire, that is at the root of Skyrim's aspirations to independence and the concomitant civil war. The Empire sowed the seeds of its own destruction...and of rebellion...with the WGC and now it is reaping the harvest. Unlike most of the Jarls and the High King...who swear allegiance to a foreign power...Ulfric, for all his faults, is a leader with a vision, not just another bureaucrat doing what he is told to do. In that sense, any vision is better than none.

All roads lead to Rome--you can point the finger of blame at this one or that one but ultimately it all comes down to the Empire.

Beyond that...and cutting through all the sophomoric obfuscation...logically, the Empire would need divine intervention to regain enough strength to confront the AD. The Thalmor presence in Skyrim violates Skyrim's sovereignty...it is essentially military rule...and, in a larger sense, critically undermines the ability of the Empire to re-group militarily. To the extent that the Thalmor have a similar or even greater presence in Cyrodill (not an unreasonable assumption), the Empire too is under the military rule of the Thalmor and cannot effectively do anything that would alert the AD to its putative re-emerging power. With the WGC, the Empire handcuffed itself and is effectively dragging all its people and provinces down with it.

Those are the facts as I see them and when you add it up, it seems pretty black and white to me...

I suppose, given the history of these threads someone will come along and quibble or re-interpret the history and the facts no matter how baldly stated. Or introduce elements that have no basis in anything but interpretation, opinion, and speculation. That said, "to treat your facts with imagination is one thing but to imagine your facts is another."

Edited by MacSuibhne, 22 July 2012 - 05:09 PM.

[StayFrosty05]

Then unfortunately you just failed at what you intend. It's true, you don't have to prove anything to anybody over the internet. You say you don't read these threads anymore but clearly you do. If you're unwilling to actually participate in the discussion, you're wasting our time, not yours.

I care more about the story of the game than the game itself, as I'm sure many do who have been playing RPGs since all they had access to were MUDs (or whatever their reasons). Having spent some of my free time on forums for years (including as a moderator on some, though not this one), I can sympathize with what you've said about not actually being listened to, but it's taken me a long time to learn there are those who will listen (even if they aren't inclined to reply) and your words if true are always valued. It's not those people that refuse to listen that keep me posting, but those rare people who actually do. If you could make an argument I promise you I would listen.

It's unfortunate if you actually have some insight that we lack, but honestly I doubt you actually do. To quote one of my favourite movies, "You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. Come back when you're worthy".

If you actually do have something to say that could actually end this conversation once and for all by reducing it to a black and white argument, it's unfortunate that others have affected you such that you aren't inclined to share it with us. Regardless of what you think we might think of whatever you say, there's no way to know for sure until you say it. Maybe your argument if actually presented can change our opinions, or vice versa (after we have an opportunity to rebut it).

Let's try and get back on the topic this thread is about though, if you'd like to continue discussing this further please private-message me (anybody else can too) or start a new thread in the appropriate forum. If not, I'd like to continue discussing the war between the Imperials and the Stormcloaks.

It's interesting you mention that, as for a matter a fact it has been your posts ClonePatrol that have re-ignited my interest in this thread...your take on the subject has made for an intriguing read and one I can very much relate to....Thank you for posting and I look forward to reading further.

[fraquar]

Without reading into the game, it's pretty black and white in my book - the Imperials want me dead (on more than one occasion). Travel down the road and I see Imperials hauling Nords away. A little further down the road the Thalmor are doing the same.

I'd have to have the patience of a 3-toed sloth in molasses and basically turn a blind eye to everything I'm seeing to see this as a shades of gray issue in the first couple of hours of gameplay.

Your 1st impression is usually a lasting impression, and my first impressions are anything but positive for the Imperial alliance.

[SFBryan18]

Well, I was tired last night, but I will add last that sides to the civil war are chosen simply based on loyalties, and nothing more since every fact is speculation and right and wrong in this game are matters of opinion based on your loyalties.

What is black and white about the entire story is that you can pin the entire rebellion on one man, Ulfric Stormcloak, and use him as a scapegoat for a reason to hate the rebellion, where as in real politics, a rebellion would have many more figures in the formula than one simple man.

When a rebellion occurs, it's usually the people who are looked at, not one leader. Like the American civil war, does anyone really care about Jefferson Davis, the Confederate president? No. And do you think George Washington was the only person to declare war on the English during the American Revolution? I doubt people said "Well, I don't like that Washington own slaves, so I'm joining up with the English".

This story might be slightly complex in your mind, because complexity is simply a perspective, but overall, it is black and white compared to real politics simply because the story only has two points of view. Three if you count the Thalmor, but the issues involved are simply a matter of who you want to take over and don't offer much more than that.

One example of this is Ulfric right to the crown... To the Nords he has every right and to the Imperials he's a murderer, and right and wrong, black and white, just depends on who your loyalties are towards, nothing else. Because tradition is tradition, but why should an Imperial care about Nordic tradition?

This story leaves very little fact and people are left with hearsay evidence that they use as fact to prove something, and then you get 10 multiquotes trying to prove it wrong, but you can't prove an opinion wrong, and hearsay evidence is worthless.

[MacSuibhne]

What is black and white about the entire story is that you can pin the entire rebellion on one man, Ulfric Stormcloak, and use him as a scapegoat for a reason to hate the rebellion, where as in real politics, a rebellion would have many more figures in the formula than one simple man.

Only if you abandon all reason and logic.