Sypron Posted May 10, 2007 Share Posted May 10, 2007 I'll put it in simpler terms for you. In TES:IV, you save the world from oblivion, so in TES:V The world will be saved from oblivion too. If in TES:IV you had the option to say, join mehrunes and have him rulling cyrodiil then you would need him to still be there in TES:V wouldn't you? They can't make TES:V have both the world being saved AND being rulled by the god of destruction can they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elpiggo Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 Unless you have, at the beginning: "How did your game end in Oblivion? Was it the world saved, or being destroyed?" But that would just be bad wouldn't it? Especially if you didn't play Oblivion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhydderch Hael Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 Actually, you can simply start off TES:V in a bad place, with the burning and the poking and the general application of nefarious nuisances. If you finished IV as a bad guy, then the situation in V is a natural progression from your actions. If you finished IV as a good guy, the tenuous victory we've already seen played out in the game is understood to have only been a temporary one: by the time V starts up, everything went from not-so-good to hell-on-earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SickleYield Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 I don't really see the problem with offering multiple endings and then choosing one as canon for later games, as long as it's clear which one. This is basically what happened with Warcraft II to Warcraft III, which were both pretty popular games. I'd prefer this to the Diablo II approach, where you learn that no matter who you played in I, they're canonically screwed by II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhydderch Hael Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 ...I'd prefer this to the Diablo II approach, where you learn that no matter who you played in I, they're canonically screwed by II.Which also applies to what I'm referring to. No matter the character, no matter the means, Diablo ends with a Phyrric victory: you won, and gain some sense of closure, but it comes at great cost. Come 'round in the sequel, the price demanded is finally paid in full during the course of the story, and things just went from not-so-good to hell-on-earth (albeit the Khanduran warrior becomes the Wanderer, the Sister of the Sightless Eye becomes Blood Raven, and the Vizjeri mage becomes the Horazon impersonator). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsi_899 Posted May 11, 2007 Author Share Posted May 11, 2007 Actually, you can simply start off TES:V in a bad place, with the burning and the poking and the general application of nefarious nuisances. If you finished IV as a bad guy, then the situation in V is a natural progression from your actions. If you finished IV as a good guy, the tenuous victory we've already seen played out in the game is understood to have only been a temporary one: by the time V starts up, everything went from not-so-good to hell-on-earth. Well let's say they made The ''How did oblivion end'' and you went to oblivion if evil or stayed in harmony if good? But if you did not play Oblivion it could start as it did start in oblivion, TES:V could require a save game file from your previous Oblivion game if you want to continue insted of starting all over again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazydave Posted May 11, 2007 Share Posted May 11, 2007 Unless you have, at the beginning: "How did your game end in Oblivion? Was it the world saved, or being destroyed?" But that would just be bad wouldn't it? Especially if you didn't play OblivionIt's not really a problem of continueity, after all there are only faint whispers about the events in TES III. the main problem would be in the lore. Every part of the story becomes a part of the history of Tamriel. But I suppose if they wanted to seemlessly use an alternitive ending, one way of doing it would be to actually have both the protagonist and the antagonist as the main character. The players choices will dictate witch one he is, and the other will be generated. That way each of them could (hypotheticly) do thier own thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsi_899 Posted May 11, 2007 Author Share Posted May 11, 2007 Unless you have, at the beginning: "How did your game end in Oblivion? Was it the world saved, or being destroyed?" But that would just be bad wouldn't it? Especially if you didn't play OblivionIt's not really a problem of continueity, after all there are only faint whispers about the events in TES III. the main problem would be in the lore. Every part of the story becomes a part of the history of Tamriel. But I suppose if they wanted to seemlessly use an alternitive ending, one way of doing it would be to actually have both the protagonist and the antagonist as the main character. The players choices will dictate witch one he is, and the other will be generated. That way each of them could (hypotheticly) do thier own thing. Yeah, guess you're right, but still i think there should be a good & Evil Main Quest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sypron Posted May 12, 2007 Share Posted May 12, 2007 That type of thing only works in games that have no sequel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.