Consequences of the Civil War

[Lessabos]

dwermer would never take over whole continent , they lived underground , thats why they didnt fight nords when their arrived to skyrim

[Lachdonin]

You're seriously overstating the issue. CD Project with the first Witcher game offered 3 very different endings, and none ultimately had grievous impact on the following game. The same counts for a likely TES 6. I mean, seriously, just consider the time skips involved. It's been 200 years between Oblivion and Skyrim! With enough time in between you can explain anything away. Hell, you don't even need much time! Take this: Ulfric and the Stormcloaks win, but soon people realize what an egotistical and racist ass he really is. Three years after ascending to the throne, he's murdered in his sleep. Variations of that theme for imperials and Nord alike. You may be Dragonborn, but you can't stop human treachery and desires everywhere.

 

Your mostly missing the point. In previous TES games, the canon continuation makes the asumption that you complete every side mission, regardless of moral implications. With the exception of the 3 or 4 endings in Arena, Bethesda has not given the option of picking a side in a conflict before. Did they let you pick between the Temple and House Dagoth? How about Shaeogorath and Jygalyg?

 

Giving the player the option of picking a side in a conflict which can seriously impact the the world come future games complicates issues beyond Bethesda's area of experience.

 

As for your assassination thing... Thats exactly what i'm afraid of. If they cop out and set things back to a predetermined standard anyway, why give the choice in the first place.

[ionianwarrior]

All they need to do is fast-forward the timeline. They don't typically let you import characters from previous games, so in all likelihood it might make a difference in some in-game history book or lore...that's about it. I mean, how many games sequels have you seen that start with: "XXX years have passed since the blah blah blah". Who knows, they could also just do a DLC that adds more to the war...perhaps the dragonborn becomes king/regent/whatever of Skyrim. In that case, the choice becomes irrelevant to any future editions. The inclusion of a choice like this in the game is certainly cool, but easily adjusted for sequels really.

[jhazor]

well they did have a game before when all sorts of endings were possible - Daggerfall if I remember rightly had 6 endings but the Canon outcome is that all 6 endings happened simultaneously in a crazy weird break in the fabric of time.

 

either Bethesda will write things in a way that will make the outcome not matter or they'll have some kind of Fudge in place

[Seviche]

That's some serious unfounded MMO speculation there. Care to provide more than your fears?

 

Well, it does create a very good environment for an MMO since it has established sides, a world with rich history, and a point in time centered around conflict rather than any one person. So, either they skip over the whole period of history with another time jump, or they play it out as the player being someone of moderate insignificance while the course of time plays out.

 

Then there is the fact that Bethsoft has shown an interest in MMOs and online games over the last few years, namely Brink, so it's not like they're against the idea. Combined with all the resources from both Skyrim and Oblivion, there's a half-continent worth of locations, peoples, meshes, textures, places... Most of them about on par with the level of detail shown in most MMOs. Character systems, leveling mechanics, crafting system, all of them easily adapted to a MMO environment. The combat system may need a little re-working, but can still work reasonably well with modern MMO systems.

 

It's not fears. I might even play such a game. I hate to say it because I can see it coming as a strong possibility and know that there are many who would hate that sort of thing. There may still be a TES VI on the horizon afterward, but think we will probably see an MMO before then.

Oh, well, that makes a lot of sense. :mellow:

 

Still, I don't think we'll see a TES MMO merely because such a system would force Bethesda to allow player to start characters that aren't criminals... unless the MMO was about the biggest prison break ever. :biggrin:

[bpestilence]

In order for an MMO to exist they would first have to fix every exploit and unbalancing aspect of the game. That's a lot of work for something that is only going to take a small market share away from WoW players.

 

If you really look back at the older games you will get angry, though.

 

Your role as Nerevarine in Morrowind and Tribunal was great because you stopped Red Mountain and made the Ashlands livable again. Oops, except for the fact that killing Vivec caused Red Mountain to erupt again in 40 years killing almost everyone on Vvardenfell, and weakening the Dunmer so much that dirty Argonians invade mainland Morrowind. The Neravarine himself, although immortal, is nowhere to be seen.

 

Your role as Champion of Cyrodill was cool, and you saved the empire! Oops, except for the fact that your actions lead to the death of the last of the Septim line, and thus cause the Empire to fall apart, and now Altmer and Bosmer are kicking the crap out of them.

 

When ES:6 comes out (in another 5 years probably), you will probably find out the same sort of thing. Your actions in the previous game either made things worse, or only delayed the inevitable.

[Stratomunchkin]

You're seriously overstating the issue. CD Project with the first Witcher game offered 3 very different endings, and none ultimately had grievous impact on the following game. The same counts for a likely TES 6. I mean, seriously, just consider the time skips involved. It's been 200 years between Oblivion and Skyrim! With enough time in between you can explain anything away. Hell, you don't even need much time! Take this: Ulfric and the Stormcloaks win, but soon people realize what an egotistical and racist ass he really is. Three years after ascending to the throne, he's murdered in his sleep. Variations of that theme for imperials and Nord alike. You may be Dragonborn, but you can't stop human treachery and desires everywhere.

Your mostly missing the point.

No, I'm most definitvely not missing the point. Your saying that the player's choice of who he helped at the time to win the Civil War will have great and lasting consequences, and that this will pose massive problems for Bethesda. Contrary to that I offered the example of The Witcher, where the player's choice of which faction he or she supports does not seriously impact the after-game setting, for the very simple and universally applicable reason that the player can't be everywhere at all times to influence and control things. I don't see any problems with Bethesda taking a sinilar approach as long as they tell it well.

[Lachdonin]

. Contrary to that I offered the example of The Witcher, where the player's choice of which faction he or she supports does not seriously impact the after-game setting, for the very simple and universally applicable reason that the player can't be everywhere at all times to influence and control things. I don't see any problems with Bethesda taking a sinilar approach as long as they tell it well.

 

Thats contrary to the way Bethesday works its games however. Your Oblivion character, for instance, is assumed to be the 'last listener', the Champion of the Arena, the Champion of Cyrodiil, Sheogorath, Archmage of the Mages guild, etc.

 

The way Bethesday referances past games very strongly suggests that the PC in previous titles did everything available. Meaning that they opperate under the asumption that you CAN be everywhere, influancing and controling things. As such, the Witcher arguement is moot.

[xlr8films]

They just do that to cover all the bases because there are some who wouldn't play as DB, etc.. I would, if it were my RPG and I moved my players from age to age.

 

I think that they will just gloss everything over as before and release another great game (in ~5 years, as stated.)

 

Too bad they didn't gravitate toward a more Fallout-ish ending sequence(s) where consequences and choices you made are shown in different contrasts prior to the credits rolling. That would have been a welcome change.

[The_Beef]

I suspect that the best way to resolve this issue, and to follow in the direction the game appears to already be pointing, is to set the next game some years later under a victorious Aldmeri Dominion. Whether you pick Stormcloak or Empire in this game doesn't, as far as the next game goes, matter: the Empire is still facing a shrewd and aggressive power that ultimately wins. The history books in TESVI will simply say that the Empire's strength, already crumbling, was further weakened by a rebellion in Skyrim led by Ulfric Stormcloak. This statement is true no matter which side wins in the player's actual experience - even if you pick the Empire, the legions have had to divert too many resources and the entire experience has further weakened morale throughout the Empire. Either the Aldmeri conquer the fractured human lands that used to form the core of the Empire, or they conquer an Empire that is intact but brittle.

 

Don't get me wrong - I don't mean this as some kind of "hahaha, the Aldmeri will conquer the puny humans" kind of statement. It's just that this seems like a nice, clean way to resolve the issue. We'll see life under an Elven empire, completely turning the race and political dynamics of previous games on their heads and making some connections to ancient Tamrielic history. It will be interesting to see an oppressed human population struggling under their Elven lords, as opposed to the opposite approach of previous games, referencing ancient history like the Nord conquests, St. Allessia, and the Ayleids along the way. Could make for a pretty good Elder Scrolls game.