Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tellemurius]

I made a post on the Bethesda forums about this. I'll copypaste it for you:

Hi all,

Please note that this post is based entirely upon the most popular creation theory of TES, it is entirely possible that every word of it is wrong and that everything was created by a giant, bright purple elephant.

I'm relatively new to the forums but have been playing the TES series for four years, beginning with Oblivion when it came out. I am relatively knowledgeable on the topic of TES lore with my peers (and anyone I know personally) but I've been doing some more in depth research lately and have been questioning the sense of some of the in-game religions. We know that most mortals worship either a Daedra or the nine Aedra (well, if Talos counts). Then there are the DB who worship Sithis and consider the Night Mother a deity as well. There is one major problem with this, the Daedra and Aedra aren't the most powerful beings in existence, so why would people worship them as so. I speak, of course, of Anu and Padomay, the two primal forces. However, these simply being forces and not sapient beings it is understandable that people wouldn't worship them, so next in line is Sithis and Anuiel.

Why is it that so many people worship Daedra and Aedra and so few people actually worship the most powerful beings in the TES universe? Hell, the Champion of Cyrodiil defeats Jyggalag, a Daedra.

yet you can't waste Mehrunes Dagon.....

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

Keep in mind that Oblivion ignored/rewrote any lore that got in the way of making the world and plot as generic and mass appealing as possible, so it can't really be brought into a conversation without ending it.

[Heron TSG]

I wonder if there will be any Deep One cults like the one in Hackdirt in Cyrodiil. Hackdirt was pretty rad, if I must do say so at thineselves.

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

...if I must do say so at thineselves.

 

[Zironic]

I think the problem is truly an artifact of game development.

Game Developers often hit a wall between desired and realistic results. They tell marketing, Yes Radiant AI is working wonderfully, because at that stage of development it is. Marketing makes a great sell to people on it. Later on, Radiant AI isn't as good or the time that it would take to make it fun and playable is far beyond the schedule they want to meet, so they cut it down. Oblivion from its conception was an extremely ambitious game that aimed to do everything in an extremely detailed and engaging environment. The problem was they obviously did not have enough resources to accomplish everything they wanted to. Imagine all the time spent in Radiant AI and it's inevitable trimming down, and how a lot of that time could have gone into other areas.

The second problem many people have is the lore change. I believe it has to do with the writers of each game changing or simply not remembering what they have written previously. It has nothing to do with mass appeal and has everything to do with different writers and quality of writers.

[Rakonas]

...if I must do say so at thineselves.

 

Has anyone even gone so far as to do even want to look more like?

[Ioric Kittencuddler]

I think the problem is truly an artifact of game development.

Game Developers often hit a wall between desired and realistic results. They tell marketing, Yes Radiant AI is working wonderfully, because at that stage of development it is. Marketing makes a great sell to people on it. Later on, Radiant AI isn't as good or the time that it would take to make it fun and playable is far beyond the schedule they want to meet, so they cut it down. Oblivion from its conception was an extremely ambitious game that aimed to do everything in an extremely detailed and engaging environment. The problem was they obviously did not have enough resources to accomplish everything they wanted to. Imagine all the time spent in Radiant AI and it's inevitable trimming down, and how a lot of that time could have gone into other areas.

The second problem many people have is the lore change. I believe it has to do with the writers of each game changing or simply not remembering what they have written previously. It has nothing to do with mass appeal and has everything to do with different writers and quality of writers.

Considering all the evidence your assumptions about their intentions are a bit beyond naive.  It doesn't take bad writing to decide to change the established lore of a setting to turn something unusual but possible less massively appealing into something extremely derivative of a recent extremely popular movie trilogy and massively appealing.  It takes an intent to make something mass appealing.  We can't prove it definitively either way of course, but it's really a case of evidence versus faith.

[Zironic]

I think the problem is truly an artifact of game development.

Game Developers often hit a wall between desired and realistic results. They tell marketing, Yes Radiant AI is working wonderfully, because at that stage of development it is. Marketing makes a great sell to people on it. Later on, Radiant AI isn't as good or the time that it would take to make it fun and playable is far beyond the schedule they want to meet, so they cut it down. Oblivion from its conception was an extremely ambitious game that aimed to do everything in an extremely detailed and engaging environment. The problem was they obviously did not have enough resources to accomplish everything they wanted to. Imagine all the time spent in Radiant AI and it's inevitable trimming down, and how a lot of that time could have gone into other areas.

The second problem many people have is the lore change. I believe it has to do with the writers of each game changing or simply not remembering what they have written previously. It has nothing to do with mass appeal and has everything to do with different writers and quality of writers.

Considering all the evidence your assumptions about their intentions are a bit beyond naive.  It doesn't take bad writing to decide to change the established lore of a setting to turn something unusual but possible less massively appealing into something extremely derivative of a recent extremely popular movie trilogy and massively appealing.  It takes an intent to make something mass appealing.  We can't prove it definitively either way of course, but it's really a case of evidence versus faith.

There is no naivety. There is just a problem with developing a videogame with an extremely ambitious scope. Did Bethesda design Oblivion intentionally for a mass appeal? No. Did they have to expand their staff to fit the scope, thus adding new and less connected writers who made lore mistakes and themselves aimed to create a generic but easy to write story? Most likely yes. You assume they sat down in a room somewhere and said, "Let's f*ck gamers! We don't need them!".

Plus, Oblivion is far from something that appeals to the masses and was simply popular due to the lack of games on the 360 at the time. Secondly, it was in development far before the entire trilogy was completed.

Game making is far from easy, and despite it's faults, oblivion is still an incredibly fun game to play, it just lacked another year of development time that would make it truly superb.

[Cheese]

I made a post on the Bethesda forums about this. I'll copypaste it for you:

Hi all,

Please note that this post is based entirely upon the most popular creation theory of TES, it is entirely possible that every word of it is wrong and that everything was created by a giant, bright purple elephant.

I'm relatively new to the forums but have been playing the TES series for four years, beginning with Oblivion when it came out. I am relatively knowledgeable on the topic of TES lore with my peers (and anyone I know personally) but I've been doing some more in depth research lately and have been questioning the sense of some of the in-game religions. We know that most mortals worship either a Daedra or the nine Aedra (well, if Talos counts). Then there are the DB who worship Sithis and consider the Night Mother a deity as well. There is one major problem with this, the Daedra and Aedra aren't the most powerful beings in existence, so why would people worship them as so. I speak, of course, of Anu and Padomay, the two primal forces. However, these simply being forces and not sapient beings it is understandable that people wouldn't worship them, so next in line is Sithis and Anuiel.

Why is it that so many people worship Daedra and Aedra and so few people actually worship the most powerful beings in the TES universe? Hell, the Champion of Cyrodiil defeats Jyggalag, a Daedra.

The Champion of Cyrodiil gets a fanatic worshipper. He dislikes it. Varied violent deaths ensue.

I think it could be something to do with them worshipping their apparent creators. The Imperials view Lorkhan and his actions as the reason they were created, and also the actions of the Aedra who sacrificed themselves to become the bones of Nirn, the Ehlfoney. Their worship of them is atleast partially an expression of their gratefulness for their creation.

Anu and Padomay are also like Good and Evil, Order and Chaos, the opposites of the TES universe.

[Cecilff2]

What about Sithis?

Sithis isn't a god.  Sithis is nothingness.  The DB in Oblivion likely worship Mephala who masquerades as the Night Mother.

[scriver]

Spoiler: More lore nitpicking and douchebaggery (click to show/hide)

Vivec followed the fifth walking way(The other two tribunal never achieved CHIM from what I recall).  If you want a "God" in elder scrolls, the closest thing is the dreamer.  The Scarab that transforms into the New Man also seems to be a similar figure, though there's no records of anyone successfully becoming this(Save for the fifth era loveletter).

While I'm not very brushed up on the Loveletter, I do know that the Scarab is Lorkhan. As he is directly connected and cause of Aedra turning into humans, I can only assume it has to do with ascension of his people into the a sort of new godhood. A new plane of existance, if you will.
The "dreamer", by which I assume you're talking about the God-Head and not Dagoth Ur, is very complicated. I mean, as he is in a way the supreme creator, and in a way is also is the entire universe in himself, he is somewhat like a god, or "the" God. Then again, he is completely extraneous to the beings of the universe, and is irrelevant and unaware almost to the point of being non-sapient.
Personally, I have also always enjoyed the thought of the God-Head as an extended metaphor for the player himself.

What about Sithis?

Sithis is more like force of nature than a deity. And anti-force of nature, even. Worshipping him is as useful as worshipping gravity, or temperature.
Ninja'd by Cecil, but still.

There is no naivety. There is just a problem with developing a videogame with an extremely ambitious scope. Did Bethesda design Oblivion intentionally for a mass appeal? No. Did they have to expand their staff to fit the scope, thus adding new and less connected writers who made lore mistakes and themselves aimed to create a generic but easy to write story? Most likely yes. You assume they sat down in a room somewhere and said, "Let's f*ck gamers! We don't need them!".

The thing is, they did exactly that. Todd Howard, at least, is of that opinion. In fact, he distinctly expressed that opinion in an interview somewhere, where he said that making a good setting is all about making it recognisable to the player (and furthermore that Morrowind was to "alien" for people to be able to relate to it - wich is just complete and utter bullshit). This is all and well in itself, but as we can see from the results, for Todd Howard and the other devs "recognisable" meant appealing to the lowest common fantasy denominator. In the endeavour to create a relate- and recognisable setting, they went to far. They put aside every idea that "the player" might not recognise, and not very surprisingly, the result was a completely unoriginal setting, devoid of anything new or interesting.

Plus, Oblivion is far from something that appeals to the masses and was simply popular due to the lack of games on the 360 at the time. Secondly, it was in development far before the entire trilogy was completed.

Game making is far from easy, and despite it's faults, oblivion is still an incredibly fun game to play, it just lacked another year of development time that would make it truly superb.

Incidentally, the elven armour in the game looks almost exactly like the elven armour in the LOTR movies. Now, who is most likely to have copied the other one?
And a year more of development might have made the game funnier - and I'm not saying the game was boring - but it wouldn't have saved the setting or the lore. Forgoing Cyrodiil on that level was an early decision, and could not have been saved by adding things later. It had to be built into the game from the ground up. Otherwise, they would only have ended up with silly things like how each city had it's own architectural style - nice in theory, but the resulting feeling of disjointness between them was just awful and detracting from the feeling of the setting as a whole.

[Heron TSG]

...if I must do say so at thineselves.

Has anyone even gone so far as to do even want to look more like?

My coalescing coulombs in the gray matter exactly, my most valued companion friend.

[nenjin]

The thing is, they did exactly that. Todd Howard, at least, is of that opinion. In fact, he distinctly expressed that opinion in an interview somewhere, where he said that making a good setting is all about making it recognisable to the player (and furthermore that Morrowind was to "alien" for people to be able to relate to it - wich is just complete and utter bullshit). This is all and well in itself, but as we can see from the results, for Todd Howard and the other devs "recognisable" meant appealing to the lowest common fantasy denominator. In the endeavour to create a relate- and recognisable setting, they went to far. They put aside every idea that "the player" might not recognise, and not very surprisingly, the result was a completely unoriginal setting, devoid of anything new or interesting.

I'm one of those people that "didn't connect" with Morrowind's setting. But I still liked the game. Still played a lot of it. Would I have played more if I was more attached to the setting? Probably.

I agree they went too far in Oblivion trying to make the setting recognizable. But, I don't think the final appreciation of the game suffered for that in particular.

It's more, to me, they got so caught up in populating a world that they forgot to populate it with interesting and varied stuff. Like, someone up there said "How many texture packs do we have for dungeons? 3, and the Oblivion towers? Good enough. There's NO way that after exploring 30 dungeons, people are going to get sick of seeing those."

There were also problems of redundancy and "get it done" mentality in the design. Dungeons, again, suffered from the same problem. They were designed in batches with the same aesthetic. (Hub room, fake corridor, real corridor, hub, corridor....) Playing through them, I could almost feel the designer's brain going "Jesus, how many of these things do I have left to do? Cntrl+C, Cntrl+V....."

Not being a diehard fan of Morrowind and ES lore in general, I can appreciate what they tried to do to make the series more accessible. But somehow, in the transition from Morrowind to Oblivion, all the good things they learned from Morrowind seemed to be forgotten. Lore I can forgive since it's ultimately fluff. But when you're not even compelled to explore the ruins they took the time to develop because you, almost psychically, know exactly what to expect.....the game has far larger problems than its lore retcon.

One gem I remember from the Oblivion pre-release hype was they claimed they brought in a real Geologist to advise them on how to do geomorphology, how erosion works, and all this crazy attention to environmental detail. When I finally played Oblivion, I felt like that's where most of the effort went.

[Omegastick]

What about Sithis?

Sithis is more like force of nature than a deity. And anti-force of nature, even. Worshipping him is as useful as worshipping gravity, or temperature.

I have to disagree with you there, Padomay is the primal force and Sithis is the 'soul' of the force. Although Sithis has no power himself he's the only being capable of controlling Padomay, and can use Padomay to reach his own goals.

[Pnx]

I always thought the worship of Daedra being so preferred was mostly because the Daedra tended to be more active and vocal, the common person can actually have contact with the Daedra. Whereas the Aedra tend to be much more distant. Nobody talks to the Aedra, and actual power doesn't matter so much as realized power,

The TES universe seems to follow the law of "worship makes the god", which is to say they're powerful because people make them powerful... Of course everything is always in doubt, I could be completely wrong about this.