The "It takes place 1000 years before Skyrim" is a poor arguement

Kurkikohtaus

Iccotak wrote: »

They Re-Created Vvardenfell from TES:III with minor differences
They Re-Created Imperial City from Oblivion and gave it the Daedric Makeover.
They Re-Created Anvil and Kvatch from Oblivion.

If those towns and Cities look just like they did in their games (with Minor differences) then Windhelm should look just like it did in Skyrim

So if A=A, and B=B, it follows that C must equal C?

Not the best argument.

Fishoscandi

If you want Skyrim's Windhelm, go play Skyrim. Plus you'll finally have those dragons! Simple.

Iccotak

Fishoscandi wrote: »

If you want Skyrim's Windhelm, go play Skyrim. Plus you'll finally have those dragons! Simple.

Just asking for lore consistency and better quality in the base game zones.
Also I couldn't care less about dragons. We already have Daedric Titans

JD2013

The city was "sacked" in 2E 572 (a mere 10 years prior to the start of ESO) by an army from Akavir. The Palace of Kings was one of the only buildings to remain standing but damaged.

It makes sense that a lot of it is made out of wood and looks different than nearly 1000 years into the future, because they're rebuilding the city.

Hallothiel

A place can change hugely in 1000 years. Hell, it can change dramatically in 5 years.

But did not know that ESO & Skyrim were developed concurrently - very enlightening, thank you.

LMar

Faulgor wrote: »

I specifically remember asking about this shortly after release in regards to Dunmer Great House architecture, and they said they just didn't have the time/resources for this.

Now that we have some new Dunmer architecture it would be nice to go back and change at least those but as you said there s no money in that.

Also it would be changing cities and buildings that have been there for 3 years now so people might even complain that they changed their favourite location or quests taking place in some places would get bugged etc

Iccotak

For the kind of changes we are asking for it would be best to do them in about 2-3 years from now. And have the changes come with a DLC so then the make their money back.

Make Windhelm have some changes and characters say the city is being rebuilt.
(Or for press sake just say you wanted wanted to re-create Skyrim like you did for fans of Morrowind and Oblivion)
Have changes to Stonefalls and Deshaan by saying people moved there from Vvardenfel.

zaria

MarrazzMist wrote: »

I'm more bothered, how towns in dls's and Vvardevfel look so similar to earlier games. And then again, not too bothered, because I know the answer is various strings of development.

Seida nein look to similar, in short, underground structures last a long time at least tunnels in rock.
Masive constructions like temples last a long time, cheap wooden buildings don't last long.

Izaki

Dude a 1000 years back from 2017, Paris didn't look like it does now. Not even slightly.

Why should Riften, Windhelm or anything in this game aside from Dwemer Ruins or even older structures look anything like Skyrim?

Tryxus

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

Dude a 1000 years back from 2017, Paris didn't look like it does now. Not even slightly.

Why should Riften, Windhelm or anything in this game aside from Dwemer Ruins or even older structures look anything like Skyrim?

Riften def shouldn't look the same, considering it was largely destroyed somewhere in the 4th Era.

Windhelm on the other hand... well the city does have a similar layout as it has in Skyrim. The buildings have similar architecture too. Just the outer walls and the entry bridge are different.

Bonzodog01

If you read the history of Windhelm, you will realise that the city has been rebuilt and redeveloped multiple times over its history. The one we see in ESO is with the city only partially rebuilt after it was completely sacked by the akaviri in 2E 572. Why is it wood? Because its much quicker to build with than stone. That is also the reason the palace court is not completed and is still closed to the public. You will find King Jorunn holding court in a small house next door to the enchanters place.

After the reign of Jorunn, the city fell into a deep state of disrepair during the reign of Elgryr The Unminded, after he taxed the citizenry to the point of breaking.

Then the city was sieged and taken in the ninth century of the second era by the forces of Tiber Septim. We can only assume that further damage was done in that time, and by the time of the fourth era, the city had been almost completely rebuilt in a style that resembled the original merethic era designs, but was in fact much more recent.

http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Windhelm

asuitandtyb14_ESO

IzakiBrotherSs wrote: »

Dude a 1000 years back from 2017, Paris didn't look like it does now. Not even slightly.

Why should Riften, Windhelm or anything in this game aside from Dwemer Ruins or even older structures look anything like Skyrim?

It's more like 700 years. But ah yes, I too can pick a random historical city and a random time to serve my point. Let me try this, let's try Memphis, Egypt circa 3100 to 2258 B.C, Alex. I'm guessing without the industrial revolution, hell even the iron age, the city was a little less changed in 700 years than Paris.

grizzledcroc

Again this really comes down to dev time ect. I feel like if the game was all sub still they would actually do a redo of the vanilla zones . Just as it stands no money . Maybe they will do it one day who knows.

ADarklore

ArchMikem wrote: »

Well technically, it's only 947 years before Skyrim.

Still boggles the mind how much time that is yet Civilization hasn't advanced practically AT ALL. Hell, considering how far along the Dwemer were, it seems like Civilization is receding the more time goes on.

It boggles the mind? Look at our own history as an example... in fact, take the Roman era and then look how much was lost after the fall of Rome, the advancements the Romans brought most of it was lost. Look at the time before the Romans, thousands of years with little advancement... and then look at our age now, with most advancements being made over a short 200-300 year period. So no, it's not surprising that ESO's civilization hasn't advanced much in 947 years... nor is it a surprise that the Dwemer civilization was lost... much like our own experience with the Roman empire.

Emmagoldman

This is just crazy! The injustice!!! Lets get to fliping cars and slinging bricks until we get an answer!

Sorry, should we care?

Gilvoth

they build morrowind, Vvardenfell, Skyrim, and Oblivion the way they want to and then make up reasons why it looks the way it does.
they don't care.

JKorr

JD2013 wrote: »

The city was "sacked" in 2E 572 (a mere 10 years prior to the start of ESO) by an army from Akavir. The Palace of Kings was one of the only buildings to remain standing but damaged.

It makes sense that a lot of it is made out of wood and looks different than nearly 1000 years into the future, because they're rebuilding the city.

Yep. A few wars, battles, a little destruction... Places change over time. Does the White Tower, the Tower of London look the same today as it did when William had it built? What about all of the "for real" castles? Over hundreds of years how many of them look exactly as they did when they were new?

Why not get upset that Riften has the walkways and ramps in really good condition? Like new, in fact.... Apparently they should be waterlogged and rotting...

Fodore

It's not really a weak argument is it though.

Things change in 1000 years, just like they have when looking and Eso and the other tes games.

Silly!

Iccotak

This is Elder scrolls, not real life.

Pretty much all of these arguments about how real life changes so much, are irrelevant when the company is practically re-creating settings from the original games with a few minor differences to make them feel different.

Like Vivec City being under construction.
Or Morrowind covered in more vegetation.
But they more or less look just the same.
Anvil looks almost just like it did in Oblivion.

Now the lore arguments about Windhelm being ransacked have more validity because they concern the world of Elder Scrolls and lore consistency.

The reason why Windhelm looks different in this game compared to Skyrim is not because of the 1000 years difference. It is because both games were in development at about the same time and they were not working together.
Meaning they were not sharing art and concept work.

Also note how old the base game architecture is more cartoonish in exaggerated.
That's because they were leaning more towards a cartoonish art style during initial development.
Learning from their mistake, from here on out all of their content uses more realistically proportioned and detailed art work design.

psychotrip

Not to be that guy, but I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point.

It's not that Windhelm in ESO isn't exactly how it was in Skyrim. That's not the problem. The problem is that its portayal in ESO actually directly conflicts with established lore. As I recall, the bridge in Windhelm is supposed to be incredibly ancient, since the time of the first human settlements on Tamriel. It was designed with those lookout points so the ancient nords could look out for falmer and / or chimer attacks. This bridge is eons old, and supposedly dates back to the merethic era. It didn't just polymorph into something different in the second era, only to change back in the fourth.

There's literally no explanation for this other than Zenimax messed up. You can retroactively explain it like we always love to do in the lore community, but at the end of the day it's just a mistake. It's just like Cropsford somehow existing in the second era even though the player helps build it in TES:IV. Or the fact that the Imperial City is facing the wrong direction. It's just an annoying oversight.

TheRealPotoroo

psychotrip wrote: »

Not to be that guy, but I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point.

It's not that Windhelm in ESO isn't exactly how it was in Skyrim. That's not the problem. The problem is that its portayal in ESO actually directly conflicts with established lore. As I recall, the bridge in Windhelm is supposed to be incredibly ancient, since the time of the first human settlements on Tamriel. It was designed with those lookout points so the ancient nords could look out for falmer and / or chimer attacks. This bridge is eons old, and supposedly dates back to the merethic era. It didn't just polymorph into something different in the second era, only to change back in the fourth.

There's literally no explanation for this other than Zenimax messed up. You can retroactively explain it like we always love to do in the lore community, but at the end of the day it's just a mistake. It's just like Cropsford somehow existing in the second era even though the player helps build it in TES:IV. Or the fact that the Imperial City is facing the wrong direction. It's just an annoying oversight.

Well, that's different. If the ESO bridge is badly wrong then fair enough, but overall I love the fact that places like Windhelm and Riften are visibly different in ESO and Skyrim. Things like Skyrim Riften being more built up than ESO Riften give a sense of history, that these cities are alive and changing over time.

psychotrip

TheRealPotoroo wrote: »

psychotrip wrote: »

Not to be that guy, but I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point.

It's not that Windhelm in ESO isn't exactly how it was in Skyrim. That's not the problem. The problem is that its portayal in ESO actually directly conflicts with established lore. As I recall, the bridge in Windhelm is supposed to be incredibly ancient, since the time of the first human settlements on Tamriel. It was designed with those lookout points so the ancient nords could look out for falmer and / or chimer attacks. This bridge is eons old, and supposedly dates back to the merethic era. It didn't just polymorph into something different in the second era, only to change back in the fourth.

There's literally no explanation for this other than Zenimax messed up. You can retroactively explain it like we always love to do in the lore community, but at the end of the day it's just a mistake. It's just like Cropsford somehow existing in the second era even though the player helps build it in TES:IV. Or the fact that the Imperial City is facing the wrong direction. It's just an annoying oversight.

Well, that's different. If the ESO bridge is badly wrong then fair enough, but overall I love the fact that places like Windhelm and Riften are visibly different in ESO and Skyrim. Things like Skyrim Riften being more built up than ESO Riften give a sense of history, that these cities are alive and changing over time.

I agree. There's definite room for change when it comes to scale and detail. As others have mentioned, the world as we see it is not meant to be literal.

When it comes to very specific and glaring mistakes, however, we should call them out for what they are.

CaptainBeerDude

The city I grew up in looked entirely different after 20 years. No industrial revolution required.

psychotrip

CaptainBeerDude wrote: »

The city I grew up in looked entirely different after 20 years. No industrial revolution required.

Again, completely missing the point:

psychotrip wrote: »

Not to be that guy, but I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point.

It's not that Windhelm in ESO isn't exactly how it was in Skyrim. That's not the problem. The problem is that its portayal in ESO actually directly conflicts with established lore. As I recall, the bridge in Windhelm is supposed to be incredibly ancient, since the time of the first human settlements on Tamriel. It was designed with those lookout points so the ancient nords could look out for falmer and / or chimer attacks. This bridge is eons old, and supposedly dates back to the merethic era. It didn't just polymorph into something different in the second era, only to change back in the fourth.

There's literally no explanation for this other than Zenimax messed up. You can retroactively explain it like we always love to do in the lore community, but at the end of the day it's just a mistake. It's just like Cropsford somehow existing in the second era even though the player helps build it in TES:IV. Or the fact that the Imperial City is facing the wrong direction. It's just an annoying oversight.

Psiion

Greetings,

Due to the age of this thread, we've decided to close it down as it may contain outdated information. If anyone would like to continue discussion on this topic, feel free to begin a new, updated thread on the subject.