Elder Scrolls online is almost entirely an evil game

Myrkgrav

Skwor wrote: »

Thank you for the laugh, my 55 years on this rock with 6 years in the military and having raised three successful children inform me otherwise.

Wow, I'd never guess that. lol.

starkerealm

Riejael wrote: »

Its ironic, because I have the opposite opinion. I believe the game forces you to be too 'good'. You don't really get to choose a side or have any real consequences for your actions.

For example, when the Davon's Watch gets invaded by the Covenant. You have to be pro Pact. You can't just throw the town under the bus and help the invaders. And why shouldn't we be able to?

It goes back to the original design. When the game launched you picked an alliance and you were locked into their PvE content. When you'd eventually get access to the other zones it was via Daedric trickery.

The assumption is, when you stagger into Davon's Watch, the village that rescued you came under Covenant attack, and they harried you through Bal Foyen, killing the friends and family of the people who'd been helping you. Turning and trying to go out and join the Covenant likely wouldn't end well, because you'd be viewed as a hostile local, which is exactly what does happen. You can't try to join up with the Covenant forces because they'll attack you on sight. So, your options are to pitch in and aid in the defense, or simply wander off and go your own way.

AlnilamE

I'm guessing this is the OP's first venture into Tamriel. Particularly if he thought highly of the "High Elves".

You can be as you want in this game. I have guildies who refuse to steal or kill innocents. Others have certain characters that are "good" while others are less honourable.

There are quests I have not taken after the first time because I don't agree with the outcomes and I think leaving them undone is better for the quest giver.

There are quests that offer to bribe you for an "evil" outcome that you can try to rationalize. Your choices are yours. I think it's one of the things that's nice about the game.

Skwor

Myrkgrav wrote: »

Skwor wrote: »

Thank you for the laugh, my 55 years on this rock with 6 years in the military and having raised three successful children inform me otherwise.

Wow, I'd never guess that. lol.

I am pretty sure you are attempting to use an ad hominen here, that you may be pretty much undermines any points you would hope to make
🤔

Aznarb

I disagree, I think most ESO quest/story are very good because their is rarely a ***-edgy-lordy side/person and one angelic-holy-shinnie one too.

Most ESO story I've run get some guy with complex/normal story where they had to made hard choice to survive, or just made tragic error because of X situation.
And if you take the politic and event in Tamriel, it make sense, it's a dark fantasy world with war, powerful entities making fun of poor human condition, etc..

That why I love this game, it's not just full cliché, their is a lot of thing who make you feel the npc are "true" with their one story.

Same for the player, you can make some choice (assassin guild, thieve one, mage one, kill a guy or let him live, etc..)
It's not gonna impact the game for obvious reason, but it's still a good thing for a bit of rp and freedom.

But, TBH, I still wait a npc whit unique hiddent quest than only the 1st player who find it can do it and have an real impact and change in the world story, that what all MMORPG miss imho.

Pink_E_808

For some reason, this thread makes me quite proud of the fact that my main has probably fenced enough items to be a Black Market Mogul several times over.

Starlock

Are.... are we playing the same game?

Iluvrien

Parts of this quoted post highlight my issue with the way that things are currently set up. (It should be noted that I am addressing the sentiments in general, not in rebuttal to the poster)

AlnilamE wrote: »

You can be as you want in this game. I have guildies who refuse to steal or kill innocents. Others have certain characters that are "good" while others are less honourable.

#1: We can be as good as we want.

AlnilamE wrote: »

There are quests I have not taken after the first time because I don't agree with the outcomes and I think leaving them undone is better for the quest giver.

#2: There are some quests that have no good outcome.

In some of the currently available quests statements #1 and #2 are mutually exclusive.

Two quests spring to mind ("A Marriage in Ruins" was one, I'd have to search for the name of the other) where my character was in a position to either discover a hidden truth early, or just straight up disbelieve what they were being told. Had that been factored into the quest design then suffering could have been prevented. A better "good" option may have existed.

Obviously all possibilities are impossible to incorporate. However, let us therefore not kid ourselves. The quest outcomes quite often have less to do with being the organic outcome of earlier actions, and far more to do with a railroad heading towards an intended conclusion. And some of those conclusions are not predictable based on the information you are originally supplied with.

If your character (player) is having to make uncomfortable decisions, then it is because ZOS want them (you) to have to make those decisions. Let's not pretend this is about verisimilitude. This is about writing the Bad End because they want the Bad End.

Riejael

starkerealm wrote: »

It goes back to the original design. When the game launched you picked an alliance and you were locked into their PvE content. When you'd eventually get access to the other zones it was via Daedric trickery..

I played back then, and thought the same thing. Why can't I help the Covenant sack the city? Change up the questlines from then onward. The vestige is the reason Davon's Watch exists. Why can't the vestige decide to help destroy the city, or let it succumb to invasion?

That's the point I'm making.

Aulus_Claudius

I definitely agree that they've made the Thieves' Guild and Dark Brotherhood too one-sided. It's very immersion-breaking to be playing my lawful-good Templar, watch a player steal from and murder an NPC in front of me, and just keep walking without being able to do anything about it.

It would be a very interesting mechanic if players could call the guards for a small bounty if they successfully apprehend the thief/murderer, for example.

Urvoth

Nah, all the main quests force you to be the goody two shoes savior so I’d definitely disagree about that.

There aren’t many options or questlines, if any most of the time, to actually take the dark side approach. Compare that to something like SWTOR where the dialogue and storylines actually allow you to play as a bad guy archetype.

worrallj

Riejael wrote: »

Its ironic, because I have the opposite opinion. I believe the game forces you to be too 'good'. You don't really get to choose a side or have any real consequences for your actions.

For example, when the Davon's Watch gets invaded by the Covenant. You have to be pro Pact. You can't just throw the town under the bus and help the invaders. And why shouldn't we be able to? We know the places can be phased. When you do the Harborage quests, you don't have the option to kill off the other adventurers, shank Mannimarco and take his place with Molag Bal.

You are railroaded into completing the story in each zone a certain way. Sure you have the option to do it in a mean way or as the OP says 'evil'. But its minor acts of evil compared to the big picture. You have no option really to be the villain. No matter how much of a *** you are, you are still seen as a hero of the land when you complete the questlines.

One game that handled villainous actions well, though primitively, was Everquest. Lets say you were playing a Agnostic Human Warrior and you decided to visit the elves in their forest. You have the literal option to maim and kill every elf you see, including the guards protecting the city. Do this enough and the Orcs nearby will like you, and the dark elves will also like you.

Benefits include being able to enter some evil cities, consequences are you can no longer enter some good cities without being attacked.

I wish more games would do this. And have systems that help and even encourage divergent gameplay and character morals.We don't always need to be heroes.

Agreed, but I really don't think it's about good vs evil persay, more just that there's no player choice. I was hugely disappointed in orsinium when I couldn't choose to play through backing either malacath vs trinimac. Just forced to be Kurog's butt monkey. No player choice really at all. Otherwise a great game don't get me wrong, but in this one aspect every update since launch has been a huge disappointment. After rollout I guess they couldn't handle all the phasing and just went 100% watching a story unfold that you have zero control over.

Ectheliontnacil

Skwor wrote: »

Myrkgrav wrote: »

Skwor wrote: »

Fundamental fact of life, everyone is born bad, we all have to be taught how to be good and even then we are still mostly bad.

Some never accept this and even try to deny it, unfortunatly to thier own misfortune.

ESO tends to mirror this and imo most good MMOs do that.

It's quite the opposite actually, but I remember being an edgy teenager so I'll forgive this transgression.

Thank you for the laugh, my 55 years on this rock with 6 years in the military and having raised three successful children inform me otherwise.

Must have been a hell of a dad haha.

Teacher: Your son got into a fight, you should discourage this behaviour.

This guy: Should I teach my son to deny the fact that he is inherently evil???

Also being born bad and staying that way for the rest of your life is a claim you can in no way back up.

Kiralyn2000

I'm reminded of some old threads I saw on the Skyrim & Oblivion forums - "The game won't let me play a good character! I have to kill things! "


Uh....

starkerealm

Aulus_Claudius wrote: »

I definitely agree that they've made the Thieves' Guild and Dark Brotherhood too one-sided. It's very immersion-breaking to be playing my lawful-good Templar, watch a player steal from and murder an NPC in front of me, and just keep walking without being able to do anything about it.

It would be a very interesting mechanic if players could call the guards for a small bounty if they successfully apprehend the thief/murderer, for example.

Then don't play it on your Templar. I haven't.

Aulus_Claudius

starkerealm wrote: »

Then don't play it on your Templar. I haven't.

I haven't, either. I'm talking about seeing other players steal and murder and just watching and walking by. A lot of people in this thread have made parallels to real life, but most folks don't go around murdering others just for walking down the street, and there are consequences to doing so. Such comparisons fly out the window when you can't even report a crime that just took place in front of you. IRL in many jurisdictions that's the same as being complicit in the crime.

Now, clearly this is a game, but that was to answer the people drawing comparisons to how evil people are IRL. As a game, I find it very immersion-breaking (not game-breaking) for there to be nothing at all I can do about it. At the very least, it'd be nice to have a button to alert the guards within a certain radius of the crime being committed.

TigerSeptim

Speaking of The Old Republic, my least-proud moment was hunting down someone (his name escapes me) and being given the choice of fighting him or ending his life instantly. It was late, I was tired, and so I chose to just shoot him. And, you know, I was playing as a bounty hunter.

I don't feel guilty for murdering an NPC in a video game. Indeed, TOR gives you the option of being a "good" Sith Lord! It would be nice to play that way in ESO as well- as someone who uses foul means to achieve a good result, also called an antihero.

There are things I object to in ESO, like the guards being invincible and (shame on you, devs!) making us have to join the Fighters' or Mages Guild, respectively, in order to intimidate or persuade someone. What about simply giving members of those factions a bonus to intimidation or persuasion; and why do they always work?

Anyway, it's a video game. Play it however you want to, and don't feel bad for making evil decisions in it! Excuse this one; he hears Tamriel beckoning.

StormeReigns

Sometimes... the most evil thing one can do - is letting someone live.
Was it a right choice? Was that lone sniveling person really worth saving?
Is there more to them then they appear to present to you?
Are they some evil mastermind, or were they the next savior?

I am a firm believer that choices should be relevant in everything we do. From Neutral NPC killings to quest completions - we should be tasked with choices and consequences (good or bad) and they should impact out surroundings in a sense.

Kill Neutral NPCs long enough... they now will mock and insult you, then eventually attack you (and drop unique goodies).
Help them out, donations, gold, food, etc. They reward you with unique goodies.

Help certain NPCs out, find out you just helped the next great good guy or big baddy doom boss after the help, and now forced to live with that choice on that character forever and get unique buffs to fight against certain mobs or walk past with out issues.

Blindly being Good / Bad is boring... I want my actions to dictate the outcome.
Random NPC: You could have saved us from this murderous crime spree if you just let "<rando npc name>" die, why did you save him... not everyone is worth savinurghblurgarg... ... ... (Good Guy Gregs would save everyone, but is everyone worth saving?)
** Random NPC suddenly dies **
<Random NPC Name>: Thanks for letting me live back there... Here is cut of my spoils...

Or

Rando NPC: Thanks for saving me, here is a gift, you should come visit now an then, my followers wish to give you thanks, you helped us, which allows us to help <town name> now we prosper and praise the goodness that you have done ... come see what we have done...
(Did you just create a cult? Or did you truly save a town that is thankful for your actions?)

tinythinker

The theme for TES games, however well or poorly you think the developers for a particular installment have followed it, is "morally grey". You start out as a prisoner and have to save some or all of Tamriel. The methods you use to do that are your own choice.

You can be thoughtful and kind in ESO as you want to be, but you can also be a jerk. Just so long as you stop the Planemeld and other events associated with particular DLC or Chapters. And as mentioned this would mean skipping joining organizations that steal and kill.

In terms of groups, organizations, and factions, none of them are perfect. For example, one of the heroes of the Covenant wrote a letter to a member of the forces invading Stonefalls suggesting how to hurt some beastfolk and cause trouble for the local villages. In the Thieves Guild, we still see some members acting within their own version of honor and even being charitable at times. And so on.

What some folks are getting at is more about:

• Choices
• Consequences

There aren't going to be "wholly evil" or "wholly good" groups to join in Tamriel, just groups with particular missions or causes and different limits on how far they will go to achieve those goals. The Order of the Silver Dawn fights werewolves, yet isn't above torturing them to death to extract information. Other groups have narrower limits on what they will do but will often still resort to some form of violence as a means to an end.

CHOICES

There aren't options to work against TG or DB, which would be very fun! Not to increase the good options as the singular or primary goal, but to add more choices. I mean, let's say I am working with some group trying to stop the DB. That doesn't mean every plot point would be kind or thoughtful. There might be a quest to assassinate some of its members because they are "too dangerous" to capture. Or maybe it's to send a message. In some cases that might just be the quest, take it or leave it. At other times, I might have a red text choice to disobey and try some other method. But in the end I still don't get the DB skill line since I made the choice to oppose them. And my actions would have to have limited effects that don't ruin the main plot of the DB story.

Assuming such things aren't retroactively added to existing DLC, there are still chances to add options to join vampire-hunters, werewolf hunters, and bounty hunters working for the law. Again, that won't make them moral champions or paragons of virtue, just a different side to the story. Too bad they nixed player vs. player bounties. That would have allowed for more interesting complexity based on players' own interactions.

Another direction would be adding groups that are strictly charitable, such as an NPC faction that collects and crafts items to help those affected by the war. It would, like most repeatable things, become strongly repetitive after a while even with heavy procedural generation, but you might travel to a burned out home and use woodworking to fix it up then watch an NPC family come back to live there and thank you. Same with bringing refugees some clothing or food you crafted. And again, were you just being nice or trying to help out the war effort or acting for some other reason? That's up to you to decide.

CONSEQUENCES

You frequently have the chance to chose to be kind and helpful. Random brigands are assailing a merchant or traveler in the open world. Do you intervene? Or you can choose a quest option that shows you are generous or merciful. Yet, in the end it makes next to no different in the game world itself. Being rude or selfish in one quest doesn't really show up in other quests (there may be one or two cases of this I'm forgetting but that's how rare it is). And there is no faction reputation that increases or decreases because of your choices other than some NPCs ignoring you if your bounty is to high.

And, therefore, you often don't feel like your character is particularly "good" or "bad". Unless you have a strong head-canon game. I can't speak to the coding or system strain that would be involved in adding more enduring or interesting consequences, but it doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Waffennacht

All the Good Daedra became the "earth bones" etc

Literally all the Good "God's" are gone

Skwor

Ectheliontnacil wrote: »

Skwor wrote: »

Myrkgrav wrote: »

Skwor wrote: »

Fundamental fact of life, everyone is born bad, we all have to be taught how to be good and even then we are still mostly bad.

Some never accept this and even try to deny it, unfortunatly to thier own misfortune.

ESO tends to mirror this and imo most good MMOs do that.

It's quite the opposite actually, but I remember being an edgy teenager so I'll forgive this transgression.

Thank you for the laugh, my 55 years on this rock with 6 years in the military and having raised three successful children inform me otherwise.

Must have been a hell of a dad haha.

Teacher: Your son got into a fight, you should discourage this behaviour.

This guy: Should I teach my son to deny the fact that he is inherently evil???

Also being born bad and staying that way for the rest of your life is a claim you can in no way back up.

You are not following the concept. Try to define good first, it really is not so easy. Unless you can claim anyone is perfectly good you will find yourself struggling to argue against my position

Have you known anyone to never do wrong? To use a cliche, I never saw a child taught to lie but all I have known had to be taught not to lie.

Aztrias

TES is the only fantasy series were I actually like Elves, the good, perfect and beautiful elves of other settings are such a bore.

Goregrinder

Is this post serious? You think this game is Evil? What standards are you comparing it to, Wizard 101?

Neoealth

Yes I kind of agree with you op in the sense that there is a lack of stuff to do for players who want to RP a righteous good character. As you say you can just not do the dark brotherhood or thieves guild content if you wish, but you get nothing for it.

I'd love like some faction to join that focuses on the 8 divines, a quest line that focuses on catching or killing the bad guys, or protecting the weak. Probably asking way to much though. I honestly don't expect anything like that.

Girl_Number8

Well, I am for one happy at how nice and good the eso community is and tbh just amazed at the friendships and acts of kindness I have seen and been a part of through the years. All the love, laughter, and even irl functions we have shared together as guildies but more importantly friends after such a long period of time.

I look forward to using their corpses for my new necros and also continuing the friendships that developed in eso....

Neoealth

Skwor wrote: »

Fundamental fact of life, everyone is born bad, we all have to be taught how to be good and even then we are still mostly bad.

Some never accept this and even try to deny it, unfortunatly to thier own misfortune.

ESO tends to mirror this and imo most good MMOs do that.

I strongly disagree with you. I believe everyone is born basically innocent. Like a blank slate. And as we grow up we are good by default. The bad behaviors are learned as we age, based on our environment and other factors. I think what makes some people slowly turn bad or evil is how weak minded they are, for example not having the ability to resist selfish urges.

Sociopaths or psychopaths would be the exception though, as they are hard wired to not care or consider how their actions affect others. But generally speaking I do think most people are good by natural default. And when I say "good" I don't mean saints, I just mean tend to lean to loving their fellow human. IE they can naturally act civil towards others, show empathy to others and share resources with others even if it does not really benefit them.

Take babies for example, they start out as basically clean slates, and learn how to behave as they get older, they don;t naturally start out trying to be evil as you seem to be suggesting (unless i mis understood you)

starkerealm

Riejael wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

It goes back to the original design. When the game launched you picked an alliance and you were locked into their PvE content. When you'd eventually get access to the other zones it was via Daedric trickery..

I played back then, and thought the same thing. Why can't I help the Covenant sack the city? Change up the questlines from then onward. The vestige is the reason Davon's Watch exists. Why can't the vestige decide to help destroy the city, or let it succumb to invasion?

That's the point I'm making.

If you wanted to side with the Covenant, you had the option to do so at character creation. Deciding to do so at Davon's Watch is ultimately self-destructive to the Covenant.

You'd squash a minor settlement and give the Covenant a foothold in Morrowind, but a poor one, because they'd need to run their supply lines from Northpoint (which is under enemy control) across the coast of Skyrim, past Solitude, Dawnstar, Winterhold, Blacklight, Ebonheart and Vivec. And, drops them into a heavily fortified part of Morrowind (one of the provinces Tiber Septum wouldn't be able to secure with military force.)

All the while, the Covenant is being torn apart back in High Rock.

The Covenant doesn't need another soldier at Davon's Watch, they need a hero back in Daggerfall.

If you want to side with the Covenant, Emeric needs you putting out fires in Glenumbra.

Shalktonin

Skwor wrote: »

Myrkgrav wrote: »

Skwor wrote: »

Thank you for the laugh, my 55 years on this rock with 6 years in the military and having raised three successful children inform me otherwise.

Wow, I'd never guess that. lol.

I am pretty sure you are attempting to use an ad hominen here, that you may be pretty much undermines any points you would hope to make
🤔

doesn't need to make a point kid, you r assertion in the beginning was wrong to begin with.

The_Lex

Waffennacht wrote: »

All the Good Daedra became the "earth bones" etc

Literally all the Good "God's" are gone

I get your point, but it's not exactly true.

The "good" daedra are Azura, Boethia, and Mephala. Of course, "good" was coined by the Dunmer.

The earth bones were not daedra. The Daedra wanted nothing to do with the creation of the Mundus. In fact, "Daedra" means "not our ancestors." The earth bones (or Ehlnofey) are the Aedra who sacrificed themselves to bring stability to Nirn.

Vandril

Skwor wrote: »

Fundamental fact of life, everyone is born bad, we all have to be taught how to be good and even then we are still mostly bad.

Some never accept this and even try to deny it, unfortunatly to thier own misfortune.

ESO tends to mirror this and imo most good MMOs do that.

Close, but not quite. "Good" and "bad", as universal concepts, don't exist. There is no innate good, and there is no innate bad. Proof: differing cultures can (and at times, do, in real life) have entirely opposite notions of what is good and what is bad. The culture that you live in and its mechanics define what is good and what is bad.

People aren't born good or evil in an innate, universal sense. Rather, what people are born as is "entirely selfish" and have to learn empathy - a learned trait, not an innate trait. Whether or not being born as selfish also means you're born as being innately evil or not is entirely based around how your culture defines evil.

(In a tangentially related note to anyone reading: sociology is an amazingly intriguing science and, if you haven't finished/gone to college yet and plan to attend, you should absolutely at least take the intro course. If you don't know what sociology is, I urge you to consider looking into it.)