More Princesses...Really?

kichwas

On 'Princess Fiction'; I like it. It's an effective hook.

The 'feisty princess' genre appeals to a lot of human instincts. Disney has been riding it for a very long time to great success, and it makes for a way to get participants to want to engage with a character's story.

If you look at the roots of genre fiction the 'hero's journey' is as old as human storytelling - western civilization may credit the Greeks with it, but it was ancient when they were still in caves.

To make that hero appeal you need to make the reader identify with them, want to emulate them, wish they knew them, want to protect them, be saved by them, want to know them, or some similar 'pro-engagement' angle. Basic human psychology makes a 'strong youthful woman' work extremely well in that spot. People tend to root for a young-female protagonist faster than they do any other age or gender category.

You'll notice throwing in a key female co-conspirator has been around in ESO for a long time. I'm thinking of the wood elf from Orsinium, and also of Lyris Titanborn. The thread notes at least one more, there may be more.

It just works...

.

Jacarranda

kichwas wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I disliked Morrowind because, well, the entire effing plot was lacking all suspense if you played TES3. There was no way Vivec or his city was going to bite the dust, and no way we were going to get a Nerevarine ahead of schedule. Obvious plot armor ruins stories because it saps player investment in the characters.

The entirety of ESO has this problem.

We know that in a little over a thousand years the dragons are gone, the high elves are basically brown-shirts following an elf version of a guy with a weird salute and short mustache, the argonians are slaves again, the dark elves have lost everything, the wood elves and khajiit have lost everything and often simply hunted by the high elves, the nords are racists again, the imperials are lording it over everyone again, and the redguards still look like the 'black sidekick' in a Hollywood Sinbad movie...

It's especially bad if you play AD in ESO... you know that basically every last thing you are fighting for will fail within a few generations, and the people you stop right now - will win so overwhelmingly that the 'Elven-Purity Reich' will basically rule for a thousand years...

I hate prequels...

In any fiction...

Because you always go in knowing how it will end.

I wish ESO had been set 1000 years AFTER Skyrim and not before. Then I would feel like my character's action mattered... (even if the only thing that really matters if what the writers at Bethesda had planned for the next game... at least I wouldn't have a giant spoiler over my head over every last thing I did).

I think the AD storyline works well as a prequel, makes Ayreen character more interesting and more tragic. ES lore takes a lot from buddhism and hinduism spirituality. Life being a circle, or better a cycle is no surprise in this game, and it makes a fair point, not only for ES universe(s), but for ours too.

Your comment on redguards is spot on tho, lol

alanmatillab16_ESO

Of all of the Five Companions, not counting our own player we have had Sai Sahan, Lyris Titanborne and Abner Tharn as the guiding "personality", I wonder who they are going to use for the next one? I can't see how they would write Varen in so is it going to be assumed that he was sacrificed all along?

TheShadowScout

kichwas wrote: »

I wish ESO had been set 1000 years AFTER Skyrim and not before.

Or a few more millenia.
Heh, I would -love- to see that someday... a TES game set in the fifth or sixth era, elder scrolls and steampunk? Bring it on! I'd play the oblivion out of that...
...just imagine it... a TES tamriel of clockworks and magics, dwemer tech re-discovered and integrated in every culture, changing them to something completely new... with dunmer sky pirate airship captains... dashing kahjiti swashbucklers... orsimer clockwork knights... altmer griffon-rider sky cavalry... breton trading houses... bosmer steam musketeers... and a war in the skies against the imperial armies of akavir?

alanmatillab16_ESO wrote: »

I can't see how they would write Varen in so is it going to be assumed that he was sacrificed all along?

They already did Varen, sort of. At the very end of Orsinium, he is the one who wanrs you of the new threat on the horizon (the daedric triad that is the driving force behind Morrowind, CWC, and Summerset storylines...) - either alive, or as ghost, depending on the player decision during the final assault on Molag Bal.
And afterwards he said you will never see him again, so... there is that.

So... they sort of did the companions, unless they want to bring back Mannimarco, or have Abner Tharn come back from the Dragonhold ending, tho that would really devalue his heroism in the final fight there...

Personally, I do hope they might look at other NPCs to revisit. Would be interesting to see how some of the others we passed in the mainstory and other early questing have done as time went by in tamriel... I mean, we do see some of it from recurring characters like Stibbons and his vexing mistress, or Rigurt... in some cases, perhaps more then we'd like... but there are others too, those that were not yet deemed worthy of a repeat performance...
And while one can never have enough Naryu interactions, I for one also would like to see Eveli Sharp-arrow again for example...

amapola76

kichwas wrote: »

It's especially bad if you play AD in ESO... you know that basically every last thing you are fighting for will fail within a few generations

It's all a matter of personal preference, of course, but for me, this is exactly why I do like prequels, whether in games, movies, or books. It makes it so much more poignant, and precious, to get to spend time in a world that will soon be lost. Especially when you see those tragic foreshadowing elements.

It's that whole memento mori/valar morghulis thing: we all die, civilizations all fail... and it doesn't mean all is lost, forever, because there is birth and growth as well, but it's a reminder to value what we have while we have it. It's true in real life, which is why it's a theme that resonates so powerfully in art, as well.

Edited to add: it's also interesting for me to imagine, for example, if Ayrenn knew what would ultimately become of her beloved AD, and that her actions were futile, do you think she would give up and just let the Veiled Heritance take power immediately, or would she fight even harder because the fight itself matters? I think she would fight to hang on to her vision no matter what the outcome, because that's what heroes do. You do what's right even when you think it's probably destined to fail. So it's interesting to me to play some of these characters with that mindset.

ElvenOverlord

Thrusts-His-Spear wrote: »

If this keeps up all of Tamriel will be run by women.

Tbf women do tend to make better leaders than men, so that wouldn't really be a bad thing.

Sylvermynx

amapola76 wrote: »

kichwas wrote: »

It's especially bad if you play AD in ESO... you know that basically every last thing you are fighting for will fail within a few generations

It's all a matter of personal preference, of course, but for me, this is exactly why I do like prequels, whether in games, movies, or books. It makes it so much more poignant, and precious, to get to spend time in a world that will soon be lost. Especially when you see those tragic foreshadowing elements.

It's that whole memento mori/valar morghulis thing: we all die, civilizations all fail... and it doesn't mean all is lost, forever, because there is birth and growth as well, but it's a reminder to value what we have while we have it. It's true in real life, which is why it's a theme that resonates so powerfully in art, as well.

Edited to add: it's also interesting for me to imagine, for example, if Ayrenn knew what would ultimately become of her beloved AD, and that her actions were futile, do you think she would give up and just let the Veiled Heritance take power immediately, or would she fight even harder because the fight itself matters? I think she would fight to hang on to her vision no matter what the outcome, because that's what heroes do. You do what's right even when you think it's probably destined to fail. So it's interesting to me to play some of these characters with that mindset.

That's - profound, @amapola76 - very. Thank you for bringing that up. I, like you, feel that Ayrenn would have still done her level best to finish the fight, retaining her vision, and hoping against hope that her efforts might change the course of AD's history. I like you appreciate prequels for reasons just like that - and even though some prequels are enough to break one's heart (Misty Lackey's books about Vanyel and Lavan Firestorm; Anne McCaffrey's Moreta's Ride in the Pern Cycle) they do give one a sense of the history of some very large epic tales whether written or in games.

ElvenOverlord

kichwas wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I disliked Morrowind because, well, the entire effing plot was lacking all suspense if you played TES3. There was no way Vivec or his city was going to bite the dust, and no way we were going to get a Nerevarine ahead of schedule. Obvious plot armor ruins stories because it saps player investment in the characters.

The entirety of ESO has this problem.

We know that in a little over a thousand years the dragons are gone, the high elves are basically brown-shirts following an elf version of a guy with a weird salute and short mustache, the argonians are slaves again, the dark elves have lost everything, the wood elves and khajiit have lost everything and often simply hunted by the high elves, the nords are racists again, the imperials are lording it over everyone again, and the redguards still look like the 'black sidekick' in a Hollywood Sinbad movie...

It's especially bad if you play AD in ESO... you know that basically every last thing you are fighting for will fail within a few generations, and the people you stop right now - will win so overwhelmingly that the 'Elven-Purity Reich' will basically rule for a thousand years...

I hate prequels...

In any fiction...

Because you always go in knowing how it will end.

I wish ESO had been set 1000 years AFTER Skyrim and not before. Then I would feel like my character's action mattered... (even if the only thing that really matters if what the writers at Bethesda had planned for the next game... at least I wouldn't have a giant spoiler over my head over every last thing I did).

I have no issue with this, there are a lot of players new to the story of ESO. I hadn't played TES3 yet when Morrowind came out so I didn't go into it knowing that Vivec would survive. If this is a problem, its not an ESO problem. Its a prequel problem. When you're making a prequel with characters that live until the present story of course you know they'll survive that's what you sign up for when you engage. They shouldn't not tell a good and engaging story just because you know the outcome based on a game that takes place after the time period its set in. So personally I have no issue with this, its a prequel its what I signed up for.

Drdeath20

People actually read and/or listen to the quest?!? I just assumed everyone skipped through as fast as humanly possible.

On a serious note....Yes they could have chosen a different theme but the storyline will in all likelyhood be altogether much different from the last even though they both share a hero/heroine from a similar begining.

And what in the world is with some of you bringing alot of noise?!?

mavfin

Rye_puff wrote: »

I love princesses.

I've got three daughters. I'd rather deal with princesses than puffed up rich boys...

mavfin

kichwas wrote: »

Because you always go in knowing how it will end.

That's why I'm actually glad I *didn't* get around to the TES games. I can take this game for what it is, and not worry about X generations from now.

b101uk

the thing is going back 2500 years, there have been a few wives and draughts who have become "Queen" etc who have lead revolts vs. occupiers etc, some were successful, some not, but it was more common between 300BC and 500AD than after or even more recent history, and back then too kings/queens ruled generally smaller holds of land, though some did hold sway over larger areas equivalent to modern country divisions at their height.

likewise back then it was more common for woman to be directly involved in war fighting along side men as warriors.

so its not as if their isn't precedent in history for some of the notions in ESO of many many more strong women than you would see in later ages of so-called enlightenment.

VoxAdActa

b101uk wrote: »

the thing is going back 2500 years, there have been a few wives and draughts who have become "Queen" etc who have lead revolts vs. occupiers etc, some were successful, some not, but it was more common between 300BC and 500AD than after or even more recent history, and back then too kings/queens ruled generally smaller holds of land, though some did hold sway over larger areas equivalent to modern country divisions at their height.

likewise back then it was more common for woman to be directly involved in war fighting along side men as warriors.

so its not as if their isn't precedent in history for some of the notions in ESO of many many more strong women than you would see in later ages of so-called enlightenment.

I don't like pulling the "IRL historical precedent" card because that not only tends to derail the discussion, it validates part of the other person's premise: that somehow, the lack of women in leadership positions in a fantasy world makes some amount of sense based on a preponderance of male-centered real-world ancient counterparts.

What's actually going on here is that people will willingly suspend disbelief for: Dragons, lightning-teleportation, infinite arrows, unkillable bankers, elves, cat-people, and a demon lord dragging the world into hell with literal big chains and a pulley, but draw the line at chicks in charge if it happens more than once. THAT is where their suspension of disbelief breaks and they start whining about "muh realism". The question that needs to be hammered on is: "WHY?"

Why, in a world where evil critters form themselves out a blue jelly-like ooze every time they die to come back and menace us again, where a million people each hold 12 earth-shattering powers in the palms of their hands ready for use at any moment, WHY is it that "too many girls in the story" (even when they're not human and not in any way subject to IRL physical limitations doled out by gender) is where they want to get off the fantasy bus?

Hammer that. Hard. Because it has nothing to do with realism. Find the root.

Lintashi

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Lintashi wrote: »

Yes, Khamira and Svana are too similar.

Only in the fact that both are princesses that have the responsibilities of their birth thrust upon them.
One starts as special agent of the mane, the other as tavern mead-drinker. One becomes queen, the other lives in a region where blood alone is not enough to secure the right to rule and thus has a lot more work ahead of her before she might get a crown. One was beloved by her parents when they were still alive, the other is estranged from her father. One has many allies among the khajiit, the other... can only count a drunken orc as her friend.

Lintashi wrote: »

Can we have a prince next please?

Well, we had that with Jorunns brat... uhhh... son. And kinda with the dominion... Naemon did hold the title, did he not? But yeah, I for one would love to see princes too... heck, I would wish the game refitted kids so they could do the "prince too young to take the throne, regent is a schemer/ess" cliché somewhere...

Lintashi wrote: »

Or older person, who is wise? Like female version of Abnur Tharn?

You mean... like Old Mjolen in Hjaalmarch who helps Fennorian with the mystical aspects of unraveling the harrowstorms? I loved her off-hand comments about the sloppy magic of the ice necromantrix...

Both Khamira and Svana are troubled young women, who witness the death of their parents, then go around saving the day, and finally get to sit on the throne. While there were some intrigue with Khamira, the moment I saw Svana, I was like "yes, she will sit on the throne of High King, and since her both parents are alive, they will die somehow, and soon". I have no problem with princesses, I really liked new She-Ra, but I really want to see and interesting plot. In She-Ra, characters are more alive, villains can achieve redemption, but in eso, I can only remember Angof. Old Mjollen only get a few lines, but I would like to see a woman of her age as main hero of some long quest, with her doing things through guile, wisdom and wit, and not running around like unkillable hero. Also, many ppl in eso wear scars, but noone gets serously injured or maimed, ever, even after fighting dragons. Seeing Svana in Blackreach, wearing thin clothes, shabby bow, and hearing that she infiltrated camp full of vampires and their hounds unnoticed, and even dragged three barely moving harrowed out, it just breaks immersion big time. Svargrim was also disappointment. He clinged to his power like a maniac, and then, goes all 'yes, my master'. He never gave an inch of his power to anyone in his entire life, and he is a Nord, but he just tolerates being called 'little king'. And it was evident from the start, that he would be villain. It would be better, if he saw reason, turned against the Grey Host, and using inside knowledge, stopped harrowstorms.
And Jorunns, brat, Faharajad's son and Naemon, were always second row heroes and villains, with barely few lines.

mavfin

VoxAdActa wrote: »

What's actually going on here is that people will willingly suspend disbelief for: Dragons, lightning-teleportation, infinite arrows, unkillable bankers, elves, cat-people, and a demon lord dragging the world into hell with literal big chains and a pulley, but draw the line at chicks in charge if it happens more than once. THAT is where their suspension of disbelief breaks and they start whining about "muh realism". The question that needs to be hammered on is: "WHY?"

Why, in a world where evil critters form themselves out a blue jelly-like ooze every time they die to come back and menace us again, where a million people each hold 12 earth-shattering powers in the palms of their hands ready for use at any moment, WHY is it that "too many girls in the story" (even when they're not human and not in any way subject to IRL physical limitations doled out by gender) is where they want to get off the fantasy bus?

Hammer that. Hard. Because it has nothing to do with realism. Find the root.

QFT..

ProfessorKittyhawk

I want a story that doesn't involve royalty. Or a new world threatening event. Orsinium involved royalty, but it was more interesting and complex and could kinda see where the villains were coming from considering the long history of being subjugated by other races i vading and pillaging their lands. But it was also a smaller scale story that still managed to feel epic.

Thats the problem I have with the year long story idea. Maybe do it ever couple years but having a cookie cutter dungeon dlc-chapter-dungeon dlc-zone story dlc format limits the scope and scale of the stories and becomes rather repetitive and predictable. I'd rather a chapter be longer and tell a more grand story rather than try to spread it across an entire year and the storytelling be stretched out accordingly. I also like having self contained dlc every now and then.

Would love it if they'd do away with dungeon dlc and just incorporated new dungeons into the new zones. Make their stories feel actually related to the rest of it rather than it feeling like "meanwhile, thousands of miles away..."

Ekzorka

I don't have a problem with the main story, but yes, from the one princess with a bow to another princess with a bow. And also two more almost-princesses in side quests.
I'm more worried and surprised that Western Skyrim is full of dumb or crippled men, there's only 2 male characters who is interesting to follow. (Ya I know it could be reference from reality I see sometimes, but still...)

Lyserus wrote: »

Also I think once ZOS settled on "play in any order you want it's the same year same time" policy, the story basically stops being interesting.. because any returning characters just can't die, you know it because 1.They have part to play in the older content and 2.ZOS will bring them back even with a weak-a reason since they are popular character

Like how Abnur Tharn ends in dragonhold, ZOS wouldn't give a certain answer, and we all know he's gonna return, so players no longer cares, we all know he is not dead

I already hate this possibility of inconsistent play through the story. Something really cool or changing life cannot happen to characters because they're stuck somewhere in time. The dramatic moments stop being dramatic because later there's a story that ruins those moments. You stop empathizing with the characters in such moments, and their actions are devalued. There are, of course, dramas with an irrevocable and final end, but it happens with a characters that you know for 5 minutes -- this doesn't create the proper effect. No matter how much we love any characters, but such "canceling everything that happened before" or "resurrecting" can only harm them, because their personality is revealed in their decisions and actions, and not in their simple existence.
And to your example: I'd like to think of Tharn as a snide, arrogant, and intelligent old man who perhaps for the first time in his long life made an act of self-sacrifice for non-native people and for a foreign province, but not as someone who just drove everyone off the island because he knew that nothing bad would happen to him.

richo262

I can imagine the boardroom pitch for this one

"Okay guys, I got a really good idea. We have a kingdom in trouble, and we have a princess that will restore her kingdom and take the throne and avert a threat"

"Didn't we do this last year?"

"No, this time the menace will have wings or turn into a swarm of creatures with wings"

"Yeh, we did this last year, we also introduced a Necro, what are we going to do to compete with that?"

"Ummmm... a shovel"

I thought the Elyswer princess story was well written, it was about restoring a matriarch and it didn't feel like it was trying to score some sort of woke points in the process. Skyrim feels forced. Same story, but you'll notice pretty every quest hub has a woman in charge. Like ... that is statistically very unlikely. I noticed this because the prologue eluded to a potential clash of kings, and the trailers (along with being pumped up from an assassins creed trailer) made me think I was going to find Skyrims Ragnar Lothbrok and Lyris, Ragnar and myself were going to bash some vampire skulls.

Instead, every quest hub had a damsel in distress, every male nord (the few that I could find) was quick to announce he was either a bumbling idiot, a coward, simply die at your feet, or come across like a creep (Blackreach). It didn't feel like it was good story writing, like the writer was trying to push a sub narrative. The only character that didn't feel like some sort of generic trash was Lyris, pretty much the only part of the story I enjoyed.

Perhaps I just had high expectations because it is Skyrim, and because it fell well short of those I'm even harder on it.

robertthebard

VoxAdActa wrote: »

b101uk wrote: »

the thing is going back 2500 years, there have been a few wives and draughts who have become "Queen" etc who have lead revolts vs. occupiers etc, some were successful, some not, but it was more common between 300BC and 500AD than after or even more recent history, and back then too kings/queens ruled generally smaller holds of land, though some did hold sway over larger areas equivalent to modern country divisions at their height.

likewise back then it was more common for woman to be directly involved in war fighting along side men as warriors.

so its not as if their isn't precedent in history for some of the notions in ESO of many many more strong women than you would see in later ages of so-called enlightenment.

I don't like pulling the "IRL historical precedent" card because that not only tends to derail the discussion, it validates part of the other person's premise: that somehow, the lack of women in leadership positions in a fantasy world makes some amount of sense based on a preponderance of male-centered real-world ancient counterparts.

What's actually going on here is that people will willingly suspend disbelief for: Dragons, lightning-teleportation, infinite arrows, unkillable bankers, elves, cat-people, and a demon lord dragging the world into hell with literal big chains and a pulley, but draw the line at chicks in charge if it happens more than once. THAT is where their suspension of disbelief breaks and they start whining about "muh realism". The question that needs to be hammered on is: "WHY?"

Why, in a world where evil critters form themselves out a blue jelly-like ooze every time they die to come back and menace us again, where a million people each hold 12 earth-shattering powers in the palms of their hands ready for use at any moment, WHY is it that "too many girls in the story" (even when they're not human and not in any way subject to IRL physical limitations doled out by gender) is where they want to get off the fantasy bus?

Hammer that. Hard. Because it has nothing to do with realism. Find the root.

Here's another possibility: It's an oft used trope in story telling. I'm not one to assign motive, although it seems you have taken that liberty here, so instead of jumping to "it's only because it's a strong female", I looked at the overall idea. Is it irony that you "don't like pulling IRL historical precedent", but then jump straight to IRL historical precedent for your argument for why someone would be tired of princesses? Your whole argument boils down to "men don't like strong women in video games/movies". Of course, when this narrative is challenged by successful franchises like Tomb Raider, or players like me, that just flip a coin, and have been flipping that coin since before this narrative raised it's ugly head to explain unsuccessful media, the argument then changes to "you're just whacking off to them in your mom's basement".

It's also important to note that I'm not assigning your motive, note the part I bolded in the above paragraph. I'm merely taking the advice you gave at the end, and "hammering it hard". Is what you postulate a motive for the OP? It could be, it could also be that they're tired of the trope. As I said, I'm not big on assigning motive, but that begs the question, why automatically assume the worst about someone, and then "hammer that home"?

Lazarus_Rising

In this times people get easily annoyed by the whole virtual signaling. You can see how bad movies score with this and how they *** up franchises. I personally get pretty annoyed by it and kills the immersion for me. I am generally fed up with bringing real life politics into video games. I just wanna enjoy a good story without having to think what message they want to hammer in my head. I think this is common sense anyway but it has to be said.

TheShadowScout

Lintashi wrote: »

Both Khamira and Svana are troubled young women, who witness the death of their parents, then go around saving the day, and finally get to sit on the throne.

Actually Svana doesn't get to sit on the throne until the moot decides. And Khamira was not troubles until the death of her parents, while for Svana the death of her mother is what shocked her out of the "troubled youth" stage...

Lintashi wrote: »

While there were some intrigue with Khamira...

...like not revealing she is the princess until ways into the elsweyr story?

Lintashi wrote: »

the moment I saw Svana, I was like "yes, she will sit on the throne of High King, and since her both parents are alive, they will die somehow, and soon".

I... have to grant that one. I thought the same. Or rather, I thought something like "Oh, its gonna be Jorunns kid revisited, foolish heir getting kicked into the rear by events to grow into their responsibilities..."

Lintashi wrote: »

...villains can achieve redemption, but in eso, I can only remember Angof.

Well... I suppose for Angorf, it depends.
But Earl Leythen comes to mind... and I seem to recall at least two or three bandits or cultists in glenumbra who had second thoughts about their path, and started working against their former comrades, rishing to help their father in need, or making amends to their ancestors... and one in reapers march, depending on player choices...
Technically you could also count Abner Tharn as well, sort of - he does side with Mannimarco for a while after all, even if only from sheer self-preservation... or even the prophet who spends the mainstroy making up for their mistakes, tho they never really were "villains" per se, just... falling in with some bad people?

But yeah, redemption is not that common in tamriel, it seems.

Lintashi wrote: »

Old Mjollen only get a few lines, but I would like to see a woman of her age as main hero of some long quest, with her doing things through guile, wisdom and wit, and not running around like unkillable hero.

Agreed.
It would make for a nice story... especially for someone like Mjollen who is just a clever old mortal, and not a supernatural, powerful, undying lich like Vastarie for example...

Lintashi wrote: »

Also, many ppl in eso wear scars, but noone gets serously injured or maimed, ever, even after fighting dragons.

I knooooowwwww!
And it has been vexing me from the beginning... with Greymoor, we first get to see people -bleeding- ever before that it was only "limping but unharmed" or "dead but unharmed" or "charred corpse/skeleton".
And there is a LOT that should be there in a medieval society, even one with magical healing... injuries that happened when no healer was around, and thus remained. Scars. Lost limbs. Bones healed together crooked. Heck, possibly even some slow magical maladies that don't really exist IRL, like "greyscale" in GoT...

Lintashi wrote: »

Seeing Svana in Blackreach, wearing thin clothes, shabby bow, and hearing that she infiltrated camp full of vampires and their hounds unnoticed, and even dragged three barely moving harrowed out, it just breaks immersion big time.

True.
And I really wish they had put her in armor once her "spoiled princess" phase transitioned into "warrior princess"... I mean, they could do it with Lyris when we go rescue her from coldharbour, right?

Lintashi wrote: »

Svargrim was also disappointment. He clinged to his power like a maniac, and then, goes all 'yes, my master'. He never gave an inch of his power to anyone in his entire life, and he is a Nord, but he just tolerates being called 'little king'. And it was evident from the start, that he would be villain.

Ehhh... from the start, it was obvious he would be an obstacle, but it wasn't clear if he was gonna be a villain, or just a nord blockhead like prince Irnskar... but as I mentioned, that one became clear soon enough.

Lintashi wrote: »

It would be better, if he saw reason, turned against the Grey Host, and using inside knowledge, stopped harrowstorms.

Nah, that would be totally against character for how he is depicted.

See, that one is actually accurate... even the tolerating stuff from the vampire lord he needs for his own immortality, tho he most likely would have tried to stab that one in the back at some point to reclaim his dominance had his harrowing plot succeeded...
...but for the "seeing reason" thing, well, first that course of action would ahve to seem reasonable for that person. And for someone like Svargrim who lost all connections to the living... its reasoable to sacrifice all the people who "failed him" by not living up to his ideas of what should be to attain more personal power. Especially for someone who clings to the rule of the -land- and not the -people-. Doubly so for someone who clearly has issues letting go, as seen on how he holds on to his grudges... and triply so for someone with an overblown opinion of himself alone, as evidenced by all the portraits of himself in his castle... and the estrangement from his family.

Also, we had the "turn against the baddies" shtick several times, from Abner Tharn to Prefect Calo, from Earl Leythen to half of coldharbour...

Lintashi wrote: »

And Jorunns, brat, Faharajad's son and Naemon, were always second row heroes and villains, with barely few lines.

Well, duh. Irnskar is just a blockhead meking a fool of himself in the first half of eastmarch questings, Azah a bit of a playboy getting the same kick in the rear as some princesses, just without the accompaning loss of parents so he stays a errant boy, and Naemon... well, that one actualyl does get a bit more then a supporting role, tho only in undeath.

I suppose at least Irnskar and Azah -could- get a bigger role in some future expansions covering more of skyrim or hammerfell... tho I kinda doubt it. They played their part, and can now stay where they are after all.

Faulgor

richo262 wrote: »

I can imagine the boardroom pitch for this one

"Okay guys, I got a really good idea. We have a kingdom in trouble, and we have a princess that will restore her kingdom and take the throne and avert a threat"

"Didn't we do this last year?"

"No, this time the menace will have wings or turn into a swarm of creatures with wings"

"Yeh, we did this last year, we also introduced a Necro, what are we going to do to compete with that?"

"Ummmm... a shovel"

I thought the Elyswer princess story was well written, it was about restoring a matriarch and it didn't feel like it was trying to score some sort of woke points in the process. Skyrim feels forced. Same story, but you'll notice pretty every quest hub has a woman in charge. Like ... that is statistically very unlikely. I noticed this because the prologue eluded to a potential clash of kings, and the trailers (along with being pumped up from an assassins creed trailer) made me think I was going to find Skyrims Ragnar Lothbrok and Lyris, Ragnar and myself were going to bash some vampire skulls.

Instead, every quest hub had a damsel in distress, every male nord (the few that I could find) was quick to announce he was either a bumbling idiot, a coward, simply die at your feet, or come across like a creep (Blackreach). It didn't feel like it was good story writing, like the writer was trying to push a sub narrative. The only character that didn't feel like some sort of generic trash was Lyris, pretty much the only part of the story I enjoyed.

Perhaps I just had high expectations because it is Skyrim, and because it fell well short of those I'm even harder on it.

I call it Girlmoor.

I noticed a preponderance of female characters in one quest and just thought "hugh, that's neat!", because that is somewhat a rarity even in ESO.

Thing is, it could actually work. You could make a Skyrim / Nord-themed DLC with a focus on women. After all, Kyne is effectively the head of their pantheon, along with Mara and Dibella the hearth gods are at least as important as Shor and Alduin in Nord mythology. They could have really leaned into that.
But they didn't. None of the plethora of women have a noteworthy connection to Nord culture (save for Old Mjolen, who expectedly became my favourite character), or develop any themes related to Skyrim and her (!) people. They seem like cardboard women with the sensibilities of a 21st century 1st world urbanite and just enough personality to carry the story in the necessary direction.
It doesn't feel like I'm playing a fantasy game of a strange land with a foreign culture. It feels contemporary. Which is about one of the worst things I can say about imagined worlds.

[Edit to remove inappropriate content]

Iccotak

@ProfessorKittyhawk

The developers have stated that they are not going to do a world changing update for some time because there is so much more of the map to fill out.

VoxAdActa

robertthebard wrote: »

Here's another possibility: It's an oft used trope in story telling. I'm not one to assign motive, although it seems you have taken that liberty here, so instead of jumping to "it's only because it's a strong female", I looked at the overall idea. Is it irony that you "don't like pulling IRL historical precedent", but then jump straight to IRL historical precedent for your argument for why someone would be tired of princesses? Your whole argument boils down to "men don't like strong women in video games/movies". Of course, when this narrative is challenged by successful franchises like Tomb Raider, or players like me, that just flip a coin, and have been flipping that coin since before this narrative raised it's ugly head to explain unsuccessful media, the argument then changes to "you're just whacking off to them in your mom's basement".

It's also important to note that I'm not assigning your motive, note the part I bolded in the above paragraph. I'm merely taking the advice you gave at the end, and "hammering it hard". Is what you postulate a motive for the OP? It could be, it could also be that they're tired of the trope. As I said, I'm not big on assigning motive, but that begs the question, why automatically assume the worst about someone, and then "hammer that home"?

I'm almost 40 years old, and never once in my life have I ever heard any man complain about "too many dudes in charge" in any story told on any media.

I've never heard "Damn, why is it every town has a guy in charge in this country?" or "The developers are just pandering to Redpill and MRAs by putting these men in important plot positions" or even "I don't mind men in the story, I just want them to be well-written!" from any dude in any of the 36 US states I've lived in.

Not once. Ever.

They only seem to make noise when women show up.

Maybe that's just some strange coincidence.

Just sayin'.

gatekeeper13

They even killed John Connor to add an all-female heroines cast in last Terminator. They are even talking about a female James Bond. Nothing will surprise me anymore. It's the era of political correctness.

Faulgor

VoxAdActa wrote: »

robertthebard wrote: »

Here's another possibility: It's an oft used trope in story telling. I'm not one to assign motive, although it seems you have taken that liberty here, so instead of jumping to "it's only because it's a strong female", I looked at the overall idea. Is it irony that you "don't like pulling IRL historical precedent", but then jump straight to IRL historical precedent for your argument for why someone would be tired of princesses? Your whole argument boils down to "men don't like strong women in video games/movies". Of course, when this narrative is challenged by successful franchises like Tomb Raider, or players like me, that just flip a coin, and have been flipping that coin since before this narrative raised it's ugly head to explain unsuccessful media, the argument then changes to "you're just whacking off to them in your mom's basement".

It's also important to note that I'm not assigning your motive, note the part I bolded in the above paragraph. I'm merely taking the advice you gave at the end, and "hammering it hard". Is what you postulate a motive for the OP? It could be, it could also be that they're tired of the trope. As I said, I'm not big on assigning motive, but that begs the question, why automatically assume the worst about someone, and then "hammer that home"?

I'm almost 40 years old, and never once in my life have I ever heard any man complain about "too many dudes in charge" in any story told on any media.

I've never heard "Damn, why is it every town has a guy in charge in this country?" or "The developers are just pandering to Redpill and MRAs by putting these men in important plot positions" or even "I don't mind men in the story, I just want them to be well-written!" from any dude in any of the 36 US states I've lived in.

Not once. Ever.

They only seem to make noise when women show up.

Maybe that's just some strange coincidence.

Just sayin'.

Maybe you didn't get around as much as you thought? Plenty of self-flagellating men who demand more female representation in media, and an even larger contingent of women who decry two men in the same room as a "sausage fest".

People in general usually don't complain about men in media in "positions of power" because that is the norm in their reality (and in the case of fantasy, their idea of medieval-like social structures). In the absence of an in-universe explanation, the familiar is assumed. Which is why the comparison to obviously fantastical elements is absurd. Nobody complains about the lacking realism in dragons or demon lords because those things are not real. Women are. So are men and their varying relationships in different cultures. People have experiences and expectations with these things, for better and worse.

And for what it's worth, I do want men to be well written, too.

Bradyfjord

In a game with several fundamental problems, such as pvp/pve balance, server lag, etc., why do people want to argue about the gender of the npc's?

asuitandtyb14_ESO

Faulgor wrote: »

richo262 wrote: »

I can imagine the boardroom pitch for this one

"Okay guys, I got a really good idea. We have a kingdom in trouble, and we have a princess that will restore her kingdom and take the throne and avert a threat"

"Didn't we do this last year?"

"No, this time the menace will have wings or turn into a swarm of creatures with wings"

"Yeh, we did this last year, we also introduced a Necro, what are we going to do to compete with that?"

"Ummmm... a shovel"

I thought the Elyswer princess story was well written, it was about restoring a matriarch and it didn't feel like it was trying to score some sort of woke points in the process. Skyrim feels forced. Same story, but you'll notice pretty every quest hub has a woman in charge. Like ... that is statistically very unlikely. I noticed this because the prologue eluded to a potential clash of kings, and the trailers (along with being pumped up from an assassins creed trailer) made me think I was going to find Skyrims Ragnar Lothbrok and Lyris, Ragnar and myself were going to bash some vampire skulls.

Instead, every quest hub had a damsel in distress, every male nord (the few that I could find) was quick to announce he was either a bumbling idiot, a coward, simply die at your feet, or come across like a creep (Blackreach). It didn't feel like it was good story writing, like the writer was trying to push a sub narrative. The only character that didn't feel like some sort of generic trash was Lyris, pretty much the only part of the story I enjoyed.

Perhaps I just had high expectations because it is Skyrim, and because it fell well short of those I'm even harder on it.

I call it Girlmoor.

I noticed a preponderance of female characters in one quest and just thought "hugh, that's neat!", because that is somewhat a rarity even in ESO.

Thing is, it could actually work. You could make a Skyrim / Nord-themed DLC with a focus on women. After all, Kyne is effectively the head of their pantheon, along with Mara and Dibella the hearth gods are at least as important as Shor and Alduin in Nord mythology. They could have really leaned into that.
But they didn't. None of the plethora of women have a noteworthy connection to Nord culture (save for Old Mjolen, who expectedly became my favourite character), or develop any themes related to Skyrim and her (!) people. They seem like cardboard women with the sensibilities of a 21st century 1st world urbanite and just enough personality to carry the story in the necessary direction.
It doesn't feel like I'm playing a fantasy game of a strange land with a foreign culture. It feels contemporary. Which is about one of the worst things I can say about imagined worlds.

I came to a similar opinion this morning. I did the dragon bridge quest, which involves two female guards and a female merchant. Earlier I found a lot of lesbian couple drops, which I could care less about (I don't care who or what anyone prefers, just leave it out, I don't care!). Before that I was doing a bit more of the main quest, which involved said princess, and a female thane, and a female clever woman. I feel like Western Skyrim in ESO is actually the Amazons of Themyscira. I much prefer the land of Skyrim, but content wise I much preferred all the earlier chapters, because I never felt so berated by one-sided demographics.

[Edit to remove inappropriate content]

dcam86b14_ESO

did you run into Elsa yet?

If you know you know

Zulera301

no such thing as too many princesses. sorry not sorry.