I would just like to remind everyone that things like happiness good and ethical are all abstract concepts that are dependent on individual authoritative bases.......

so in the end we are all sorta whistling past the grave yard on this.

Also this is why political/philosophical threads have no place on this forum

DenMoria wrote: »

That's where you wrong though. Unfortunately, if you do not hold the "acceptable" point of view as dictated by certain parties having staked out the "moral high ground", you are evil. This is why I stopped caring.

Rain_Greyraven wrote: »

I would just like to remind everyone that things like happiness good and ethical are all abstract concepts that are dependent on individual authoritative bases.......

so in the end we are all sorta whistling past the grave yard on this.

Also this is why political/philosophical threads have no place on this forum

Luckily I never let other peoples opinions effect me one way or the other.

I stay true to my ethos and fine tune it when necessary .......and also keep my middle finger ready when needed.

I wouldn't get too hung up on the 'meaning' of the story. The whole 'we don't want outsiders here' bit is over and done with very quickly, and as others have already said, is just a device to get players to Summerset in the first place. I'd play the whole thing before judging it, the characters are fleshed out and interesting, there are some suprises along the way and some superb and truly funny dialogue. If you impose some real-world political viewpoint on a fantasy story it's going to ruin it for you. Relax and enjoy the ride, this is the best DLC story by far in my opinion. Also:

AlnilamE wrote: »

I think the timeline of developing such an expansion in a game of this size precludes any sort of intentional characterization of real life events. Remember that Summerset was *announced* on March 21, 2018. At that point, all these quests and plot had already been written and even voiced several months prior. They had no way of knowing this would sadly be a hot political topic within a month of release.

that topic has been hot for a looong time, not just from some time after march 2018 lmao.

I feel you aren't very attuned to the lore behind the races of Tamriel. Altmer ARE racist. It's been evident in all the TES games. Not just ESO. No one's choking you with their politcal views. You seem to be reading into things that don't exist.

Altmer have always hated the other races. The Thalmor in Skyrim literally want to destroy all non-elven races.

Real-world migrant crisis: People from impoverished, war-torn, corrupt, and/or unstable nations flee to wealthier nations to try and build a better life for themselves.

Summerset: A super isolationist country occupied by a notoriously xenophobic and elitist culture opens its borders a little bit to non-Altmer.

There's really not any similarity between the two. The people coming to Summerset aren't refugees seeking asylum or anything like that. They're just... normal people who are interested in visiting Summerset. It's more Japan ending its isolationism at the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate than it is the migrant situation of Europe or North America.

Though if you'd like to sympathize with the Altmer and read into something that's not particularly there, well... that's on you. And says a lot more about you than the game, I think.

I'm more left than they come and agree completely.

The issue is not that immigration is made a topic of the story - given the Altmer's xenophobic culture, Summerset is a natural setting for this matter. It's that there is no ambiguity and you can't side with the opposite, Altmeri view of things. Every time it's brought up, it's basically a moral club brought down on the naughty, naughty Altmer. Even one of the staunchest opponents of the open borders, Kinlady Avinisse - who wrote the A Rejection of Open Borders pamphlet - is converted through the actions and wise words of our noble hero. This also weaves into the main story, which literally ends with a "moral of the story: change is good!" line. This morality play runs against TES' usual treatment of different points of view within the world of Tamriel, allowing for ambiguity and shades of grey. Other Tamrielic cultures have just as objectionable practices, but they are handled much better, even in ESO. E.g. patriarchal structures of Orc strongholds, or Bosmeri cannibalism.

It's upsetting to me from the point of world-building that the story that takes place in the home of the Altmer is just a total deconstruction of their culture, portraying them as a decadent, cruel, and narcisstic people. It's how people from the outside have always seen the Altmer, and instead of giving us another view on this (necessarily) biased interpretation, it's just affirmed and commented on with a stern tut-tut-tut.

I'd like to thank the Nord Foreign Affairs Mission for making all of this possible. Without such um mammoth diplomacy, the fancy lads er I mean the Altmer might have declared war on all of Mundus in a few centuries or so.

@Rain_Greyraven

I find that a bit strange, really. I mean, as a statement. It's a big obvious, isn't it? A general consensus can be reached from a scientific perspective to understand these things and therefore do the 'most good' by the 'most people.' We understand the more Universal concept of ethics from the perspective of medicine as the concept of doing no harm, we exercise this by involving and understanding the patient as best we can, and then figuring out which course of action is best for the patient. This is understood by every doctor worth their salt. So whilst it's true that these are individual concepts, it is possible to ascertain what a Universal system of ethics would look like.

Generally it involves listening to people and taking their views into account, and then following through on the action that causes the least amount of harm. This is the basis for Universal ethics as defined by medicine, and it's pretty good. Thus, if impeding a group does very little harm, yet spares another group trauma? This is an act of Universal good, as it eases the most pain and does the least harm. This is the most anyone can do in any given situation. Naturally, the weak and the vulnerable must always be looked out for the most as it's they who can be exploited to suffer the most.

It's not that difficult to extrapolate what more Universal concepts of happiness, ethics, and good look like.

We must simply understand what happiness is to a person, then we grant them that which allows them to be happy just so long as it doesn't cause another to suffer. If it does, we grant them what we can up until the point where it causes another to suffer, then we work around the best and attempt to convey to the person we're trying to help where their happiness impedes another's. This might just be a background in psychology talking, but it is entirely possible to do this. It's all about -- as I mentioned in my last post -- understanding. Understanding doesn't have to necessarily mean agreement, but it does indeed mean understanding. If you understand someone, hurting them then becomes a choice and there's no innocence in that.

This is why many choose to live in ignorance of other people. It makes hurting them simpler. They don't have to worry about their own empathy and they don't need to feel they're enacting any kind of wrong, they're acting from a position of ignorance and innocence. As such, there are people who will intentionally remain ignorant on the suffering of another group as that makes it easier to demonise them. This all comes from a tribal background of protecting resources, but in a post-tribal world -- such as the one we find ourselves in now -- where globalisation is the most efficient means for the happiness of everyone involved? That tribalism does lots of harm and little good.

I think that in understanding people we can figure out how to adopt systematic approaches to Universal ethics, happiness, and good. Whilst the notions of what these admittedly abstract concepts are is indeed individual, the notions of how we would logically and practically apply them is not.

This is why -- in application -- happiness, good, and ethics can be parsed in a more Universal sense.

isailandshootub17_ESO wrote: »

I'm aware of some of the High Elf lore, that they prefer themselves to the other races. I realize that if you wanted to create a story in which you could create a morality play about immigration and racism, you'd have to use the Altmer. I'm just thinking that they might have used a slightly different storyline other than immigration, since that is the major political issue about which most of the world is quite split.

If you open the border of Summerset freely for everyone, it is unimmersive and unlorefriendly if there's no discrimination and Altmers act like nothing happened.

The bold part is where it is wrong. It is not that if you wanted to create a story in which you could create a morality play about immigration and racism, you'd have to use the Altmer, it is the opposite: since you create a story about the Altmer, there has to be immigration and racism. Ask yourself this question: How else can the Altmer react? Act like nothing happened when suddenly 10 million other races immigrate to Summerset in mass?

You can't create a story about Summerset without Altmers acting that way. There's no other way.

Please give me an example of how the storyline could be different. You can't. Altmers will absolutely react aggressively when you open their border. It's like 1+1=2, it's a fact.

Sicardus wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

I'm more left than they come and agree completely.

The issue is not that immigration is made a topic of the story - given the Altmer's xenophobic culture, Summerset is a natural setting for this matter. It's that there is no ambiguity and you can't side with the opposite, Altmeri view of things. Every time it's brought up, it's basically a moral club brought down on the naughty, naughty Altmer. Even one of the staunchest opponents of the open borders, Kinlady Avinisse - who wrote the A Rejection of Open Borders pamphlet - is converted through the actions and wise words of our noble hero. This also weaves into the main story, which literally ends with a "moral of the story: change is good!" line. This morality play runs against TES' usual treatment of different points of view within the world of Tamriel, allowing for ambiguity and shades of grey. Other Tamrielic cultures have just as objectionable practices, but they are handled much better, even in ESO. E.g. patriarchal structures of Orc strongholds, or Bosmeri cannibalism.

It's upsetting to me from the point of world-building that the story that takes place in the home of the Altmer is just a total deconstruction of their culture, portraying them as a decadent, cruel, and narcisstic people. It's how people from the outside have always seen the Altmer, and instead of giving us another view on this (necessarily) biased interpretation, it's just affirmed and commented on with a stern tut-tut-tut.

The problem with OP's argument...and by extension yours, is that you guys fail to realize that even if your character was an Altmer, they are still an outsider to the Altmeri mainland and society. The only way for them to thrive in their role and questline is to support a more pro immigration stance. Otherwise they can't do the more important focus of the Summerset questline: ending a holy war between three "demon monarchs" or Daedra. There's no specific agenda set in place here.

It worked for the Stormcloaks in Skyrim.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
But you wouldn't even have to join the opposing "faction" to convey some ambiguity. It worked in the very same main quest for Daedra worshippers just fine.
Honestly, I think it comes down to the fact that the Altmer were overall underdeveloped in favour of the main quest, great as it was. I'm looking forward to Murkmire where they can focus on one zone and develop a story on a smaller scale, which I think ZOS does best.

If the purpose of these elements in the game was to preach, there would be more consequences for being racist garbage. There really aren't any. We're not there to fight racists, it's just part of the setting and in the long run we cannot do a thing about it. Changing a handful of NPCs' minds about outsiders, in the face of an entire nation, is consequential only in the way it affects the ability to complete the actual storyline. They did not even come close to making it the focus of the arc. Not once did my toon get to beat the living hell out of anyone just for being racist, it's always for something else and the racism is incidental because it's part of the culture.