VaranisArano wrote: »

Iccotak wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

Vvardenfell had a little bit of stuff related to the failed Nerevarine, but still mostly a completely different story.

The majority of Vvardenfell's main quest was spoiled to Oblivion and back if you played TES 3.

1. Obviously Vivec has plot armor and isn't going to die.
2. Obviously Clockwork City has plot armor and is going to be okay.
3. Obviously Baar Dau doesn't fall and wipe out the city. Plot armor.
4. Obviously we don't get a Nerevarine centuries ahead of schedule. Prophecy plot armor.
5. Obviously Chodala is gonna fail - he's one of the fallen Incarnates we meet in the Cave of the Incarnates.

Clockwork City had similar problems - at least there we got a vastly expanded version of a zone that was at best a long dungeon in the Tribunal DLC...but I never once felt concerned that Sotha Sil or the Clockwork City were ever in serious danger. They have "this person/location appears in future games" style plot armor.

As a player who recently played through TES3 before playing ESO's Morrowind, I found the Chapter's drama around Vivec's powers fading and Baar Dau falling to be manufactured and hollow.

My concern with seeing the same locations as in future games is that when ESO's storylines lean hard on "Oh, no, this iconic location/person is going to be destroyed! You must rush to save them!!!" to produce the energy of their climax, they get badly undercut when I'm like "No it doesn't, ZOS, I've been here in future games. There's no rush. It'll be fine."

Leaning too hard into nostalgia constrains the storytelling and makes immersion harder in the actual story. That's especially true when ZOS tries to do apocalyptic storytelling in an iconic location. We all know it survived.

(And I don't think its any accident that my favorite of ZOS' DLC, Orsinium, isn't apocalyptic. ESO can tell fantastic stories without repeating iconic locations or threatening to destroy the world.)

I have played Morrowind many times before ESO and personally did not find the story to be the same, HOWEVER I do agree that a lot of Vvardenfell's story was a bit hollow - but I found that for different reasons - because I just didn't find the writing of that chapter in any way enthralling.

I get that we know Tamriel survives. Of course it does, we've seen it. So, what is the solution? Avoid Daedric Prince arcs that threaten the world or indeed any existential threats to Tamrel? Again, I would surprisingly okay with that, maybe have quests for the Daedra that are smaller and more personal involving their artefacts etc - The Mage's Guild quest with Sheogorath was quite fun in places.

I would also heartily welcome more DLC like Orsinium - the writing of that DLC was fabulous. Smaller, more political stories would be heartily welcome, but I wonder how long that would keep people interested with the game if it were just small stories like that as players do, by and large, enjoy a big, world ending threat. Perhaps a balance? We know that Tamriel will survive, but perhaps that's where the willing suspension of disbelief kicks in if the story is well written enough?

Balance may be key.

My suggestion for that would require ZOS to change up content release in order to better pace the imminent danger with the smaller stories.

Daedric War Story Arc was good for this reason. It had both Large and Small stories in a neat three part arc. Morrowind, Clockwork City, and Summerset.

If ZOS were to do three zones released in a year (one larger and the other two smaller) then they would need more and/or larger teams working on this.

And yes it would have to be one year because that was the sweet spot for maintaining player attention in the narrative arc.

I'd add that the larger piece of content should probably be the last one. I know that doesn't work well with ZOS' schedule, but I find it very odd to have the big cash-only Chapters leave certain plot threads hanging while relegating the defeat of the overarching big bad to the Q4 DLC.