I have always thought that ESO had this world building in place somewhat – from the past singular games and knowing of the future, or maybe I misunderstand what world building means. I do like seeing/reading all the different perceptions of others of how the lore can be interpreted or is interpreted even through roleplaying for these to me opens up other views that may not have been thought of before. I do think someone knows what happened to the Dwemer though might leave it to the players to solve this mystery and I think that is what I love most of the Elder Scrolls – that there is mystery even when I too want concrete answers or what is the truth behind certain things though think too answers are given throughout the lore or the lore books or the npc's in game and quests for us to discover as well and I do truly hope some of the older lore writers, are still consulted upon at times for certain things of the lore or even the lore writers that have played all these games and love the lore of Elder Scrolls as well or even the players that have followed the Elder Scrolls from the very beginning.

edit: I am such a bad speller..

I haven't read the article yet, but recently I've been wondering whether "The Lore" has become more important for a lot of fans than the games themselves.

The lore has been created as the series developed over time. Each game-- even "spinoffs" (Battlespire, Redguard, etc.) which aren't part of the main series-- has added to the franchise's lore and the worlds the games take place in, sometimes dropping certain bits or modifying parts as the devs saw fit.

Unfortunately (IMHO), what many fans have come to see as "The Lore" was mostly written by a particular Bethesda employee who isn't even there anymore, and who wasn't even part of the original team of devs who created the series (with Arena), who has achieved such Stature and Importance in many fans' minds that anything he's written about The Elder Scrolls after leaving Bethesda is considered by said fans to be Established Canon.

The reason I think this is unfortunate is because he revised bits of the original lore which he considered to be "wrong," added a lot of Really Cool Stuff which may have been inspired by ingesting stuff and letting his imagination run wild, which no doubt gave rise to a lot of stories (books) which the fans love but which are not necessarily things that can be easily depicted in a computer game. Consider that the limitations of Arena and Daggerfall didn't even allow the depiction of cities and locations accurately coinciding with their descriptions as given by short in-game text (Arena) or in the in-game books (Daggerfall). The players were required, possibly even encouraged, to create their own visualizations of stuff in their heads because the games were not always able to show those things.

So what we have now is a body of ideas which mostly took its current shape in the middle of the main series (Morrowind), so beloved by many fans that any discrepancies or inconsistencies between it and the series-founding games are judged in favor of what came after (in Morrowind), not in favor of what came before (in Arena and Daggerfall), and any discrepancies in later games are judged to be "lore-breaking errors" committed by devs who either "don't know" or "don't respect" The Lore.

That's kind of how I see it, anyway, and it worries me a bit, because it makes me wonder how the hardcore Lore fans will react if anything at all in ESO, ES6, or other future ES content doesn't meet their devout and stringent opinions about what is Correct Canon in The Lore. To put it another way, I wonder if The Lore has become so "poured in concrete" that it is no longer any sort of organic body of ideas and stories which are allowed the freedom to grow and evolve as the franchise continues.

@SeaGtGruff

I think you would appreciate what is mentioned in this article then of the early development of the Elder Scrolls Franchise beginning with Vijay Lakshman, the lead designer of the first Elder Scrolls game, 1994’s Arena, and who came up with the phrase “Elder Scrolls” without knowing what it meant and who also wrote 5 novels worth of details about the world..

That link also doesn't let me read the whole article. It's the same as the first one: sign up to read the rest.

Eporem wrote: »

metheglyn wrote: »

That link also doesn't let me read the whole article. It's the same as the first one: sign up to read the rest.

so strange - links this other here and returns to see where this one leads - https://remapradio.com/articles/who-cares-about-the-lore/

so the first link I gave does take me as well to the signin page - though this one just posted does not - can you let me know if the link just posted allows you to read the article in full or does it go to the signin page again..I may have combined two links together in the first one
- bleh

Unfortunately, all the links lead to the same page with required sign up to read the full article. There likely isn't a way to read it otherwise, which is too bad. I found it an interesting article and would have read the full thing, but I don't care to sign up to that site. Thanks for trying, though!

I've delayed commenting because the article also cuts off for me.

As for the main topic, inevitably all very long franchises change over time. The first Elder Scrolls game released in 1994 and there are probably people who are part of ESO's dev team that are younger than that game. Even amongst earlier writers, we know they changed their minds on many things. I'm usually not a fan of retcons in general but I mind it less in TES because the series has a heavy focus on abstract concepts and a world that can changes in ways that ours cannot and also how grief/loss/change is so crucial to the metanarrative of the series.

As a disgruntled ex-warcraft lore fan, there can be a debate about whether the lore matters more to players or the game/companies that own them. I used to be very passionate about warcraft lore for many years but after major writing decisions that disrespected previous canon, lore, and character growth and Blizzard's response was that gameplay mattered more to them than story did. I also follow Riot Games's fantasy world and while I enjoy it a lot, former writers and artists have posted on social media before on things that executives refused to greenlight or things they had to fight to get put in game that players loved. I recall similarly a talk about how the epilogue to Clockwork City in ESO was a fight to get that conversation with Sotha Sil in game and a lot of players I know myself included find that to be an iconic moment in eso. ZOS has been more private than most about development stuff until recently so we'll never no for certain but I do think that their situation feels closer to Riot's than Blizzard's. Still, this is a game run by a company looking to make a profit. I'm reminded of a post I saved over a year ago from another platform that is relevant to this:

The saddest thing is not when there is a boring story. The saddest thing is when there is an expansive lore setting with unique aesthetics but it's tied to a behemoth of a corporate product so that they can never risk exploring it to it's full potential.

No we can't make any of the characters we want people to buy too morally ambiguous or kill them off. Better to play it safe.

No we can't try new art direction when there is potentially millions of dollars riding on each character's popularity.

No the story has to revolve around how we release the next update and never truly have a finish line in sight.

Yeah you know that amazing tidbit of lore. Well it might not be marketable so we thought about going in that direction but axed it so people won't ever get to experience it.

On the flipside but also still relevant, the fans do keep things alive. How many times have you stumbled across a curated social media built around someone's hyperfixation over a minor character in a series that barely had any presence or voicelines filled with lovingly crafted headcanons and expansions of their story? Death of the author is an interesting concept debated for many reasons but for a more positive example it is interesting to think about the impact fans have in keeping a series or story going during the gaps between content or when the lights finally go down and the stage comes to a close for the general audience.

Then there is the perspective problem. I know some people see TES as a generic fantasy series and want it to stay more grounded. I'm much more in the camp of liking the weird dreamlike inconsistencies of the lore and am giddy when we're getting content for weird and obscure things that embrace those abstract concepts I mentioned at the start of this. Even within the writing team we see the clash of this tug of war to make TES more traditional or embrace the chaos. In some ways, the two camps are irreconcilable but I also do not think TES will ever fully commit to one or the other leaving it in this awkward limbo where both schools of thought get enough to keep them interested but never fully what they want. For me, I'm somewhat okay with that, I have my stories I weave in the in game universe and I can similar to the game's official lore/story, weave little creative discrepancies and point to things we're given about how reality and time in TES are frequently altered but I know some people who are less happy with this arrangement.

Sorry if this is a bit stream of consciousness rambling, I couldn't really read the article due to the paywall stuff but given prior debates and discussions I've been in and reading the thread I could guess some of the content. I have a lot more thoughts I could say too but for now I think this is enough.