I would posit a very small but valid concern is the very idea of it- that Bethesda sold the rights to their flagship series to be made by another studio. It may not be a tangible reason, but it remains, and it leaves a trace of doubt for the future of the single player series because it infers that they are looking at TES as a money maker more than a labor of love. We all know they need to make a profit off the games they produce, but the impression was still there that they would never sacrifice quality for profit, and now, there's a murkiness to that that is unshakable for some people.

More fans for them is good? Yes

For me? No

If features are taken from the game I enjoy for the sake of pulling new fans should I be happy and welcome that? You can't say my logic is flawed when you don't even know my thought process. I don't view a game company in terms of business, thats depressing. More like artists. Making for profit is the wrong reason to make something. If they continue this route how long before TES goes the CoD route. I don't see innovation there.

To me. What TES is to me. That is in part the magic of TES, you can be who you want to be and if you want add all sorts of mods. Now this MMO idea? Can you mod it to how you want? I don't use mods all the time but I like the basic features of TES;

-Leveling system from single player
-Open World Sandbox
-Quests, NPC's enviroment
-That 'be who you want to be' concept

Those four things are flexible across all TES games I know but that is in my mind how I define the experience. A MMO, of what we have seen so far I can't see any of these things. These are all warning signs to me. I'm waiting for gameplay though, hopefully it can prove my fears wrong.

Yeah, but compare Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim, and then to TES:O. The previous TES games have more similarities than differences, and TES:O has more differences than similarities, even just going by the GI magazine article.

If games don't get more fans, then the studios don't get more money to create more games. More fans is good for everyone, except elitists.

They knew what they were doing when they choose to lose a few fans and gain thousands at the same time. They enjoy making these games, and enjoy it more when it makes more money. They aren't an indie studio making this in their spare time with no intent on making money, so when they do make a few bucks its just a bonus. Maybe you don't view it as a business, but that is unrealistic of you. Be more realistic.

Bethesda didn't own the rights. Zenimax did. They opened a sister studio to develop the MMO that THEY wanted, so as not to impact Bethesda and the games they were good at. No rights were sold.

And? I do not link differences and similarities to inherent goodness or badness. Redguard and Battlespire were also quite different from the main games and, while their sales were not phenomenal, generally the fan following is very strong despite its size. That's why I'm giving this a chance. I note and acknowledge the differences that would, in a Bethesda game, worry me but am not bothered by Zeni's intent to use them.

No, but they are linked to inherent "TES-ness"; otherwise, you could take Call of Duty and rename it The Elder Scrolls and not have any issues.

So because I don't agree with your opinion you label me 'Elitist'? Which is also not a fact but your own personal projection.

I welcome new fans to the series. But not at the expense of changing it into a generic hack and slash action game with exploration features. I like single player open world games, especially ones that are RPG like TES. There are not many other experiences out there like it and I would be saddened if the MMO brought about the end of that.

Except Redguard and Battlespire, one a linear platformer and the other a mostly-linear exp-based action-RPG.

Maybe it helps that I think of this as a prequel spinoff? See, I am not looking for gameplay like the main games, or even a style of storytelling like the main games. I'm expecting something that will be a non-TES-ish gameplay around a TES-ish plot.

Actually, I never labeled you as elitist. I said that more fans is good for everyone who isn't elitist. Meaning that unless you care more about being able to stick your pinky in the air when you talk about gaming, you shouldn't have a problem with that game reaching a broader audience.

No problem with a broader audience. Problem with systematically stripping away gameplay aspects that made the games complicated and have a RPG flavour.

And yet so many other people have no problem with the design direction that the team has taken with Skyrim.

So wouldn't that mean that they're the real fans of the series?

I hate to twist your words but, your saying;

Only a real fan could accept the game as it is without providing any critisim?

If you don't like certain aspects of a certain game your not a fan?

Obviously you didn't say that but thats what I think when I read that question.

Also, the terribly cliche "Online" label. World of Warcraft did fine without it. "Online" doesn't shout "quality!" to me.

No, but thanks for illustrating my point. You say that you're angry at Bethesda for abandoning the "true" Elder Scrolls, which implies that only people who agree with you could really be considered fans of the series. Everyone else is just too mainstream.

The problem is, you're failing to account for the fact that you're greatly outnumbered by those mainstream people, so why is it impossible that they actually represent the real fanbase for the games?

Fan is like sandbox, there's as many definitions as there are people to use it. We ought to replace the term with about six broad over-terms and group by category.

EDIT: As to the discussion at hand, let me offer my bit here: I think you both ought to step back for a second, because I think you may both start saying foolish things out of frustration.

Fact is, I am a series fan. I've liked the series since I started it. I've had criticisms of each game both during development and after release. Broadly, as a console user who doesn't mind the lack of explicit numbering in newer titles and prefers faster combat gameplay, I fall into the mainstream when it comes to that, however I would prefer that the plots use more of the esoteric weird fantasy stuff that usually just gets mentioned or put in books and side quests. Therefore I am not in the mainstream category. Only I am, according to above.

There are too many redundant, oversimplified or outright inaccurate terms being bandied about for this conversation to continue with civility for long. Just an observation.

I think the fallacy in your argument is that you're assuming the 'mainstream' fans are the majority. What is the logic behind that conclusion?

I also wish they'd come up with a different name. Alas, it's harder than it sounds. 'Specially when you're working with an already established IP.

The same logic that states the mainstream fans aren't the true fans.

What scares me most about that is you make perfect sense. If the fanbase has changed then that means that these games are no longer created for 'me'. This saddens me. I'm not angry at Bethesda, more like resigned and upset. Skyrim is still a great game. I just miss a lot of features from previous games. Edit: I should say I think that once you have a core of fans you should always cater your game for them, any additional along the way is just from spreading fame. Not to fundamentally change everything to cater for new people

Yeah agree! , I'd hate to see people labeled as fan type II though. Labelling is just un-flexible.

Way to dodge the question. Do you have an actual statement or facts to base it on?

... I thought that was the definition of mainstream.

I think I can chime in here. "Mainstream" is more or less by definition the broadest, also assumed to be the shallowest, demographic to aim at. Therefore by its very nature the mainstream market is bigger, if less inherently loyal and fanatical, than catering to a smaller, yet more loyal, fanbase. However, all mainstream inherently means is something a wide market would buy. Generally, people who see the word fill in the other, derogatory details themselves. The success of Game of Thrones and the book series it sprung from, a subcreative dark fantasy, in the mainstream market reinforces my point that what we call the mainstream is not actually as dim and narrow-minded as we often assume here.

Name's not fantastic, but it works. Any other descriptive names would likely only make sense to longtime fans or give the wrong idea. "TES Interregnum" sounds cooler, but who outside the lore buffs would know instantly that it means second era between Akaviri and Tiber? Not to mention that doesn't immediately scream "ITSA MMO!"

Being that I write (see signature), I don't think they ever made it "for" anyone or anything but the fact that it was something they enjoyed doing that they could use to turn a profit. That may be a cold comfort, but it is a thing.

And I also agree that labels can be very inflexible, but such is the pitfall of using a syllabic language designed primarily to tell one another where the good fruits can be found and to communicate tactics when trying to outmaneuver the mammoth you hope to feed to your clan.

Thank you for your well written response, but it still doesn't address the issue that the original poster was claiming that the majority of TES fans were mainstream. That was the crux of my question. Your post is a great addition to the discussion though