Does anyone else have hard time digesting the story of ESO? If the story happens long time ago before the other ES games, why haven't I heard or read about it in Morrowind, Oblivion or Skyrim? Nothing in the previous games ever indicated about the events of ESO that presumably in the second era... feels very forced IMO. Does it also mean I cannot be a champion of Molag Bal since he's the ultimate bad guy ?

They chose this time period for that reason, no history nothing super significant that would throw offthe current lore of the TES games, with that being said they might recreate some of the things weve read in books just to loosly tie in the TES series a bit but only just enough to leave room to create.

And they did mention that there will be some kind of way to receive artifacts and possible way to be recognized by deadra but it was a small hint. Who knows since deadra are so deceitful and cunning there might be a quest that you do for Molag Bal where you can gain favor for your soul back....

http://www.imperial-library.info/content/pocket-guide-empire-first-edition-cyrodiil#1


Another member included this info in his post in a similar thread & I will edit this post to give him/her their due credit when I get a chance.

Not to step on your toes, Spat. You know I love ya.

Easy explanation: history is written by those who are in charge. Since that was so transitory during this time period, it is easy to suppose that very few records endured. We do however have more records than you might think. The book "Brief History of the Empire v1", a text that has existed since Daggerfall, had this to say:

"Before the day of http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Tiber_Septim, all http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Tamriel was chaos. The poet Tracizis called that era "the days and nights of blood and venom." The kings were a petty lot of grasping tyrants".

Source: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Brief_History_of_the_Empire,_Part_1

Sounds pretty close to ESO's vision, methinks.

Why didn't anything in Arena or Daggerfall mention that Morrowind had been home to a trio of living gods for the last 3500 years? (Daggerfall had two different books about the life of Barenziah, and neither of them mentioned the Tribunal at all)

It's because it was added later. Every game since Arena has introduced lore that wasn't there before, and nothing in the existing lore explicitly contradicts the events of ESO.

Nope, for me it feels fine.

Do you remember what happened here on earth almost 1000 years ago? There is plenty of room to add things at a later point just like you learn about the past one thing at a time.

it feels out of place to both you and me because IT IS out of place. the alliances are completely out of the relm of elderscrolls pattern.

There are actually some really good lore explanations for the fact that you haven't heard about it. For instance, this is the Dark Ages of Tamriel. Their is no central authority. Think of our own dark ages and the vast vast amounts of knowledge that were lost or only maintained in obscure closed off monasteries, kept far from the eyes of common folks. Now consider the fact that Tamriel is still only a Medieval level society.

On top of that, there are some really interesting metaphysical goings on at the moment such as the Planemeld. If this ends up causing a Dragonbreak (a discontinuity in time) then that would explain the poor memory of later generations.

Lastly, just because your character never heard about the events, doesn't mean people didn't know about it. You have not read every book in Skyrim because every book in Skyrim does not appear in Skyrim. The games are merely approximations or representations of the real-fictional world of Tamriel. There exists knowledge that you do not know of. Consider the lack of toilets or latrines in all games. Consider the lack of children in every game prior to Skryim.

It isn't true that children didn't exist prior to Skyrim. They just hadn't been represented.

TL;DR

Its a video game and its a prequel. Gimme a break.

Are you complaining that lore keeps expanding and improving? That would svck if nothing new happened in ES.

Btw, they add villain system later along with justice system so you can be badass.

Speaking of lore I think would be cool if there was books about ES, after ESO and Skyrim success its kinda obvious this IP established itself.

Nobody knew about about any so called "Dragonwar" prior to Skyrim, either. Every game adds something new to the lore.

There is lore, it's just not well known, which is why they chose that era, they don't want to be bound by too much lore.

I didn't know there were dragons until after I went to the watchtower, I didn't know I was Neravarine until Azura told me/ I fufilled the profecies myself. Therefore I'm not going to judge ESO's lore/quests until I've experienced them myself.

Faulgor for the win.

Its like our Dark Ages no real recorded history just myths and legends with a smattering of facts.

Just like King Arthur and Merlin. We know there was a King called Arthur but was there are Merlin? Did he really have a magic sword called Excalibur ? That part is all myth with no facts to back it up.

The time of Tiber Spetim is when the history books really start to get back to facts as the dark ages of Tameriel is basically over. But even then Tiber Septim becomes a legend and myth even reaches god hood and becomes the 9th divine called Talos.

Thank you for saying that. There's this prevalent idea that "the lore" is set in stone, and not only is it all TRUE (even though, ESPECIALLY in the ES world, much of it is clearly couched in language that make's it clear it's an opinion, an interpretation, or even an outright fabrication), it also can't be added to or amended. Real world history is recreated, reconstructed and reinterpreted all the time; new past events are discovered or brought to a prominence they never previously had all the time by historians, authors and the public imagination. Shouldn't the history of a fictional world have MORE space to be negotiated, rather than less?

I do understand the appetite of the young for "facts", and I gotta blame parts of our educational system for instilling in the youth the idea that history is just a collection of facts (and that therefore the same should apply to fantasy worlds). That's a reassuringly simple and easy to grasp view. No serious historian would agree with it though, and if anybody makes it through college with that idea intact then they've been failed by their teachers; you really should not be able to escape from high school without appreciating to what degree history is a social construct :/

i think it is bad thing that they decided to go back in time because they said they do not wont to brake the lore. BUT?? if this games turn out to be successful they will sooner or later have to bring dragon mounts and akavir continent into the game play. it will be hard to explain why all of those things are forgotten in morowind and skyrim when it has so many storys to tell, and good storys are hard to forget.

How so?
Even though many people like something, it doesn't mean ZOS has to do it.

In Skyrim no one believes that the dragons are real, period. Until one destroys a fort, and people see them flying overhead [or attacking their village]. If people forgot dragons, they can forget a lot of stuff.

Stories get changed, details are forgotten or added until you end up with something that is nothing like the original incident. They should be able to work just about anything they need for ESO into the lore without breaking it.

That wasn't at all what our dark ages were like. I know you have read this exact same thing on the lore forums as well Nordjitsu...brainfarting? Our 'dark ages' were more a product of idiotic renaissance scholars than any lack of progression or information from that time period in Europe. We have tons of info about it and so did they.
The rest of this this is true.

There can be no world building unless they build. You cannot build a world out of nothing. The way canon works is that unless new information contradicts old information, it is right. In the case of a contradiction the more credible source(s) supersedes the less credible one(s).

Eh. Not knowing about a random plot by a daedra lord to absord the world into his personal oblivion realm isn't a big deal- these things apparently just happen (see, well, Oblivion). What bothers me about the story is the setup and framework is both bad (though I expect that from an ES game's main story line); and completely unsuitable for an MMO. Not even Molag Bal needs to create millions of instances of the Chosen One destined to defeat him in a self-fulfilling prophecy of stupid.

The Akavir invasion happens before the game begins and they do not invade again after being wiped out in Morrowind. As for Dragon Mounts the Akavir never had them.

u missed my point, if this game last dev will sometime in the future have to introduce dragon mounts just like wow did it with flying

and when expansions start coming they will have to introduce new areas, after one, two or maybe three expansions tamriel and islands near him will be depleted, so they will have to unleash us upon akavir.

talaran gave me good response which assured me that we will have dragon mounts and akavir playground and all of that wont ruined the lore

ESO doesn't HAVE to have dragon mounts in this game. I don't know why you say that they HAVE too.

Well....the attitude you are expressing here makes me a bit uncomfortable, even though I agree that there is no problem with ESO.

You can't just change whatever whenever. Or you can, but you shouldn't because you will destroy your world and your fan base.

There are changes that makes sense and there are changes that don't make sense. Fleshing out a previously unexplained part of history makes total sense and there is no contradiction. Other changes, like if they change Moon Sugar from a hard core drug to a benign substance, make absolutely no sense at all. The rules of the world shouldn't change. Biology shouldn't change. Those types of things ought to be set in stone. I think its a serious problem when people assume that lore is just history. History is one small part of lore, but there are lots of other things that go into it. The lore is the entire foundation of the world and it needs to remain consistent with itself in order for it to be believable and thus immersive. I'd encourage you to read Tolkien's thoughts on the subject. Google "Tolkien second world" and I'm sure you'll find it.

Wrong. The Dark Ages were very much dark. We now know a lot about that period of time but only because our epidemiological techniques, ie. our ways of gaining knowledge, have improved so much.

Common people in particular knew very little at the time and immediately following that time. That's a fact and the only thing that is relevant to our conversation here. The vast majority of knowledge was maintained either by priests of the Catholic church or by other cultures. Literacy rates where at their lowest point in all of history since the invention and spread of written language.

Now we know a lot more because of techniques like archaeology and because there has been enough research to gather all of the then disparate sources together. Still though, there are things that were lost that will never be recovered (look up the Burning of the Library at Alexandria for example.)

What we know now though is completely irrelevant to the conversation. Skyrim in the fourth era is anologous to the mid to late Medieval period at best, not the freakin 21st century.