Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

BonusWaffle said:
Blades aside, I decided killing paarthurnax was the thing to do, not for the blades, but because it seems to me that paarthurnax is simply using you to kill alduin. With his only rival out of the way Paarthurnax can lead the dragons and rule the world. Also his name means something like ambition tyranny cruelty in dragon language if i remember right.
Click to expand...

Why didn't Paarthurnax take over the world earlier? Before Alduin returned? For example, during the war with the Thalmor, when all the factions were weaker?

The argument about the name is just silly. My name is Michael, Who is like God?. Despite the obvious religious nature of the rhetorical question, I'm completely irreligious. Names don't determine anything. Paarthurnax could've meant Mr Big Poopy Pants, and it wouldn't make Paarthurnax Mr Big Poopy Pants.
 
Also, Parthurnaax trying to rule the world when there's the bloke who killed the much more powerful Alduin still running around seems a bit like a bad plan to me, for some reason. The guy had a hundred opportunities to go mass murdering, he didn't.

The PC, on the other hand, is almost always a wrecking ball of pure, senseless murder. There's really not much place for moral judgement in a game like Skyrim, coming from the protagonist anyway.
 
And the Killing Parthurnaax is so tacked on at the end, like trying to pull a moral choice without actually elaborating on why I should kill the Dragon, he was more usefull to the whole ordeal than the Blades themselves, that just expect me to go do their killing.
 
Well I think the key here is patience. Paarthurnax knew that alduin wasnt dead and was going to come back eventually some time in the future and probably would be too happy with paarthurnax taking his place. Also the dragonborn is mortal, if he can wait thousands of years for alduin he can wait a couple dozen more for this one to croak. And yeah there will be more dragonborn, but you cant just not do things because someone sometime will try to stop you eventually.

When you say the dragon world for "fire" a jet of flame springs from your mouth. Dragon names mean a bit more than catholic names.
 
that still doesn't have to mean anything, or that Parth will become the next Dragon-Hitler or what ever.

As far as I get it, its more about to unite them, so they are not as easily killed like before. They already tried to dominate humanity or well destroying the world. Parth would be stupid to just do it "again". I dont see him as an altruistic character either though who loves humanity, but I dont think he would have survived for so long if he was not capable of reading the signs of the times and actually making reasonable decisions and it doesnt seem like he has a grudge on humans/elves and the like either.

Trying to somehow coexist will eventually be an better alternative for the Dragons in Tamriel for the simple fact that yeah, well they already failed once pretty miserably and dissapered for a very long time. Its pretty clear and obvious that humans in general are an huge obstacle, even for Dragons. - Not to mention they scale very badly with the heroes :p so the peasant will kill them with investing enough in sword skills.
 
Crni Vuk said:
that still doesn't have to mean anything, or that Parth will become the next Dragon-Hitler or what ever.

As far as I get it, its more about to unite them, so they are not as easily killed like before. They already tried to dominate humanity or well destroying the world. Parth would be stupid to just do it "again". I dont see him as an altruistic character either though who loves humanity, but I dont think he would have survived for so long if he was not capable of reading the signs of the times and actually making reasonable decisions and it doesnt seem like he has a grudge on humans/elves and the like either.

Trying to somehow coexist will eventually be an better alternative for the Dragons in Tamriel for the simple fact that yeah, well they already failed once pretty miserably and dissapered for a very long time. Its pretty clear and obvious that humans in general are an huge obstacle, even for Dragons. - Not to mention they scale very badly with the heroes :p so the peasant will kill them with investing enough in sword skills.
Click to expand...

Why wouldnt his name apply to his character when its shown that names meanings apply to every other dragons characteristics? Do you actually have a reason? Just saying "no your wrong" does not further your point. And to your "they lost the last time so he wouldnt try to make another" They really didnt lose. They ruled tamriel for a pretty long time. Thats like saying "well the roman empire fell, obviously this whole british empire thing wont work out, so theres no use trying, lets have tea"

I guess you could say that paarthurnax is resisting his nature like he talked about, but i guess thats where the decision comes in. Is he lying? Even if he isnt lying, can you trust him to keep resisting? Is letting him live worth the risk? Who knows when another dragonborn as powerful as you will come along? You could be damning generations of people to tyrannical rule under dragons.
 
so you know the name of every other dragon? What if there is an dragon with the name Buttercup. Or if there is another Dragon with the name He-Who-Knows-How-To-Make-Awesome-Steaks?

We just "assume" that the names have a meaning. Which it probably does. But how strong that meaning is as far as the character of the Dragon goes, is a whole different questions and pure speculation. They say Nomen est Omen, its after all a theory that the name can have such a strong meaning. But that doesnt mean it has to be always set in stone.

Not to mention, even with translations, there is always room left for "interpretation", since its an language afterall. You know the word Ignorance can have many meanings in German. Or the words for it self could be very ancient, so that its meanings changed a little over time, or the words could be similar to latin, where plural and singular and other stuff is changing its meaning when you writte it in different ways, like where tute is an stronger form of tut. Its probably very unlikely that the people at Bethesda spend so much time with that dragon talk, but understanding languages correctly is as far as we know from our own experience not easy, pretty sure everyone here has his experiences from school.

And even if the meaning of his name is absolutely correct, that STILL doesnt rule out the possibility that yeah well Parth might have changed his "opinion" and "attitude" over time. Thousands of years are a long time to reconsider your past. There are countless of examplese where whole deities changed their attitude for example. Why should a Dragon, which is a sentient beeing be always bound to the meaning of its "name"? Where is the rule which dictates that. I dont remember it.
 
Yeah your right, but i think that dragon names differ quite a bit from human names. If you shout "craig" in english some guy named craig isnt going to hear you from across the world, while if you say odahviing on the other hand, that exact dragon hears your call, implying that the name itself is tied to him more concretely than just happening to be what people call him.

Maybe paarthurnax really did change for the better. Personally i didnt think leaving him alive was worth taking that chance.
 
I figured sitting alone atop the highest mountain in the world for milennia is punishment enough for any crime.
Also, I never feel quite comfortable with videogame genocide. I see no need to exterminate the entire dragon race (especially considering they're intelligent beings).
 
Jebus said:
I figured sitting alone atop the highest mountain in the world for milennia is punishment enough for any crime.
Also, I never feel quite comfortable with videogame genocide. I see no need to exterminate the entire dragon race (especially considering they're intelligent beings).
Click to expand...

He was waiting for Alduin to return, as he knew he had been cast adrift in time there. Whether he wanted to serve him, stop him, or overthrow him however is hard to say. But you must remember that dragons are the creations of Akatosh, the dragongod of time. I think dragons plan a bit further ahead than us puny mortals. So to dismiss his possible bad intentions because he sat on the mountain makes little sense. He'd be safe from attacks there, where Alduin returns, the beginning of doings he would want to be involved in.

Still, this is just a snippet we're discussing here, with no developments to it, so it's useless to discuss really. It all comes down to whether you trust Parthuurnax or not, which makes no difference in any case.
 
BonusWaffle said:
Well I think the key here is patience. Paarthurnax knew that alduin wasnt dead and was going to come back eventually some time in the future and probably would be too happy with paarthurnax taking his place. Also the dragonborn is mortal, if he can wait thousands of years for alduin he can wait a couple dozen more for this one to croak. And yeah there will be more dragonborn, but you cant just not do things because someone sometime will try to stop you eventually.
Click to expand...

How about we take Occam's Razor to it instead and just accept Paarthurnax's explanation, that he overcame his evil nature and devoted himself to a life of philosophy, at face value?

I found it to be an interesting, yet unused bit of complexity. Bethesda (on purpose, I hope) juxtaposed the bloodthirsty New Blades that want to murder dragons with a dragon that mended his ways and became a hermit.

Shame you can't point out to Delphine and Tin-Foil-Hat-Grandpa that killing him thousands of years after he committed his crime wouldn't be justice. It would just be petty revenge, done for purely ideological reasons.

When you say the dragon world for "fire" a jet of flame springs from your mouth. Dragon names mean a bit more than catholic names.
Click to expand...

It's when you use the Thu'um explicitly. Paarthurnax has no problems talking to you in dragonese without causing weird stuff to happen.

Also, Michael is a Hebrew name. Not Catholic. DYR.
 
Killing someone because of what they might do or because of what they might be seems a bit harsh to me :) . But then, as was already pointed out, the dragonborn isn't exactly someone with a finely painted moral map. A little bit of preemtive killing (provided it's a monster) and butchering imperials or stormcloaks (provided the right side wins) is just proper heroic behaviour. No need, or point, in bringing in morals :wink:
 
This game was so bland, I was pretty hyped for it, back in the morrowind days I remember reading up about Skyrim and the Nords and thought it sounded awesome,but then, just like they did to Cryodiil, they transformed it into a generic fantasy setting, in this case, Vikings.

I uninstalled halfway through, it just felt so trivial, repetitive and soulless, I didn't connect or believe any of the characters, and I quickly got bored of hacking at a Draugr for six hours in about a hundred copy paste caves.

The game practically forced you into being a heroic warrior Nord, they made you feel out of place if you tried to roll a character any other way.

Magic was atrociously boring, just hold down LMB for two minutes until the Draugr falls down.

Loot was pointless because there was extreme level scaling, and any ancient artefacts you found could just be simply sold off for a measly 2000-3000 Gold.

There were no real RPG elements present, the game felt like an Action-Adventure, not an RPG by any standards, and on top of that the combat was the worst I've ever seen, I know Morrowinds was alittle controversial but come on, this was just plain silly, all you had to do was hold down LMB until the bandit/ Draugr ragdolled in front of you.

The world was horribly generic and boring, and the Nords were just Vikings, and nothing more, where were the cities carved into mountains! the gigantic Snow Whales! (I think thats what they were named) the deep underground mines that stretched beneath the land! where were the Real Nords! the ones that shouted regularly, for the simplest of things like sharpening a sword or blasting open a cavern?

Dragon fights were click fests and were horribly un-exciting and repetitive.


In my opinion, I think combat should have been something similar to Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.

I'm done with Bethesda, I thought MAYBE they could redeem themselves after Fallout 3, but it seems not.


What an uninspired turd of a game, and yet everyone ate it up as they did Fallout 3.
 
I agree with the Nord stuff. It feels a bit like there is to much focus on that. They simply welcome you way to easily, which becomes very obvious when you start to play some of the races which really are very alien, like the Cat or Lizard races. It simply seems a bit strang when you see how easily you can gain trust and become a "nord" of some sort ...

So yeah, as far as the immersion and roleplaying goes, this would have required better writing. But it seems Bethesda never is doing such stuff. Not even in Morrowind would you feel much of the slavery when playing Argonians for example. And it seems never to really make a difference if youre female or male.
 
I'm ashamed to admit that even I thought it was a great game, obviously that was before I did the mayor quest lines.

Fallout 3 and Skyrim are rpg decline incarnate. Masterfully terrible.
 
Akratus said:
I'm ashamed to admit that even I thought it was a great game, obviously that was before I did the mayor quest lines.

Fallout 3 and Skyrim are rpg decline incarnate. Masterfully terrible.
Click to expand...
IMO, complete sequel of fo3 is skyrim though I hate both.
 
I was also hyped for this game. I think I managed to spoil the experience for myself by watching a ton of videos of the game before I got it, but I think I would eventually realize that it was mainly boring.
The game is very well designed, but design cannot make up for the story. The story was an extremely bland 'get Macguffin, use Macguffin to kill Big Bad Dragon!' type of story. It also seems to me that Bethesda dropped the ball on the atmosphere part. They try to make it clear that the return of the dragons will herald the end of time, but what really happens is that sometimes, when you are going about your business, a dragon comes and squats on a building, and you scream at it until it drops dead. The gameplay was fairly solid, in the clicking department. The melee was solid, but fell apart in combat against non-humanoid opponents. Dragons were, as has been said before, a clickfest. Magic was indeed 'activate buff, fire the spell for a long time, win!' type of gimmick. The crafting was completely broken, Skyrim is a rare game in which you can train to craft god weaponry by crafting hundreds of daggers. Many skills were completely useless, such as speech, pickpocket and illusion. There was no reason to go anywhere, except to get a hundred gold coins for killing a bandit. The shouts ranged from hilariously overpowered (FUS RO DAH!) to completely useless (how many of you used Aura Whisper?)

Skyrim is indeed the Fallout 3 of the Elder Scrolls. Well designed, but ultimately bland and forgettable.
 
well its definitely an improvement over Oblivion.

But its not really like Bethesda had any other way then to go up from there ...
 
Crni Vuk said:
well its definitely an improvement over Oblivion.
Click to expand...
I don't get it.
While both are sucks, for quest oblivion is far better than skyrim I guess? other things is just decoration. looking good but actually sucks.

but skyrim is improed version of fo3 though. I don't like either.
 
Woo, I am not a native english speaker but I have to tell you, you don't say "It is sucks" you just Say "It sucks".

How bad is Oblivion? never played it, I am not into medieval settings. I only played Skyrm because of the Viking vibe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top