Talk:The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion/Archive 1

Bugs

I think the sheer number of bugs that still plague the game (even after the official patch) is noteworthy. A fansite called Baldurdash has identified more than 200 such bugs (many of them critical, including "crashes-to-desktop and many quest errors that break entire questlines"). Documentation of all these remaining issues, and an unofficial patch for the PC version only, can be found here http://www.baldurdash.org/TESOblivion/TESOblivion.html.

It is certainly possible to complete the game without running into major issues (minor ones, as we know, occur aplenty), but a significant portion of these bugs can severely break the game if you happen to run into them, and Bethesda apparently has no plans to fix them. WikiBob42 12:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

PS3?

Just a note on that issue, Bethesda hasn't said anything official about it. So I suggest that we refer to it as a rumor, not a rule. That being said, I think that it is quite likely that we will see it on the PS3. Ratwar 02:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Watch Attack of The Show. it has been confirmed that it will be released o the PS3.

Not everyone lives in a country where Attack of the Show is broadcast. All I know is that Bethesda themselves have said that there are currently no plans for other versions, and also, the sites that originally started the rumour (by listing it for pre-order) - such as Gamestop and EBGames, have removed the title from listings, presumably on request from Bethesda. So the truth is, for the moment at least, that any rumours of other platform versions, such as for the PS3 or PSP, are just that - rumours. --Dreaded Walrus 17:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Im sorry but attack of the show is not very reliable when it comes to rumors. They tend to grab any random thing that fits there "cool crap before its just crap" thing an repeat it about 12 hours too late. Brokenscope 23:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Way back before Oblivion was released a Bethesda representative said that their policy is something along the lines of, “If the system can support our game, we'll port it onto it." Will the PS3 support Oblivion? Then it will be on the PS3. JovBlackheart 21:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the Official U.S. Playstation Magazine November Issue confirmed an Oblivion for the PS3. The version will have slightly updated graphics and a new guild, the "Nights Nine". This is the "Holy Crusader", "Good-Guys" type guild. Downloadable content on the PS3 is as of yet unconfirmed, though. There will also be a PSP version of the game, but instead of an open world-type thing, it will be a 10-level linear dungeon crawler. 15:34, 5 August 2006

Has the PS3 version been canceled? Nat495 02:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Axes, Blade and Blunt

Axes are governed by either the blade or blunt skill, depending on the specific axe. Stop reverting this. --The Yar 19:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a citation or something might help prevent reverts.--Lloegr-Cymru^{£ ¥} 19:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

True, but as the disclaimers maybe should indicate, articles like this only loosely adhere to citation and original research requirements. I'll see if I can find one (other than my own character wielding an axe via the blade skill). --The Yar 17:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Even that might suffice here on the Talk page. Maybe even put a comment into the article's code directing people to look at the talk page before reverting the statement. Also, because someone might ask the question: are you sure your character's wielding an axe via the blade skill is not a bug? Again, I ask before someone else does. --Lloegr-Cymru^{£ ¥} 18:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll comment on the original research suspicions. Well, let's first look into the purpose of the policies - they all are means to ensure that the information is true. Verifiability is targeted against speculations, and NOR against unproven theories. Verifiability is not limited to citing publications, and the policies note that easily verifiable information doesn't require citations. For games, the means of verifying information are games themselves or editing tools. This might be called a sort of research, but it is not what NOR is about, at it isn't original in the sense the word is used there. NOR speaks just about primary sources of information, which Wikipedia isn't, but endorses compiling or sorting of data from existing ones. Retrieving data from game files is just use of existing primary sources, selecting required data, but not creating it.

So, using data files (or, more specifically, oblivion.esm) as a source is wholly appropriate. I have worked with it using TESCS, and it proves that game really contains several axes with type specified as blade. This can be easily checked, so this statement is just fine. CP/M 00:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Just for the record, I put the original fact in, but I was not party to the ensuing back-and-forth reverts. --The Yar 15:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

That should be excellent ammo to use in the event of any more revert wars.--Lloegr-Cymru^{£ ¥} 23:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I've played this game probably hundreds of hours and have yet to see an axe that uses the Blade skill.

Axes use the Blunt skill, at least on my game and everyone elses game that I know. T0mm0 23:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Despite the pre-release talk, in actual game play axes are ONLY govenered by the Blunt Skill. Drshems 21:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Guilds

The guilds section says there are 6, 5 of which are joinable. Then it lists 11 joinable guilds. Anyone want to try to clean that up? --The Yar 20:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I gave it a whirl. --The Yar 21:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The Elder Scrolls Wikiproject

Recently The Elder Scrolls wikiproject has been created. Its purpose is to create a well organized structure of all articles regarding The Elder Scrolls universe, including games, world lore, and any other information.

I suggest anyone concerned with TES articles in Wikipedia to join this project, as it will be the main place to discuss anything about TES encompassing more than one article. Expanding TES information in WP chaotically would make it incomprehensive. Any global changes should be discussed in the WP:TES. CP/M

Release Date

March 21, 2006 is now the official release date, that information has been added to the FAQ and a press release for the game has been posted to the official website declaring the game in the gold master stage of manufacturing. the game ships out on march 20 and will begin arriving in stores march 21, it should be available through all of the US and europe by the end of the same week depending on the method of delivery available to the store location.

press release official faq

hey omniwolf, i want to see you write something that pertains to me being right! hehe (hey i finally quit my job man) Tik 16:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

you werent right. the simple reality is the official dates were subject to change right up until the point of the gold announcement. considering that every retail store was still inventing dates throughout the month of march than the most anyone could do is guess based on typical industry shipping schedules. even as we speak there is now a "release week", with no specific dates beyond those derived from the shipping methods used at a variety of stores. anyone claiming "they knew the day" was wrong, and still is even under the current release schedule, since even now there is no street release date, only a shipping schedule which will put the game into various parts of the world on a variety of dates. even stores within the US are not all releasing on the same day. so quite simply, there never was, and still isnt anything to be right about. to even attempt to claim differant is to lack the understanding of the situation and how things work. and for the record, even petes "march 20th" has proven to be an estimate, as the actual factory has begun making small shipments of the game already, some preorders, such as those from take2 will arrive prior to the week of march 21-28. --Omniwolf 13:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

dude, why cant you admit that you were wrong. I specifically said 20-21 and you said 'NO NO ID COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE THIS DATE" give me a break man, the game was released on monday to EVERYBODY. and that release week crap is just you putting a spin on the ordeal trying to make up for being wrong. if i had been wrong i easily would have said, yeah i was wrong. the DAY you can aqcuire the game and take it home officially, is the day that it came out. i was right you were wrong. Your just gonna have to get over it man. Tik 20:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Negative things

This article completly ignores all the negative things about Oblivion, like there being almost no dialogue, the lack of a religious joinable religious faction, Levitation, Spears, Crossbows, Throwing Weapons, the lack of written directions which were replaced by the compass, the merging of skills, the removal of some skills. ~~Lumpy~~

theres 50+ hours of spoken dialogue. as for things being "removed". its a new game, those things were never added in the first place. you cant "remove" something that didnt already exist. now, if you want to speak of removing them from the series - fine - but dont act like they were removed from oblivion, since they werent in to begin with. what i was planning to do was create a section like the one that exists in morrowinds article, making cross comparisons to previous games. it would contain things that have been brought back (such as fast travel via the map which existed in previous elder scrolls games), as well as comparing things that were not included such as those you pointed out. your more than welcome to add this section yourself, i wasnt going to do it until the game was released so that the list would be more accurate. if anyone does get around to this for oblivion, i would suggest using the morrowind/daggerfall comparison section in the morrowind article as a starting template.--Omniwolf 14:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Omniwolf. Besides the fact that the developers have always stated that each new Elder Scrolls games begins its life as a completely new creation, who is to say that these things are negatives? I personally hated certain aspects of Morrowind, one of which was lack of map travel and marking of destinations using the compass. The is an encycopedic article, and therefore we need a netural point of view. Just because you feel that the removal of levitation is a negative, perhaps others don't. Defkkon 15:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I doubt anyone feels that the removal of levitation is a positive. And it could say it this way: "Oblivion is often criticized for ...", right? Lumpy

to what end? simply stating its removal as fact would be enough. the article is borderline POV already due to the fact that we have nothing to rely on but dev quotes and preview articles. at some point it needs to grow into a more factual accounting and not just statements of opinion and critique. --Omniwolf 03:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

i started a section for listing changes. i tried to keep the same style that was present in the morrowind article, attempting to keep it a factual accounting of changes with as little opinion as possible. --Omniwolf 04:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with omni on this as well, games like final fantasy 7, wild arms, grandia, and elder scrolls games have game mechanics that are constantly changing, which people expect from them. So saying that you think levitation being taken out is more akin to fancruft and personal opinion than anything else, lots of things from daggerfall were changed in the transition to morrowind and that game was one of the better rpgs to come out recently. so seriously, one mans trash is another mans treasure, right? Tik 16:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Departure from a Trend

I think there is something missing and I can best describe it in the form of a critiqeu, although it can be easilly transformed in to a NPOV description of how Oblivion is a break from the common ES trend.

The Critique: Tamriel is bizarre by lack of any other words. Only the High Rock qaurter is what you might consider normal. Now when I say that Tamriel is bizarre it's not only in the landscape but also in story, people, the creatures, the culture, the history, simply put the whole world.

This became more apperent as the world was fleshed out more with each game. Most obviously right after Daggerfall when Red-Gaurd was made and the Pocket Guide to the Empire was published. It already describes a world that is both vibrant and alien. Specifically Cyrodiil is put down as the integration of all colourfull parts of the Empire, mixing their religion, opinion, philosphy with magic, politics, gods and demons. While at the same time the Colovian West went into the King Arthur overdrive.

The Dwemer Orrery threw out the idea of "normal" (but not a sensible) universe and Battlespire came to follow it up with a trip through Oblivions multi-angulair-modern-art-design frenzy with a story that revealed that the Daedra were more then simple demons and governed by the laws of nature as much as any other mortal. Morrowind topped it off with a three way culture clash of the Empire, the Tribunal Temple and the Daedra worshipppers.

This trend however did not continue. Where Oblivion provides the cinematic story the other games were missing, it departs from the common trend by not providing an indepth view of the world. Oblivion certainly does touch on certain aspects, it lacks the detailed world that marked the previous games. 86.80.122.213 19:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC) Proweler

Spears considered throwing weapons?

I added "The spear skill and weapons have been removed." to the [Changes from Previous Elder Scrolls Games] section, and then the user [Defkkon] reverted it with the comment, "Spears are considered throwing weapons". You didn't throw them in MW! When I think of "thowing weapons", especially when they are listed alongside the crossbows, I think of the ranged Thowing Stars & Knifes in MW. Therefore, I think spears should be mentioned in the [Changes from Previous Elder Scrolls Games] section, otherwise it may be misleading. JovBlackheart 15:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

You know what? I honestly thought I remembered them being ranged weapons. I always used melee weapons in Morrowind. Now that I think about it, you're right - spears were melee with longer range. I take back my revert, thanks for discussing it. Defkkon 23:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

It is somewhat disturbing to me that none of the critisism about the sometimes glaring bugs, such as the failure to correctly detect incompatible video cards, goes completely unmentioned. This doesn't read to me like an encyclopedia article, it reads to me like a press release. I recognise that it's a good game, but it's not flawless, and to maintain NPOV, shouldn't the article reflect that? 207.161.55.158 00:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not Bugzilla or IGN. Unless they are major bugs that effect a large portion of the players or are "famous," they do not belong in an article. Good luck in the future with wikipedia --Mboverload 00:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I simply mean that in other articles, where there was something negative to be said on a topic, it is given mention. Why should an article about a game be any different? Right here we've got a long article talking about how great a new game is. If there are fairly large numbers of people who have some problem with the game, whether it's a perception that some features were left out, or the fact that due to bugs in the shader detection code, anyone with less than a Geforce FX is left in the cold, why not include it in some respect? It seems like it would lend some balance to an article that seems at first glance to be skewed towards being positive without any tempering.207.161.55.158 01:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Any bugs, crashes, or compatability issues should be listed in an article, because they are facts of the game. Maybe there should be a different section, since you can't list an issue under "criticism" unless it has actually been criticized, but if it's a common problem it should still be at least mentioned. Tonberry King 04:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Much negative critique was left out from this article and the whole thing looks like it is made by the marketing department of the company. Check the forums out, many people that have gaming experience in most of the Elder Scrolls Games, say the whole game has been dumbed down, and I agree personally, but that has nothing to do with this ufcourse. I think the whole "rioting" in the Elder Scrolls forums should be taken seriously and the reasons of the unease should be mentioned here. -dmjncd 06 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.77.154.223 (talk • contribs) .

Factions/Guilds

Arena Faction/Gladiator Guild

I've managed to get a straight answer from a dev about the arena, his answer was this:

QUOTE Vega, let me clarify the issue for you.

There is an Arena, obviously. But you also join the Arena as a combatant. So it's not called the "gladiator's guild," but in practice that's what it is. So when you "join the Arena," you are joining an elite group of warriors who fight in matches in the Arena. You work your way up a circuit (with ranks), all the way to the top.

The Arena has a really rich history in the Elder Scrolls lore, although it's never actually been featured prominently in an Elder Scrolls game before. The first game in the series was called Arena, but even then it existed more as background story than actual gameplay. So, fictionally, there has always been an Arena, and it has always been called the Arena... and not the "gladiators guild."

Is the Arena a "guild"? Yes and no. "Yes" in the sense that you're joining an organization, and completing Arena matches just as you would quests. "No" in the sense that it's not one of the standard Elder Scrolls guilds; those are the Dark Brotherhood (which is the Elder Scrolls assassins guild), Fighters Guild, etc. When the guilds give you quests, you're potentialy sent out anywhere in Cyrodiil; when the Arena gives you a match, you fight that match in the Arena. So the Arena is like the guilds in some ways, and very much unlike them in others.

Betting on fights does NOT require you to join the Arena. Anyone can do that, without ever stepping into the Arena as a combatant.

Hope that sheds some light on things for you. END QUOTE

ive re-written parts of this and added it to the article, also removed prior discusion of this topic now that a dev has clarified it. the forum discusion is located here --Omniwolf 14:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The Blades

Look guys, I've just opened an account because I'm sick of correcting stuff on this article only to have it changed to the wrong info again. Case in point: the Blades. They are, as I edited a couple weeks ago, required for main quest completion. Here's the quote from Gavin Carter (Oblivion's Producer): "The five major guilds you can join are the Arena, Dark Brotherhood, Thieves Guild, Fighters Guild, and the Mages Guild. Also, in the course of the main storyline you join the Blades faction."

Here's the link to the interview where he says this: [1]

I'm correcting it again. Let's try and not argue over this, it's been more than confirmed. aghostinthemachine

Perhaps there are better things to expend one's energy on than whether or not the Blades in fact are a "normal" faction or a pseudo one (as in Morrowind). If I were to speculate I'd not find it har to believe that the Blades will be closely knit to the main storyline, with quests and tasks given as possibly several global(/main quest) variables are fullfilled. But that's pure speculation, as is anything before we get our hand on it after the actual release.

As far as the Carter quote you provided, that one sounds quite like the Morrowind implemention of the Blades. But that's open for interpretation I suppose. Main point, no need to bang our heads until it is released. Scoo 07:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying you need to JOIN The Blades to finish the main quest? If so then thats not true. I have never joined the Blades and have finished the Main Quest twice.--Sasarai 16:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur, as a joinable guild it offers NO missions, plotlines or benefits that would make it like the other listed guilds. The Knight of the Thorn are a better candidate then the Blades.

But that is just me Vohod 23:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

You may be offered a chance to join the Blades. If you don't speak to Jauffre at the right time, you aren't even offered a chance. You can decline and continue to work with them. My guess is that this is for roleplaying purposes. If you're roleplaying an atheist, you may not necessarily wish to join an order that devotes itself to Talos. Umlautbob 02:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Collectors Edition

removed "not official" from the collectors edition since actually the contents of the collectors edition have been known for quite some time, theres been alot of discusion on the official forums with devs about what was going into the box. every version gets a paper map and the collectors edition gets the 3 bonus items. much in the same pattern as morrowind which contained a disc (soundtrack, a book (artwork), and a metal figure (ordinator) the oblivion CE has a disc (making of dvd), a book (lore and art), and a metal sculpture (septim coin) --Omniwolf 02:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I read about this somewhere, the CE is 70$ while the regular is the basic 60$, didnt know if the really high 70$ would be worth mentioning since not many games out there are worth this amount at all, usually only MMO's use this type of approach with added stuff, however TES:O doesnt add much. Tik 14:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

to be technical the US MSRP is $50 for the regular PC, $60 for the collectors edition PC. the xbox360 regular version is $60, and the xbox360 collectors edition is $70. console manufacturers have always collected an extra fee. in recent years past the average PC game price hovered around $40, with the average console version of the same game at $50. with recent increases in games accross the board the next generation of PC games is now averaging $50, and the next generation console games are pushing the $60 boundry. its even more profoundly noticable than when the CE is another $10 on top of that. you can see this extra console fee reflected in sonys game prices as well, most of thier first party self published games were released in the $40 range even when all thier 3rd party publisers were still $50 for new release. this trend of $50 PC games and comparably $60 console versions will most likely remain in the coming year, not just for oblivion, but for all next generation titles.--Omniwolf 16:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, also wanted to add that since development costs are increasing, some of the price is being added to the consumer price to help alleviate this problem. Tik 19:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Collectors Edition info has been officially released along with pics, I added the septim gold coin pic. Source --Xander 12:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Middleware Content

I've also added middelware links to the article for gamebryo, speedtree, and havok. this should allow further research for anyone that wishes to explore technical details.--Omniwolf 03:02, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

It also uses FaceGen (I'm almost positive). --Denkriston 03:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

I'll see if I can verify and attempt to add links and logo if no one else gets to it first. thanks.--Omniwolf 11:16, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

GameBryo Engine

Oblivion uses a customized version of the Gamebryo run-time engine developed first by NDL and optomized by bethesda softworks.

Gamebryo is a second generation of the net immerse game engine (which was used for morrowind) and includes much more than just a graphics renderer.

please do some research on gamebryo starting with the original developer before making false claims that gamebryo is nothing more than a renderer: http://www.ndl.com/gamebryo-engine.cfm

--Omniwolf 03:02, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

User Opinions

while some people may not appreciate the changes made from one game to the next in the series, wikipedia is not the place for reviews. opinions should also be kept to a minimum and used only for brief referance purposes and clearly labled.

i make note of this here because this article has had recent vandalism from people who wish to interject thier opinion while over shadowing the facts.

please do not vandalize, but feel free to expand the article in more creative ways while attempting to follow the non-pov guide lines.

--Omniwolf 07:43, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I think the introduction article is a pov plain and simple, it should be changed, also there are WAY too many links at the end of this article and most of them should be removed. I think too much enthusiasm and adjective praise.-Tik

IMO the most relevant statement from the NPOV article:

What is the neutral point of view? What we mean isn't obvious, and is easily misunderstood. There are many other valid interpretations of "unbiased," and "neutral". The notion of "unbiased writing" that informs Wikipedia's policy is "presenting conflicting views without asserting them."

the article is attempting to present the only existing views available.

the article is not asserting claims as fact, but clearly lableing them as developer claims. since the game is still in development (and clearly marked as such), there are no real world facts to present that would otherwise dispute the existing claims.

in reviewing those sections it seems to me that its more neutral to lable developer claims, than to remove everything for lack of other existing sources. if that were the approach to take, than we could not have articles on objects that do not yet exist.

i see much the same approach used in science articles where theorys are described with each point of view clearly labled. by not asserting an opinion as a fact, it allows the sharing of all relevant data, without mis statement of known truth. i could give specific examples, but id rather be finding more data to incorporate than attempting to cut clearly labled sources. --Omniwolf 17:12, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

as for the links.. theres dozens of sites on the web making any attempt to search for additional information useing google rather difficult. the small sample of links collected here are the most relevant and contain the most information thereby providing someone researching oblivion access to what they need rather than having to sift through the rest of the clutter. --Omniwolf 17:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Morrowind Speculation

removed section: "Based on information in Morrowind, it is believed that the events of Oblivion are partially related to the deaths of Vivec, Almalexia, and Sotha Sil. The three God-Kings of Morrowind were said to have made a agreement with the Daedra lords to not attack/invade land of Tamriel as long as Almsilvi lived, and since they are now gone, the Daedra are free to do all they wish. Indeed, much of what has been revealed shows that the Daedra are rampant."

This is contradicted by what information has been released about the storyline. The amulet worn by the emperor keeps the seals of oblivion shut. With his death (most likely by an assassin) the power of the amulet is broken. The player's main quest is to find a blood heir. Only the true bloodline of the emperor can activate the amulet and restore the seals to oblivion, and most of his sons were recently killed.

There is also no reason to believe Vivec is dead; since in the historical version of morrowinds quest killing him produces a "you have broken the thread of prophecy" message. --Omniwolf 06:26, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, technically, yes but killing anyone essential to the main quest at any point will produce that message whether they have fulfilled their usefulness already or not. These NPCs just have a flag set marked Essential - if that is set and you kill them, the message pops up. It is not unset once they have outlived their usefulness. Once you have spoken to Azura, you are free from the prophecy and can slaughter indiscriminately. Vivec may well be killed by the Nerevarine Incarnate, if only to complete the hat-trick, in the historical version. Due to this programming peculiarity, no character who is flagged essential to the quest can also have a mission to kill them (obviously excepting you-know-who) or the message problem will appear. Bethesda may well have wanted to have Vivec killed by the player, but couldn't set it as a task since it would make that message appear, if you see what I mean. --Divinedegenerate 16:26, 18 January 2006

the problem is now your speculating on something that was never more than a theory to begin with. just because you "can" kill him, doesn't mean you "should" kill him. the only thing that is ever considered cannon from one game to the next is the main quest content. even with daggerfall, there is only one correct ending according to lore, despite the existence of multiple endings within the game itself. so short of waiting till oblivion comes and finding information containing the death of vivec, there is no reason to assume he's dead. if we were to apply the same logic your using, it would be as easy to assume that most of vardenfall has been exterminated by a false neverine. the game doesn't exactly stop you from killing 99% of the inhabitants. but regardless, optional paths and optional kills, you can't possibly expect everyone to finish the game the same way. assuming vivec is dead, is pointless assumption based on your options in your game. which is why that kind of speculation does not belong in the oblivion article (which is why this entire section of the discussion page is here debating it). its bad enough this article is borderline advertisement, it doesn't need to be converted into morrowind conspiracy theories... remember... this is supposed to be an encyclopedia --Omniwolf 14:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, actually, that Vivec being alive is cannon for the reasons you give. I was just saying that the 'Thread of Prophecy' message isn't a convincing reason for his continued existence by itself. It must be tricky for Bethesda to make calls like that in such an open-ended gameplay structure. --DivineDegenerate

---

Actually Vivecs death can be debated but him being alive is most likely canon.

---

You played Morrowind, right? I'm going to re-add what you deleted, because its obvious that you've not explored Morrowind enough to know that what you removed is still entirely correct. The amulet that sealed up Oblivion was part of the Almsilvi/Daedra pact that would end at the fall of the Third Age. And when would the Third Age end? The Death of Almsilvi and the Emperor.

Incorrect. The amulet was made in 1E266, more than 400 years before the Tribunal even ascended to godhood. "Shezarr, the missing sibling god of the Eight Divines, arrives at the White Gold Tower in the Imperial City and transforms the dying Alessia into the first of the Cyrodiilic saints. Thus Empress Alessia becomes the first gem in the Cyrodiilic Amulet of Kings. The Elder Council elects Belharza the Man-Bull as the second Emperor of Cyrodiil."

And in Bloodmoon, why gosh, a fortune teller talks about the fall of the Empire (remember Caius's comment that as soon as the Emperor dies, the Empire goes with it?), and how someone is going to need to find the Dragon's Sire?

In short, both Morrowind and Bloodmoon gave serious clues as to the next Elder Scrolls game, and what has been stated by Bethesda still matches up with it. Oblivion is the first game in the Fourth Age of Tamriel. The events in Morrowind unarguably cause the end of the Third Age.

you still miss the point: vivec is not dead in any currently official storyline. also not all of them signed the pact to prevent invasion. i understand your intent, but your details are not accurate. i deleted it not out of ignorance but to give you a chance to correct your information. you seem intent on adding your opinion of the lore rather than what is known. --Omniwolf 06:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

---

No, the amulet has nothing to do with the Almsivi pact. The amulet was created by Lorkhan and it contains the souls of all the Emperors. The pact was broken several times while Seht was dead anyway.

If you think the amulet has nothing to do with the Almsivi pact, you really ain't bothered to do your research in the Elder Scrolls series... As for Vivec not being dead, perhaps you're not aware that Vivec's mortal at the end of Morrowind.

---

and perhaps your not aware that it never says he's dead. just because he's mortal doesn't mean he died. tes4oblivion is only a few years after the events of morrowind. do not make assumptions where no factual answers have been given.

Vivec spoke quite a bit after you destroyed Dagoth Ur and the Haert of Lorkhan that he felt life slipping away and that he was mortal. In addition, we do know that the otehr two ended up dead. Even if he is not dead, he may as well be. He's powerless now.

Just to resolve all this...

It isn't yet known what have caused the events of TES4, and no versions seem completely correct. I personally think that the only inevitable event in the plot, the destruction of Lorkhan's Heart, has something to do with all that. Lorkhan was the primary creator of Nirn, and his heart remained in the world for some reason.

But that isn't proven, so let's wait until the ingame info, if, of course, devs won't make it a mystery.

DragoonWraith 21:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC): Alright, Oblivion's been released, and, well, the Amulet of Kings is a mess. There are a lot of consistency issues with it. The long and short of it, though, is that the really important consequence of Morrowind comes from the destruction of the First Stone, the Heart of Lorkhan, not the death of the Almsivi. In fact, Nirn has seen the loss of several Stones recently - the Mantella of Walk-Brass, and Chim-el Adabal of White-Gold. Chim-el Adabal, for those who didn't catch it, is the Amulet of Kings. It also predates Alessia, and humanity, by a couple of Eras. Basically, everything Oblivion tells you about the Amulet of Kings is a lie. The truth was revealed primarily by Nu-Mantia.

It is also considered canon by most people who actually care (read: not Todd Howard) that Vivec submitted to trial by the Emperor at Hogithum Hall, for his crime of the murder of Indoril Nerevar. He claims that it was committed by Vehk the mortal, not Vehk the god, and so the god should not be held accountable. To clarify matters, he suggests summoning Azura for her testimony as the only remaining witness of the event. This turns out to be a trick by Vivec to get Azura to the Mundus where he could, ah, Muatramize her (read Sermon XIV if you're curious about what Muatra is). These events are recorded in the Imperial Library here.

Actually, none of this even applies because the game creators have often stated that each game is an individual story and bears almost no relation to any of the previous games. Because of this, the story could be taking place at any time, before, or after the death of the gods, or even simultaneously. What is important is that none of this is mentioned in Oblivion, so it should not be in the article.

Size of Game World?

From the wikipedia article: "It has been confirmed by producer Todd Howard that the world will be larger than the previous installment in the series: The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. The province of Cyrodiil alone is approximately 16 square miles."

From official webpage: (http://www.elderscrolls.com/games/oblivion_overview.htm) "Oblivion is a single-player game that takes place in Tamriel's capital province, Cyrodiil."

More official info: (http://www.elderscrolls.com/codex/team_rpgnextgen.htm) "Even though Morrowind is about 0.0001% the landmass of Daggerfall, the way you play it makes it feel even richer. Oblivion's landmass is larger than Morrowind's, but you can fast travel around much easier"

I guess my confusion is in the sentence "The province of Cyrodiil alone is approximately 16 square miles" in the wiki article. Alone implies more than one province which conflicts with the 2nd quote "...takes place in Tamriel's capital province, Cyrodiil."

To clarify the size of the gameworld:

TES IV:Oblivion "the game"; takes place primarily in the capitol province of tamriel "Cyrodiil".

this province is approx 16 square miles. the game however also contains other areas of play.

even though you cannot go to other provinces of tamriel you can go to at least one other plane of existance:

"The Realm of Oblivion" in lore is described as infinite; in game terms youll be exploring large randomly generated sections of terrain every time you enter a portal and leave the normal land of cyrodiil.

there have been no official size estimates for the playable sections of "the realm of oblivion".

the statement "cyrodiil alone is 16 square miles" is thus refering to only the aprox size of the exterior landmass contained within the cyrodiil areas of the game.

for the other playable areas we dont have estimates, but think of it like this:

0 +16 square miles of above ground terrain in cyrodiil province(although this probably includes water surface areas as well)

+ unknown size of interior buildings

+ unknown playable area of the realm of oblivion

+ 200 underground dungeons not included in the above ground estimate

+ we dont know if the walled citys were included in cyrodiils estimates (because walled citys will have to be "entered" and load as seperate world cells, not part of surrounding terrain)

= we have no idea of the total size of the playable areas available in the game, but cyrodiil alone is 16 square miles to explore.

--Omniwolf 23:18, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

i hope the updated version of this explanation in the article is a bit more clear now--Omniwolf 12:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I have edited the article's mention on the space of Oblivion after careful research; unlike what was previously thought, the realms of Oblivion are NOT randomly generated. When the player enters one of the "non-quest" Oblivion gates, (the editor reports that there are 90 instances of the gate) they are transported to a randomly selected "level" of Oblivion. The game comes with 7 of them, andeach time you enter from a different portal, it re-populates everything, and if you leave a plane without closing the gate, the game remembers which plane that gate went to, and the condition of the plane. It keeps it separate from any other "open" planes of Oblivion the player has been to. Personally, I find the prospect of splitting 7 planes across 90 gates to be a bit tedious, as it clearly was in-game. Hence, I'm currently working on a mod to partially rectify that problem. Nottheking 01:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. There have never been any "random generator", or "real" NPC AI, or something like that in Oblivion. It doesn't have anything to do with "If NPC are clever PC won't be needed", these things just weren't developed to save funds.CP/M 14:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

As for the space of the rest of the game, keep in mind that the "Walled cities" were likely not counted, as they are EXACTLY the same size on the inside as on the outside; you can see the cities clearly, and even see INTO them, albeit from great distances. However, when looking in from the outside, you see a copy of the city that uses lower-detail models, and is stripped of life, hence allowing it to be run much more smoothly. Nottheking 01:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Just one little question: how do you better define the limits if its not an island-continent like Morrowind? A big barrier in the land just doesn't sound Bethesda.

I believe Gavin Carter (or perhaps another dev?) touched on this a few days ago. I forget which interview it was. Apparently there is indeed an uncrossable barrier at least partially surrounding the area in which you are allowed to travel. Apparently you can see into the distance past this, as Bethedsa modeled enough terrain past this barrier for it to look like there is a large expanse of land you can't get to. He mentioned that they tried to make sure it wasn't cheesy. We'll just have to see, I suppose. He also mentioned that the draw distance is so much improved, that if they were to place the Morrowind island into the Oblivion Engine, you could actually see the edges of the island when standing in the middle. Defkkon 13:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is largely correct; the barriers appear to come in the form of certain cell properties; those that are not supposed to be part of the game are marked in the editor as such, (and are just as easily removed from the list through use of the Construction Set) and in-game, the player attempting to enter those cells recieves the message "You cannot go that way. Turn back." Personally, I find it a bit more intrusive than I'd like, given that it often pops up in a field, rather than on a mountain slope. So it appears largely out of nowhere. Nottheking 01:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

As for the draw distance, I have checked, and it appears to be in the neighborhood of 25 cells; by comparison, the entirely of Morrowind's area was barely over 40 cells, from the end of Vivec to the tip of Sheogorad, so using the engine as used in Oblivion, standing anywhere, you could see the entirety of Dagoth-Ur. Nottheking 01:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by "40 cells"? Oblivion actually shows 5 cells (9 if you edit the ini) and 25 cells partially. MW has over a thousand of cells total, as well as TES4. CP/M 14:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to the linear dimensions of Morrowind, not of the actual size. Morrowind has 1,390 exterior cells in the game, though the way they are arranged, the actual dimensions of the map are 47 cells North-South, 42 cells East-West. Hence the comment of the 25 cells for Oblivion; that is the total cell-draw range, including LOD cells. Hence, my statement on being able to see the mountain of Dagoth-Ur from any spot on the island. (note: upon further examination, I will say that if you'd stand out in the waters south of Azura's coast, the actual cell "Dagoth Ur," as the crater, will not be visible, as it will be 27 cells away) Nottheking 22:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Laundry List of features

I did not add this, but I did some minor copyeditting. I'm doubtful as to whether the list should exist here. A) It's just a laundry list of features. B) It's explicitly stated as being plagiarized. -Fuzzy 16:08, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Some minor corrections in spelling, e.g. 'Unofficial' -Hecks 16:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

since the list seems to have been deleted, and no one re-added it, i added a link to the actual article that it was plagarized from instead of re-adding the entire content back in myself. i actually put the link up a while ago, but figured id comment on it here while im cleaning up the discusion page. --Omniwolf 12:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Discussion

Omnilas removed a large amount of text a few days ago without explanation and without answer to me asking why on his discussion. Since a large amount of the text wasn't his, I thought it best to revert it. -Fuzzy 13:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

yeah, that seemed a bit odd to just delete so much for no reason... maybe it was an accident--Omniwolf 12:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Oblivion / Hell

Oblivion is quoted repeatedly as a VERSION of hell. While obviously there are extensive differances when comparing oblivion to religious or mythological sources in the real world, the truth of the matter is that theres differances in every version of hell depending on your source of comparison. whether hell includes cute fluffy bunnys or fiery infernos all depends on what lore your going to compare it with. perhaps the article could use a section devoted to explaining what the realm of oblivion is within tamriels lore. but it doesnt need to be interspersed into a long winded parenthesis that breaks up the flow of the introduction, when naming it a "version" of something, summarizes its differances the same way, and in one word.--Omniwolf 03:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

ive started a section to attempt to explain oblivion as compared to hell. if anyone wishes to fill it in a bit more feel free, im not a lore expert. if no one else gets around to it i may do more research and flesh it out a bit more myself. just please keep in mind that the devs liberally use the "oblivion is a version of hell" comment, and rather than confuse people by contradicting this ive tried to explain the differances in the versions rather than argue over "its not hell". --Omniwolf 04:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I added a description of how Oblivion is composed of different spheres, and listed all the Daedra which may occupy them. [On Oblivion] is nice souce for Oblivion info. JovBlackheart 21:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I renamed it The Plane of Oblivion to diminish any confusion. For instance, a king could refer to his kingdom as his realm, but it would be pretty unusual to refer to his land as his plane. I also thought it sounded better then The Dimension of Oblivion. JovBlackheart 22:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

i like the whole 'cute fluffy bunnys' point u made omni, really drives that statement lol. Tik 15:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Some user decided to eliminate Jyggalag from the list of Daedric Princes without explanation, and I’m reverting their change with one. The book "On Oblivion" lists 16 Daedric Princes, minus one, Meridia. There was some confusion on whether of not Jyggalag was an alternate name for Meridia, but the developer Mark Nelson cleared that up: "Jyggalag is not Meridia. Meridia is Meridia. Who, exactly, Jyggalag is remains to be seen." So, Jyggalag is a Daedric Prince, and he/she is not Meridia (who I consequentially forgot to mention), therefore Jyggalag's fully qualified for being mentioned on the list. JovBlackheart 16:18, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The game says that there are 16 daedra princes, each with his own plane of Oblivion, the daedra princes each have their own shrine, so it could be that only Dagon's plane is a hellish waste land, the other's plane could be very different.-Cama z0ts5/10/06

Are very different. For example, Clavicus Vile's realm in Redguard.

Molag Bal's realm is the same type as Dagon's. I'm not sure about others. - T0mm0 19:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

External links

I think there are too many. See the discussion on the DDO talk page, but I think it needs to be reduced to perhaps the official game site, the official forums, and one one or two good database type links with game info. I don't see a reason to list a ton of fansites, except perhaps a list on a seperate page. In the Be bold spirit, I went ahead and slimmed it down to what I think is appropriate - adding a HTML comment too. _ℑilver§^ℑide 05:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• www.bloodandshadows.com really should be up on the external links. It's the site whose forums got far more attention and discussion from Bethesda's developers than anywhere else... Emil (the guy behind the Arena, Dark Brotherhood, and also the heart and soul of the Thief series) contributes relevant stuff on there everyday.
• I think that there should be some mod sites there as well Xander 10:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• I disagree - it's for information on Oblivion. This is an encyclopedia; and there are already again far too many links down there AGAIN. _ℑilver§^ℑide 19:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Yet more culled

I've just culled a crapload of links, and here's my rationale:

• TESwiki: this has little content (compared to OblivioWiki and UESP), and the administrator says it was only a test that is soon to be re-merged.
• Dev diary: cool, but we gotta cut down.
• DirectSong: again, cutting down. It's right on the official site's sidebar anyway.
• Gamespot: not a fansite, and space is at a premium.
• The Dark Brotherhood: sounds cool, but too small and nothing released.
• Blog: it's a... blog.
• Podcast: hasn't started yet, so doesn't deserve a space.
• Elderscrolls-Oblivion: listed twice. Has (comparitively) few files so I left it as a fansite instead.
• Character generator: again, cool, but not enough content to make it worth keeping.
• RPG Codex: not a fansite.
• Xbox 360 Galaxy: reviews, oooh wow, how significant.

I've also vaguely re-sorted lists based on their amount of content and/or popularity, edited the UESP link to point directly to the Oblivion hub, and re-added the Oblivion Mod Wiki. I'm not sure when it left the list(?!?) but the pageviews alone show it's very popular.

So there we have it, more merciless stripping. I'm tempted to take more, but this will do for now. Garrett^Talk 04:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

TESwiki, we decided not to merge, so I put it back. _ℑilver§^ℑide 21:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Triva questions:

please consider visiting the official forums rather than asking for information here--Omniwolf 13:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The Heir's Name

Is the heir's name really going to be Martin Septim?

just for the sake of setting this straight, he's an illegitimate child born outside of marriage, disowned and not raised as the son of septim. so yea, his name is martin, but its not septim. he would not be an heir had any legitimate son remained. with all legitimate heirs of septim dead, the emperor is removing his bastard status and granting him the crown. its simply a requirement of how the amulet works, without a blood relative in possession of the amulet, the gates cannot be stopped. you find all of this out relatively early, which is why its in dozens of magazines already. further questions like that should be asked on the official forums. this is an encyclopedia and not a Game FAQ or a spoiler collection. --Omniwolf 13:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The reason I was asking was because it was on Sean Bean's page and I was wondering if it was trolling or not.

Reviews

Where are you finding that information from PC Gamer UK? I believe it, but a link to the scans would be appreciated. Adg1034 23:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)adg1034

anything like that would be a breach of copyright, we should not encourage illegal scans. the magazine is easy enough to come accross in the real world for comfirmation. or visit the official oblivion forums where every article like that is discussed at length with multiple confirmations from people who own the magazine, without resorting to illegal breach of copyright.--Omniwolf 13:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

This implicitly confirms it. --Slashdevslashtty 00:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to condense the section into an actual paragraph rater than a list of review scores. Two or three respected magazines awarding 9/10 scores gets the point across nicely. However, please do add reviews if they make some additional point or criticism about the game that hasn't been covered yet. Have any actually given the game less than 9/10? --Sam Blanning (formerly Malthusian) (talk) 18:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Leak of the game

Should the leak of the game be mentioned? -202.124.104.17

Quite honestly, I don't know that I can cite a single game in the last few years that wasn't leaked. I don't think it needs to be mentioned. -Fuzzy 13:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Unless it's something out of the ordinary like when the French version of Halo 2 was leaked about a month before release it doesn't really need to be mentioned. It's common for almost every game to be leaked on or around its ship date. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 13:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Disputed

Well someone keeps wanting to add the information about how reviewers posted reviews of the game less than a day after they had it. That information is false. The public only had it for less than a day, but reviewers get advance copies of the game weeks in advance. Can anyone provide proof that the reviewers posted reviews after playing the game for less than a day? --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 16:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

See User talk:137.52.113.174 for my attempts of resolving this situation before it got to this level. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 16:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm removing the tag. As a computer game magazine editor, we regularly get releases and press-demo's WAY before the general public. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 17:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Minor clarifications requested

Here's some things that weren't clear to me as I read the article:

• The Overview section says Bethesda might be giving away the Construction Set "because of pending Havok licensing issues". It would help if we cited someone saying this, because then I could find out what those issues are ;-)
• The Radiant A.I. section mentions "testing with PAC AI for further developments". I'm not sure what that means. Also what does "PAC" stand for?
• The same section ends with "To give you a clue as to the enormity of this technology, there will be over 1,000 NPCs not including other monsters." That sentence probably should be rewritten.

Why "other monsters"? Does this mean "non-humanoid monsters"? "monsters of races not available as player characters"?

Other games have had lots of NPCs; perhaps we should say something like "1,000 NPCs interacting with each other as well as the PC" (emphasising the NPC interaction, which is a great benefit of the Radiant AI).

Chris Chittleborough 16:40, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Odd tone, and future tense

Just to note, there's some odd tone here - the SpeedTree section uses trademark symbols and describes how it was an 'excellent choice', and there's a little bit of conversational tone elsewhere: 'To give you a clue as to the enormity of this technology, there will be over 1,000 NPCs not including other monsters' (although 'enormity' means 'terribleness'!). That second quote also indicates the future tense in use for this product, which should be updated now it's been released. I'd look at some of these myself, but not enough time right now. -- Mithent 02:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The descriptions of "how cool is it" look like a poorly written ad. "Reliable performance" of Gamebryo is also infamous. I'll clear it right now. CP/M 15:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Screenshot Disorganization

Those screenshots are extraordinarily numerous and somewhat messy, causing several edit buttons to pile up at the end, rendering the text that they fall on top of unreadable. Should we remove some of the screenshots? By no means are ALL of those necessary for the article or essential in demonstrating the text. Personally I feel that the following should be kept, along with maybe one or two others placed elsewhere in the article, wherever needed.

• 
  For the FaceGen section.
• 
  For the SpeedTree section.
• 
  Or this for the SpeedTree section.

-Dave 04:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that problem does not show up in Internet Explorer, so many readers won't have seen it. There doesn't seem to be an easy fix other than Dave's suggestion. (I tried <div align="right">. It didn't work.) Chris Chittleborough 12:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Please adhere this article to REAL web standards not Microsoft's IE "standards". Thank You. 66.82.9.67 03:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)MEK 9:13 PM, 3/28/06 (UTC)

I agree with Dave here, the screenshots are too many in my opinion. Support Dave's suggestion of keeping a couple for illustrating a few topics, and the last night-time one of the ing-game city Anvil since it include the user interface (HUD). Scoo 10:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler

The total spoiler section 'general story' definitely should be moved somewhere else. It's a just-released game, so it could heavily damage gameplay experience. I have removed it except the very beginning. (If you want to cut-and-paste, it' [[2]]). CP/M 14:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

CRPG, or RPG?

Currently Oblivion is referred to as a Computer role-playing game, as opposed to simply a Role-playing game, in the article's opening statement. I think this is inaccurate.

TES definably started as a CRPG series, with every release up to Morrowind being PC exclusive, but Morrowind & Oblivion have been just as much Xbox games as PC games, really. True, on the PC TES games are still clearly superior, with the CS/mods and more customizable interfaces and game settings- but Oblivion was being developed for Xbox 360 along with PC right from the get-go, had simultaneous release dates on both platforms, & I believe the game may have been more then a little bit influenced by this. Furthermore, I feel that the series will continue with this trend with TES V, possibly expanding to even more consoles then just the 360. So tell me, is Oblivion really still a CRPG? JovBlackheart 16:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. With console releases, it no longer can be CRPG only. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 17:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

CRPG means something more than an RPG on the computer. American style RPGs and Japanese style RPGs are better understood as seperate genres, though sharing a couple elements. CRPG is better understood as meaning American-style, though I don't know if the nomenclature will ever change.

But a console is as much a computer as "normal" PC. Oblivion is still a CRPG, because both the XBOX 360 and PC are both computers. The fact that an XBOX is generally called a console doesn't change the fact that it's still a computer. The definition of a computers, which can be found in the relevant Wikipedia article, is as follows: "A computer is a machine designed for manipulating data according to a list of instructions known as a program." I don't see how a console in that light differs from a personal computer. Additionally the terms "CRPG" and "RPG" are there to signify the difference between the electronic version and the pen-and-paper tabletop variant. I really think Oblivion should be referred to as a Computer role-playing game, rather than just a normal RPG. mensch • t 22:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

In the Wikipedia article for CRPGs (as well as in everyday life), the term "RPG" is perfectably acceptable when referring to a CRPG. For the purposes of this article, they are interchangeable.--The Yar 06:26, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

How absurd. There is no such thing as an RPG on computer, just as there is no such thing as a CRPG on pen and paper, however, both terms are rather technical and for everyday use RPG can be used to describe both. What difference does it make anyway? Do you fear that someone will be unable to figure out that Oblivion is a CRPG, despite the fact that it is obviously a video game?

Code in PC version for topless models

From Changes from previous games: "Nudity from both the player portrait and creatures has been partially removed, though the PC version retains the code for topless models."

Is that true? Can anyone give me the full scoop on this? If the code was designed with the specific intention of making the female models topless, and that content wasn't reviewed by the ESRB, isn't it similar to the "Hot Coffee scandal"? Thanks. JovBlackheart 20:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

If a "code" example be provided, I might be able to verify this (and possibly provide a screenshot). --Ted 05:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it's possible to modify the game files to remove the bras on female 3D models (according to the official forums). Highly dubious if this could be compared with the GTA:SA incident (this cartoon say it all). Bethesda's stance on their forums. Scoo 16:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

The 3-D mesh in question is on the game disk as shipped, and can be unlocked with a mod that can be found here(NSFW) among other places. However, there's been no evidence that I've seen that Bethesda failed to tell the ESRB that the 3-D mesh is on the disk. In fact, when UGO interviewed Bethesda's Head of PR, Pete Hines prior to the game's release, they specfically asked him about the potential for another "Hot Coffee," and in his response, he mentions the possibility of Bethesda-created content that's "hidden away somehow", but states that they take full responsibility for it, and that what's on the disk as shipped is "true to the ... descriptors on the box." One of the content descriptors that the ESRB has given Oblivion is "Sexual Themes", which they define as "Mild to moderate sexual references and/or depictions. May include partial nudity". In other words, the content on the disk, even content that needs a mod to activate, does not exceed the labeling that the ESRB gave the game. Without evidence that the developer withheld disclosure, and without content that exceeds the descriptors given by the ESRB, it is impossible to have another "Hot Coffee scandal".

I'm not quite certain as of yet, but digging through both the game and the editor, it does appear that indeed, there is no "nudity" content in the game, in any form, for NPCs. I'd hazzard a guess that what Pete Hines meant was that perhaps the game, on the PC, contained code for allowing modders to replace the meshes and textures for NPCs with ones that would be, indeed, nude. It may be that the disc itself also contains "extra" models that could be used for a "nude mod."

As for the models themselves, I have verified that the game's meshes, used IN-GAME, simply do not even include anything that would be necessary for it to be classified as "nudity." Sure enough, underneath those underwear portions of the models is pure empty space; that underwear is part of the skin itself, and the only reason it appears as underwear is largely because of texturing. Nottheking 01:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect. There's already a mod out for it, that enables the topless modles. Granted, they're really ugly breasts, but they do exist in game. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim INCORRECT AGAIN: the mod ADDS the nudity- it doesn't exist in any archive files ON THE GAME_Fire! 23:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I have the original "mod", and AFAIK all it did is replace the bra file with one that was blank. With the bra being separate from the female torso, the removal of the bra reveals a pair of bad looking breasts, w/ nipples and two ugly bumps (which are presumably used to attach to the bra and/or clothes). I can't positively verify this though, as all the Oblivion files are archived. JovBlackheart 14:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Tone

Many parts of this article are advertising copy. --24.131.209.132 23:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Jeremy Soule section

While I do enjoy the music in the game, the entire section of the music/Jeremy Soule is some of the worst posistive bias I've seen on Wikipedia - it's like Soule's agent wrote it, or something. Really needs to be more NPOV. Aerothorn 05:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Tell me, the music section reads like an ad for Directmusic.com.

I am more than compelled to agree... this hardly reads as if it were written by a non-partisan source. Charles M. Reed 16:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I cut the section down to relevant facts, although maybe someone should make sure I didn't cut something important. TattooedPhreak 11:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

After looking at the section again, if you scan down to the Trivia section, Jeremy Soule is described as "American composer", while in the music section it is "British composer". I will see which is correct, however I don't personally think the music is so great as to warrant two seperate citations, so I am going to remove it from the trivia section. TattooedPhreak 11:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I just deleted the entire 'Music' section. Basically all it said was that Soule composed the music, when that information was already under the Cast and Crew info. Ratwar 06:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Horse Controversy

Would it be worth it to add the recent controversy over the horse mod? Need to be careful with your stance I suppose, make it clear that even if this a slippery slope, that PC users will have to pay as well.

There is no controversy. It is optional content, affecting the game in no way, shape, or form. It's an add-on for pure novelty purposes, sold at a small priced, designed to make an extra buck or 2 for the company. I see no controversy. --JOK3R 15:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm late to the conversation, but the horse controversy did spark discussion, commentary, and debate about virtual property, micro-transactions, and the precendence (and fear) of game developers excusing themselves from delivering a finished game, without gamers opening their wallets. This stands in direct contrast to the modding community which has, on many occasions, produced mods that have matched or exceeded the quality of the commercial product. Perhaps it could be mentioned that micro-transactions are a way for developers to increase revenue, despite there being free, official plugins. What this would show is a developer's conflict between busisness, and the need to show appreciation, through any gesture, for the player base. Many other games having given away more for nothing, for which links could be provided. The sale of these plugins has the effect of burning through the goodwill of the community. This, I believe, is the reason for the controversy, and is important enough to include. --KaiSeun 03:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Questions about the size of the game

How many MB's is Morrowind (Xbox version)?

How many GB's is Oblivion (360 version?)

Thanks. McDonaldsGuy 01:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Morrowind For both PC and Xbox is around 630MB

Oblivion for both PC and Xbox 360 is around 4.5GB (4500MB) It is said that over half the Oblivion disc is sound. e.g. Talking, Convos.

Well, I don't have the exact figure on the disc size on hand, I do know that without anything else added, a full install of Oblivion on the PC comes up to 4.26GB of disc space; the disc itself appears to be 4.6GB or so. "Only" 1.66GB of space is taken up by the game's two "container" files of voice acting; it is still the single largest component of the game, but far from "half of the disc." Note that assuming that it's compressed to the same 64kbps bitrate used in Morrowind, that comes up to roughly 60 hours of voice, comfortably enough to satisfy the "50+ hours" claim. Nottheking 00:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Differences between 360 and PC Versions

Can someone list the differences here?

Mainly customizability, through the CS & initiative file tweaking, keyboard hotkeys, etc. In graphics and content, the two versions are identical by default, while you are simply guaranteed high-quality visuals on the Xbox360. JovBlackheart 15:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

That covers most of the differences. The interface, it turns out, is susprisingly the same across both platforms. Some key/buttons are different, but the same options are availible.

As for the graphics options, saying that they are the SAME is a bit of a stretch... By default, the Xbox 360 version is "as good" as going through the PC version and setting almost all of the in-game settings to their maximum. A few exceptions seem to ecompass resolution, (set at 1280x720) grass draw distance, (which appears to be closer to the 70% point) and anti-aliasing. (set at x4, whereas most modern ATi cards can select x6, and modern nVidia cards x8S)

Then there are further options that fall into the ".INI tweaks." This includes tweaks to make all objects reflect in the water, not merely basic terrain and city walls. Additionally, blood decal durations can be pushed beyond 10 seconds, and grass and full-scale cell-loading settings can be increased. Nottheking 00:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Removals

Why are all comments on negative aspects of the game removed, as well as all references to the fact that the game's publisher released a promotional video showing features that are not in the real game? Why are the developers' claims about the AI presented as fact, when they have never been observed by players or independent reviewers? I added a reference to this yesterday and it was deleted (I kid you not) one minute later. Why does the whole article read like an ad for the game? 213.58.67.15 03:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm putting my bets on the fact that the fanboys removed it. Perhaps a revert? - XX55XX 00:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

A wiki or an encyclopedia is beyond personal opinion. Besides, such observations are only applicable at that point in time making the comment inaccurate in say six (6) months time for example when the application is patched.Beugnen 06:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Radiant AI

They showed off what RAI could do, and it can do that, but if they had enabled it fully, it would have been chaos in the streets. You do see quite a bit of the AI in action, and if you don't believe me, ask the modders that whiners have been flaming on the forums. The ones who have seen and tested the scripts on their own. Don't turn wikipedia into a flamezone for a game you dislike. Imagine the MW article if that had happened.

In fact, it was not RAI, but simple scripting. I worked with the game's scripting and AI, it doesn't have any motivations or whatever else, only scheduled events, and no traces suggesting anything more advanced was attempted. The devs enabled all they had, they simply didn't have the supposed features. What -is- there is achieved with thousands of scripts and packages. CP/M 21:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I have never witnessed any AI in the game on par with what is advertised in the article. Even slaughtering every guard in a city resulted in no behavioral changes. Carrying illegal goods did nothing. Even guards won't notice you're a criminal unless you walk up to them (theft assault). I'm adding a notice to the AI section to note that it's not in the game. 216.176.105.92 21:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a policy against original research and so I reverted your edit. Please read WP:CITE as well. You may not have seen any AI on par with what is advertised but I have seen some pretty interesting AI activity. If you feel this reversion was unwarranted, I encourage you to resubmit, this time citing the information as required. --Yamla 21:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

http://www.psychophil.com/weblog/?p=1231 Happy now? The AI is stupid, it's scripted only, nothing near what the article claims it has. http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=518882 216.176.105.92 21:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No, sorry. Blogs and message boards aren't reliable sources. --Yamla 21:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

So personal experience isn't reliable, other people's experiences aren't reliable. What counts? I mean a simple 20 second google search turns up hundreds of hits about the absurdly stupid AI. 216.176.105.92 21:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/games/pc/The-Elder-Scrolls-IV-Oblivion-Review-21532.shtml good enough? I mean the only difference between a reveiw and a blog is the host. Why is the AI section even in there? It was yanked straight from a press release and has no basis in reality. 216.176.105.92 21:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeap, softpedia looks to be a reasonable source. The problem with blogs is that it would be very easy for me to set up a blog saying the AI in Oblivion was brilliant. And no, personal experience is not sufficient. The criteria for information on Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. --Yamla 22:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

So is it remotely verifiable that the AI mentioned was ever in the game? Or was it just taken from a press release and repeated as if it were fact? I've personally not seen anything close to that. Frankly the AI I've seen isn't much beyond the old Ultima games. Eban 12:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

This is just a criticism of the game, not based in fact. RAI is absoultely a part of Oblivion, you just aren't as impressed with it as you would have liked to be. The accompanying DVD with the CE clearly shows the RAI tweaking, and there is a thread in the official Oblivion forums that is a mile long, detailing all of the presumably unscripted RAI activities players have seen. It is particularly apparent with thief-type NPCs, who will often spontaneously sneak off to steal or pickpocket. I personally witnessed a massive, unscripted brawl between guards and pirates on the Waterfront for this very reason. The article is correct that RAI was toned way down because it was chaotic, but it is definitely there and works as described. --The Yar 21:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Most modders and gamers can see that the Radiant AI is in fact not radiant and barely AI, as just about everything is scripted. The entire Radiant AI section is not verifiable, and should be scrapped.

Radiant AI is a complete joke. I don't know who was impressed by it. I found it laughable-when I wasn't losing entire armies of allies because my tanks kept charging the guys the archers and mages were trying to attack, catching their projectiles, and then ATTACKING THEM FOR IT. On one occasion in my game, Ocato killed Jauffre and Baurus because Martin was attacking a Daedra that Ocato fired a spell at. I love this game, but you pretty much have to be a rabid fanboy not to recognize that Radiant AI is deeply flawed and falls far short of what we were promised.Umlautbob 03:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

dwemer

Please STOP including into the "changes" section that dwemer eqipment has been renamed Dwarven. Dwarven and dwemer are two different races according to TES lore. The dwemer are still referenced in the books in oblivion. They're not the same thing. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 23:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

They are the same thing. THe name Dwarf is a corruption of the name Dwemer.63.226.175.215 14:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

No, they are not! Dwemer are decendants of the elven races, according to TES lore! ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 22:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Dwemer are the "Deep Elves", noting the -mer, indicating elves. Go to the Imperial library website, it will show you the in-game books referring to the Dwemer as elves.⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 23:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Noone is saying the Dwemer are not Elves. What is being said is that "Dwarf" refers to the Dwemer... it is a corruption/mistranslation sometimes used by non-Elves.

As for the changes... Dwarven equipment has been called Dwarven equipment since Arena, so I'm sorta confused why anyone would be saying it's a change in the first place. --Phorteetoo 02:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

It may be a mistranslation, but its sourced nowhere in the game as such (unless you've found something I haven't). All signs I've seen point towards Dwarven referring to a different race. Oh but you're so right on the arena thing. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 14:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The right word is dwemer, and there are no "normal" elves or dwarves in TES. Two humanoid races, Men and Mer, split later in dwe-, alt-, chi- (then dun-), bos- for mer, and different countries for men. So no place is left for some other dwarves, and they aren't mentioned. CP/M 21:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The Pocket Guide to the Empire and several texts from Morrowind make it abundantly clear that Dwarf = Dwemer. Them being descended from Elves is true in TES as perhaps opposed to other similar fantasy lore, but that fact is entirely irrelevant; Dwarves are Dwemer and Dwemer are Dwarves. I believe Morrowind taking place in proximity to Dwemeri lands is why the correct terminology is used instead of the more crude "Dwarf" that the people of Cyrodiil may be more accustomed to. That's partly speculation, but either way I think that it is a valid point to make that Dwemer has become Dwarven in Oblivion--The Yar 04:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

First of all, actually look at the armor. It's the same. Second--"The earliest civilization of which there are records is that of the Dwemer. Sometimes called Dwarves by the ignorant, the Dwemer were the remnants of the early Aldmer who had settled the coasts..." This is a verbatim quote from the Pocket Guide to the Empire, third edition, page 41, first paragraph. It came with the Collector's Edition. That's official supplemental information, and what's in there is canon. Wikipedia's own article on the Dwemer states that they are misnamed the Dwarves by some, and that the name came from a race of giants they supposedly came into contact with. Heck, run a Google search on "Dwemer." One the very first page of results, I find three pages saying they are also called the Dwarves. That's if you don't want to count the second instance of an article that appears twice. I am re-adding the fact and I'd appreciate it if any dissenters would take it up with me before re-deleting it so I can present my case. There are simply too many authoritative and official sources stating "Dwemer = Dwarves" to come to any other conclusion. Umlautbob 03:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with Umlautbob (böb?) and The Yar. Dwemer = Dwarf/Dwarven. It is made clear throughout Morrowind also that they are the same thing. --Dreaded Walrus 03:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibility of a Lore section?

Salutations everyone. I wonder, would it be possible for a Lore section to be added to the article catagory list, with brief summaries of the history, characters, deities, traits, and so forth covered in the many books found throughout the game - we shouldn't spoil any content of course, so shortness is emphasized. We could use this section for many internal links to more in depth new articles regards the lore of Tamriel, and Cyrodiil in particular - with spoiler notices unless some wish to discover and intepret the lore independently. --D-Katana 28 April 02:00 (UTC)

I think that would be more fitting on the series page, personally. Otherwise there's going to be a lot of redundancy with existing (or future) content in the other TES articles. Garrett^Talk 23:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The PC version of the game was re-rated to M

We should make a section about that. My source is this. It is from GameSpot.

    according to the article, both versions were re-rated m.

Indeed, that is correct. Already, Bethesda has changed all of the ratings on at least the Elderscrolls.com site to reflect this change. Nottheking 19:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Oblivion Mobile NOT Travels game

I put this here because no one reads the other page, but according to Elderscrolls.net, the mobile version will not be a Travels game. So that page has to be fixed, and I can't move it.

Roleplaying game

Does Action-adventure_game not seem more appropriate? --86.2.153.77 04:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

On the basis that there aren’t behind-the-scenes dice roles & turn based combat? I don't think so. You choose to major in 7 out of 21 skills, which can be raised all the way to 100, giving you new and better abilities along the way. In raising the skills you gain attribute modifiers, so when you raise levels, you gain HP and increase your stats allowing you to take more damage, run faster, have more stamina in battles, be less likely to be stunned, etc. Not to mention the practically unlimited choices so far as race/appearance/birthsigns and your unrivaled freedom in choosing what you do and when you want to do it in the game world. I think it's very much a role-playing game. JovBlackheart 16:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I take it you've never actually played a crpg before then. Being able to pick different races and increase stats can be done in most(if not all) action adventure games, many FPS's, even MMOFPS's, as can the "freedom to go anywhere". --86.14.132.122 05:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd add that many RPGs don't allow the player to pick different races, and don't give the freedom to go anywhere. If there's a defining attribute, it's neither stats growth nor open world.CP/M 17:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I deleted a section of this debate because it spun out of control with no benefit to the article. The Wikipedia article for Western-style RPGs lists TES as one of the prime examples of the current RPG genre, and refers to Oblivion multiple times. --The Yar 06:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Pay-for-download controversy

Just a suggestion, but maybe one of the (more experience Wiki users), should add something about the premium mod service and it's related controversy, as that seems to have been a unique instance with this game.

When the pay-to-play plugins first came out they got a pretty frosty reception (and still do), especially from the PC crowd who were used to the free add ons as seen in Morrowind and it might be intresting to note - a recent poll I posted on the forum showed a roughly 50/50 split between the pro-mod and anti-mod camps, so it's a fairly neutral subject. Just rather noteworthy shift in focus --Beugnen 06:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)given Morrowind and previous TES games were 100% free in terms of patches and plugins. --88.11.53.126 22:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, any "controversy" among a small group of fans should not be mentioned in this article. This is an encyclopedia with the sole purpose of educating about a specific topic. It's only natural there will be complainers and "controversy" when add-ons come along that cost additional money. It's nothing new. Many other publishers have done this in the past (and been very successful at it). I strongly oppose it being in the article. It's irrelevant to the subject of the game itself and can be easily considered NPOV. Just my 2 cents. --JOK3R 20:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The controversy seems to apply also to other mods and the way they are introduced. For instance, the Orrery building is already in game, being more like an incomplete game rather than just mod. CP/M 17:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, the fact that they have released four mods before even patching the game has many people very angry. --DragoonWraith 02:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

What is your evidence? How many? Please refer to Wiki guidelines.Beugnen 06:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

More Description Of Music?

Don't you think we should input more information on the music? How about mentioning the full orchestral ambient music, that changes between locations and your danger level? I think a little more input on that would be pretty cool.

Feedback please, and I'll post it on.

Vandalism

This article gets vandalized a lot, so before you make an edit please check the recent history first and revert first if necessary. Making edits on top of a vandalized version makes a messy situation. -- S Sepp 10:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems as if all of the recent anon edits have required reverts, what's the criteria for partial protection? --The Yar 16:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Localization problems

The article mentions several foreign ports of the game having characters being referred to in the wrong gender. I have also observed this problem in the English-speaking versions as well: In Bravil (I think it was Bravil) the Argonian City-Swimmer talks about herself briefly in the third person as a 'he' before saying "No, I am here in front of you" or something like that. Judging by the context and other dialogues, I think the third person reference was intentional, but the gender mix-up seems wrong. I have also heard people refer to the Mages' Guild head Dagail (in Leyawiin) as a man under the 'Rumors' topic. I didn't put these in the article because I wasn't sure what kind of citation would be needed. Could someone tell me if this is relevant enough and if it should/can be verified? Tonberry King 04:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Easily verifiable information (in this case, by using the Construction Set) doesn't need special citations, so it's enough. However, such mistakes seem few. CP/M 04:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sales

How many units has this game sold since release as i think that should be on the wiki page ?--Paul 17:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

It would be difficult to get accurate information. Besides, such temporal-based measurements are only going to become out-of-date.Beugnen 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Article rating

I believe this article has sufficient quality for a GA or B-Class rating.

PSP?

As well as the PS3 version that is rumoured to be happening, perhaps a mention could go to the PSP version that is supposedly in the works, as seen on EB Games? The fact that they are not only allowing orders, but have set a (not exactly cheap) pricetag, and even a temporary release date seems to suggest that they, at least, are certain that a version is in production, regardless of how suitable it may not be?--Dreaded Walrus 09:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah. It now seems to have been removed from the site, along with the PS3 version. I hope that all people who pre-ordered got their money back :P --Dreaded Walrus 08:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

A PS3 version of oblivion is officiall, also a psp version called Elder Crolls Travel: Oblivion http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154065

E3 presentation

A closed-doors demonstration given at E3 for the game apparently has Todd Howard, the executive producer, playing the game as he demonstrates the game's vital features. This can be seen through his way of playing and how he speaks to the viewers during the video (some may speculate it is not him playing, some will notice he fast-travels and misleads players on his destinations.) The full demo presentation was handed out on DVD to retailers at an insider pre-launch event to promote the Xbox 360.
Ok. I'm not going to edit this article, as I'd probably be tempted to also add why I think this is the most sub-par TES game ever, and that has no place here. But as far as the above statement goes, here's the facts:
- On E3 2005, Todd played a specially modified version of the game. It was not a video. As far as warping to other parts of the world is concerned, I can only guess he used a key bound to a command like cow (center on world).
- The "leaked" video (if that wasn't indeed a marketing gag) supposedly came from a DVD (it was in fact initially distributed as a DVD image) given to managers of a big US based game store chain, one of whom supposedly leaked it to the internet. It was recorded after E3 and is similar but not identical to the presentation given at E3.
- The video from that 'leaked' DVD was made available by Bethesda Softworks via its website several weaks after its supposed leak to the internet in much smaller files of inferior quality but exactly matching content. Stargelman 14:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

OFLC (Australian) Rating

Could people please stop changing the OFLC rating in the info box? I changed it a few days ago, and today its changed to T (which isn't even an OFLC rating). Let me tell you a story: early promotional material sad it was MA (I don't know if that's because they got it rated as that or they were saying that to be on the safe side). I have a poster that says that. However, by the time it was released, it was (and still is) classified as M. The game box says as much and you can find it on the OFLC website. Can someone please stop changing it? It's M. End of story. --DK 05:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure who is doing that DK. But anyway those who do rate the game here be sure to indicate the country it applies to since the game may have different ratings depending on country.Beugnen 05:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Spamlink

A fan journal in the fansites was just called a spamlink. Why is that? There are links to fan journals on the Morrowind page. Bibliomancer 18:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It isn't spam; but anyway only major sites are to be added. Hm... Hey, there is some more low-rank and nonenglish crap - I'll clean it right now and warn the spammers. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Fan sites that do not provide factual information or resources are not useful as encyclopedic reference. Fan sites and mod sites should not be included unless they are cited in the article. Please read Wikipedia:External links and for more info. Take StarCraft (a featured article) as an example, it contains no fan sites in its External Links section. --Voidvector 19:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Mod sites

I have removed the mod sites external link section. They have almost no encyclopedic value and are barely mentioned in the article. See WP:NOT and WP:EL --Voidvector 12:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Planet Elder Scrolls (Free Fileplanet registration required to download mods)
• The Elder Scrolls Source
• Oblivion Source
• The Elder Scrolls Files

OblivioWiki

I have recently removed a lot of external links from here per WP:EL policies. When I removed the external links initially, I based my judgments on other Featured Articles. Most featured articles in Portal:CVG have only 1 or 2 wikis. So from the previous 3 wikis (UESP, Oblivion Mod, OblivioWiki), I chose to keep UESP and Oblivion Mod.

An anonymous editor later reposted OblivioWiki. I reverted it on the ground that we already have 2 wikis, and that comparing to the other 2 wikis, OblivioWiki is a commercial site (with advertisements). The poster later messaged me regarding this. Quote the message on my talk page:

I noticed that you removed OblivioWiki from the wiki links because it's a "commercial wiki," which means what? I'm not an expert at policies here, but if listing it goes against one of them, then I'll agree with the link remove. However, you'd have to remove the GuildWiki and NeverWiki links from Guild Wars and Neverwinter Nights 2, respectively, as they are sister sites and they'd be considered "commercial wikis" as well.

If the link is being removed because "2 wikis would suffice," well, Elder Scrolls Pages is a general Elder Scrolls wiki, which also includes Oblivion and older games, while the other is a mod-listing only wiki. Oblivion would well fit with the two as it's a Oblivion-only wiki. Btw, what makes the other two not commercial wikis, if that's the reason for removal?

I think this discussion is more appropriate here. How do other editors here feel about listing OblivioWiki as an External Links? --Voidvector 02:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure about defining OblivioWiki as a commercial site; Google AdSense is sensible way to discreetly cover hosting costs. I'm biased towards UESP since it's bigger and long-established site. The Oblivion Mod Wiki offers completely different content from the other two, whereas, arguably, OblivioWiki has the same goals as UESP's Oblivion section. I agree that three wikis is overkill... it's a difficult decision, but for now I think it should stay gone. Garrett^Talk 10:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)