Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-2165692-20140425203121/@comment-24902649-20141205165316

Datadragon Odahviing wrote: And my line here was totally ignored.

Datadragon Odahviing wrote: I did explain earlier is that while gameplay =/= lore, this is not very valid since game play must be based on lore not just for immersion, but also to actually tie the lore into the game, or else you can ignore the lore totally, since it is irrelevant. If you make gameplay that contradicts lore, aren't you making it so your lore is not to be believed? There is no such thing as Established lore > Gameplay, since Gameplay is how one experiences lore in all of its forms.

If the lore contradicts the gameplay, you can very well say the lore is irrelevant to the game without making a logical leap, since it really has no link. So you're saying that, since all those books and things are experienced as part of gameplay, they're wrong? Does that mean that Alduin isn't actually a dragon, necessarily? After all, you only SEE him as a dragon. He could be a miniature parrot.

No. It doesn't. That's fucking well stupid. Cut it out with the semantics.