Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-26893431-20160824210343/@comment-26893431-20180129162240

Sothas wrote: Again, you don't understand TES. It is obvious you only recently started playing. Lore is LITERALLY written by the fans. Redguard lore, for example, was so heavily influence by forum posts that it's hard to even tell what ideas originated from fans and which originated from the devs. And during the days of Redguard and Morrowind, the devs REGULARLY posted in forums and made OOG docs. So are Kuhlman's OOG texts not to be used either? Or do you just have a hate boner for MK?

And I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but even by your standards MK OOG texts ARE, how did you put it? "Part of the lore." I mean... That's just a round about way of saying canon, isn't it? Once again, you don't understand TES. Anyway, Even C0DA is heavily referenced in ESO now, so maybe you should start reevaluating yourself, because you seem to always be wrong... Like always. Been playing these games since 2005, so no, not recently.

Lore is not written by fans, TES is not unique in that aspect; every franchise does this. The lore is written by the developers, not the fans. Fans may have some influence on it, but they don't write the lore, Bethesda decides what is and isn't part of their universe, because it's their franchise, not yours, no mine, not Kirkbride's, but Bethesda's.

To quote Pete Hines: Interviewer: "Does Bethesda consider Obscure Texts and developer comments as "actual lore" or "canon"?"

Pete Hines: "It depends."

Kirkbride's OOG texts are not part of the lore. C0DA isn't heavily referenced, just because there's an easter egg in one book does not mean C0DA is suddenly heavily referenced.

Maybe you should stop and consider this one thing: Who owns the Elder Scrolls Franchise?

When you answer that, you know who writes its lore.