Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-2165692-20140425203121/@comment-17114085-20140822142511

Datadragon Odahviing wrote: To contextualize, we must ignore gameplay =/= lore, in fact I came up with an argument against this, which is worded: ''Gameplay =/= lore? But gameplay must be based on lore and lore must be supported by relevant details in gameplay, or else the lore itself is pointless and irrelevant to the game, making it superflous, which essentially = immersion break = crap game.'' Gameplay =/= Lore must always be taken into account. Or else we get to things like, being able to cross all of Skyrim in a day, despite it supposedly being bigger than High Rock, which was at least 10 times larger in Daggerfall than Skyrim is portrayed. Same thing can be said for a bunch of other things, like how I can shot an arrow at a guy's chest and if I am hidden he totally forgets that he was just shot in the chest by a fricking arrow.

A game has limitations, while lore does not. That is why gameplay =/= lore.