UESP Forums

i never once finished the main quest in morrowind, never once finished the main quest in oblivion, despite many characters over many hundreds of hours.

i have finished the main quest in skyrim, but mainly because i liked my first character well enough to get him all the way to level 70, but it was probably the least memorable part of my game, and i won't be doing it again, because i don't like to repeat things, and the game allows for that like no other game does.

the more i follow questlines, the less i feel like i'm constructing my own character and adventure, which has always struck me as the point of the elder scrolls series - the way the leveling works, the wide open world, the sheer amount of things to do - and i always saw the main quest as something that was put in for people who enjoy that kind of thing - following a narrative.

sometimes, from reading players' experiences, it seems like people feel compelled to do the main quest with all of their characters, and I'm curious as to why? isn't it more interesting to strike out on a different path every time? doesn't the game world call out to you to do that? doesn't it make more sense to have divergent characters in the same world, rather than repeat that same experience each time?

(by the way, i would so dig it if you could set up your characters as npc's in the world, give them a routine, so that when you started a new character you could interact with them, but hey, that's me dreaming.)

i understand that the intro to the game, and in the previous titles, sets you up as the hero in this narrative, but i can see that being a decision made for the sake of casual gamers, or for the sake of coherence, a marketing decision, a smart one, but one that does not adhere to bethesda's true strengths, and true intent, as the developer. and so, it's easy to ignore.

(ideally i'd like to be able to start a new character in the inn of my choice, probably just as unlikely to happen.)

anyway,
thoughts?

I never played morrowind but I hear the story is good eventhough I'll never understand it. For oblivion I loved the main quest but I can't stand it because of the oblivion wastelands. It kills my eyes. But skyrim's main quest is interesting but not memorable because it's so short. It seems they could've made it much more detailed and stretched out. I honestly love them both though, even if the guild questlines are far more entertaining.

You make it sound super complicated or something. It's a series of Point A to point B quests, like any other faction. Consider it the Blades faction in Morrowind. Sure, you learn a lot of lore and interact with weird demigod creatures but the story itself is linear and easy to grasp.

So far I've always done the MQ and SQ.

It just seems wrong, knowing that if I ignore Dagoth Ur; Mehrunes Dagon; or Alduin, that all the people and animals I formed bonds with will die and all our efforts would be in vain. I like to at least advance to a point where the enemy seems to be on the run with their tail tucked between the legs then start rallying the rest of the people.

The OP is assuming there's a point, or that if there is that there is only one point. You could pick up one of these games and never do a single quest at all. In Morrowind you could collect steel helmets and make a pyramid out of them if you wished. That could be the point of your game. I'm not sure how much fun you'd have doing that but it's doable.

this is what i'm getting at. the idea that these things are happening regardless, but they're not, you have to trigger them. if you don't visit the blades guy, or pass by the gates of kvatch, then the oblivion gates never appear at all, you can do every other quest in the game, level as high as possible, and most people in the game world will never mention the gates or mehrunes dagon or any impending doom, same with the dragons in skyrim, same with - i don't even remember what the mq is in morrowind.

you can enjoy to world to it's fullest without having to travel down the same well worn path that everyone else does - that is the point of the game's design. (now all we need is a zombiU style permadeath system and we might actually have something).
i don't like hearing negative feedback about the story in elder scrolls games, because i think it's mostly irrelevant, and i dread that aspect of the game being given too much attention in future installments.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want the main quests to get even shorter and weaker in the future, either. Those stories should be there for the people interested in them, and the writing and programming shouldn't suffer because not everyone does them. Same goes for side quests and random encounters. All of those things should be treated with respect even though some players won't do them. Some of the factions in Skyrim were already much weaker than in Morrowind and Oblivion, and I worry that trend of cutting content will continue.

The main quests in Oblivion and Skyrim almost seemed like demos. They briefly show off a lot of what the game is capable of - features which are then put to better use in other areas of the games. It makes sense, since the main questline is probably what gets developed first, and receives all the novel assets which can then be re-used. In Morrowind, the main quest seemed to provide purpose; in the later games, I tend to avoid it, and try to ignore the fiery hellgates and lizard monsters dominating the countryside.

This.

For Skyrim, Only one character has done the main quest beyond the Note of Jurgen Windcaller. (yes, I know) I do Dragon Rising/Way of the voice on most characters, simply to unlock dragons/go to Solstheim for free (as applicable) I just feel it's something reserved for the dragonborn character - the downside is had I known how the main quest worked out, she would just have been the pretty mage for the College of Winterhold, and it would have been some nord for the main quest, like the guy on the cover.

For Oblivion, I went at first with a playstyle I knew I liked - female Altmer spell sword - to do the main quest. Now that I've got Oblivion working on PC, the dremora guy I've got from a mod is going to do the main quest, simply because the thought of a dremora doing the main quest is highly amusing to me. I haven't quite worked out why he's doing it from an RP perspective but...

The main quest is fun (for Oblivion and Skyrim, can't say about Arena since I still haven't got out of the starting dungeon...) and personally, I think you miss out if you don't do it at least once.

He rebelled against Dagon after receiving a vision from Periff anon Alessia.

Better start than what I've got...

You could play as Imago Storm, the leader of Clan Dremora in Battlespire. He rebelled against Dagon before, on his last attempt at expansion, because apparently the Prince of Change isn't too good at managing his domain.

Or one of the other dremora under his command since I don't want to have to put 10/15 console commands in again in case I break the game... (This is going off topic, so this bit could go in the playable dremora thread I started earlier.)

There are only finite ways we can play these games. The MQ and Side quests can't be altered (maybe with mods I guess); locations and people remain the same for every playthrough. The only thing that can be controlled/altered by players is the char build/equipment, the order they complete SQ, exploring locations, difficulty level and how they interact with NPCs to finish quests (good, neutral, evil). All these can be easily done without ignoring the MQ.

Skipping Kvatch is simply unacceptable from a roleplay perspective (the daedra and mythic dawn won't wait for us to become master for each guild and explore all the dungeons first). Plus, Sean Bean gets to answer all my questions, praise me for all my hard work, and call me his bff. You're missing out on great story, characters, voice acting, and locations (I even like planes of oblivion despite monotony).

P.s. I still respect your choice to largely ignore the MQ. In the end they're just games I suppose.

I guess it depends on your perspective. Each of my characters takes a completely different quest, and at one point or another (usually belated) I get into the MQ, but it doesn't feel "the same" every time. I mean, yes, quests usually take a rather direct form that you can't alter very much, but the character that I use and the path that he has come from is never the same, so it always feels like a different experience for me. Going through Morrowind with my first character was nothing like the experience with my second or third, the same way Oblivion and Skyrim aren't the same with each character I use. If you want to and can elevate yourself to a certain level of imagination, you can really create a character that is unique each time - even as you redo storylines you are familiar with.

That's just me. Apparently I'm a weirdo.

I have an overwhelming tendency to stay away from the main quest. At least, I string it out as long as I can. The main quest is supposed to be the long-term, overarching story, no? I drift into the side-quests and explore rather than 'finish' the big story which defines this one particular world.

I'm not a MQ-ignorer but certainly a MQ-delayer. I do this in other games too. In Saints Row (2 and 3) and Farcry3 I finished the main story only after there were no side missions left to do.
Why do I do this, you may ask? I guess I feel I should be saving the best for last. It also helps that in ES games this means I can minimize random NPC deaths. (Oblivion Gates, Dragons and Vampires only show up when my character is very strong).

i think the possible combinations of ways to spend time within the world are many, whether they are supported by the game's systems or not.

and hearthfire gave us the ability to change the game world a little bit, i would love to see the series move in that direction even more. like i said earlier, even letting us design our own npcs.

There's absolutely nothing in the games that tell you to do the MQ, the main idea of TES is being able to do anything you can in the world.
However I do find the MQ to be a good way to get your character stronger in a staggered way as I find my characters level well doing the MQ and don't absolutely dominate everything.
But that being said, I only really complete the MQ once or twice, normally getting to a point with my other characters where the unique things start to spawn (Oblivion Gates in Oblivion and Dragons in Skyrim) and then leave the MQ completely.

I tend to do the MQ on my first playthroughs, mainly to get a good idea of the world, and where my future characters will fit into it. That being said, In Skyrim, I could see a bit more incentive to do the MQ for certain characters because shouts can be a part of an overall character build, or simply part of ones RP.

On a side note, the MQ usually has at least one NPC worth meeting ( Martin, Parthy etc. )

This. All of this.

I also feel like finishing the main quest gives you this certain feeling of finality. In Oblivion certain people died, you could not explore the realms of Oblivion anymore, etc. After that the world just wasn't the same and I kind of felt... weird. In Skyrim I delayed the MQ for a looong time. I actually had owned the game for a year before finally finishing it. And I'm glad I did that. I definitely want to experience the main quest but I'm in no rush with them and often want to save the "big finale" for last.

I agree! I feel like when the main conflict is resolved, the world gets a somewhat different feel. Same thing with the Civil War quest in Skyrim; I may join depending on the character, but I try not to finish it. I like the conflict.

Like the NPCs notice. Good job Bethesda.

The game tries to nudge you in that direction, half-heartedly, but it doesn't keep hammering it down your throat or anything like Vivec would.

True, it does make sense for the game to do that, after all it is the story that normally leads to saving the world.

Another reason why I love TES is the way it doesn't shove the MQ down your throat and let's you explore first.