Jump to content

Welcome to LoversLab
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

What makes a good quest for you?

Oblivion Fallout Skyrim Quest

  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

Poll: What makes a good quest for you? (111 member(s) have cast votes)

What makes a good quest for you? (You can choose more then one answer)

  1. The Length of the Mission (17 votes [12.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.06%

  2. Mission Reward (9 votes [6.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.38%

  3. Depth of the Mission (Does it make you want to finish it) (97 votes [68.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.79%

  4. Other, please specify (18 votes [12.77%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.77%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41
GodSmack

GodSmack

    indecisive hipster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 890 posts

A good example would be maids 2 deception, I downloaded it on a whim, next thing i knew i was playing to till 2Am with tears going down my face.(after the first play through.)

 

 

basically i want a quest that takes me and the PC on an emotional roller coster, making bonds with people and then seeing those bonds either grow and flourish or be destroyed by an outside force. optional and eviromental effects are great too but i typically am used to games that dont have those features

 

if its not like that ill just sigh and autopilot through it....

 

Edit: voted Depth btw


  • 0

AdBot

AdBot
  • Advert

#42
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

 

 

That's the thing, you are now judging a game's merits base on the differences choices made, not necessarily by your initial experience through the game. It becomes a strange game of what's there but the player won't see is more important that what the player sees. This isn't necessarily a knock against Skyrim, but a observation on how games handle and present choices and how player tends to gravitate towards it. Everyone say they want meaningful choices and have the game response, but you can't validate that until you know about the alternative.

 

Going into a game blind the player shouldn't know if the options the game preset actually make a difference. Using Skyrim as example, in the beginning player can pick to follow Hadvar or Ralof in Helgen, of course after all these years we know that ultimately it makes little differences, but at that moment a fresh player won't know that, the player won't know that regardless of who to follow it all leads to Riverwood. Suppose the player followed Hadvar and ended up in Riverwood in the player's minds it could very well be "I picked Hadvar and now I am alive in Riverwood." The player won't know for sure that Ralof path is similar until they read up on it or reload a game, and now it becomes a meta game of the player went out of the game to peek under the hood and found their "choice" invalidated. The game is the same as it was, but the player found out there's actually no consequences. The easy counterargument is why not make Ralof's path different, then that becomes simply making things different just because and fall down this rabbit hole of making as many content the player can't see as possible for the sake of validation.

 

Sorry, but why do you bother quoting my posts without reading them?

 

Skyrim is a bad example of an RPG in general, Skyrim is a terrible example of choices in a game. Period. Don't quote Skyrim, please, to illustrate your idea that "all choices suck and make no difference". Can you understand me now? If Skyrim is the only RPG you've played - that's fine, I can see where you're coming from. Just don't make it a universal rule, please.


  • 0

#43
afa

afa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,672 posts

No Skyrim isn't the only rpg I have played and I don't care for its story, but it is an easy one to use as a simple example since it is the common ground here.

"Good" and "bad" subjective statements are pointless and really isn't the matter at hand here. your good rpg is another person's bad one.

 

Go pick your favorite rpg instead, pick your favorite choice. And ask why is that "good" and what if that particular choice weren't a choice, but the only way the game could have played out and there are no other path. Would that game still be good? Or is the act of pick and choose the only thing worthwhile. How did you come about knowing that there are different path, how meaningful or meaningless it is finding out about them after the fact.


  • 0

#44
bytion

bytion

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 514 posts

it's all about choices, I don't mean how many choices it has in a quest, they have to make sense, the man behind the quest must have a deep understanding of the human reactions, Skyrim and Fallout 4 are bad examples here, they have choice, sometimes many choices, but always jump from: I want to be nice to I'm just an asshole for no reasons, if a person is asking to make a choice, they will make a reasonable one base on their motive and desire, not out of blue "good" or “evil”.

 

So the quest is better not make player feel they are forced to do something, but give them motive to, sometimes in Fallout 4 I feel the quests need a "fuck it" option, and there isn't.


  • 0

#45
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

afa,

 

I understand you're not a native English speaker - neither am I - but please get back to the discussion after you keep up your reading skills and start writing sentences that make any sense to other people, not only to yourself. Seriously - I have no clue what you're talking about already.

 

Thank you


  • 0

#46
zzz72w3r

zzz72w3r

    Mega Poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,032 posts

Not to pick sides as I am not a native English speaker either, although by my age and education I really should be better than native speakers...

 

I do have a background in stochastic programing and afa's prose style, so to speak, is very familiar to me or those with backgrounds in AI. 

 

Choices in games are all fixed paths (*under current technology).  The player is just a rat in a maze and the "choices" are basically our ways of mapping the maze.  Is mapping a maze more fun than traveling down a brand new road?  Would you rather retrace your paths to experience different dead ends or would you rather have something totally different from beginning to end?  Well, that depends on the dead ends and the new path, isn't it?  Also, keep in mind that developers work under a budget so choices for choices sake do not necessarily a better game make.  Every dead end in a maze that players don't experience is wasted resource that can be used to improve the game.

 

*Procedure generated worlds and NPCs will be the game changer but we are probably far from the tech to be good enough.


  • 0

#47
afa

afa

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,672 posts

afa,

 

I understand you're not a native English speaker - neither am I - but please get back to the discussion after you keep up your reading skills and start writing sentences that make any sense to other people, not only to yourself. Seriously - I have no clue what you're talking about already.

 

Thank you

It seems like you are the one who don't understand the larger concept of this.

 

Not to pick sides as I am not a native English speaker either, although by my age and education I really should be better than native speakers...

 

I do have a background in stochastic programing and afa's prose style, so to speak, is very familiar to me or those with backgrounds in AI. 

 

Choices in games are all fixed paths (*under current technology).  The player is just a rat in a maze and the "choices" are basically our ways of mapping the maze.  Is mapping a maze more fun than traveling down a brand new road?  Would you rather retrace your paths to experience different dead ends or would you rather have something totally different from beginning to end?  Well, that depends on the dead ends and the new path, isn't it?  Also, keep in mind that developers work under a budget so choices for choices sake do not necessarily a better game make.  Every dead end in a maze that players don't experience is wasted resource that can be used to improve the game.

 

*Procedure generated worlds and NPCs will be the game changer but we are probably far from the tech to be good enough.

This is it. At some point the enjoyment doesn't come from the actual story that people always talk about, but the myriad of possible branches and outcome, and the differences between them. With limited time and resources the possible outcomes are limited, rather those choices hit their marks for an individual player is mostly a shot in the dark or focus tested to hell for better or worse.

And take one more step back, how did the player came to know that he is in a maze or not, which gets into if the game shows its hand (and is it lying), or any preconceived expectation the player brings with him.


  • 0

#48
bicobus

bicobus

    Kodama Dōji

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

The problem with choices and skyrim is that skyrim is a bethesda game. You can go an clear a cave, 2 days later it's filled right back with bandits. The world is static, and so are any choices the player can do that revolve around that world. However, because skyrim is a bethesda game, you're free to tackle problems you face anyway you want! That's how you are introduced to the game. A genie transport you in skyrim, and tells you "There is a giant lizard that needs killing. No go!". You turn around to ask for something a bit more specific, but the genie is gone and you're left all alone in the wilderness with your leather armor and your little iron sword.

 

In skyrim, you don't need to eat, sleep, drink or even care what people are doing. The only thing that matters is smashing, crashing, slicing, burning, freezing other stuff and eventually do the same thing with that giant lizard (but he's not really that important). There is no narration and no consequences, and all in all skyrim in a whole is quite bland.

 

There is no meaningful choices in skyrim, just choices about how to kill stuff.


  • 0

#49
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

 

Choices in games are all fixed paths (*under current technology).  The player is just a rat in a maze and the "choices" are basically our ways of mapping the maze.  Is mapping a maze more fun than traveling down a brand new road?  Would you rather retrace your paths to experience different dead ends or would you rather have something totally different from beginning to end?  Well, that depends on the dead ends and the new path, isn't it?  Also, keep in mind that developers work under a budget so choices for choices sake do not necessarily a better game make.  Every dead end in a maze that players don't experience is wasted resource that can be used to improve the game.

 

*Procedure generated worlds and NPCs will be the game changer but we are probably far from the tech to be good enough.

 

Now you're speaking my language, but I will respectfully disagree about "wasted resources". From this PoV the whole Legion quest line is a "wasted effort" for a player in New Vegas who sides with NCR then? You mean, Obsidian should just have "streamlined" the game, put the player on rails and force him/her to side with NCR? Really? I guess it's okay for a 1st person shooter, but here we go - instead of giving player a choice (a "false choice", I assume, as you take it) just make the game into "shoot the legion" linear shooter, probably improving dreaded animations instead. Well, I don't think so. Sorry, I don't. There is a whole wagon of linear FPSs on the market already, why would we need another one?

 

That's the whole point of the role-playing - your character makes choices and you get one path through the game - or a "maze", so to speak. Another character, with another set of skills, another personality, makes another set of choices and you get another path through the maze. That's the whole point of role-playing  - exploring the game from the perspective of different characters. When you don't have choices, there is only one linear path - you can't play a role. Just like you can't play a role in DOOM - you just shoot stuff.

 

And no, you don't really need procedural generation for that. Speaking of which - is minecraft the best RPG? Its world is dynamically generated. No. You need good quest design. Like those in old Black Isle games. I would suggest everyone interested in seeing what "good RPG" means play them for a while. Baldurs Gate, Fallout, Planescape. You can't put a skimpy armour on your character or have sex (well, in Fallout 2 you can, but its just fade to black), your PC can't get pregnant from a sabrecat - but this is simply another dimension when it comes down to RP compared to what Bethesda produces today.

 

 

 


It seems like you are the one who don't understand the larger concept of this.

 

It's even worse, bro. Not only I don't understand the larger concept of this - I fail to understand even smaller concepts you construct. I can only understand your words, but not sentences.


  • 0

#50
zzz72w3r

zzz72w3r

    Mega Poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,032 posts

 

 

Choices in games are all fixed paths (*under current technology).  The player is just a rat in a maze and the "choices" are basically our ways of mapping the maze.  Is mapping a maze more fun than traveling down a brand new road?  Would you rather retrace your paths to experience different dead ends or would you rather have something totally different from beginning to end?  Well, that depends on the dead ends and the new path, isn't it?  Also, keep in mind that developers work under a budget so choices for choices sake do not necessarily a better game make.  Every dead end in a maze that players don't experience is wasted resource that can be used to improve the game.

 

*Procedure generated worlds and NPCs will be the game changer but we are probably far from the tech to be good enough.

 

Now you're speaking my language, but I will respectfully disagree about "wasted resources". From this PoV the whole Legion quest line is a "wasted effort" for a player in New Vegas who sides with NCR then? You mean, Obsidian should just have "streamlined" the game, put the player on rails and force him/her to side with NCR? Really? I guess it's okay for a 1st person shooter, but here we go - instead of giving player a choice (a "false choice", I assume, as you take it) just make the game into "shoot the legion" linear shooter, probably improving dreaded animations instead. Well, I don't think so. Sorry, I don't. There is a whole wagon of linear FPSs on the market already, why would we need another one?

 

That's the whole point of the role-playing - your character makes choices and you get one path through the game - or a "maze", so to speak. Another character, with another set of skills, another personality, makes another set of choices and you get another path through the maze. That's the whole point of role-playing  - exploring the game from the perspective of different characters. When you don't have choices, there is only one linear path - you can't play a role. Just like you can't play a role in DOOM - you just shoot stuff.

 

 

 


It seems like you are the one who don't understand the larger concept of this.

 

 

 

It's even worse, bro. Not only I don't understand the larger concept of this - I fail to understand even smaller concepts you construct. I can only understand your words, but not sentences.

 

 

The mechanics of how enemies react to player depending on approach and weapon choices in FPS is not much different than having NPC converse differently with you whether you are good or evil in RPG.  It's just a branch of computer codes.  RPG tell different stories from prerecorded dialogue trees and FPS offer different run through using different AI packages.  (Of course if your idea of RPG is MMO style with stats and loot then choices don't really matter). 

 

The reason FPS has gained popularity not because players are getting stupider but rather it is easier to offer "choices" in FPS than RPG.  You can mix and match weapon/AI packages to offer unique varied action based role playing experience so a lot of the codes and assets that cost money to build can be reused.  Storytelling on the other hand needs to be coherent so offering "choices" will result in many of the stuff that cost money to build likely to be played just once.  In the old days where storytelling is text based this is not a big deal but it is very different today.  Voice acting and animations ain't cheap. 

 

Can developers offer many deep, complex interweaving RPG "choices"?  Of course they "can" in a technical sense but not from a commercial sense, and probably not even creatively.  So what afa is saying is that given the reality, do we want developers to spend money on more choices or more/better distinct stories?  Afa also talked about the "illusion" of choices, which are slight detours of the same main path that offers different ambiances.  The experience is different but it's the same road.  He didn't say it was good or bad, he just said those are not "true choices" from the perspective of game designer/director.  

 

Most of the debate between you two are really just different ways of using the word "choice".  So a computer scientist, a psychologist and a theologian walk into a bar and debate the word "choice"....


  • 0

#51
Bazinga

Bazinga

    dismembered

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Emotional attachment. And drama, baby. Make me give a shit. Create interesting NPCs that don't have mouth diarrhea but become interesting through a few key remarks they make, their quirks, the way they act in the story, the traces they leave in the gameworld they are supposed to live in (nearly all games forget that) and so on. Show and don't fucking tell.

And if you rely on telling then better be an exceptional writer or else I don't want to read your shitty endless monologues and conversations.

And then get the ball rolling, let player favorites die or let the player choose whom to save, reveal new aspects of seemingly one-note characters, let characters grow or get changed by whatever emotional rollercoaster you put them and the player through.

And never add filler quests like collecting some furs or cleaning out a cellar because this is what games always did. Better just spread a few bread crumbs of lore and little story bits so the player can play detective or archeologist and don't fill the area with quests at all. And just do good level design instead.

 

Not sure good quests really fit the TES formula though. NPCs and the stories you experience with them tend to be rather forgettable in these games.

The thing I like about Skyrim in particular are the little touches, the environmental storytelling, the NPC-NPC banter, the letters and other pieces of lore you can find and so on. That part is much improved compared to Oblivion and better than for instance in Witcher 3.

... Which had lightyears better NPCs and stories to actually play through yourself though but the gameworld was pretty forgettable and you always found the same shitty notes about poor souls that tragically died because war is cruel or some monster got them. Got old very fast.

Gimme Witcher 3's story and NPCs but with environmental storytelling at least on Skyrim level and less linear dungeons and I'm happy.

No wait, give me good gameplay on top of all that because none of this shit has anything to do with the question if it will keep me interested enough for long enough to actually see the ending credits. We're talking about games and not novels afterall.


  • 0

#52
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

 

The mechanics of how enemies react to player depending on approach and weapon choices in FPS is not much different than having NPC converse differently with you whether you are good or evil in RPG.  It's just a branch of computer codes.  RPG tell different stories from prerecorded dialogue trees and FPS offer different run through using different AI packages.  (Of course if your idea of RPG is MMO style with stats and loot then choices don't really matter). 

 

The reason FPS has gained popularity not because players are getting stupider but rather it is easier to offer "choices" in FPS than RPG.  You can mix and match weapon/AI packages to offer unique varied action based role playing experience so a lot of the codes and assets that cost money to build can be reused.  Storytelling on the other hand needs to be coherent so offering "choices" will result in many of the stuff that cost money to build likely to be played just once.  In the old days where storytelling is text based this is not a big deal but it is very different today.  Voice acting and animations ain't cheap. 

 

Can developers offer many deep, complex interweaving RPG "choices"?  Of course they "can" in a technical sense but not from a commercial sense, and probably not even creatively.  So what afa is saying is that given the reality, do we want developers to spend money on more choices or more/better distinct stories?  Afa also talked about the "illusion" of choices, which are slight detours of the same main path that offers different ambiances.  The experience is different but it's the same road.  He didn't say it was good or bad, he just said those are not "true choices" from the perspective of game designer/director.  

 

Most of the debate between you two are really just different ways of using the word "choice".  So a computer scientist, a psychologist and a theologian walk into a bar and debate the word "choice"....

 

 

So the choices in RPG are not real choices, they are just branches in the code. Brilliant. Thank you for enlightening me. I would never know otherwise. I though it was voodoo magic!

 

In the old days where storytelling is text based this is not a big deal but it is very different today.  Voice acting and animations ain't cheap - Why do you need voice acting with lipsync, and cut scenes? Do they add anything to the story, or RP? Quite the contrary - this being added to the game at the expense of the RP element. In FO4 you don't even read dialogues any more - even your own lines. You just "choose" between 3 grades of Yes in the "dialogue wheel". Even that simplified, castrated RP element that still existed in Skyrim, is not in Fallout 4 any more. It's simply a shooter with some (again simplified) stats. No wonder you have an impression that this is the only way and form, and some consider it's better to simply give player "more content" - the one he or she could passively watch and take a couple of shots.

 

No, players didn't get stupider (I hope), they just can't read anything longer than a tweet. Or don't want to, at least, and get quickly tired when they have to. The same reason why these days most people make "YouTube tutorials" even when a text page or PDF could really do a better job.

 

So if I'd be asked a question - would I prefer multiple stats/skills/alignment based paths in a quest to a fully voiced acting and animated cutscenes - fuck yeah! Any day, baby. Why? Because I could play it over and over, several times with different characters. One is a rogue, another is a warrior. One is charismatic and smart, another is dumb as brick. And I would really notice the difference in how people react to my character - by refusing to talk, attacking on sight, being afraid, being helpful, giving gifts, offering jobs. Some refuse to cooperate or even talk if you ever committed a crime, others won't contact you unless you have a couple of murders behind your belt - so the consequences of your choices aren't just changed dialogue lines. Different ways of solving the same problems for different classes/builds - and I don't mean just choosing a way to kill stuff: where a warrior charges in killing everyone right and left, a rogue convinces a guard to let him in through the back door, sneaks in, picks locks and puts the whole place on fire with all inhabitants, getting some nice loot from a hidden treasury in the process. That would create replayability.

 

The only reason why Skyrim is being played over and over again is mods - so people try new mods. Other than that - it's really terrible at this. You could just join every guild in one play-through and become a sneaky assassin heavy armoured pickpocketing werewolf battlemage, thane of everything and your mom, Arch Mage of Dark Brotherhood. What would be the point of playing it again? In fact I've played Skyrim the only time when it got released, then forgot about it for 3 years, and returned to the game when modding scene became what it is now.

 

Speaking of the practical part of this: what's easier - releasing 1 mod that gets played several times due to multiple choices, or releasing 3 linear ones? Considering that people on average will spend about the same total time playing your mod(s) and will get at least equal amount of fun? I can understand why this tendency to release linear games prevails in commercial development (you can't charge people 3 times for a single "DLC"), but if you don't charge money for your work - what's the point?

 

The reason FPS has gained popularity... Kid. They have always been popular. And they predate RPGs. The problem is not that "FPS are popular". The problem is that RPGs are becoming FPS with stats. The problem with that? You can't create a living character any more. One with a distinct personality, making his/her own unique choices. One that you will like and remember and share his/her emotions. That's the whole idea.

 

The experience is different but it's the same road - yes, you could say the same about life. The real one. The path from being born to being dead. Just with a different experience for everyone. What constitutes a real choice then?

 

So a computer scientist, a psychologist and a theologian walk into a bar and debate the word "choice".... - I write code for 30 years, so I guess this kinda makes me a "computer scientist" (I hate this stupid term though). Which one are you then, and who is afa?


  • 0

#53
zzz72w3r

zzz72w3r

    Mega Poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,032 posts

 

Spoiler

 

So the choices in RPG are not real choices, they are just branches in the code. Brilliant. Thank you for enlightening me. I would never know otherwise. I though it was voodoo magic!

 

In the old days where storytelling is text based this is not a big deal but it is very different today.  Voice acting and animations ain't cheap - Why do you need voice acting with lipsync, and cut scenes? Do they add anything to the story, or RP? Quite the contrary - this being added to the game at the expense of the RP element. In FO4 you don't even read dialogues any more - even your own lines. You just "choose" between 3 grades of Yes in the "dialogue wheel". Even that simplified, castrated RP element that still existed in Skyrim, is not in Fallout 4 any more. It's simply a shooter with some (again simplified) stats. No wonder you have an impression that this is the only way and form, and some consider it's better to simply give player "more content" - the one he or she could passively watch and take a couple of shots.

 

No, players didn't get stupider (I hope), they just can't read anything longer than a tweet. Or don't want to, at least, and get quickly tired when they have to. The same reason why these days most people make "YouTube tutorials" even when a text page or PDF could really do a better job.

 

So if I'd be asked a question - would I prefer multiple stats/skills/alignment based paths in a quest to a fully voiced acting and animated cutscenes - fuck yeah! Any day, baby. Why? Because I could play it over and over, several times with different characters. One is a rogue, another is a warrior. One is charismatic and smart, another is dumb as brick. And I would really notice the difference in how people react to my character - by refusing to talk, attacking on sight, being afraid, being helpful, giving gifts, offering jobs. Some refuse to cooperate or even talk if you ever committed a crime, others won't contact you unless you have a couple of murders behind your belt - so the consequences of your choices aren't just changed dialogue lines. Different ways of solving the same problems for different classes/builds - and I don't mean just choosing a way to kill stuff: where a warrior charges in killing everyone right and left, a rogue convinces a guard to let him in through the back door, sneaks in, picks locks and puts the whole place on fire with all inhabitants, getting some nice loot from a hidden treasury in the process. That would create replayability.

 

The only reason why Skyrim is being played over and over again is mods - so people try new mods. Other than that - it's really terrible at this. You could just join every guild in one play-through and become a sneaky assassin heavy armoured pickpocketing werewolf battlemage, thane of everything and your mom, Arch Mage of Dark Brotherhood. What would be the point of playing it again? In fact I've played Skyrim the only time when it got released, then forgot about it for 3 years, and returned to the game when modding scene became what it is now.

 

Speaking of the practical part of this: what's easier - releasing 1 mod that gets played several times due to multiple choices, or releasing 3 linear ones? Considering that people on average will spend about the same total time playing your mod(s) and will get at least equal amount of fun? I can understand why this tendency to release linear games prevails in commercial development (you can't charge people 3 times for a single "DLC"), but if you don't charge money for your work - what's the point?

 

The reason FPS has gained popularity... Kid. They have always been popular. And they predate RPGs. The problem is not that "FPS are popular". The problem is that RPGs are becoming FPS with stats. The problem with that? You can't create a living character any more. One with a distinct personality, making his/her own unique choices. One that you will like and remember and share his/her emotions. That's the whole idea.

 

The experience is different but it's the same road - yes, you could say the same about life. The real one. The path from being born to being dead. Just with a different experience for everyone. What constitutes a real choice then?

 

So a computer scientist, a psychologist and a theologian walk into a bar and debate the word "choice".... - I write code for 30 years, so I guess this kinda makes me a "computer scientist" (I hate this stupid term though). Which one are you then, and who is afa?

 

 

You have a very firm idea of what you like and what you considered as good which is perfectly fine but that does not necessarily make them objective.  I don't like FPS either but I want to understand their success.  I try not to give myself intellectual hand job by reasoning something popular I don't like as other people's failings :D 

 

Mods are free but mod creators' time are not.  Which is more preferable: good linear playable quests or ambitious multi-choice mods that may never get finished?  Or have mod creators burn out from adding choices they never intended because users want them?

 

I am pretty sure you know the difference between a computer scientist and someone who just know how to write codes. 

 

This discussion is now derailing what OP wanted so I am ending my participation :angel:


  • 0

#54
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

 


You have a very firm idea of what you like and what you considered as good which is perfectly fine but that does not necessarily make them objective.  I don't like FPS either but I want to understand their success.  I try not to give myself intellectual hand job by reasoning something popular I don't like as other people's failings :D

 

Mods are free but mod creators' time are not.  Which is more preferable: good linear playable quests or ambitious multi-choice mods that may never get finished?  Or have mod creators burn out from adding choices they never intended because users want them?

 

I am pretty sure you know the difference between a computer scientist and someone who just know how to write codes. 

 

This discussion is now derailing what OP wanted so I am ending my participation :angel:

 

 

I never said I don't like FPS. I don't like the idea of RPG becoming FPS - because it leads to the extinction of the former. There was RPG Fallout, which is now FPS Fallout with an imitation of dialogues. Truth is  - Fallout 4 is pretty mediocre as a FPS too. The recent incarnation of DOOM absolutely beats it in this department. There were far better FPS games with a story and dialogues (that don't change anything) in the past, like Half Life 2.
 

If TES6 follows the same trend, it's lost as an RPG, and the whole RPG genre becomes a small niche, represented by games like "Pillars of Eternity" by Obsidian and several others from developers like inXile. It's nice to have them, but having Fallout and TES go is still kinda sad.

 

Speaking of "wasted efforts" again - take a look at Enderal. How much time was wasted on creating endless cutscenes that will become a mere annoyance on a second play-through? (if there will be one) Why devs bothered working on all those skill trees when they don't have any impact on the linear (as rails) story whatsoever?


  • 1

#55
Nazzzgul666

Nazzzgul666

    Mega Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,398 posts

Not to pick sides as I am not a native English speaker either, although by my age and education I really should be better than native speakers...

 

I do have a background in stochastic programing and afa's prose style, so to speak, is very familiar to me or those with backgrounds in AI. 

 

Choices in games are all fixed paths (*under current technology).  The player is just a rat in a maze and the "choices" are basically our ways of mapping the maze.  Is mapping a maze more fun than traveling down a brand new road?  Would you rather retrace your paths to experience different dead ends or would you rather have something totally different from beginning to end?  Well, that depends on the dead ends and the new path, isn't it?  Also, keep in mind that developers work under a budget so choices for choices sake do not necessarily a better game make.  Every dead end in a maze that players don't experience is wasted resource that can be used to improve the game.

 

*Procedure generated worlds and NPCs will be the game changer but we are probably far from the tech to be good enough.

To me that doesn't sound like background in AI but stupid marketing. A dead end nobody ever plays is wasted, yes. But as long as it's possible to experience it, somebody will. Probably many. A different (not necessarily dead, though) end is what makes me to replay the whole game. At least it's one reason to that. And a game i don't want to play a second time is hardly a good one. I play RPGs (and even some FPS and other games) for the story, not for "amazing" fighting systems, animations, graphics or whatever. Those are nice to have, but a good story (not only the questline, that imho includes characters and atmosphere) is mandatory for RPGs. And if i can have a second, third,... path, i get a second story in one game.

 

I recently played Archimedean Dynasty, a submarine simulation from 1996 that still had a better story than FO4. The only real choices were to miss sidequests if you didn't talk to the questgivers in time, but the atmosphere and dialogues were great. I really don't know how much a good storywriter earns, but why is it so fucking hard to hire one?

 

*edit: I totally agree with philout. When you make a lot of cutscenes, make sure that there are different ones for different paths, not necesarily more, though. That way you'll increase the fun to play it again instead of reducing it.


  • 0

#56
Grey Cloud

Grey Cloud

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 479 posts

I agree about cutscenes, they totally ruined NWN2 for me. Too many, most way too long and most unnecessary.


  • 0

#57
phillout

phillout

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts

Speaking of cutscenes - I remember the times when scrolling text was good enough as a way to tell a story, preceding the current events, even in a movie.

 

Not only those on a tight budget, but even some well-known AAA titles. Hums X-Wing theme....


  • 0

#58
bicobus

bicobus

    Kodama Dōji

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Yeah, but you need somewhat decent writers for that. Bethesda do not really have any.

 

I blame Michael Bay and his explosions.


  • 0

#59
sweforce

sweforce

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts

 - Molag Bal's quest - actually... pretty terrible. A vigilant asks you to join him in checking out the house, and then you have no choice but to kill him and submit to Molag Bal. I had to use some "I have a terrible premonition" excuse for my vigilant character to refuse helping him. And why would a vampire want to join a vigilant (those who usually attack him on sight) in checking the house?

 

There isn't really a reason for that vigilant to be alive when the quest begins. It is enough if someone mention that he went in there together with his aide (Vigilants tend to travel in pairs)and disappeared. Then you enter to investigate and find them dead on the floor and they have apparently killed each other. A vampire should be able to work with that.

 


  • 0

#60
GinaNicole

GinaNicole

    Member

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 167 posts

I consider Depth of Quest to encompass story line. A good quest to me is like a good book, it makes want to read to the end. Story is important.

For me the other important part of a good quest is choice and consequence. Especially if the consequences follow you throughout the game and not just the quest. As players we make those type of choices when we install certain mods. An example might be Skyrim Unbound with dragon souls set to random. The player has no idea if their PC is going to be Dragonborn or not, and that choice affects the entire play-through.

I like quests that do the same sort of thing. Especially so if there are multiple outcomes to make it re-playable.


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Oblivion, Fallout, Skyrim, Quest