Quests are useless

[Damned Registrations]

True but 'what is a quest?' is inherently way too vague to be useful for a discussion. I think for gameplay/narrative discussion purposes, it's not a quest if you didn't need to be told about it by a specific person to do the thing. So the water chip isn't really a quest (or at least didn't need to be- I don't know the specifics of the game but that scenario would totally work if you could just find out about and bring the chip there without any specific contact) and the 'ring the bells' 'quest' in dark souls doesn't count either, since you can blunder through the game murdering everyone before they get a word in, and still manage to find and throw the switches that open that gate in a roundabout way. OTOH the 'collect the four lordsouls' thing is clearly a quest, although you can technically get it from 2 different people I suppose, it's not something you can do on your own. They're all clearly quests from a narrative standpoint, but gameplay wise, some of these are no different than finding switches that open a door or causes some other thing to happen. And there's a huge difference in feel between a door that opens when you throw a switch, and a door that opens only when you throw a switch that you've been told to throw. That latter seems like it robs you of agency, even if it's functionally just two switches you had to hit in a specific order. It sucks the fun out of the game when you have to do as you're told.

Also, I'd consider 'find a waterchip' to still be a request to do a specific thing, even if there's more than one available.

 

[laclongquan]

Can someone list games that have such overwhelming gameplay that no quests are needed ?
ToEE was mentioned but it has quests, many quests so it is obviously not a legitimate example.

Silent Storm, Silent Storm Sentinels, and Hammer & Sickle.

Other than the main story advancement, they have almost no quest at all.

What they has is the shining gameplay.

You realize that you fail by including the word almost ?

But i am also at fault, i should rephrase my post into

Can someone list rpgs that have such overwhelming gameplay that no quests are needed ?

Before someone mentions Tetris or Pong ...

Nah~ You just nitpicking out of panic is all.

I can confidently say almost no RPG can escape out of the "design a quest" mentality among designers.

Can YOU point out a RPG that has no quest?

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Can someone list games that have such overwhelming gameplay that no quests are needed ?
ToEE was mentioned but it has quests, many quests so it is obviously not a legitimate example.

Ultima Underworld.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I don't think you people understood what I meant.

I don't mind quest logs at all, I don't mind objectives.

Those who are saying "oh ideally you should just be given a quest in an indirect way that looks natural and then everything would be fine", to me that is part of the problem. That is just dancing around what essentially STILL amounts to random people giving you a quest. It's just dressing it up.

The problem is essentially that computer software is only good at one thing, and that is mathematical equations. It is not good at stimulating natural dialogue between characters because everything ultimately has to be pre-scripted.

So any game that isn't majorly focused on the strength of its mechanics above all, unless it's something like a VN at all, will try to create an immersive experience, but it never works, because it is always too limited and there is little to no adaptability, whereas a good DM can adapt his setting to any situation.

I don't mind something like Might and Magic VI for instance where you meet people, get straightforward objectives, explore, accomplish them, go see them again, get your reward, thanks and bye.

But anything that amounts to a convoluted task always somehow devolves into tedium.

So what if you have the choice to fight, stealth or talk? At the end of the day it's still always those same three things.

For instance in a recent PnP I played where we were detectives interrogating employees in a dance club, the guys decided to start messing around and ask for drugs from a patron, then drag him into a room, blackmail him, twist his finger... even though our warrant only allowed us to question employees. I was trying to resume the other players but they wouldn't hear me. Then the DM had the manager come him, get very outraged, try to drag them out of the room, then one of the players trying to throw him a holding spell, but the manager who is secretly some sort of ghoul noticed it and activated a defense. Then I tried to reason with him, he said he would complain to the police because we assaulted a patron and violated our warrant, but I got him to allow me to send employees to talk with me since I hadn't started any mess. Then afterwards coming back to our HQ, we had to placate our bosses, then later placate the FBI.

Can YOU do something like this in any game? No, you only have combat, stealth or dialogue. It's pathetic, it's laughable.

Designers should stop trying to impress us with how "brilliant" they are and should let the mechanics speak for themselves. It's how games pre-decline used to be, after all.

 

[Silly Germans]

I don't think you people understood what I meant.

I don't mind quest logs at all, I don't mind objectives.

Those who are saying "oh ideally you should just be given a quest in an indirect way that looks natural and then everything would be fine", to me that is part of the problem. That is just dancing around what essentially STILL amounts to random people giving you a quest. It's just dressing it up.

The problem is essentially that computer software is only good at one thing, and that is mathematical equations. It is not good at stimulating natural dialogue between characters because everything ultimately has to be pre-scripted.

So any game that isn't majorly focused on the strength of its mechanics above all, unless it's something like a VN at all, will try to create an immersive experience, but it never works, because it is always too limited and there is little to no adaptability, whereas a good DM can adapt his setting to any situation.

I don't mind something like Might and Magic VI for instance where you meet people, get straightforward objectives, explore, accomplish them, go see them again, get your reward, thanks and bye.

But anything that amounts to a convoluted task always somehow devolves into tedium.

So what if you have the choice to fight, stealth or talk? At the end of the day it's still always those same three things.

For instance in a recent PnP I played where we were detectives interrogating employees in a dance club, the guys decided to start messing around and ask for drugs from a patron, then drag him into a room, blackmail him, twist his finger... even though our warrant only allowed us to question employees. I was trying to resume the other players but they wouldn't hear me. Then the DM had the manager come him, get very outraged, try to drag them out of the room, then one of the players trying to throw him a holding spell, but the manager who is secretly some sort of ghoul noticed it and activated a defense. Then I tried to reason with him, he said he would complain to the police because we assaulted a patron and violated our warrant, but I got him to allow me to send employees to talk with me since I hadn't started any mess. Then afterwards coming back to our HQ, we had to placate our bosses, then later placate the FBI.

Can YOU do something like this in any game? No, you only have combat, stealth or dialogue. It's pathetic, it's laughable.

Designers should stop trying to impress us with how "brilliant" they are and should let the mechanics speak for themselves. It's how games pre-decline used to be, after all.

You use the word Quest wrong.

 

[Butter]

I don't get it. Quests are fine as long as they're in M&M6, but they're not fine if they're in Bloodlines? Because Troika provided multiple solutions to their quests, but that's inferior to a human DM? And you'd rather do fetch quests than something with an ounce of narrative?

 

[HeatEXTEND]

from entertainment to art.

 

[anvi]

Quests are useless and annoying. I said this before but they are unnecessary and older games proved it. Eye of the Beholder 2, the game starts with a 2 minute intro movie that explains there are reports of evil goings on at Castle Darkmoon and the town elder had sent a scout to investigate, but she never returned. So he is hiring you and your party to go and find out what is happening and find the scout. That's it. There is only one quest, the game is the quest. Every game that has quests is doing it wrong.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

I don't think you people understood what I meant.

What about the questing in Arcanum? Let's have your opinion on that and things might get a little more clear.

 

[Falksi]

I don't think you people understood what I meant.

I don't mind quest logs at all, I don't mind objectives.

Those who are saying "oh ideally you should just be given a quest in an indirect way that looks natural and then everything would be fine", to me that is part of the problem. That is just dancing around what essentially STILL amounts to random people giving you a quest. It's just dressing it up.

The problem is essentially that computer software is only good at one thing, and that is mathematical equations. It is not good at stimulating natural dialogue between characters because everything ultimately has to be pre-scripted.

So any game that isn't majorly focused on the strength of its mechanics above all, unless it's something like a VN at all, will try to create an immersive experience, but it never works, because it is always too limited and there is little to no adaptability, whereas a good DM can adapt his setting to any situation.

I don't mind something like Might and Magic VI for instance where you meet people, get straightforward objectives, explore, accomplish them, go see them again, get your reward, thanks and bye.

But anything that amounts to a convoluted task always somehow devolves into tedium.

So what if you have the choice to fight, stealth or talk? At the end of the day it's still always those same three things.

For instance in a recent PnP I played where we were detectives interrogating employees in a dance club, the guys decided to start messing around and ask for drugs from a patron, then drag him into a room, blackmail him, twist his finger... even though our warrant only allowed us to question employees. I was trying to resume the other players but they wouldn't hear me. Then the DM had the manager come him, get very outraged, try to drag them out of the room, then one of the players trying to throw him a holding spell, but the manager who is secretly some sort of ghoul noticed it and activated a defense. Then I tried to reason with him, he said he would complain to the police because we assaulted a patron and violated our warrant, but I got him to allow me to send employees to talk with me since I hadn't started any mess. Then afterwards coming back to our HQ, we had to placate our bosses, then later placate the FBI.

Can YOU do something like this in any game? No, you only have combat, stealth or dialogue. It's pathetic, it's laughable.

Designers should stop trying to impress us with how "brilliant" they are and should let the mechanics speak for themselves. It's how games pre-decline used to be, after all.

The problem is that these are games, not real life. What you ask & expect is just not reality.

Games are games. You can play them & have a good - if limited & restricted - RPG experience with them, some many times over if done right. Ultimately you'll exhaust all options regardless of how good the game is, that's just where we are in gaming. What you're expecting is pretty fucking ridiculous tbh. It's like complaining that the PC doesn't suck your cock every time you activate a sex scene.

The main thing is that the game throws enough new & stimulating things at you from the off to excite & entice you, and back that up with enough depth to keep you playing & keep it enjoyable.

If you want a PnP experience, that's what PnP is for.

 

[Lilura]

The main thing is that the game throws enough new & stimulating things at you from the off to excite & entice you

Stimulate, excite and entice - straight off the bat?

Wrong. Games should kill you over and over again and destroy your soul until you RTFM and get gud.

 

[Delterius]

I like enticing.

 

[Falksi]

The main thing is that the game throws enough new & stimulating things at you from the off to excite & entice you

Stimulate, excite and entice - straight off the bat?

Wrong. Games should kill you over and over again and destroy your soul until you RTFM and get gud.

You're a dominatrix aren't you?

 

[RickOmbo]

If only games allowed to kill evil trash mobs for 99% of the playtime.

 

[laclongquan]

ITT PnP players desperately trying to draw attention to the difference between computer games and what a (PnP) game should be... in an effort to save that dying genre.

Acknowledge your agenda, but you are annoying in the same way those flaming queers trying get our attention with their gay behaviors.

 

[RickOmbo]

No computer can replicate jokes of my DM, he is the best. Not to mention voices he does.

 

[Darth Canoli]

When I hear about being sent on a quest, I think grand things. I think journeys, adventure, danger, reward that matches the death defying antics you've set to embark on, thrills and plenty of kills.

But instead you'll get shit like, "I have a quest for you. My tavern has RATS in the cellar. Go kill 'em." That's not a QUEST. A quest is about glory and legend. When you're on a quest you have the Conan the Barbarian OST playing in your head constantly. It's bravery and heroism.

That's why I propose, to bring back the honor to the term "QUEST" we separate a QUEST from a TASK. Tasks are the shitty quests we all know of. Fetch quests, courier runs, moving from Point A to Point B with little engagement, it's stuff that isn't cool. It's actually really boring, but it's easy experience and you may find something that could lead to a QUEST.

Then when you get the fabled quest, it's pure excitement. You know it'll be good. You know this is what it's all about. QUESTS.

YES!

Quests should be about slaying giant spiders and the likes!

 

[Lilura]

If only games allowed to kill evil trash mobs for 99% of the playtime.

That's actually how I play Fallout, Arcanum and Planescape: Torment.

It's called power progression. Get gud.

 

[anvi]

If only games allowed to kill evil trash mobs for 99% of the playtime.

This is perfectly fine if it is fun. TOEE was just that and it was awesome. Again, most old RPGs and blobbers are just exploring the world and killing everything that gets in your way. It is fun if the combat is fun. Throw in some interesting exploration and a few puzzles and it is a good game and a lot better than all these shitty modern RPGs.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

snip

Just because a computer game can't ever attain the potential of a PnP session, doesn't mean any attempts at reaching those heigths are a waste of time and detrimental to the game experience.

In actuality this evidentely false by the simple fact that the best RPG's are the ones with an abundance of player agency, reactivity and non-linear quests.

What would be pathethic is if every RPG was only about that tiring simplistic gameplay loop you seem to adore. Then we wouldn't have ever had those excelent games.
Many of which (if not most) came out in the "pre-decline" days.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I don't think you people understood what I meant.

What about the questing in Arcanum? Let's have your opinion on that and things might get a little more clear.

To me Arcanum was a flawed game, that was still fun, but I wouldn't call it fun because of its quests. It was fun because of its world, strange and familiar at the same time, and because it was full of characters that gave the world life, even though you were never sure who you could trust.

But when I think back of "Good morning human. Can you do this for me? Only there's this problem because..." I just cringe.

 

[Deleted Member 22431]

Dumbfucks are useless.

 

[barghwata]

Just because a computer game can't ever attain the potential of a PnP session, doesn't mean any attempts at reaching those heigths are a waste of time and detrimental to the game experience.

In actuality this evidentely false by the simple fact that the best RPG's are the ones with an abundance of player agency, reactivity and non-linear quests.

What would be pathethic is if every RPG was only about that tiring simplistic gameplay loop you seem to adore. Then we wouldn't have ever had those excelent games.
Many of which came out in the "pre-decline" days (not to mention the age of decline ended back in 2014/2015).

I agree, but i don't think that's his point, even though he is explaining it in the worst way possible. What he takes issue with isn't so much non-linear quests as is it narrative-heavy quests, you know..... those quests that are very scripted and that literally give you instructions on how to finish them. Many modern RPGs fell victim to this type of quest design for some reason.

Even Fallout New Vegas, which has excellent quest design does sometimes suffer from this issue, specifically in these quests where the game gives you a list of optional solutions to solve the quest marked with an [Optional] tag instead of letting you think for yourself:

It's great to have multiple paths and solutions to quests of course but it is a problem if the quest design gets too scripted, in my opinion it's better to just give the player an objective and then let them fuck around and do the quest in whatever way they want through the game mechanics alone, without a heavy handed narrative that dictates the way the quest should go down.

I think what happened here is that the OP played way too many RPGs with garbage quest design and then came to this over the top conclusion that "Quests bad and all RPGs should be hack n slash games and dungeon crawlers", and even though i agree with him that CRPGs are very far from approching the potential of PnP games, that doesn't mean developers should just give up all together.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

Why are you lecturing me on art Jarl? Is there an RPG commentator/forum-goer who has written more on art assets than myself? No, there isn't. I've got artistic appreciation all through my commentary. It's just that I stop short of calling it art (because that's pretentious). I use "artwork" and "art assets". Yes, there can be artistic area design but I don't call it art. Or if I do, it's not in that superlative, transcendent way.

I'd be more impressed if devs approach dungeon design as a science, rather than an art.

Anyway, this all came about because someone contended that adding narrative into a game turns it from "mere entertainment" into "art."

What a load of shit.

If you describe game design as a science, you're going to run into the same problem that you ran into with describing it as an art: most game designers are pig ignorant. The only science they probably encountered in their lives might be a mandated Psychology 101 course. When many scientists can't even put together a proper study after having spent four or more years training, that's a serious problem for these scientific game designers. Honestly, the most the game industry could possibly manage is pretensions of being scientific, much like how today they pretend to be artistic.

 

[ADL]

Quests created by hand are pointless unless they're actually good, well written and have levels of interactivity beyond "kill 10 boars and come back to me for XP to do it all over again". Otherwise I'll take Daggerfall/No Man's Sky level proc-gen any day of the fucking week.