Quests are useless

[Hobo Elf]

Arguable. BG1's story is generic and boring and the companions aren't half as developed as in the sequel. I guess it can count as half a storyfag game, but the main focus is on questing (fetch and kill quests) and crawling through hordes of bandits. I might be biased though because I don't like BG1 that much, it just feels too generic to me so I always ignored the story.

I actually like the story in BG1. Well, at least what it was trying to do anyway. The Bhaalspawn stuff is boring wank, but I really enjoyed Sarevok as a villain. Instead of being a generic fantasy thug who just brutes his way through with strength he used politics and the economy to cuck the Sword Coast, i.e flooded the market with shit iron that is frail and breaks apart randomly, and then maneuvering himself into a position of power by appearing as the only guy who has all the man power and connections to battle the iron shortage and increasing bandit activity. This is great because it's also tied into the gameplay where non-magical weapons will break eventually. Usually the leap from Sword to Sword +1 is a significant one in D&D, but in BG1 it's extra important and feels great because now you don't have to worry about lugging extra weapons around in case they break apart.
But as you said, BG1 isn't much of a storyfag game. It's more about going on little, random D&D adventures. The plot was mostly just there in the background until the very end, and its purpose was to serve the gameplay, rather than forcing the gameplay to serve the plot.

 

[Lilura]

This is great because it's also tied into the gameplay where non-magical weapons will break eventually. Usually the leap from Sword to Sword +1 is a significant one in D&D, but in BG1 it's extra important and feels great because now you don't have to worry about lugging extra weapons around in case they break apart.

Non-magical metal weapons only. It's an iron taint, not a wood taint. Thus, such weapons as clubs, quarterstaffs and bows are unaffected (even though the arrow-tip is metal). But yes, it's nice how the iron taint affects game-play in some way.

 

[JarlFrank]

I don't think I ever said that about PS:T.

It was a long time ago.

Glad we agree on what is and isn't a storyfag RPG. However, I don't see how Arcanum can be the best game ever (or even in the top 20) because its non-commital combat system sucks and its combat encounter design does, too.

It does have reactive greatness, meaningful questing and the greatest hub in the genre, though (Tarant). I'd never deny it that. Plus, isometric perspective, nice UI and good world-building along with good writing, lore and interesting characterizations. And GUNS.

But... its combat is atrocious. What a pity.

I'm just an Arcanum fanboy and will always consider it the best RPG ever despite its flaws, which I acknowledge. This is as much because of my fond memories as it is because of the game itself, so my fanatical Arcanum-fanboyism should only be taken half seriously. The things it does well have never been done as well before or since, but the flaws are pretty damn serious.

The combat system itself is fine to me, but the encounter design is truly dreadful. Back in the day I didn't mind cause I was a teen who hadn't played that many RPGs yet, but whenever I replay the game I realize that the encounter design in Arcanum is some of the worst in the genre.

 

[Lilura]

so my fanatical Arcanum-fanboyism should only be taken half seriously

Do you like it THIS much, though, like Thief? And would you grant dumbfuck tags for anyone who shat on it? I'd like to know. As would anvi .

The combat system itself is fine to me

I just don't like how players can switch between combat modes. Turn-based is ok when playing with guns. And I usually wield guns. Also, I usually quit my playthroughs after doing Tarant, which I consider one of the best highlights the genre has to offer.

Also, I don't like its overworld encounter scaling because it facilitates power progression and wealth accumulation far more than questing does.

 

[JarlFrank]

so my fanatical Arcanum-fanboyism should only be taken half seriously

Do you like it THIS much, though, like Thief? And would you grant dumbfuck tags for anyone who shat on it? I'd like to know. As would anvi .

Thief is the more flawless game, but I like both about equally.

I would dumbfuck an Arcanum-shitter if the shitting was ignorant enough. Shitting on the combat? Justified. Shitting on the worldbuilding and quest design? Dumbfuck.

I just don't like how players can switch between combat modes. Turn-based is ok when playing with guns. And I usually wield guns. Also, I usually quit my playthroughs after doing Tarant, which I consider one of the best highlights the genre has to offer.

The real time mode is pretty great for getting through weak mobs due to how fast it is, while turn based is good for tougher encounters.

And yeah, Tarant is the best location in the game. I tend to play until Caladon at least on my replays though, since that unlocks new content in Tarant (which is a genius move not seen too often in RPGs: the main city of the game getting new content at later stages of the main quest to show that the world isn't stagnant and static, but actually has things happening in it; a new recruitable companion, Perriman Smythe, arrives later in the game, and you get the orcish labor strike in the factory).

 

[Lilura]

Yeah, I like how terrain can change over time or as a result of the player's actions/inaction.

Progression-based or time-based.

Fallout has a few examples of that (time-based reactivity).

 

[Gibson]

The one thing that's truly retarded here is your definition of "storyfag".

then give me the official definition of a storyfag game and I'll gladly change my list; in the absence of the definition, however, I may define it as I please, so to me:
-> do I give a shit about the story and/or is the story a central part of the game? if yes, then storyfag, if no then not a storyfag.
example: JA2->I really don't give a shit about the story; BG2->I give a shit about the story.

 

[JarlFrank]

The one thing that's truly retarded here is your definition of "storyfag".

then give me the official definition of a storyfag game and I'll gladly change my list; in the absence of the definition, however, I may define it as I please, so to me:
-> do I give a shit about the story and/or is the story a central part of the game? if yes, then storyfag, if no then not a storyfag.
example: JA2->I really don't give a shit about the story; BG2->I give a shit about the story.

But whether you give a shit about the story or not isn't an inherent quality of the game but an entirely subjective personal opinion.

Theoretically someone could play PST or Disco Elysium and not give a shit about the story, even though both games focus on the story heavily.

Then the game would suddenly not be a storyfag RPG anymore???

Criteria for categorizing games must be objective, not subjective.
Therefore your criteria suck.

Official definition: a game that focuses on the story above other gameplay elements, making it the main focus of the game. In a true storyfag game, storytelling is more important than either combat or player choice.

The only game in your list this applies to would be PST.

 

[Darkzone]

Yeah, I like how terrain can change over time or as a result of the player's actions/inaction.
Progression-based or time-based.
Fallout has a few examples of that (time-based reactivity).

Event-based (discrete-event simulation shortend to DES) or time-based (fixed-increment time progression). Progression can be time and event based, therefore applying it just to events is a mistake.

 

[Gibson]

Official definition: a game that focuses on the story above other gameplay elements, making it the main focus of the game. In a true storyfag game, storytelling is more important than either combat or player choice.

"official" by whom? source please. is it duden, Miriam-webster or perhaps oxford?

also:

Criteria for categorizing games must be objective, not subjective.

that's why in all these years, the most prestigious and respectable forum on the web, still hasn't come up with the definition of an RPG, ebven though it's in the name of the site.
good luck with that.

 

[JarlFrank]

Official definition: a game that focuses on the story above other gameplay elements, making it the main focus of the game. In a true storyfag game, storytelling is more important than either combat or player choice.

"official" by whom? source please. is it duden, Miriam-webster or perhaps oxford?

By common fucking sense you imbecile.

Criteria for categorizing games must be objective, not subjective.

that's why in all these years, the most prestigious and respectable forum on the web, still hasn't come up with the definition of an RPG, ebven though it's in the name of the site.
good luck with that.

This is a meme.

The commonly accepted definition of RPG is "Game where the player controls either a single character or multiple characters whose abilities inside and outside of combat are governed by stats, perks or other mechanical elements that are unique to those characters (i.e. Doomguy having HP and armor doesn't count as stats) and define how these characters are played, usually these stats/perks/whatevers also change during the course of the game based on experience gain that allows the player to create distinct character builds".

As in, the reasonable common sense understanding of what an RPG is.

 

[Darkzone]

The best quest log is still Arcanum's. It takes notes when people give you quests so you can remember wtf they wanted of you, and also makes journal entries about important things, but it doesn't meticulously keep track of every quest step. "I'm supposed to find the mines of the Black Mountain clan" is all you get.

Perhaps just a small description of the quest or rumor in the journal, would be a good midground solution. For me one of the more remarkable things in Fallout series is the search for hidden quest, but often enough you just stumble across them without a true search for them, because the "true" quests are in the journal.

 

[Gibson]

By common fucking sense you imbecile.

so first, according to you, it's an official definition, I quote:

Official definition: a game that focuses on the story above other gameplay elements, making it the main focus of the game. In a true storyfag game, storytelling is more important than either combat or player choice.

and now it's just according to common sense.
so - which one is it?

This is a meme.

indeed, I'm starting to woder that myself.

 

[JarlFrank]

The definition is official by my authority as RPG expert.

 

[Viata]

The definition is official by my authority as RPG expert.

 

[EldarEldrad]

For main quest it is just representation of overall game process. It is major flaw, if main quest has bad design. For sidequest bad design generally leads to skipping that quest completely for me.

Personally, I like quest design in Geneforge 1. Main quest is just "Escape Sucia Island" goal without any steps in log you need to perform. Some side quests are traditional but some are just milestones on your way to acquire specific ending. Game gives you subtle hints about them but do not push them in your face as Fallout New Vegas does with all that "Make THIS quest for NCR win, we put another remainder even in quest name".

And overall, quest log is essential part of game interface. No quest log is better than bad quest log.

 

[Tacgnol]

Personally, I like quest design in Geneforge 1

Geneforge 1 was superb and I really wish Jeff would try something in the same vein again.

The faction design in particular felt very organic and unforced in the first Geneforge. I was also impressed by how you could completely ignore all the factions/side content if you wanted and just push towards the end.

 

[Darkzone]

Some side quests are traditional but some are just milestones on your way to acquire specific ending. Game gives you subtle hints about them but do not push them in your face as Fallout New Vegas does with all that "Make THIS quest for NCR win, we put another remainder even in quest name".
And overall, quest log is essential part of game interface. No quest log is better than bad quest log.

The problem for me is to figure it out how to keep the overall subtle hints in the player's mind. How to mke the rumors / hints important, while keeping the game decoration just it?

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

You'd think the boars, rats, spiders, mice, bats would become extinct with all the people kill questing. I guess this was just some lazy exterminators way to get shit done by hiring third party (which means he's getting paid a lot more than he's giving you to take care of pests).

For no quests make sure the storyline has no quest-like mentioned motive either. instead... "you find a hole in the ground. a big rat comes out. You kill it. Enter hole?" I guess maybe that's a quest. The quest to kill shit in that damn hole.

 

[Darkzone]

You'd think the boars, rats, spiders, mice, bats would become extinct with all the people kill questing. I guess this was just some lazy exterminators way to get shit done by hiring third party (which means he's getting paid a lot more than he's giving you to take care of pests).
For no quests make sure the storyline has no quest-like mentioned motive either. instead... "you find a hole in the ground. a big rat comes out. You kill it. Enter hole?" I guess maybe that's a quest. The quest to kill shit in that damn hole.

Not necessary they have a very high reproductive rate. It is like in Australia where they failed in controlling the rodents that were imported in 19th century.
Extinction often happens to species with a low reproductive rate and to species that despite a high reproductive rate fail to gather enough resources (in calories) to survive and reproduce (either due to no fertiliy or too low reproduction or the death of their offspring). This may happen due to changes in environment or interspecies competition.

 

[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.

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.

So you seem to be shitting on CRPG quests without being able to appreciate actual good CRPG questing.

Shitting on the worldbuilding and quest design? Dumbfuck.

There we go.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

You'd think the boars, rats, spiders, mice, bats would become extinct with all the people kill questing. I guess this was just some lazy exterminators way to get shit done by hiring third party (which means he's getting paid a lot more than he's giving you to take care of pests).
For no quests make sure the storyline has no quest-like mentioned motive either. instead... "you find a hole in the ground. a big rat comes out. You kill it. Enter hole?" I guess maybe that's a quest. The quest to kill shit in that damn hole.

Not necessary they have a very high reproductive rate. It is like in Australia where they failed in controlling the rodents that were imported in 19th century.
Extinction often happens to species with a low reproductive rate and to species that despite a high reproductive rate fail to gather enough resources (in calories) to survive and reproduce (either due to no fertiliy or too low reproduction or the death of their offspring). This may happen due to changes in environment or interspecies competition.

GOD I HATE MEECES TO PIECES! They shit, piss and chew on everything. Fuckers.

 

[Stavrophore]

I am beginning to cringe more and more when an NPC approaches me and says I "might help him". Well thank you very much sir, how about you shove it? Thank you for adding clutter to my game!

I don't think I can think of a single quest in the dozens of RPGs that I played that I cared about. I have come to believe that quests are just developer wankery, wanking about how creative they consider themselves to be. I want no part of it. I think it's why I play far fewer RPGs, and the ones I still want to play are those that have little to none.

I made a thread like 8 years ago where I said that quest design was just a pretentious gimmick, but now I think it is quests themselves.

Even a game I loved like Bloodlines, I didn't like it at all because of quests. I liked it because it had well written, relatable characters, a spooky atmosphere, and enjoyable levels and situations.

It's much better to just have FedEx quests for 100% of the game than having to jump through a series of hoops that I don't give two shits about.

Stop thinking that you're going to be a great DM, you're never going to be. A piece of software will never give you the total freedom and adaptability that a pen and paper game and a bunch of friends will.

Just let me go through levels, kill monsters, find loot, rest and shop in towns, rince and repeat.

I just think of my years old unfinished PoE save, and on the rare occasions I think of reinstalling it, I think back of all the quests, and all the hoops and pretentiousness tied to them, and I think "not this bullshit again" and try to forget this game ever existed.

I mean you have some point, but your arguments and presentation is very lacking. What i would like to see is an RPG made like EVE online, where the players create interesting events and happening in game. Other than that you are immersed in game and do some ordinary stuff like hunting, killing bandits, sleep, eat, drink, brew potions, learn magicka and spells etc. Something similar to Kingdom Come Deliverance but multiplayer and with even more depth like being able to build your houses/fortresses/guild place. You could then raid against other clans, stealthily take their belongings, play solo or with others, possiblities are limitless. You could make your robber band like in mount and blade.

 

[JarlFrank]

multiplayer

No.

 

[Stavrophore]

multiplayer

No.

Well unless we get human like AI in our lifetime, then no, multiplayer will be a superior option for this kind of game.