76 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sylv is the OP.


And some people don't want to have to dig all around a large map looking for the two trees the amulet was left by. Some of us don't find that fun.

That said quest markers being toggable is fine. But gone completely? No thank you.

I don't object to them being available, as long as using them isn't necessary.

In the DAO quest Crosscut Drifters, you find a bunch of clues that supposedly reveal the location of a hidden cache. But they don't actually tell the player where the cache is. They do, however, activate a quest marker.

And that's what I'm trying to avoid. It's not that players who like quest markers are lazy, but that they offer a shortcut in quest design that developers shouldn't take. As it is in DAI, Memories of the Grey consists of "go to these specific places, and maybe have the Deft Hands perk when you get there". That's not much of a quest. I understand that the Inquisitor is simply understood to have received the clues and interpreted them correctly, but that doesn't really leave much for the player to do other than walk from place to place.

This issue makes me nostalgic for Ultima VII.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You should probably reword your initial post then. Right now it reads that 'quest markers make it too easy and everything else is fine otherwise', as opposed to 'the quests should be reworked to be more engaging and interactive'. i.e. less collect the shards/bear hides and more like the mini story arcs in DA:O.

It only reads like that if you stop reading after the first two sentences.

[RShara]

Sylv is the OP.

 

 

And some people don't want to have to dig all around a large map looking for the two trees the amulet was left by. Some of us don't find that fun.

 

That said quest markers being toggable is fine. But gone completely? No thank you.

 

My bad.  That's not what I took away from the OP.  I wouldn't mind BG2 style quests, if they were fewer, and had more depth to them, instead of quest markers.  The maps would also need to be smaller, and there wouldn't be stuff like Landmarks and xxx bottles, probably.

[Ryzaki]

I don't object to them being available, as long as using them isn't necessary.

In the DAO quest Crosscut Drifters, you find a bunch of clues that supposedly reveal the location of a hidden cache. But they don't actually tell the player where the cache is. They do, however, activate a quest marker.

And that's what I'm trying to avoid. It's not that players who like quest markers are lazy, but that they offer a shortcut in quest design that developers shouldn't take. As it is in DAI, Memories of the Grey consists of "go to these specific places, and maybe have the Deft Hands perk when you get there". That's not much of a quest. I understand that the Inquisitor is simply understood to have received the clues and interpreted them correctly, but that doesn't really leave much for the player to do other than walk from place to place.

This issue makes me nostalgic for Ultima VII.

 

Oooh I see your problem. That actually blows. It should do both.

[Thiefy]

It only reads like that if you stop reading after the first two sentences.

Obviously not since you already had to explain yourself several times to different people.

[Sylvius the Mad]

My bad. That's not what I took away from the OP. I wouldn't mind BG2 style quests, if they were fewer, and had more depth to them, instead of quest markers. The maps would also need to be smaller, and there wouldn't be stuff like Landmarks and xxx bottles, probably.

Smaller maps would ruin it. I want maps like this, but with detailed clues.

In somewhere like the Fallow Mire, there are only so many places to go. Same with the Sword Coast. And while Hinterlands is big, it's divided into discreet sections with limited pathways between them. Once you see the whole Hinterlands map, it's fairly simple. It's just a way bigger version of DAO's Korcari Wilds.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Obviously not since you already had to explain yourself several times to different people.

I'm starting to wonder if people don't read full posts before drawing conclusions about their content.

That would be dumb.

[Sylvius the Mad]

With that many missions? It would be dreadful.

Because you'd rather just be told where to go, with no ambiguity at all?

[Thiefy]

I'm starting to wonder if people don't read full posts before drawing conclusions about their content.

That would be dumb.

I read the post in its entirety, which isn't as much or as complex as you'd make it to be. I just interpreted what you said different from what you meant.

 

As did several other people.

 

If you don't want to admit that I had a point that's fine. You'll still be explaining yourself over and over until you abandon the thread.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I'm starting to wonder if people don't read full posts before drawing conclusions about their content.

That would be dumb.

 

I wouldn't be so confident that the original post is so clear that it's okay to call anyone who didn't get 100% of your meaning "dumb."

 

That would be... pretty dumb. 

[Liveshiptrader]

Removing quest markers to give incentive to explore seems like a bad idea when the incentive to even do the quests is low.

[learie]

I don't want them to remove quest markers, but I'd love for the side/fetch quests to be more interesting. Find 22 shards in the Western Approach? OMG, I'm going insane with boredom.

[Brass_Buckles]

Many of DAI's quests involve walking to a marked spot on the map to retrieve an object.

What if there wasn't any such marker?

Imagine how much more engaging a quest like Memories of the Grey would be if, instead of being shown the locations on the map, we instead had to question people about what they'd seen and piece together the clues.

 

Well, one reason for quest markers instead of having dialogue to tell you where things are is that it takes resources to pay for voice actors and writers to do so.  You'll notice that for the mosaic tiles, at least, there aren't quest markers.  Same for the elven artifacts.  So, not everything does have a quest marker--just the important things, which you might want to get to quickly without having to wander the map for hours on end.

 

I do understand why people would want to do away with quest markers, but I actually like having them because I tend to play through pretty slowly, exploring everywhere, anyway.  Perhaps a toggle, as people always suggest?

 

I'd say (with an educated guess) that most of the flaws in this game are due to the fact of the Multi console release. The graphics are worse than I expected and seem to have been dumbed down. Menus were not well thought out and quests were not well thought out. This could have been game of the year had it not been for the fact that they developed it for too many consoles. A game of this scale should have been "next gen consoles" and PC only. 360 and PS3 are the past.

Back on topic: I agree with your post. Not having quest markers for some of the quests would have presented a challenge that many would have enjoyed.

 

You do realize that it has, in fact, gotten multiple Game of the Year awards, right...?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Also, three dimensional enviroments are much harder to maneuver than two dimensional enviroments. They tend to add another plane of direction, combining that with environmental design, I do understand why they place these quest markers there. The issue here is not a quest marker issue because realistically speaking it is just a user interface element that marks where the next location is. Practically has a little significance, the idea that should be addressed is the quest design in general. I do not think a quest marker would influence the design of a quest.

Except that these quests would obviously break if we took away the quest markers. So either BioWare's quest designers are incompetent, or the existence of quest markers influenced quest design.

[Enigmatick]

Except that these quests would obviously break if we took away the quest markers. So either BioWare's quest designers are incompetent, or the existence of quest markers influenced quest design.

I haven't played it yet, but isn't there a bit in the emerald graves where a prisoner verbally directs you to a key instead of there being a quest marker there? Between that and the number of maps I saw being picked up, I'd hoped/figured the quests accounted for no markers.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I read the post in its entirety, which isn't as much or as complex as you'd make it to be. I just interpreted what you said different from what you meant.

As did several other people.

If you don't want to admit that I had a point that's fine. You'll still be explaining yourself over and over until you abandon the thread.

My original post didn't make any assertions. It asked questions, and made suppositions.

I don't understand how you people read.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Removing quest markers to give incentive to explore seems like a bad idea when the incentive to even do the quests is low.

I'm not trying to create an incentive to explore. I'm trying to make the quests better.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Well, one reason for quest markers instead of having dialogue to tell you where things are is that it takes resources to pay for voice actors and writers to do so. You'll notice that for the mosaic tiles, at least, there aren't quest markers. Same for the elven artifacts. So, not everything does have a quest marker--just the important things, which you might want to get to quickly without having to wander the map for hours on end.

No one wants us to wander aimlessly. That's why I hate the mosaic quest - we get no guidance at all as to where those things might be found. And that's exactly how the other quests would work if we simply removed the quest markers.

It would be terrible.

I'm saying the quests should have been designed such that we don't need the markers.

[Thiefy]

My original post didn't make any assertions. It asked questions, and made suppositions.

I don't understand how you people read.

And (multiple) people still misunderstood. It happens.

 

Maybe you aren't as good at communicating as you think you are.