76 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

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.

A great many give you no clues at all beyond the quest markers.

[Sylvius the Mad]

And (multiple) people still misunderstood. It happens.

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

No one is good at communicating. There's no such thing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

That would be terrible design. Having a UI element directly influence something that belongs in the logical system. I think quest markers are just UI elements that signify where the next quest is. when a decision is being made, i think developers are more likely to say "walk from here to there" rather than "put quest marker from here to there"

But they haven't. There's no guidance offered at all for most of these quests, except for the quest markers.

In DA2, I refused to read the journal because it contained too much metagame information. As such, I missed a bunch of companion quests, and I was assigned quests I didn't know I'd been given. That's bad quest design; it happens.

But I'd be even more lost if I disabled quest markers in DAI.

[mav805]

I agree Sylvius, the necessity for quest markers to accomplish anything is due to what is quite easily the most poorly designed aspect of the game, the quest system. Unfortunately quests are also a huge part of it (as they should be), but are nothing more than shallow errands to be used as filler, with the vast majority not even substantive enough to qualify as real quests.

 

This isn't due to markers per se, although I do dislike them intensely and would rather there were a toggle, but because the quest log and general dialog is insufficient for describing the task, the circumstances, etc. As a result rather than being interesting and compelling, the quests are completely forgettable in almost every way. That is what truly needs to be addressed I think. More greatly detailed quests with better dialog and substance. Obsidian is doing a great job in Pillars of Eternity, their quest log is spot on, and as a result quest markers are not needed.

[Martanek]

You do realise that without the quest markers we'd be given better instructions, right?

Instead of just telling us there are two in the Fallow Mire, it should tell us where we might find someone who might have more information. And that person could give us more clues, or maybe that person will be dead and we'll go through his belongings for clues. Or maybe it's a trap, and this guy's information will be unreliable.

I'm describing a situation wherein the quest is deeper and more engaging, not just one in which we get the same shallow quest with vital information denied us.

 

 

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Without quest markers, quests would have to be designed differently, with hints here and there, but it would be the player who puts together pieces of the puzzle. That's both challenging and fun, and this is one of the sources of enjoyment for me while playing RPG's. But I doubt it very much that an average console kid will ever understand the meaning of these lines. The MMORPG quest design seems to have hit the Dragon Age series pretty hard.

[Martanek]

Lol at the kiddos who think that wanting quest markers = lazy gamer.

 

It must be because I'm a WoW player and can't stand a challenge, right? 

 

I like challenges just fine, and I've still got my original copies of Space Quest and Kings Quest on 3½ floppy A disks. I played the crap out of them as a kid without this thing called 'google' and beat them just fine.

 

The difference between this specific game and the games you "real gamers" are referring to is the sheer size and immensity of it all. The world is HUGE, the items in question are generally tiny as crap. You just end up spending literal hours upon hours circling an area looking for something. You might consider that fun but I consider it a waste of time.

 

It doesn't remove 'the challenge' from the game, it cuts the bull**** out.

 

Oh yeah, and then theres the fact that the quests with the giant purple areas around quest markers already do that. So kind of a moot point since they have both quest types in game.

 

 

You hit the nail on the head here. You said "The world is HUGE". But why make Dragon Age: Skyrim in the first place? A game world does not have to be huge, it should "only" be big enough to be filled with interesting content. I do not really like a Dragon Age game be "skyrimized" because it does not fit its RPG nature IMO. Mind you, I wished DA:O had stretched itself a little more at the time but "a bigger world" does not equate "a sandbox" – it means enlarging the game world to a certain extent so as not to hinder its quest design and storytelling. Sandboxing Dragon Age was not a good idea to begin with.

[Shandyr]

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.

 

This contradicts modern game philosophy on many levels, so I'm against it.

 

1.) Questioning people/talking to NPCs ingame means more voice over which would cost more money.

2.) Players should not be forced to think. The game should be able to be completed by just pressing a few buttons.

3.) The player is not allowed to suffer failure of any kind. Imagine what would happen if they couldn't solve a quest without markers?

That would frustrate the player. But the game should evoke feelings of happiness only. Not of frustration.

It must be a line of one moment of happiness after another.

 

So I demand map markers for every single herb and ore! It's too much effort to search for them.

[Wulfram]

Have you gone to the Hissing Wastes, Sylvius?  Because that area they do use clues rather than markers, and it is pretty good.  Except for the last bit where they don't really provide a good enough clue as to where to start looking.

 

Generally I'd rather have quest markers for most major quests though.  It allows me to focus on the bits of gameplay I enjoy, and that's fighting stuff and interesting conversations, not hunting through the landscape.

[TevinterSupremacist]

Maybe quest markers should be there depending on the type of the mission. Tedious gathering fetch quests should have them -or better yet these quests should be avoided- but quests about "talk to the people in that area to discover who might be a spy" should not.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Without quest markers, quests would have to be designed differently, with hints here and there, but it would be the player who puts together pieces of the puzzle. That's both challenging and fun, and this is one of the sources of enjoyment for me while playing RPG's. But I doubt it very much that an average console kid will ever understand the meaning of these lines. The MMORPG quest design seems to have hit the Dragon Age series pretty hard.

Those players march to the quest markers like good little soldiers who don't question their orders.

But some of us aren't inclined merely to do as we're told.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Have you gone to the Hissing Wastes, Sylvius? Because that area they do use clues rather than markers, and it is pretty good. Except for the last bit where they don't really provide a good enough clue as to where to start looking.

Generally I'd rather have quest markers for most major quests though. It allows me to focus on the bits of gameplay I enjoy, and that's fighting stuff and interesting conversations, not hunting through the landscape.

I don't enjoy hunting through the landscape either. But I do enjoy figuring stuff out (not through trial and error - trial and error is a lousy way to learn anything). Having the quests designed around quest markers removes any need or even opportunity to think.

I haven't been to the Hissing Wastes yet. If that's how those quests are designed, great, but that makes the lack of that desig elsewhere even more disappointing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

1.) Questioning people/talking to NPCs ingame means more voice over which would cost more money.

Then that's a cost of voice-acting about which the developers should be honest and the players should be aware. If voicing NPCs leads to shallower quest design, everyone should know that so we can properly calculate the net value of voice acting.

Or many of the clues could be codex entries. Or in the journal itself (as part of the quest description).

As it is, DAI makes no effort to explain how we know where to find things, or to involve us in that discovery process.

[Martanek]

I don't enjoy hunting through the landscape either. But I do enjoy figuring stuff out (not through trial and error - trial and error is a lousy way to learn anything). Having the quests designed around quest markers removes any need or even opportunity to think.

I haven't been to the Hissing Wastes yet. If that's how those quests are designed, great, but that makes the lack of that desig elsewhere even more disappointing.

 

 

This "need or even opportunity to think" you mention in your post is exactly what modern console RPG's deliberately tend to skip in their design these days. Thinking hurts, that's the old truth, so console players must not be troubled by anything that gets in their way of enjoyment, i. e. mashing buttons f(e)ast with an awesome response, "cinematic feel", and most importantly, simplified gameplay offering merely hand-holding, and rewarding the player for just getting to a quest mark, not for getting to a quest solution on their own. Well, some may call this "an evolution", but I will always call a spade a spade.

[TheGreenLion]

I agree that there are some instances where Quest Markers shouldn't be necessary but because of the quest design can be done no other way.

 

Let's take one quest for example, Bergrit's Claws. The note you pick up has no direct correlation to Hafter's Woods, or the type of bears you need to kill. Once you pick up the note a shiny quest marker appears and you go to it. You don't even get a secondary objective of turning them in because the mysterious fellow who sent Bergrit to get the claws isn't mentioned in the note either. No thinking involved, just go to the marker and kill/loot the bears...quest done. 

 

Say there wasn't a quest marker, you'd eventually find them but blindly. However, if the note mentioned the area, you would enter Hafter's Woods and think, "Hey, there are supposed to be bears here that I can get claws from." and proceed to poke around and find them. (Nevermind that the area is a mob spawning hell-hole, different subject)

 

Now also say there was a name mentioned in the note like Bob (inventive I know) and where to meet him for payment. So now you have incentive to kill the bears beyond just killing bears. There could have been some dialogue along the lines of him asking where Bergrit is and you could: Tell him that Bergrit is toast, he asks about the claws and you could hand them over for a different reward or lie and keep them for a smaller reward.

 

A quest like that could have had some finesse and you wouldn't even need the marker to do it. It would make a bit more sense because nobody but you knows that you found Bergrit and killed the bears he was supposed to go after, yet the quest simply ends with zero resolution because it wasn't designed to be resolved in a meaningful way. It was designed simply for the sake of giving you Masterwork materials, XP, Power and Influence. 

 

There are many examples of such quests that could have been so much better and fleshed out to the point where a marker was no longer necessary. I would have much preferred a better quality quest like that then twenty non-descript 'go to the marker and do stuff' quests.

[katokires]

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.

Game is bad enough as it is, no need to make it worse.

You have to keep in mind that people playing this game have VERY different levels of immersion. Immersion for me is the worst thing ever, so everything that makes it more immersive makes it disgusting for me. Concerning immersion I guess they are on a good point, it is ****** worse than Origins where I could be completely distant from immersion but still not as hellish immersive as you suggested.
Any extreme will kill the game for half players or something like that.

[Remmirath]

I generally turn quest markers off whenever I can. It's true that simply being able to turn them off wouldn't help at all in DA:I as it stands, because not only is there not enough information to go on aside from the quest marker, but that would remove half of the already-nearly-useless information from the minimap (which I find terribly useless, but that is -- although in some ways related -- another issue).

A good deal of these quests would be far better if there were actually anything to go on, anything to figure out. Not only is it a very meta-gaming thing to do, which is difficult to figure out an in character explanation for, but searching around to find a blinking quest marker is just not interesting to me. I'd much rather have some hints, have to talk to people, or so on. I'd say it also feels rather more rewarding if one actually has to do something to finish the quest other than track down the glowy marker.

As it is, many of the quests in the game are completely separated from roleplaying by the fact that there's no way your character would be able to figure it out without the quest marker, and that's a large problem.

You have to keep in mind that people playing this game have VERY different levels of immersion. Immersion for me is the worst thing ever, so everything that makes it more immersive makes it disgusting for me.

I am honestly curious here: if you dislike immersion so, what are you looking for in an RPG that you wouldn't get out of any other game type?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Game is bad enough as it is, no need to make it worse.

It's a roleplaying game. Every aspect of it should exist to facilitate roleplaying.

And I didn't say the quest markers shouldn't be available. Just that they shouldn't be all that's available.

Do you honestly find walking to a location fun? Because that's all these quests are at this point walk to point A. Now walk to point B. That barely counts as a quest. I'd much rather a quest that gives me even the slightest opportunity to make a decision.

[katokires]

Things is DAO and 2 (and all previous Bioware RPGs) did not feel immersive at all. It is always a little doll I controlled and built to do something. As I do with my tabletop characters too. I never lived through them. they are my toys, tools to built stories, that's it. All I care about my characters in Origins for instance is how much of each stat, key skills, romance and decisions, I mean, of course, in a mechanical way.

 

There is no RPG for me, just G, G for cold-blooded mechanics, G for stats distribution, G for vendetta, well, yeah...

 

But now, seriously, I just hate immersion but love building characters. If you can point me another kind of game where I can control my character status and skills with lots of variations on race/class/etc I go for it. Otherwise I stay with RPG in general. And D&D.

That also explains why Inquisition is not RPG for me, it does not work as a character maker. The most perfect RPG ever is Wizards of the Coast D&D 4th edition character maker, there, you build, a character, from level 1 to 30. PERIOD. HEAVEN. PERFECTION.

 

Go on talking about my insanity, but that's just the way I am and god makes no mistake (says Lady Gaga)

[In Exile]

I agree Sylvius, the necessity for quest markers to accomplish anything is due to what is quite easily the most poorly designed aspect of the game, the quest system. Unfortunately quests are also a huge part of it (as they should be), but are nothing more than shallow errands to be used as filler, with the vast majority not even substantive enough to qualify as real quests.

This isn't due to markers per se, although I do dislike them intensely and would rather there were a toggle, but because the quest log and general dialog is insufficient for describing the task, the circumstances, etc. As a result rather than being interesting and compelling, the quests are completely forgettable in almost every way. That is what truly needs to be addressed I think. More greatly detailed quests with better dialog and substance. Obsidian is doing a great job in Pillars of Eternity, their quest log is spot on, and as a result quest markers are not needed.

Quest logs are generally useless and vague. I can't think of a game that ever did a good job with them. The usual saving grace in isometric games was the highlight usable items button and the (compared to today) substantially smaller maps.

[Lilacs]

The way quests are designed in Dragon Age: Inquisition is open for discussion. To me, it seems that this was a design decision to encourage exploration. Some quests have no information in the Quest Journal as to their location, and some quests have no markers and practically with no information on how to find them. A couple of times, I had to Google them or look at YouTube videos as how to locate them.

 

Being familiar on how Bethesda games work (quest markers are better implemented in the Elder Scrolls Online. I only wished they had a proper mini-map for the game), my frustration is less in Dragon Age: Inquisition; however, it happens at times. When that occurs, I take a break from the game. One good thing about the quest markers is the purple ring; it pinpoints you to the exact location of the quest. On the other hand, it is not fully accurate. Sometimes you have to go way outside of the center of the purple ring to find the quest items despite continuously pressing the search button (making the quest items glow, would be ideal because the quest items are too small sometimes; plus making the items glow would work better than continually pressing down on the shift key on a keyboard or the thumb stick using a controller, which can leave one with a sore finger).

 

Nevertheless, the quest markers work well with finding quests that involve NPC’s and larger things such as a settlement or a landmark. Outside of that, quest markers, in Dragon Age: Inquisition, tend to elicit frustration oftentimes. Although quest markers point the player to the location of quests with the help of the purple ring, actually finding the quests in question can be a hindrance, for despite being in the center of the purple ring, quests cannot be located at times. As a result (for me), it is a waste of precious time if one doesn't have long stretches of time to play Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

The Quest Journal is not really a good source as to where to go to unearth quests. It just details the steps that must be taken in order to complete quests. When a quest marker isn't available for a quest, one is left to just go Google such quest or to look it up on YouTube in the hope another player has posted it. Thus, the Quest Journal needs revamping; it is no help most of the time when there isn't a quest marker—it is too vague; it provides no indication on how to locate quests.

 

I play Dragon Age: Inquisition when I have long stretches of time, for while I am questing, I take the time to enjoy the scenery. The beauty of the world makes questing less frustrating for me. I simply just explore at times and hope that I find the quest(s) in question while exploring this stunning world that is Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

What Bioware can do to remedy this is to provide more hints in the Quest Journal. Such hints can come from the area itself by using landmarks or NPC’s who are situated in that area for that purpose. The player does not necessarily have to speak with the NPC’s. Text can be used for that or simply use the NPC’s as hints. For example, when you get to NPC by this name, you are deadly close or you are there. In addition, the hints can also come from the companions. They tend to point out things to us, so why not proceed to another step by having the companions hinting the location of quests to us (voice acting costs, so, I will understand if this step is not taken, but the other ones are good alternatives)?

 

As things stand at the moment in Dragon Age: Inquisition the quest marker does work most times. The purple ring is very accurate at times. Bioware simply needs to tweak it so that the marker pinpoints you exactly to the quest. A combination of hints and the quest maker will work well with Dragon Age: Inquisition. The world is immense that both are required to remove frustration and thus adding satisfaction. There is something that I enjoy, though. It is the ability to mark a quest myself, which appears on the mini-map. I just follow it and it takes me to the quest.

In conclusion, hints and the quest marker will work effectively well in Dragon Age: Inquisition. Hints will add the feeling of using one’s mental ability to piece a quest together and thus completing it, giving satisfaction to the player, and the quest marker will enhance the hints given via the Quest Journal or our companions or NPC’s in the world. To me, both are needed in the immense world of Dragon Age: Inquisition.

[eyezonlyii]

Can we please break the habit of deriding "console gamers"? Not so console gamers are promote who need to be handheld through every game, just like all PC gamers aren't the pinnacle of electronic entertainment.

[SpiritMuse]

Can we please break the habit of deriding "console gamers"? Not so console gamers are promote who need to be handheld through every game, just like all PC gamers aren't the pinnacle of electronic entertainment.

This please. People are not inferior human beings just because they enjoy different things and have different priorities.


I personally don't like running around aimlessly trying to figure out where to go next for a quest, so I like having quest markers. I tried the stuff in the Hissing Wastes, I thought it looked interesting, but I soon got bored with running around randomly trying to figure out where the treasure maps were supposed to be leading me to. So I looked online to find a map where they were indicated. And I ended up doing the same for the specialization quests, again because I couldn't be bothered to waste time combing the entire map for that one mob I was supposed to kill. Does that make me a drooling halfwit with no attention span?

Or maybe I'm just spoiled because treasure maps were done so much better in Assassin's Creed Black Flag.

[eyezonlyii]

Wow. Just reread my post. That's what I get for using Swype keyboard at whatever late hour that was. Lol.

[Martanek]

This please. People are not inferior human beings just because they enjoy different things and have different priorities.


I personally don't like running around aimlessly trying to figure out where to go next for a quest, so I like having quest markers. I tried the stuff in the Hissing Wastes, I thought it looked interesting, but I soon got bored with running around randomly trying to figure out where the treasure maps were supposed to be leading me to. So I looked online to find a map where they were indicated. And I ended up doing the same for the specialization quests, again because I couldn't be bothered to waste time combing the entire map for that one mob I was supposed to kill. Does that make me a drooling halfwit with no attention span?

Or maybe I'm just spoiled because treasure maps were done so much better in Assassin's Creed Black Flag.

 

You are not a drooling halfwit, because you apparently know how to express yourself lucidly. Unfortunately, you do not seem to understand how a proper quest should be designed (the first sentence in your post gives you away), and you do not seem to differentiate between "a quest" and "a task", either. Translated into a human language, you are a typical modern-day console gamer (no offense, just stating the obvious).

[SpiritMuse]

You are not a drooling halfwit, because you apparently know how to express yourself lucidly. Unfortunately, you do not seem to understand how a proper quest should be designed (the first sentence in your post clearly confirms this), and you do not seem to differentiate between "a quest" and "a task", either. Translated into a human language, you are a typical modern-day console gamer (no offense, just stating the obvious).

See, the thing is, I actually don't disagree with you that much. I understand why you think that DAI's questing is, mechanically, a bit on the simplistic side. It bothers me too when a note you find doesn't give any indication of where something is supposed to be but somehow your Inquisitor still knows exactly where to go - which ends up making quest markers essential for some of these. And I agree that a lot of the quests would have to be changed a bit for a player to be able to solve them without relying on quest markers alone. It all doesn't bother me enough to stop my enjoyment of the game, but still.

It's just the language that some people use when talking about this that makes me feel antagonistic. As mainly a console player I can't help but take offense when people insult console players. Even in what you wrote to me just now there's a sense that you're talking down to me. That may not have been intended on your part, but it's easy to read it in there when so many others are doing it intentionally.