NeoGAF

Alvarez · 08:31 AM

Anyone else tired of being everyone's bitch in pretty much every modern RPG? Virtually every RPG forces the "you are the Chosen One" trope on the player, and then they predictably follow it up with hundreds of "please collect 8 wolf meats because I'm hungry and want wolf meats" quests. Should the Chosen One really being participating in these trivial tasks? Many games mock how ridiculous this is... and then they do it anyway, as if mocking it excuses it.

Why are questgivers telling me about problems they should be attempting to resolve on their own? Why do questgivers exist? When was the last time you approached a stranger and asked him to collect some oranges for you because you're hungry? This typically doesn't happen in a real world scenario and it interrupts players' suspension of disbelief.

Tell, don't show. That's all modern RPGs ever do--and the tales these questgivers tell are often long-winded and are almost always boring.

"Questgivers" need to go, and RPGs--no, all games--need to show, not tell. And in a world where 60+ hour games go for 5 dollars on Steam, the industry desperately needs a return to quality over quantity, even if it means halving the length and cost of games. No one--I hope--is fooled by or likes filler. Filler is not content.

Does it really take 3000 quests to tell World of Warcraft's story?

Quests should be quests. Quests should serve a purpose: they should establish the setting, enrich characters, or offer story exposition. "Collect 8 wolf meats" is not a quest. It's filler. "Land on an uncharted island, get your materia stolen, and visit an ally's hometown to learn more about her origins" is a quest.

Let's visit one of the worst modern offenders: Xenoblade. At every turn, NPCs beg you to cull enemies that are enroaching upon their town--but the enemies aren't encroaching, are they? Those enemies never enter towns. There is no real threat. The NPCs are lying. This is a fetch quest. It's filler.

Instead of shoving piles of nauseating fetch quests upon players, why not simply make a few memorable quests that serve a purpose?

Here's an example scenario: It's noon in Xenoblade's first town and the marketplace is bustling. Mouthwatering aromas waft through the air--and the wild animals outside the city gates can't take it anymore. The animals burst through the gates and ravage the marketplace, goring innocents and eating everything in sight. You, the player, can choose to simply walk past the ensuing massacre--or you can help the townspeople defend themselves. There is no questgiver to tell you what you will win or lose by participating or not participating. You must make your decision right then and there, by yourself. Crazy idea, I know.

Should you help fight off the animals, you will be hailed as a hero. Should you run away, you may be considered a coward for a time. Regardless of your decision, one of your party members, Fiora, will stay and help the townspeople for the duration of this event. She will apply first aid to injured townspeople, an action that will show the player more about her personality and skills. Should the player participate in the event, Fiora will patch Shulk (the main character) up in a cutscene and give him a kiss on the cheek.

Wouldn't this one scenario be infinitely more interesting and memorable than 20+ kill quests? This scenario would prove that the wild animals really are a threat.

Quality over quantity. Show, don't tell.

Mihael Mello Keehl · (12-02-2013, 08:30 AM)

Forreal.. Why you cant get your own food?

akira28 · (12-02-2013, 08:32 AM)

Originally Posted by Mihael Mello Keehl

Forreal.. Why you cant get your own food?

Wolf meats can't be beat.

Good point though OP. And even some of the greats are guilty of using filler quests.

Speevy · (12-02-2013, 08:34 AM)

I think people secretly crave a bit of tedium in their RPGs.

Being unable to relax makes it more of an action game.

Morrigan Targaryen · (12-02-2013, 08:35 AM)

100% agreed. Some quests do try to engage the player more with clever or interesting writing, but for the most part the whole quest-giver thing feels so trite and I wish it'd disappear. Games don't need them, not even RPGs, to be meaty with content. Just look at Dark Souls, there's plenty of optional content and no quest giver crap. The optional stuff is found naturally when exploring the game universe, as it should always be.

Sure some games do lend themselves decently to a "notice board" approach, and I don't really mind that in some games, but I think it's abused with filler crap too often.

Net_Wrecker · (12-02-2013, 08:37 AM)

Content bloat like this will only become a bigger issue as more games go open world and try to best their rivals in game length and number of "quests." It's maddening, and I too am sick of Mr. or Ms. Badass Hero going out into the "dangerous wilds" to kill X number of Y so Citizen Dude can pat you on the head for Z XP and you can unlock a sweet cheevo for 5 "Side Missions" Complete.

lord pie · (12-02-2013, 08:39 AM)

I think things are the way they are for structural reasons. What you are talking about kinda leads to emergent behavior and things that don't feel scripted - which is pretty much the hardest thing to design a game around.
It is also a matter of making it obvious to the player what they can and cannot interact with, and which of these things will have an effect on either the story or character. Take away this distinction, with obvious beginnings, end conditions, structure and locations in the world and you run the risk of adding a lot of confusion.
Not that I dissagree with you, there is an obvious disconnect from reality, but there are good reasons things to be the way they are - beyond simply being more economical.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 08:40 AM)

Originally Posted by Speevy

I think people secretly crave a bit of tedium in their RPGs.

Being unable to relax makes it more of an action game.

Absolutely true. I love grinding while listening to the radio and so on, but tedium does not have to permeate our quests. Why not reserve tedium for professions such as fishing and herbalism? (I absolutely loved going around collecting herbs in the Elder Scrolls games. So relaxing, beautiful landscapes.) Why not reserve tedium for minigames such as the battle arena in Final Fantasy VII? Reserve tedium for collecting all the feathers in Assassin's Creed 2.

Players can relax while exploring. Wandering Demon's Souls and Dark Souls in search of new areas and items is infinitely more relaxing and entertaining than running back and forth between questgivers, wouldn't you say? Exploration is a highly under-utilized thing in gaming. Let us find the interesting things on our own--don't push us to a specific location and tell us to kill 8 wolves. That's stupid.

-tetsuo- · (12-02-2013, 08:41 AM)

Skyrim is packed to the brim with this terrible nonsense.

Bronetta · (12-02-2013, 08:41 AM)

Darksiders 2.

You play as Death, the most powerful and feared horseman of the apocalypse. Motherfucking Death. He makes it clear to a NPC early on in the game that he isn't an errand boy. Then he spends the next 20+ hours being everybody's bitch. Maybe the game would have been less boring if he lived up to his name instead of being a butler.

Koozek · 08:45 AM

Dito! Exactly what annoys me in modern RPGs. I'm playing the Bravely Default demo right now completing all quests and enjoy it but I still miss deeper sidequests with an own story, like in the old FFs, Chrono Trigger/Cross or Shadow Hearts :(
Those fetch-quests get boring and tiresome so quick for me. It fits MMOs where only quantity is possible on a large scale, not single player RPGs where quality should be the priority.

JoeyJungle · (12-02-2013, 08:44 AM)

I like in Nier where after you do a few quests a dude will be like "Don't you have anything better to do?" Alluding to the fact that most quests are a waste of time, and that in Nier most of them are pretty bad and not even remotely necessary.

Ken · (12-02-2013, 08:44 AM)

Originally Posted by Alvarez

Here's an example scenario: It's noon in Xenoblade's first town and the marketplace is bustling. Mouthwatering aromas waft through the air--and the wild animals outside the city gates can't take it anymore. The animals burst through the gates and ravage the marketplace, goring innocents and eating everything in sight. You, the player, can choose to simply walk past the ensuing massacre--or you can help the townspeople defend themselves. There is no questgiver to tell you what you will win or lose by participating or not participating. You must make your decision right then and there, by yourself. Crazy idea, I know.

Recent MMOs like GW2 and FFXIV seem to like these types of active world event quests. They certainly haven't been impervious to the "wolf meat" type of objectives you listed in the OP though but it seems like a step in possibly the right direction.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 08:44 AM)

Originally Posted by -tetsuo-

Skyrim is packed to the brim with this terrible nonsense.

All because of that "quest-making engine" they added to Skyrim. The one where innkeepers always have something tedious and meaningless for you to do. I much preferred the quest system of Morrowind/Oblivion, where every quest was unique. Sure, some of them weren't fantastic, but all of them were interesting enough to investigate.

Meia · (12-02-2013, 08:45 AM)

Originally Posted by Speevy

I think people secretly crave a bit of tedium in their RPGs.

Being unable to relax makes it more of an action game.

This isn't 100% wrong.

There's really no reason why the quest you came up with in your scenario and the classic fetch/kill quests can't exist in the same game. It's all up to the developer, really. FFXIV is kind of an example of this, as your scenario kind of exists in FATEs that can pop up even if you're in the middle of a town while picking up classic quests(though story ramifications or how NPCs treat you is something that no developer has really nailed yet).

Do a task, see a bar fill. Do multiple tasks at the same time in one area of a map makes a player feel more accomplished as well, as it gives the illusion of it being "faster". Tie story segments behind quest strings ensures that people will do them as well. It's kind of classic MMO quests 101 really. There's no reason why though a turn-in can't culminate in the scenario you provided though. :)

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 08:50 AM)

Originally Posted by Ken

Recent MMOs like GW2 and FFXIV seem to like these types of active world event quests. They certainly haven't been impervious to the "wolf meat" type of objectives you listed in the OP though but it seems like a step in possibly the right direction.

Unfortunately, in both games, they are lackluster.

In FF14, FATES are self-contained. If you don't kill that pack of enemies over there, ... nothing will happen. No one will be in danger. The Primals are supposedly a massive threat, and they show just how dangerous and terrible they are by sending out their minions to.............. stand around on some grass over there.

It would be infinitely more interesting if these kinds of scenarios were truly threatening, as they are in Final Fantasy XI, Rift, STALKER, and other games. Ifrit's minions should be storming Ul'dah. The Lich King should have killed the mages that hold Dalaran up, sending Dalaran toppling into the Crystalsong Forest.

Instead, these villains stand aside, providing no inconvenience or threat of any kind to anyone. These are not villains. These are not threats. They are sources of EXP and items.

Sophia · (12-02-2013, 08:50 AM)

Originally Posted by Ken

Recent MMOs like GW2 and FFXIV seem to like these types of active world event quests. They certainly haven't been impervious to the "wolf meat" type of objectives you listed in the OP though but it seems like a step in possibly the right direction.

Unfortunately, while these are a step in the right direction, the lack of any degree of permanence in both the games you listed is a significant downer. It makes your actions feel like they weren't really relevant, because the events just happen again later half the time. Especially in FFXIV. It's actually a concept that would be better implemented in a single player RPG, as there the events wouldn't repeat itself.

FFXIV, however, also has another step in the right direction with story quests and class quests. These generally aren't filler and have multiple objectives. They actually feel like real quests. Sadly, there's still a number of generic filler quests.

Originally Posted by Alvarez

Unfortunately, in both games, they are lackluster.

In FF14, FATES are self-contained. If you don't kill that pack of enemies over there, ... nothing will happen. No one will be in danger. The Primals are supposedly a massive threat, and they show just how dangerous and terrible they are by sending out their minions to.............. stand around on some grass over there.

It would be infinitely more interesting if these kinds of scenarios were truly threatening, as they are in Final Fantasy XI, Rift, STALKER, and other games. Ifrit's minions should be storming Ul'dah. The Lich King should have killed the mages that hold Dalaran up, sending Dalaran toppling into the Crystalsong Forest.

Instead, these villains stand aside, providing no inconvenience or threat of any kind to anyone. These are not villains. These are not threats. They are sources of EXP and items.

Figures someone else posts the same thing as me basically at the exact same time. :P

KyanMehwulfe · (12-02-2013, 08:52 AM)

You write this as if it's a matter of designer preference rather than technical limitation.

WoW in particular is nearly a decade old game in a very gameplay-limiting genre that was specifically tasked with quantity over quality. "Quests," in particular, is sort of a matter of semantics, too -- call them errands, if you want. But it's not an apt comparison to any modern RPG. I mean, thousands of MMO gamers have been writing this exact thread for over 15 years, and dozens of MMOs have tried. And, slowly, they are succeeding. But it's not a matter of preference or needed to read a quest rant -- it's about technical limitation, and balancing the need to offer an epic adventure with the need to give millions of players thousands of hours of content. Single-player RPGs that last less than a day's worth of hours struggle with this, so you can imagine the technical hurdles a MMO aiming for a year's worth of hours must face.

It's easier said than done. I've seen a thousand posts like this on EQ, WoW, etc forums, and countless developers agree. It has nothing to do with design and everything to do with development limitations. Do you think Blizzard sits down and thinks the opposite of this? It doesn't take a random quest observation on GAF to be acutely aware of this for anyone that is trying to make epic fantasy adventures as their livelihood.

thetrin · 08:59 AM

It depends on the game. Some side quests are damn good (like eradicating a nest of horribly difficult demons in SMTIV that only show up when you accept the quest).

Others do nothing but show that some dude is too lazy to kill the rats in his own cellar.

For me, quests need to be actually challenging, and when you're done, feel like it added to your time with the game.

Bravely Default does a great job with side quests, too. You never need to do them, but doing so nets you a cool boss fight and a new class to use. It behooves you to actually do that quest, though the choice is yours.

I will say that the next step going forward is the consequence of not doing a side quest. Hell, it would be interesting if ignoring a side quest caused some undesirable calamity to occur, which changes the landscape, but now opens up new options for the player (perhaps even other quests). I'd like to see more games that actually challenge the player to NOT complete a quest (ie. either complete the quest and get a much needed item, or don't complete it, live with the consequences, and perhaps open more interesting and unique scenarios up to explore)

Seanspeed · (12-02-2013, 08:58 AM)

Numbers don't pop out of people's heads when I hit them, either.

FryHole · (12-02-2013, 08:58 AM)

I think a problem with the suggested Xenoblade scenario is that Xenoblade is such a story driven game, such a scene would feel like part of the main plot (it's an 'event', would probably require cutscenes) and cause dissonance if never or hardly ever mentioned again - if you ignore the attack and go on your merry way, but no one ever comments on that choice except a generic response from the townsfolk, it would feel odd. The other way round, again if your heroism is soon forgotten you'd be wondering why. At which point it should probably just be incorporated into the main plot.

You could argue that the game could be designed to realistically incorporate such choices into the downstream gameplay, but then it branches every time you choose - is such a structure manageable? The benefit of fetch quests and the like is that very nature you dislike, the disconnect from the main storyline. They have to be that way so they can be ignored.

That's not to say there's not a middle ground solution to be found!

Also, I'd be right titsed off if I was forced into a quest scenario that robbed me of a party member for a time.

demidar · (12-02-2013, 09:02 AM)

With the amount of people who love Skyrim? Yeah, these filler quests aren't going away, they're only gonna get more numerous as worlds become bigger and there is a need to fill those worlds with any content, regardless of quality.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:03 AM)

Originally Posted by KyanMehwulfe

You write this as if it's a matter of designer preference rather than technical limitation.

WoW in particular...

This thread is more aimed at new single player games, where there is no excuse to have so much filler.

That said, there is also no excuse for MMOs to have so much filler. WoW and other MMOs could easily downsize to 10% of its quest content and focus on dynamic, group, and raid content instead.

And despite all of the "our engine doesn't support it!" excuses, ... these are just excuses at the end of the day. Yes, it would take time and money to expand an engine as old as WoW's, but it can always be done. Not that it would be the financially sound thing to do. It wouldn't. Despite my thread, there's a lot of gamers out there who just don't care about this kind of thing.

Sophia · (12-02-2013, 09:05 AM)

World of Warcraft can do, and has done, interesting non-filler questlines. It's not really a matter of technical issues. A matter of time and effort perhaps....

That said, World of Warcraft has long since stopped being a bastion of good game design. :\

CaptainGyro · (12-02-2013, 09:05 AM)

Originally Posted by Alvarez

Why are questgivers telling me about problems they should be attempting to resolve on their own? Why do questgivers exist? When was the last time you approached a stranger and asked him to collect some oranges for you because you're hungry? This typically doesn't happen in a real world scenario and it interrupts players' suspension of disbelief

My question is why do people let such small unrealistic things ruin their enjoyment of a game? if video games were only made up of things that typically happened in a real world scenario, video games would pretty much suck ass as far as I am concerned

Bedlam · (12-02-2013, 09:07 AM)

I thought the thread title alluded to a different problem that seriously hampers my enjoyment with modern RPGs: Quest markers. Fetch quest and the like (let's face it, most quests come down to this) would be a hell of a lot more interesting if the game just gave me a description of the destination instead of flatout showing me on the map.

Also, treasure hunts like in RDR ... I want that stuff in RPGs!

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:11 AM)

Originally Posted by thetrin

I will say that the next step going forward is the consequence of not doing a side quest. Hell, it would be interesting if ignoring a side quest caused some undesirable calamity to occur, which changes the landscape, but now opens up new options for the player (perhaps even other quests). I'd like to see more games that actually challenge the player to NOT complete a quest (ie. either complete the quest and get a much needed item, or don't complete it, live with the consequences, and perhaps open more interesting and unique scenarios up to explore)

BioWare games have been doing this since... 1997?, I believe. There are other games/companies that do this too. It's great, although some people (such as FryHole, if you'll scroll up to his post) dislike this type of design because it takes control away from them.

I have a friend who was so upset when Lothering burned down in DA:O that she quit the game and has not returned to it since. She is one of those people who freaks out over missables, even when it's unimportant fetch quest stuff.

Personally, I love it when a game's story takes control. It further suspends my disbelief. The game proves that the world is a living world, and that the threats are real.

Slamtastic · (12-02-2013, 09:12 AM)

Originally Posted by -tetsuo-

Skyrim is packed to the brim with this terrible nonsense.

I remember very few fetch quests in my time playing Skyrim.

Edit: Well, few "Kill X number of enemies and give me X number of drops" quests. I did steal various miscellany repeatedly and assassinate a few generics with the same pattern.

Originally Posted by Bronetta

Darksiders 2.

Maybe the game would have been less boring if he lived up to his name instead of being a butler.

The story being set up with Death having to help people with their problems before they would assist him doesn't make the combat any less fun or the puzzles any less well designed.

Not a boring game by any stretch of the imagination.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:14 AM)

Originally Posted by Bedlam

I thought the thread title alluded to a different problem that seriously hampers my enjoyment with modern RPGs: Quest markers. Fetch quest and the like (let's face it, most quests come down to this) would be a hell of a lot more interesting if the game just gave me a description of the destination instead of flatout showing me on the map.

Also, treasure hunts like in RDR ... I want that stuff in RPGs!

I also dislike the hand-holding when it comes to quests! I hate being (virtually) forced to stare at my minimap while playing a game. I much preferred Morrowind, where quests gave you vague instructions and then you had to go explore and see what you could find. The "face the quest marker and run forward until you reach it" thing is super lame. It makes looking around and exploring meaningless.

Rickenslacker · (12-02-2013, 09:15 AM)

In loot heavy ARPGs I think Diablo II is one of the only games to really get it right, 6 quests per act and a total of 21 in the vanilla game, 27 after the expansion. The gravity of the requests are in tune with the overarching narrative, but beyond that the rewards are almost aways something worthwhile to your character's mechanical growth -- added resistances, skill points, stat points, weapon bonuses, that kind of thing. When I play most Diablo clones these days it feels like I'm doing 20-odd quests in the opening area, and for generic vendor trash that I'd get from any of the hundred things I kill completing them. Makes me feel that most devs completely missed what made D2's work, including current Blizz and the ex-Blizz North staff at Runic.

And while Elder Scrolls was never above having a bunch of dumb crap to do, they certainly felt higher quality than the degeneration of design that the quest markers caused. With Morrowind, you'd have elements within the world serve as guidance towards your goals, using dialogues with NPCs to figure direction. Come Oblivion and all Bethesda games onward it's thrown away for the sake of an all knowing HUD element guiding your path, and while it can be turned off they never add those basic hooks in the world to make actually getting to those destinations feel anything more than aimlessly wandering.

Orayn · (12-02-2013, 09:16 AM)

Originally Posted by Bronetta

Darksiders 2.

You play as Death, the most powerful and feared horseman of the apocalypse. Motherfucking Death. He makes it clear to a NPC early on in the game that he isn't an errand boy. Then he spends the next 20+ hours being everybody's bitch. Maybe the game would have been less boring if he lived up to his name instead of being a butler.

Justified in-universe somewhat. Death is only the most powerful and feared Horseman of the Apocalypse when he's working in his official capacity preserving the balance of the universe. (AKA Reaper Mode) In Darksiders II, he's going rogue on a personal mission to clear his brother's name, and isn't firing on all cylinders as a result of that. His spiel about not being an errand boy is because he's annoyed at doing what he sees as a trivial task, but Death really is a nice guy and doesn't mind helping people.

Morrigan Targaryen · (12-02-2013, 09:17 AM)

Originally Posted by Seanspeed

Numbers don't pop out of people's heads when I hit them, either.

Whoosh.

Lime · (12-02-2013, 09:18 AM)

So, so many games rely on this form of procedurally-created superficiality in order to produce content/experiences for the player. Assassin's Creed, Far Cry 3, Mass Effect series, all sorts of RPGs, etc.

These open-world games and RPGs are basically 3-inches deep ocean.

kazebyaka · (12-02-2013, 09:18 AM)

quests are just a fancy name for errands to mask the fact that you waste time doing shitty tasks

Droplet · (12-02-2013, 09:19 AM)

I agree, but also kind of don't. As people mentioned before, the kind of tedium that comes from fetch quests is what makes it an RPG because it's a way for the player to relax before they go back to the main quest again. Having quests that are initiated in the way you're suggesting seems more intrusive to the main plot.

Still, I agree they're implemented kind of terribly now. I did like the quests in Tales of Xillia, mostly because it was clear cut who was offering a quest and who was just going to talk, and the goodies you get from them, which were mostly attachments for your characters, were pretty nice. My main problem with it is just that most of them are something like "please go kill those monsters outside of town" or "get me three of these petals" that seem kind of ridiculous, although some of them had nice stories to go with them and even a little character development (the pink quests were cute). I'd just rather prefer if somebody is saying "I'm starving, please get me food" that they really look like they're starving in some way so that I'm compelled to go outside of the narrative, talk to them, and do the damn quest rather than just keep them in the backlog.

Glass Rebel · 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Orayn

Justified in-universe somewhat. Death is only the most powerful and feared Horseman of the Apocalypse when he's working in his official capacity preserving the balance of the universe. (AKA Reaper Mode) In Darksiders II, he's going rogue on a personal mission to clear his brother's name, and isn't firing on all cylinders as a result of that. His spiel about not being an errand boy is because he's annoyed at doing what he sees as a trivial task, but Death really is a nice guy and doesn't mind helping people.

So what you're saying is that Death is totally tsundere. Gotcha.

Log4Girlz · (12-02-2013, 09:21 AM)

I like the job board style of quest giving, like Borderlands. Some asshole posted up a job and offers a reward. Tada.

Morrigan Targaryen · (12-02-2013, 09:22 AM)

Originally Posted by Lime

These open-world games and RPGs are basically 3-inches deep ocean.

Oh wow, that is a brilliant metaphor. I'm totally stealing that in the future. :)

TheChewyWaffles · (12-02-2013, 09:23 AM)

You're just going to have to use your imagination more, OP.

CecilRousso · (12-02-2013, 09:23 AM)

Stuff like that should be criticized, it kills the immersion. It might be ok for MMO's, but not single player RPG's.

I like how The Witcher 1 and 2 handles it.

In The Witcher 1 - the quests are there because your job IS to kill monsters for others. And you can demand money for in some cases, or refuse them.

In The Witcher 2 - There are bounty quests that suits your profession, but most quests actually tells you something about the area or the situation. Even if they might be fetch quests in their nature, they're all very well written.

New Vegas is also a good example. You're a courier, that travels the area looking for the one that shot you. You have a reason for going to the different places, and you have a reason to contact all these peoples, that might help you.

Skyrim is a missed opportunity. The quests should have focused on you being the Dragonborn, not a random stranger to beg favors for.

Reviewers should be more critical about the bad examples though. It's not ok to the wolf pelt quests anymore. The bar should be higher.

KyanMehwulfe · (12-02-2013, 09:24 AM)

Originally Posted by Sophia

World of Warcraft can do, and has done, interesting non-filler questlines. It's not really a matter of technical issues. A matter of time and effort perhaps....

One and the same. It takes great resources precisely because it's such a technical hurdle. WoW actually was consider quite good at this, even, for a MMO when it release, and yet I remember specifically a group of us talking with Pardo in beta about generic quests, and they were frank that they needed filler content so people wouldn't get bored, but also that it was simply difficult to have world events like this run properly on a server with thousands of players while maintaining a sense of cohesion in the world between players who have and have not accessed the content (yet). Actually, this is exactly why Pardo and Kaplan put so much effort in Gnomeregan in beta. They wanted a higher level of quality in the terms of scripting and events, and believe it or not, in mid 2004 beta, Gnomeregan was pretty evolutionary for a MMO dungeon in terms of adventure quality. They tried to bring than to the open world but you saw what later WoW developers eventually had to concede to -- phases or whatever they ended up calling them in WLK where each player has their own unique world because WoW had trouble solving the cohesion problem.

It's not limited to WoW either. I remember very specifically talking with Marc Jacobs in early closed WAR beta about public quests, and a handful of us expressed concerning over PQs not impacting the 'war economy' or 'local infrastructure' enough -- basically existing in a bubble that only effects the world via a single stat variable that goes up or down. He said, hey, I'd love that too, but we're struggling make this system work -- we'd love to develop what you describe but we need to finish bubble PQs because we can even remotely think about offering something like that. There was even a vocal group of testers who wanted less quantity, exactly like is considered here on gaf, because we noticed that in beta basically everyone was fighting in the same 1 or 2 locations anyhow -- so why not offer less content and focus on just offering a lower amount of high quality, dynamic and repeatable content. And, what, have people quit in a couple weeks? Quantity is a very real concern for MMOs and it's part of the nature of the genre and the nature of user base. At some point, if you keep instance content and reducing quantity for quality, why don't you just develop a single-player RPG to begin with.

This is of course a different topic for, say, a single-player Japanese RPG, but then again I don't think this is a problem there. I've never particular felt overwhelmed by "kill 10 rant" quests in Final Fantasy or Suikoden... though XII did have that one sewer errand....

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:25 AM)

Originally Posted by Log4Girlz

I like the job board style of quest giving, like Borderlands. Some asshole posted up a job and offers a reward. Tada.

A complete contrast:

In Final Fantasy XIII there are 60+ quests that send you out to kill monsters that are "terrorizing" the area. The funny part is that 1) The monsters don't spawn unless you accept the quest, meaning they don't exist, and 2) The monsters have nothing to terrorize, because your party of six are the only inhabitants in the entire world. So virtually every FF13 quest has you hunting down monsters that don't exist to prevent them from terrorizing no one.

Sober · (12-02-2013, 09:27 AM)

Originally Posted by Orayn

Justified in-universe somewhat. Death is only the most powerful and feared Horseman of the Apocalypse when he's working in his official capacity preserving the balance of the universe. (AKA Reaper Mode) In Darksiders II, he's going rogue on a personal mission to clear his brother's name, and isn't firing on all cylinders as a result of that. His spiel about not being an errand boy is because he's annoyed at doing what he sees as a trivial task, but Death really is a nice guy and doesn't mind helping people.

Sure but it doesn't help that world 2 is Questception 3: To the Power of Three. And halfway through that it's kinda downhill from there.

Slamtastic · (12-02-2013, 09:27 AM)

Recently I've been playing TERA, which is an MMO-ass MMO, consisting of nothing but "Kill X of Y" (including sometimes killing 1 of a boss monster with a story setup cutscene that doesn't make sense because everyone else kills this monster too and you can kill it multiple times), and yet...it has really good combat (by MMO standards) so I haven't noticed.

I'd be okay with being told to collect 5 charms off Lesser Demons, with a 1/10 drop rate, in a DMC game for example, because it's just fighting more enemies, which is what you do in the game anyway, what I bought the game to do.

Mauricio_Magus · (12-02-2013, 09:28 AM)

Xenoblade could have handled it better, but every quest was optional which is great.

Sophia · (12-02-2013, 09:29 AM)

Originally Posted by KyanMehwulfe

One and the same. It takes great resources precisely because it's such a technical hurdle. WoW actually was consider quite good at this, even, for a MMO when it release, and yet I remember specifically a group of us talking with Pardo in beta about generic quests, and they were frank that they needed filler content so people wouldn't get bored, but also that it was simply difficult to have world events like this run properly on a server with thousands of players while maintaining a sense of cohesion in the world between players who have and have not accessed the content (yet). Actually, this is exactly why Pardo and Kaplan put so much effort in Gnomeregan in beta. They wanted a higher level of quality in the terms of scripting and events, and believe it or not, in mid 2004 beta, Gnomeregan was pretty evolutionary for a MMO dungeon in terms of adventure quality. They tried to bring than to the open world but you saw what later WoW developers eventually had to concede to -- phases or whatever they ended up calling them in WLK where each player has their own unique world because WoW had trouble solving the cohesion problem.

Excuse me if I'm a bit skeptical, seeing as the amount of filler quests in the game has only increased over the years. Significantly, too. Mind you, the non filler quests have gotten better, but they're few and far between.

Also, Gnomeregan was pretty well hated back in the day. I remember them putting so much effort into it, only for it to get wasted to some of the stupidest design I've ever seen in an MMO. :\

thetrin · (12-02-2013, 09:30 AM)

Originally Posted by FryHole

I think a problem with the suggested Xenoblade scenario is that Xenoblade is such a story driven game, such a scene would feel like part of the main plot (it's an 'event', would probably require cutscenes) and cause dissonance if never or hardly ever mentioned again - if you ignore the attack and go on your merry way, but no one ever comments on that choice except a generic response from the townsfolk, it would feel odd. The other way round, again if your heroism is soon forgotten you'd be wondering why. At which point it should probably just be incorporated into the main plot.

You could argue that the game could be designed to realistically incorporate such choices into the downstream gameplay, but then it branches every time you choose - is such a structure manageable? The benefit of fetch quests and the like is that very nature you dislike, the disconnect from the main storyline. They have to be that way so they can be ignored.

That's not to say there's not a middle ground solution to be found!

Also, I'd be right titsed off if I was forced into a quest scenario that robbed me of a party member for a time.

From a dev standpoint, he easiest way to handle it would be to localize the repercussions of a quest. Let's say a band of raiders has been ransacking towns in a single region. If you take on the quest, you can defeat them, and the area will prosper when you visit the next time.

If you ignore the raids, buy your goods and go on your way, you could return to that region to find that a town is now in shambles, has burned to the ground, and the shops that were once there are no longer there. On the other hand, less savory folks have now set up a black market trading post in the area, meaning you can now get certain goods you couldn't before.

That would present a really interesting moral dilemma.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:32 AM)

Originally Posted by KyanMehwulfe

And, what, have people quit in a couple weeks? Quantity is a very real concern for MMOs and it's part of the nature of the genre and the nature of user base.

No one does filler quest content for fun, though, and it certainly doesn't keep them subbed to the game. People do raid and group content for fun. People do interesting puzzle achievements, such as those offered in Rift and Guild Wars 2, for fun.

The claim that reducing the amount of quests in an MMO will make people stop playing the MMO is absolutely hilarious, and anyone who makes this claim probably hasn't played a single MMO. Consider how many of your friends dread leveling or doing boring quest content--especially a second time. Consider when the last time you saw "That quest was awesome!" in guild chat was.

All of these are excuses. Not only will not making filler quests allow the primary narratives to shine, but it would also free up time for the designers to make more unique and actually fun gameplay content. If game designers can't think up new ideas beyond "MOAR QUESTS", why are they employed at all?

Salamando · (12-02-2013, 09:37 AM)

How do you feel about WoW's new Timeless Isle then? Only quests are of the "Go out there and kill stuff" variety. Most of your gameplay is exploring the isle, killing rare mobs that spawn, and taking part in small scenarios.

Alvarez · (12-02-2013, 09:41 AM)

Originally Posted by Salamando

How do you feel about WoW's new Timeless Isle then? Only quests are of the "Go out there and kill stuff" variety. Most of your gameplay is exploring the isle, killing rare mobs that spawn, and taking part in small scenarios.

Love it. It could be way better, but it's already such a contrast to the typical awful WoW daily questing that it's great.

I spent 4-5 hours on that island the first day it came out just exploring.