Support NeoGAF

[Lijik]

I turn it off when I can. Sometimes I get lost in sections that assume you have it on (the hound pits pub in Dishonored 1 was awful about this, I constantly found myself having to blindly run around to find where the npcs were. Never had that problem in the main levels) but more often than not its a more pleasant experience.

 

[Voliko]

I've tried to turn off minimaps and markers but it just turns into an exercise in frustration. I'd rather just play old games that don't have that stuff in the first place

 

[Moonkid]

I played through the Last of Us this way and it was perfectly doable. Now The Witcher 3 on the other hand I can't imagine doing the same for.

 

[Deleted member 59090]

It's not exactly the same but I found turning off GPS in GTA helped me get to know the city a lot more. Yeah you spend a lot of time checking the map early on but after a while you learn the layout of the city and even something as simple as coming back to an area you've already done a bunch of missions in feels like coming home because you know exactly where everything is.

 

[Yarbskoo]

This means the levels are filled with assets and details that are ultimately window dressing. The gameplay relevant items may be blended in with all the other stuff and be difficult to spot.

I do love me a nicely detailed environment, but I also kinda miss the minimalist levels from earlier 3D games. Games like System Shock 2 and Thief had immersive environments that were fun to explore, but most of the smaller props were more than just background distractions. The detail had a gameplay purpose.

 

[MiamiWesker]

I hope you all appreciate Zelda more than ever as these markers become more and more common. Zelda games never had to use a vision mode not a map with a ton of icons. The games are so beautifully designed that everything is naturally discoverable.

 

[Henkka]

I dunno. It's hard to know beforehand if disabling those will lead to a better experience, or a more frustrating experience. You can't know to what extent the devs took into account that a small minority of players would turn all markers off. Like,

"We don't need to make this objective that visible, since there'll be a marker anyway"

But I did play TLOU for the first time with Listen mode off, because I thought it would be more realistic/suspenseful. Worked out fine.

 

[UrbanRats]

"Have you played a video game before? Yes/No" right at the start of the game, just to help everybody out.

If you're on this website, you dont need it and the game is better for it

Depends, some games expect you to use that shit and dont convey info any other way.

 

[grosvenor_92]

I got Dishonored 2 today so I'll definitely try playing with it off.

I also got a $50 steam card so I'm tempted to get Deus EX MD. If i do buy it I'll most likely turn it off it that as well

 

[mattiewheels]

The first Assassin's Creed is a key example, it was obviously designed to be played from environmental clues alone and it looks like they added the hud and markers for mainstream appeal, but that turned out to neuter the inherent thrill of the game.

 

[oSoLucky]

I almost always play on the highest difficulty available, and I also leave most of those aids on unless they're especially intrusive. Immersion isn't something that happens to me or I give a shit about to begin with though. I never look for outside help on a first playthrough but I use what tools the game gives me.

 

[FLAguy954]

For me that feels like I'm deliberately wasting what little leisure time I have trying to grapple with a game that was not designed in this way.
It's cool if you can though.

This. It was cool when I did it for Metro: Last Light and it seemed to work really well there since they made sure to design the game with that mode in mind. However, my gaming time is limited and I don't have a whole lot of time to be searching for little details that I can use a waypoint marker for.

 

[Baleoce]

I quite like waypoints off in open world / RPGs too. A good game should function as intended if you're listening closely to the detail and get to know the areas well enough.

 

[Neoleo2143]

I hope you all appreciate Zelda more than ever as these markers become more and more common. Zelda games never had to use a vision mode not a map with a ton of icons. The games are so beautifully designed that everything is naturally discoverable.

Well, there was the Wolf sense in TP.

ALBW also marked the dungeon locations on your map but it was more about how you got to those locations. But there could have been more player driven interactions if possible (which Zelda BoTW makes good on)

Zelda BoTW's highlight the possible interactive objects for each rune respectively, but the separations makes it closer to metroid prime's visors (which detective mode is a corruption of) and actually interacting with said objects is also an important part so it's an interesting mix of detective mode and traditional zelda items. Finding what to interact with isn't the point which is why detective mode has issues.

I think the most interesting part of BoTW is its implementation of waypoint markers because it changes the behavior of the player in an interesting way. Waypoints are entirely set by the player while being at a great height (which is why the Ubisoft towers are there) and while the maps aren't filled with icons (but instead the player places themselves which lends a feeling of charting out a place) but the content is still technically there, they're just punctuation in a journey to another place set by the player.

Zelda BoTW doesn't really do anything new mechanically in this regard but its implementation is deliberate and considered in order to give it meaning.

 

[Karak]

We have had large videos on this on the channel concerning map mess and interacting with a game world via the icons and even did some pretty cool tests with gamers playing with and without hud elements and then querying their responses.

I love it personally for most games but find that playing the game for while to get the lay of the land and how the devs expected you to play is best then I turn them off a bit at a time.

My hope is that more game devs give more and more options to gamers for these kinds of things.

 

[TheMoon]

We have had large videos on this on the channel concerning map mess and interacting with a game world via the icons and even did some pretty cool tests with gamers playing with and without hud elements and then querying their responses.

I love it personally for most games but find that playing the game for while to get the lay of the land and how the devs expected you to play is best then I turn them off a bit at a time.

My hope is that more game devs give more and more options to gamers for these kinds of things.

what channel?

 

[RedSwirl]

The physical difficulty of playing a game is more important than the immersion of a role? Not to me.

Case in point: Batman.

Batman's using that shit. He'd be stupid not to, he knows that, and his objective is to take care of the threat - not see how difficult he can make it for himself. If Batman's using it, I'm using it.

Case in point: Deus Ex.

'I never asked for these advantages, so I'm not going to use them. I'm a walking tank, I'm beyond human, but screw seeing through walls it's too easy.'

Power fantasies are just that. If you want masochism from them, you're playing the wrong kind of game. Those games do exist.

I find the break in logic of playing out of character far more egregious than having advantages over enemies that I'm intended to use - in a power fantasy. In a video game.

Batman's the definition of a CHEAT. Jenson's the definition of GIFTED. It's the point of each respective game.

We only take notice of these characters in the first place because of their advantages.

X-ray vision in Deus Ex makes more sense for the same reason it does in Dishonored -- it's an unlock that costs resources to use, and is explained in-universe. I use it liberally in both games. What isn't explained in either game though are waypoint markers that automatically tell you where next to go to further the plot. In Deus Ex I guess it could make sense if Jensen has that augmented into his vision. And to tell the truth having locations marked on maps has always made sense since it's something the protagonist or an NPC would plausibly do (an NPC in Zelda A Link to the Past explicitly mentions marking Link's map). The problem is games like Skyrim where without receiving any description of the location of an objective, you just magically know where it is.

 

[Cathcart]

I played through the Last of Us this way and it was perfectly doable. Now The Witcher 3 on the other hand I can't imagine doing the same for.

I did it for the Witcher 3 and loved it. I even turned the minimap off and just looked at the full map when I needed it. One of my all time favorite game experiences. It's an incredible world and getting lost always lead to something great.

 

[mileS]

I tried this with the Witcher 3 but found myself opening the full map much more often instead. Next game like this I'll give it a real shot.

 

[Arion]

I did it for the Witcher 3 and loved it. I even turned the minimap off and just looked at the full map when I needed it. One of my all time favorite game experiences. It's an incredible world and getting lost always lead to something great.

Sweet. I plan on trying the same on the W3 expansions.

 

[Chubzdoomer]

I find it hard to play without objective markers unfortunately because most games are designed with them in mind and ofter little else in direction. So it's just aimlessly finding a needle in a haystack.

Exactly. This is why I prefer to keep them on. I most recently tried turning them off in Hitman and it was just a mess trying to figure out the opportunities.

 

[Sec0nd]

Can't do it. I'll be walking towards each and every nook and fucking cranny of the map to see if I can pick something up. Much rather instantly see the things I can interact with and be done with it.

 

[Berserking Guts]

It depends. Normally I'd agree, but if the game is designed around these objective markers then it becomes impossible if, say, an NPC in Hitman has an item on his person that needs acquiring. It happened to me, I had to locate an Interpol Badge, but without the marker I didn't even know I was looking for a needle in a haystack.

I love to turn that shit off, but only if the game supports that sort of independent play style.

 

[Moonkid]

I did it for the Witcher 3 and loved it. I even turned the minimap off and just looked at the full map when I needed it. One of my all time favorite game experiences. It's an incredible world and getting lost always lead to something great.

It's mighty tempting but the world just feels far too big. I can see it being viable for the main quest but when juggling side-quests I feel like it won't be much fun.

 

[Arion]

It depends. Normally I'd agree, but if the game is designed around these objective markers then it becomes impossible if, say, an NPC in Hitman has an item on his person that needs acquiring. It happened to me, I had to locate an Interpol Badge, but without the marker I didn't even know I was looking for a needle in a haystack.

I love to turn that shit off, but only if the game supports that sort of independent play style.

Again, with Hitman if you just get close to the NPC he will start talking about the opportunity and it becomes pretty obvious. The maps are small enough to just walk around fully in 10-15 mins.

 

[odhiex]

Dear developers, please keep making these as the options.

Sometimes, I'd tried this for my second/third playthrough... It's really good.

But thankfully, options like the objective marker, detective vision, mini map etc, helped me a lot in completing games, as I don't have a lot of gaming time.

 

[Zugma]

I can't speak for the 3 games in the OP, as I haven't played them yet, but I feel that many of the games in this era are designed around having these things on. While it would be nice to be able to turn them off and enjoy a superior experience, not every game is designed in such a way that having them off will do anything but add to the frustration.

Assassin's Creed was one game mentioned in here, and that's a good example of one where turning off the indicators and markers would really just waste the player's time, not do much to add to the immersion. Take Morrowind, for example: this is a game that didn't feature the now common "Bethesda compass", so quest-givers would direct the player to objectives by using actual directions in the dialogue, and then these would be recorded in your journal for reference. Because these directions towards your objective are integrated into the game world, the player can make due without the compass, and enjoy (imo) a more immersive game experience. However, more recent Bethesda titles lack this detail, so without the compass being on (or the place being marked for you on your map), players will simply be left to wander aimlessly until happening upon the location.

Of course, this does not mean every game fails to provide a meaningful experience with markers (or other aids) disabled. The Last of Us is always designed with the listen mode being off in mind, and this really shows on the harder difficulties where you can't use it at all.

It's really just a case-by-case basis thing. Some games will be just as good (or better) with them disabled, but others will be so much more tedious. At the very least, let's just keep hoping games will even include the choice.

 

[E_Darkness]

I just got Dishonored 2 so I may give this a go and see if I enjoy it.

These kind of options should really be in more things.

 

[Freeman76]

I do it this way so everybody else should. Fuck that, play how you want.

 

[thetrin]

People who turn off waypoints and objective markers are crazy people. Don't know why a person would do that.

 

[JP]

It really depends on the game with me, if it fits in naturally with the game world then I have no issues with using it but if it's something that's been introduced due to poor design then I really try to avoid it.

I'm playing Batman: Arkham Asylum at the moment and I use it because it makes perfect sense in that world, to me. With Rise of The Tomb Raider, I don't use it because it just feels like it's an incredibly clumsy way top do what they do with it.

 

[Stormblessed]

"Detective vision" is an anti-frustration feature that's grown widespread because it saves time working out how to design environments that organically lead to the players to their objectives.

I think there a lot of games you could play for the first time where the lack of objective markers would just lead to confusion. Like something in the vein of Fallout 3, where the homogeneous environments like the subways are bound to get you turned around. They also let developers get away with things like interrupting your drive in open world games - you can take that call from your cousin Roman because despite dividing your attention, the game knows you won't get lost due to the lower amount of effort you have to go to navigating the world.

 

[General Lee]

Floating objective markers are one of the worst thing that has happened to modern game design. Detective modes I can somewhat understand, even though I don't see why they have to be obnoxiously ugly full screen filters - there are less jarring ways to point out interactable objects. Running blindly after an objective marker is just an awful way of playing a game, and sometimes there's not much choice. It's good that there's the option to have the game show where you need to go if you get stuck, but it really shouldn't feel necessary for smooth progress. I don't think anyone enjoys following a marker, but I suppose many just want to turn their brains off when gaming so it helps.

In hindsight I felt like W3 would've been a much better experience if I had just disabled all the ? map markers and other point of interest markers and just went through it more naturally rather than running from one marker to the next. I would probably have missed more things, but the level of immersion would've been much better. The completionist in me just doesn't want to progress before an area is clear of ???'s.

 

[Tohsaka]

I usually leave them on since it feels like the game was designed around their use most of the time.

 

[Roussow]

I mean technically you can do this for almost every game where you can turn off objective markers, I really don't think you nessesarily should though, some stuff just isn't designed with it in mind. For example, The Witcher 3's npc's will occasionally give you detailed instructions and you can navigate by the landmarks they pointed out, however most the time they don't really give you anything to work with, and constantly checking the full map on my way there is crazy tedious, I'm not really gaining anything if I'm just tabbing out of the game anyway.

Firewatch was a good game to turn off indicators in, it had a decent sized world (for the games length) and was peppered with identifiable landmarks, and the directions you're given are incredibly clear -- plus you can usually radio in for directions if you're lost. There's a fully functional in game map and compass -- you still use these, you just don't have little dotted lines appearing all over them.

With Dishonored 2, I turned off the direction indicators that are in screen at all times -- but no fucking way am I going to not use the heart or grab dark vision, especially the heart -- I'm just robbing myself of upgrades by not equipping that thing.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Hitman I played with objectives off cause getting your own weird imperfect assassinations is more fun then the scripted ones.

But normally I play with objective markers on and just explore around anyways. Nothing bothers me more then pixel-hunting for the interactable needed to progress, so I'm willing to give up the small amount of immersion in favour of saving myself the trouble.

As for detective vision, when devs start implementing decent sound design I'll turn it off. So never.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Nah, I'm good.

 

[Yabberwocky]

You made a great point, OP, especially about how removing markers/vision makes the game experience more immersive. With markers on, I just tend to go on auto-pilot from one objective marker to another objective marker. (That being said, in a bigger RPG, it does save a lot of frustration. I wish I could have turned it off in FFXV's main storyline quests, though, it was ludicrously unnecessary, especially if you just had to walk a few steps. The giant quest completion pop-ups were also a huge pet peeve.) I also get annoyed with objective markers and detective vision for what a mess it can make visually, along with detective vision often undermining some good art direction.

The Last Guardian is my new favorite example for leading the player and giving you clues (or pointing out your objective) without being remotely intrusive, as using Trico himself is really clever. It also builds the relationship between him and the player, because he helps you out as much as you help him. Trico will look in the direction you're supposed to go, complain if you're going in the wrong direction, or sometimes interact with objects in the environment to give you hints. One time I was completely off the mark with solving a puzzle, and Trico got progressively more and more annoyed with me - he was really bellowing by the end. I love the organic subtly to TLG, it's so satisfying and immersive. I've never really experienced anything like it - I'm still in awe of how well it worked - and it really helped with building a genuine relationship with Trico.

 

[Dahbomb]

I don't think I can play a massive open world game like Ass Creed without markers. Would have no idea where to go and I would just be constantly bringing up the main map to orient myself.

But semi open world games sure.

 

[Carn82]

You should try the Metro games on hardcore or whatever mode it is where you don't have a HUD, Wew lad.

They are still waiting on my PS4, sounds like a great time

 

[haveheart]

Deus Ex Mankind Divided is twice as good with markes turned off.

Same accounts for Dishonored 1/2

 

[vareon]

Yeah, some games are fun without markers and some are just adding frustration. It's great if you can pick up hints to your objective from the game world, NPCs, etc, but way too many games today leave barebones instructions on the quest log and rely on markers to direct players.

 

[harriet the spy]

I just wished games stopped having it (or at least by default), so I know the game is not designed arounding having them. For instance if the game has very little landmarks and a reasonably complicated map, it's beyond boring to just play the memorization game. But with a well designed map you know that it was designed so you actually find your way around.

But yes, I generally fucking hate mini maps. It's horrible to just look at an ugly, top-down, 1/5 of the screen just because it's more efficient. I sometimes have the same problems with subttitles, an addition I need to wean off of (english is my second language)

 

[Cave Johnson]

Can you imagine placing an objective marker in original Thief? It will drive anyone insane. The amount of layering in the level design will cause confusion to how and where the player should go due to the sandbox framework of the game.

And that's when you know "objective markers" off would be an oxymoron. Some games aren't designed to have objective markers (unless you literally create a tracking system.)

For games like Dishonored, turning it off wouldn't be as bothersome due to the fact the levels are broken into hubs, and the level design isn't so sophisticated that it would automatically disorient the player not to mention the power of blink that can give you flexibility for movement.

 

[Arklite]

Rise of the Tomb Raider's vision mode made streams obnoxious to watch. Worse, it trivializes Endurance mode, which is far more tense and enjoyable without the waypoint safety net.

 

[grumble]

The issue with this stuff is that the game design starts to be based around it. Similarly to fast travel games where you're expected to teleport back and forth between objectives, the games tend to be balanced so that, at times, not using the objective markers and super vision can be a major pain in the ass.

 

[Arion]

I do it this way so everybody else should. Fuck that, play how you want.

I simply suggested everyone trying it out and see if they enjoy it. Never implied it as mandatory.

People who turn off waypoints and objective markers are crazy people. Don't know why a person would do that.

Because it turns the navigation into gameplay. You are required to think about where, why and how you have to get to your destination instead of brainlessly following bread crumbs. You end up paying much more attention to your surroundings and the story which ultimately increases your engagement with the game. You might also appreciate the level design more and start to see the developer's intent. This is one of the reasons why Souls games are so enjoyable.

Hitman especially because it transforms into a spy game. You walk around blending into the crowd and environment, eavesdropping on conversations, reading documents and following around NPCs to gather intelligence. This is as close as we will get to a true 007 experience.

I mentioned it in OP but I guess people didn't read, of course it's not possible to do this in every game because some aren't designed with that in mind. Regardless, I was surprised to find so many recent games that were in fact built to allow it.

 

[Soodanim]

Someone mentioned that it was worth doing in the MGSV thread when that released, and I swear by that way if playing. I turn off everything expect reticles purely for grenade arcs because you can't translate that into a controller input well enough to live without it.

It gives some things that are otherwise rendered useless a purpose and removes the super easy mode of letting the dog ID every single person and you having a moving marker for them until the end of time. It makes some of the equipment make so much more sense, too. You actually need to use the hand sonar thing. You actually need to use infra-red goggles to find hidden enemies. It makes the game feel more like MGS3, and that's never a bad thing.

Seriously, try it. (While you're there, turn off the camera shaking when you sprint.)

 

[MartyStu]

Floating objective markers are one of the worst thing that has happened to modern game design. Detective modes I can somewhat understand, even though I don't see why they have to be obnoxiously ugly full screen filters - there are less jarring ways to point out interactable objects. Running blindly after an objective marker is just an awful way of playing a game, and sometimes there's not much choice. It's good that there's the option to have the game show where you need to go if you get stuck, but it really shouldn't feel necessary for smooth progress. I don't think anyone enjoys following a marker, but I suppose many just want to turn their brains off when gaming so it helps.

In hindsight I felt like W3 would've been a much better experience if I had just disabled all the ? map markers and other point of interest markers and just went through it more naturally rather than running from one marker to the next. I would probably have missed more things, but the level of immersion would've been much better. The completionist in me just doesn't want to progress before an area is clear of ???'s.

Yeah, that is the worst way to play W3. Most people agree on that point.

It is astounding to me how such a small default can have such a large impact on the gaming experience of so many people.

 

[Charlouie Jonesman]

I usually keep them turned on and only turn 'em off if they become too annoying. And honestly, I remember people getting pissed at the piss-colored indications for interactive objects in Deus Ex: HR, and while the visual effect on them was definitly overdone, compared to the original from, what, 2000(?) there's just so much stuff lying around in the world that is non-interactive even though it looks like it might be, that I don't really want to pixel-hunt for the stuff that *is*. As long as there's no big "Here's a secret!" neon sign, I'm fine.