The one game I can think of that has actually done this well is Fallout. The timer is long enough that you have plenty of time to explore and do side quests, but short enough that you can't do everything and can't afford to waste time for no reason. Plus you can actually influence the timer in sensible ways through your actions. It's a time limit that fits sensibly in the game, allows you plenty of freedom to actually play the game, but still adds in the tension and realism of knowing that your urgent quest that must be completed before everyone dies actually is urgent and must be completed before everyone dies.JimmyPage666 said:I just logged on to say this! A well implemented timer in ME3 might have worked. As it is I could faff about for weeks on side quests before doing that "urgent must do now or all life will end" quest. I had this with many games where I can go off on side missions or find collectibles for ages while the main mission was saying "get there now! something terrible is happening!" Really broke the immersion.
The bit about fitting in the game is important there as well. The problem with the pseudo-timer in Mass Effect 2 is that it made some parts of the game different from others, without any indication that was the case. For most of the game, you can wander around spending as much time as you like doing side quests. Then suddenly at one point you can't, even though all the side quests are still open and you know that there won't be another chance to do them. The game completely changes from a relatively relaxed exploration game to "You must do this quest right now or we give you a shit ending", but doesn't even bother to tell you that the change has happened. And once you do know its there, you're forced to make sure you do things in the right order to avoid triggering the timer before you're ready, which rather spoils the free exploration feel it had before. It wasn't a bad idea of trying to introduce a bit of realism and urgency, but it wasn't implemented at all well.