Why do people HATE quest markers?
- Thread starter endtherapture
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd like them to mix it up a little more. Every once in a while it is fun to actually have to discover something. Particulary with treasure hunt kinda quests
It's not as simple as turning them off. The game is made with questmarkers in mind, so there are barely any directions in the quest text.endtherapture said:
They weren't in the earlier TOS games and people played through them just fine.AntiChri5 said:
Im going to assume you meant TES, not TOS.
Other TES games haven't had people move about to such a degree. In Morrowind, characters stayed glued to the same spot for their entire lives. So "in the third house from the right after the bridge" was a much more reliable way of finding them. In Skyrim, characters stick to a schedule. They wake up, have breakfast, do their daily activities (work, wander the market, whatever then have dinner and go home. Directions would be much more complicated.
"Well, from 9 PM to 8 AM they are at home. From 9 AM to 6 PM they are at work. They have dinner at the inn at around 7 then go home for the day. Unless their schedule has been interrupted by a dragon attack, theif, vampire or other event, in which case they could be anywhere. Or they may have been kidnapped by the Falmer or a Vampire. Try looking everywhere, you will find them eventually."
Oblivion had people moving about to some, but not as much. It also had quest markers.
Other TES games haven't had people move about to such a degree. In Morrowind, characters stayed glued to the same spot for their entire lives. So "in the third house from the right after the bridge" was a much more reliable way of finding them. In Skyrim, characters stick to a schedule. They wake up, have breakfast, do their daily activities (work, wander the market, whatever then have dinner and go home. Directions would be much more complicated.
"Well, from 9 PM to 8 AM they are at home. From 9 AM to 6 PM they are at work. They have dinner at the inn at around 7 then go home for the day. Unless their schedule has been interrupted by a dragon attack, theif, vampire or other event, in which case they could be anywhere. Or they may have been kidnapped by the Falmer or a Vampire. Try looking everywhere, you will find them eventually."
Oblivion had people moving about to some, but not as much. It also had quest markers.
Zachary Amaranth said:
A specific example detailing exactly what I was talking about was raised. In this example the object was designated "..." and the place was designated "a cave". The caves location was SPECIFICALLY detailed by the person you quoted to be totally unknown in location. As in it could be literally everywhere on the entire map (see bolded part).Zachary Amaranth said:
"for you to have literally ZERO idea where it is and be unwilling to narrow it down at all for someone to help you find it" - This is how I described the scenario. The cave is in an unknown location in the entire nation of skyrim. Thus the NPC either has no idea where it is in the nation or is unwilling to provide information as to where the cave is. Thus you can see it matches exactly with the situation i described.
This was your exact response, the response indicated that the scenario stated by the person you quoted (which i have just demonstrated is the same as the one I have been using) should not be immersion breaking.
With all that demonstrated: How on earth is that not what you said. Ive literally drawn you a line, word for word, to what youve said. Im honestly excited to see how you deny it at this point if you do at all. Youve always seemed honest in the past, this is just weird. Im not even the only poster to realise youre literally denying youve said something available in text on the same page. Maybe you didnt read the exact example the person you quoted used. But they used MY example. And YOU said it wasnt immersion breaking. I have those quotes right up there.
I found those quotes in ONE post you posted without making any editions other than to add a reference number. Since ive taken everything youve said exactly as you said it how on earth could i be twisting your words.
Im willing to concede I might have misunderstood what you wrote, but me, and obviously another poster, both found that extremely confusing if thats NOT what you meant. This is really stupid, and honestly I think its a misunderstanding. Im not trying to misrepresent you at all, I HONESTLY thought, and do think until you wanna correct me, that you justified the lack of immersion in a situation i described by saying its not immersion breaking to not know where you lose stuff. If thats now what you meant just tell me what you DID mean. This is dumb and turning unnecessarily hostile.
I find that quest markers are essential. Just like someone mentioned earlier there are times when I just want to do the quest. I don't always have several hours available to play the game and if I spend too long lost in the wilderness because I can't find the right cave I'm not going to be enjoying myself.
If there are quest markers then I can explore openly when I want to and still get back to the quest. This isn't childish or wanting everything handed to me on a silver platter, it's just that wandering around in the wilderness isn't always the enjoyable part.
One particularly annoying example of non-quest markers that I found was in Morrowind. I was doing quests for House Redoran and was given directions to a farm. I tried to follow those directions carefully, even back tracking several times to a known point and trying again. If I had a quest marker placed on the farm I wouldn't have wasted so much time walking back and forth and more time actually having fun, which is why I play games in the first place.
If there are quest markers then I can explore openly when I want to and still get back to the quest. This isn't childish or wanting everything handed to me on a silver platter, it's just that wandering around in the wilderness isn't always the enjoyable part.
One particularly annoying example of non-quest markers that I found was in Morrowind. I was doing quests for House Redoran and was given directions to a farm. I tried to follow those directions carefully, even back tracking several times to a known point and trying again. If I had a quest marker placed on the farm I wouldn't have wasted so much time walking back and forth and more time actually having fun, which is why I play games in the first place.
I go a ways back in gaming. I do remember (and still have) the notebook that was beside my 66mHz 486 that held my gaming notes from the days of my IIe all the way to Daggerfall (which required me starting a new notebook.) Drawing maps and notating quests for Ultima games, various games worth of cheats, hints, codes, and vice-presidents (the "age verification" question to play one of the Leisure Suit Larry games was how I learned about fmr Vice President Spiro T. Agnew.)
Console gaming DID kind of change things in that regard. I never needed a notebook. I don't think it was really such a bad thing though, just different. The games were more skill based at that point. PC DID have "smarter" games. Games that required more problem solving and less lightning fast reflexes. But that doesn't really "dumb down" games in general, rather just changes the focus from puzzle solving to reflexes and reaction times. And the PC was still there, so consoles just "added to" gaming as opposed to "dumbing down."
Plus as I've gotten older and my window for gaming time has gotten smaller and smaller (I wish I had the gaming time I used to have as a kid.) As such I do appreciate not having to pause to update my notes or map, or look at my index to remember where I wrote down the quest I stumbled back into after having left it behind days before.
But, I can see examples where it just gives too much away for some of us too. I think Skyrim's a bad example, I still believe the map and quest designers were trolling us with the markers. I ALWAYS found it actually quicker to follow a road or path than try to walk straight to the objective. With all the ribboning, layering, and terrain walls added to the map to make it seem bigger than it actually was; the markers led you into dead ends and wrong turns just as often as it would lead you directly to your objective. But anyway...
As a solution, how about a "conditional" quest marker system in some future hypothetical game. When you get the quest, only an area is marked out on the map as a guide. You could either explore that area and find the objective, or ask around and investigate. Chosing to investigate or ask for directions would narrow down marked area or give you an added arrow towards your objective. It's the only kind of hybrid I can think of that bridges between the option quest markers on/off.
Console gaming DID kind of change things in that regard. I never needed a notebook. I don't think it was really such a bad thing though, just different. The games were more skill based at that point. PC DID have "smarter" games. Games that required more problem solving and less lightning fast reflexes. But that doesn't really "dumb down" games in general, rather just changes the focus from puzzle solving to reflexes and reaction times. And the PC was still there, so consoles just "added to" gaming as opposed to "dumbing down."
Plus as I've gotten older and my window for gaming time has gotten smaller and smaller (I wish I had the gaming time I used to have as a kid.) As such I do appreciate not having to pause to update my notes or map, or look at my index to remember where I wrote down the quest I stumbled back into after having left it behind days before.
But, I can see examples where it just gives too much away for some of us too. I think Skyrim's a bad example, I still believe the map and quest designers were trolling us with the markers. I ALWAYS found it actually quicker to follow a road or path than try to walk straight to the objective. With all the ribboning, layering, and terrain walls added to the map to make it seem bigger than it actually was; the markers led you into dead ends and wrong turns just as often as it would lead you directly to your objective. But anyway...
As a solution, how about a "conditional" quest marker system in some future hypothetical game. When you get the quest, only an area is marked out on the map as a guide. You could either explore that area and find the objective, or ask around and investigate. Chosing to investigate or ask for directions would narrow down marked area or give you an added arrow towards your objective. It's the only kind of hybrid I can think of that bridges between the option quest markers on/off.
And you STILL had to add things to get from your statement to mine.BiscuitTrouser said:
EDIT: If you think it's bad that it's "getting hostile," stop being hostile.
I remember needing a notebook to keep track of things in Uncharted Waters on the NES back in the day, so I'm not convinced that the platform has anything to do with it.Kyrian007 said:
Yeah, I think this is a huge thing. Back in the 1980s when something like Oubliette needed a 1000 page manual to play, games like that were more of a niche market. And I don't think that's a bad thing - lengthy games are designed for a broader range of people (as well as those same people who were once willing to read a 1000 page manual, and now have less time). As far as I'm concerned, that's how it should be - streamlining, and making it possible to enjoy a lengthy game without it requiring more work than your actual job is not "dumbing down", it's simple accessibility. And it's just good business sense.
I love quest markers, 'cause I hate getting lost. But they should be optional.
And they are in Bravely Default. I am LOVING how customizable this game is. Tweaking the random encounter rate (all the way to turning it off) alone is invaluable.
If it wasn't for what I've heard is a terrible second half, this would be the perfect game.
Ah, well, enough shilling.
And they are in Bravely Default. I am LOVING how customizable this game is. Tweaking the random encounter rate (all the way to turning it off) alone is invaluable.
If it wasn't for what I've heard is a terrible second half, this would be the perfect game.
Ah, well, enough shilling.
I was at first going to defend quest markers because as an RPG fan without a huge amount of time to play games, I'd like to be able to cut out a good portion of the wandering around aimlessly and move along with the story and action. But after some thought I think it would be just as helpful to have more in-game hints and less connect the dots. In Bravely Default you have the little yellow and blue "!" markers showing quest and sidequest locations. A simple party chat reminder would be just as helpful without marring up the scenery.
But overall, it doesn't bother me, there is still and exploratory element that satisfies that need for me. But I do miss talking to people in town and coming across one old dude in the corner that casually mentions "They say a huge tower sprung up from the ground far to the west, but I hear the way is very dangerous!"
But overall, it doesn't bother me, there is still and exploratory element that satisfies that need for me. But I do miss talking to people in town and coming across one old dude in the corner that casually mentions "They say a huge tower sprung up from the ground far to the west, but I hear the way is very dangerous!"
I added numbers to show the linkage between your statement and my statement as you wrote them. I didnt change any words. I added the numerical bridge between the words you wrote and the ones directly above them to make it extremely obvious how I was reading what you wrote to come to my conclusion.Zachary Amaranth said:
Cant you just correct me since I apparently am not reading what you wrote correctly? Why continue to string me along just saying "Nope, wrong, nope" when clearly theres a communication issue here thats confused at least 2 separate individuals as to your intent. Either that or it looks like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and wont admit that you said something thats a little funny.
If i AM reading it wrong you agree there IS am immersion issue with the scenario that hero in a half shell described? Or dont you. Can you just answer this question instead of jabbing at me?
For me, it's all dependent on the game.endtherapture said:
If I'm in a game whose core gameplay is predicated, at least partially, on exploration, than the most I want to see as far as quest markers go is a rough "region" where the quest is. And in the case of a first person perspective, I want nothing on my HUD save for, at the most, a compass direction.
However, in a game like, let's say FTL, quest markers are not only acceptable but a necessity.
It's all dependent on the perspective, the "cruciality" of the quest, and whatever other mitigating gameplay mechanics may be present.
Can't really say much that has not already been said. Personally I dont like to know that I even have the option. I don't really care how stupid this sounds to you, but it basically nullify any sense of accomplishment and I end up feeling sort of stupid for not having used it. Don't get it? Don't have to, just respect and understand that someone are able to feel that way.
My main problem with it is that it's getting harder and harder to find a game where it does not even exist, and I find that rather sad. I know I am not alone when I say I enjoy games like that, because games without are made differently.
So a few years down the line, when quest tracking is in every single game, what are we supposed to do? Where are our games?
My main problem with it is that it's getting harder and harder to find a game where it does not even exist, and I find that rather sad. I know I am not alone when I say I enjoy games like that, because games without are made differently.
So a few years down the line, when quest tracking is in every single game, what are we supposed to do? Where are our games?
I disagree about skyrimendtherapture said:
when given a quest most ncp's are basically saying "retrieve X that is in that one of the countless crypts/cave fill with draugr/bandits in skyrim. Since I assume your mind reader; I won't have give any hints or directions for the location of X"
If your lucky you might randomly stumble upon X at point less then 10 hours(in real time) later when not using quest markers. Maybe X is a cave/crypt you cleared in the past and you will mostly likely will never randomly stumble upon it.
X=fetch quest item
I think people hate them because its handholding and while I do get that argument I enjoy them its a handholding feature I don't mind for once because if I'm lost in a free roam like Skyrim or a less sandbox but still can be confusing on the level design with say mountains in your way like Borderlands the quest marker gets me on the right track when I want to complete the game for me its simply I suck with internal naviation if there is a town to my right I will always go left. But with a game like the original Tomb Raider if it had a quest marker would I use it? Maybe it would of course take away some of the challenge in navigating the terrain because the big arrow allows me to scan over the canyon cliffs faster and find the actual landing platforms I missed the first 15 tries I did this part of the mission it would've helped me get unstuck a heck of alot sooner in that game. In the case of Dues Ex HR they had multiple markers which cluttered up the screen but toggling one or all of them off fixes the issues and a toggle feature for it is really the only fix you need a simple quest markers on/off in the options menu makes everyone happy.
The dumbing down on the player experience is part of the argument. Often markers are used in place of designers actually writing an adventure (i.e. wanting to take you through their game and encourage exploration and supply all kinds of ways to make their quests interesting), and instead take an extremely lazy and hollow route of just pointing the player where they need to go to advance the plot.
If you play a game without quest markers and instantly become lost, stumbling and left without an idea of where to go, either you are hopeless or the game is poorly designed. I'll add that, in most cases, you don't even have an option to turn them off. It's either a lazy player or a lazy developer. I want to play the game, not the UI.
If you play a game without quest markers and instantly become lost, stumbling and left without an idea of where to go, either you are hopeless or the game is poorly designed. I'll add that, in most cases, you don't even have an option to turn them off. It's either a lazy player or a lazy developer. I want to play the game, not the UI.
Hmm, I don't hate quest markers, but if I did, I do know how I'd argue against them.
Quest markers are often used not merely to supplement investigation and exploration, but rather are used to replace investigation and exploration. Let's say you have a quest in which you are solving a murder mystery. At the scene of the murder, the only piece of evidence is a strange dagger. In an older game without quest markers, you might have to ask around to see if someone could identify this weapon; at some point the town blacksmith might tell you that he's never seen anything like it but one of his old military friends stationed in a nearby city has served all around the world and has an interest in that sort of thing. At which point you would have discovered for yourself that you ought to head towards the next city, etc etc. In a newer game, these steps might exist, but it's just as likely that the devs don't bother adding this at all, and instead just point you directly to garrison headquarters in the next city, as if you were some kind of psychic and knew exactly where to look.
Simply turning off quest markers is not going to bring all the clue-finding and detective work back...because all that stuff has simply been replaced by quest markers.
Quest markers are often used not merely to supplement investigation and exploration, but rather are used to replace investigation and exploration. Let's say you have a quest in which you are solving a murder mystery. At the scene of the murder, the only piece of evidence is a strange dagger. In an older game without quest markers, you might have to ask around to see if someone could identify this weapon; at some point the town blacksmith might tell you that he's never seen anything like it but one of his old military friends stationed in a nearby city has served all around the world and has an interest in that sort of thing. At which point you would have discovered for yourself that you ought to head towards the next city, etc etc. In a newer game, these steps might exist, but it's just as likely that the devs don't bother adding this at all, and instead just point you directly to garrison headquarters in the next city, as if you were some kind of psychic and knew exactly where to look.
Simply turning off quest markers is not going to bring all the clue-finding and detective work back...because all that stuff has simply been replaced by quest markers.
Highlight the quest in your journal and hit "A". The marker goes away, man. You can keep your HUD on.Darth Rosenberg said:
I do agree with you on HUD customization though. I like to play Skyrim with the HUD off, but it also does not make sense to me that my guy can be an expert blacksmith, hardened adventurer, master explorer, and not, at some point, have a compass.