 |
|
|
| |
Quests in Single Player Games
by Luke Bergeron on 11/13/09 11:45:00 pm
|
|
| |
|
Posted 11/13/09 11:45:00 pm
|
| |
So, I play video games, but the older I get, the less likely it is that I complete them. I’m like a goddamn video game tourist that comes to your overseas city and then stays in the hotel the whole time, only eats Chinese food instead of the local delicacies, and compares everything about the foreign culture to the country I’m from (yet profess to not particularly like). So here are several grains of salt for you to have – they go great with tequila.
Still, I try tons of different games. I game on the PC, the PS3, the iPhone, and the Nintendo DS. I like games. I like multiplayer and single player – they both have their merits. So, kind, generous, and slaving developers, please understand that I say this in the highest regard and with the greatest respect: PLEASE STOP PUTTING “QUESTS” IN SINGLE PLAYER GAMES.
Now, I like MMOs. And I understand why quests are necessary in those games. You want players to keep playing and take their time, to go through your content slowly, otherwise players could max out, get bored, and stop paying your subscription fees. More player time means millions of dollars spend on making the grind interesting, and an easy way to do that is through quests. I get that not every quest can be “go kill your arch nemesis who’s been flagging your progress for the fifty levels.” Sometimes it has to be “get me 10 grapefruit” and well you’re at it, “kill me ten bears.” I UNDERSTAND.
But in single player games, the goal should be a focused, tailored experience. Pinpointed, like shark’s teeth honed with freakin’ lasers. Multiplayer games have to be balanced so players have a chance to be equal to each other. But there’s no reason that single player games shouldn’t make the player feel like s/he’s the goddamn HERO, the Kwisatz Haderach, the Messiah, and at least one of the comings (preferably the second) all rolled into one.
The Kwisatz Haderach does not fetch 10 grapefruit or kill ten bears. The HERO pwns everything and doesn’t want to deal with a cumbersome quest log, or journal, or what-have-you that helps her deal with all the fruit fetching and wildlife slaying you’ve bestowed upon her. STOP IT. Write your games so the player is always doing something epic, and preferably isn’t doing more than three epic things at once.
It’s forgivable in a multiplayer game, but stop putting them into single player games. Nothing makes me leave a game faster (or worse yet, watch the review and decide not to buy your game) as quests in single player.
Maybe this is sacrilege, but I like short, linear, single player experiences. I like single player games that are paced by a master of the art to be exciting, heart-pounding, and able to be described with other overzealous adjectives. But once you put lameduck “quests” that make me collect 10 grapefruit and kill ten bears, I think your pacing is poorly thought out. I think your pacing sucks. I think you need better writers. Or designers.
Or maybe, you just need to stop being everything to everyone. Leave the quests for multiplayer. Please. It's okay. Really, it is.
Reposted from my blog at http://mispeled.net
|
| |
|
|
The game I'm working on has different npcs you need to save. The game encourages multiple playthroughs because you need different player builds in order to save the npcs. Clearly there's going to be some grind into this, you will most likely be saving the same NPC at one point, even reading the same lines of dialogue. But that's okay, because the players are likely to enjoy seeing how their player builds affect the NPCs they can save.
You also have to factor in hours of gameplay time, length. Many gamers consider gameplay time an important factor in purchasing decision. (I'm talking length in hours here, not months, lol) Is having repetitive elements a better answer than a short sweet linear experience? Perhaps. If the player is having fun doing the same thing, and says "wow! That was a sweet long game!" then more power to you.
Even the definition of a quest is obscure, players routinely kill the same zombies and nazis, but none of them are complaining. Perhaps you should stop playing MMO's.
There's a difference between that and the core gameplay, the "killing zombies and nazi's" stuff you're talking about. I wouldn't say Left 4 Dead puts you on a quest to kill zombies. The game itself is killing Nazi's and survive. Now, if, while killing zombies to make it through the level, there was a reward for collecting 10 pieces of zombie innards, well, that's a different story.
In most of those games they're traditionally known as "side quests" for a reason. For instance Borderlands will give you many quests, but if you truly desired it you could just plow straight into the story stuff. Oblivion, NwN, DA:O, Mass Effect, all of them are RPGs which contain quests. The vast majority of which you are not required to do unless you desire to. Not to mention when playing RPGs it eventually becomes old hat to pick up all quests and then only bother if they're along the way or promise something interesting.
In this way they're no worse than a shooter with a "secondary objective" that may or may not be completed. Hell if you set out *only* to do the story stuff then they're no worse than the CoD series which basically go, "get there, do this, kill shit on the way".
On IMY, I do exactly what I want, when I want, and only what I want. No fancy 3d graphics, but in my opinion, it's the ultimate sandbox game in a game with a very solid design. I'll take game play over eye candy any day.