I don't think it is much of a problem, and I think that
Soldak Entertainment has a few games where they actually sort of explore this, as in there actually is a main quest that happens while you can do related side quests. The idea just didn't catch on.
I don’t really consider it an issue cos otherwise the game is annoying. You could have it that most side quests that aren’t tied to the main story can be done after or have it area gated but again it’s a non-issue for me.
A story can be comprised of “smaller cataclysms” that are somewhat or fully solved and then allow you to go back to exploring, before entering the final “point of no return until the end of the game” and fighting the “big endgame cataclysm”
Or it can have more menial side quests only be available in the initial/middle part of the game and, from a certain point onward, they become unavailable & the only side quests you can do tie directly into the mainline story, giving the feeling of importance and progress toward saving the world
Unsighted already answers this extremely elegantly with every robot character including yourself having a different clock counting down til they shut down. It slows to a crawl for things like fishing, and there are items to extend you/characters you care about, but it still always exists
I know using an MMO is kind of "cheating", but I like how Final Fantasy XIV does it: every once in a while, you get a point where a character must spend time doing X or similar situations (troops being mustered, documents being researched) so you are given cutoff points to do other things.
Well that's the exact problem they're talking about. You want to do leisurely side quests and pursue npc romances, but the game is telling you you have to hurry up or people will die even though you have unlimited time
Nope. I love RPGs and I love spending time in those worlds/sandboxes. I like having the ability to dive into tough content if I’m in the mood, and I like having the ability to just relax and go fishing if that’s the mood I’m in.
No, your character is on an urgent quest to save people. He/she is not some “explorer” looking for “loot” and “secret bosses” all around the “map”. That’s you. It’s fine if that’s what you enjoy, but you’re not roleplaying then.
not every game’s merits have to be based on if you personally would buy it or not, even besides the fact that this article is specifically about the contradiction between narrative and gameplay
Myself and the person I am responding to are giving our opinion about that contradiction. Our opinion is we don’t care that there’s a contradiction. My apologies for sharing that opinion. Not sure how that comment equates to me thinking every game has to cater to me 🤣 deep breaths friend
well i had given you the benefit of the doubt that you had just meant you preferred games that gave you time to do things on your own and didn’t mean to distract from a discussion of game design by outright saying you don’t even give a shit about the subject.
There are ways to write the main quest so there is no ticking clock - things happen on the PC's time table. I don't have many examples, but Fallout New Vegas, second half of Fallout 4 (once Shaun is known to be safe), Mafia III.
Witcher 3 is better at this than most cause while your goal is to find Ciri your job is literally to help people with their monster problems and you need money AND information to continue your search. So while some stuff might be a stretch it makes sense to be doing odd jobs around the countryside.
Crossing half of Velen to get a Gwent card is still kinda odd lmao. TBH this is just one of those things we have to accept to allow player freedom. Even other genres do it, see: Majora's Mask.
yeah, collecting Gwent cards is really a stretch but you gotta suspend disbelief on some stuff. Still I think it's mostly a good case study in creating real reasons why you can't always go directly to the main quest and should do other things as well in your downtime and to enable next steps.
The Witcher 3 does a better job than most RPGs to justify it, that's for sure. I do believe it's not necessary to do so, if the intent is to give player freedom. A shorter, more linear experience could benefit, but open worlds are not compatible with a sense of urgency.
Yeah good example of this is Assassin's Creed Odyssey (mostly because it's most recent game I finished) where I got sidetracked and then completely forgot about the point of the main story
Tbf he also used a Baldur's Gate 3 example which is a bad example because in act 1 and 2 all of the sidequests do relate to the tadpoles and to getting help freeing yourself from them or learning about them. This article just isn't very good
I'll concede that Halsin is a decent lead, but once you find him, it becomes clear he can't help you.
None of the other leads promise a solution to the "I'm going to turn into a mind flayer" problem (well, except Ethel, but you don't know about her in advance).
It definitely exists - you're given a limited amount of time to live in Cyberpunk 2077 but it doesn't actually trigger until you get into a specific elevator. The article is just very lazy. Even the complaint about Scottish dwarves just shows they really don't know the genre
it's on a timer in the same sense that you are because you'll die some day. immaterial to present circumstances and unlikely to come to pass without forewarning
Before the patch, IIRC it was quite severe, I think people actually lost to it. And the game had the limit ticking down on display everytime you opened your PipBoy
I really enjoyed Assassin's Creed Origins, at least the first 2/3rds, because there was a narrative reason for you to do side quests. Bayek is not going to stop being a Medjay, and the main story is a slow unpicking of a conspiracy, it can't really be rushed.
I remember that Lightning returns gives you a limited time until the world ends. Which is great to create a sense of urgency but also gave me the feeling I was "wasting time" when I wasn't optimizing my time doing side-quest.
I do think pacing matters. An example that shows my age more than I'd like is how I felt a helluva lot more stressed about looking for my lost infant than I did about, say, tracking down the dirty bastard who left me in a shallow grave. The latter'll keep; the former feels inherently time-sensitive.
Time limits, points of no return, less urgent non-world ending threats, main story breaks are all ways to deal with it. For something like Fallout New Vegas it helps that the event that triggers the climax "the legion mounts an attack on the hoover dam" isnt ever specified as to when its going down
I think the problem is conveying the sense of time. Realistically, many stories would take MONTHS if not longer. Helping some old lady find her cat isn't gonna make a difference but your character would feel a little better for helping!
I usually don’t mind this but did in Dragon Age. Your character literally acknowledges the world is ending but insists that everyone should go do things like patch things up with their mom.
If you’re talking about Veilguard you have to remember that they are using the Eluvians to travel, so it takes very little to go from place to place. I like it, it makes much more sense than in Inquisition where you constantly traveled around the world for small tasks.
It's not so much the companion quests – "make sure your team has their shit together" is a time-honoured Bioware fig leaf, particularly when those efforts help vs. the enemy. The cutscenes like "Harding & Emmerich are going camping in Ferelden this weekend" are where I was like "uhh...WHAT?!?"
Devils advocate, reconciling with family sounds like a sensible way to spend time when there is a genuine fear the world is ending and you can't do anything about it.
I don't think side quests bring anything to the story tbh. Give me a list of tasks I need to accomplish, make every one complicated, interesting and related to the main story.
I'm tired of "kill this 14th bandits camp" filler bullshit.
I love Cyberpunk, but it's definitely one of the worst offenders. You're dying, supposedly VERY quickly, and getting that dealt with is not very high on your extremely long list of priorities.
I always saw this as a symptom of Open World games rather than specifically RPG games. Rockstar's Open World games have always had this issue, too. And even mid-sized games like Batman Arkham City struggle with this dissonance a bit.
The pacing in Cyberpunk 2077 is a HUGE failure though. It makes no sense for V to participate in side activities and waste time while litteraly on a race against time to avoid dying… Focusing on the story/main side quests really elevates its narrative and emotional experience.
It really feels like the story was written before they decided to make it open world sometimes, I think it would have been a much stronger game if it was more mission based and V had a more set personality like Geralt.
What’s sad is since launch their focus has been to make the game even more open world with more distractions and side content (new cars, new appartments, new gigs, etc…). You have to catter to a certain crowd to make money in this industry unfortunately.
Many games have someone subtly-not-so-subtly hint that you should use the break in the story to check out what's happening on the map. Spider-Man, Miles Morales and the sequel come to mind immediately.
Comments
Soldak Entertainment has a few games where they actually sort of explore this, as in there actually is a main quest that happens while you can do related side quests. The idea just didn't catch on.
Basically, pace the story in such a way that it allows for exploration and side quests when the situation isn’t too dire
1/?
This could be for a short period o time or for the remainder of the game
2/?
3/?
4/4
Citizen Sleeper has a visual novel calendar & can generate real tension with quests that have time limits.
You could build the passage of time into the mechanics like Romancing SaGa 2 & Minstrel Song do.
Or just put the main quest on a timer like Fallout 1.
Side quests provide money, exp, and equipment; but also the world building, rumours, and clues that inform you on where best to investigate.
Amazing RPG structure.
One solution is to force people into quests with timers which everyone hates.
Anyway, good morning to you too there big fella.
I don't think all CRPGs need to be typical and there is room for experimentation! :)
For my CRPG I aim to make "quests" procedural and systemic (as opposed to FOMO content), and have the game play out over decades.
None of the other leads promise a solution to the "I'm going to turn into a mind flayer" problem (well, except Ethel, but you don't know about her in advance).
"Do you want to get into the car and go fight the big bad who's kidnapped your girl?"
Me: "Not yet. I still have to finish tutoring all my cabaret club waifus first."
I'm tired of "kill this 14th bandits camp" filler bullshit.
Means that the player has some time to kill and side quests don’t feel like a weird tangent from the story
More "I need some time to do X to let us do Y, come see me when you are ready" and less "the world is ending rush here RIGHT now"