Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2015
S
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Oct 2015
Something I found incredibly frustrating about the first game was the inability to be pro-active about solving quests. My quest log very rarely gave me any information that could be used to actively go and solve that quest. It felt like the game wanted me to do very specific things but absolutely did not want to tell me what those things were. Most of the quests in DoS were progressed purely by wandering around and stumbling onto the correct solution. As someone who is very stubborn about not looking online for the solution, this results in a game that is chock full of aimless wandering. My first playthrough (almost completely unassisted) ended up being something like 120hrs and if I'm honest, I was pretty glad the game ended when it did. Not a great feeling to end on. In hindsight, I would've looked at a walkthrough more often. That isn't a good way for a game to be really.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
I'm not going to say that it's a good thing, but I actually believe that the lack of direction encouraging you to wander around was an intentional choice by Larian. They want you to wander around and discover the solutions on your own. They certainly did not want it to be about making a bee-line for a quest maker on your map.

That said, the quest log could definitely have used more detail and recorded hints which you had found through dialogue or investigation.

Joined: Oct 2015
S
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Oct 2015
You're probably right, and I'm not one for hand-holding and following quest markers in games. I just think DoS takes it a step too far. It didn't help that I often felt confused as to what my overall goal was at any point in time. Am I going after this guy or am I trying to find this item?

My quest log often looked something like this

I spoke with this person
We found out that...
This person is trying to do this

More of a diary of what had happened and not what the game wanted me to do. After all, there are only a few sets ways to progress the story, it's not like I can decide on my own what would be the best way to progress.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
I have mixed feelings. Personally I would like a clue about the quest I'm doing, especially if there's a risk I may permanently stall the quest in the meantime (similarly, I remember somebody describing Unix as having a bit of a "you asked for it, you got it" attitude: although it's my preferred user environment, it's frequently very annoying) but I don't want excessive amounts of "follow the cheese" either. I hasten to add that, for once, that's a legit use of "cheese", as the pointer in Oblivion's compass was often referred to as a cheese wedge.

The whole hand-holding argument is an issue in itself though, and a bit of a balancing act between people who arguably want too much direction and those who are unable to stop themselves if apparently unwanted assistance is provided.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Feb 2014
mfr Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2014
I wonder whether it would be practical to have different levels of guidance in game, comparable to the different difficulty settings. For example, the most detailed help might be a "Go here" marker with the last piece of relevant text, the next level down would be relevant text only and finally the "you're on your own" setting.

The historical order of the dialogue record is not very helpful, especially if, like me, you tend to go from place to place like the ball in a pinball machine. It would be much more useful if quest-relevant conversations were tagged with the quest name and searchable in game. This would be a great help if you only play for short periods at a time and have a poor memory - I fall into both groups particularly when playing after a few drinks.


Someone must have spiked her senna pod drink!
Joined: Oct 2015
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2015
There were plenty of points in the game where I had to refer to a walkthrough to work out what I was supposed to be doing.

I probably would have been fine if I'd played the game from start to end in one go, but when you come back to it after a couple of weeks, the quest log does NOT give you enough for you to pick up where you left off.

I can't remember which games did this exactly, but I remember playing games where you would talk to your companion and they would remind you about what they thought you should do next. I agree that the quest pointers and compasses, possibly makes things too easy.

Witcher 3 had quest pointers and compasses though. God, can you imagine being lost in the massive Witcher 3 world with D:OS's quest management? You could literally spend the rest of your lifetime wandering aimlessly in that world.

Joined: Oct 2015
N
old hand
Offline
old hand
N
Joined: Oct 2015
It could also update with new information while showing old information.

Joined: Jun 2012
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Jun 2012
I'm not the kind of player who goes full-rage mode when someone criticizes his favorite game, but - for Christ Sake!! - the lack of hand-holding is exactly what made D:OS quests fun to solve (even with the mediocre writing and the 2d characters)!

Every single quest in that game was perfectly doable without external help (If I made it. Everyone can). The maps were not that big, the hints were all there. Ok, the quest log could have been organized in a more efficient way. Ok, you were provided with more than one main objective at the same time. But, seriously: a quest log that thinks for me or a quest marker that mimics Google maps is everything I DON'T WANT in Orignal Sin II.

The refreshing feeling of not being treated like an idiot was exactly what I liked in Original Sin quest design.



Last edited by Baudolino05; 30/08/16 04:32 PM.
Joined: Aug 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Aug 2013
But there is a difference between a stupid marker on the map or a questgiver pointing directly to where one needs to go and giving hints or a riddle in order for the player to actively solve a quest instead of stumble over the solution by chance

Last edited by 4verse; 31/08/16 01:47 PM.
Joined: Oct 2015
N
old hand
Offline
old hand
N
Joined: Oct 2015
Originally Posted by 4verse
But there is a difference between a stupid marker on the map or a questgiver pointing directly to where one needs to go and giving hints or a riddle in order for the player to actively solve a quest instead of stumble over the solution by chance


I dunno most of the time it makes total sense (outside one or two broken quests... but those would have been broken even with a map marker)

Someone's house is locked? check outside their house, check where they work, check their pockets.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Also, I'm not sure if the EE fixed this, but in the vanilla version, sometimes clues and information you got from dialogue didn't show up in the quest log. You've earned that information from investigation, so it should be put into your quest log.


Joined: Jun 2012
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Jun 2012
Originally Posted by 4verse
But there is a difference between a stupid marker on the map or a questgiver pointing directly to where one needs to go and giving hints or a riddle in order for the player to actively solve a quest instead of stumble over the solution by chance


You got enough hints to solve every single quest in D:OS I. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to do that. You were forced to explore in order to solve many quests. That's true. But exploration is among the highlights of the first game, and this is also due to the quest design.

Last edited by Baudolino05; 31/08/16 03:00 PM.
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Don't forget Baudolino that those original fans of the hardcore games are 20 years older now with more responsibilities, and less free time.

Sometimes people don't have a lot of time to play, and they can put the game down for long stretches and forget where they left off when they pick it back up. I often find myself playing a game for a month, then moving on to the newest shiny thing. I don't always remember where I left off when I get back to the first game.

While I didn't have problems remembering what to do in D:OS 1, it's not a bad idea for Larian to remember that not everyone will play through the entire game in a few weeks. That's especially important for co-op when the difficulties of coordinating schedules means that it might end up being only one playing session every one or two weeks.


Joined: Jun 2012
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Jun 2012
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Don't forget Baudolino that those original fans of the hardcore games are 20 years older now with more responsibilities, and less free time.

Sometimes people don't have a lot of time to play, and they can put the game down for long stretches and forget where they left off when they pick it back up. I often find myself playing a game for a month, then moving on to the newest shiny thing. I don't always remember where I left off when I get back to the first game.

While I didn't have problems remembering what to do in D:OS 1, it's not a bad idea for Larian to remember that not everyone will play through the entire game in a few weeks. That's especially important for co-op when the difficulties of coordinating schedules means that it might end up being only one playing session every one or two weeks.



I'm not against the idea of a quest log that organizes efficiently the info you get through exploration and dialogues, Stabbey. I'm definitely against the idea of a quest log that solves the quests for you, which is basically what you get when you play a run-of-the-mill RPG these days.

Last edited by Baudolino05; 31/08/16 03:53 PM.
Joined: Aug 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Aug 2013
Originally Posted by Baudolino05
Originally Posted by 4verse
But there is a difference between a stupid marker on the map or a questgiver pointing directly to where one needs to go and giving hints or a riddle in order for the player to actively solve a quest instead of stumble over the solution by chance


You got enough hints to solve every single quest in D:OS I. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to do that. You were forced to explore in order to solve many quests. That's true. But exploration is among the highlights of the first game, and this is also due to the quest design.


In EE, yes. In vanilla, not so much, IMO.


"I don't make games to make money, I make money to make games". (Swen Vincke)
Joined: Jun 2012
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Jun 2012
Originally Posted by 4verse
Originally Posted by Baudolino05
Originally Posted by 4verse
But there is a difference between a stupid marker on the map or a questgiver pointing directly to where one needs to go and giving hints or a riddle in order for the player to actively solve a quest instead of stumble over the solution by chance


You got enough hints to solve every single quest in D:OS I. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to do that. You were forced to explore in order to solve many quests. That's true. But exploration is among the highlights of the first game, and this is also due to the quest design.


In EE, yes. In vanilla, not so much, IMO.


I beat the game 2 times: One Vanilla and one EE. The hints were all there both times. The log was more useful in the EE edition though. I admit that.

Last edited by Baudolino05; 01/09/16 09:41 AM.
Joined: Mar 2015
K
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
K
Joined: Mar 2015
No quest hints, please. I'd rather look into a walkthrough when I am really stuck (did this once or twice in vanilla D:OS) instead of having _every_ quest spoiled from the very beginning.

Luckily, I think with D:OS2, when there are multiple ways to solve quests and so it seems less likely that we'll be told how to proceed.

Joined: Aug 2016
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Aug 2016
I couldn't agree more, holding hands maybe would attract new players, but on the long run you would just lose more. This was the essence of the first game and this is the main reason why people will surely speak about it for a good while. It wasn't easy but it gave a lot of joy to follow common sense and actually find things out by myself.
I admit it too, I was persistent but had to check walkthrough occasionally laugh

Joined: Sep 2015
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2015
I like the way it is done in Divine Divinety: You talk to Bob and he tells you to kill some wolfes in a cave to the north (just an example, I dont remember names and quests from there). In your quest log log appears a note: "Bob wants me to kill some wolfes in a cave north of his house." I have a map and I can make markers on the map. In this case I would make a marker at Bobs house "Bob, kill wolves cave north". No markers or anything. Great feeling of exploration.

Of course, the quest log must be well organized. A think that it was not always perfect in D:OS1. Right now I play DA:O again and I like this: Quest are sorted by area and they are divided in open and solved quests. I do not want a diary where things are written in the order how I find them and different quest status is shown by different text color (I think it was like this in DD, it was hard to find a specific quest, especially if you started it a long time ago).

Divinity2 was a fun game, but the ! and ? over peoples heads felt immersion breaking for me. And I defenitely do not want an arrow that shows me the way. If you add those things, please give us the option to turn off quest markers.

This is something I have learned from the elder scrolls (I am sure for Morrowind, not so sure about the rest): Please give every char a name, not just commoner, merchant or noble. In most games I press tab and I only talk to chars with a name because only they are relevant for quests. I think it feels immersion breaking if only 10% of the people have normal names while the rest had names that just describe their job or status. In TES only 10% of the people had a quest for you too while the rest said some usual lines, but you did not know until you talked to them. In Morrowind even normal bandits in a dungeon had names and when fighting them I was thinking if I could have talked to them if I did things different before. Yes, this does make it harder to find out who has a quest for you, but Morrowind was on of the most immersive game worlds ever, even if the gameplay was very repetitive (walk a lot, click things to death, jump and run like crazy just to increase your skill)

I started computer gaming with realms of arcadia 3 in 1995, so I am used to being lost on a giant map without having much direction.


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Jun 2012
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Jun 2012
Originally Posted by Madscientist


This is something I have learned from the elder scrolls (I am sure for Morrowind, not so sure about the rest): Please give every char a name, not just commoner, merchant or noble. In most games I press tab and I only talk to chars with a name because only they are relevant for quests. I think it feels immersion breaking if only 10% of the people have normal names while the rest had names that just describe their job or status. In TES only 10% of the people had a quest for you too while the rest said some usual lines, but you did not know until you talked to them. In Morrowind even normal bandits in a dungeon had names and when fighting them I was thinking if I could have talked to them if I did things different before. Yes, this does make it harder to find out who has a quest for you, but Morrowind was on of the most immersive game worlds ever, even if the gameplay was very repetitive (walk a lot, click things to death, jump and run like crazy just to increase your skill)



Honest to death: this is the ONLY kind of hand-holding that I want in my RPGs. I know this is a quite immersion-breaking feature, but if most of the characters in the game just tell me generic stuff, I want to know up front which characters don't (this saves me a HUGE amount of time. Hours of pointless clicking that doesn't add ANYTHING to the gameplay or to the story).
Of course, they could name all the characters and use a different font (or color, of whatever) in order to highlight the relevant ones. And of course, if every character in the game has something interesting to say, there's no need to name only a handful of them. But as long as generic characters are in the game, generic names are a useful tool for the player.

Last edited by Baudolino05; 05/09/16 09:03 AM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  gbnf, Kurnster, Monodon, Stephen_Larian 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5