Is There a Better Alternative to Questing? - Som Pourfarzaneh at MMORPG.com

SBFord

Is There a Better Alternative to Questing? - Som Pourfarzaneh at MMORPG.com

Games like EverQuest and World of Warcraft have given us so much, providing the conceptual framework for the majority of MMOs that have been released over the past decade plus. Most contemporary MMORPGs, although distinct in their own right, emulate one or more tropes from their predecessors, which in turn were inspired by other video games and pen-and-paper RPGs.

Read the full story here

Loke666

I think some questing still are valid, TSW handles this well. Questhubs and huge numbers of exterminator & FEDEX quests however are very dated. I think a mix of some larger epic quests, Dynamic events and the sandbox exploration model is the best way to handle things unless someone invents something totally new.

FomaldehydeJim

I am not sure there is, you need a goal and a reason for achieving said goal. Put it this way, if we removed all quests and just said "you need to grind to be better" would that not just be a quest by another name? We could remove traditional levels and provide other rewards; skills, aesthetics, skills, achievements... but aren't they all quests by another name? 

And we can lock off areas without traditional levels by forcing people to complete X, Y and Z first. 

In honesty I prefer this system.  But the idea that quests are dead? That suggests there is no reason or arc to my character and endeavours, and for me that would be a backward step. 

Dauzqul

There has to be some form of "grind" to make accomplishments feel rewarding.

Scot

Very difficult to have both questing and sandbox, but it is my preferred type of MMO too. A themepark set in a sandbox is the idea, you would quest in a central area and then go out into the sanbox "marches/wastes" etc.

The interaction between the two types of play are the biggest problem, what rewards you get and how do those rewards impinge on each other.

Something like that really could begin a new genre as WoW did, but it is a tall order.

Po_gg

As Loke says above, TSW's mechanic is a pretty cool alteration from the "regular" quest-hub layout. Probably because they approached from the adventure side.

Btw, maybe not the most accurate question, it's not about questing, before that it's about story and narrative. And if you want to have that (and not just an empty world without any directions), then yes, the easiest and laziest solution is quest hubs and quest tracker shopping lists, etc. It's age old, but still working - many don't like it, but for a lot of players it's still the best and most comprehensible solution. (for example when TSW launched, it was a frequent lament, "why only 1 main quest, I want to get everything from the hub" lol, those are not quest hubs  )
Of course there are other ways as well, we too played with a few mechanics back in the MUD era. During the LotRO course (the one I used to mention a lot :awesome: ) it is also a topic of discussion, how to build a narrative without the same old, usual questing mechanics.

Deivos

I've made mention of this before, about means to change the delivery of quests and the type of systems that would benefit semi-social and open systems such as MMOs.

It's not about removing quests, but changing their presentation so that the players can feel more like they are leading the narrative rather than following it. Removing a majority of quest markers and hubs and instead using techniques like phasing to provide a drip of activities and events for the player that fulfills in building a personal narrative to their adventure through the game world.

Not like how ESO did it, but rather that you have central quests and events that players can take, and all the miniquests and events you normally fill hubs with are culled and instead provided as randomly seeded events that pop up near the player as they work their way around to complete their primary quests. You can pull from all the local physical assets or spawn in unique event assets associated with these generated moments to make it so the player not only has a consistent level of activity during their gameplay, but you can use this to deliver snippets of events and progress that impacts the primary quest like milestones.

The players are ultimately still running through a massive pile of quests, but the difference is that they aren't doing so in the context of following a bunch of icons on their map, but instead as a consequence of pioneering their own way towards a much greater goal.

cameltosis

If I think about the majority of single player RPGs I play, they generally follow the following formula:

Quests:
These are used to tell a story and to guide the player around the game.

Combat:
This is used to provide the moment-to-moment fun and is what rewards XP and thus progression.


With this model, quests become detached from progression. If you don;t enjoy questing they you can just completely ignore it and just go out, explore, kill, craft and you'll still progress and level up. However, if you like story or aren't sure where to go, you can do some quests which will guide you to interesting places or introduce you to interesting NPCs and stories which help connect you to the world.

So, my solution to the quest hub problem would be to remove all XP from completing quests and increase the XP gained from killing stuff. This way, those who enjoy the quests and storyline can still follow it and in the normal course of gameplay they'll still get their XP and level up. For the rest of us who are tired of generic quests and boring storylines, we can just head out into the world, explore, kill and have fun our own way.

This would, however, necessitate having larger, more open worlds where you can easily head out and explore properly. A game like SW:TOR wouldn't work with this model due to the very small, linear zones that they have, but bigger worlds with more interesting places to visit would work great. Finally, if a dev wants to gate content behind a quest, just make sure that there is some way to notify the user that a quest needs to be completed to gain access.

Vonatar

I was having this conversation with some friends a few weeks ago. We all came to the discussion thinking that the heritage quests in EQ2 were some of the best questing experiences, being lengthy multi-stage quests that took a long time to ultimately finish. TSW does this well too, and in a more varied and interesting way than EQ2. I still like the old fashioned D&D approach though, where a quest is a proper adventure. In some ways I think DDO got this right and would like to see more of that.

nhat

FF14 did a good job, they give you multiple options on how you want to level, by dungeons, quest or fates. GW2, while they did a good job with events got boring after a while and I actually missed questing at that point

sanshi44

I think they need to seperate Quests and Errands.
Quests need to be rarer and harder to come by probaly more hidden so no ! guiding u to them and often lead u on a long quests line (like Everquest Epic Quests) that leads our a grand and difficult adventure that rewards you something that worth the time and effort spent

Errands are pretty much everything that is considered a quest now (Collect X amount of belts from these mobs and what not) but should be used more for Reputatation with NPC or factions along with some XP I feel games should bring back the faction system found in Everquest 1 aswell

Nanfoodle

I think the problem with questing is the part where you return to the NPC you have the quest to, just to get a reward. If I am going to return to an NPC it needs to really advance the story. In stead having the hand in NPC meet you in the field or deep in the dungeon. Maybe joining you in killing that monster that killed his family would be more impacting. The quest hub part of quest is the problem. Kill 10 wolves quest should just have a reward happen when you have killed that tenth wolf. May games are breaking that model. Some are really trying to do that on a greater level. EQN is one game trying to do that. Waiting to see if they pull it off has been a pain lol. I think more developers need to try and think outside the box of the hug style questing. Quests are still something that can be fun, devs just need to be less lazy.

Loke666

Po_gg said:

As Loke says above, TSW's mechanic is a pretty cool alteration from the "regular" quest-hub layout. Probably because they approached from the adventure side.

Btw, maybe not the most accurate question, it's not about questing, before that it's about story and narrative. And if you want to have that (and not just an empty world without any directions), then yes, the easiest and laziest solution is quest hubs and quest tracker shopping lists, etc. It's age old, but still working - many don't like it, but for a lot of players it's still the best and most comprehensible solution. (for example when TSW launched, it was a frequent lament, "why only 1 main quest, I want to get everything from the hub" lol, those are not quest hubs  )
Of course there are other ways as well, we too played with a few mechanics back in the MUD era. During the LotRO course (the one I used to mention a lot :awesome: ) it is also a topic of discussion, how to build a narrative without the same old, usual questing mechanics.

Does it really work anymore?

I am not certain of that, new MMOs generally do pretty badly and even Wow is bleeding players now. It might not be questing that is the reason for that, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is part of the problem.

Now, I don't think it is questing in itself that is the real problem with them but the implementation of them. Questhubs, moronic quests about walking 20 feet to another npcs just to tell her something the questgiver just as well could have done without paying you a reward... Stuff like that.

Even Meridian 59 had quests back in '96 and those quests were as dumb as the current ones (I killed 10 rats in the moat as my first one) but there were less quests and not really any typical questhubs were a bunch of needy npcs stand around giving all players the same tired quests.

Now, if quests should continue to be part of MMOs they need to start to skip the menial tasks and focus on the more epic stuff. Saving the princess from a dragon is fine, collecting cabbages for a farmer isn't. Because I think even the most questloving player tires of crap quests, and I rather see 200 good, challenging and well written quests than a thousand of the boring kind that just cloggs my questlog like a public toilet.

meonthissite

GW2 had few and far between dynamic events. Their events weren't dynamic either rarely did your choices make any difference so these event trees would look like stick figure sapplings rather than old oaks with multiple twigs. GW2 also had hearts which were pretty much quests under a different name. You went to the area did what it said to do and then turned it in. The only two things that Arenanet did do differently is that the bulk of exp came from gathering as well, countless times players would ask in forums why they had not reached max level from doing hearts and the DEs in all of the zones and they would have to be directed to gathering everything they could find as well as the discovery of poi's. Most other titles don't give you exp for gathering and if they do it's so low it doesn't make a difference. I personally like a balance of quests and sandbox but I would have to say that GW2 was not sandbox in the slightest sense. I am highly interested in Ark as an all sandbox experience with heavy crafting but sadly I think it won't have any questing at all when released not even an arch storyline.

Abaxial

I agree with Cameltosis, but I would take it even further. Imagine a world map the size of Europe, with numerous adventure locations, but these not signposted in any way. You and your guild mates would make your own quests - quests that were expeditions of discovery, looking to explore the world. With semi-procedural design it could be done. The only real obstacle would be the tendency of people to post their findings on internet sites, thus removing the mystery.

Moirae

Yes, they are things the gaming industry has stopped bothering doing well. Good crafting (ala SWG or EQ2), excellent housing (SWG ala EQ2), other classes such as those who solely craft, and those who entertain (ala SWG). But the gaming companies don't think those things matter.

Superman0X

I have never understood that issue with quest hubs. This is generally a good thing, and it works well... What IS a problem is the quests that are given. Kill 10 rats and bring me their tails... Kill 10 more rats and bring me their claws... Kill 10 more rats and bring me their (you get the picture). Why is this just not a vendor who buys rat parts with a quest reward for the first 10 of each you bring them? Person A, please take this item to person B. (Person B is standing 2 ft away). Person B asks you to take a message to person A in return.. and so on. Why is this a quest? Why are they giving you items, experience, gold, etc for this? It is not how the quests are given, or the fact that quest givers are gathered at one location (quest hub), it is that the quests are terrible. It makes sense that most quest rewards would be located in town, or other generally safe locations. It doesn't make sense that they be doled out one at a time in a totally arbitrary fashion, and generally make no sense for risk vs reward.

giftedHorn

I don't like quests, not even in TSW. Even there, quests are boring when you repeat them, and what is an MMO for if not to replay again and again? Oh, for multiplayer interaction? Well, quests get in the way of that, too.

You do need to give players something to do, though, other than just grind experience points. Could survival substitute for quests? In a PvE sword-and-sorcery game? So instead of your daily kill fifty orcs quest, your first order of business would be to earn or steal enough gold pieces to cover your daily expenses.

lobotaru

Questing is built to support story telling, not leveling. Usually RPGs have a set storyline with a few side quests here and there, but an MMORPG overuses this mechanic to the point where even good plot threads could dilute one another. I think most MMORPGs would do better keeping the number of available quests down to the level of many good single player RPGs and find alternative means to leveling in between those quests. Any MMO that creates a strong community experience should be able to overcome the deficiency.

Sovrath

Dauzqul said:

There has to be some form of "grind" to make accomplishments feel rewarding.

Well, while I'm all for grind games because one is actually "doing something" (as opposed to running here then running there then running here again) I think the feeling of accomplishment must come from completing challenging or meaningful activities.

Maquiame

Quests should not give xp, they should advance adventure and exploration. Let people play how they want, areas should not be gated off by levels, quests should not be the determining factor as to what content is available to you. And there needs to be more content, even questing, focused on grouping and guilds. We need quests that run from level 1 - 50, quests that are trying to destroy the one two rings. We don't need any more tasks and tasks (kill ten rats, deliver this letter) should be named just that - tasks. Repeatable quests should be things like. "Our city has a rat problem for every ten rat heads you bring me I'll give you one silver." Or things like "Bloodfire Valley is a hellpit overrun with demons, help us keep them from spilling out and we will give you one gold piece for every two horns you bring us."

IsilithTehroth

I like runescape's witty, whimsical, cheeky quests and how they do them. They give rewards that you really want in challenging quests that actually make you want to do them.

SavageHorizon

It was EQ2 that first introduced us to the type of quests hubs you see in mmo's today not Wow, that game came out after WOW. Whether it was weeks is irrelevant, EQ2 came first.

Amaranthar

Deivos said:

I've made mention of this before, about means to change the delivery of quests and the type of systems that would benefit semi-social and open systems such as MMOs.

It's not about removing quests, but changing their presentation so that the players can feel more like they are leading the narrative rather than following it. Removing a majority of quest markers and hubs and instead using techniques like phasing to provide a drip of activities and events for the player that fulfills in building a personal narrative to their adventure through the game world.

Not like how ESO did it, but rather that you have central quests and events that players can take, and all the miniquests and events you normally fill hubs with are culled and instead provided as randomly seeded events that pop up near the player as they work their way around to complete their primary quests. You can pull from all the local physical assets or spawn in unique event assets associated with these generated moments to make it so the player not only has a consistent level of activity during their gameplay, but you can use this to deliver snippets of events and progress that impacts the primary quest like milestones.

The players are ultimately still running through a massive pile of quests, but the difference is that they aren't doing so in the context of following a bunch of icons on their map, but instead as a consequence of pioneering their own way towards a much greater goal.

This is the way I see it.

From reading these replies, the first thing I want to point out (because I get the feeling that gamers still don't get this, on the whole) is that if you want a Sandbox World that lives and breaths you have to do away with the typical ideal of levels with vast growth between them. That doesn't mean you can't have classes, it doesn't mean you can't "level", but what it does mean is that you have to have an open world where players can go anywhere and play with anyone else. Within reason. You still need advancement. And you still need areas that are just too dangerous for the less than well developed characters (unless they have aid from those who are high leveled/skilled. But those areas should be within the normal world, as in -lowest dungeon levels- or -Badlands/Ruins-.

• Once you get that world built, you can populate it with "quests" as Deivos talks about here.
  
• You run into them.
  
• You find them in your explorations.
  
• You can get them from clues inside the lore, or written in books/scrolls found in the game.
  
• You can get them from inscriptions on dungeon walls.
  
• You can get them from clues, hints, and even outright notes from ancient treasures and artifacts.
  
• You can even combine these, as in writing on an ancient artifact that solves the mystery in an ancient story that's well circulated or in the great library, and sends you on a quest.

Another thing I think would be exciting is to have the basic quests like features that give the normal rewards (for any and all), but then sometimes have a final stage that's solvable once only. Making these much more difficult, since the reward is "one off".

I think having (some, not all) "quests" that are world-wide, one-off, but difficult to solve can be very exciting. Players could but wouldn't have to share clues or discoveries towards this one-off goal, can share publicly or only with a few friends, even trade for said info, any way they want to play it. With an exciting reward, a rare item of magic or wealth.

But generally, just put "quests" into the world in a more natural, "realistic" way. Play for them, don't just have them handed out to you. And let us gamers think a little, instead of this numbing dispenser thing in current games.

fs23otm

I like quests... I do think the "Quest Marker" gameplay needs to change... I don't want to run into a hub... find the "!" and go kill... It should be more organic... Kill some boars, find a few items, then when you get near a town someone comes up to you and offers to exchange for those items. Explore an old tomb... find a book, and then find the person to give the book to. The problem is people want to be lead by the tooth to each turn in.... the general gamer has gotten lazy and will not read text and try to discover things on their own.

Amaranthar

Amaranthar said:

Deivos said:

I've made mention of this before, about means to change the delivery of quests and the type of systems that would benefit semi-social and open systems such as MMOs.

It's not about removing quests, but changing their presentation so that the players can feel more like they are leading the narrative rather than following it. Removing a majority of quest markers and hubs and instead using techniques like phasing to provide a drip of activities and events for the player that fulfills in building a personal narrative to their adventure through the game world.

Not like how ESO did it, but rather that you have central quests and events that players can take, and all the miniquests and events you normally fill hubs with are culled and instead provided as randomly seeded events that pop up near the player as they work their way around to complete their primary quests. You can pull from all the local physical assets or spawn in unique event assets associated with these generated moments to make it so the player not only has a consistent level of activity during their gameplay, but you can use this to deliver snippets of events and progress that impacts the primary quest like milestones.

The players are ultimately still running through a massive pile of quests, but the difference is that they aren't doing so in the context of following a bunch of icons on their map, but instead as a consequence of pioneering their own way towards a much greater goal.

This is the way I see it.

From reading these replies, the first thing I want to point out (because I get the feeling that gamers still don't get this, on the whole) is that if you want a Sandbox World that lives and breaths you have to do away with the typical ideal of levels with vast growth between them. That doesn't mean you can't have classes, it doesn't mean you can't "level", but what it does mean is that you have to have an open world where players can go anywhere and play with anyone else. Within reason. You still need advancement. And you still need areas that are just too dangerous for the less than well developed characters (unless they have aid from those who are high leveled/skilled. But those areas should be within the normal world, as in -lowest dungeon levels- or -Badlands/Ruins-.

• Once you get that world built, you can populate it with "quests" as Deivos talks about here.
  
• You run into them.
  
• You find them in your explorations.
  
• You can get them from clues inside the lore, or written in books/scrolls found in the game.
  
• You can get them from inscriptions on dungeon walls.
  
• You can get them from clues, hints, and even outright notes from ancient treasures and artifacts.
  
• You can even combine these, as in writing on an ancient artifact that solves the mystery in an ancient story that's well circulated or in the great library, and sends you on a quest.

Another thing I think would be exciting is to have the basic quests like features that give the normal rewards (for any and all), but then sometimes have a final stage that's solvable once only. Making these much more difficult, since the reward is "one off".

I think having (some, not all) "quests" that are world-wide, one-off, but difficult to solve can be very exciting. Players could but wouldn't have to share clues or discoveries towards this one-off goal, can share publicly or only with a few friends, even trade for said info, any way they want to play it. With an exciting reward, a rare item of magic or wealth.

But generally, just put "quests" into the world in a more natural, "realistic" way. Play for them, don't just have them handed out to you. And let us gamers think a little, instead of this numbing dispenser thing in current games.

Just adding, and breaking it up a little.
I said above "one-off" items. But that doesn't mean the reward has to be a single item. There can be treasure hoards that can be divided up between a group of players.

The real world offers a lot of ideas here too. I'll use some of them in the following examples:

• A single magical item that has unique properties. Those can include spells that normally are used by a particular class or skill, speed, flight, special damage properties, whatever. The deeper the Sandbox game play, the deeper this can be, as you can use things like hunger or charisma too.
• Treasure hoards, of course.
• Artistic things, unique. Statues, paintings, tradable things that should be worth a lot to collectors.
• Imagine a lost room like the Amber Room. Where the wall panels can be removed and put inside player houses, castles, or guild houses. Either in individual panels or as a whole set (reproducing the entire room).
• Sets of magical (or not) jewelry. Special for their rareness (like extra large gems) or cumulative magic as a set.
• Imagine the Lost City Of Gold, a special quest that's really hard to complete, not just for danger but also for the difficulty in solving.

There's really no limit to the excitement and game play that can be put into a good Sandbox game.