Quests are great but something new is needed so that you dont die of boredom after 2 hours. And that new thing must be player created content. Allow players to control cities and war with other cities, allow players to get in need so that other players have to resque them and so on. Basiaclly you have to make the world more dynamic; make mobs move around from place to place like nomads, make a new race invade the map from the north and let the nature grow or shrink depending on how used it is.
It will take more from the developers to make such a game but on the other hand, the first game of those who come will be a legend.
The next major breakthrough in questing will be to allow players to participate in creating quests for other players to perform.
The trick there is to create a system in which the rewards of doing the quest are balanced against the difficulty in accomplishing said quest.
But yeah, it would be a miracle if an MMO came out that really gave the players that much control over their game setting. Hell, developers could spend all the time in the world on better content (rather than pushing more and more out, often to the detriment of the game), and game staff could get in on things, too, by making up their own quests with the same system.
The technology is there, though it would take a lot of theoretical work to get the system down just right. And that might take a really long time to get down to an exact science.
"I think getting rid of quests would make the lush MMORPG landscape arid and dry."
I believe that this describes the latest English releases of MMORPGs perfectly, totally dry and containing no lushness whatsoever. Most quests are just kill these mobs, collect the items they drop, bring them back to me and get a reward. Most of the newest MMORPGs contain little more then a few minute quests, which at best are either not worth doing, or just plain boring. A true quest is one which lets the player interact with a number of characters, NPCs and PCs, and allows entering different areas and different actions (Being a traitor, or murdering an NPC which is important in the quest, to trigger new quests, or change your quest deeply, while affecting the storyline. Other players could quest to kill you or find traces of your whereabouts and such, questing which involves player interaction, on a small or large scale. War, or an assassination. However I have never seen such an immense questing system in any MMORPG. As they said, only on P&P games can you achieve that. Although I believe it would pushing quest/game developers to the limit, I do not believe that it is impossible if they try hard enough.
To those who say questing is pointless or sucks, I'll say the same to PvPing, and grinding.
I don't see a problem with quests being repeatable or not unique (as in everybody gets to do them). What kills the questing experience is all the websites on the internet that post the solution to all quests about 5 minutes after the quests has gone live.
If you're solo you can ignore this and try to find a solution to your quest yourself but in a group it's a different matter. In any group there is usually already someone who has completed the quest and then it's a question of that person saying: now we run here, kill this, run there, talk to him, run there, ... Even if nobody has done the quest before people will usually get 'fustrated' after 5 minutes and go afk to look up the solution on a website.
I remember having great fun with a quest where a prisoner claimed to be innocent and I had to try and clear his name. It was quite well written and even though still pretty linear some 'detective' work was required. It took me a couple of days to complete it and gave me a sense of achievement having done it. Had I looked up the solution the quest would have taken me about half an hour.
I support Belgiums efforts to get noticed ... at all.
I think Jon and Carolyn are both wrong in certain points and both correct in certain points.
We all shouldn't use small relevances to either make it a priority nor as reason to cast it out of the worlds. Everyone needs to stop taking sides and instead form your own opinion. Which I see some of you have, which is good and I applaud those who do.
However, removing questing elements will only will make it less diverse. The problem isn't the quesintg. It is how they are trying to fit it in a Massive community. I think the real arguement here isn't about questing. Rather on how questing is really used. Herding players like cows through a storyline that has no identity for each individual is the problem. People that think a particular scenerio equals the definintion of questing is not only ignorant but very imprudent. Questing has much more diversity than that and to leave out something that actually creates diversity in a gaming element would only support linearity.
Also, Stating that questing is basically a grind or even telling others to go play a single player RPG if they want questing like "GungaDin" has stated in this thread, only shows ignorance and immaturity in this discussion which should be ignored. Come on people, lets be a bit more on task here.
I agree however that Questing in MMOG communities are stagnant and linear. MMOG's are a Persistant World that should be constantly changing due to lore, story and quests that are based around the current events and reactions to how the players interact with the world.
Now there isn't nothing wrong with static quests, however they shouldn't be the core nor the flow of the events. Static questing should only be a root to routine development of character, town, offsprings and etc. Only things that are routine by default (life).
Not only is UO one game that has some core features that shown a PW can survive without static quests. But I see no one here say anything about Asheron's Call. There really wasn't any quests that you just typically walk up to a NPC to retrieve, nor a Quest log and etc. Most things in game where from you findiing books, items and etc and bringing them to someone that would actually kick off a quest, event or other. Also Town criers would take currency to give you hints to what current events may entail. If anything, I believe AC was one game that had exceptional potential. Yet of course, like all others, quests were still static, but the monthly events really gave a different feel to it enough for me to have been an Avid AC fan to never leave my dear Dereth for even a second to go play in that so-called world of Norrath. Blah!!!
I could go into great depth on how not only questing is an integral part of MMOG's But also how it should be used to be successful in future MMOG's. But most of you probably won't even read past what I have type so far as it is. However, just as a starter....Skills systems are the way and levels need to be removed. Questing needs to be more diverse and survival should be "KEY". Player controlled environments, rules that punish characters in game, crimes, politics, jail time, perma-death, fist fights that knock unconscious, therefore robbing, picking pockets and other unlawful things can happen as also bounties and assasins can exist. I can go all day and night about this. I have been putting together ideas ever since the REAL grandad of MMOG's and it isn't UO or M59. More like NwNO...Don't believe me? go here www.bladekeep.com/nwn Shees and it had PvP to! Eventhough I am not a fan of the current PvP ones as they all SUCK. They serve no one but real carebears of the MMOG communities.
So, you all should remember, questing isn't the real problem. It is how they are using questing. So, if you think "The act or an instance of seeking or pursuing something" is something bad in MMOG's then I think if they ever got rid of it then I will stop playing.
Quests are fine as long as they are not enforced. I am not spending my time and money to run a story line dreamed up by a dev. That is what books are for. When I play an MMOG I want a wide open world where I can make my own story. And I also want them to have the massive part of MMOG. Guild Wars and DDO and several other upcoming titles are not MMOGs to me. If I wanted a 6 person group and a storyline dictated to me I'd play a regular PC game with my friends and save myself $15 a month.
Originally posted by Eindrachen The next major breakthrough in questing will be to allow players to participate in creating quests for other players to perform. The trick there is to create a system in which the rewards of doing the quest are balanced against the difficulty in accomplishing said quest. But yeah, it would be a miracle if an MMO came out that really gave the players that much control over their game setting. Hell, developers could spend all the time in the world on better content (rather than pushing more and more out, often to the detriment of the game), and game staff could get in on things, too, by making up their own quests with the same system. The technology is there, though it would take a lot of theoretical work to get the system down just right. And that might take a really long time to get down to an exact science.
There's actually a mod for this for WoW. You can also create items like books with clues and such in them with another mod. I know some roleplayers that use them to enchance their RP storylines. Scroll down to the bottom of the page for one of the player mods for creating quests at http://www.curse-gaming.com/en/searchwow-142.html
I think a fundamental problem is that people say "RPG" as if that means something. It's like saying "I like books or movies". Well, a person might, but it really says nothing. What kind of book or movie? What genre? Or is it really not the movie, but the social interaction?
The same thing is true of RPGs. Carolyn says that MUDs grew out of tabletop paper-and-pencil (PnP) RPGs, and these were based on quests. That's true, but it is also a very shallow view of the genre. Yes, I did start on basically what she said: DnD, another RPG (maybe local) called Warlock, etc. And for the first few months, it was a bunch of very mindless dungeon crawling or quests.
But you know what? We got tired of these. Why? Because we stopped seeing the "RP" part as solely being "playing an XXX", where XXX is a mage, dwarven fighter, etc. We moved on to playing a character who happened to be a mage, or a dwarven fighter, and who was part of a larger story, and one that we influenced.
Not to deride it, but I call games emphasizing the role-based play as "third-person shooters" because that's about the limit of the RP. They are just props for the player to manipulate. If they die, that sucks but only because there's some soft of penalty, or because of the ego hit. Not because your character actually "died".
And Carolyn's view completely disregards that the PnP games have "grown up" since those early days. Look at PnP games like the World of Darkness, In Nomine, Amber (the diceless RPG). These are extremely character-focused where the point is not to go out and do "quests" but emphasize "understanding" your character, or epic stories, etc.
So quests, particularly the ones we see in MMOGs, being a key ingredient of an RPG? Please... The normal quest has almost nothing to do with the progress of a story arc. Sure, it might be use the story as a backdrop, but does it really matter (to the story) whether the quest succeeds or fails? And if it fails, you can usually just try again. And unlike the "quests" of the tabletop game, where's the challenge? Just in overcoming the "hit points" of the opponents? Even in a "tabletop third-person shooters" you at least have the challenge and the interaction of a human opponent (the GM). No automated quest can come close to even this simple fact.
And she also fails to mention that MUDs have moved on as well, in the form of those that emphasize RP, but even more so in the MUSH/MUX variants where there are typically no NPCs (of the automated variety), no quests--just players making up stories for other players, or in true tabletop fashion, a GM playing the parts of NPCs--not some blind automatons.
I have to agree that MMOGs are lacking in innovation. But I don't completely place the blame on the companies, but on the market. MMOG development is extremely expensive. You just about can't develop one anymore and target less than 100k subscribers, if not 500k. And so you play to the mass-market. The exact same thing is happening in movies. Are any of the "blockbusters" truly innovative? Most these days are franchises of some sort, or are adaptations of known quantities like books (or even video games), or are based on "star-power". New, and thus risky stories require small budgets.
I think the same will be required to drive innovation in MMOGs. We have to let there be some games at least that can be developed for less than $5 million. We might have to accept the consequences of this, perhaps lower graphical quality as in my opinion, art and graphics, and the programming required to drive this, contribute to a lot of the cost. It boggles my mind that most MMOGs have simpler game rules than many PnP RPGs. Why? Because games have little time to devise rules. They're too busy with the game engine. Look at how feature incomplete games are at beta nowadays. And the sorry part is that they are just as buggy as ever, even with that.
So for now, I've given up on MMOGs, and will stick with MUSHes. Anyone who wants more RP and less grinding are welcome to join
I get tired of quests and NPC's that are "dumb". But I have a great idea:
I'd like to see players work up to a point where they create quests for others. For instance, I start out as a Hunter. I hunt animals of all kinds and collect skins and teeth and bones. From these things I fashion more and more elaborate gear to sell. When I reach a certain level, I can start creating quests -- I become an employer -- asking other players to go collect skins and bones for me, for which I pay them in coin or merchandise. They go out and harvest stuff for me. I could then stop my hunting and become a shop keeper. But if I don't keep up my skills I could be confronted by a robber (another player), beaten a combat and loose some stuff. You get it? THAT would be the coolest. It's a world run by the players, not by the NPC's.
"We" did not get tired of these, "we" did not get tired of the roleplay part of RPG. I want to see MORE of it in games but instead we're seeing more grinderific games like RF Online. "You" might be tired of it, but you are not "we". I must respectfully point out, that there's a division here of two sets of "we" and your opinion does not encompass "all"
In an MMORPG quests are a binary substitution for world content. The goal of the developer should be to have a world which is so motivational and immersive in and of itself so as to make questing un-necessary. Indeed in all the years of gaming that Ive had only one game had come close to this, that was ironically enough Star Wars Galaxies. I played the game a full year before doing any quest, in fact the first was Jabbas Theme Park, which I did once the villiage opened. Up until that time I was a crafter, merchant, explorer, my "content" was provided by the society in the game and the guild I was a member of. All of that changed with the release of Rage of the Wookies and the failure that was the CU...now its much worse...but the point is still valid. Quests are a substitue for real in game immersion, time fillers, and for the most part the digital representaion of connect-the-dots.
Questing is such a focus these days for the simple fact that the worlds in which these games happen to take place in are static. There is no evolving story line in them, the noobie zone is for all intents and purposes identical for every new player. The same holds true for the high end, especially in raid intensive high end games like WoW or the EQs.
So quests even though they are very much a part of the modern MMORPG genre are there only because the worlds themselves are not motivating enough. After all its easier to make a static story that tells you whats going on in the world than it is to build an immersive environment where it would be obvious, like our modern world with all of its diverse information spreading facilities (internet, tv, radio, etc.).
One of the other newer features of online games, is the tutorial. Granted, there needs to be an interface tutorial, although even that could be put into a manual like it use to be. But now games make the tutorial so extended for new online game players that you are level five by the time you finish. I call that "hand holding". Is it really needed? That also takes away from the exploratory feel of a game. The way it was done in Oblivion at least made it feel part of the story.
One of the other newer features of online games, is the tutorial. Granted, there needs to be an interface tutorial, although even that could be put into a manual like it use to be. But now games make the tutorial so extended for new online game players that you are level five by the time you finish. I call that "hand holding". Is it really needed? That also takes away from the exploratory feel of a game. The way it was done in Oblivion at least made it feel part of the story.
When I first logged into UO way back in July 1998, I had no idea how to move, type, talk, interact or anything to do with the game. Luckily the guy that gave me UO for my birthday was there with me to show me what to do. He took me to the bank to store the items I had on my avatar that I didn't want to lose if i died. He then showed me the way around the town of Britain and eventually took me beyond the guard line to kill some Rabbits and Wolves. This was so awesome and as I would slowly kill these animals, my skills were going up. This was great fun! After a little while, we went back to town and my friend showed me how to interact with NPC vendors then returned to the forest. As I ventured forth, I came upon Britain Graveyard. I was like, whoah awesome skeletons and zombies to kill! So i ran over and started to kill those. By now, my skill had gotten better so I was able to kill them relatively quickly. I was looting some corpses and I saw a blue-named character running towards me. My friend said that was a player, his name was Zeratul. I was like cool! So i went to kill another skeleton, then something happened.
I saw a flash of light and then a lightning bolt hit my character. The screen went black, and my friend started laughing at me. I was like, what's happening?!? Then some words appeared on the screen .... "You are dead!" The screen turned to a shade of grey and i was a ghost standing on my now naked body. Zeratul had stolen everything off my body. After my friend stopped laughing at me he told me that I was PK'ed and that I need to run back to the town healer to get resurrected. The name Zeratul was burnt into my head ... I must have my vengeance. And so I would continue to advance my characters combat skills, and whenever I saw Zeratul, i would drop what I was doing and engage him. More often than not he would kill me again and again, but I made it my mission ... my QUEST, to slay Zeratul as soon as possible. I would slowly move away from the town of Britain where the animals/monsters would prgressively get stronger and harder to kill, but my skills in combat arts were gaining also so the difficulty was all relative. Eventually I became strong enough and skilled enough to kill Zeratul and take his items. I slept well that night lol.
From the above story (nostalgia anyone ? :P), you can take away the following things. When I first logged into the game, if i didn't have my friend there to help me to learn the game, I would have been stuck on the spot. Sure I could have read the game manual but the point is there was no in-game tutorial (these weren't thought of back then), nor was there a single quest in the game to hold my hand through the first couple of hours in the game. You might say "but you had your friend there to hold your hand". Yeah i did, but isn't that the principle of an MMO ? To learn/play/adapt with your friends? In our UO server, we did have a FORM of a quest, and that was player bounties. If you were killed by another player, a popup box came up and it said, "would you like to report this player as a murder?" If you clicked yes, it would update a bulletin board at the town bank with a pre-determined $ value for the return of the killers head. This put a target on the killers head, but it also gave the other players in the game the choice of persuing that play, or not paying it any regard at all. The choice was there ... go out and seek this player and ATTEMPT to take him down and get his head, or go about your business getting your skills up.
The first days of SWG back in July of 2003 was very similar. When I first logged into the game, after admiring the great graphics and the star wars feel to the game, I simply yelled "WHAT DO I DO NOW?!" Then I got several in-game tells from other players asking me what my class was and then giving me suggestions as what to do next. It was great, I didn't need 10-20 quests in order to learn the game or to get my first few levels. Both UO and SWG are (and in the case of SWG, WAS) totally skill based, not level-grinding based.
IMO, quests aren't a necessity but are instead good in small doses to just to give the player a change of pase once in a while. A newbie tutorial either should be part of the interface on first login, or should remain in the in-game manual which is the first thing I read when i get a new game.
The dream mmo for me would be one where we are truly the world. Not just toons playing in the NPC's world like we do now. We are simply puppets that follow their directions. Why cant i be an adventurer /farmer and not form a mission to have people clear my land of the varmin? Why not allow me to set up a bounty against a neighbor that has wronged me? There are things that can be done and done now. What you need is a world big enough so every one is not sitting on top of each other. Make the professions rely on each other and the world will take shape. throw in some NPC's that are worthy of fighting and you could have a good game.
I was referring to the length and type of tutorial, that to me is unnessary hand holding. I do know players new to online gaming need more than experienced players. And some games are intrical enough to require a more informative tutorial.
But, the thead here is about quests, so sorry if i derailed it.
Originally posted by Gooney In an MMORPG quests are a binary substitution for world content. The goal of the developer should be to have a world which is so motivational and immersive in and of itself so as to make questing un-necessary. Indeed in all the years of gaming that Ive had only one game had come close to this, that was ironically enough Star Wars Galaxies. I played the game a full year before doing any quest, in fact the first was Jabbas Theme Park, which I did once the villiage opened. Up until that time I was a crafter, merchant, explorer, my "content" was provided by the society in the game and the guild I was a member of. All of that changed with the release of Rage of the Wookies and the failure that was the CU...now its much worse...but the point is still valid. Quests are a substitue for real in game immersion, time fillers, and for the most part the digital representaion of connect-the-dots. Questing is such a focus these days for the simple fact that the worlds in which these games happen to take place in are static. There is no evolving story line in them, the noobie zone is for all intents and purposes identical for every new player. The same holds true for the high end, especially in raid intensive high end games like WoW or the EQs. So quests even though they are very much a part of the modern MMORPG genre are there only because the worlds themselves are not motivating enough. After all its easier to make a static story that tells you whats going on in the world than it is to build an immersive environment where it would be obvious, like our modern world with all of its diverse information spreading facilities (internet, tv, radio, etc.). -Gooney
I agree completly. In SWG the only quest i did waswhen i really needed money in the beginning. Everything in that game was self generated. You formed guilds and helped each other out. You could fashopin your person almost anyway you wanted. If you got bored you could collect a few missions and make some money and go on in pursuit of being a jedi. Most of these games are not as sucessful as they appear and other than the few exeptions most die out relatively quickly. People are starting to appreciate what we had in SWG in the beginning. New games will win people over with flashy graphics but they lack soul and therefore wont last long. As people max out and get tired of grinding new toons to max lvl the game genre will have to re-invint itself again.
I guess that was the brilliance of SWG. The xp just came naturally. You crafted and explored and fough along the way. It too would get repetitve at times but you could always go overt and attack the opposite faction and still gain xp. The war was actually a major part of the game. Why play star wars if you didnt have a beef with one side or the other. More games need to be like that. Y ou really need ot be able to be traveling and all of the sudden there is a city that wasnt there before. Or better yet a town be destroyed. in WoW you can raid a town and everyone respawns and they have their city back. If you can add enough true content then the quest that are provided by the npc's should serve as a backdrop and not as the main story. I do not want to be steered through my experience in the new world. I would like to explore with no maps and create my own. never knowing where i am going or what i am going to discover. There should be changes made to the inviroment. I want to see the scars made on the land from a big battle. These companies are making huge amounts of money. just do the math...15 dollars times 500k people. Thats over 7,500,000 dollars a month. For that kind of money we deserve to have more. And dont forget ht eoriginal 50 bucks we paid for the initial game. Thats another 25,000,000. Thats 115,000,000 for a bunch of generic never really go anywhere quest just for the first year plus another 90,000,000 each year after wards just in subscription fees. Anyone else feel a little cheated? Or robbed even?
A single argument for sandbox: (*sigh* and I'm going to draw upon SWG experience here)
At one time, it was possible to effect the state of the game, by placing and destroying bases. Player bases. The more there were, the cheaper things were for your side. It became a series of neverending (well, neverending until the overpowerful cunge curse was levelled against the playerbase) 'quests' to destry the other side's bases. No respawning. when finished, the base went boom, and was gone (until someone earned another base and put somewhere else) off the map, and the wilderness was restored by the good guys (us).
Thus, it became a very personal thing (and gratifing) to wipe out the imperialist scum from the face of Kauri (erm, yeah, hey guys an gals still out there in the worlds beyond). Didn't need an npc out in the wilderness to tell me to get rid of boogerlings, there existed bases on the planets that had to be scourged. Thus, we removed them with utmost prejudice, were we could.
It wasnt my intention to hijack the thread into yet another SWG lament. I was using SWG simply as an example. An example which I believe is the future of truely immersive MMOs.
Lets face it, MMO quests are pretty weak, and for the most part poor substitutions to those you find in a decent single player game. Nearly everyone doing quests in an MMO are doing them specifically to attain a particular item, XP or badge of some sort. Few players even read the quest stories, they simply click by them as fast as possible so that thier journal updates with the goal. Most people doing quests already know how they are going to end because they read about it in a forum, spoiler site or a friend tells them.
All of this shows me that questing and MMORPGs simply do not mix well, yes they may be diversions but at the very best they are a digital crutch on which a weaker game world leans on.
WoW is a perfect example of this principle, the world in and of itself is beautiful, vibrant, feels living and motivational but is ultimately totally static, divided into zones that never change, never age, never improve or worsen. The quests serve the function of leading the player around the world by thier nose in an apparent attempt to impress them with the beauty and vastness of the world of Azeroth. The quests in the game work, but the heavy reliance on them will forever pigeonhole WoW into that single player type of MMO, one in which community is less important and can for all intents and purposes be totally ignored.
Its fallacious to suggest that quests and sandboxes are somehow mutually exclusive to each others.
Some people, myself included, like to go out there and make their own stories. They like to set their own course and be their own people even if its in the service of others. They may typically object to having their hands taken and pulled in a direction they feel is inappropriate for their characters or leads them away from their self defined goals. They enjoy feeling in some control of their character's destiny.
Meanwhile some people need their hands held and their stories told to them. That's not a bad thing, a well written quest can be entertaining and educational, if only in the sense of helping you understand some background elements to the world in which they play. These players enjoy the sense of following a predefined path and uncovering the story laid out for them by the devs.
Thirdly there are those people who enjoy either diverting off the predeffined path for a bit of a wander or enjoy diverting off their self-defined route to follow another, more worn, path for a while.
Cutting to the point; each game pitches to one play style or another, many try to over laiden their egg baskets. What I'm trying to say is that while it's worthwhile for Devs to focus on well crafted meaningful quests they should do so to the exclusion of everything else. Give players the opportunity to make their own decisions, including the decision to not make any real decisions, and feel involved in the game world and you'll have them until your game holds nothing more for them.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference." -- The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost
Its fallacious to suggest that quests and sandboxes are somehow mutually exclusive to each others.
Some people, myself included, like to go out there and make their own stories. They like to set their own course and be their own people even if its in the service of others. They may typically object to having their hands taken and pulled in a direction they feel is inappropriate for their characters or leads them away from their self defined goals. They enjoy feeling in some control of their character's destiny.
Meanwhile some people need their hands held and their stories told to them. That's not a bad thing, a well written quest can be entertaining and educational, if only in the sense of helping you understand some background elements to the world in which they play. These players enjoy the sense of following a predefined path and uncovering the story laid out for them by the devs.
Thirdly there are those people who enjoy either diverting off the predeffined path for a bit of a wander or enjoy diverting off their self-defined route to follow another, more worn, path for a while.
Cutting to the point; each game pitches to one play style or another, many try to over laiden their egg baskets. What I'm trying to say is that while it's worthwhile for Devs to focus on well crafted meaningful quests they should do so to the exclusion of everything else. Give players the opportunity to make their own decisions, including the decision to not make any real decisions, and feel involved in the game world and you'll have them until your game holds nothing more for them.
I of course agree with you. Heres the thing though.
Who says that a game must be all things to all people. The current wow-ification of the MMO industry is positive for one major thing...namely exposing legions of players to the MMO phenom, which will ultimately mean that the pie has grown (pie being the market). Which in turn means that viable self-sustaining niches are becoming a real viable market. The powers-that-are are of course reacting in a completely predictible fashion; which is making their games more or less, wow-like. This will continue until the next watershed.
Sandboxes aside, and thats actually a completely different discussion which would require its own definition of the term "sandbox" is it a "Koesterian Sandbox" ála the plutonic form of SWG? Or the "do anything" sandbox including terrain manipulation 'ala Second Life?
Quests in and of themselves are not an "evil" they serve a purpose and to completely ignore them would be foolish in the extreme. They are however, vastly over-used in todays MMOs, and have changed from a gameplay enhancing tool to nothing more than a prop or a world creation and immersion creation tool. Both of which are tasks for which quests are very poorly equipped to perform. And unfortunately quests are used for this time and time again.
Personally, I don't recall quests being the foundation of the MUD that I used to play. It may have been an exception to the norm, but Igormud was structured around 'areas', not quests. Sure there was - I say 'was', as I believe it's still going - a list of quests you could do in the main guild hall and you needed a certain amount of quest points to become a top-level avatar, but the game was mostly about exploring, finding interesting items, doing mini-quests and killing monsters.
In fact, I wish contemporary MMOs were as creative as some of the areas I explored on Igor. A good example was a mad area called Velvet's, where you had to be wear boots to climb up the rocky cliff to the entrance, then needed a rope to lasso a tree to get up to a wooded area above the cliffs. The only way into the area itself was by pressing a knot on a particular tree (the knot hopped randomly from tree to tree, but you could discern it by its slightly different description), while fending off the attacks of a few aggressive druids.
Once inside the area was pretty crazy with things like carniverous grass (bringing new meaning to 'Do not step on the grass' signs), a castle you could only enter by waiting to be eaten by it; nauseatingly cute critters that blocked your path, stole items from you and wrapped them in birthday paper and gave them to each other - and so on.
A clever little section was a cave, where you could disturb bones and release a 'ghost of a pirate'. The 'ghost would rattle his chains and swear revenge. If you managed to figure out the puzzle and said 'church', his eyes would light up and head off to the church to get resurrected, as if he were a normal player character. He'd then become 'the reincarnated pirate' and chase after you. He was pretty tough as well, but if you killed him you got his ghostly chains that we a time-limited, but very powerful weapon with interesting special attacks.
I realise that with the amount of people playing MMOs, areas would have the usual problems of people camping monsters and waiting for resets etc, but I would have thought that creative use of instancing would solve most of the problems, e.g instance small parts of an area where a boss monster/mini-quest/object resides.
The thing I've found the most disheartening about contemporary MMOs are the grindy gameplay and the sense of 'RPG on rails'. The only MMO that I've played recently that seemed to address the issue of hiding the grind and making quests quite unique was Dungeons and Dragons Online. There's a definite sense that you can play the game through without having to repeat quests very much (unless you want to, of course). Although, finding a group was frustrating and ultimately I didn't want to pay the monthly fee for casual play.
Comments
Quests are great but something new is needed so that you dont die of boredom after 2 hours. And that new thing must be player created content. Allow players to control cities and war with other cities, allow players to get in need so that other players have to resque them and so on. Basiaclly you have to make the world more dynamic; make mobs move around from place to place like nomads, make a new race invade the map from the north and let the nature grow or shrink depending on how used it is.
It will take more from the developers to make such a game but on the other hand, the first game of those who come will be a legend.
The next major breakthrough in questing will be to allow players to participate in creating quests for other players to perform.
The trick there is to create a system in which the rewards of doing the quest are balanced against the difficulty in accomplishing said quest.
But yeah, it would be a miracle if an MMO came out that really gave the players that much control over their game setting. Hell, developers could spend all the time in the world on better content (rather than pushing more and more out, often to the detriment of the game), and game staff could get in on things, too, by making up their own quests with the same system.
The technology is there, though it would take a lot of theoretical work to get the system down just right. And that might take a really long time to get down to an exact science.
"I think getting rid of quests would make the lush MMORPG landscape arid and dry."
I believe that this describes the latest English releases of MMORPGs perfectly, totally dry and containing no lushness whatsoever. Most quests are just kill these mobs, collect the items they drop, bring them back to me and get a reward. Most of the newest MMORPGs contain little more then a few minute quests, which at best are either not worth doing, or just plain boring. A true quest is one which lets the player interact with a number of characters, NPCs and PCs, and allows entering different areas and different actions (Being a traitor, or murdering an NPC which is important in the quest, to trigger new quests, or change your quest deeply, while affecting the storyline. Other players could quest to kill you or find traces of your whereabouts and such, questing which involves player interaction, on a small or large scale. War, or an assassination. However I have never seen such an immense questing system in any MMORPG. As they said, only on P&P games can you achieve that. Although I believe it would pushing quest/game developers to the limit, I do not believe that it is impossible if they try hard enough.
To those who say questing is pointless or sucks, I'll say the same to PvPing, and grinding.
I don't see a problem with quests being repeatable or not unique (as in everybody gets to do them). What kills the questing experience is all the websites on the internet that post the solution to all quests about 5 minutes after the quests has gone live.
If you're solo you can ignore this and try to find a solution to your quest yourself but in a group it's a different matter. In any group there is usually already someone who has completed the quest and then it's a question of that person saying: now we run here, kill this, run there, talk to him, run there, ... Even if nobody has done the quest before people will usually get 'fustrated' after 5 minutes and go afk to look up the solution on a website.
I remember having great fun with a quest where a prisoner claimed to be innocent and I had to try and clear his name. It was quite well written and even though still pretty linear some 'detective' work was required. It took me a couple of days to complete it and gave me a sense of achievement having done it. Had I looked up the solution the quest would have taken me about half an hour.
I support Belgiums efforts to get noticed ... at all.
Should i kill the Bandit Chief or should i join them?
It will be very hard to make a online game like that, but it would be something new.
I think Jon and Carolyn are both wrong in certain points and both correct in certain points.
We all shouldn't use small relevances to either make it a priority nor as reason to cast it out of the worlds. Everyone needs to stop taking sides and instead form your own opinion. Which I see some of you have, which is good and I applaud those who do.
However, removing questing elements will only will make it less diverse. The problem isn't the quesintg. It is how they are trying to fit it in a Massive community. I think the real arguement here isn't about questing. Rather on how questing is really used. Herding players like cows through a storyline that has no identity for each individual is the problem. People that think a particular scenerio equals the definintion of questing is not only ignorant but very imprudent. Questing has much more diversity than that and to leave out something that actually creates diversity in a gaming element would only support linearity.
Also, Stating that questing is basically a grind or even telling others to go play a single player RPG if they want questing like "GungaDin" has stated in this thread, only shows ignorance and immaturity in this discussion which should be ignored. Come on people, lets be a bit more on task here.
I agree however that Questing in MMOG communities are stagnant and linear. MMOG's are a Persistant World that should be constantly changing due to lore, story and quests that are based around the current events and reactions to how the players interact with the world.
Now there isn't nothing wrong with static quests, however they shouldn't be the core nor the flow of the events. Static questing should only be a root to routine development of character, town, offsprings and etc. Only things that are routine by default (life).
Not only is UO one game that has some core features that shown a PW can survive without static quests. But I see no one here say anything about Asheron's Call. There really wasn't any quests that you just typically walk up to a NPC to retrieve, nor a Quest log and etc. Most things in game where from you findiing books, items and etc and bringing them to someone that would actually kick off a quest, event or other. Also Town criers would take currency to give you hints to what current events may entail. If anything, I believe AC was one game that had exceptional potential. Yet of course, like all others, quests were still static, but the monthly events really gave a different feel to it enough for me to have been an Avid AC fan to never leave my dear Dereth for even a second to go play in that so-called world of Norrath. Blah!!!
I could go into great depth on how not only questing is an integral part of MMOG's But also how it should be used to be successful in future MMOG's. But most of you probably won't even read past what I have type so far as it is. However, just as a starter....Skills systems are the way and levels need to be removed. Questing needs to be more diverse and survival should be "KEY". Player controlled environments, rules that punish characters in game, crimes, politics, jail time, perma-death, fist fights that knock unconscious, therefore robbing, picking pockets and other unlawful things can happen as also bounties and assasins can exist. I can go all day and night about this. I have been putting together ideas ever since the REAL grandad of MMOG's and it isn't UO or M59. More like NwNO...Don't believe me? go here www.bladekeep.com/nwn Shees and it had PvP to! Eventhough I am not a fan of the current PvP ones as they all SUCK. They serve no one but real carebears of the MMOG communities.
So, you all should remember, questing isn't the real problem. It is how they are using questing. So, if you think "The act or an instance of seeking or pursuing something" is something bad in MMOG's then I think if they ever got rid of it then I will stop playing.
NUFF SAID!!!
Me and my race of boogers take offense to that.
Hmm where to begin?
I think a fundamental problem is that people say "RPG" as if that means something. It's like saying "I like books or movies". Well, a person might, but it really says nothing. What kind of book or movie? What genre? Or is it really not the movie, but the social interaction?
The same thing is true of RPGs. Carolyn says that MUDs grew out of tabletop paper-and-pencil (PnP) RPGs, and these were based on quests. That's true, but it is also a very shallow view of the genre. Yes, I did start on basically what she said: DnD, another RPG (maybe local) called Warlock, etc. And for the first few months, it was a bunch of very mindless dungeon crawling or quests.
But you know what? We got tired of these. Why? Because we stopped seeing the "RP" part as solely being "playing an XXX", where XXX is a mage, dwarven fighter, etc. We moved on to playing a character who happened to be a mage, or a dwarven fighter, and who was part of a larger story, and one that we influenced.
Not to deride it, but I call games emphasizing the role-based play as "third-person shooters" because that's about the limit of the RP. They are just props for the player to manipulate. If they die, that sucks but only because there's some soft of penalty, or because of the ego hit. Not because your character actually "died".
And Carolyn's view completely disregards that the PnP games have "grown up" since those early days. Look at PnP games like the World of Darkness, In Nomine, Amber (the diceless RPG). These are extremely character-focused where the point is not to go out and do "quests" but emphasize "understanding" your character, or epic stories, etc.
So quests, particularly the ones we see in MMOGs, being a key ingredient of an RPG? Please... The normal quest has almost nothing to do with the progress of a story arc. Sure, it might be use the story as a backdrop, but does it really matter (to the story) whether the quest succeeds or fails? And if it fails, you can usually just try again. And unlike the "quests" of the tabletop game, where's the challenge? Just in overcoming the "hit points" of the opponents? Even in a "tabletop third-person shooters" you at least have the challenge and the interaction of a human opponent (the GM). No automated quest can come close to even this simple fact.
And she also fails to mention that MUDs have moved on as well, in the form of those that emphasize RP, but even more so in the MUSH/MUX variants where there are typically no NPCs (of the automated variety), no quests--just players making up stories for other players, or in true tabletop fashion, a GM playing the parts of NPCs--not some blind automatons.
I have to agree that MMOGs are lacking in innovation. But I don't completely place the blame on the companies, but on the market. MMOG development is extremely expensive. You just about can't develop one anymore and target less than 100k subscribers, if not 500k. And so you play to the mass-market. The exact same thing is happening in movies. Are any of the "blockbusters" truly innovative? Most these days are franchises of some sort, or are adaptations of known quantities like books (or even video games), or are based on "star-power". New, and thus risky stories require small budgets.
I think the same will be required to drive innovation in MMOGs. We have to let there be some games at least that can be developed for less than $5 million. We might have to accept the consequences of this, perhaps lower graphical quality as in my opinion, art and graphics, and the programming required to drive this, contribute to a lot of the cost. It boggles my mind that most MMOGs have simpler game rules than many PnP RPGs. Why? Because games have little time to devise rules. They're too busy with the game engine. Look at how feature incomplete games are at beta nowadays. And the sorry part is that they are just as buggy as ever, even with that.
So for now, I've given up on MMOGs, and will stick with MUSHes. Anyone who wants more RP and less grinding are welcome to join
I get tired of quests and NPC's that are "dumb". But I have a great idea:
I'd like to see players work up to a point where they create quests for others. For instance, I start out as a Hunter. I hunt animals of all kinds and collect skins and teeth and bones. From these things I fashion more and more elaborate gear to sell. When I reach a certain level, I can start creating quests -- I become an employer -- asking other players to go collect skins and bones for me, for which I pay them in coin or merchandise. They go out and harvest stuff for me. I could then stop my hunting and become a shop keeper. But if I don't keep up my skills I could be confronted by a robber (another player), beaten a combat and loose some stuff. You get it? THAT would be the coolest. It's a world run by the players, not by the NPC's.
In an MMORPG quests are a binary substitution for world content. The goal of the developer should be to have a world which is so motivational and immersive in and of itself so as to make questing un-necessary. Indeed in all the years of gaming that Ive had only one game had come close to this, that was ironically enough Star Wars Galaxies. I played the game a full year before doing any quest, in fact the first was Jabbas Theme Park, which I did once the villiage opened. Up until that time I was a crafter, merchant, explorer, my "content" was provided by the society in the game and the guild I was a member of. All of that changed with the release of Rage of the Wookies and the failure that was the CU...now its much worse...but the point is still valid. Quests are a substitue for real in game immersion, time fillers, and for the most part the digital representaion of connect-the-dots.
Questing is such a focus these days for the simple fact that the worlds in which these games happen to take place in are static. There is no evolving story line in them, the noobie zone is for all intents and purposes identical for every new player. The same holds true for the high end, especially in raid intensive high end games like WoW or the EQs.
So quests even though they are very much a part of the modern MMORPG genre are there only because the worlds themselves are not motivating enough. After all its easier to make a static story that tells you whats going on in the world than it is to build an immersive environment where it would be obvious, like our modern world with all of its diverse information spreading facilities (internet, tv, radio, etc.).
-Gooney
One of the other newer features of online games, is the tutorial. Granted, there needs to be an interface tutorial, although even that could be put into a manual like it use to be. But now games make the tutorial so extended for new online game players that you are level five by the time you finish. I call that "hand holding". Is it really needed? That also takes away from the exploratory feel of a game. The way it was done in Oblivion at least made it feel part of the story.
One of the other newer features of online games, is the tutorial. Granted, there needs to be an interface tutorial, although even that could be put into a manual like it use to be. But now games make the tutorial so extended for new online game players that you are level five by the time you finish. I call that "hand holding". Is it really needed? That also takes away from the exploratory feel of a game. The way it was done in Oblivion at least made it feel part of the story.
When I first logged into UO way back in July 1998, I had no idea how to move, type, talk, interact or anything to do with the game. Luckily the guy that gave me UO for my birthday was there with me to show me what to do. He took me to the bank to store the items I had on my avatar that I didn't want to lose if i died. He then showed me the way around the town of Britain and eventually took me beyond the guard line to kill some Rabbits and Wolves. This was so awesome and as I would slowly kill these animals, my skills were going up. This was great fun! After a little while, we went back to town and my friend showed me how to interact with NPC vendors then returned to the forest. As I ventured forth, I came upon Britain Graveyard. I was like, whoah awesome skeletons and zombies to kill! So i ran over and started to kill those. By now, my skill had gotten better so I was able to kill them relatively quickly. I was looting some corpses and I saw a blue-named character running towards me. My friend said that was a player, his name was Zeratul. I was like cool! So i went to kill another skeleton, then something happened.
I saw a flash of light and then a lightning bolt hit my character. The screen went black, and my friend started laughing at me. I was like, what's happening?!? Then some words appeared on the screen .... "You are dead!" The screen turned to a shade of grey and i was a ghost standing on my now naked body. Zeratul had stolen everything off my body. After my friend stopped laughing at me he told me that I was PK'ed and that I need to run back to the town healer to get resurrected. The name Zeratul was burnt into my head ... I must have my vengeance. And so I would continue to advance my characters combat skills, and whenever I saw Zeratul, i would drop what I was doing and engage him. More often than not he would kill me again and again, but I made it my mission ... my QUEST, to slay Zeratul as soon as possible. I would slowly move away from the town of Britain where the animals/monsters would prgressively get stronger and harder to kill, but my skills in combat arts were gaining also so the difficulty was all relative. Eventually I became strong enough and skilled enough to kill Zeratul and take his items. I slept well that night lol.
From the above story (nostalgia anyone ? :P), you can take away the following things. When I first logged into the game, if i didn't have my friend there to help me to learn the game, I would have been stuck on the spot. Sure I could have read the game manual but the point is there was no in-game tutorial (these weren't thought of back then), nor was there a single quest in the game to hold my hand through the first couple of hours in the game. You might say "but you had your friend there to hold your hand". Yeah i did, but isn't that the principle of an MMO ? To learn/play/adapt with your friends? In our UO server, we did have a FORM of a quest, and that was player bounties. If you were killed by another player, a popup box came up and it said, "would you like to report this player as a murder?" If you clicked yes, it would update a bulletin board at the town bank with a pre-determined $ value for the return of the killers head. This put a target on the killers head, but it also gave the other players in the game the choice of persuing that play, or not paying it any regard at all. The choice was there ... go out and seek this player and ATTEMPT to take him down and get his head, or go about your business getting your skills up.
The first days of SWG back in July of 2003 was very similar. When I first logged into the game, after admiring the great graphics and the star wars feel to the game, I simply yelled "WHAT DO I DO NOW?!" Then I got several in-game tells from other players asking me what my class was and then giving me suggestions as what to do next. It was great, I didn't need 10-20 quests in order to learn the game or to get my first few levels. Both UO and SWG are (and in the case of SWG, WAS) totally skill based, not level-grinding based.
IMO, quests aren't a necessity but are instead good in small doses to just to give the player a change of pase once in a while. A newbie tutorial either should be part of the interface on first login, or should remain in the in-game manual which is the first thing I read when i get a new game.
- Inferno
I was referring to the length and type of tutorial, that to me is unnessary hand holding. I do know players new to online gaming need more than experienced players. And some games are intrical enough to require a more informative tutorial.
But, the thead here is about quests, so sorry if i derailed it.
A single argument for sandbox: (*sigh* and I'm going to draw upon SWG experience here)
At one time, it was possible to effect the state of the game, by placing and destroying bases. Player bases. The more there were, the cheaper things were for your side. It became a series of neverending (well, neverending until the overpowerful cunge curse was levelled against the playerbase) 'quests' to destry the other side's bases. No respawning. when finished, the base went boom, and was gone (until someone earned another base and put somewhere else) off the map, and the wilderness was restored by the good guys (us).
Thus, it became a very personal thing (and gratifing) to wipe out the imperialist scum from the face of Kauri (erm, yeah, hey guys an gals still out there in the worlds beyond). Didn't need an npc out in the wilderness to tell me to get rid of boogerlings, there existed bases on the planets that had to be scourged. Thus, we removed them with utmost prejudice, were we could.
It wasnt my intention to hijack the thread into yet another SWG lament. I was using SWG simply as an example. An example which I believe is the future of truely immersive MMOs.
Lets face it, MMO quests are pretty weak, and for the most part poor substitutions to those you find in a decent single player game. Nearly everyone doing quests in an MMO are doing them specifically to attain a particular item, XP or badge of some sort. Few players even read the quest stories, they simply click by them as fast as possible so that thier journal updates with the goal. Most people doing quests already know how they are going to end because they read about it in a forum, spoiler site or a friend tells them.
All of this shows me that questing and MMORPGs simply do not mix well, yes they may be diversions but at the very best they are a digital crutch on which a weaker game world leans on.
WoW is a perfect example of this principle, the world in and of itself is beautiful, vibrant, feels living and motivational but is ultimately totally static, divided into zones that never change, never age, never improve or worsen. The quests serve the function of leading the player around the world by thier nose in an apparent attempt to impress them with the beauty and vastness of the world of Azeroth. The quests in the game work, but the heavy reliance on them will forever pigeonhole WoW into that single player type of MMO, one in which community is less important and can for all intents and purposes be totally ignored.
-Gooney
Its fallacious to suggest that quests and sandboxes are somehow mutually exclusive to each others.
Some people, myself included, like to go out there and make their own stories. They like to set their own course and be their own people even if its in the service of others. They may typically object to having their hands taken and pulled in a direction they feel is inappropriate for their characters or leads them away from their self defined goals. They enjoy feeling in some control of their character's destiny.
Meanwhile some people need their hands held and their stories told to them. That's not a bad thing, a well written quest can be entertaining and educational, if only in the sense of helping you understand some background elements to the world in which they play. These players enjoy the sense of following a predefined path and uncovering the story laid out for them by the devs.
Thirdly there are those people who enjoy either diverting off the predeffined path for a bit of a wander or enjoy diverting off their self-defined route to follow another, more worn, path for a while.
Cutting to the point; each game pitches to one play style or another, many try to over laiden their egg baskets. What I'm trying to say is that while it's worthwhile for Devs to focus on well crafted meaningful quests they should do so to the exclusion of everything else. Give players the opportunity to make their own decisions, including the decision to not make any real decisions, and feel involved in the game world and you'll have them until your game holds nothing more for them.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
-- The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost
Who says that a game must be all things to all people. The current wow-ification of the MMO industry is positive for one major thing...namely exposing legions of players to the MMO phenom, which will ultimately mean that the pie has grown (pie being the market). Which in turn means that viable self-sustaining niches are becoming a real viable market. The powers-that-are are of course reacting in a completely predictible fashion; which is making their games more or less, wow-like. This will continue until the next watershed.
Sandboxes aside, and thats actually a completely different discussion which would require its own definition of the term "sandbox" is it a "Koesterian Sandbox" ála the plutonic form of SWG? Or the "do anything" sandbox including terrain manipulation 'ala Second Life?
Quests in and of themselves are not an "evil" they serve a purpose and to completely ignore them would be foolish in the extreme. They are however, vastly over-used in todays MMOs, and have changed from a gameplay enhancing tool to nothing more than a prop or a world creation and immersion creation tool. Both of which are tasks for which quests are very poorly equipped to perform. And unfortunately quests are used for this time and time again.
-Gooney
I used to play. It may have been an exception to the norm, but Igormud
was structured around 'areas', not quests. Sure there was - I say
'was', as I believe it's still going - a list of quests you could do in
the main guild hall and you needed a certain amount of quest points to
become a top-level avatar, but the game was mostly about exploring,
finding interesting items, doing mini-quests and killing monsters.
In fact, I wish contemporary MMOs were as creative as some of the areas
I explored on Igor. A good example was a mad area called Velvet's,
where you had to be wear boots to climb up the rocky cliff to the
entrance, then needed a rope to lasso a tree to get up to a wooded area
above the cliffs. The only way into the area itself was by pressing a
knot on a particular tree (the knot hopped randomly from tree to tree,
but you could discern it by its slightly different description), while
fending off the attacks of a few aggressive druids.
Once inside the area was pretty crazy with things like carniverous
grass (bringing new meaning to 'Do not step on the grass' signs), a
castle you could only enter by waiting to be eaten by it; nauseatingly
cute critters that blocked your path, stole items from you and wrapped
them in birthday paper and gave them to each other - and so on.
A clever little section was a cave, where you could disturb bones and
release a 'ghost of a pirate'. The 'ghost would rattle his chains and
swear revenge. If you managed to figure out the puzzle and said
'church', his eyes would light up and head off to the church to get
resurrected, as if he were a normal player character. He'd then become
'the reincarnated pirate' and chase after you. He was pretty tough as
well, but if you killed him you got his ghostly chains that we a
time-limited, but very powerful weapon with interesting special attacks.
I realise that with the amount of people playing MMOs, areas would have
the usual problems of people camping monsters and waiting for resets
etc, but I would have thought that creative use of instancing would
solve most of the problems, e.g instance small parts of an area where a
boss monster/mini-quest/object resides.
The thing I've found the most disheartening about contemporary MMOs are
the grindy gameplay and the sense of 'RPG on rails'. The only MMO that
I've played recently that seemed to address the issue of hiding the
grind and making quests quite unique was Dungeons and Dragons Online.
There's a definite sense that you can play the game through without
having to repeat quests very much (unless you want to, of course).
Although, finding a group was frustrating and ultimately I didn't want
to pay the monthly fee for casual play.