inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Sept 13, 2018 21:41:53 GMT
I've grown less tolerant of player hand-holding as the years go on. Players should be allowed to make mistakes, OR pick choices that support their roleplay, without being forced into certain actions by the devs. Now, I'm not saying this about grand, sweeping choices that shape the world, but smaller ones that nevertheless impact play experience.
One such example is the ability to refuse a quest, for whatever reason the player makes that choice. I decided to make this post because I've come across this in my current play.
When confronted by Mother Giselle for Dorian's personal quest, there is the option: [6. I’ve no time for this.] I have better things to do than arrange family reunions.* IMO that should be the end of it. Instead, she shoves the letter in your face while the quest goes in your log. This is completely disregards player choice. Hell, there are Skyrim mods that fix problems like this so players aren't forced into quests they don't want.
There is this same issue with Iron Bull's quest. That has the further impact of affecting the player's map travel, because the cutscene would play if the player goes to Storm Coast with Iron Bull in the party. You should be able to say, "I want nothing to do with Qunari," and leave it at that.
I do understand that the devs don't want the player to make a "mistake" and miss out on content, especially important content such as this that is a follower's character arc. But at some point, players should be allowed to make those choices. Sometimes, it's intentional, and skipping that content is purposely done.
I'm sure some will say that the quest can just be ignored. That's only true in some cases. Even so, it's only a half measure/workaround and is not a substitute for real choice.
* A disclaimer to add that this has nothing to do with the content of Dorian's personal quest. DO NOT DISCUSS THAT HERE.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
May 15, 2024 16:43:45 GMT
9,204
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,840
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Sept 14, 2018 0:23:57 GMT
Not a great example. Who cares if a quest gets in the log?
|
|
melbella
N6
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 7,959 Likes: 24,340
inherit
214
0
24,340
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
7,959
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Sept 14, 2018 0:41:33 GMT
Not a great example. Who cares if a quest gets in the log?
Well, me for one. But the point is, if you explicitly say you aren't interested and don't want to do it (now or later), why not count that as "completed" so it goes to the completed list?
Instead it stays active in the quest log, clogs up an already clogged journal, icons stay on the map, and every time you talk to a character relevant to the quest, you have to make sure you don't accidentally pick the dialogue option to do the quest that you don't want to do. Just call it completed already! Or, maybe have a "refused" or "failed" list so you can see what you specifically chose not to do.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
31,337
colfoley
16,629
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Sept 14, 2018 1:28:48 GMT
Personally I think that all quests should go in the log even if you don't want to do them. You might change your mind later and they should be logged. Even if it is 'Mother Giselle asked me to help her with Dorian, I decided not to.', the quest can just sit there, it really isn't hurting anything.
On the larget matter at hand I would be in full whole hearted support of this really. However BioWare should keep in mind that such 'mistakes' should be considered morality neutral. It shouldn't be up to them to determine if we did the wrong thing but that should be left up to the player. The last few BioWare games have done a GREAT job along these lines with the choices themselves, keeping it up to the player what is the good and bad choice instead of having the 'good' choice and the 'bad' choice. Like with the Grey Wardens making them a part of the Inquisition or exiling them both ways have their own pros and cons, right and wrong is not obvious but up the player. I suppose the closest example would be the choice with the Elven rituals. You have ELves attacking you, yoou are trying to get to the end of the mission, you have no idea that ignoring the rituals will force you to do battle with the rest of the Sentinels, you just do. But a Player Character can either consider the choice to ignore them good despite the consquences (they attacked us, we have to stop Corypheus, they didn't make it very clear) or a bad choice (despite everything it was still wrong to kill what may be the last of a people)
|
|
xerrai
N3
Posts: 842 Likes: 1,156
inherit
1451
0
1,156
xerrai
842
September 2016
xerrai
|
Post by xerrai on Sept 14, 2018 2:02:27 GMT
I mostly agree with the premise. If its not essential to the main quest and I don't want to deal with it, then I shouldn't have to. And I don't want it cluttering my journal either.
If we absolutely have to keep the quest available in case we change out mind, then just tack it to an NPC that I can come back to later.
To borrow your Iron Bull example, if I chose the "I don't want to deal with the Qunari" option, then that should deactivate/cancel the quest. Then if I want to change my mind later on, I just come back to Iron Bull, go to the optional side of his dialogue wheel and find the option that says something along the lines of "Do you remember that Ben-Hassrath offer?" and regain the option to accept the quest.
|
|
inherit
4964
0
Jun 17, 2017 17:29:55 GMT
3,700
arvaarad
1,465
Mar 18, 2017 16:32:40 GMT
March 2017
arvaarad
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Jade Empire
|
Post by arvaarad on Sept 14, 2018 2:17:23 GMT
Personally I think that all quests should go in the log even if you don't want to do them. You might change your mind later and they should be logged. I don’t quite agree with this. In some situations, refusing a quest has repercussions (positive or negative) on approval/reputation/etc., but if the quest is doable anyway, it leads to weird situations where the player refuses the quest with one party, then actually does the quest with a different one, in order to play all the angles. It ends up encouraging strange, manipulative character choices. And there are already plenty of ways to RP a social manipulator. Now, I don’t necessarily think every refusal needs to be permanent. For example, if the questgiver is very persistent, it doesn’t always make sense that they’d drop the matter after a refusal. They’d still be more than happy to accept your help if you change your mind. But if the PC seriously burns the bridge, I’d prefer if it stayed burnt.
|
|
inherit
285
0
1,950
Zemgus
1,251
August 2016
zemgus
|
Post by Zemgus on Sept 14, 2018 4:05:20 GMT
When confronted by Mother Giselle for Dorian's personal quest, there is the option: [6. I’ve no time for this.] I have better things to do than arrange family reunions.* IMO that should be the end of it. Instead, she shoves the letter in your face while the quest goes in your log. This is completely disregards player choice. Hell, there are Skyrim mods that fix problems like this so players aren't forced into quests they don't want. I actually disagree with this. I often encounter this problem with games where there's no other option than to choose the dialogue that says "yes of course I'll help you fam" or you lose that quest forever. Sometimes I don't like how the quest is presented or what the "I accept" dialogue options are. But I still want to do it... it's all about roleplay. Maybe a good compromise would be the ability to remove quests from the log. But I like that you brought up this "allow us to make mistakes" topic. I would like there to be "bad" choices that have far reaching consequences and can lead to worse endings. Always winning is boring. Andromeda tried to give us a character that wasn't a natural leader... and while that wasn't a bad idea in itself they fucked up 'cause that was essentially the only option. I'd like to be able to have characters with completely different backgrounds, motives and characteristics. Also biases. Flaws. ME3 Shepard was autowritten to hate Cerberus and love Alliance. I wanted to go to the exact opposite direction with my Shepard. Like fine you can't have two different games and allow the player to choose their faction... but at least don't define the main characters opinions like that or give some dialogue options where the player can define the characters opinions/loyalties even if they have to work for certain faction/against Cerberus.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Sept 14, 2018 6:05:45 GMT
Not a great example. Who cares if a quest gets in the log? I care. Besides, I gave another example with Iron Bull's quest, stating how that interferes with going to the Storm Coast. For me it's also about roleplay. I want to be able to refuse a quest outright and have that choice counted. However BioWare should keep in mind that such 'mistakes' should be considered morality neutral. It shouldn't be up to them to determine if we did the wrong thing but that should be left up to the player. The last few BioWare games have done a GREAT job along these lines with the choices themselves, keeping it up to the player what is the good and bad choice instead of having the 'good' choice and the 'bad' choice. Like with the Grey Wardens making them a part of the Inquisition or exiling them both ways have their own pros and cons, right and wrong is not obvious but up the player. I'm not talking about morality, though. In this case, it would be the writers thinking the player is gimping themselves and missing content (the follower's character arc) by refusing the quest. It has nothing to go with a choice being morally good or bad.
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
May 15, 2024 14:56:51 GMT
26,692
gervaise21
10,812
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Sept 14, 2018 8:31:30 GMT
I agree that you should be allowed to refuse a quest and that depending on the nature of it, your decision should be final. Your example of the Iron Bull quest is one I agree should have been final. I stated I did not wish to work with the Qunari, so that should have been an end to it. Instead it went into my log as an unfinished quest. I would even have been happy that if I categorically refused to go and meet them, Iron Bull left at that point, although I am sure the Qun would rather him stay working with the Inquisition. I suppose the writers would argue that if you are that against working with the Qun you would never have recruited him in the first place.
What I object to with the Dorian quest is that the dialogue option to refuse it makes you look like a jerk. If I refused to get involved, it was that I didn't feel it my place to interfere with someone else's private family affair, not simply that I didn't have time. In this case I would have preferred it if my refusal took the onus from me and transferred it to Dorian. So Giselle then gives him the letter and he approaches my PC asking them as a friend to go with him as he suspects some sort of trap. Then if you turn round and say you are not interested, that would be an end to it but you would have to suffer the negative effect it would have on your relationship with Dorian.
To be honest, with a lot of those personal quests leaving the quest in the log, even after you have refused to do it, is basically the writers saying "you really want to do this" and to avoid players complaining that they didn't realise saying no would deny them content/have a bad effect on their relationship with the character. It is "hand holding" but some players seem to want this.
|
|
mmoblitz
N3
USN-Retired
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: mmoblitz
PSN: NotPC
Posts: 515 Likes: 590
inherit
1777
0
Jan 20, 2022 10:02:17 GMT
590
mmoblitz
USN-Retired
515
Oct 11, 2016 11:10:36 GMT
October 2016
mmoblitz
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
mmoblitz
NotPC
|
Post by mmoblitz on Sept 14, 2018 12:20:27 GMT
Options are often the difference between a good RPG and a great RPG.
|
|
inherit
1020
0
Nov 26, 2017 12:37:49 GMT
21,685
fylimar
5,415
Aug 16, 2016 18:31:34 GMT
August 2016
fylimar
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by fylimar on Sept 14, 2018 16:15:27 GMT
I agree, that you should be allowed to make bad decisions and face the consequences and that you should be able to refuse quests and they are gone from your questlog. I guess, it makes sense with some quests, to just talk to the questgiver again, if you change your mind, but there should be quests, that are gone, if you refuse them.
|
|
inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on Sept 14, 2018 17:52:47 GMT
I suppose the writers would argue that if you are that against working with the Qun you would never have recruited him in the first place. This is true, and I agree with it. My Inquisitor does not recruit him. However, I think that is a separate issue from quest refusal because the player can have any sort of reason for refusing the quest. To deny the player that is to deny them that roleplay. With Bull specifically, I think the situation would be different if he were more like Sten. But he's not. Bull evinces to be "going native," as it were, and slipping from his assigned role. As we see from the quest itself, he needs a push from the player to go to one side or the other. It's one thing for the Inquisitor to deal with Iron Bull, his personality, his men and methods, but another thing entirely to be formally allied with the Qunari. Bull himself even admits to trepidation about their presence and what that might mean for the future.
|
|
inherit
507
0
Jun 21, 2021 22:15:41 GMT
5,802
Artemis
Somewhere, out there...
2,630
August 2016
artemis
CuriousArtemis
curiousartemis
|
Post by Artemis on Sept 19, 2018 4:34:23 GMT
Tbh I like to have a more streamlined, tightly-woven story than BioWare have been giving us of late. That means sometimes the MC has to be more defined, like Hawke or Shepard, and I'm okay with that. The Inquisitor was a bit too much like the Warden in that their personality could be all over the place, along with their personal feelings about people and factions.
Though, oddly enough, I enjoy making my various Lavellans and having headcanons about their personalities and such. Harder to do this with Hawke, Ryder, or Shepard. But even so, I'd sacrifice that + 98 million other little choices if I could have a tight, narrative-driven story instead, sort of like the MET.
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Sept 20, 2018 20:21:24 GMT
Not a great example. Who cares if a quest gets in the log?
Well, me for one. But the point is, if you explicitly say you aren't interested and don't want to do it (now or later), why not count that as "completed" so it goes to the completed list?
Instead it stays active in the quest log, clogs up an already clogged journal, icons stay on the map, and every time you talk to a character relevant to the quest, you have to make sure you don't accidentally pick the dialogue option to do the quest that you don't want to do. Just call it completed already! Or, maybe have a "refused" or "failed" list so you can see what you specifically chose not to do.
The reason not to automatically end the quest is the possibility the protagonist was being disingenuous. I'd love to see quests have actual failure conditions, but the game shouldn't prevent us from doing a quest just because we said we wouldn't.
|
|
inherit
4964
0
Jun 17, 2017 17:29:55 GMT
3,700
arvaarad
1,465
Mar 18, 2017 16:32:40 GMT
March 2017
arvaarad
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Jade Empire
|
Post by arvaarad on Sept 20, 2018 23:46:45 GMT
Well, me for one. But the point is, if you explicitly say you aren't interested and don't want to do it (now or later), why not count that as "completed" so it goes to the completed list?
Instead it stays active in the quest log, clogs up an already clogged journal, icons stay on the map, and every time you talk to a character relevant to the quest, you have to make sure you don't accidentally pick the dialogue option to do the quest that you don't want to do. Just call it completed already! Or, maybe have a "refused" or "failed" list so you can see what you specifically chose not to do.
The reason not to automatically end the quest is the possibility the protagonist was being disingenuous. I'd love to see quests have actual failure conditions, but the game shouldn't prevent us from doing a quest just because we said we wouldn't. I’d be cool with a scenario where a hard refusal + quest giver that isn’t that desperate leads to the quest being dropped. Perhaps the PC can still gather the items or whatever, but the quest giver isn’t there when they return, or crosses their arms, frowns, and refuses to give any reward. They view the PC as too difficult or weird, so they just don’t want to interact anymore. If the refusal is polite/noncommital, or if the quest giver absolutely needs someone to do this quest, then it seems fair to expect that they’ll accept a quest completion, even if the PC initially refused to do it.
|
|
melbella
N6
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 7,959 Likes: 24,340
inherit
214
0
24,340
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
7,959
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Sept 21, 2018 1:13:54 GMT
The reason not to automatically end the quest is the possibility the protagonist was being disingenuous. Well, since the protagonist is me, I should know whether I mean it or not, yes? If somehow not, you can always reload if the result isn't what you want or intend. But no amount of reloading will get rid of a quest I don't want to do once it's permattached to my quest log. The only way to have it not show up is to not talk to the quest giver, if that's an option. For example, say you don't want to go meet Blackwall in DAI. You can't avoid talking to Leliana about him since the convo with her request follows a cutscene. You then have to go find him and either recruit him or tell him to get lost if you want the quest out of your journal.
|
|
inherit
154
0
May 15, 2024 22:00:43 GMT
1,997
Reznore
942
August 2016
reznore
|
Post by Reznore on Sept 21, 2018 2:11:50 GMT
Not sure Dragon Age are games that are good for the moronic playthrough. Gameplay wise, those games are very poor. You kill stuff. And you can only kill a certain type of stuff, baddies/monsters/wildlife. There's not a lot of ways you can mess up. For example in Skyrim or Fallout NV, I had simple quests that went totally sideways for gameplay reasons. Played a bad thief in Skyrim, so failing and running away was a theme, and also shooting innocents in the ass by accident from time to time. In Fallout, I had a quest in a casino but found a butchered prostitute, it seems she was killed for some snuff movies of something...and playing a volatile drugged up pc I decided "this pisses me off" and shot up the whole place, and failed a number of quests. This is not something happening in a DA game. Gameplay wise it's too poor to have that kind of emergent gaming experiences.
Now you have the story, characters, cutscenes, and it's the meat and potato of the experience in DA. And it costs a lot of money/ressources to make that so choices are going to be somewhat limited. DAI is not a good example, because in many ways it was the safest game of the three. I accidently got my LI killed in DAO/ DA2. I had companions leaving me in DAO/DA2 when I didn't want them to...I was bracing myself for DAI, and it felt like a walk in the park. I don't know if this was a reaction to DA2 being dark and Hawke being a bit of a looser. I'd rather have a DA4 where losses can happen because mistakes were made.
About the quests stuck in the journal, this does not bother me. What is annoying is roleplay in side quests in DA4 was abysmal. You mostly repeated what the quest giver was saying, said "ok" and that was it.
|
|
Sylvius the Mad
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 686 Likes: 740
inherit
1078
0
Jul 17, 2019 20:15:37 GMT
740
Sylvius the Mad
686
August 2016
sylvius
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Sylvius the Mad on Sept 21, 2018 3:06:25 GMT
Well, since the protagonist is me, I should know whether I mean it or not, yes? You do, yes. The game does not. The game has no idea. That's why automatically dropping the quest doesn't work. The result I intend is that my character responds a certain way. That's as far as my intent goes. My character might intend the NPC react a certain way, but since he lacks mind-control abilities he's bound to be disappointed. I don't really understand why it matters what's in your journal, but if it does the easy solution would seem to be to make the journal user-editable. I stopped reading the journal after DA2 because the DA2 journal had too much metagame information in it. If my character doesn't experience it in-world, I don't want to know about it.
|
|
inherit
507
0
Jun 21, 2021 22:15:41 GMT
5,802
Artemis
Somewhere, out there...
2,630
August 2016
artemis
CuriousArtemis
curiousartemis
|
Post by Artemis on Sept 21, 2018 3:47:10 GMT
Not sure Dragon Age are games that are good for the moronic playthrough. Gameplay wise, those games are very poor. You kill stuff. And you can only kill a certain type of stuff, baddies/monsters/wildlife. There's not a lot of ways you can mess up. For example in Skyrim or Fallout NV, I had simple quests that went totally sideways for gameplay reasons. Played a bad thief in Skyrim, so failing and running away was a theme, and also shooting innocents in the ass by accident from time to time. In Fallout, I had a quest in a casino but found a butchered prostitute, it seems she was killed for some snuff movies of something...and playing a volatile drugged up pc I decided "this pisses me off" and shot up the whole place, and failed a number of quests. This is not something happening in a DA game. Gameplay wise it's too poor to have that kind of emergent gaming experiences. Now you have the story, characters, cutscenes, and it's the meat and potato of the experience in DA. And it costs a lot of money/ressources to make that so choices are going to be somewhat limited. DAI is not a good example, because in many ways it was the safest game of the three. I accidently got my LI killed in DAO/ DA2. I had companions leaving me in DAO/DA2 when I didn't want them to...I was bracing myself for DAI, and it felt like a walk in the park. I don't know if this was a reaction to DA2 being dark and Hawke being a bit of a looser. I'd rather have a DA4 where losses can happen because mistakes were made. Yeah, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. I feel the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10489
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2018 10:48:22 GMT
Well, me for one. But the point is, if you explicitly say you aren't interested and don't want to do it (now or later), why not count that as "completed" so it goes to the completed list?
Instead it stays active in the quest log, clogs up an already clogged journal, icons stay on the map, and every time you talk to a character relevant to the quest, you have to make sure you don't accidentally pick the dialogue option to do the quest that you don't want to do. Just call it completed already! Or, maybe have a "refused" or "failed" list so you can see what you specifically chose not to do.
The reason not to automatically end the quest is the possibility the protagonist was being disingenuous. I'd love to see quests have actual failure conditions, but the game shouldn't prevent us from doing a quest just because we said we wouldn't. I agree, but the PC should be required to go back to the character and explain why they've changed their mind rather than have the quest info just magically appear in their journal. A better idea would be to replace the journal entry with a reminder that a quest is available if time permits. (Though this is dependent on how much dialogue you got out of the NPC concerning the quest details)
|
|
Norstaera
N3
Stealth Swooper
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 385 Likes: 745
inherit
Stealth Swooper
1178
0
Apr 20, 2024 18:37:45 GMT
745
Norstaera
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
385
Aug 24, 2016 16:13:41 GMT
August 2016
norstaera
Bottom
http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/3ead/s5mkgfa593ihxkkzg.jpg
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Norstaera on Sept 21, 2018 16:05:41 GMT
I also like my active journal to be 'clean'. I have enough active quests to do, some with several stages, that I don't want to have to scroll past a bunch of stuff I don't want to do to check my progress on one I've chosen (or have to do because, reasons). There's a Skyrim mod that allows you to mark an active/in-progress quest and move it to completed/ignored status. It doesn't affect the game's quest log, but at least you have an optional one to view.
This becomes more important, it seems to me, if we want our characters to be able to make mistakes. I like this idea. I agree that certain core decisions have to be made in order to progress the story. If I told Alistair I didn't want to fight darkspawn without more knowledgeable Wardens to back me up, the game wouldn't have progressed. That wasn't an option. Same goes for companions (sorry melbella ). You may choose not to recruit them, but you should have to meet them which is why I have no problem with those quests staying in my active log. The companions count as important. When you talk to Leliana about a Warden in the Hinterlands, she's talking about getting more information about the situation. Until you specifically say 'Go away' to somebody, that quest should remain active.
As far as making mistakes (or choices that mean something, ahem), that leaves a whole lot of quests from Dorian's dad (as mentioned before) to talking the widower about flowers to the random corpse or letter you find. BTW, something I wrote in the wish list thread might tie in to this discussion, fetch quests. Example: If we tell a farmer we can't help him with wild boars destroying his crops, so be it. Quest activated and closed. Done. Not in our active log ever again. Even if we come across some wild boars later and kill them, the quest does not reactivate and close again - killing them now has no bearing on anything. Later, when we talk to Lord High Muckety-Muck (because we have to talk to him) our earlier decision about the farmer can come back to bite us. It should, because that farmer worked the Lord's lands. We may have to work harder to convince him to help us, or do a favor for him first. [Be funny if the favor was going back to the same farmer, killing the wild boars (if not already dead), and rebuilding all his fences to make them stronger than they were before.] Even without the favor, we may find ourselves in the position of having to speak to him later after he's had time to think about us. If we never encounter the farmer, then we start on a neutral ground w/ Lord High M-M and his decision hinges solely on our persuasive abilities. Or possibly our reputation thus far, depending on where we are in the game. If we helped the farmer, then Lord High M-M is more likely to listen to us favorably, less persuasion/reputation needed.
Our 'bad' choices could have smaller consequences: because you didn't take care of the boars, there's a food shortage later or food prices are higher. You refused to wipe out some bandits and the roads are less safe, more bandits spawn in the area. Not only do you have to fight more of them because of chance ambushes, etc., when you need help from the guards or soldiers they are too busy. You refused to help a merchant protect his caravan and later meet him begging on the streets.
Do you remember the original trailer with Varric and Crestwood, I think it was? Two decisions, help the people and possibly let red templars (or whoever the bad guys were) go free or chase the baddies and the people suffer. Now, maybe they dropped that choice from the final game because they couldn't reconcile the different results in the game - too many divergent factors for such a significant place. Whatever, but that's one sort of choice I'd like to be able to make. If I say that 'I don't have time for that', the quest doesn't become active. Whether or not you can go back to that person later . . . I dunno. Maybe. But it should not be a quest if you don't outright refuse or accept. If you refuse, the quest is briefly active and then closed. If you accept, then it's in your active quest log as it should be.
I agree that the 'I don't have time for that' option is frequently rude when it doesn't have to be. Maybe the solution is to have 2 versions: 1) I'm sorry, I can't do that right now = a soft no that doesn't mean you can't come back to the quest later. It doesn't become active in your log, either. 2) No, I don't really have time for that. I can't help you. = a hard no. Quest is entered in your journal as completed, your refusal noted.
Ok, I've rambled enough for now. Real life is demanding my attention.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
May 15, 2024 16:43:45 GMT
9,204
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,840
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Sept 21, 2018 19:26:23 GMT
The reason not to automatically end the quest is the possibility the protagonist was being disingenuous. I'd love to see quests have actual failure conditions, but the game shouldn't prevent us from doing a quest just because we said we wouldn't. I agree, but the PC should be required to go back to the character and explain why they've changed their mind rather than have the quest info just magically appear in their journal. A better idea would be to replace the journal entry with a reminder that a quest is available if time permits. (Though this is dependent on how much dialogue you got out of the NPC concerning the quest details) Ideally you'd have that conversation, yes, but I'm not sure that's a great use of wordcount.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10489
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2018 20:32:29 GMT
I agree, but the PC should be required to go back to the character and explain why they've changed their mind rather than have the quest info just magically appear in their journal. A better idea would be to replace the journal entry with a reminder that a quest is available if time permits. (Though this is dependent on how much dialogue you got out of the NPC concerning the quest details) Ideally you'd have that conversation, yes, but I'm not sure that's a great use of wordcount. I'm not saying you'd have a log of the conversation. I'm saying you'd only get x amount of the true journal entry based on how many of the conversation options you've exhausted.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
May 15, 2024 16:43:45 GMT
9,204
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,840
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Sept 21, 2018 22:47:52 GMT
I agree, but the PC should be required to go back to the character and explain why they've changed their mind rather than have the quest info just magically appear in their journal. A better idea would be to replace the journal entry with a reminder that a quest is available if time permits. (Though this is dependent on how much dialogue you got out of the NPC concerning the quest details) Ideally you'd have that conversation, yes, but I'm not sure that's a great use of wordcount. Itals added to show which wordcount I'm talking about. I don't think Bio's likely to find this worth the cost. They'll probably just keep with the current system if this is the alternative.
|
|
melbella
N6
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 7,959 Likes: 24,340
inherit
214
0
24,340
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
7,959
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Sept 22, 2018 0:37:35 GMT
You do, yes. The game does not. The game has no idea. That's why automatically dropping the quest doesn't work. Yes, the game would know because I just picked the "I don't want to do your quest" option. That is how the game knows I don't want to do the quest. Nothing is automatic. Perhaps a warning could pop up, saying this quest will be removed....click to proceed with this option. Yes, it's 'gamey' but at least no one could say they weren't warned.
Same goes for companions (sorry melbella ). You may choose not to recruit them, but you should have to meet them
I was just using that as an example of a quest you can't avoid being added to the journal, nevermind refuse it. But, I don't believe one should have to meet companions. I missed both Leliana and Sten my first time through DAO, and people on this board have mentioned they have never encountered Fenris in DA2 (their loss, I say ). The games still work and it leaves something to be discovered later on.
|
|