Except you can decide the fate of one person. Also, the quest was really fun, I don't see what you have against it, I really don't I don't see how you explained it was a bad thing. The point is that you are supposed to question them and figure it out, that's sort've how it works in real life too... It's a detective quest, you figure out who did it then get clues to prove it, I see nothing wrong with that. It seems like you need some shocking M. Night Shamalan twist at the end of every quest to make it worthwhile but that isn't going to happen in this game or any other game. Plot twists are meant to be few and far between or else you can't really suspend your disbelief when everything feels like the Twilight Zone.

I definitely see your point OP. I honestly never really noticed it when I was doing quests, but I am getting what you are saying. If they put it in, then they put it in and I won't complain about it!

... If you want to finish the quest you stay, if you cbf you go... thats all there is.

Honestly, I think that some quests could benefit from being LESS linear, take the investigation for that stolen painting in Chorrol, for example, as far as I understand it, had to be done in exactly the right linear fashion, and even though you may well have figured out who the culprit was before finding all the clues, due to how linear the quest was designed, you couldn't actually complete it until you had enough clues, for a quest like that, it would be much better if it took a more non-linear approach, where as long as you found enough evidence to back up the conclusion you reach, you could complete the quest, even if you didn't do everything in a particular order, you could eve add in the potential to cause someone to be wrongly convicted. I mean, yes, sometimes, a certain level of linearity is necessary, like say, if you're trapped in a dungeon and have to find a way out, there isn't a lot you can do to let the player deviate from a specific path, but a supposedly open world RPG which makes freedom a key selling point should not try to limit players more than is really neccessary.



That would COMPLETELY RUIN Skyrim. The Elder Scrolls isn't supposed to force you to play the main quest, it's supposed to let you be who you want to be, if that happens to be someone who wants nothing to do with the whole affair concerning Alduin, then you should be able to do just that. Besides, the main quests in past Elder Scrolls games were really not interesting enough to make replaying them with every character you create interesting, and I can't see Skyrim being like that either.

If you want to have the main quest forced on you, go play Dragon Age or something. I don't like doing the "If you want x, then play y." thing, but in this case, it's the only thing I can say, because what you're asking for is not what the Elder Scrolls is about, if you're going to make the game like that, you might as well abandon any pretenses of making it an open world game and make it completely linear, because that's exactly what you're doing, the supposed "freedom" becomes an illusion if the game doesn't give you a chance to exercise it.

I think that's what it's assumed a responsible thorough person would do. However, I think assuming the player is a responsible thorough person can lead to taking away from the experience if you aren't. Or forcing arbitrary steps when the player can reasonably assume information based on what they know, causes problems. Once the player has enough information they will try to move on to the next step, if they need to do something else then it becomes a big mess of talking to everyone about various topics. It can also cause problems with save games, because people tend to forget things like conversational steps if they have the information they need.

In a heavy RPG game, there should be consideration given to other options. For instance, for a very basic RPG structure, they would provide a solution for good/neutral/evil characters. If they wanted to be terribly thorough about quest structure, they would go into further detail, I suppose following the basic structure (lawful, chaotic, etc). Of course, that's not really an issue if the quest itself would generally be offered or accepted only by a person of a specific kind of character. That may very well be the case, I'm not too familiar with Oblivion quests. However, even when it might be anticipated as good only, the generally reaction from types might be (Good: Help character), (Neutral: Ignore, ask about reward/payment), (Evil: Take advantage of).

Understandably, there are limitations on what they can reasonably expected to do, especially since the induction of full voice acting in Oblivion.

I'm wondering if many people here actually read the OP?

The way I interpreted it, he's saying it would be good if certain quest lines had a pace which was different from the general flow of the game in order to create a certain mood. I agree entirely...

...one example I can think of is you've antagonized a specific group/organization. Said group has you kidnapped, you're horded onto a boat, and taken to a dungeon/prison out at sea. You're trapped there for the duration, cut off from your supplies, and have to live as a prisoner for a few days while you formulate an escape. Such a situation wouldn't allow you to just fast travel back to safety at any point or really backtrack at all, as you're a prisoner. Everything happening at that point in the game is related to that quest, and not really 'open' in the TES sense.

I think that'd a great way to give more mood/atmosphere to an individual quest/questline.

^this

That kind of thing is really fun exactly once. And then gets less fun each time as you figure out all possible paths and the constraints. And the constraints get annoying.
Maybe the 100th time I do that quest I just want to get that painting and have it done with.

And thats why a game as a TES game shouldnt be linear like that, you shouldnt force people into a role like that.
Its not what this kind of game is about.

The problem was any lack of intrigue or interest. As I mentioned, it's not hard to figure out after talking with a couple people, but you're forced to go through specific motions to complete it. You couldn't do anything with the clues before you finished talking to everyone, and you couldn't talk about the clues until you went to accuse the thief. It never tried to cast much doubt on who the real thief is, or really try to set up multiple possible suspects,

If you're going to force someone through a specific sequence of quest markers, then at least make it interesting. But as it was, for an open-world RPG, most of Oblivion's quests were already too linear, IMO.

Ok, your one of the few that didn't get any intrigue or interest out of trying to find out who stole it, we get that.

As for it being fun one time around, that is the point of not making the game linear. Sure, the canvas the castle quest was fun the first time through, that's why I never did it again on any other characters, what's so hard about that? It doesn't make it a bad quest because it doesn't have replay value, it is still a very good quest but it's ONE quest that does that and that just illustrates the point that the game shouldn't be linear. The whole point is that you said Canvas the Castle was a bad quest when it is a very good quest to me and many others, you may not like it but I'm just voicing the opinion of the other view and not saying your opinion is wrong, just illustrating what made the quest good, at least to me and others.

And to be fair, Canvas the Castle was one of those quests that really didn't have quest markers to illustrate the goal, you actually had to find it on your own.

Most of the fun I derive from the TES series is in the great sense of freedom it lends to the player. I love exploring, too.

This thread is almost month old? I think Beth has the perfect balance of an open world.

It has risen from the grave! I hope thread necromancy isn't illegal in Cyrodill?

I can sort of see what OP is getting at, that you can miss a lot by taking short cuts very easily, but I think they should find other ways to improve quest length and depth than forcing linearity.

Why is it you are always talking down about how other people choose to play the game?

Ive been waiting to use this acronym..
NIMBY


I officially coin the phrase:

NIMES

Not in my elder scolls

He's mad.

For me one of the most important/fun parts of a TES game is the open world freedom,
but I can understand that some quests would be better if they were less open or in a closed off area

Hitman games do this as well. They give you a description on what to do and a setting and you get to solve it however you want. I always tried in Hitman to do the mission like a realistic Hitman would. But its so hard! Therefore I found it more satisfying when I actually got the assassin rank on a mission for completing it the way your supposed to. That being said in an Open game it is always way more rewarding to solve the quest in realistic manner when so many options are open to you.

Nice of you to put the correct answer at the top of the poll.

This
Your example could've been made more difficult without resorting to making it linear. If a player is smart enough to figure out a way to avoid something they should be rewarded with avoiding it, not made to fight it anyway

Bethesda could make each quests have different possibilities for the mage, warrior and thief but if you have to build those into the quests then imo you've failed to deliver an enjoyable default experience.

I want their world to remain open and non-scripted. The world itself should offer plenty of possibilities for all sorts of characters to create their own tactics. This isnt always as polished as it could be but overall it is more enjoyable to scripted events. Every time I do a quests I can do them compleetly different. Not just through three different methodes that the game presented to me. Figuring out my own way to compleet quests is what makes TES great. So my answer... just to be clear is... NO!!!