Timed Quests : V - Skyrim

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:50 am

I'm not a fan of timed missions, hope to see none of them or very few.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:42 am

What's the worst thing that can be done to a linear story? Putting it in an open world.

My hope for Skyrim, is for a slightly less open world and much more open writing style. I know games like TES are all about doing what you want when you want to...but I don't think the world should wait for us all the time. Sure, for simple fetch quests like finding 20 bear pelts, there shouldn't be any rush. But for things like Sanguines quest, where you have to liven up the party, its suppose to be tomorrow but in reality the game waits and they keep partying untill you get around to it.

Either that's one hell of a party that's still going on 2 ingame months later, or something needs to change.

The best way to fix this, in my mind, would be to rework the writing for a more open format and at the same time tweak the game-world so it isn't so open. A better way to handle the party quest would be to say that every Thursday they hold it at 8pm, and you have to liven up the party on one of the days they meet. And then the game world would change so that they infact only meet on the days and times given to the player. With this the world then becomes more believable, and at the same time its still open.

Other things that would benefit from timed quests would be when we're told to meet someone at a specific time. They say to meet them tomorrow at 2pm, but really the npcs visit the designated spot night after night untill you show up to continue that quest. Missing the time doesn't have to mean you fail the quest either. Say you miss the meeting. Instead of just getting locked out of the quest, maybe you could find the npc again and ask to meet another time. If they hate you, maybe they'll say no untill you improve your standing with them. If they're neutral, they could act upset but set up another date. If they like you, they could act like they understand you had things to do and propose another time to meet. Failing to meet the time doesn't need to mean you fail.

Another thing that would gain from timed quest would be parts of the story where threats are pressent. Remember the Oblivion gates outside the cities? Supossidly everyone was freeking out and scared to death from the doom that could be attacking at any second...except that doom never came no matter how long you waited. The enemies of the world would wait for you. That...makes the world look really staged.

If the writing says theirs an imminant threat that demands action...shouldn't it really demand action? There's no real threat, even if the story says there is...if the threat waits for the hero to get around to saving the day. Say a kid was kidnapped, and you take the quest from the parrent. If you wait say 2 ingame weeks till you go to investigate the cave, the kid may all ready be sold off into slavery. The quest could then get harder because you didn't act right away, and now you have to buy the child his freedom, or rescue the kid of a rich mans estate which is crawling with guards.

Basically, does anyone want to see a slightly less open world so the story can make sense, and see a much less linear story so the open world can really be open?

Way too basic thinking, too restrictive, too in the box, uninteresting ideas, kinds of that limit a game instead of enlightening and add to the grandeur of it.
try thinking out of the box give more freedom instead of less.
This reharsemant of Oblivion false impendent doom is pathetic, right, but there s way to enslave the player to do something (or not) other than ticking an internal counter.
Whenyou think in timing you should think in mossions like Daggerfall when you had to deliver something or take something in a period of time or you would fail. No cheezy crying like i want to do it. Deal with failure.
It would even be interesting that if you fail to complete a quest (where something valuable isn t delivered)you start to be hunted by law or an interesting in specific group or groups.
As for the game since we are sure we re not the only one Dragon Sinatra out there, it would be fun if someone else save the world after some chain of events (aleatorial, choosen in a pool,or not) occur and you end up like a poor second rate smock that didn t fullfiled it, but life goes on and you keep with your adventurer life.
If one day as a player you feel like it you woul have to rerun to fill the main quest.
This would be true freedom, this would add replayability, this would be truly interesting and never done before(AFAIK, i can be wrong).
I ve already suggested such, but i m sure it fell in empty ears.
Game designers since the push for eyecandy are each time poorer in interesting ideas. In the past as GFX was poor they had to think to keep people in, now they just have to shake bright raimbowlike colors, vaporware and thats most of it.
I m hope i m wrong but i m pretty sure we will have a false invasion alrm, because mothing much relevent happens unitl you complete the main quest, and thats it. So far its what its shaken at us.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:46 pm

Hi all,

This is my first post ever on these forums. I've been following along with all of you since TES III, mostly just reading about lore, the things you all liked/disliked in general, ideas on what people want to see in upcoming TES games, etc as well as chuckling at some of the heated debates between some of the users. I decided to start posting on the Skyrim discussions because frankly I'm too excited to wait until 11.11.11 for this to be released and feel like if I don't talk about it with a multitude of like-minded individuals, I'll explode.

Back to the topic. While I understand the OP's suggestions, I feel like (as with many posts) this is a bit of a grey area. To answer the poll, I definitely do not want timed quests to be implemented into the game, or quests that you fail if you don't complete in a specific time. I believe this would be unfeasible in a TES game where much of the game is based on completing a ton of side quests, several of which are given/accepted simultaneously and where the game itself engages the player in hours upon hours of gameplay at the player's own pace.

However, ResistanceKnight does have some really great ideas for creating more evolving types of quests. I like the idea of having certain (not all) quests change a bit over time (depending on the situation) if you don't get to them right away. This would allow the same quest to possibly be a bit different on your next playthrough, allowing multiple playthroughs to feel different each time. I like the idea of accepting an "urgent" request, where if not fulfilled immediately, the quest doesn't fail, but becomes harder and harder to complete. Really, if you've accepted a quest to obtain a frozen slaughterfish from an icy cave and then accept a request from some local townsfolk to clear out several grizzly bears on the outskirts of town, you can probably leave the fish which will not thaw out anytime this century and go take care of the bears. If you don't, and say, wait a few days/weeks/months, the bears may have cleared out of the area already. You would still be able to hunt them down, but maybe now the group is larger as cubs may have grown up, depending on how much time has passed. Perhaps the bears killed a bunch of people from the town who tried to deal with the problem themselves (I did see several requests for more advanced AI for NPCs posted in these forums) since it took you so long to get to it and then you'd have all that blood on your hands, just like when Toby Maguire beat Macho Man Randy Savage and then didn't stop that thief after he got shafted on his pay. Poor Uncle Ben, now he'll have to stick to making rice.

More than likely, there will be a bunch of ingredient/resource gathering quests where you have all the time in the world to collect the items and bring them to the respective quest giver. Though I wonder if flora and fauna would have a life and death cycle in this game. There will probably also be the "clear out this cave/dungeon of goblins/vampires" types of quests where again you'd be able to get to it whenever, but the longer you leave it, the more enemies/creatures you'll have to face and if you leave any survivors, they should be able to rebuild the horde/coven or whatever, given enough time. Then when you go back to finish the job properly, they would be stronger/harder to kill.

While all of our ideas are good (some great, and I'm not referring to myself either), what we have to remember is that BGS has been doing this for years now and have gotten pretty damn good at it. It's just not possible to FIT all this great STUFF into the game without it being huge and we also want it to be released on time with minimal bugs. We just have to trust that they will put in the right stuff from previous games and that the new features will be awesome. Regardless of what is or isn't in Skyrim, I say enjoy it for what it is. An escape from our monotonous lives into a phenomenal and massive fantasy realm where we can kick ass, take names and launch flames from our hands. It's called lube people, look into it!

Anyway, sorry for the long post...I must've had a lot to say

Cheers!

I wish every member was like you. We could do with some of that round here.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:22 am

I wouldn't mind a few. Maybe do in three days sort of thing, or perhaps even the thing in Tribunal where you had a specific amount of time to memorize the play. Stupid me wrote every single response, but I enjoyed it.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:07 am

This was something i really liked in daggerfall, and i wondered why it wasn't in 3 or 4.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:01 am

No thank you. I absolutely hate timed quests with passion and escort quests as well, althoug latter is mostly because of crappy AI of the NPCs or poor balance.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:23 am

Why place a time on something and make it stressful when you can play it casually and enjoy it? Unless it's REALLY gunna add something and isn't going to interrupt everything else, I can't stand the idea of such quests. For example the timed section of the Great Sigil Stone in Oblivion was good, because it was used for a certain purpose. That works, timed quests generally, just don't.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:31 pm

I was gonna say yes but your examples put me off.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:23 am

timed quests takes away all the beauty and immersion. I didnt like the fact that your character was timed in the final oblivion gate quest.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:40 pm

I think long-term timed quests would be good. (you have 20 days to do this or 120 days to do that) but having less than a day or two to get around to a quest is terrible.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:38 am

timed quests takes away all the beauty and immersion. I didnt like the fact that your character was timed in the final oblivion gate quest.

What immersion is there in being able to do everything? Where's the immersion in parties that last 4 ingame months till the player gets around to it? That's something I dont get.

I don't want the game to tell you after 20 gameplay that you fail if you haven't finished the main quest by then. But if they say that the world ends tomorrow if you don't save the world, then so be it. The game should reflect that then. Why didn't you like the fact that you were timed? You were told you had to buck up and save the day. There was a threat to fail, an actual threat. I loved that, because I could feel the pressure a hero would feel. The game shouldn't guarantee the survival of the world, but that's something else entirely.

This is about the world being believable. The open world description for Oblivion and Morrowind is a bad one in my book. Its an open stage, not a world. Every act is the same, every hero is the same. If people want options, this is what they should be fighting for.

The option of being late has never actually been an option. The hero is litterally forced to win. With timed quests and open style writing, the story could be given to us in a believable manner in an open world while still imposing a threat on our hero. The main quest could have parts that are different from playthrough to playthrough, we could still win but with varrying amounts of success. Side quests could benefit by behaving in a believable manner while not forcing the character to fail once the time limit is reached. The side quest could change or evolve into something harder or more delicate. Playthroughs could be different. Look back at my last post on the first page. Open style writing plus time triggers mixed in can change a stage into a world.

I think long-term timed quests would be good. (you have 20 days to do this or 120 days to do that) but having less than a day or two to get around to a quest is terrible.

Thats the kinda stuff I'm talking about, long term stuff. I'd hate short term quest time as well, unless its like the Grand Gate Battle near Bruma where the hero is timed. I liked that, because it gave a sense of needing to hurry or people will die. Maybe if the time limit for that is reached, it could end up outside and then we'd have to follow it out and stop it before it got to Bruma. Failing to meat the time doesn't have to mean the quest fails.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:18 am

I dont think there should be times quests but the world should progress without you. Choose not to kill a couple of dragons - there is moe destruction, pirces go up a little - in effect there is some consequence to the choice that you made by not doing certain actions. I think it should be slow and subtle but it should still have some impact.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:58 am

I wish every member was like you. We could do with some of that round here.

Hey thanks man. I find it funny when I see some of the trolling and flaming that goes on in here sometimes. It's great to be passionate about a topic, but no need to bash other members for having an idea or opinion that differs from your own.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:37 pm

NO NO NO NO HELL NO I REFU... NO NOOOO NOPE nope

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:33 am

My life is stressful enough as it is. I don't like having to deal with time pressure in my games as well.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:05 am

Its not dealing with pressure if the timed missions are optional, like a merchant annoucing the necessity to deliver a merchandise in spot X in 2 days just like in daggerfall. Just one example. take it or leave it, the choice is yours, but if you accept the game, play by the rules.

People talk about immersiveness to defend non timed quest.
But what is immersiveness... its just plausability, Are the settings Plausible ? Does the world hold itself toghether ?

The best example of immersiveness failure is Oblivion.
Portal from hell open, you get closing some, and suddenly it down on you noone is coming from them, absolutely NOTHING happens, they just sit there like a desk in the middle ofa field rotting as the time pass, with some mudcrab dancing around and 2 imps and a Daedroth playing poker to pass time... and the world that was already very badled handed get its final push to crumble apart and the feel dumb as hell.
Why that? because there s no constraint. Its the Paradox of open world feature and sense and urgency clashing toghether because the developper weren t smart enought or willing to do some thinking and sew something that would hold together. They prefered shakesticks at grafics that were critizised since day 1 and bethered a week after by modders.
Then there s the stupid leveling and so many gameplay features that were absolutely weak in Oblivion. Bethesda Luck was the fact that there were so much new users bewildered with this new kind of RPG it made tremendous success, because until now its by far the weakest quality implementation in the TES series considering tech at hand + experience.

And in Skyrim we risk this again, the call of the end of the world is trumpeted around, and really nothing interesting will happen because...because they are too fearfull to break the open world concept obeying the self imposed concept of impeding doom...they think its not feasible.
There s many way to do it, some simple, some more elaborate.

In a real world you only have obligations if you accept them and abide by them, if the same concept is taken to the game or jut part of it, it will only make the wolrd more immersive and believable. Its still up to you to accept a mission or not, play the hero or not. You re the one responsible for constraining yourself the way you want at the level you want, which most of the time you can t choose IRL, you just have to constraint yourself.

What bethesda need to do to make a better game is giving more options to the gamer, the same way simulations does, in the end of the day a RPG, PnP or CRPG is a simulation of another world. Gameplay wise, Bethesda is falling behind compared to the rest of the market.
There s a lot of easy ways to give customzation of some aspect ofthe gameplay to the players, and this because the system is already there complete and waiting for someone to think a bit out of the box and do some benchmark out of the MKT miopy path.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:32 am

My life is stressful enough as it is. I don't like having to deal with time pressure in my games as well.

I've all ready given examples of how timed quests dont have to mean failure. Infact, timed parts of quests can allow for a more open world. Look at Oblivion. Kavatch always burned to the ground, you never got to see it before it was a smoldering ruin, and you never had a shot to save it. That's not open, that's staged. With timed parts of quests, Kavatch could have been a visitable town before a specific part of the main quest was tripped, and even then you could have saved more of the town if you ran straight there.

Timed quest plus open format writing can transform an open stage into an open world, it only takes some creative thinking.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:53 am

Anything long-term would be interesting, however like Xen Thar said, the game should play at the player's own pace.

Timed quests shouldn't just be thrown out the window. As long as it isn't forced on the player, like,"OMFG YOU WAITED TOO LONG DRAGON COME OUT AND BOOM!", but more in the area of,"Dovahkiin, go to the Mountain and train, for soon the dragons will be upon us.", giving a pretty vague timeline for when it will occur. In Oblivion the MQ went along smoothly if you did it from the get go, In Skyrim I'm sure it will be the same. However anything that the player willingly accepts, like merchant good quests or perhaps chasing down a thief, could be fair game to be timed on a short duration. A few days at most, quests that call upon conscience give us a quick decision to make on the matter. A guard comes up to you, and since your a mage with high Fame, asks you to do the right thing and stop a thief who took something that belong to the ruler of the town, and you have a certain amount of time you get to a cave or dungeon to stop him.

ResistanceKnight, you have some great ideas, and this is an awesome one. Quests that give greater consequence the longer you wait, and greater reward the quicker you get it done would give more depth to the world. However, in a game where most come to play to relieve stress or relax and have fun, I don't see this appearing in great quantity. I do see this possibly coming up a few times, and hopefully if it comes up, it comes up in the manner you described.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:06 am

Anything long-term would be interesting, however like Xen Thar said, the game should play at the player's own pace.

I agree. The game's story, in my mind, should be written in such a way that we really feel like who every we are playing as. Rpg like TES have an extremely hard job at doing that, because we get to choose who we are and how we play. However, it is possible to do it. The first thing to do this however doesn't have anything to do with the character. When we get to make our own character, the game world needs to be created in such a way that allows for all types of characters. A believable world, which we can place our own character into, allows for our characters to really grow and become real.

When the world waits forever, it becomes a stage instead of a world. That removes from the character developement, because no matter how unique we get with our character's back story and playstyle, there's only one way the play can go on the stage. I'll use Kavatch as an example again. A fool-harty character who happens upon Kavatch after the destruction may be shocked, and become more serious about saving the world. However, with my example of how Kavatch could have been handled with open styled writing and timed quests, that fool-hearty character might blow off finding Marting right away and then go to Kavatch later finding it a smoldering ruin. He could then feel responsible.

If the fool-hearty character goes to find Martin right away, and then helps in saving most of Kavatch, that character may stay more foolhearty than if he hadn't gone right away. Timed quests and open style writing, like I've said before, can make a world much more open.

Timed quests shouldn't just be thrown out the window. As long as it isn't forced on the player, like,"OMFG YOU WAITED TOO LONG DRAGON COME OUT AND BOOM!", but more in the area of,"Dovahkiin, go to the Mountain and train, for soon the dragons will be upon us.", giving a pretty vague timeline for when it will occur. In Oblivion the MQ went along smoothly if you did it from the get go, In Skyrim I'm sure it will be the same. However anything that the player willingly accepts, like merchant good quests or perhaps chasing down a thief, could be fair game to be timed on a short duration. A few days at most, quests that call upon conscience give us a quick decision to make on the matter. A guard comes up to you, and since your a mage with high Fame, asks you to do the right thing and stop a thief who took something that belong to the ruler of the town, and you have a certain amount of time you get to a cave or dungeon to stop him.

Those are some good examples as well. I agree that things shouldn't be like the "OMFG" example you give, and I don't really get how people think I'm saying that. Maybe I should have worded it better or something. :shrug:

ResistanceKnight, you have some great ideas, and this is an awesome one. Quests that give greater consequence the longer you wait, and greater reward the quicker you get it done would give more depth to the world. However, in a game where most come to play to relieve stress or relax and have fun, I don't see this appearing in great quantity. I do see this possibly coming up a few times, and hopefully if it comes up, it comes up in the manner you described.

I have to admit, from my Three Skills topic to this one, I never figured I'd here that. But what's the point of making topics everyones' going to agree with? We're suppose to be here to discuss, and the best way to get people to notice your topics and to talk about things is to be a little controversial.

I dont see it happening either, but its still something I'd like considered. It could open up the world a lot more than it all ready is if done right.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:10 am

Why place a time on something and make it stressful when you can play it casually and enjoy it? Unless it's REALLY gunna add something and isn't going to interrupt everything else, I can't stand the idea of such quests. For example the timed section of the Great Sigil Stone in Oblivion was good, because it was used for a certain purpose. That works, timed quests generally, just don't.

Where is everyone getting thsi idea that I want every single quest to be timed down to the second? I'd hate that too. Honestly I would. But there are a lot of spots where it could add something.

Evoloving quests based on how long you wait to do them after taking them would add a ton to the world. First playthrough you save billy from the bandits who locked him up in a cave. Second you wait a while, go to the cave, find the bandits and kill them but no billy so you look around. You find a sales bill saying billy was sold into slavery, so now you gotta go there to save him.

That right there is something I would love to see, and I really don't get why people wouldn't like that.

Other parts where for instance the character is told they are going to die in two weeks if you don't get the cure, should have your health deteriorate and finally die when the day comes around. I mean, the story's saying that we have to hurry...shouldn't we have to hurry then?

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:44 pm

+10 to ResistanceKnight

You sir, are absolutely right. However, to get more people to understand your point, you may want to try a thread titled "Better writing + Better quests = Better game"

That's what you're really talking about, and that's what I think everyone here can agree on having in Skyrim.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:07 pm

Yes, please. Some parts of quests just make so much more sense like this. Though some quests could still be completely un-timed. For example if an NPC mentions that they've lost something a long time ago, or "always wanted to do [INSERT THING] but need your help", it would make sense that they wouldn't mind waiting around for a while longer.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:37 am

I like the idea of mixing in some quests with a sense of urgency, but not too many. I think the writing (story-wise) for Elder Scrolls is great already, but yes some of the quests could be expanded upon or be allowed to branch off into different outcomes with several ways of completing them. Would definitely up the replayability factor quite a bit for an already replayable game. You as a human player will be able to adapt to an ever-evolving quest system, but I'm interested to see how the NPCs react based on the new Radiant AI tech that is being implemented into the game. I have a feeling we're going to see a much more alive world this time around.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:14 am

Look I'm all for having a less static world and certain quests with conditions and time limits could work but it has to be done Tastefully without seeming Overbearing.

» Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:55 am

+10 to ResistanceKnight

You sir, are absolutely right. However, to get more people to understand your point, you may want to try a thread titled "Better writing + Better quests = Better game"

That's what you're really talking about, and that's what I think everyone here can agree on having in Skyrim.

Eh, I didn't want to say that because my better might not be everyone elses better. Writing can always be better, and more quallity quests would be great, but my way of making them better isnt' always better for everyone else.

I really think evolving quests based on how long you wait would add a lot to the world, and timed parts of quests could open up the world and allow for differences between playtrhoughs based on your actions and your inacction...and an actual threat would be nice, but my way isnt' the only way to go about this. I'm sure there are many ways, and this radiant story sounds like a great example of another way. I'm really looking forward to the stories Skyrim gives us, and I want to see this radient story in action.

Besides, if everyone agree'd it be boring. I'd much rather debate with people over things instead of agree with them every single time.

That's why my ideas aren't always popular ones. I just like to debate about things like this though, that's why I'm here in the first place.