It has to make sense. If a quest giver points me to a place in a map, then it makes sense to have a marker, but if I magically know where a tiny object is inside a dungeon that nobody has been in for hundreds of years, then it doesn't make sense.
Agreed. I've spoken to a lot of MMO players who like this kind of hand-holding, but I feel like it takes an opportunity for exploration and turns it into a rat maze.
@@darthsnarfthink about the Stones of Barenziah quest in Skyrim. One of the first mods most people install is quest markers for them. Having to search every single area of the map for a bunch of random gems is like pulling teeth. It's worse that without mods some of the stones are locked behind particular factions or property ownership. I don't mind a lack of quest markers but please don't decide to make it such a painful process in the first place.
@@darthsnarf Yep. I think quests/dialogue should be designed and written with the assumption that quest markers won't be used. Then the designer can add them afterward. I played Skyrim again recently and without quest markers, some quests could only be completed by randomly stumbling upon the solution.
I think the issue people who don't want quest markers have with it being an accessibility option is that games that go down that path usually don't bother to support that decision. Yeah, you can turn them off in something like skyrim (although I'm not sure if that was a built-in option?) but GOOD LUCK trying to ascertain the objectives and locations for your quest from just the information diegetically offered to you.
Elder Scrolls are a very good example of what happen with gamedevs and designers when you add automatic, magical quest markers. They don't bother even describing people or location, it's just "follow the marker" and you can't play without it. Now, there are production things that Tim didn't talk about. Again with Elder Scrolls, seems pretty obvious that was also a way to compensate from moving to voice over which was very costly and a bit new at the time. Markers save a lot of money and headaches during production, unfortunately.
@@LiraeNoir Saves on localization costs too. Also, I think folks underestimate just how many people *cannot* follow written instructions, especially in a virtual world, where you're lacking normal senses. Just look at how many folks can't follow IRL recipes, patterns, or maps - or software instructions 😅
@@mandisaw If you want to make games that don't rely on pattern recognition for solution finding, then I'm not sure if you really are in the business to entertain anyone. What you're describing sounds like incredibly disabled person, for whom games might not even be suitable entertainment. I mean, suck that blind people without legs don't ride bicycles, world is just too cruel.
I think this is where "Journals" can sort of save the day. If an NPC tells me "This pedant has meant a lot to my family, thank you for offering your help in retrieving it" and the game puts a floating marker exactly on the item simply to save voice acting and localization cost, then I simply want a quest description in the quest log to be like: "Horald Windsor, the Laketown's Blacksmith, has asked me to retrieve a pendant that has held great value for his family. He has pointed on my map that it has been left in a chest in the basement of the Abandoned Mill inside the Pitch Forest." Sure I would prefer to have all that be voiced and animated, but I'm no mad man and I understand how much work that'd be, I can still use my imagination to patch the holes if the descriptions is at least making somewhat of an effort to sell its roleplaying aspect. But to give no information at all if I have the option to disable markers? That's just weird. That'd be like offering the players the option to have Plasma Weapons and then go and give plasma immunity to all the NPCs, like... what? Why give an unviable option to the player?
@@groovemoustache I mentioned in another thread that Journals serve a different purpose than markers. But the localization costs still stands, and it can easily exceed the VA cost if you're only doing one voice-region, but many text-regions (as is often the case). Also, many people already skip the quest-giver text in the first place, they're not going to read it all through if you show it in the Journal. I love reading & talking to NPCs! But the stats on text-heavy games are not-great these days.
I was playing Prey (2017) recently and have found how they do quest markers interesting. It’s tackled in a way where if the quest has the info such as: there’s an item in a safe, the safe code is 0451. The quest marker will guide you to the safe. However, in another quest, there was the task of a missing keycard hidden in a room. The quest marker guides you to the room, but does not tell you where the item is. So, they approach it based on what your character knows.
@@liaminwales isn't that sort of spoiling a missable gameplay mechanic? It is an early spoiler, but still... It's fun to figure stuff on your own in that game. Also it's fun that there are multiple solutions to problems. Like using the dumbest gun in the game is actually needed if you aren't a space wizard. Prey 2017 definitely did a lot of great things right, but it's really hard to replay it multiple times since it's not that dynamic. I heard that the devs did intent to have random hazards that were present in mooncrash but scrapped that idea. I'd wish you could save people, if you knew where to find them, or just were fast enough in like a dead rising type of sandbox.
@@bezceljudzelzceljsh5799 Wait what? The game is almost 7 years old, are you saying i spoiled the plot? I hope your joking. The plot was a love letter to SIFI books, they had someone who knows P K D's books well. Missions where named after his books & the story is inspired by his books. It's still one of the best SIFI game's made today, a real understanding of SIFI was shown. The graphics still look good, just wish they made a follow up game that expanded on the ideas.
Also you can play most of the game without quest markers at all and it'll still be totally playable (aside from finding specific corpses by using a terminal). Dishonored games (especially 2) are also great at that, they feel totally different without markers, yet it feels like they were designed that way from the start
@@d4n5t3p3 For the corpses, that can certainly be tricky for no markers, but at the very least they’ll provide what section they’re in. Granted, those sections can be massive and they can be cleverly hidden somewhere so it can get tedious. For Dishonored, it certainly feels like they designed that game with a lot of testing without the HUD. I’m on a no powers playthrough and incredibly impressed with how much thought was put into the levels to accommodate for that. It’s the most fun I’ve had with 2 so far and slows the game down in such a way for me to appreciate a lot more things that I would missed by using movement powers to get around. I should try a no markers run next time for Prey and Dishonored / 2. I have yet to do that.
Morrowind's lack of quest markers is absolutely one of my favorite things about it. I feel so immersed and smart figuring out quests in games like that.
Same here. And it pushes you to actually look at the world, at people, even talk to people, to figure things out. Instead of following the magic gps. Which is something that has been "re-discovered' recently. Everyone gushed over Breath of the Wild and Elden Ring for the exploration, when we old school players of Ultima, Morrowind and other older crpg (or just tabletop players) have been asking for the removal, or the better handling and design of fast travel and automatic or gamified quest markers for many many years.
I don't really have an issue with Morrowind having zero quest markers, but I do have an issue with some of the quests which tell me "go east" when the point in question is really southeast. I can't recall which quest it was that was the worst example of this, but I do recall that it happened, and I was streaming me playing Morrowind to some of my friends that were also like "Wtf." Morrowind typically does a decent job of telling you where to go, but if you aren't going to have quest markers, you better be damn descriptive of where to go.
@@BorkBigFrighten2 A fair criticism but in a game that immersive, I end up forgiving the game and thinking "Oh, the person I spoke to gave me faulty directions," haha.
Morrowind was the first rpg I played that didn’t have quest markers . And it legit changed my view on gaming. The satisfaction of completing difficult quests in morrowind unlike any other video game I’ve ever played it feels like I really did it , ME
Oh man, would be great to have a quest marker that can get more precise according to the info you have. For example a quest giver tells you "Go get that item from that dungeon", and you have a big area marker. Then you talk to NPCs and one of them is like "Oh yeah, I know that item, it's most likely in the basement" and the marker gets reduced. Or "Oh yeah, I actually saw that item, it's in the bookcase on the main floor" and the marker changes from an area to a point.
Kingdom Come Deliverance tackled this very issue. Successfully in my opinion. When playing in hardcore mode the map is simply an image of the games map on a canvas with nothing but a cursor, there’s no compass direction markings or quest marker to follow. It’s really neat actually because it’s set up for both types of player as the game is filled with enough information for you to play without utilising quest markers whilst also supporting the quest marker on lower difficulty modes. Good game. I recommend it.
@@henrycrabs3497 People are overcritical of anything these days. Fallout 2, BG 2, VTMB 1 would be completely destroyed if they were subjected to modern social standards lol. The best thing somebody can do is play a game without caring about what critics have to say.
The absence of automated/magical markers also has one very strong implication: it allow for *exploration*. When you have markers, you follow them instead of looking around and searching for signs. No markers force deeper interaction with npc and the world to give you information and clues in the first place, then push the player to look around and actually explore, with all the positive feelings and reward that entail. Even better if the game lets YOU, the player/character write notes in your journal and marks on your map. Manual, made-by-player markers are good. Something like ARMA does it well, albeit in a very different genre.
I'm firmly in the "no quest markers ever" camp myself. It's a lot more fun when I have to navigate the actual game world, not an artificial, heavily simplified interface layer on top of it. The fact that you can look things up on the internet doesn't change anything for me either, since you can also just not do that if you want to explore and navigate on your own. On the other hand, games that have quest markers usually either don't let you disable them at all, or aren't designed to be played without them (meaning that if you disable quest markers, you will be given no clue whatsoever on where anything is).
I agree with you. When you design for no quest markers you generally end up with a better designed world because it has to facilitate navigating by the world itself. Also if you know your audience can just look things up if they're frustrated, then it's fine to just let them do that if they want but make the game's intended/default experience ask a higher player investment.
No Quest Markers is great when the quests are designed with that in mind. But when I'm playing Skyrim and an NPC asks for a specific unique item, and gives me zero indication where to find it in the world, well then I just have to hope I stumble upon the solution randomly as I explore the world. And it's not that the NPC doesn't know where it is. They just don't tell you through dialogue because they assume you're using quest markers. Skyrim without quest markers would be a nightmare. Other games are better about this though. Bethesda games are particularly bad.
It's fun exploring if the world always interacts to your exploring of it. Imagine you look for a specific item (*ahem water chip) and there is no context or anything, or there is just 1 NPC that can hint to that location the item is at. This is not fun. This is torture. It's like hot and cold game but it's always cold. Thank God for the internet for providing solutions although figuring it out on your own and telling friends about it was a weird flex back then.
You can definitely write quests in a way that the quest can be done without a quest marker. The marker is there as a guide, but not as a necessary tool to complete said quest or mission. If you want to, you can skip dialogue, not bother to take notes and then just follow the marker, but if you want you can listen to the quest giver, read the notes around and follow the trail to complete the mission. I understand this is a much bigger undertaking than most people might think, but it's the way I would prefer it. Some brilliant quest mods are written this way for games like New Vegas or Skyrim and I wish to see more of this.
@@soldat88hunThere's a friend of mine who literally skips every piece of dialogue he *can* because he's shoot first, ask questions never. It's gameplay first and foremost for him and it's how he approaches any game, in any genre. I *loathe* that approach, but it's how he does it. He's also very intelligent, well spoken and good at problem solving - none of that matters, he does it that way and his way is with the blunt-est instrument possible. So, sadly, individuals that choose that option absolutely exist.
@@soldat88hun I like my numbers going up, and rpgs do that. [Number go up] -> [brain make happy chemical] Also that's the reason why games that didn't need "rpg" elements now have them :(
@@nerdock4747 Well, if brute force solves all the games problems, isn't that a valid way to play? If it's a rpg game, can't he play as a power seeking murderer?
I prefer no quest marker myself. But I played the heck out of Morrowind, Fallout, Baldur's Gate and Arcanum. So when I think "RPG" that's immediately where my head goes.
We are currently making an Addon for Elder Scrolls Online where players get to add directions for each of the 2k+ quests so that they can quest like in Morrowind.
I personally prefer no quest markers at all. Also I've come to realize that I don't even like a player map marker. It takes the fun out of exploration in an open world game when you're basically equipped with an in-game google maps gps all the time. I like how the game Darkwood by the polish studio Acid Wizard handled it. You have a map, and markers are automatically placed for locations you discover, but the caveat is that you can't see your own location on the map. A location you are in the vicinity off gets highlighted in red when you're near that location, but not which cardinal direction you're coming from or facing, so the player has to do some of the legwork of navigation for themselves. It's fun to get lost in games sometimes, and the interesting situations you end up in as a consequence 😄
I like area markers because they help bridge the gap between my and my character's memory and knowledge without spoiling the exploration. Similar to automatic quest journals. I also like when the area gets more narrow as I discover new things. Say I need to find something in a specific inn in a village far to the west. It could start out covering the whole region that I haven't explored at all, narrow down to the village once I see a road sign or a map of the region, narrow down to the inn once I see it or a map of the village, and so on.
Thank you for the video! I like when quests are written in a way that does not require quest markers. Then for the time constrained among us (like myself) I like the inclusion of in game systems that can guide the player more closely (e.g. the clairvoyance spell in Skyrim) to their goal. Toggle-able UI markers are fine as a third layer. Thanks again and have a great weekend!
The reason I like area markers is because sometimes I put games down for a few days (or much longer) at a time and by the time I come back I genuinely CAN'T remember what I was looking for. Sure I could go back and find the SPECIFIC NPC that has the vague or almost exact directions which lead me to my objective, or I could have a marker pointing me directly do the object so I don't have to look for it, but both of those are boring. Mark the NPC that gave me the quest, give me a concise summary of my quest and objective in the journal, AND mark the general search area within reason like described in this video. The result is that you've made an intuitive quest system that keeps me in the game world and not on GameFAQs or reddit.
My favorite system for these types of problems was the way they handled it in RDR2. They made the option to hide or use the minimap extremely easy to do on the fly (it's a d-pad + face-button combo on a controller), and added an ability to check it briefly when it's off before it disappears again. It maintains that sense of direction having a minimap provides, but also allows you to get lost in the beautiful open world. Also, the sound is designed in such a way that the random events you pass by are still hard to miss, especially if you wear headphones. It feels like a game that was designed to be played without a minimap until Rockstar realized that's a bit of an accessibility concern when it comes to those random events.
Yeah radius can work pretty well. In Kingdom Come Deliverance it is done perfectly. It lets me know general area, but still lets me figure stuff out for myself. But I love the Fallout and Arcanum approach too. But in modern 3D open worlds, no markers at all can be difficult.
I disagree. That design just killed whodunnit investigations for example. "Who is the killer? Where are they?" Well just look at the map, if the marker as a radius for the local town, you know they haven't left town.
@@LiraeNoir It didn't "kill whodunnit investigation", it made it more playable and fun. Games are not reality simulators and KCD is not detective simulator (although it comes closer than most), it still has to be finishable and playable without endless frustration that reality brings.
In a fantasy RPG I would use a handdrawn map of the area, and then a hand-drawn marker, like humans would do that to roughtly mark it for someone. (A cross, a circle or an outline around the region)
People dislike having the quest markers be optional because usually the game was designed with markers in mind, and the option to disable them is an afterthought. I've seen someone stubbornly try to play Skyrim with markers disabled and the journal just didn't give enough information on where you had to go. IF the game is designed without markers, but it just happens to have them as an option, I don't think anyone would complain. I have this same problem with fast travel. I don't like it, even as an option. Because if fast travel is available, quest designers will have you travel across the whole map multiple times within the same quest, just because it's easy to do. and if you want an "immersive" way to travel, you are out of luck.
I recently started playing Avernum Escape From the Pit, and I really like how the game does quest markers. The game has a world map that shows discovered locations and quest "areas". For example, if you hover your mouse over a location, it will show a list of quests that you already started and are in your quest log that are related to that area. I think this is a good way to guide the player to the right location for a quest but still require the player to search the location to find what they are looking for. Also, in addition to having the quest shown on the map, the quest log does a good job describing how to get to the quest and how to complete it without even needing a quest marker.
Ideally, quests should be written well enough to give effective directions if you choose not to use quest markers. However, a quest marker toggle in the options menu should exist too, if the player chooses them.
Agree, specially when you leave the game for a short while and forget the devilish details behind the quests. Sure, a handbook system like the one in Neverwinter Nights can come in handy (and I prefer it over any type of auto-marking over the map, let alone the hud) but in the end, having the narrative covering the quests paths and an optional area marking is truly more than enough for an RPG. On a side note, I might be wrong so please someone correct me, but I kinda remember that the narrative in New Vegas allowed you to complete the quests with the compass markings disabled, while F3 went the opposite way.
@@PointReflex Not sure about Fallout 3 but New Vegas definitely guided you along at least the main quest if not most side quests just by quest directions by the NPC’s.
For what it's worth (basically nothing). I strongly dislike quest markers; I believe it prevents players from engaging with the world, immersing themselves, and exploring. Just my opinion.
Area markers are indeed a good solution. They provide the guidance for people to know where to go (it could be anywhere on a world map otherwise) without spoiling what to do or where to go exactly. There were games which showed you quest markers for the exact chest an item is in or enemies you have to kill (not just one boss NPC), and it feels very cheap, rendering the entire experience grindy. It's like the NPCs already knows what to do, where to go, and you are just one of many on a conveyor belt of "adventurers" jumping through the hoops laid before you. While technically it's arguably often the case, it's bad to make it too obvious.
Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind is an excellent example of both good design without quest markers and why it's so hard to pull off, particularly in a modern context. I think a big factor is voiced dialogue. Morrowind's dialogue is completely text based, and the player's journal records both quest updates and NPC dialogue. Finding a particular objective encourages exploration and can feel very rewarding (when it works!), the player can refer back to the directions given by an NPC while exploring at any time. In the sequel, Oblivion, it's easy to see just how much the introduction of completely voiced dialogue had flow-on effects to other design considerations. Dialogue now has a cost associated with it (paying voice actors) and, at the time of development, disk storage constraints affected how much dialogue could be recorded. Not only that, but any changes to quest design following testing could require lines to be re-voiced if an objective is moved. Even if a developer went to the effort of having voice actors record directions, listening to dozens or hundreds of NPC's slowly explain how to find an objective (only for the player to forget and have to refer to their notes later anyway) isn't exactly fun. Personally, I wish there was a resurgence in games with text-based dialogue, but I completely understand the reasons why this is unlikely. Tim, if you get the chance I'd love to hear your thoughts on voiced vs. text-based dialogue in game design. Great video!
I like early Piranha Bytes approach to this. If you want a map, you have to buy/steal it from a mapmaker in the game. The maps are not always accurate or complete, and sometimes contain embelishments (such as an elaborate drawing of a troll in the corner of the Gothic 2 map where a black troll lives). It's just a drawn map; the only marked thing is your position and orientation. However, occasionally quest givers will ask if you have a map, and if you do they will draw on it to tell you where to go. Or if you don't they will just try to explain it. Others might give you a new map with specific markings on it. Having the map be diegetic is such a great touch and a massive boost to immersion. I wish more games did it like that.
My only standard with quest markers is that if a long-lost treasure has been missing for thousands of years, you probably shouldn't have a quest marker that shows its place within one meter. (And yes, I'm of the same generation that loves the ambiguity of old Thief games' maps.)
I personally prefer using just the normal map to lead a player to something, then once theyre inside the dungeon or whatever it be, just let good level design guide them around eg if you gotta steal the orzob scepter from the big haunted castle, just mark the big haunted castle on the map (not as a quest marker just as a thing that was always there) and then once theyre there in the castle good map design will make it clear where theyre going
Recently I've replayed Morrowind (with modded graphics and minor gameplay tweaks) and Elden Ring. Neither of the games have quest markers and the effect of this is that It made me take in and remember the environments, roads, bridges etc. Elden Ring has a really good map where you have drawings on it and you'll always find something interesting if you zoom in, discover a little ruin of a church and decide to ride there. On top of that, Elden Ring's big quest marker for main quest is the massive glowing tree in the distance. "See that tree? Get to it." Now that's one hell of a quest marker.
Elden Ring didn't need quest markers as it didn't have a traditional quest system, more like little stories that you can affect throughout your journey. Much less to keep track of. But I sure could have used an in-game journal and NPC markers ( the latter of which they added later, thankfully). I haven't played Morrowind in a while but as far as I recall, that game did fine without markers because they gave you enough information to solve the quests on your own. Good system.
@@bigvladgaming Yes, the Morrowind quest givers gave you detailed instructions how to get to the quest and it was all kept in a journal. Problem was, sometimes the instructions were just blatantly wrong, which was a bit frustrating. I think somewhere in the game's production a decision to move a quest or the quest giver was made but the text for the directions was not updated.
@@archaeologistify Ah that sounds frustrating. I'm guessing there are patches/mods to address those inconsistencies? I don't remember that but it's been almost... 20 years since I've played. 😄
Depending on the game, environmental markers and visual storytelling where possible, instead of any meta quest markers. As a fallback, immersive markers - meaning using UI design that is both distinguishable and perfectly blends in with your map UI/theme, e.g. something that looks like it's drawn by hand. It would be great if an option for this was an easy solution, but the difference is more fundamental. Although e.g. The Witcher 3 has a POI marker option and does provide a degree of immersive in-world support for quest markers (tracks etc) if one decides to mod them out, it is ultimately a game designed to be played with markers in mind. Anyhow, hats off Tim. You are one of the few designers I look up to. Wish I could do what you do, alas I am stuck writing code for banks xD. Keep the great content going!
Here’s the thing, i’ve heard that game guides were much more relevant for older gamers and a game guide or manual would have notes, hints, and suggestions. I only bring that up because when I played the original Fallout I had to take fastidious notes and I feel like either a more in depth quest journal or quest makers would have helped. Who knows maybe i’m a baby gamer and my opinion is invalid. (Edit) Tim’s solution is the best
Nothing wrong with taking notes, although one would hope in a modern game there's a good system for that inside the game and you don't need to alt tab to do it. There's also very little wrong with having the game synthesize what you learned, with automatic journal and even map markers when you have the information; because find taking note fastidious, or people might drop off a game for a few months and forget everything that happened last time. But that's not what Tim is describing, nor what the vast majority of games with markers do.
Game guides were a cottage industry, an analog "DRM" measure, and a whole secondary revenue source for many games/publishers. GameFAQs and its antecedents on forums, Usenet, and IRC are monuments of fan-made guides, and got me through many a JRPG. I even made one myself for Shonen Jump All-Stars, since the game never got localized, and my Japanese was good enough to play, but not translate everything in real-time. Prima Guides, inch-thick manuals by a 3rd-party publisher - I bought some even for games I never ended up playing! They also had great art, incl fold-out full-size maps sometimes. Nintendo Power was as much about hints and their tips hotline as learning about upcoming games. And some NES & DOS/Amiga era games were basically not playable, or not 100%- able without looking things up in the game's manual. PC adventure games & RPGs were famous for this.
An in-depth journal is what Fallout lacked. Quest design in Morrowind was marvelous because it didn't have quest markers AND ALSO it had in-depth dialogue and journal explaining what you had to do.
I think it's an issue that could be easily solved by just making the quest objects stand out, like quest npc having bright clothes or something. Area markers are fine if they are not immersion breaking, just having a pencil circle on the map in a fantasy setting is good. I found the issue with not exact markers are bad explanation on the quest side and the item not being distinctive enough, looking around is fine, having to search every crevice to find something is annoying.
I think the way Kingdom Come: Deliverance handed this is pretty great. Sometimes it’ll go right to the NPC but very often it gives you an area and it legitimately takes you time to find the bandit camp or the lost satchel inside of the mine given a wide search area.
I love how you give a pragmatic answer based in level design when I suspect the asker wanted a principle-based answer that is right for all games. Really showed me a different side to the problem that i wouldnt have expected. Of *course* quest markers are just a tool, and of *course* there are games where they support or detract from the aesthetic being delivered.
I like how this idea is implemented in some of the quests in the 3d Fallout games where you're given a radius and have to tune into a radio frequency and use the signal strength to find the actual location. Obviously this only works from some settings but I think it's a really neat way of doing something different than just having a marker or radius.
Same with the contracts in Witcher 3 with the added bonus that each had a short story associated with it that expanded the player's understanding of the world and/or made the people inhabiting it feel more realistic as opposed to interchangable cardboard cutouts. I was pleasantly surprised to slowly uncover the story of the Devil by the Well. By the time it came time to do the deed, I felt Geralt was doing his job as a Witcher and putting the poor lady's soul to rest. Same with the Missing in Action quest and pretty much every other I can remember. So much extra work, but so worth it. The generic bandit camps I could've done without and eventually did. As the medium evolves, I expect developers will continually come up with new and innovative ways to make side questing, especially more interesting without the extremes of pinpoint map markers/no map markers; fetch this, fetch that. Ugh. Only thing right now is that the quantity over quality mindset has ensured that, no matter what the developer does with side quest navigation, it's bound to get old fast. Sincerely hoping the craze over "player has spent 'x' amount of time in our game" stuff goes bye-bye. I'll come back to your game, I promise -- over and over again -- if you'll just stop trying to exhaust me on the whole idea of it in the first playthrough. ;)
Fallout 4 did this a few times, but 76 does it quite a lot. I agree, it's an interesting twist because it gives you basically a diegetic quest marker in the form of the radio signal.
I played fallout in my early teens and not having quest markers was especially tough, but I didn't notice then because it wasn't a particularly wide adoption of quest markers in general
I have always enjoyed the feeling of figuring something out for myself, so when someone spouts some directions at me or gives me a little puzzle to solve in an RPG, and I can find or accomplish that task, I feel great about it. But if I’ve had a glass of rum or I haven’t slept in a few days or if I’m just too stressed out to fully commit to playing my role… I’ll probably either look it up or rely on a quest marker to help me. I almost always appreciate the care that developers put into either labeling specific objects or areas with quest markers. I 100% always appreciate it when I don’t HAVE to have them to pull off the quest.
I personally really dislike them and have modded games to remove them. I feel like its much more interesting to just have great quest writing and distinctive quest items that allow them to stand out without the need for UI elements to point them out. It can also help if the environment is designed to lead the player to the objective, or built in a way that displays the objective prominently through audio and visual cues.
There's a really cool concept that they used for quests in Ruined King. *bit* off topic since it's not about quest markers themselves, but there's an NPC you can talk to in different areas that are basically gossipers, whom you can pay a small amount of gold to to locate people that want quests done. It's a little like Rotface in New Vegas, except more direct. It makes sense thematically, too. It's reasonable for someone going around to catch gossip in town and try to make a quick buck out of it, whether it be a kid or a beggar or what have you, and it gives players an actual sense of immersion tied to finding quests that doesn't impede the practicality of the system. I'll gladly pay 5 gold in an Elder Scrolls game per quest for someone to tell me "Hey, this dude needs something done. He's probably over here." Just some food for thought.
For me there is an added benefit to quest markers. When I go to an area I want to explore it thoroughly. However, if you accidentally follow the quest path the game may start an event like a battle or cutscene and lock you out from any further exploration. Quest markers in this case let me know witch path to follow last.
Yes, you're not alone. Many of us follow what appear (markers or no) to be the critical path last, at best to not forget to explore the rest, at worst because too many times we've been burned by games that close things off or alter the game state too radically. I would hope that in 2024 and beyond this is not a thing anymore, but... I can understand that fear.
Quest markers are a necessity of modern gaming UI in some genres IMO. On the players' side, it's an add'l information source, like health bars or journal entries. Yes, it's non-diagetic, but you have to make some compromises to ensure everyone's up-to-speed and able to get to the fun. On the developers' side, given how many ppl actually can't navigate from context clues, or won't talk/read NPC dialogues, or have IRL gaps in their playtime that can run into months, it's an effective strategy for reducing frustration. Signposting is great, and shouldn't go away, but most folks don't have the same time/context for gaming as when they were kids 🤷
Interesting idea about the variable radius makers. I can't think of a game that uses multiple markers of one item, but I've seen several that do something like here are 4 markers go get whatever thingy is there. Thank you for your vids. I find them insightful and useful for anyone who really interested in game design.
A good thing to remember if you're not doing quest markers is to make sure you can freely access all of the quest info (in journal or by talking to the quest giver again) - if the quest giver tells you where to go and you stop playing for a month, you need to be able to figure out your direction when you come back, otherwise the quest is pretty much failed for the player.
The coolest quest direction system I have seen was in doac. It was really cool how they did it where If you had already completed the quest related to the npc they would say hey I heard "Tim" has a quest for you. Quest markers are ok, but having a dynamic system like doac had gives players something most don't even know they are missing. I know it is just a really primitive program, but it made the world seem more real.
I feel like the biggest issue for having an option to turn off quest markers is the additional burden it adds onto mission/level/world designers and QA. Since the design has to cater to a "no marker" experience, you can't really put a monster randomly in the middle of nowhere, but rather somewhere with at least a landmark, with road signs all over the game world. And have NPC tell the player "oh yeah, go west from Crunchtown and you can see a tower in the middle of a forest, the troll is right by that tower". Also, gonna try my shot at asking a question (I'm not sure if this has been discussed before): What's your opinion on designers/producers with absolute zero technical knowledge? Do you think it's helpful or actually an industry norm for these roles to learn at least some skills on the technical side so they can communicate better with engineers? And what about designers who never touch anything in engine and have engineers do all the tweaking work for them? It's a pretty common thing in eastern (China/Japan) but I'm not sure what's it like for western developers.
Hey Tim, thanks for the brainshare. Lemme throw this at you: Have you considered systemitizing the quest marker as part of the gameplay build of - say - and RPG? So the player flow is, trigger quest with word description and then perform a "Wayfinder/Navigation/Orientation" skill check to place a marker next to where a designer would have placed the marker. The skill check has some limitations to make it a meaningful decision: maybe I get one roll per marker, or maybe it takes time to re-roll or some other resource. Maybe the accuracy scales with the proximity to the marker, so the closer I am when my reroll happens, the more accurate the marker info will be. This would gamify the diffuculty option and lean it into the player fantasy of the build they are playing. This sort of mechanic could then also be useful for other emergent applications like try to figure out where an NPC might be, or try to figure out where a beast you have to track might be. It comes down to a skill check with a cooldown or cost. Sprinkle on top a clues and insights acquisition feature where the more ppl you ask about the target, the more +1s you add to your skill check. This would be the player lifting the fog of war of location possibilities through skilling up their build. Sounds kinda neat, no?
You could have markers based on sightings, and different NPCs can give you a different location, even if in the same general area. Say, one saw the monster near the cabin in the woods. Another saw it near the big horse-shaped rock. A third one saw it on the far side of the lake. Not every quest should have the same structure, of course, there could be some variation. And you can have all of those kinds of markers. Location-specific, different radiuses (depending on fuzziness of information), a specific point in a location (a house, for instance, or a certain room in a dungeon, or a well...) I like (and want) games that have all of that.
Imo the greatest implementation of 'quest markers' was in Outer Wilds. Hearing music off in space made me think "huh, I wonder what's going on out there?" *sets course* One of a kind game. I wish I could erase my memory selectively to replay it over and over.
Imo the replicated man from fallout 3 is a great example of not having quest markers. You’re given the setup for the quest, and then you have to seek out people you think would know more about the synth. The game doesn’t immediately guide you to a convenient terminal or note, but you also have clear direction on how to progress, keeping you from checking in the wrong place and getting frustrated why your interpretation of the quest didn’t lead you to the right spot. You actually need to think instead of turning your brain off and running at the quest blip on your compass, and that’s what i want from a quest. I want to be made to think about my quest and how to achieve it, which is why mystery type quests (like the robot vault in Far Harbour) tend to be my favorite
One I very much quite like is not having quest markers, but instead being given all the necessary details of where I need to go. For example: A quest requires I go to a town in order to find a character to talk to. Rather than giving me a marker, describe where to go and what to look for (Within realistic reasons) and let me figure it out so that I will gain that extra bit of satisfaction from doing it myself. This can either be in the Quest Log area, or in a notes section. Just somewhere to reference so I'm not relying strictly on memory. Now this is my personal preference, and I would like to see more RPG style games implement it, but I can definitely understand why people wouldn't like it or may view it as kinda pointless since it leans into the area markers category.
I think that area markers are usually the best because they incentive exploration more than the others, even more than no marker at all. If you don't give any indication i think that some players would look for a guide without even trying to search first, if you create an area they can think "Well, it's around here, i'm going to look"
I think you're right. Like as a player, having no quest marker often leads to wandering around hoping to figure out where I need to go where as marking the exact object for every quest makes it feel like the developer is holding your hand the whole time. Radius is a middle ground that lets you solve things without reading through a wall of chat logs to see what you missed.
One honorable mention that I believe is worth noting are the Arkham games (and now that I think about it, same with Subnautica). They use the radio for it: "we think Riddler's hiding out in the old 'laff factory'" "I'll check it out". Then you look on your map for the factory and try to find it, make your way there (you can set a waypoint or not) and start to explore it for clues. Honestly it's a great system. It's also believable dialogue that's simultaneously a relatively un-invasive quest system. More often than not, you don't feel like you're "on a quest", you feel much more immersed in the experience. Edit: Jedi Outcast was a "no markers" system that worked amazingly well and was both challenging and rewarding. Ex: You land on Nar Shadaa and are told "find Reelo Baruk" and that's IT. Who knew you'd be force pushing garbage traffic controls to get into his hideout with that simple direction? That's another game that did it excellently (but that system ties directly into map design, there weren't a lot of dead ends and you couldn't explore literally everything and was more linear than not).
The issue with the ability to turn off quest markers is that most games don't give you alternatives. I once tried to do a "immersive hardcore" run in Skyrim with no HUD and stuff but there's no indication to your objective apart from the quest marker, the quest description is totally useless so you are forced to use markers if you want to know where to go. One game I liked that balanced the quest marker thing is Kingdom Come: Deliverance, there's a quest where you have to find someone in hiding, at first there's no marker so you ask people around until one of them say: "Oh, I'm sure he is hiding in there, follow the river west of the camp until you hear a noise then head north." and as you collect clues quest markers start appearing, at first it's a search area on the map then it becomes more and more precise the more informations you have which is pretty cool.
it also depends on the style of game and quest if you want exploration and the act of solving the issue is intended to be part of the fun, quest markers stand in the way of immersion if you add alot of semi randomized fetchquests or kill xx number of enemy type then not having quest markers for a simple repetitive task can be exhausting so theres quests where it makes sense to know what you have to do, and the game automatically using your tools to make it comfortable makes sense and theres quests for immersion, the quest requests you to use your imagination and pay attention to things; explore, then quest markers stand in the way of it
I'm definitely in the camp of "game options won't solve this". I think a great example is how people play Souls (yup, got to reference Souls again): a tiny minority of players play with absolutely no outside knowledge, no Wikis, nothing; a large amount of players use Wiki "when they feel stuck", or just find another mental excuse to get the info they need; and then some play with Wiki and guides outright - this is based on a poll I've seen. But the game design informs the player - if you have no markers in your game, it tells the player it's a game about exploration, discovery and maybe careful planning. In that case, even players who prefer markers might say "I'll try it without markers until I get stuck".
I actually thought there were some quests in Starfield that had an interesting approach to this. Namely, there's one where you are searching for lost items of hotel guests, and they tell you where each guest last saw their item. No quest markers guide you to the locations themselves, so you do actually have to pay attention to the information you're told and search the relevant areas, but when you are close enough to the item itself a quest marker appears over it. For all of the other criticisms leveled at the game, this seemed like a good way to require the player to look for a quest item themselves while preventing them from missing a tiny object like a keycard just because they happened not to see it in a dark corner or something.
The reason certain gamers dislike even having the option for quest markers is that quest designers often will design for markers being on for all players, which can cause them to get lazy. As an example - in the first mission of Dishonored, the idea of having quest markers off is actually quite reasonable - you can navigate entirely via environmental clues and diegetic indicators, like signs. But there's a part of the mission where you can knock out a certain character and exfiltrate them from a building - the quest says "Bring him to a safe place"... so you'd think that putting him in an alley or something would work... but no. The designer meant "Put him in this specific dumpster in this specific alleyway" - which would have been impossible for the player to discern without markers.
Quest markers need to be used carefully and not be *too* clairvoyant. They also need to be entirely optional; I as a player should be allowed to disable them completely and still be able to figure out where to go. Skyrim made the error of designing the quests around the quest markers, so many (most?) quest descriptions didn't even *mention* location names, directions, or anything else to help you navigate. They simply assumed you'd follow the quest arrow and have no use for quest descriptions. A mod was made to change this, I think, but this is something quest designers need to keep in mind when writing their quests. I also strongly dislike markers that change depending on where you are, i.e. they lead to a specific door that leads to a building, and then it changes to point to an elevator to take you up to a certain floor, for example. If I am to use quest markers, I want it to be a static pointer that leads me to a region that I will then have to explore on my own to find my target.
The bonus with area markers could be than the area could be narrowed down, when the character learns more about the area or the quest - I like the area solution
I love it when games start with a large radius for a quest and allow you to do side objectives to shrink it. Like doing a favor for some guy who says, "it's not the first cave, try one of the others"
Ravendawn does this, circle areas, some small (like for an entrance) some big (find X in this area), you can hover the circle to get more info, it works great, you know where to go, but still feel like you're exploring.
I think this question is actually an issue of world design over anything else. If you have a location you can namedrop in the quest, or a world designed well enough that the player can intuit where the thing they need would be, then the player can also find it. If the area is too big, the world needs more diagetic subdivisions, and if they can't intuit, you need a more intuitive world. Quest markers got popularized by Bethesda because in Oblivion, they created NPCs they gave up control of and couldn't guarantee where they would be at any given moment. I think they work well to solve that particular problem.
Hmm. I'm on team no markers, but this video sold me on well thought out radius markers, maybe that is better. You could even monitor the player and adjust/shrink them if it seems like they're stuck (Warframe does this in some missions actually). Much to think about. Great vid.
I think this can definitely fall under accessibility options. I can imagine not everyone is great with pathfinding, map reading, following directions, etc. For me ideally you would have good quest and environmental design that allows a player to follow directions and find things without the need for a marker, but allows people who can't to use them.
@@TheYoungtrustNo, that would fall under breaking accessibility. B/c then you're gating-off the ability to play the game for a large segment of players. It's far more likely to be viewed as frustrating, if not outright hostile, and cost you sales & positive reviews.
I have commented on this issue before. Personally for immersion I would go without any markers on the map at all, like Kingdom Come Deliverance on HC mode. That even works on a fantasy setting, less so in space. BUT! The game itself needs to be done in a way that it is completely doable. NPCs can guide... Or mislead you, roadsigns, eavesdropping etc. In Skyrim simply turning the HUD/Markers off is pointless as you are completely lost as the game was built with markers in mind. Also people checking online for an easy way out is not the issue here as it is a personal choice, like using cheats for godmode or various exploits.
thanks for bringing this up. I prefer quest markers or area markers. there's value in making the player search the environment a little, but I don't think there's much value in giving the player text directions which may make sense to the person giving the directions but not the person receiving them. personally I have full blown ADHD so pretty much every single time I close a conversation/journal containing specific directions, I immediately forget it. pain in the ass. they're not RPGs, but the old quake/doom games had maps that involved backtracking or a way of finding the exit that didn't seem to have any rationale, so in such cases I'd just look the shit up because it gives me a headache otherwise. I think the original doom is a great action game but a substandard puzzle game.
also, I'll add it does make sense and could be more immersive if you have to refer to a journal or remember a conversation because if you're some dude swinging primitive weapons around like a sword then that's probably how you'd know where to go. also, if anyone's ever given you directions in real life you know they're not always clear, accurate, or reliable. so I'm all for "well of course the guy at the bar gave me the wrong directions, he was drunk off his ass and telling wild tales", but I'm not sure how you'd bake that into the gameplay in a fun way.
For me, one of the most immersion breaking aspects of The Outer Worlds is all the markers blatantly spelling out what the player should do-not just quest markers, but markers showing where enemies are. The result is that I spend a huge amount of time sifting through the game's menus and staring at the UI, rather than actually roleplaying and paying attention to the characters and world around me. I know a lot of classic Fallout and Arcanum fans thought The Outer Worlds was a very disappointing game in comparison, and I think the markers is a big reason for that. The fact that the classic Fallouts and Arcanum don’t have quest markers is a lot of the reason that people still play those games today. It’s a refreshing and innovative feature to this day. Just look at how much praise FromSoftware gets for having no quest markers and letting players figure things out for themselves, even though they don't do it half as well as games like Arcanum. Of course, having markers clearly spelling out objectives will tend to give a game much more mainstream appeal, but if that’s how things have to be, then at least give players the option to turn the hand-holding off. I think a roleplaying game should specifically be designed to function without markers, like Fallout 1 and Arcanum. And then if need be, an easy mode should be added in after the fact that puts markers in.
I dont really mind either approach. But I def prefer a Morrowind like style. NPCs give you enough information to go out and explore and find it yourself. Really made me feel like I was truly exploring and learning the worlds locations.
Another interesting way might be starting with a larger radius, and having ways the player can acquire information to narrow down the search and decrease the radius. For example, NPC in town tells you the monster is somewhere in Valley X, after a while exploring the valley you might encounter another NPC that you can talk to that can give you additional information, letting you know it's probably somewhere inside this cave up North, and the circle will adjust to that.
This is a bit late, but I still wanted to mention that, even though this can change how the games are played, quest markers SHOULD be considerd an accessibility feature (escpecially with "multilevel" areas). It's not everyone that has a good spatial coordination and memory. I realize that just "follow the target and click on the interaction" is (mostly) not a fun mechanic; however if you get lost in a paper bag, you'll get lost even more in a game paper bag and this can cost you players who'll put down the game even though they find everything else enjoyable. As you mentioned in other videos from Tim, if finding the locaton is an integral part of the game (puzzles, find clues, etc...) then that's a good reason. But otherwise I don't think there's a good reason not to do some form of guidance, other than perhaps missing developement time, as making a good one is still a challenge.
Regarding dislike for toggle options, I think a game without markers at all is sort of like an unspoken contract with the player that quests were designed to provide them with enough contexual information or clues to get them where they need to be, whereas a marker option sets some level of doubt that all the quests had that level of commitment in designing them to be feasible, enjoyable, and rewarding without. If a marker sends them to a cave, a non-marker version has to give enough contexual clues, tools, landmarks etc. that function like an invisible hand guiding them to the object/location, which is obviously more time-consuming and finnicky to implement for a developer vs markers, and for the player it's easy to imagine a quest designer overlooking something if markers exist since those context clues seem less critical to the design. It can be so satisfying to play a game with no markers, but because of the potential for frustration if that design is not completely on point, it sort of necessitates being an integral part of the experience, and optional markers signal that that might not be the case.
People who complain about optional markers probably wouldn’t if they were off by default. I usually hear it as a complaint about quest design-that if you design a quest to be completed without markers, that forces the designer to think in a different way about the information they give and the landmarks they place in the world. In a game with quest markers, you sometimes can’t complete the quests without the markers. Quest markers on by default means your playtesters are less likely to reveal those kinds of issues. Off by default would make your game accessible while also requiring quest designs that are completable without
I am a 40yo man who works a full time job. I don't have time or will to explore and memorize an entire open world only to figure out where quests triggers are. The only way you could make me play an open world without quest markers is Elden Ring. Give me so much variety of enemies, items, npc's, etc that I WILL want to explore the entire world and I will find the quests along the way. But if you're gonna make me walk vast empty fields fighting once in a while the same enemies over and over, you better give me markers. /rant That said, a game can be designed around markers and let the player turn them off. I am sure the people who go full role play on video games are a minority anyway.
Thanks for the great episode, Tim. It's always a joy to hear you're prospective on video games, especially rpg's. If you happen to read this comment, i have a question if your willing to answer. What's you're take on remaking video games for the "modern audience" trend.
I think the right answer is, depends on the game. In the Witcher 3 having to look for things was great, in Lost Ark, completely different game, quest markers are more fitting.
I like this approach, help them find a dungeon in a large world, but not just lead them through it. But, what about have the markers acquired, such as by having the quest giver or some other NPC "add it to your map" -- that way you still have the possibility to have some quests involve investigation or exploration to solve. Not sure how the radius thing would work on UI, though, wouldn't some *point* have to be shown there, effectively leading to the middle of the area?
I used to be kind of elitist with my thoughts on quest markers. "None at all! Game devs that rely on this are just lazy and don't want to make the effort of visual storytelling!" However, I've since realized that quest markers make a big impact of the style of gameplay. Games with an emphasis on high action, and low exploration or investigation, I can see quest markers down to the tiniest detail being a good thing. It can keep the action moving and prevent stalling points. And the opposite being very true (if gameplay is about investigating and exploring, quest markers feel like handholding and railroading). However, I would applaud any game that can insert it into the gameworld instead of feeling "gamey". If it's the future, you have a HUD display. If it is fantasy, it's an ethereal magic. A game that is more open in playstyle could accommodate both play with and without quest markers by letting you then choose the HUD or Magic markers in lieu of something else. Perhaps you have to invest in an item or resource and make effort to switch between normal and marker mode.. there is opportunity cost to make the clever person feel rewarded, but an easy fallback when you get stuck. And I like the idea of getting an area marker, and then either searching once there, or spending time/effort to "scan" and get the more narrow mark. If you make this happen over time, it is like a fallback to prevent a person from getting stuck too long. Try and search, but after a while a "ping" and you can switch to marker mode and see a closer target, etc. And if its in the game's systems, it can be interacted with. You can make a side quest difficult because of interference disrupting the feature. Or maybe to get it to work you need to research it first, or perform a ritual with some items tied to the goal in some way (or scrying, etc). You could provide alternative ways to succeed.. using diplomacy to get in-world info, or sneak and theft of documents, or research and decrypt ancient languages, etc. Thebpoint being the info can point you where to go instead of a waypoint, rewarding different playstyles. I am sure some will still dislike this, but I think this design would be the least troublesome to detractors of a given style.
Using a Professional Chef's experience as a metaphor: As a designer, when do you *know* what you have cooking is appetizing? Similarly, what are the tasting notes producers will have that make you confident in that commitment? Also, what concerns for that development team's workload and realistic ability to consistently serve up the courses that go into the meal do you go over to develop that confidence?
Hi Tim, would love to hear your thoughts on games that end and return the player to the menu upon completing the main questline, versus games that allow the player to continue playing on. Wondering if you favor a specific camp and how a developer might approach this choice. It's bittersweet to have to leave a character you've spent that time with, but also bittersweet to see the world you've saved (or doomed) no longer brimming with that sweet main-narrative life. Thanks for the channel!
I really like the idea that you only know the rough area where something is and doing investigation gets you closer to the goal With physics objects that can be pushed around though, that's a real pain because they always go missing and are a pain to find Quest objects shouldn't have physics :P
Personally, i do want a system that forces me to think and figure out where the quest object or npc is. I dont want the direct marker that allows me to turn my brain off and run straight to it. Only problem is, is when i end up searching in the wrong area because the hint or clue i was given wasn’t specific enough
Thanks for answering my question! When the game is finished how long it will take to get to store shelves? What's the lead time for shipping? There is the digital only method of epic game, Steam or online store of Xbox/Playstation.
This has brought to mind an idea I had regarding maps more then quest markers. I think Tim makes a good point about how players will just look something up, and generally I think players would just prefer to have the information in game. My idea was to keep a map experience diegetic to the game, where a player may need paper and ink to maintain a map (just an example, I think a lot of players would hate having to make town runs for more ink or something). I think though my only personal complaint with some games quest markers comes down to how well integrated it is with the world. It's easier in a sci-fi setting to believe a blinking dot. But, how do you make a good diegetic quest marker in a more grounded fantasy world?
Well if the CHARACTER is adding notes and marks to their actual map in their bag, based on what they know, that's one thing. But that's note what quest markers are like in 99%+ of games. They appear and come magically, with added information the character did not have.
I'm def in the camp of 'just tell me where to go'. I'm going back through a lot of older games and realizing how difficult they are to even get started from the lack of maps AND markers. If your game has a linear story and I can't just literally wander around a dungeon for hours, then give me clear direction. But if I have to find a place or a person BEFORE I can actually start enjoying wandering in the dungeon... that's super annoying to me. It's just murder when the pc also informs me that they know such-and-such NPC or such-and-such area super well. Well, guess what? I don't know any of this world, I just started playing! I'm not talking to EVERYONE in an entire city to find that one guy who's gonna give me the essential dialogue trigger before I can get to actually playing the game.
I think any approach is fine as long as it's fully committed. I'd hate to see a quest where the quest giver tells me that they lost their dog in an area to the east, but it's actually a corpse down a well right next to the quest giver. Or have a quest marker tell me I should tell something to an NPC in an area I don't even have access to.
I like you view on this, I do think radius base markers are the most flexible ones. No markers at all, you need some good writing to at least guide you to where it should be. So if you paid attention, you shouldn't have much problems finding it. But on the other hand it's harder for people who skip most story bits
I strongly disagree that you need good writing for that. All of us old enough to remember a time before everyone had a gps in their pocket, where we routinely gave and received directions. And you didn't need to be a talented narrative writer to explain to your SO where is the restaurant you'll meet them tonight, or a friend how to come from the metro station to your apartment, or a visiting cousin where in the whole city is the landmark or museum you are recommending.
Okay, I can’t think of how to name this, but this example is how I like quest markers: You go to a dude, he gives you a quest to go to a dungeon. He says “let me mark this on your map”. Then, the dungeon location is revealed on the map, and a quest marker points towards a dungeon. However, once you enter it, no more quest marker pointing you where to go in the dungeon, you gotta figure that out yourself
Basically show me where the content is, don’t solve it for me. Bethesda games are bad about this, pointing to a specific item on a desk in many cases. Also have it be immersive, my character wouldn’t magically know where something is if no one tells them. Also gives great opportunity for quests to find info on the place or a money sink in the form of map makers who you have to buy info from to get quest markers
The new Hitman trilogy is an example of a game with highly configurable quest markers. I think the "no markers at all" options are basically not viable for a first playthrough though, so I would never say it's unequivocally successful.
I hoped you'd address the fact that quest markers mean you're conditioning players to ignore surroundings, level design and dialogue in one fell swoop. Of course, most developers are encouraged to do so cause those qualities are often sorely neglected...
This. Not only do they condition you into never paying all that much attention, they reinforce the idea that quests are just a linear sequence of tasks that you have to do in a certain order, rather than something that you can solve in a variety of different ways. If a quest marker gives me a specific location to go to (even if it's just a "radius"), you might assume there is no real reason to look for alternate paths at all.
I think that while modern settings and other particular examples may be exempted, the level designer and the quest designers should always work hand in hand to make the quest locations as explicit or as hidden as they need to be, playing morrowind back in the day and having to find cassius in balmora where every house is the same and the indications very vague was tedious, there's also the fact that in real life there are things like street signs that can get you in the right direction with a simple glance, easly replicable in an fps, not so in an isometric game where you have to interact with the sign. Overall the presentation needs to go one step above reality to make it somewhat explicit what a place is for from a far away look, that way quest markers could be discarded completely or just have a simple map to make everything function. As for some games that while they may have them, they don't really need quest markers i would name thief, dragon's dogma, oblivion and skyrim to a certain extent, the witcher 2, blood, shadow warrior, hedon, souls games especially dark souls's undead burg and elden ring, and the long dark. Overall i'm the kind of guy who's level design+map > quest marker, there's no contest on which one is more immersive, the rest is the player's lack of attention at best or bad level design at worst.
Hey Tim, appreciate the answer, but it starts to lead into a different question: How would you design a game in a modern-internet age where a lot of players look up a guide for literally everything? Do you let this inform your design decisions to try to put more information into the game itself, or do you push against the grain and deliberately hide information, knowing that if a player wants to know more they will just open a guide or wiki? My go-to small example of this being changed in a game series is Monster Hunter. In the old games you got basically no information for skills outside of their name, no damage numbers on monsters, and had no in-game resource to check weaknesses, resistances or drops. It was basically mandatory to play with a wiki open on a second screen. Then World came along and introduced all those things, and while many hardcore players balked (at first) it made the game FAR more accessible to new players who didn't have a veteran to guide them through, without changing much if any of the actual core gameplay.
I think ideally you would start with a large radius, and maybe oif your character talks to someone and they tell you, hey try that cave over there, then the quest marker can get more precise and you learn more about what you need to do or find
I dont know if you have seen or played it yet but 'Rogue Trader' has A LOT of interesting design choices regarding many of your topics. I know you dont like reviewing a game but I think you still should take a look at it as it could be very interesting to you :)
Would it be unreasonable to have the quest marker be dependent on the type of quest? For example if the quest is for an item nobody wants to rummage through an area hunting pixels, so you just mark the item exactly. If you are looking for an npc you a quest area so you search for a specific looking monster or npc to talk to. and if its to find an area like going to a new town or city give them no quest marker and just describe where they need to go.
It has to make sense. If a quest giver points me to a place in a map, then it makes sense to have a marker, but if I magically know where a tiny object is inside a dungeon that nobody has been in for hundreds of years, then it doesn't make sense.
Agreed. I've spoken to a lot of MMO players who like this kind of hand-holding, but I feel like it takes an opportunity for exploration and turns it into a rat maze.
Some Quests are literally impossible to complete if you don't use the quest marker, that should be avoided and give as many in game hints as possible.
@@darthsnarfthink about the Stones of Barenziah quest in Skyrim. One of the first mods most people install is quest markers for them. Having to search every single area of the map for a bunch of random gems is like pulling teeth. It's worse that without mods some of the stones are locked behind particular factions or property ownership. I don't mind a lack of quest markers but please don't decide to make it such a painful process in the first place.
@@darthsnarf Yep. I think quests/dialogue should be designed and written with the assumption that quest markers won't be used. Then the designer can add them afterward. I played Skyrim again recently and without quest markers, some quests could only be completed by randomly stumbling upon the solution.
@@disky01MMO players aren't there for the content, they're there for the reward (because the reward is the content for an MMO)
I think the issue people who don't want quest markers have with it being an accessibility option is that games that go down that path usually don't bother to support that decision. Yeah, you can turn them off in something like skyrim (although I'm not sure if that was a built-in option?) but GOOD LUCK trying to ascertain the objectives and locations for your quest from just the information diegetically offered to you.
Elder Scrolls are a very good example of what happen with gamedevs and designers when you add automatic, magical quest markers. They don't bother even describing people or location, it's just "follow the marker" and you can't play without it.
Now, there are production things that Tim didn't talk about. Again with Elder Scrolls, seems pretty obvious that was also a way to compensate from moving to voice over which was very costly and a bit new at the time. Markers save a lot of money and headaches during production, unfortunately.
@@LiraeNoir Saves on localization costs too. Also, I think folks underestimate just how many people *cannot* follow written instructions, especially in a virtual world, where you're lacking normal senses. Just look at how many folks can't follow IRL recipes, patterns, or maps - or software instructions 😅
@@mandisaw If you want to make games that don't rely on pattern recognition for solution finding, then I'm not sure if you really are in the business to entertain anyone. What you're describing sounds like incredibly disabled person, for whom games might not even be suitable entertainment.
I mean, suck that blind people without legs don't ride bicycles, world is just too cruel.
I think this is where "Journals" can sort of save the day. If an NPC tells me "This pedant has meant a lot to my family, thank you for offering your help in retrieving it" and the game puts a floating marker exactly on the item simply to save voice acting and localization cost, then I simply want a quest description in the quest log to be like: "Horald Windsor, the Laketown's Blacksmith, has asked me to retrieve a pendant that has held great value for his family. He has pointed on my map that it has been left in a chest in the basement of the Abandoned Mill inside the Pitch Forest."
Sure I would prefer to have all that be voiced and animated, but I'm no mad man and I understand how much work that'd be, I can still use my imagination to patch the holes if the descriptions is at least making somewhat of an effort to sell its roleplaying aspect. But to give no information at all if I have the option to disable markers? That's just weird. That'd be like offering the players the option to have Plasma Weapons and then go and give plasma immunity to all the NPCs, like... what? Why give an unviable option to the player?
@@groovemoustache I mentioned in another thread that Journals serve a different purpose than markers. But the localization costs still stands, and it can easily exceed the VA cost if you're only doing one voice-region, but many text-regions (as is often the case).
Also, many people already skip the quest-giver text in the first place, they're not going to read it all through if you show it in the Journal. I love reading & talking to NPCs! But the stats on text-heavy games are not-great these days.
I was playing Prey (2017) recently and have found how they do quest markers interesting.
It’s tackled in a way where if the quest has the info such as: there’s an item in a safe, the safe code is 0451. The quest marker will guide you to the safe.
However, in another quest, there was the task of a missing keycard hidden in a room. The quest marker guides you to the room, but does not tell you where the item is.
So, they approach it based on what your character knows.
The hidden safe codes in videos was a nice touch, give a visual hint like the code's been wiped out in the present then reveal in the video.
@@liaminwales isn't that sort of spoiling a missable gameplay mechanic?
It is an early spoiler, but still...
It's fun to figure stuff on your own in that game.
Also it's fun that there are multiple solutions to problems.
Like using the dumbest gun in the game is actually needed if you aren't a space wizard.
Prey 2017 definitely did a lot of great things right, but it's really hard to replay it multiple times since it's not that dynamic.
I heard that the devs did intent to have random hazards that were present in mooncrash but scrapped that idea.
I'd wish you could save people, if you knew where to find them, or just were fast enough in like a dead rising type of sandbox.
@@bezceljudzelzceljsh5799 Wait what?
The game is almost 7 years old, are you saying i spoiled the plot?
I hope your joking.
The plot was a love letter to SIFI books, they had someone who knows P K D's books well. Missions where named after his books & the story is inspired by his books. It's still one of the best SIFI game's made today, a real understanding of SIFI was shown.
The graphics still look good, just wish they made a follow up game that expanded on the ideas.
Also you can play most of the game without quest markers at all and it'll still be totally playable (aside from finding specific corpses by using a terminal).
Dishonored games (especially 2) are also great at that, they feel totally different without markers, yet it feels like they were designed that way from the start
@@d4n5t3p3 For the corpses, that can certainly be tricky for no markers, but at the very least they’ll provide what section they’re in. Granted, those sections can be massive and they can be cleverly hidden somewhere so it can get tedious.
For Dishonored, it certainly feels like they designed that game with a lot of testing without the HUD. I’m on a no powers playthrough and incredibly impressed with how much thought was put into the levels to accommodate for that.
It’s the most fun I’ve had with 2 so far and slows the game down in such a way for me to appreciate a lot more things that I would missed by using movement powers to get around.
I should try a no markers run next time for Prey and Dishonored / 2. I have yet to do that.
Morrowind's lack of quest markers is absolutely one of my favorite things about it. I feel so immersed and smart figuring out quests in games like that.
Same here. And it pushes you to actually look at the world, at people, even talk to people, to figure things out. Instead of following the magic gps.
Which is something that has been "re-discovered' recently. Everyone gushed over Breath of the Wild and Elden Ring for the exploration, when we old school players of Ultima, Morrowind and other older crpg (or just tabletop players) have been asking for the removal, or the better handling and design of fast travel and automatic or gamified quest markers for many many years.
I don't really have an issue with Morrowind having zero quest markers, but I do have an issue with some of the quests which tell me "go east" when the point in question is really southeast. I can't recall which quest it was that was the worst example of this, but I do recall that it happened, and I was streaming me playing Morrowind to some of my friends that were also like "Wtf."
Morrowind typically does a decent job of telling you where to go, but if you aren't going to have quest markers, you better be damn descriptive of where to go.
@@BorkBigFrighten2 A fair criticism but in a game that immersive, I end up forgiving the game and thinking "Oh, the person I spoke to gave me faulty directions," haha.
Morrowind was the first rpg I played that didn’t have quest markers . And it legit changed my view on gaming. The satisfaction of completing difficult quests in morrowind unlike any other video game I’ve ever played it feels like I really did it , ME
Oh man, would be great to have a quest marker that can get more precise according to the info you have. For example a quest giver tells you "Go get that item from that dungeon", and you have a big area marker. Then you talk to NPCs and one of them is like "Oh yeah, I know that item, it's most likely in the basement" and the marker gets reduced. Or "Oh yeah, I actually saw that item, it's in the bookcase on the main floor" and the marker changes from an area to a point.
Kingdom Come Deliverance tackled this very issue. Successfully in my opinion. When playing in hardcore mode the map is simply an image of the games map on a canvas with nothing but a cursor, there’s no compass direction markings or quest marker to follow. It’s really neat actually because it’s set up for both types of player as the game is filled with enough information for you to play without utilising quest markers whilst also supporting the quest marker on lower difficulty modes. Good game. I recommend it.
It's an eh title the story and game play are both lackluster
Also, that game has a mix of precise quest markets and "area" markers, depending on the quest.
@@henrycrabs3497 it's a fantastic game, one of the best RPGs I ever played, at least on PC and in hardcore mode with all DLCs.
@@henrycrabs3497 People are overcritical of anything these days. Fallout 2, BG 2, VTMB 1 would be completely destroyed if they were subjected to modern social standards lol. The best thing somebody can do is play a game without caring about what critics have to say.
The absence of automated/magical markers also has one very strong implication: it allow for *exploration*. When you have markers, you follow them instead of looking around and searching for signs. No markers force deeper interaction with npc and the world to give you information and clues in the first place, then push the player to look around and actually explore, with all the positive feelings and reward that entail.
Even better if the game lets YOU, the player/character write notes in your journal and marks on your map. Manual, made-by-player markers are good. Something like ARMA does it well, albeit in a very different genre.
I'm firmly in the "no quest markers ever" camp myself. It's a lot more fun when I have to navigate the actual game world, not an artificial, heavily simplified interface layer on top of it.
The fact that you can look things up on the internet doesn't change anything for me either, since you can also just not do that if you want to explore and navigate on your own. On the other hand, games that have quest markers usually either don't let you disable them at all, or aren't designed to be played without them (meaning that if you disable quest markers, you will be given no clue whatsoever on where anything is).
I agree with you. When you design for no quest markers you generally end up with a better designed world because it has to facilitate navigating by the world itself. Also if you know your audience can just look things up if they're frustrated, then it's fine to just let them do that if they want but make the game's intended/default experience ask a higher player investment.
No Quest Markers is great when the quests are designed with that in mind. But when I'm playing Skyrim and an NPC asks for a specific unique item, and gives me zero indication where to find it in the world, well then I just have to hope I stumble upon the solution randomly as I explore the world. And it's not that the NPC doesn't know where it is. They just don't tell you through dialogue because they assume you're using quest markers. Skyrim without quest markers would be a nightmare. Other games are better about this though. Bethesda games are particularly bad.
It's fun exploring if the world always interacts to your exploring of it. Imagine you look for a specific item (*ahem water chip) and there is no context or anything, or there is just 1 NPC that can hint to that location the item is at. This is not fun. This is torture. It's like hot and cold game but it's always cold. Thank God for the internet for providing solutions although figuring it out on your own and telling friends about it was a weird flex back then.
You can definitely write quests in a way that the quest can be done without a quest marker. The marker is there as a guide, but not as a necessary tool to complete said quest or mission.
If you want to, you can skip dialogue, not bother to take notes and then just follow the marker, but if you want you can listen to the quest giver, read the notes around and follow the trail to complete the mission.
I understand this is a much bigger undertaking than most people might think, but it's the way I would prefer it. Some brilliant quest mods are written this way for games like New Vegas or Skyrim and I wish to see more of this.
if you skip the narrative why would you play an rpg?
@@soldat88hun Oh, my sweet summer child. Let me tell you the tale of the MMO player.
@@soldat88hunThere's a friend of mine who literally skips every piece of dialogue he *can* because he's shoot first, ask questions never. It's gameplay first and foremost for him and it's how he approaches any game, in any genre. I *loathe* that approach, but it's how he does it.
He's also very intelligent, well spoken and good at problem solving - none of that matters, he does it that way and his way is with the blunt-est instrument possible.
So, sadly, individuals that choose that option absolutely exist.
@@soldat88hun I like my numbers going up, and rpgs do that.
[Number go up] -> [brain make happy chemical]
Also that's the reason why games that didn't need "rpg" elements now have them :(
@@nerdock4747 Well, if brute force solves all the games problems, isn't that a valid way to play?
If it's a rpg game, can't he play as a power seeking murderer?
I prefer no quest marker myself. But I played the heck out of Morrowind, Fallout, Baldur's Gate and Arcanum. So when I think "RPG" that's immediately where my head goes.
We are currently making an Addon for Elder Scrolls Online where players get to add directions for each of the 2k+ quests so that they can quest like in Morrowind.
I personally prefer no quest markers at all. Also I've come to realize that I don't even like a player map marker.
It takes the fun out of exploration in an open world game when you're basically equipped with an in-game google maps gps all the time.
I like how the game Darkwood by the polish studio Acid Wizard handled it. You have a map, and markers are automatically placed for locations you discover, but the caveat is that you can't see your own location on the map.
A location you are in the vicinity off gets highlighted in red when you're near that location, but not which cardinal direction you're coming from or facing, so the player has to do some of the legwork of navigation for themselves.
It's fun to get lost in games sometimes, and the interesting situations you end up in as a consequence 😄
I like area markers because they help bridge the gap between my and my character's memory and knowledge without spoiling the exploration. Similar to automatic quest journals.
I also like when the area gets more narrow as I discover new things. Say I need to find something in a specific inn in a village far to the west. It could start out covering the whole region that I haven't explored at all, narrow down to the village once I see a road sign or a map of the region, narrow down to the inn once I see it or a map of the village, and so on.
Thank you for the video!
I like when quests are written in a way that does not require quest markers. Then for the time constrained among us (like myself) I like the inclusion of in game systems that can guide the player more closely (e.g. the clairvoyance spell in Skyrim) to their goal. Toggle-able UI markers are fine as a third layer.
Thanks again and have a great weekend!
The reason I like area markers is because sometimes I put games down for a few days (or much longer) at a time and by the time I come back I genuinely CAN'T remember what I was looking for. Sure I could go back and find the SPECIFIC NPC that has the vague or almost exact directions which lead me to my objective, or I could have a marker pointing me directly do the object so I don't have to look for it, but both of those are boring.
Mark the NPC that gave me the quest, give me a concise summary of my quest and objective in the journal, AND mark the general search area within reason like described in this video. The result is that you've made an intuitive quest system that keeps me in the game world and not on GameFAQs or reddit.
Some part of me also misses how certain games had overall maps small enough to make it a non-issue (like Majora's Mask or Shadow of the Colossus)
My favorite system for these types of problems was the way they handled it in RDR2. They made the option to hide or use the minimap extremely easy to do on the fly (it's a d-pad + face-button combo on a controller), and added an ability to check it briefly when it's off before it disappears again. It maintains that sense of direction having a minimap provides, but also allows you to get lost in the beautiful open world. Also, the sound is designed in such a way that the random events you pass by are still hard to miss, especially if you wear headphones. It feels like a game that was designed to be played without a minimap until Rockstar realized that's a bit of an accessibility concern when it comes to those random events.
Yeah radius can work pretty well. In Kingdom Come Deliverance it is done perfectly. It lets me know general area, but still lets me figure stuff out for myself. But I love the Fallout and Arcanum approach too. But in modern 3D open worlds, no markers at all can be difficult.
kc:d was the first game i thought of for radius markers lol
I disagree. That design just killed whodunnit investigations for example. "Who is the killer? Where are they?" Well just look at the map, if the marker as a radius for the local town, you know they haven't left town.
@@LiraeNoir It didn't "kill whodunnit investigation", it made it more playable and fun. Games are not reality simulators and KCD is not detective simulator (although it comes closer than most), it still has to be finishable and playable without endless frustration that reality brings.
In a fantasy RPG I would use a handdrawn map of the area, and then a hand-drawn marker, like humans would do that to roughtly mark it for someone. (A cross, a circle or an outline around the region)
People dislike having the quest markers be optional because usually the game was designed with markers in mind, and the option to disable them is an afterthought. I've seen someone stubbornly try to play Skyrim with markers disabled and the journal just didn't give enough information on where you had to go. IF the game is designed without markers, but it just happens to have them as an option, I don't think anyone would complain.
I have this same problem with fast travel. I don't like it, even as an option. Because if fast travel is available, quest designers will have you travel across the whole map multiple times within the same quest, just because it's easy to do. and if you want an "immersive" way to travel, you are out of luck.
I recently started playing Avernum Escape From the Pit, and I really like how the game does quest markers. The game has a world map that shows discovered locations and quest "areas". For example, if you hover your mouse over a location, it will show a list of quests that you already started and are in your quest log that are related to that area. I think this is a good way to guide the player to the right location for a quest but still require the player to search the location to find what they are looking for.
Also, in addition to having the quest shown on the map, the quest log does a good job describing how to get to the quest and how to complete it without even needing a quest marker.
Ideally, quests should be written well enough to give effective directions if you choose not to use quest markers. However, a quest marker toggle in the options menu should exist too, if the player chooses them.
Agree, specially when you leave the game for a short while and forget the devilish details behind the quests. Sure, a handbook system like the one in Neverwinter Nights can come in handy (and I prefer it over any type of auto-marking over the map, let alone the hud) but in the end, having the narrative covering the quests paths and an optional area marking is truly more than enough for an RPG.
On a side note, I might be wrong so please someone correct me, but I kinda remember that the narrative in New Vegas allowed you to complete the quests with the compass markings disabled, while F3 went the opposite way.
@@PointReflex Not sure about Fallout 3 but New Vegas definitely guided you along at least the main quest if not most side quests just by quest directions by the NPC’s.
I had an argument about this with my brother and what you said was basically our conclusion. It's a good compromise.
For what it's worth (basically nothing). I strongly dislike quest markers; I believe it prevents players from engaging with the world, immersing themselves, and exploring. Just my opinion.
Iii
No m m
Mmm
Y I’m
Area markers are indeed a good solution. They provide the guidance for people to know where to go (it could be anywhere on a world map otherwise) without spoiling what to do or where to go exactly. There were games which showed you quest markers for the exact chest an item is in or enemies you have to kill (not just one boss NPC), and it feels very cheap, rendering the entire experience grindy. It's like the NPCs already knows what to do, where to go, and you are just one of many on a conveyor belt of "adventurers" jumping through the hoops laid before you. While technically it's arguably often the case, it's bad to make it too obvious.
Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind is an excellent example of both good design without quest markers and why it's so hard to pull off, particularly in a modern context. I think a big factor is voiced dialogue.
Morrowind's dialogue is completely text based, and the player's journal records both quest updates and NPC dialogue. Finding a particular objective encourages exploration and can feel very rewarding (when it works!), the player can refer back to the directions given by an NPC while exploring at any time.
In the sequel, Oblivion, it's easy to see just how much the introduction of completely voiced dialogue had flow-on effects to other design considerations. Dialogue now has a cost associated with it (paying voice actors) and, at the time of development, disk storage constraints affected how much dialogue could be recorded. Not only that, but any changes to quest design following testing could require lines to be re-voiced if an objective is moved. Even if a developer went to the effort of having voice actors record directions, listening to dozens or hundreds of NPC's slowly explain how to find an objective (only for the player to forget and have to refer to their notes later anyway) isn't exactly fun.
Personally, I wish there was a resurgence in games with text-based dialogue, but I completely understand the reasons why this is unlikely. Tim, if you get the chance I'd love to hear your thoughts on voiced vs. text-based dialogue in game design. Great video!
I like early Piranha Bytes approach to this. If you want a map, you have to buy/steal it from a mapmaker in the game. The maps are not always accurate or complete, and sometimes contain embelishments (such as an elaborate drawing of a troll in the corner of the Gothic 2 map where a black troll lives). It's just a drawn map; the only marked thing is your position and orientation.
However, occasionally quest givers will ask if you have a map, and if you do they will draw on it to tell you where to go. Or if you don't they will just try to explain it. Others might give you a new map with specific markings on it.
Having the map be diegetic is such a great touch and a massive boost to immersion. I wish more games did it like that.
My only standard with quest markers is that if a long-lost treasure has been missing for thousands of years, you probably shouldn't have a quest marker that shows its place within one meter. (And yes, I'm of the same generation that loves the ambiguity of old Thief games' maps.)
Not related to this video, but to this channel: I devoured Lord of Light in like 3 days. It was so good. Thanks for recommending it (constantly) Tim!
I personally prefer using just the normal map to lead a player to something, then once theyre inside the dungeon or whatever it be, just let good level design guide them around
eg if you gotta steal the orzob scepter from the big haunted castle, just mark the big haunted castle on the map (not as a quest marker just as a thing that was always there) and then once theyre there in the castle good map design will make it clear where theyre going
What if the castle is the whole map?
@@bezceljudzelzceljsh5799then you could have smaller areas and rooms, and then point towards those
Recently I've replayed Morrowind (with modded graphics and minor gameplay tweaks) and Elden Ring. Neither of the games have quest markers and the effect of this is that It made me take in and remember the environments, roads, bridges etc. Elden Ring has a really good map where you have drawings on it and you'll always find something interesting if you zoom in, discover a little ruin of a church and decide to ride there. On top of that, Elden Ring's big quest marker for main quest is the massive glowing tree in the distance. "See that tree? Get to it." Now that's one hell of a quest marker.
Elden Ring didn't need quest markers as it didn't have a traditional quest system, more like little stories that you can affect throughout your journey. Much less to keep track of. But I sure could have used an in-game journal and NPC markers ( the latter of which they added later, thankfully). I haven't played Morrowind in a while but as far as I recall, that game did fine without markers because they gave you enough information to solve the quests on your own. Good system.
@@bigvladgaming Yes, the Morrowind quest givers gave you detailed instructions how to get to the quest and it was all kept in a journal. Problem was, sometimes the instructions were just blatantly wrong, which was a bit frustrating. I think somewhere in the game's production a decision to move a quest or the quest giver was made but the text for the directions was not updated.
@@archaeologistify Ah that sounds frustrating. I'm guessing there are patches/mods to address those inconsistencies? I don't remember that but it's been almost... 20 years since I've played. 😄
@@archaeologistify There are very few quests (maybe 2 or 3, all sidequests) in Morrowind which actually give false directions, it's way overblown IMO
@@Revacholiere I know, but it only took one of them for me to become sceptical and feel worse about the rest while I played it for the first time.
Depending on the game, environmental markers and visual storytelling where possible, instead of any meta quest markers.
As a fallback, immersive markers - meaning using UI design that is both distinguishable and perfectly blends in with your map UI/theme, e.g. something that looks like it's drawn by hand.
It would be great if an option for this was an easy solution, but the difference is more fundamental. Although e.g. The Witcher 3 has a POI marker option and does provide a degree of immersive in-world support for quest markers (tracks etc) if one decides to mod them out, it is ultimately a game designed to be played with markers in mind.
Anyhow, hats off Tim. You are one of the few designers I look up to. Wish I could do what you do, alas I am stuck writing code for banks xD. Keep the great content going!
Here’s the thing, i’ve heard that game guides were much more relevant for older gamers and a game guide or manual would have notes, hints, and suggestions. I only bring that up because when I played the original Fallout I had to take fastidious notes and I feel like either a more in depth quest journal or quest makers would have helped. Who knows maybe i’m a baby gamer and my opinion is invalid. (Edit) Tim’s solution is the best
Nothing wrong with taking notes, although one would hope in a modern game there's a good system for that inside the game and you don't need to alt tab to do it.
There's also very little wrong with having the game synthesize what you learned, with automatic journal and even map markers when you have the information; because find taking note fastidious, or people might drop off a game for a few months and forget everything that happened last time.
But that's not what Tim is describing, nor what the vast majority of games with markers do.
Game guides were a cottage industry, an analog "DRM" measure, and a whole secondary revenue source for many games/publishers. GameFAQs and its antecedents on forums, Usenet, and IRC are monuments of fan-made guides, and got me through many a JRPG. I even made one myself for Shonen Jump All-Stars, since the game never got localized, and my Japanese was good enough to play, but not translate everything in real-time.
Prima Guides, inch-thick manuals by a 3rd-party publisher - I bought some even for games I never ended up playing! They also had great art, incl fold-out full-size maps sometimes.
Nintendo Power was as much about hints and their tips hotline as learning about upcoming games.
And some NES & DOS/Amiga era games were basically not playable, or not 100%- able without looking things up in the game's manual. PC adventure games & RPGs were famous for this.
An in-depth journal is what Fallout lacked. Quest design in Morrowind was marvelous because it didn't have quest markers AND ALSO it had in-depth dialogue and journal explaining what you had to do.
I think it's an issue that could be easily solved by just making the quest objects stand out, like quest npc having bright clothes or something.
Area markers are fine if they are not immersion breaking, just having a pencil circle on the map in a fantasy setting is good.
I found the issue with not exact markers are bad explanation on the quest side and the item not being distinctive enough, looking around is fine, having to search every crevice to find something is annoying.
I think the way Kingdom Come: Deliverance handed this is pretty great. Sometimes it’ll go right to the NPC but very often it gives you an area and it legitimately takes you time to find the bandit camp or the lost satchel inside of the mine given a wide search area.
I love how you give a pragmatic answer based in level design when I suspect the asker wanted a principle-based answer that is right for all games. Really showed me a different side to the problem that i wouldnt have expected. Of *course* quest markers are just a tool, and of *course* there are games where they support or detract from the aesthetic being delivered.
I like how this idea is implemented in some of the quests in the 3d Fallout games where you're given a radius and have to tune into a radio frequency and use the signal strength to find the actual location. Obviously this only works from some settings but I think it's a really neat way of doing something different than just having a marker or radius.
Same with the contracts in Witcher 3 with the added bonus that each had a short story associated with it that expanded the player's understanding of the world and/or made the people inhabiting it feel more realistic as opposed to interchangable cardboard cutouts. I was pleasantly surprised to slowly uncover the story of the Devil by the Well. By the time it came time to do the deed, I felt Geralt was doing his job as a Witcher and putting the poor lady's soul to rest. Same with the Missing in Action quest and pretty much every other I can remember. So much extra work, but so worth it. The generic bandit camps I could've done without and eventually did.
As the medium evolves, I expect developers will continually come up with new and innovative ways to make side questing, especially more interesting without the extremes of pinpoint map markers/no map markers; fetch this, fetch that. Ugh. Only thing right now is that the quantity over quality mindset has ensured that, no matter what the developer does with side quest navigation, it's bound to get old fast. Sincerely hoping the craze over "player has spent 'x' amount of time in our game" stuff goes bye-bye. I'll come back to your game, I promise -- over and over again -- if you'll just stop trying to exhaust me on the whole idea of it in the first playthrough. ;)
Fallout 4 did this a few times, but 76 does it quite a lot. I agree, it's an interesting twist because it gives you basically a diegetic quest marker in the form of the radio signal.
I played fallout in my early teens and not having quest markers was especially tough, but I didn't notice then because it wasn't a particularly wide adoption of quest markers in general
I have always enjoyed the feeling of figuring something out for myself, so when someone spouts some directions at me or gives me a little puzzle to solve in an RPG, and I can find or accomplish that task, I feel great about it.
But if I’ve had a glass of rum or I haven’t slept in a few days or if I’m just too stressed out to fully commit to playing my role… I’ll probably either look it up or rely on a quest marker to help me.
I almost always appreciate the care that developers put into either labeling specific objects or areas with quest markers. I 100% always appreciate it when I don’t HAVE to have them to pull off the quest.
I personally really dislike them and have modded games to remove them. I feel like its much more interesting to just have great quest writing and distinctive quest items that allow them to stand out without the need for UI elements to point them out. It can also help if the environment is designed to lead the player to the objective, or built in a way that displays the objective prominently through audio and visual cues.
Agree so much with this!
I don't like it. I end up missing what the game wants me to find then I just have to look up someone else showing me what to get.
@@TheGamedragon96 Noted. You are free to disagree.
There's a really cool concept that they used for quests in Ruined King. *bit* off topic since it's not about quest markers themselves, but there's an NPC you can talk to in different areas that are basically gossipers, whom you can pay a small amount of gold to to locate people that want quests done. It's a little like Rotface in New Vegas, except more direct.
It makes sense thematically, too. It's reasonable for someone going around to catch gossip in town and try to make a quick buck out of it, whether it be a kid or a beggar or what have you, and it gives players an actual sense of immersion tied to finding quests that doesn't impede the practicality of the system. I'll gladly pay 5 gold in an Elder Scrolls game per quest for someone to tell me "Hey, this dude needs something done. He's probably over here."
Just some food for thought.
For me there is an added benefit to quest markers. When I go to an area I want to explore it thoroughly. However, if you accidentally follow the quest path the game may start an event like a battle or cutscene and lock you out from any further exploration. Quest markers in this case let me know witch path to follow last.
Yes, you're not alone. Many of us follow what appear (markers or no) to be the critical path last, at best to not forget to explore the rest, at worst because too many times we've been burned by games that close things off or alter the game state too radically.
I would hope that in 2024 and beyond this is not a thing anymore, but... I can understand that fear.
Quest markers are a necessity of modern gaming UI in some genres IMO. On the players' side, it's an add'l information source, like health bars or journal entries. Yes, it's non-diagetic, but you have to make some compromises to ensure everyone's up-to-speed and able to get to the fun.
On the developers' side, given how many ppl actually can't navigate from context clues, or won't talk/read NPC dialogues, or have IRL gaps in their playtime that can run into months, it's an effective strategy for reducing frustration. Signposting is great, and shouldn't go away, but most folks don't have the same time/context for gaming as when they were kids 🤷
Interesting idea about the variable radius makers. I can't think of a game that uses multiple markers of one item, but I've seen several that do something like here are 4 markers go get whatever thingy is there.
Thank you for your vids. I find them insightful and useful for anyone who really interested in game design.
Daily Tim with Coffee, call it Tim Bits
Tim Hortons might have an issue with Tim Bits
Different industries, fair game @@wesss9353
@@AlexanderLaubscher-v9qcopyright laws, trademarks infringement
A good thing to remember if you're not doing quest markers is to make sure you can freely access all of the quest info (in journal or by talking to the quest giver again) - if the quest giver tells you where to go and you stop playing for a month, you need to be able to figure out your direction when you come back, otherwise the quest is pretty much failed for the player.
The coolest quest direction system I have seen was in doac. It was really cool how they did it where If you had already completed the quest related to the npc they would say hey I heard "Tim" has a quest for you. Quest markers are ok, but having a dynamic system like doac had gives players something most don't even know they are missing. I know it is just a really primitive program, but it made the world seem more real.
Such matter-of-a-fact insight. Thanks for making these.
I feel like the biggest issue for having an option to turn off quest markers is the additional burden it adds onto mission/level/world designers and QA. Since the design has to cater to a "no marker" experience, you can't really put a monster randomly in the middle of nowhere, but rather somewhere with at least a landmark, with road signs all over the game world. And have NPC tell the player "oh yeah, go west from Crunchtown and you can see a tower in the middle of a forest, the troll is right by that tower".
Also, gonna try my shot at asking a question (I'm not sure if this has been discussed before): What's your opinion on designers/producers with absolute zero technical knowledge? Do you think it's helpful or actually an industry norm for these roles to learn at least some skills on the technical side so they can communicate better with engineers? And what about designers who never touch anything in engine and have engineers do all the tweaking work for them? It's a pretty common thing in eastern (China/Japan) but I'm not sure what's it like for western developers.
Hey Tim, thanks for the brainshare.
Lemme throw this at you: Have you considered systemitizing the quest marker as part of the gameplay build of - say - and RPG?
So the player flow is, trigger quest with word description and then perform a "Wayfinder/Navigation/Orientation" skill check to place a marker next to where a designer would have placed the marker.
The skill check has some limitations to make it a meaningful decision: maybe I get one roll per marker, or maybe it takes time to re-roll or some other resource. Maybe the accuracy scales with the proximity to the marker, so the closer I am when my reroll happens, the more accurate the marker info will be.
This would gamify the diffuculty option and lean it into the player fantasy of the build they are playing. This sort of mechanic could then also be useful for other emergent applications like try to figure out where an NPC might be, or try to figure out where a beast you have to track might be. It comes down to a skill check with a cooldown or cost. Sprinkle on top a clues and insights acquisition feature where the more ppl you ask about the target, the more +1s you add to your skill check.
This would be the player lifting the fog of war of location possibilities through skilling up their build. Sounds kinda neat, no?
You could have markers based on sightings, and different NPCs can give you a different location, even if in the same general area. Say, one saw the monster near the cabin in the woods. Another saw it near the big horse-shaped rock. A third one saw it on the far side of the lake.
Not every quest should have the same structure, of course, there could be some variation. And you can have all of those kinds of markers. Location-specific, different radiuses (depending on fuzziness of information), a specific point in a location (a house, for instance, or a certain room in a dungeon, or a well...)
I like (and want) games that have all of that.
Imo the greatest implementation of 'quest markers' was in Outer Wilds. Hearing music off in space made me think "huh, I wonder what's going on out there?" *sets course* One of a kind game. I wish I could erase my memory selectively to replay it over and over.
Imo the replicated man from fallout 3 is a great example of not having quest markers. You’re given the setup for the quest, and then you have to seek out people you think would know more about the synth. The game doesn’t immediately guide you to a convenient terminal or note, but you also have clear direction on how to progress, keeping you from checking in the wrong place and getting frustrated why your interpretation of the quest didn’t lead you to the right spot.
You actually need to think instead of turning your brain off and running at the quest blip on your compass, and that’s what i want from a quest. I want to be made to think about my quest and how to achieve it, which is why mystery type quests (like the robot vault in Far Harbour) tend to be my favorite
One I very much quite like is not having quest markers, but instead being given all the necessary details of where I need to go. For example: A quest requires I go to a town in order to find a character to talk to. Rather than giving me a marker, describe where to go and what to look for (Within realistic reasons) and let me figure it out so that I will gain that extra bit of satisfaction from doing it myself. This can either be in the Quest Log area, or in a notes section. Just somewhere to reference so I'm not relying strictly on memory. Now this is my personal preference, and I would like to see more RPG style games implement it, but I can definitely understand why people wouldn't like it or may view it as kinda pointless since it leans into the area markers category.
I think that area markers are usually the best because they incentive exploration more than the others, even more than no marker at all.
If you don't give any indication i think that some players would look for a guide without even trying to search first, if you create an area they can think "Well, it's around here, i'm going to look"
I think you're right. Like as a player, having no quest marker often leads to wandering around hoping to figure out where I need to go where as marking the exact object for every quest makes it feel like the developer is holding your hand the whole time. Radius is a middle ground that lets you solve things without reading through a wall of chat logs to see what you missed.
One honorable mention that I believe is worth noting are the Arkham games (and now that I think about it, same with Subnautica). They use the radio for it: "we think Riddler's hiding out in the old 'laff factory'" "I'll check it out". Then you look on your map for the factory and try to find it, make your way there (you can set a waypoint or not) and start to explore it for clues. Honestly it's a great system. It's also believable dialogue that's simultaneously a relatively un-invasive quest system. More often than not, you don't feel like you're "on a quest", you feel much more immersed in the experience.
Edit: Jedi Outcast was a "no markers" system that worked amazingly well and was both challenging and rewarding. Ex: You land on Nar Shadaa and are told "find Reelo Baruk" and that's IT. Who knew you'd be force pushing garbage traffic controls to get into his hideout with that simple direction? That's another game that did it excellently (but that system ties directly into map design, there weren't a lot of dead ends and you couldn't explore literally everything and was more linear than not).
The issue with the ability to turn off quest markers is that most games don't give you alternatives. I once tried to do a "immersive hardcore" run in Skyrim with no HUD and stuff but there's no indication to your objective apart from the quest marker, the quest description is totally useless so you are forced to use markers if you want to know where to go.
One game I liked that balanced the quest marker thing is Kingdom Come: Deliverance, there's a quest where you have to find someone in hiding, at first there's no marker so you ask people around until one of them say: "Oh, I'm sure he is hiding in there, follow the river west of the camp until you hear a noise then head north." and as you collect clues quest markers start appearing, at first it's a search area on the map then it becomes more and more precise the more informations you have which is pretty cool.
it also depends on the style of game and quest
if you want exploration and the act of solving the issue is intended to be part of the fun, quest markers stand in the way of immersion
if you add alot of semi randomized fetchquests or kill xx number of enemy type then not having quest markers for a simple repetitive task can be exhausting
so theres quests where it makes sense to know what you have to do, and the game automatically using your tools to make it comfortable makes sense
and theres quests for immersion, the quest requests you to use your imagination and pay attention to things; explore, then quest markers stand in the way of it
I'm definitely in the camp of "game options won't solve this". I think a great example is how people play Souls (yup, got to reference Souls again): a tiny minority of players play with absolutely no outside knowledge, no Wikis, nothing; a large amount of players use Wiki "when they feel stuck", or just find another mental excuse to get the info they need; and then some play with Wiki and guides outright - this is based on a poll I've seen. But the game design informs the player - if you have no markers in your game, it tells the player it's a game about exploration, discovery and maybe careful planning. In that case, even players who prefer markers might say "I'll try it without markers until I get stuck".
I actually thought there were some quests in Starfield that had an interesting approach to this. Namely, there's one where you are searching for lost items of hotel guests, and they tell you where each guest last saw their item. No quest markers guide you to the locations themselves, so you do actually have to pay attention to the information you're told and search the relevant areas, but when you are close enough to the item itself a quest marker appears over it. For all of the other criticisms leveled at the game, this seemed like a good way to require the player to look for a quest item themselves while preventing them from missing a tiny object like a keycard just because they happened not to see it in a dark corner or something.
The reason certain gamers dislike even having the option for quest markers is that quest designers often will design for markers being on for all players, which can cause them to get lazy.
As an example - in the first mission of Dishonored, the idea of having quest markers off is actually quite reasonable - you can navigate entirely via environmental clues and diegetic indicators, like signs. But there's a part of the mission where you can knock out a certain character and exfiltrate them from a building - the quest says "Bring him to a safe place"... so you'd think that putting him in an alley or something would work... but no. The designer meant "Put him in this specific dumpster in this specific alleyway" - which would have been impossible for the player to discern without markers.
Quest markers need to be used carefully and not be *too* clairvoyant. They also need to be entirely optional; I as a player should be allowed to disable them completely and still be able to figure out where to go. Skyrim made the error of designing the quests around the quest markers, so many (most?) quest descriptions didn't even *mention* location names, directions, or anything else to help you navigate. They simply assumed you'd follow the quest arrow and have no use for quest descriptions. A mod was made to change this, I think, but this is something quest designers need to keep in mind when writing their quests.
I also strongly dislike markers that change depending on where you are, i.e. they lead to a specific door that leads to a building, and then it changes to point to an elevator to take you up to a certain floor, for example. If I am to use quest markers, I want it to be a static pointer that leads me to a region that I will then have to explore on my own to find my target.
The bonus with area markers could be than the area could be narrowed down, when the character learns more about the area or the quest - I like the area solution
I love it when games start with a large radius for a quest and allow you to do side objectives to shrink it. Like doing a favor for some guy who says, "it's not the first cave, try one of the others"
Ravendawn does this, circle areas, some small (like for an entrance) some big (find X in this area), you can hover the circle to get more info, it works great, you know where to go, but still feel like you're exploring.
I think this question is actually an issue of world design over anything else. If you have a location you can namedrop in the quest, or a world designed well enough that the player can intuit where the thing they need would be, then the player can also find it. If the area is too big, the world needs more diagetic subdivisions, and if they can't intuit, you need a more intuitive world.
Quest markers got popularized by Bethesda because in Oblivion, they created NPCs they gave up control of and couldn't guarantee where they would be at any given moment. I think they work well to solve that particular problem.
Hmm. I'm on team no markers, but this video sold me on well thought out radius markers, maybe that is better. You could even monitor the player and adjust/shrink them if it seems like they're stuck (Warframe does this in some missions actually).
Much to think about. Great vid.
I think this can definitely fall under accessibility options. I can imagine not everyone is great with pathfinding, map reading, following directions, etc. For me ideally you would have good quest and environmental design that allows a player to follow directions and find things without the need for a marker, but allows people who can't to use them.
or maybe an item the game that tells you where something is for a price.
Yes, more accessibility is always better, despite whatever the FromSoftFans crowd is saying.
@@TheYoungtrustNo, that would fall under breaking accessibility. B/c then you're gating-off the ability to play the game for a large segment of players. It's far more likely to be viewed as frustrating, if not outright hostile, and cost you sales & positive reviews.
@@mandisaw I see, thanks for the input.
@@TheYoungtrust No prob! Some of this stuff isn't just "pure" game design, especially with commercial games.
What an elegant solution
I have commented on this issue before. Personally for immersion I would go without any markers on the map at all, like Kingdom Come Deliverance on HC mode. That even works on a fantasy setting, less so in space. BUT! The game itself needs to be done in a way that it is completely doable. NPCs can guide... Or mislead you, roadsigns, eavesdropping etc. In Skyrim simply turning the HUD/Markers off is pointless as you are completely lost as the game was built with markers in mind. Also people checking online for an easy way out is not the issue here as it is a personal choice, like using cheats for godmode or various exploits.
thanks for bringing this up. I prefer quest markers or area markers. there's value in making the player search the environment a little, but I don't think there's much value in giving the player text directions which may make sense to the person giving the directions but not the person receiving them. personally I have full blown ADHD so pretty much every single time I close a conversation/journal containing specific directions, I immediately forget it. pain in the ass. they're not RPGs, but the old quake/doom games had maps that involved backtracking or a way of finding the exit that didn't seem to have any rationale, so in such cases I'd just look the shit up because it gives me a headache otherwise. I think the original doom is a great action game but a substandard puzzle game.
also, I'll add it does make sense and could be more immersive if you have to refer to a journal or remember a conversation because if you're some dude swinging primitive weapons around like a sword then that's probably how you'd know where to go. also, if anyone's ever given you directions in real life you know they're not always clear, accurate, or reliable. so I'm all for "well of course the guy at the bar gave me the wrong directions, he was drunk off his ass and telling wild tales", but I'm not sure how you'd bake that into the gameplay in a fun way.
For me, one of the most immersion breaking aspects of The Outer Worlds is all the markers blatantly spelling out what the player should do-not just quest markers, but markers showing where enemies are. The result is that I spend a huge amount of time sifting through the game's menus and staring at the UI, rather than actually roleplaying and paying attention to the characters and world around me.
I know a lot of classic Fallout and Arcanum fans thought The Outer Worlds was a very disappointing game in comparison, and I think the markers is a big reason for that. The fact that the classic Fallouts and Arcanum don’t have quest markers is a lot of the reason that people still play those games today. It’s a refreshing and innovative feature to this day. Just look at how much praise FromSoftware gets for having no quest markers and letting players figure things out for themselves, even though they don't do it half as well as games like Arcanum.
Of course, having markers clearly spelling out objectives will tend to give a game much more mainstream appeal, but if that’s how things have to be, then at least give players the option to turn the hand-holding off. I think a roleplaying game should specifically be designed to function without markers, like Fallout 1 and Arcanum. And then if need be, an easy mode should be added in after the fact that puts markers in.
I dont really mind either approach. But I def prefer a Morrowind like style. NPCs give you enough information to go out and explore and find it yourself. Really made me feel like I was truly exploring and learning the worlds locations.
Another interesting way might be starting with a larger radius, and having ways the player can acquire information to narrow down the search and decrease the radius.
For example, NPC in town tells you the monster is somewhere in Valley X, after a while exploring the valley you might encounter another NPC that you can talk to that can give you additional information, letting you know it's probably somewhere inside this cave up North, and the circle will adjust to that.
seems legit
This is a bit late, but I still wanted to mention that, even though this can change how the games are played, quest markers SHOULD be considerd an accessibility feature (escpecially with "multilevel" areas).
It's not everyone that has a good spatial coordination and memory. I realize that just "follow the target and click on the interaction" is (mostly) not a fun mechanic; however if you get lost in a paper bag, you'll get lost even more in a game paper bag and this can cost you players who'll put down the game even though they find everything else enjoyable.
As you mentioned in other videos from Tim, if finding the locaton is an integral part of the game (puzzles, find clues, etc...) then that's a good reason. But otherwise I don't think there's a good reason not to do some form of guidance, other than perhaps missing developement time, as making a good one is still a challenge.
Regarding dislike for toggle options, I think a game without markers at all is sort of like an unspoken contract with the player that quests were designed to provide them with enough contexual information or clues to get them where they need to be, whereas a marker option sets some level of doubt that all the quests had that level of commitment in designing them to be feasible, enjoyable, and rewarding without.
If a marker sends them to a cave, a non-marker version has to give enough contexual clues, tools, landmarks etc. that function like an invisible hand guiding them to the object/location, which is obviously more time-consuming and finnicky to implement for a developer vs markers, and for the player it's easy to imagine a quest designer overlooking something if markers exist since those context clues seem less critical to the design.
It can be so satisfying to play a game with no markers, but because of the potential for frustration if that design is not completely on point, it sort of necessitates being an integral part of the experience, and optional markers signal that that might not be the case.
People who complain about optional markers probably wouldn’t if they were off by default. I usually hear it as a complaint about quest design-that if you design a quest to be completed without markers, that forces the designer to think in a different way about the information they give and the landmarks they place in the world. In a game with quest markers, you sometimes can’t complete the quests without the markers. Quest markers on by default means your playtesters are less likely to reveal those kinds of issues. Off by default would make your game accessible while also requiring quest designs that are completable without
I am a 40yo man who works a full time job. I don't have time or will to explore and memorize an entire open world only to figure out where quests triggers are. The only way you could make me play an open world without quest markers is Elden Ring. Give me so much variety of enemies, items, npc's, etc that I WILL want to explore the entire world and I will find the quests along the way. But if you're gonna make me walk vast empty fields fighting once in a while the same enemies over and over, you better give me markers. /rant
That said, a game can be designed around markers and let the player turn them off. I am sure the people who go full role play on video games are a minority anyway.
I think an interesting companion to this topic would be your thoughts on signposting, and how to do it effectively
Thanks for the great episode, Tim. It's always a joy to hear you're prospective on video games, especially rpg's. If you happen to read this comment, i have a question if your willing to answer. What's you're take on remaking video games for the "modern audience" trend.
I think the right answer is, depends on the game. In the Witcher 3 having to look for things was great, in Lost Ark, completely different game, quest markers are more fitting.
I am of the opinion that quest markers should be available and optional but that quests should be completeable without requiring them.
I like this approach, help them find a dungeon in a large world, but not just lead them through it. But, what about have the markers acquired, such as by having the quest giver or some other NPC "add it to your map" -- that way you still have the possibility to have some quests involve investigation or exploration to solve.
Not sure how the radius thing would work on UI, though, wouldn't some *point* have to be shown there, effectively leading to the middle of the area?
I used to be kind of elitist with my thoughts on quest markers.
"None at all! Game devs that rely on this are just lazy and don't want to make the effort of visual storytelling!"
However, I've since realized that quest markers make a big impact of the style of gameplay.
Games with an emphasis on high action, and low exploration or investigation, I can see quest markers down to the tiniest detail being a good thing. It can keep the action moving and prevent stalling points.
And the opposite being very true (if gameplay is about investigating and exploring, quest markers feel like handholding and railroading).
However, I would applaud any game that can insert it into the gameworld instead of feeling "gamey".
If it's the future, you have a HUD display. If it is fantasy, it's an ethereal magic.
A game that is more open in playstyle could accommodate both play with and without quest markers by letting you then choose the HUD or Magic markers in lieu of something else. Perhaps you have to invest in an item or resource and make effort to switch between normal and marker mode.. there is opportunity cost to make the clever person feel rewarded, but an easy fallback when you get stuck.
And I like the idea of getting an area marker, and then either searching once there, or spending time/effort to "scan" and get the more narrow mark.
If you make this happen over time, it is like a fallback to prevent a person from getting stuck too long. Try and search, but after a while a "ping" and you can switch to marker mode and see a closer target, etc.
And if its in the game's systems, it can be interacted with.
You can make a side quest difficult because of interference disrupting the feature. Or maybe to get it to work you need to research it first, or perform a ritual with some items tied to the goal in some way (or scrying, etc).
You could provide alternative ways to succeed.. using diplomacy to get in-world info, or sneak and theft of documents, or research and decrypt ancient languages, etc. Thebpoint being the info can point you where to go instead of a waypoint, rewarding different playstyles.
I am sure some will still dislike this, but I think this design would be the least troublesome to detractors of a given style.
I like how Elden ring and stardew valley did their quests
Using a Professional Chef's experience as a metaphor:
As a designer, when do you *know* what you have cooking is appetizing? Similarly, what are the tasting notes producers will have that make you confident in that commitment? Also, what concerns for that development team's workload and realistic ability to consistently serve up the courses that go into the meal do you go over to develop that confidence?
Hi Tim, would love to hear your thoughts on games that end and return the player to the menu upon completing the main questline, versus games that allow the player to continue playing on. Wondering if you favor a specific camp and how a developer might approach this choice. It's bittersweet to have to leave a character you've spent that time with, but also bittersweet to see the world you've saved (or doomed) no longer brimming with that sweet main-narrative life. Thanks for the channel!
I really like the idea that you only know the rough area where something is and doing investigation gets you closer to the goal
With physics objects that can be pushed around though, that's a real pain because they always go missing and are a pain to find
Quest objects shouldn't have physics :P
Personally, i do want a system that forces me to think and figure out where the quest object or npc is. I dont want the direct marker that allows me to turn my brain off and run straight to it. Only problem is, is when i end up searching in the wrong area because the hint or clue i was given wasn’t specific enough
Thanks for answering my question!
When the game is finished how long it will take to get to store shelves?
What's the lead time for shipping?
There is the digital only method of epic game, Steam or online store of Xbox/Playstation.
This has brought to mind an idea I had regarding maps more then quest markers. I think Tim makes a good point about how players will just look something up, and generally I think players would just prefer to have the information in game. My idea was to keep a map experience diegetic to the game, where a player may need paper and ink to maintain a map (just an example, I think a lot of players would hate having to make town runs for more ink or something). I think though my only personal complaint with some games quest markers comes down to how well integrated it is with the world.
It's easier in a sci-fi setting to believe a blinking dot. But, how do you make a good diegetic quest marker in a more grounded fantasy world?
Well if the CHARACTER is adding notes and marks to their actual map in their bag, based on what they know, that's one thing.
But that's note what quest markers are like in 99%+ of games. They appear and come magically, with added information the character did not have.
I'm def in the camp of 'just tell me where to go'. I'm going back through a lot of older games and realizing how difficult they are to even get started from the lack of maps AND markers. If your game has a linear story and I can't just literally wander around a dungeon for hours, then give me clear direction. But if I have to find a place or a person BEFORE I can actually start enjoying wandering in the dungeon... that's super annoying to me. It's just murder when the pc also informs me that they know such-and-such NPC or such-and-such area super well. Well, guess what? I don't know any of this world, I just started playing! I'm not talking to EVERYONE in an entire city to find that one guy who's gonna give me the essential dialogue trigger before I can get to actually playing the game.
I think any approach is fine as long as it's fully committed. I'd hate to see a quest where the quest giver tells me that they lost their dog in an area to the east, but it's actually a corpse down a well right next to the quest giver. Or have a quest marker tell me I should tell something to an NPC in an area I don't even have access to.
I like you view on this, I do think radius base markers are the most flexible ones. No markers at all, you need some good writing to at least guide you to where it should be. So if you paid attention, you shouldn't have much problems finding it. But on the other hand it's harder for people who skip most story bits
I strongly disagree that you need good writing for that.
All of us old enough to remember a time before everyone had a gps in their pocket, where we routinely gave and received directions. And you didn't need to be a talented narrative writer to explain to your SO where is the restaurant you'll meet them tonight, or a friend how to come from the metro station to your apartment, or a visiting cousin where in the whole city is the landmark or museum you are recommending.
Hi Tim, it's me, part of everyone :)
you haven’t even finished the video yet
Finally someone honest, not pretending to be everyone
Okay, I can’t think of how to name this, but this example is how I like quest markers:
You go to a dude, he gives you a quest to go to a dungeon. He says “let me mark this on your map”. Then, the dungeon location is revealed on the map, and a quest marker points towards a dungeon. However, once you enter it, no more quest marker pointing you where to go in the dungeon, you gotta figure that out yourself
Basically show me where the content is, don’t solve it for me. Bethesda games are bad about this, pointing to a specific item on a desk in many cases. Also have it be immersive, my character wouldn’t magically know where something is if no one tells them. Also gives great opportunity for quests to find info on the place or a money sink in the form of map makers who you have to buy info from to get quest markers
The new Hitman trilogy is an example of a game with highly configurable quest markers. I think the "no markers at all" options are basically not viable for a first playthrough though, so I would never say it's unequivocally successful.
I hoped you'd address the fact that quest markers mean you're conditioning players to ignore surroundings, level design and dialogue in one fell swoop. Of course, most developers are encouraged to do so cause those qualities are often sorely neglected...
This. Not only do they condition you into never paying all that much attention, they reinforce the idea that quests are just a linear sequence of tasks that you have to do in a certain order, rather than something that you can solve in a variety of different ways. If a quest marker gives me a specific location to go to (even if it's just a "radius"), you might assume there is no real reason to look for alternate paths at all.
I think that while modern settings and other particular examples may be exempted, the level designer and the quest designers should always work hand in hand to make the quest locations as explicit or as hidden as they need to be, playing morrowind back in the day and having to find cassius in balmora where every house is the same and the indications very vague was tedious, there's also the fact that in real life there are things like street signs that can get you in the right direction with a simple glance, easly replicable in an fps, not so in an isometric game where you have to interact with the sign.
Overall the presentation needs to go one step above reality to make it somewhat explicit what a place is for from a far away look, that way quest markers could be discarded completely or just have a simple map to make everything function.
As for some games that while they may have them, they don't really need quest markers i would name thief, dragon's dogma, oblivion and skyrim to a certain extent, the witcher 2, blood, shadow warrior, hedon, souls games especially dark souls's undead burg and elden ring, and the long dark.
Overall i'm the kind of guy who's level design+map > quest marker, there's no contest on which one is more immersive, the rest is the player's lack of attention at best or bad level design at worst.
Hey Tim, appreciate the answer, but it starts to lead into a different question: How would you design a game in a modern-internet age where a lot of players look up a guide for literally everything? Do you let this inform your design decisions to try to put more information into the game itself, or do you push against the grain and deliberately hide information, knowing that if a player wants to know more they will just open a guide or wiki?
My go-to small example of this being changed in a game series is Monster Hunter. In the old games you got basically no information for skills outside of their name, no damage numbers on monsters, and had no in-game resource to check weaknesses, resistances or drops. It was basically mandatory to play with a wiki open on a second screen. Then World came along and introduced all those things, and while many hardcore players balked (at first) it made the game FAR more accessible to new players who didn't have a veteran to guide them through, without changing much if any of the actual core gameplay.
I think ideally you would start with a large radius, and maybe oif your character talks to someone and they tell you, hey try that cave over there, then the quest marker can get more precise and you learn more about what you need to do or find
I dont know if you have seen or played it yet but 'Rogue Trader' has A LOT of interesting design choices regarding many of your topics.
I know you dont like reviewing a game but I think you still should take a look at it as it could be very interesting to you :)
Would it be unreasonable to have the quest marker be dependent on the type of quest? For example if the quest is for an item nobody wants to rummage through an area hunting pixels, so you just mark the item exactly. If you are looking for an npc you a quest area so you search for a specific looking monster or npc to talk to. and if its to find an area like going to a new town or city give them no quest marker and just describe where they need to go.