If you want to hide little quests that don’t have an impact on the game but they are just there for more fun or exploring then go for it. If you want to add unique locations that’ll have players going “WTF” haha then go for it as well.
The thing that worries me about this is how you stated that you are worried if players wonder off the path and lose themselves, Are you guys not going to make a map or an arrow pointing where the quest is located or where to go, or a symbol that represents the main quest or a quest? etc. 0_o If you guys put this in the game there is no need to worry about players losing their way. To be honest that might encourage more exploration, because players don’t always have to worry about sticking to the path and losing their way. Sorry if that doesn’t make any sense.
I can’t speak for everyone but I certainly don’t want too much MMO in my ARPG. However, I will say that MMOs in general do handle the openness or lateralness of their games well just in the sense that, unless its instanced, you risk going to an area and you will die. I like that sense of openness where I immediately know I should get the heck out of there or else.
But I don’t think this needs to be limited to just “zones” and it could be implemented into an ARPG. For example how about that area that you start adventuring in has some tough ass guys and you think, “oh, maybe I should tuck tail and run!”, but you make your way around or barely survive some tough fights and you discover an easier instance/event/area as a bonus for your determination. Essentially an area or story or progression has a reward for those willing to explore or just gives them the ability to take the chance, not some big invisible wall with a debris pile or broken bridge set piece in front of it. Again you can’t always go for complete realism, but if the pile of debris is in the way then I just go around it. If the bridge is out, I just get wet. Let me explore like we were able to in something like Skyrim. But instead of encounters scaling to me, let me get my butt handed to me if I’ve ventured too far. If the map is well marked, the quest details are there, and I see tough guys, I’m sure even the casual gamer will realize they are going in the wrong direction.
Too open is like WoW/Rift where it takes 3 hours to find the dude to kill to finish a quest. As a comparison to D3, where there is absolutely no openness, I always imagined having the ability to wander from one town to the next (more ancillary towns), discovering hidden merchants/quests. You could even randomize it so when playing an area, certain towns/enchanted coves/whatever you want to call it pop up and it adds a certain dynamic that rewards players for exploring your world. When entering these randomized add-on areas, you discover monsters that are slightly more difficult than those found in the immediate quest, but also offer unique opportunities. These area could take 10 minutes to complete to an hour. You can tie in story lines that give you hidden insight or help you gain favor, but you always find some bad ass weapon or great amulet or you find some chest with 100 grand in gold in it. Its not always there, but when you come across these hidden explorable opportunities, there is a chance to be rewarded and it helps break up the monotony of playing the story line straight through.
The randomization in Diablo 2 was barely cosmetic. That said - and I’m sure that someone will correct me on this if I am wrong - Grim Dawn will not have randomized levels like Diablo 2.
What it will have is set levels where certain routes and ways will be blocked and opened up randomly for each playthrough. This could potentially have a much larger effect in deciding what route you take to something than anything in Diablo 2 ever did.
I dig the idea you mentioned about some quests and stuff that are hard to find. Exploration should be rewarded. Being able to traverse new areas freely, zooming out and the ability to rotate the camera, man that’s a dream come true for me. I would really like to be able to put those features to good use on a nice long free roam.
I honestly thought that TQ had a good open field, but obviously not to the extent of, say, Skyrim, but that’s okay. There were enough places to go that you really felt like you were exploring rather than marching. If the quests are really well spaced, I think a quick key for an arrow of some kind would be beneficial. It would only appear on the hot key and would be opaque enough to be able to see where you’re going. If you don’t want it, don’t use it, but it’s your choice.
Sacred is too open. Certain maps in Immortal Throne were not linear enough. That should give a good impression what I’d be looking for in an ARPG. If I want to explore and such I’ll play another RPG sub-genre. When it comes to ARPG’s I want to get in, do my thing and get out instead of spending time doing “useless” things. Other games are for that.
I’ve got a inverted question for you then. How linear is too linear?
with a linear map, there’s really no chance of getting lost, so it mostly comes down to length. with a non-linear approach you can mask that length with width/volume not to mention conceivably place the end point closer to the start so there’s a shorter path start-end.
for myself, too open would be the point at which i become lost, not distracted, distracted is ok, lost as in unable to navigate successfully. to answer my own question, too linear is the point at which i notice i’m on a rail, for some reason that kinda bugs me. so a very clever or skillfully concealed forced linear pathing is probably fine.
on further consideration, diablo 2 did a heck of a job concealing the linear pathing with the various signpost quests. TQ did ok, but the signposts were a bit spread out.
for navigation, i’m thinking landmarks, but that’s hard to do with a fixed focus isometric view.
When it comes to Hack and Slash games I’m not looking for an indepth exploration experience. I’m looking for quick action. With such games I’d like to methodically clear every inch without a lot of backtracking of the map. In Immortal Throne there is a map, some ruins with the lich queen quest, which is a perfect example of not linear enough. The rest of TQ and IT is good enough.
Too linear is like the sidescrolling beat 'em ups or the new Sacred 3
I’m not bothered with illusions to give a sense of freedom. As Dungeonmaster I know how to give of the illusion that the choice of players matter while they in fact do not. Giving them a sense of freedom when there isn’t any. Great to use in RPG’s. But when it comes to H&S I only want in depth character building and loot. Rest of the gameplay is just extra en should be kept as simple as possible in my opinion.
I certainly dont want to encourage Grim Dawn into, what I consider TQ’s only flaw… TOO LINEAR.
I don’t want to feel the DEV’s breathing down my neck all the way through the game ushering me on from A to B. Sounds like Diablo 3 right?
NO NO NO NO NO !!! NOOOOOOOOO!
BIGGER IS BETTER - (Voice over from a wrestiling game back on the PS)
IMO of course
I agree with your post…
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesss!
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesss!
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesss!
Also the mandatory long cutscenes before fighting bosses in Diablo 3 were really frustrating. I know you could skip them, but they still stopped the gameplay.
ah, the jungle right?
don’t quite remember a lich QUEEN, but i remember undead king dudes. that was more of a side quest wasn’t it? I think the optimum path was relatively linear, but there weren’t any guidelines. you kinda had to know where everything was.
there was certainly backtracking if you missed it, I know i did the first time.
oh wait.
right.
lich queen.
the one in the middle of the ruins. still the jungle. needed to find the mcguffin to summon her with so you can beat her down.
hmm. point.
although that’s more quest design problem than map/world problem. you can probably design a similar backtrack on a side scroll if you feature a quest hub type design. (go get quest, get thing, come back to giver, loop) there was also, uh circe? there were like 3-4 quests in her little village that you had to go back to redeem. on the upside she had a portal thingy so it was pretty easy to get there.
question on backtracking. what annoys you most about it? the fact you’re retreading the ground (lack of novelty) or that there’s usually nothing to do in the ground being retrod(lack of action) or something else?
I personally think TQ had a good start… get lost? find the path. But I personally am an explore every corner person, and while pipeline are constricting the 1/2" tube some unnamed games have come up with are terrible.
Now, too big, and not being able to find the exit to the level is a game killer.
But mostly, OP, I’m just a little frustrated with the “lets dumb down the world so everyone can play” approach that other games took - its downright wrong.
I would say the issue is that if your creating a dungeon crawler you are creating a game for explorers. Casual explorers should catch on. You CAN simplify things so that someone who can’t find the back of their closet can play your game, but then you just ran off all the explorers that cared about your game.
I will admit that I was getting ready to pre-order Grim Dawn… but now, naw. You are starting to scare me with your Blizzard-Zynga talk.
From what I can see in the available material the individual levels/areas are just about the size I like: Progress Map from March 2012 (from [post=50544]State of the Game Address[/post]).
If you do not mind a minor spoiler of the early beginning, then you can set this into relation with this map of Lower Crossing (from [post=56368]Level Paths and Dynamic Barriers[/post]).
Good question. Personally I’d like to go through things methodically. Not just the way of exploring and unearthen each inch of the map. But also in the way of cleaning up the quests. With an ARPG I do not enjoy keeping track of notes and what to do and where. In most cases I don’t even read the texts and skim it at most. That is why quests in World of Warcraft are so perfect. It just says you need to kill something for x amount. I really don’t read the conversation/context and just want quick action for the limited time I can play.
The quests in TQ were orderly. You’d complete them without really going out of your way while exploring and moving ahead into new terrain/content. With Immortal Throne you’d had to go back after gathering the 4 stones for Hades’s vault. You’d have to go back for other quests as well. I simply did not bother with that. Simply because I was not keeping track of it. I had no idea where to even find the npc’s and wasn’t willing to waste time trying to locate them.
It is a whole different matter when playing Morrowind. In such an RPG I intently listen to conversations and write down what seems important. But with an ARPG I am looking, and expecting, a fast paced game where you keep going foward with limited depth. An ARPG to me is basically a game you can pick up and put down easily. You can play it 15-20mins before work and/or in between other activities without getting lost by what kind of story or such it had. And over the years you will still invest a lot of time in such a way. All an ARPG needs in my opinion is atmosphere, interesting environments and interesting build possibilities. Unlike another RPG where I expect more depth for which I will sit down for long periods of time.
I sure hope I’m not talking zynga speak, that’s. disturbing.
That’s weird, in the Elder Scrolls games I routinely fast forward through the texty bits assuming that anything really important will get tossed into a log somewhere. or pinned on the map.
I do however skim the books and then read what interest me closely, some of them are really quite engaging. For instance the dude in light armor stealing apples from the orchard during a siege. although now that i think about it, why the besiegers didn’t chop down the orchard makes scarce sense, although i think they explained that.
I can see your point on the getting lost on the quest givers. it’s a major weakness for non-hub quest givers, you often have a hard time finding them again. and even if they are in the hub you can have trouble remembering which section or which hub.
Heck I’m playing Divine Divinity right now, and even with the quest log which is pretty detailed on where to go back to, sometimes I’ll be in the neighborhood and completely forget to visit a reward. OTOH the big flashing neon signs in the minimap noting completed quests seem, a little obnoxious. Of course I’m exactly the type that needs or uses the damned things.
hmm, mount and blade did it pretty well, they hotlink the locations/people in the quest log and the pedia entry the hotlink takes you to has an option to center the map on the target, which’ll get you in the right ballpark and then the search options from there are pretty limited, so easy to find at that point, although tracking down a lord on the move is always a pain.
I love to explore to an extent but if an area is to big it becomes a lot of work to fully explore it. I think the overworld should have lots and lots of smaller sized open areas vs less much larger areas. Smaller chunks that are intricate yet able to be completed in a reasonable time make the game feel more rewarding and it takes more time overall and less time in one sitting to complete the game once through.
That has been my experience so far with games. If the game becomes work to explore or tedious then it is far less fun.
