Get Rid of the Dang Arrows

[remnant_phoenix]

While I mostly agree with the underlying philosophy he's presenting (open, organic player discovery is superior to being led by the nose) I do part ways on the details.

I think that, as long as the marker isn't intrusive (see: Call of Duty) a objective marker on a mini-map or compass is helpful. Then again, it's a subjective thing. Yahtzee says that the arrow is prodding and not easily ignored. I found it very easy to set my marker in Skyrim, but then completely ignore it along the way to explore whatever I wanted.

Also, I've found that Assassin's Creed 3 is one of the better modern games when it comes to markers and general HUD. There is less HUD in AC3 than in previous titles, and it does the nice different-colored-circle-on-the-mini-map thing, letting me know, "Hey, I'm not going to tell you EXACTLY where the animals you need to hunt are, but here's a chunk of the map that you should work with, because that's the general area."

It's a balance. Yahtzee talks about the joy of making hand-drawn maps; some gamers yearn for those old days, but I don't. At the same time, I'm not on board with the infamous "Follow" marker that COD has made famous.

I think a game like Uncharted did the balance well. Very little HUD, no objective markers, but if you take a while figuring out where to go next, it offers an optional hint as to the path you're supposed to take: that, to me, combines the best of all approaches.

 

[themilo504]

I kind of agree on the other hand I still have horrible memory?s of getting hopelessly lost in morrowind and while only focusing on your minimap or objective marker is bad having to open your quest log to check your walking instructions a lot is even worse.

to make it work you have to create a lot of easily identifiably landmarks and very clear and accurate npc instructions both of which cost a lot more time and money and are a lot harder to do well as opposed to simply giving you a quest marker.

also didn?t you complain once that a lot of sidequests were hard to find in your yakuza 4 review.

I Do agree that linear games don?t need objective arrows and I also agree that in mission based open world games like thief or dishonored there not needed but In truly open world games like skyrim or assassins creed I like to know where to go on the huge map to complete my quest/task although I do dislike it when there are quest markers in dungeons.

 

[themilo504]

double post sorry

 

[el_kabong]

A fair point. However, I've definitely lost enjoyment from games that don't have any kind of objective markers.

Discovery is usually only part of the "cake of fun" I'm trying to eat when playing a video game. Progression/advancement is another. The best games are when those two things go hand in hand. When you get rid of objective markers or maps entirely in an open-world game, you may (in effect) be killing any advancement or forcing players to Google an answer. Nothing breaks immersion more than having to look something up on Google just to continue the game.

Really, it depends on the game and the feel it's going for. I would say I agree with less (in count and obviousness) objective markers. I don't think getting rid of them entirely is the thing to do, though.

 

[RA92]

I played Dishonoured without objective markers and enjoyed it a lot more for being able to turn them off, while i'm sure many people found them nessecary. As long as features like this are optional i have no problem at all with them

But see, if a game is designed around an objective marker, then the level design or quest info might not be sufficient to let the players find their destination. For reference, Skyrim.

Also, funnily enough, Dishono(u)red has its own stealthy objective marker even if you turn off the quest marker. [http://www.blog.radiator.debacle.us/2012/11/dishonoreds-narrative-design-how-heart.html]

Hats off, Arkane. Pretty brilliant.

Eh, I actually rather like the markers. They let me know where to go last after I've explored everywhere else. Few things irritate me like accidentally stumbling into the next level/area/cutscene before I've explored to my heart's content.

That, on another hand, is a fair point. In quite a lot of RPGs I constantly save so that if I stumble across a critical location I don't want to be in, I can load back to a recent point.

I think now I understand why I like semi-open world adventure games, like BG&E. It's not large enough to get lost into, but holds enough secret in its tight design to wow and test you. Though no objective marker in FO:NV can stop me from stopping and investigating every single interesting landmark.

 

[Darth_Payn]

Open-world games, yes; linear-level games, no. Markers serve a purpose by letting you know where an objective/side-mission starter/collectible is waiting for you so you can keep it waiting while you explore and do something else. Good example is from Batman:Arkham City, where Batman marks main story objectives with something on the HUD, like the radio frequency coming from the Joker's HQ or the temperature gauge to look for Mr. Freeze, so I can explore the city as I like, and answer mr. Zsasz's phone calls, help Political Prisoners being bullied by Inmates, investigate crime scenes for evidence, or solve Riddler challenges.
Still, good article. I liked the bit in the middle where you described the chest of drawers in the middle of the forest.

 

[Covarr]

Wii U's time to shine here! Rather than an on-screen minimap, markers can be placed on a less-distracting map on the controller that doesn't cover up the screen. Here's a few different ideas I had to utilize this:

1. Major quest markers are included, but off by default. They can be toggled on and off with an icon. Minor quest markers, or other locations of note, can be marked by the player (yay touchscreen!) or possibly even by NPCs. They can not be enabled by default.

2. All markers are off by default. There are five slots (or more or less, do some user testing to see what works) available that can each store a marker for one location. Each slot allows for either a searched location from a database or a custom user-defined location. When a new quest objective is received, the option is given to add it (or replace an existing one).

With a touchscreen to more easily add or remove markers, there will be less need to have everything marked by default, and a sense of engagement by letting the player be more involved.

P.S. Thanks

 

[Halbert]

If I had to summarize Yahtzee's complaint, it would be that the markers cause you to watch the GUI at the expense of everything else. My concern is that the presence of such shortcuts leads to unwise design decisions. Let me use an example.

In AC2:B, you have to kill guard captains before you can capture towers which grant you control over an area. While the guard captains dress differently than regular soldiers, your best bet for finding them is the floating indicator over their heads. This is especially helpful, given that some of them will flee the moment you come into conflict with any of their troops, or even set off the alarm by walking into a restricted area.

At one point, there's a tower on a large plateau. There is one path up to the top, and it is guarded. Engaging the guards or moving past them sets off the alarm, at which point the guard captain immediately begins to flee. If he makes it to the tower, he cannot be engaged again until he reappears later. The only real way to defeat this section is to sprint past the guards, ignoring them to the exclusion of the captain, and kill him before he can get away.

None of this is news if you played it, but my point is that this section would have never made it into the game without that marker indicating the guard captain. It would be utterly impossible to understand what was happening in this section without it. Relying on a GUI element to facilitate accomplishment of the game seems to me to be bad design.

 

[hermes]

But Yahtzee, every game has to have them, because previous games that have done well had them!! How can we ever make progress as people if we dont carry over every popular feature whether or not its necessary or appropriate?

Funny enough, most of the oldest, most successful exploratory games didn't have floating markers (Doom, Zelda, Half Life), and so a way to show the player where to go next was considered an evolution.

Personally, I don't agree with Yatzhee on this one. I think there has to be better ways to do it than a giant yellow arrow; but I don't think exploring for the seventh time the same-looking corridors in search of a door we may have passed, while being attacked by infinite spawning enemies, is a feature we should feel nostalgic about...

 

[UNHchabo]

There are far too many games - seems to happen a lot in sandbox driving games, on reflection - where I spend far too much of the experience with my eyes glued to the minimap.

When I read this, the first thing I thought was "but, those city maps in Saints Row 2 - or whereever - are confusing when you first start playing. It can be hard to figure out which streets get you where you're going! Just like in a real city -"

At which point my brain said "well, how do you get around in a real city with no objective marker?"

And my brain then responded "with GPS, which tells me when to turn"

....

So yeah, there's my idea about how to replace mini maps and objective markers in sandbox Crime games. Have an option for an actual in-game GPS to tell you when and where to turn, but without showing you. All audio, or maybe a little HUDs left, right, straight light at the bottom of the screen that doesn't use a map.

And give players who like objective markers the option to use them anyway. But that way those that want a more organic experience can have one.

I don't know if it was added in a post-release patch, but I liked that about Burnout Paradise -- it had the "turn signals" up top showing you the suggested route whenever you approached an intersection. Then you can just watch the road for traffic as you're drifting at 200mph. Because of this, I didn't really have Yahtzee's complaint about needing to open the map every 10 seconds.

 

[Corven]

I really liked the fact that in Dishonored you could turn off pretty much every U.I. indicator so that you could play the game with out being held by the hand, it really made the game much better since you actually had to search the level carefully if you wanted to find everything.

 

[Something Amyss]

I do find their presence in linear games a bit puzzling though. I'd prefer that they simply make the path clear through the level layout, Valve-style. Then again, that's much easier said than done.

and it's much easier (and lazier) to just toss in arrows.

I find them baffling in linear games. But then again, given enough time in an open-world game, I'll stop using the arrows and markers anyway.

 

[Rack]

I need these markers because I have no sense of direction whatsoever. I can literally get lost in a straight line, I'll end up going backwards what feels like MORE than half the time. Options to turn them off? Sounds good to me.

 

[Rack]

I need these markers because I have no sense of direction whatsoever. I can literally get lost in a straight line, I'll end up going backwards what feels like MORE than half the time. Options to turn them off? Sounds good to me.

 

[Victoria Dragon]

Assassin's Creed had map markers all over the mini-map . . . .and even that requires more thought than having on screen markers. BTW i am SSSSOOOOOO LOOKING FORWARD to Yahtzee's tearing Ass creed 3 apart because even a fan as i am I couldn't have been more disappointed. Yep Skyrim I think does this the best. Skyrim allows you to place exactly however many markers you want catering to everyone in a way. You can turn all the markers of and even with them one you still need to navigate there. . . . Yep Ass Creed 3 sucks ass. . . .please someone agree with me on this cuz I'm tired of hearing how 'amazing' it is. . . .there is no excuse for some of the graphics after doing that successfully for 4 games. . . .

 

[kazriko]

I thought Yahtzee reviewed an Uncharted game at some point in the last couple of years. Uncharted games don't have markers... They do have gentle nudges of where to go if you linger in one place for too long, but no markers.

 

[xear0]

Playing Dark Souls right now. No quest markers. No Maps even. Wander down the wrong hallway and you get crushed by a big mean guy you weren't meant to fight yet.

 

[getoffmycloud]

There are far too many games - seems to happen a lot in sandbox driving games, on reflection - where I spend far too much of the experience with my eyes glued to the minimap.

When I read this, the first thing I thought was "but, those city maps in Saints Row 2 - or whereever - are confusing when you first start playing. It can be hard to figure out which streets get you where you're going! Just like in a real city -"

At which point my brain said "well, how do you get around in a real city with no objective marker?"

And my brain then responded "with GPS, which tells me when to turn"

....

So yeah, there's my idea about how to replace mini maps and objective markers in sandbox Crime games. Have an option for an actual in-game GPS to tell you when and where to turn, but without showing you. All audio, or maybe a little HUDs left, right, straight light at the bottom of the screen that doesn't use a map.

And give players who like objective markers the option to use them anyway. But that way those that want a more organic experience can have one.

The best solution I have seen in this was in the getaway on PS2 when you needed to turn the indicator on the car would come on, so simple but worked really well.