Why do people HATE quest markers?

[RandV80]

For me it's largely a visual problem. Floating objective markers are noticeable; they stand out and, while the reason for this seems obvious, the result is that they become the focus. Your eye goes straight for it instead of taking in the environment, which fades into so much background noise.

If developers could start making the markers a little less conspicuous I doubt I would mind so much. We don't need an arrow to tell us where to go when putting a little white dot over the spot will suffice. Or, dedicate a button to making the marker pop up, then have it disappear when the button's released. It's there when I need it, gone when I don't, and I don't even need to go into the option menu to switch it off if I don't want to use it.

Yep that's typically how I feel, I liken it to haven subtitles on a show/movie that's already in your native language. You don't need them, but your eyes can't help but gravitate towards them and read along. In a game like Oblivion there was no real avoiding it because the 'compass' was sitting their right in the middle of the screen, always telling you where everything is. Bethesda did a better job withe the UI design in Fallout 3, where the same functionality was much smaller and tucked away in the bottom left of the screen.

Another thing that can cause the same problem for me is minimaps, and I've been the most annoyed by Square in this. FFXII and especially the FFIV remake on the DS have been the biggest offenders for me. I mean on the DS where Dragon Quest remakes used both screens to extend the gameplay view (and could be rotated), the FF remakes they made the entire bottom screen a map that basically showed you the whole level and where all the secrets were.

 

[RandV80]

Actually a game that did this SO well is dishonored:

(Minor spoilers)

Spoiler

I played with no UI so i had no markers really, it was interesting that in one level I heard guards talking about a room where they brand you and torture you, and if you bare the mark you are exiled forever. They sounded scared. Immediately I knew how to perform a non lethal run of the level, i didnt need a single marker. I COULD turn it on, but those guards discussing the room and its function was normal, not contrived and gave me vital information that did away with the need for makers

The Metroid Prime games also do it really well. It's on by default, an exclamation mark shows up on the map for where you should go next. But you can turn it off and in doing everything is designed well enough that you can usually find your way just by exploring a little. I didn't think to do this for my first playthrough of Metroid Prime, but for Metroid Prime 2 I turned it off from the start and only got really stuck once. At which point you can just turn it back on temporarily to help yourself out.

Really this sort of design is the key. It's not really a matter of right or wrong, but a matter of preference. Some people don't have fun without some help or guidance, and others don't have fun if they feel the game is trying to hold their hand. So the best way to handle it is provide options for both.

 

[Cybylt]

Thinking about it, best example is Dragon's Dogma. To get map markers for things you have to ask around and people will tell you "Oh, I saw that by (insert landmark here)" or something to that effect and others to corroborate until you go from a general area to a fairly precise location. Unless a pawn in your party has already completed the quest, in which case they just straight up tell you and you get precise markers.

Can't remember how well the quest journal was however, but I do think that might be the best way of incorporating it into game play.

 

[Something Amyss]

Your point was that when you lose something its not "immersion breaking" for you to have literally ZERO idea where it is and be unwilling to narrow it down at all for someone to help you find it. Thats ridiculous. So naturally my example did look ridiculous.

Except I didn't say that, and you're resorting to a strawman yet again. Which was the problem in the first place.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

That is not good for immersion and players who want to roleplay and get immersed in the game need more information to play it realistically.

It's perfectly realistic that a person not know where they lost something, so where's the immersion issue?

Your point was that when you lose something its not "immersion breaking" for you to have literally ZERO idea where it is and be unwilling to narrow it down at all for someone to help you find it. Thats ridiculous. So naturally my example did look ridiculous.

Except I didn't say that, and you're resorting to a strawman yet again. Which was the problem in the first place.

It seems like that's what you're saying.

 

[Something Amyss]

It seems like that's what you're saying.

If you strip away the part where he twists my words, yes.

 

[lapan]

I'd like them to mix it up a little more. Every once in a while it is fun to actually have to discover something. Particulary with treasure hunt kinda quests

Okay yeah, quest markers often dumb down a game. But they're not the anti-christ. I'd like having an option for them in the game.

So if you wanted to have a casual session, turn the ability on, follow the marker.

However if you wanted an immersive gaming session, you could turn them off and use the direction in the quest journal that the NPC gave you or whatever.

I've played Morrowind, yeah it's cool having directions and adding an extra layer of depth, but when you're following blatantly wrong directions, or spending 45 minutes out of your precious hour gaming time looking in every house of a town looking for the NPC, then yeah that sucks and the convenience of a quest marker would be helpful.

Similarly in Skyrim, turning off your compass and just using the map to orient yourself is pretty fun at times.

It's not as simple as turning them off. The game is made with questmarkers in mind, so there are barely any directions in the quest text.

Some folks don't realise that, in a game in which people actually move about like, say, Skyrim, they are a necessity.

They weren't in the earlier TOS games and people played through them just fine.

 

[AntiChri5]

Im going to assume you meant TES, not TOS.

Other TES games haven't had people move about to such a degree. In Morrowind, characters stayed glued to the same spot for their entire lives. So "in the third house from the right after the bridge" was a much more reliable way of finding them. In Skyrim, characters stick to a schedule. They wake up, have breakfast, do their daily activities (work, wander the market, whatever then have dinner and go home. Directions would be much more complicated.

"Well, from 9 PM to 8 AM they are at home. From 9 AM to 6 PM they are at work. They have dinner at the inn at around 7 then go home for the day. Unless their schedule has been interrupted by a dragon attack, theif, vampire or other event, in which case they could be anywhere. Or they may have been kidnapped by the Falmer or a Vampire. Try looking everywhere, you will find them eventually."

Oblivion had people moving about to some, but not as much. It also had quest markers.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Except I didn't say that, and you're resorting to a strawman yet again. Which was the problem in the first place.

As has been stated, because of the random generation of quests, most will not even give you the name of the place, but will just say "I lost my ... in a cave. Can you get it back for me?" That cave could literally be anywhere across the entire map, and you didn't even get a name, so you have to use the quest markers.(1)

Or you could explore, which is what people say they want.

That is not good for immersion and players who want to roleplay and get immersed in the game need more information to play it realistically.

It's perfectly realistic that a person not know where they lost something, so where's the immersion issue? (Which is implicitly aimed at sentence one(1) since the "That" in the scentence this refers to sentence 1 and this is a response)

A specific example detailing exactly what I was talking about was raised. In this example the object was designated "..." and the place was designated "a cave". The caves location was SPECIFICALLY detailed by the person you quoted to be totally unknown in location. As in it could be literally everywhere on the entire map (see bolded part).

"for you to have literally ZERO idea where it is and be unwilling to narrow it down at all for someone to help you find it" - This is how I described the scenario. The cave is in an unknown location in the entire nation of skyrim. Thus the NPC either has no idea where it is in the nation or is unwilling to provide information as to where the cave is. Thus you can see it matches exactly with the situation i described.

This was your exact response, the response indicated that the scenario stated by the person you quoted (which i have just demonstrated is the same as the one I have been using) should not be immersion breaking.

With all that demonstrated: How on earth is that not what you said. Ive literally drawn you a line, word for word, to what youve said. Im honestly excited to see how you deny it at this point if you do at all. Youve always seemed honest in the past, this is just weird. Im not even the only poster to realise youre literally denying youve said something available in text on the same page. Maybe you didnt read the exact example the person you quoted used. But they used MY example. And YOU said it wasnt immersion breaking. I have those quotes right up there.

I found those quotes in ONE post you posted without making any editions other than to add a reference number. Since ive taken everything youve said exactly as you said it how on earth could i be twisting your words.

Im willing to concede I might have misunderstood what you wrote, but me, and obviously another poster, both found that extremely confusing if thats NOT what you meant. This is really stupid, and honestly I think its a misunderstanding. Im not trying to misrepresent you at all, I HONESTLY thought, and do think until you wanna correct me, that you justified the lack of immersion in a situation i described by saying its not immersion breaking to not know where you lose stuff. If thats now what you meant just tell me what you DID mean. This is dumb and turning unnecessarily hostile.

 

[Lodgem]

I find that quest markers are essential. Just like someone mentioned earlier there are times when I just want to do the quest. I don't always have several hours available to play the game and if I spend too long lost in the wilderness because I can't find the right cave I'm not going to be enjoying myself.

If there are quest markers then I can explore openly when I want to and still get back to the quest. This isn't childish or wanting everything handed to me on a silver platter, it's just that wandering around in the wilderness isn't always the enjoyable part.

One particularly annoying example of non-quest markers that I found was in Morrowind. I was doing quests for House Redoran and was given directions to a farm. I tried to follow those directions carefully, even back tracking several times to a known point and trying again. If I had a quest marker placed on the farm I wouldn't have wasted so much time walking back and forth and more time actually having fun, which is why I play games in the first place.

 

[Kyrian007]

I go a ways back in gaming. I do remember (and still have) the notebook that was beside my 66mHz 486 that held my gaming notes from the days of my IIe all the way to Daggerfall (which required me starting a new notebook.) Drawing maps and notating quests for Ultima games, various games worth of cheats, hints, codes, and vice-presidents (the "age verification" question to play one of the Leisure Suit Larry games was how I learned about fmr Vice President Spiro T. Agnew.)

Console gaming DID kind of change things in that regard. I never needed a notebook. I don't think it was really such a bad thing though, just different. The games were more skill based at that point. PC DID have "smarter" games. Games that required more problem solving and less lightning fast reflexes. But that doesn't really "dumb down" games in general, rather just changes the focus from puzzle solving to reflexes and reaction times. And the PC was still there, so consoles just "added to" gaming as opposed to "dumbing down."

Plus as I've gotten older and my window for gaming time has gotten smaller and smaller (I wish I had the gaming time I used to have as a kid.) As such I do appreciate not having to pause to update my notes or map, or look at my index to remember where I wrote down the quest I stumbled back into after having left it behind days before.

But, I can see examples where it just gives too much away for some of us too. I think Skyrim's a bad example, I still believe the map and quest designers were trolling us with the markers. I ALWAYS found it actually quicker to follow a road or path than try to walk straight to the objective. With all the ribboning, layering, and terrain walls added to the map to make it seem bigger than it actually was; the markers led you into dead ends and wrong turns just as often as it would lead you directly to your objective. But anyway...

As a solution, how about a "conditional" quest marker system in some future hypothetical game. When you get the quest, only an area is marked out on the map as a guide. You could either explore that area and find the objective, or ask around and investigate. Chosing to investigate or ask for directions would narrow down marked area or give you an added arrow towards your objective. It's the only kind of hybrid I can think of that bridges between the option quest markers on/off.

 

[Something Amyss]

-snip-

And you STILL had to add things to get from your statement to mine.

EDIT: If you think it's bad that it's "getting hostile," stop being hostile.

 

[Raikas]

I go a ways back in gaming. I do remember (and still have) the notebook that was beside my 66mHz 486 that held my gaming notes from the days of my IIe all the way to Daggerfall (which required me starting a new notebook.) Drawing maps and notating quests for Ultima games, various games worth of cheats, hints, codes, and vice-presidents (the "age verification" question to play one of the Leisure Suit Larry games was how I learned about fmr Vice President Spiro T. Agnew.)

Console gaming DID kind of change things in that regard. I never needed a notebook. I don't think it was really such a bad thing though, just different. The games were more skill based at that point. PC DID have "smarter" games. Games that required more problem solving and less lightning fast reflexes. But that doesn't really "dumb down" games in general, rather just changes the focus from puzzle solving to reflexes and reaction times. And the PC was still there, so consoles just "added to" gaming as opposed to "dumbing down."

I remember needing a notebook to keep track of things in Uncharted Waters on the NES back in the day, so I'm not convinced that the platform has anything to do with it.

Plus as I've gotten older and my window for gaming time has gotten smaller and smaller (I wish I had the gaming time I used to have as a kid.) As such I do appreciate not having to pause to update my notes or map, or look at my index to remember where I wrote down the quest I stumbled back into after having left it behind days before.

Yeah, I think this is a huge thing. Back in the 1980s when something like Oubliette needed a 1000 page manual to play, games like that were more of a niche market. And I don't think that's a bad thing - lengthy games are designed for a broader range of people (as well as those same people who were once willing to read a 1000 page manual, and now have less time). As far as I'm concerned, that's how it should be - streamlining, and making it possible to enjoy a lengthy game without it requiring more work than your actual job is not "dumbing down", it's simple accessibility. And it's just good business sense.

 

[McMarbles]

I love quest markers, 'cause I hate getting lost. But they should be optional.

And they are in Bravely Default. I am LOVING how customizable this game is. Tweaking the random encounter rate (all the way to turning it off) alone is invaluable.

If it wasn't for what I've heard is a terrible second half, this would be the perfect game.

Ah, well, enough shilling.

 

[Chrozi]

I was at first going to defend quest markers because as an RPG fan without a huge amount of time to play games, I'd like to be able to cut out a good portion of the wandering around aimlessly and move along with the story and action. But after some thought I think it would be just as helpful to have more in-game hints and less connect the dots. In Bravely Default you have the little yellow and blue "!" markers showing quest and sidequest locations. A simple party chat reminder would be just as helpful without marring up the scenery.

But overall, it doesn't bother me, there is still and exploratory element that satisfies that need for me. But I do miss talking to people in town and coming across one old dude in the corner that casually mentions "They say a huge tower sprung up from the ground far to the west, but I hear the way is very dangerous!"

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

And you STILL had to add things to get from your statement to mine.

EDIT: If you think it's bad that it's "getting hostile," stop being hostile.

I added numbers to show the linkage between your statement and my statement as you wrote them. I didnt change any words. I added the numerical bridge between the words you wrote and the ones directly above them to make it extremely obvious how I was reading what you wrote to come to my conclusion.

Cant you just correct me since I apparently am not reading what you wrote correctly? Why continue to string me along just saying "Nope, wrong, nope" when clearly theres a communication issue here thats confused at least 2 separate individuals as to your intent. Either that or it looks like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and wont admit that you said something thats a little funny.

If i AM reading it wrong you agree there IS am immersion issue with the scenario that hero in a half shell described? Or dont you. Can you just answer this question instead of jabbing at me?

 

[Vigormortis]

snip

For me, it's all dependent on the game.

If I'm in a game whose core gameplay is predicated, at least partially, on exploration, than the most I want to see as far as quest markers go is a rough "region" where the quest is. And in the case of a first person perspective, I want nothing on my HUD save for, at the most, a compass direction.

However, in a game like, let's say FTL, quest markers are not only acceptable but a necessity.

It's all dependent on the perspective, the "cruciality" of the quest, and whatever other mitigating gameplay mechanics may be present.

 

[Rattja]

Can't really say much that has not already been said. Personally I dont like to know that I even have the option. I don't really care how stupid this sounds to you, but it basically nullify any sense of accomplishment and I end up feeling sort of stupid for not having used it. Don't get it? Don't have to, just respect and understand that someone are able to feel that way.

My main problem with it is that it's getting harder and harder to find a game where it does not even exist, and I find that rather sad. I know I am not alone when I say I enjoy games like that, because games without are made differently.
So a few years down the line, when quest tracking is in every single game, what are we supposed to do? Where are our games?