Quest Compass: A Plea

[cogar888]

Only sophisticated PC gamers are capable of following directions. They had to add in the quest compass to accommodate all of the small brained console players, who are handheld through games like REmake.

As someone who will be playing this on PS4, I agree. I hope they've written directions into the dialogue and given the option to disable the quest compass, but it's probably too late at this point for them to significantly change the game's design if it wasn't already built that way.

[SonicMage117]

I was the first one who said "No hand holding" because that goes hand in hand with designing the quests around not having to use a quest compass. And it does, simply.

 

You can't really ask for one without the other and proceeding to act as if that somehow works doesn't make sense. If devs design a game around the thought in process of players not having to use the quest compass due to given infotmarion by npc's then why have the quest compass to begin with?

 

 

Anyway, glad the game has one. Some players like myself don't want to spend much time learning the exact layout of the land, assuming that the map is large, quest compass is a must and quests being designed bkeakly for the reliance on the quest compass is more of a plus. I'm not looking for replayability, as in most games, I just want to finish once then uninstall and move on.

 

So, it's really not much nonsense after all, just a good point of perspective that some here obviously do not agree with. There was nothing irrelevant about it, as all these things are connected. Oh well.

Edited December 11, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Malcador]

Seems like OP is just hoping Obsidian is competent, really.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Malcador

[agris]

Seems like OP is just hoping Obsidian is competent, really.

 

That's a funny comment, but really I don't think this boils down to competent vs incomponent. It's a deliberate decision that game makers must make in an age of quest compasses. There's been a few posts in this thread about how some games that feature a quest compass, such as Fallout: New Vegas, don't really support playing with it disabled because of the lack of description in quest logs and dialogue.

 

Those things take time to write, so on one hand I can understand why game makers choose not to support quest compass-free gameplay. This is why I'm making a plea, in the hope that Cainarsky are aware that some of their players want to play this way - a way that ever player of Fallout 1 and 2 is accustomed to.

[injurai]

One of my favorite aspects of Morrowind was getting written/spoken instructions in the writing/voice of a character that related to some sort of question or job. You had to then go explore what it meant to fulfill this request.

 

What was awful in Skyrim was how often the character told you what to expect, then the game would just guide you through to some object that needed acquired. I don't care about fulfilling an npc's fetch quest. I care about exploration, investigation, discovery, and problem solving. Give me that, and give me the wonderful writing in character to a particular npc that fills out the game world. That's a realized rpg world. Not the sort mechanical rote that has sadly become common. The waypoint compass is just the realization of that rote mechanic. It doesn't mean the deeper planning ins't there, but it often does. It circumvents the need for richer quest design.

[the truthseeker]

Considering the multi-platform release, the best potential option is to have a toggle to Quest points or not.

[Malcador]

 

Seems like OP is just hoping Obsidian is competent, really.

 

That's a funny comment, but really I don't think this boils down to competent vs incomponent. It's a deliberate decision that game makers must make in an age of quest compasses. There's been a few posts in this thread about how some games that feature a quest compass, such as Fallout: New Vegas, don't really support playing with it disabled because of the lack of description in quest logs and dialogue.

 

Those things take time to write, so on one hand I can understand why game makers choose not to support quest compass-free gameplay. This is why I'm making a plea, in the hope that Cainarsky are aware that some of their players want to play this way - a way that ever player of Fallout 1 and 2 is accustomed to.

 

 

If the compass is an option, designing it as if it were not is incompetence, though.

[SonicMage117]

Obsidian designing quests dialogue around a compass doesn't affect the storytelling quality anymore than using my gps to get somewhere I've never been affects our family trips from having maximum amount of fun. Yeep.

[Fenixp]

Well, there's quest compass/minimap and then there's map markers. I think the former is much more evil than the latter.

 

Personally, my biggest gripe with objective markers on a compass/minimap are with creating a situation where your attention gets drawn to a UI element on your screen, which is, unsurprisingly, not particularly interesting - but you feel the urge to watch it purely so that you don't get lost on the way. Make that optional, but still use markers on the in-game "big screen" map and suddenly, your attention doesn't get drawn by something that's constantly present on the screen. You look about more. You're more incentivized to get off the beaten path and explore.

 

In fact, in Witcher 3 where I absolutely had the issue where I felt like I've constantly had to watch the minimap in order to not miss some obscure side-path, all that was needed to achieve this effect was downloading a mod which would display HUD based on context. I made minimap with objective markers only display when I was using Witcher Senses and suddenly... Exploration! Beautiful world! No tunnel vision! I get lost, I press a button. Minimap fades away after a few seconds and I'm again delegated to watching environment and navigating from memory. Game suddenly feels a lot more natural.

[Tigranes]

Looks like agris has made the points well enough.

 

It should be very clear why it benefits a game to have dialogues and quests and levels designed in a way that things make sense, regardless of whether you hate quest compasses or love them. Consider:

• World A: You hear the goblins are attacking from the mountain to the north. You know what goblin camps look like because the game is consistent in how they look and what kind of places they tend to be placed in. So using common sense, you are able to take a walk to the big mountain you see, find some trails, and discover the goblin attacks. If you want, you could use the quest marker as well.
• World B: You are told the goblins are attacking. But nobody told you exactly where it's coming from, and the game was designed in a way that goblins don't exactly have a known habitat, they're just sort of here and there. Without the compass, you'd have to aimlessly wander around, so really, the only choice is to turn it on and just walk where it tells you to walk.

 

You would think that going for World A is common sense, but look at the history of RPGs and that's not necessarily the case. World A does take more effort. But I would say, again, whether you use the compass or not, there's a joy in discovering a gameworld where you realise goblins tend to hide out in shady crannies of mountains, instead of a game experience where I just say "mountain, river, whatever, none of it matters, game tells me to go somewhere kill stuff i go and kill."

 

It's exactly the same as emergent gameplay over scripted events. We all know the joy: having observed that goblins are curious and will check out a moving object, you decide to throw a barrel their way, then bomb them all when they are clustered. It's not half as fun if, instead, there is no such consistency, and instead you get a scripted game where a giant pop up tells you "QUEST UPDATE: THROW A DISTRACTION AT X SPOT", and then "QUEST UPDATE: THROW THE BOMB USING THE A BUTTON."

[SonicMage117]

Having "enough" info for quest will vary player by player, this isn't a general thing, nor will it ever be. Therefore, anyone trying to compress that by saying "One size fits all if done right" doesn't exist. Some people are just visual learners, while others are literary, doesn't make them less intelligent.

 

My youtube videos are mostly me playing games with hud disabled but that's only after I've learned the maps and game mechanics well enough to be confident with the decision to turn it off.

 

Hard to believe that people would choose quest info over quest markers in a game that features large open world and on top of that other planets and space stations. Why is it hard to believe? Because the world might be really big - we don't know the extent of it. Along with that, to much information in quest dialogue makes the player look/feel stupid rather than smarter so there's that too.

 

"Under the pink bridge on the left side of the courtyard on the west wing space station which has 3 moons"

 

Vs

 

"I heard it was somewhere near a bridge by the courtyard on a space station, I don't know"

 

It also seems more realistic and believable with less detail in the dialogue for reasoning. Why would the npc have depth of a quest or object's whereabouts anyway? But the player, having some 3rd eye or some type of power to lead them does make more sense since they are the star of the story. This is the realm of how games just flow best.

 

If we'd have it with ultra detailed dialogue, everyone would probably be complaining about that in the end as things would fall apart and/or not quite make much sense.

[Fenixp]

Let me preface the reply by saying that, in ideal world, having NPCs and quest descriptions detailed enough to be able to play the game with compass/minimap disabled is the ideal solution. It lends more credibility to the writing (usually, when somebody wants you to go somewhere, he'll actuyally tell you where that is) and makes the world building more consistent. In fact, in ideal world, an in-game mechanic replacing need for a compass entirely would be implemented - sadly, I've only ever seen something like that in Outcast, where you could ask NPCs "Where is {name of location/person}" and they would get up and point in the direction you needed to go. Then there's Far Cry 2 which would merely highlight road signs which lead in the direction of your objective. Both solutions were damned clever and I'm sure they could be expanded upon with modern tech, instead of the lazy "slap a marker on the screen" solution. However...

 

It's exactly the same as emergent gameplay over scripted events. We all know the joy: having observed that goblins are curious and will check out a moving object, you decide to throw a barrel their way, then bomb them all when they are clustered. It's not half as fun if, instead, there is no such consistency, and instead you get a scripted game where a giant pop up tells you "QUEST UPDATE: THROW A DISTRACTION AT X SPOT", and then "QUEST UPDATE: THROW THE BOMB USING THE A BUTTON."

The main difference between emergent gameplay and writing which doesn't facilitate play without quest markers is the parts of development process which need to be coordinated well. If you're building a systems-driven game, glaring bugs will become obvious fairly quickly and development of mechanics tends to be interconnected enough to make that possible (albeit still damned difficult)

 

However, to make NPCs describe quests properly for player to be able to navigate by their descriptions means coordinating:

- Level designers

- Quest designers

- Writers

 

and, in case of last minute changes, you can add voice actors to the list. And, sadly, writing and level design aren't married in the same way as mechanics are, so if writer writes a thing and level designer then changes everything around and forgets to inform the writers / writers don't care anymore, you'll be informing player of things that are no longer true. God forbid that dialogue is already voiced.

 

Now, I still think that when you do something, you should do it properly and all the reasoning I gave isn't much more than excuses from proper planning and work ethic. Sadly, we do live in the real world, and software development projects with insane milestones are especially prone to failures in the whole 'planning' bit. In other words, I want to play another game like Morrowind where navigation was a big part of the appeal, but I can definitely see why would development companies want to avoid this.

 

Edit: Just to re-iterate, I also think that the lazy clutch of quest markers needs to be obliterated, sooner than later.

 

Nintendo has realized this with their Zelda and designed it without a need for quest markers (they can be turned off and the game comfortably played without them). Assassin's Creed Oddyssey apparently allows to play with only having vague directions as opposed to knowing precisely where an objective is. Red Dead Redemption 2 is supposed to compensate for disabled minimap by more detailed descriptions etc. Prey's entirely designed to be playable without quest markers - and then makes disabling them cumbersome, but ... Eh.

 

It seems that developers are slowly realizing how intrinsically detrimental compasses / minimaps are to gameplay. It seems designers are sick of creating these vast, detailed open worlds which will then be reduced to mere tunnels by slapping a direction arrow in. Let's hope development continues in this direction and Obsidian surprises us with their own, clever and novel, solution.

Edited December 13, 2018 by Fenixp

[SonicMage117]

Hmmmm... Yeah, it's almost a bit of entitlment than actually what's best for the game's sake and the playability of it. Your definition of proper could be (and is) subjective. We should never forget these things.

 

Anyway, this is the problem with Crpg gamers not playing open world games like Far Cry 2, it's everything you're describing but yet it turned out poorly. Sometimes less in more, less complexity in navigation is good. Why would you want to make this type of game appeal to a very niche group of gamers and alienate the better portion of demographic? It just wouldn't make sense, so I hope Obsidian sticks to the norm Fallout/Skyrim quest maping structure, which is good. It's not broken so there's no need to worry about fixing something that isn't broke - unless you're trying to make the game like Shenmue or Kingdom Come which doesn't fit anyway.

Edited December 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

i feel with morrowind, main draw was always world itself. writing was primarily a sideshow and characters almost non-existent. peeps playing it wouldnt be getting itchy wanting to know 'what happens next' or 'i must resolve this' yadda yadda. it could get away with prioritising immersion over convenience bcs thats what it was selling.

 

think if ur constructing something where narrative and character are more salient, ur gonna attract more players who want to get through the beats and limit their time wandering around aimlessly.

 

also now eyeballs are more fickle. if player hits rut playing game they can just click something else on steam rather than walking all the way to local video game shop and installing from multiple discs. times be what they be.

 

visual aid also more reliable way of conveying information. problem with writing is that u can compose the clearest instructions known to god or man - and some reader will introject their own issues and turn it all into nonsense.

[SonicMage117]

Exactly right.

 

I can barely remember my schedule or what I had for dinner yesterday - even if it was necessary information to some conversation, why in the world would I (or anyone else for that matter) expect developers to treat a player any different? It's rarely a good way to approach players and when it actually works, it's through non-rpg's for whatever reason.

 

I suppose next the opposing force will pry quest log into the mix but quest logs with recorded information is far worse than a quest compass could ever be. I hate having to look at needed information to remember it, I rather prefer my character remembering things like a secret password or combination in their own, instead of havung to look in a menu at quest log info that takes time to look at. While that's different, it's still relevant as it has to do with how developers appraoch demographics and development through storytelling.

 

I'd rather have them put the effort into something else rather than do something unneeded just for picky people that doesn't improve the game at all.

[Fenixp]

also now eyeballs are more fickle. if player hits rut playing game they can just click something else on steam rather than walking all the way to local video game shop and installing from multiple discs. times be what they be.

 

visual aid also more reliable way of conveying information. problem with writing is that u can compose the clearest instructions known to god or man - and some reader will introject their own issues and turn it all into nonsense.

I'm not sure it bears repeating since it got said like twenty times throughout the thread, but the request is not to remove quest markers. They're trivial to implement and there's no reason not have them in the game. Problem is, quest markers are trivial to implement like god mode to get through tough challenges would be trivial to implement - it's easy, it's convenient, but that doesn't make it a particularly good or engaging mechanic and if your game is based around it, it'll suffer as a consequence.

[SonicMage117]

But it is asking devs to remove or add option to turn it off, because you're begging devs to make the game's dialogue descriptive enough to not rely on quest compass. You want them to give players enough info to create a more "realistic" experience, which is ironically the opposite of what it will be.

 

And again I'll say, anyone will use gps to get where they are going if they've never been there before, stopping and asking for directions is never really good for anyone, no matter how informative the person's help is. That's why the argument doesn't make sense.

 

It's not God mode in navigation lol, Now you're just talking silly. People will go where they want to go, period. There are tons of games that I've played with quest compasses where I still stop to fight something and die or get distracted and go somewhere else. If you think a quest compass stops anyone from rewarding exploration or doing anything but that particular quest, you couldn't be more wrong. And again, if it was really about dialogue/story competence/quality than this wouldn't be the issue.

Edited December 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Tigranes]

Let me preface the reply by saying that, in ideal world, having NPCs and quest descriptions detailed enough to be able to play the game with compass/minimap disabled is the ideal solution. [...]

 

It's exactly the same as emergent gameplay over scripted events. We all know the joy: having observed that goblins are curious and will check out a moving object, you decide to throw a barrel their way, then bomb them all when they are clustered. It's not half as fun if, instead, there is no such consistency, and instead you get a scripted game where a giant pop up tells you "QUEST UPDATE: THROW A DISTRACTION AT X SPOT", and then "QUEST UPDATE: THROW THE BOMB USING THE A BUTTON."

The main difference between emergent gameplay and writing which doesn't facilitate play without quest markers is the parts of development process which need to be coordinated well. If you're building a systems-driven game, glaring bugs will become obvious fairly quickly and development of mechanics tends to be interconnected enough to make that possible (albeit still damned difficult)

 

However, to make NPCs describe quests properly for player to be able to navigate by their descriptions means coordinating:

- Level designers

- Quest designers

- Writers

 

and, in case of last minute changes, you can add voice actors to the list. And, sadly, writing and level design aren't married in the same way as mechanics are, so if writer writes a thing and level designer then changes everything around and forgets to inform the writers / writers don't care anymore, you'll be informing player of things that are no longer true. God forbid that dialogue is already voiced.

 

Now, I still think that when you do something, you should do it properly and all the reasoning I gave isn't much more than excuses from proper planning and work ethic. Sadly, we do live in the real world, and software development projects with insane milestones are especially prone to failures in the whole 'planning' bit. In other words, I want to play another game like Morrowind where navigation was a big part of the appeal, but I can definitely see why would development companies want to avoid this.

 

Edit: Just to re-iterate, I also think that the lazy clutch of quest markers needs to be obliterated, sooner than later.

 

Nintendo has realized this with their Zelda and designed it without a need for quest markers (they can be turned off and the game comfortably played without them). Assassin's Creed Oddyssey apparently allows to play with only having vague directions as opposed to knowing precisely where an objective is. Red Dead Redemption 2 is supposed to compensate for disabled minimap by more detailed descriptions etc. Prey's entirely designed to be playable without quest markers - and then makes disabling them cumbersome, but ... Eh.

 

It seems that developers are slowly realizing how intrinsically detrimental compasses / minimaps are to gameplay. It seems designers are sick of creating these vast, detailed open worlds which will then be reduced to mere tunnels by slapping a direction arrow in. Let's hope development continues in this direction and Obsidian surprises us with their own, clever and novel, solution.

 

 

I'm playing Zelda BOTW right now, and it's a delight. You can often look at a map and intuit where things are going to be (e.g. a clearing where the big miniboss lugs tend to sleep), or just look around and use your eyes and the scenery will make sense.

 

When I use quest compass, I find myself not really taking in the scenery around me, because I'm just beelining for the next shiny objective, trying to just walk through lakes and jump over fences and mountains. (Indeed, the same thing happens with Google Maps & such; people change the way they explore the city.) It's lovely to have the option to be able to take in the sights differently if you so desire.

 

Of course, you're right - and it's not easy to have all that coordination. But plenty of games have done it, older games, newer games, and it would be a pity if pursuing player convenience had the side effect of sidelining what should be a pretty basic goal to everyone's benefit: a world designed to make sense, quest compass or no quest compass.

[SonicMage117]

I for one, find it much more easier and intuitive to follow quest compass than to pause the game or hit a buton and look at the an overview 2D/3D map of the open world. This is mainly due to the fact that  I often find myself having to zoom in in order to see the details like: shop, inn, food market, armory, etc. However, I always find the overworld map useful for marking waypoints which I then tend to follow (I'm sure you do too if you use the overworld map).

 

Breath Of The Wild may be a smaller open world than most rpg's, which is mainly vast country space with fields, yes? So you can see everything, there's no city that has lots of buildings or anything like Fallout but there still are caves so you're never going to be able to 100% the game without quest markers, that much I know. Any 3rd person or first person game with dungeons, caves, etc. is pretty guaranteed for the player to rely on such things as a quest compass anyway.

 

So I don't think it really has anything to do with the world making sense, it just has to do with developers wanting to make the open world accessible to everyone.

 

Curious though, what is a world that you feel doesn't make sense? I can't think of any rpg that has an open world that doesn't make sense, much less one that is somehow inferior to BoTW's open world.

 

 

If there is somehow an rpg that doesn't require you to look for non-obvious stuff and secrets, that's badly designed in my opinion. I want stuff to be so hidden that it's nt obvious, to where I have to purchase an item or secret locations map if I feel I can't find things on my own. That's at least rewarding and shows that the devs at least tried enough to make efforts. Example: Horizon Zero Dawn, Dragon's Dogma.

 

 

Red Dead Redemption 2 is probably one of the better open world designs in years abd you're going to need the quest compass as the map doesn't show things that the compass does (smart decision by Rockstar). So many secrets.

[Madscientist]

some comments:

- As I have said before, the most irritating thing in the video was the marker that shows my quest goal is in this direction and distance. I don´t want to see such a thing.

- I agree that the Zelda games are a perfect example how to do it right. You know where to go without a big arrow pointing in that direction.

- I also liked the way Gothic 1+2 did it. No map or quest markers by default. You can get a map, but it looks like a piece of paper where somebody made a drawing to show you the rough direction. But ToW is Sci Fi and not middle ages, so its likely that we have a "real" map of the area.

- I guess I am really old fashioned. When hiking I prefer using a paper map over my phone. Sometimes I even printed a screenshot from OpenStreetMap and took this map instead of looking at my phone. I think the problem with using GPS is that you look at your device all the time and not at the surrounding. You miss lots of stuff around you and sometimes the digital map is wrong or outdated. There were several people who fell into a river because of blindly following the navigation map. Like they turned left when the phone said "turn left now." or their GPS showed a bridge but there was a ferry wich was on the other side at this moment.

Regarding games: When playing the witcher 3 I looked more at the mini map when running around than looking at my environment. I prefer stopping and looking at the map every now and then over having a tool that always shows you the direction to go.

 

As a summary, I really hope that the game wants you to think a bit for yourself ( Somebody tells you to go to the mines. Mines can usually be found in mountains. Maybe I should try going to the huge mountain there at the end of this road.) instead of blindly following big arrows on the screen.

[Fenixp]

- I guess I am really old fashioned. When hiking I prefer using a paper map over my phone. Sometimes I even printed a screenshot from OpenStreetMap and took this map instead of looking at my phone.

The GPS comparison is actually a fairly apt one for me. While I don't drag paper maps around on me, I only use GPS navigation when my goal is to get from point A to point B as efficiently as possible - in other words, when the road is the inconvenient bit which takes time and energy away from me between my current position and my goal.

 

On the other hand, when I go hiking, I try not use navigation - and when I do, it's when I'm feeling utterly lost, just so that I have a fast way of seeing where exactly am I. And precisely, that's because I'm hiking much more for the road than for the destination.

 

When designers feel like they positively have to force a navigation-like tool on the player to get from point A to point B, it's very much forcing the former mindset. It's the point where I have to ask whether opting for an open world was a good choice since the game's clearly trying to persuade the player that the destination's much more important than the road to it - and if it is so, opting for a semi-linear hub-based structure would probably have been a better idea than offering an open world without sufficient amount of thought put into it, just because it's the thing to do nowadays.

 

On the other hand, when designers create an interesting open world that's fun to explore, I'd dare to say most players won't even mind being lost every now and again, because that just feeds into the sense of exploration and adventure. And navigating through a well-thought out world where you always know where you are by landmarks and general feel of the area is such a joy and can give a game so much sense of place.

 

And the best part is - if players want to take out their phones, follow a dot and fall into a river every now and again, it's just so easy to implement. But even those will look up from the phone at some point and appreciate the additional design which went into the open world.

Edited December 13, 2018 by Fenixp

[agris]

[...] I also liked the way Gothic 1+2 did it. No map or quest markers by default. You can get a map, but it looks like a piece of paper where somebody made a drawing to show you the rough direction. But ToW is Sci Fi and not middle ages, so its likely that we have a "real" map of the area.

 

[...] Regarding games: When playing the witcher 3 I looked more at the mini map when running around than looking at my environment. I prefer stopping and looking at the map every now and then over having a tool that always shows you the direction to go.

 

As a summary, I really hope that the game wants you to think a bit for yourself ( Somebody tells you to go to the mines. Mines can usually be found in mountains. Maybe I should try going to the huge mountain there at the end of this road.) instead of blindly following big arrows on the screen.

 

 

[...] On the other hand, when designers create an interesting open world that's fun to explore, I'd dare to say most players won't even mind being lost every now and again, because that just feeds into the sense of exploration and adventure. And navigating through a well-thought out world where you always know where you are by landmarks and general feel of the area is such a joy and can give a game so much sense of place.

 

And the best part is - if players want to take out their phones, follow a dot and fall into a river every now and again, it's just so easy to implement. But even those will look up from the phone at some point and appreciate the additional design which went into the open world.

 

Well said on all fronts, and for Fenixp; the important distinction about my original post is that the quest compass is still available for those who dislike the feeling of being lost, who dislike thinking about what was said and locating or navigating themselves, etc. I'm not asking for the exclusion of a feature, but the inclusion of support for a method of gameplay that has deep roots in RPGs - namely Fallout, Arcanum, Bloodlines and Temple of Elemental Evil. All wonderful classics that still hold up today, made by Timothy Cain and Leonard Boyarsky,  who - incidentally - are leading the development of The Outer Worlds.

Edited December 13, 2018 by agris

[Gfted1]

Imo the devs should stick to their creative vision for quest acquisition and completion. And toggles cost zotz.

[SonicMage117]

some comments:

- As I have said before, the most irritating thing in the video was the marker that shows my quest goal is in this direction and distance. I don´t want to see such a thing.

I can respect that but just because you don't, doesn't mean others think the same. Some like to have specifics visually just as people here wants specifics audited through dialogue.

- I agree that the Zelda games are a perfect example how to do it right. You know where to go without a big arrow pointing in that direction.

- I also liked the way Gothic 1+2 did it. No map or quest markers by default. You can get a map, but it looks like a piece of paper where somebody made a drawing to show you the rough direction.

That's exactly how Red Dead Redemption 2 is for the treasure hunts and other collectibles....

- I guess I am really old fashioned.

It's not that you're Old-fashioned, more like easily distracted. There is no old-fashioned in an industry as new as gaming.

When hiking I prefer using a paper map over my phone. Sometimes I even printed a screenshot from OpenStreetMap and took this map instead of looking at my phone. I think the problem with using GPS is that you look at your device all the time and not at the surrounding. You miss lots of stuff around you and sometimes the digital map is wrong or outdated. There were several people who fell into a river because of blindly following the navigation map. Like they turned left when the phone said "turn left now." or their GPS showed a bridge but there was a ferry wich was on the other side at this moment.

Then you got bad directions, never had that happen to me because I never had a bad gps or copied a bad map and I've never known anyone to fall in a lake because of having their eyes on the phone. While I appreciate the illustrations, it's not realistic comparison for a game that has a quest compass.

 

Your strange example is no different from me saying "Npc's giving you directions in games makes me uncomfortable because I know people who have asked someone for directions and the person whom they asked lead them down an alley and mugged them, so I don't want an npc to give me directions or escort me in the game for that reason" lol Yes, people can be wrong too.

Regarding games: When playing the witcher 3 I looked more at the mini map when running around than looking at my environment. I prefer stopping and looking at the map every now and then over having a tool that always shows you the direction to go.

I rarely looked at the minimap in Witcher 3 unless I needed to somewhere quick, mininap is incredibly useful since I have limited time to play sometimes (with work, kids, etc.). But I will say, Being on a horse in games like Red Dead Redemption 2 and Witcher 3 means you're moving fast and constantly running into enemies or something new one way or another so suggesting that mini-maps amd quest compasses keep players from fully enjoying or experiencing the game isn't so logical at this point.

As a summary, I really hope that the game wants you to think a bit for yourself ( Somebody tells you to go to the mines. Mines can usually be found in mountains. Maybe I should try going to the huge mountain there at the end of this road.) instead of blindly following big arrows on the screen.

You're making it seem like mini-maps and quest compasses take away free will lol Sorry but what you're saying just isn't true. You're trying way too hard to validate your argument by going to irrational extremes. Mini-maps and quest compasses do not by any rate mean that players won't be able to go where they want or that they will be discouraged to appreciate the game. Nice try though, I'll admit. I can only imagine that devs will read it and laugh...

 

Especially because your wall of comment expressing your hate for mini-maps/quest compasses begs the question:

 

Why don't/didn't you just disable the mini-map and quest compass from the options menu to begin with if it bothered you that much in games like Witcher 3 as you describe? Or do you not know that you can do such a thing?

Edited December 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[SonicMage117]

Imo the devs should stick to their creative vision for quest acquisition and completion. And toggles cost zotz.

Well, we're pretty much being told now that if we get mini-maps/quest compasses that we'll run into walls - by people who don't know how to turn off the hud via options menu...Reminds me of politics where people will gather, make up things and push it, expecting people to buy into the bs in ehoping to validate their point.

 

These are the last type of people who devs will take seriously. Can't wait to see what they say next.

Edited December 13, 2018 by SonicMage117