Suggestions on Quest Design and Leveling

[Mybrokenenglish]

Hello everyone,

I'd like to share some ideas I had and see if people agree. Maybe we're lucky and some game designer from CDPR will read and get inspired?

1) I was thinking about the "classic quest system" we are used to in practically all RPGs: when an NPC offers you a quest, you don't even think about accepting it or not, because you know you will get a "positive reward" (exp., loot, money...). We don't take any risk when accepting, worst case scenario we will get some exp. and level up. Why don't we have some quests where you get also some "negative reward" when completed? Why can't we have an (secondary) NPC dead because we accepted the quest, or a loss of in-game money with no chanche to recover it? It would be great to start a quest and after is completed you realize you fucked up; next time you'll think twice before accepting another quest. I want this kind of thrill when taking a decision and not the "oh, well, I'll still get a level 35 rare rifle and 1000 exp" feeling. I made sooooo many bad decisions I regretted in my life, but not even 1 in videogames.

2) I know, people won't like this: exp. and leveling up. In the witcher 3 (game I LOVED) you are playing as Geralt, master witcher, who is at level 3 and is completely smashed by a random level 9 wolf because he cannot wear a level 12 armor he found in a chest. What's the meaning of that? I thought I was a professional monster-slayer, not a stupid guy who has an sword in his hand and says "well, it's waaaay too powerful for me, I'll keep it in my bag for the future". This kind of things destroy the immersivity, and we know how immersive the developers want cyberpunk to be (first-person vs third-person fight, anyone?). Now, I understand that classic RPGs have always had this system, I understand that it's a "cheap" way to make the player feel rewarded and improved while palying, but would it be that bad to change this kind of system? Why can't you just give the player a better gear without assigning a level to it? Why can't I wear a level 7 jacket? I found it, I can use it. Ok, in cyberpunk this could be justified somehow (on the contrary to the witcher series), but do we really need it? If I were good enough to find a weapon before I was supposed to find it, why should I be punished by the game? Just make it harder to find, decrease the loot or make it very expensive to buy with in-game credits, don't make it impossible to use by numbers.
And again, why do I have to gain exp. when completing a mission? Just give me credits and I'll buy a better gear/mod and get stronger through that. I don't need to unlock a perk to increase my damage with guns by 15%, I can just buy a better gun or install a mod for higher precision! It's an action-RPG, not a turn-base RPG, we can beat the game through skills, not just math. On the contrary, I love the idea of getting exp when using guns, or some skills and stuff like that (e.g. like in Skyrim). For example, I will reload my gun faster after I reloaded guns 1000 times, but no need to make it unlockable via exp.
(this to me was the only real flaw of the witcher 3, together with the day-one-bugs)

And what do you guys think? Do you like these thoughts? Do you have anything to add?

 

[Rawls]

Re-titled to reflect content of thread.

 

[0248991]

Hi,
I like how these suggestions are open minded in some ways;
but instead of focusing on balancing stuff, or making it somewhat coherent,
it seems to me you just replaced one mechanic with the other - basically turning exp and level importance to money.

Not saying it's bad, this can actually be breaking innovation, as RPG games on the market seem to be some cliche assassin's whatevers and/or some repetitive mixes of everything from medieval to futuristic.

Especially about this quest "staticness", I think it's very good to point out that there are observable patterns or logic behind dialogues, which is bad in most of the cases.

For example, in witcher 3 - I do not remember - even a single time - when using axiie in dialogue had "bad" consequence.
I think that for roleplaying game, decision should be based on situation, not on "see axii->use axii" and everything will turn out well at the end.
Problem with that is also that player can't predict anything about using axii - on how many targets it will be used , if it will work, for how long it will last and so what can you do, etc...

 

[Benzenzimmern]

Hey, as a quest designer I can talk a bit about point 1:

I absolutely agree with your idea, and that's something we already use as part of our quest design (and have also used in The Witcher before). The one thing we never want is people to already know what they can expect from a quest.
Usually, when we pitch a new quest idea or story, we always look for an interesting theme, character moments, unexpected twists and choices and consequences for the player. The nitty-gritty of a quest comes later, once we have a good base idea.
So you can definitely expect that a character might die based on one of your decisions (even if at some point you thought you were doing the right thing - as in real life, sometimes things spiral out of control), or start to resent you based on your behavior. But on the other hand, sometimes things might even go better than you expected. As long as it's interesting all the way through, we did our job well.
If a quest has none of these interesting moments of choice and consequence, than as quest designers and writers we always look to improve it.

I do not remember - even a single time - when using axiie in dialogue had "bad" consequence.

We actually tried to do that sometimes. As an example if you use Axii against a group of thugs in White Orchard, the ones that are not affected can immediately tell that you're trying to manipulate their buddies with magic and will attack.

One of our newer quest designers actually used this in a side quest he sent in as part of his application. You were supposed to find and bring back two brothers in the middle of a forest. At the same time, your main story had you hunt a dangerous monster in the same forest, so it made sense to look for the brothers as well.
Once you found them, they didn't immediately want to return, so you had to convince them. You could use words, beat them up, or use "Axii", which you'd expect to work fine. And it does, they both start walking home.
However, later you found out that the monster you were hunting in the main quest tracked them both down and killed them on their way home. Since they were still under the influence of Axii, they just walked home without consideration for their surroundings, which made them an easy target. Maybe without Axii, they would have had a chance to run away.
That was a really nice example of how to use the player's expectations against him, because in retrospect this tragedy could have maybe been averted. So that part of the quest was actually a big plus for us!

 

[0248991]

Hey,
it' really nice example, but what I don't like about it:

That was a really nice example of how to use the player's expectations against him

I think that this is bad design. At least for me, quests should not be as full of contradictions, twists and unpredictable situations as possible, "maxing the story out of it"... - it even does not for me;
but rather support it's story with what it is; let the player understand in simple way, but let him decide in the hard way.
I think that player would regret his "bad" choices more if they are predictable, he knows what they are about, but under the pressure of situation (/or whatever) makes it anyway.

For example, as you described flow of the quest - why would Geralt let walk two hypnotized guys through forest alone, if he knows that there is some beast's territory ?

 

[Sardukhar]

That was a really nice example of how to use the player's expectations against him, because in retrospect this tragedy could have maybe been averted. So that part of the quest was actually a big plus for us!

Yeah, anything that subverts "videogame mindset" of Press A for B and "Been There Done That" reflexes.

I mean think about it. You mind control someone to walk somewhere - would you do that in the real world? What about when they hit a crosswalk or a river?

Getting the player to jump -out- of the standard response set and -into- their character and setting is, I think, a real advance in current digital storytelling.

Now if you can let me talk to Father about why maybe kidnap/murdering Commonwealth citizens and replacing them with robots is horrific and immoral, that'd be great.

Really hope I can ask reasonable questions and avert obvious consequences in quests with some real-world "common sense" in 2077.

 

[Mybrokenenglish]

Hey, as a quest designer I can talk a bit about point 1:

I absolutely agree with your idea, and that's something we already use as part of our quest design (and have also used in The Witcher before).

First thing I want to say: WOW, I couldn't expect a senior quest designer to read AND REPLY my post. That's why I love CDPR so much (ok, your marvellous games come first )

Second, yes, you guys put a lot of "bad decision" in your games, and I love that, but what I meant with my post is that at the end of every quest you get loot and experience point, which are "positive rewards" even if you took "bad decisions". I would like to have quests that don't give you loot and exp., only maluses, you really have to pay for your mistake of completing that quest. Maybe a quest where you cannot choose anything at all, but just completing it makes your in-game life harder? I mean, I love to take decisions in quests, but just deciding if I want to accept or refuse a quest at all should be a decision (and it's not, since we will get exp and loot at the end of it anyways).

"Obvious" example: an extremely shady NPC offers me a quest, I decide to accept it anyway, and at the end of it I learn that the NPC was a thief and I lose all my in-game credits with no ways to take it back. Next time I'll need to think twice before starting a quest! Of course you guys master the art of quest-writing and the NPC shouldn't be that shady, just a couple of hints and stuff like that, but it was just to make a clear example.

Anyway, thank you very much for your attention and keep working hard for this (possible) masterpiece!

P.S. please, tell your collegues not to troll us with the live streaming on-going right now on twitch and convince them to show us some gameplay ahaha.

Post automatically merged: Aug 27, 2018

Now if you can let me talk to Father about why maybe kidnap/murdering Commonwealth citizens and replacing them with robots is horrific and immoral, that'd be great.

Really hope I can ask reasonable questions and avert obvious consequences in quests with some real-world "common sense" in 2077.

After fallout 4 I lost all my hopes towards Bethesda's RPG but we also know that CDPR's guys are on a completely different (higher) level in writing quests, so I think we can be relaxed on that

 

[Suhiira]

I think that this is bad design.

Some quests should be unpredictable and have twists, most should be pretty straight forward.

You don't want the player to get bored with everything being predictable, but at that same time you don't want to many quests with so many twists they are essentially a series of random events.

 

[AdamTaylor]

I would love to see a good variety in the quests. Most should be pretty straight forward, with some options on how to handle things along the way. And there should be some that are questionable choice. Do something obviously "bad" for a nice reward, but have to deal with the consequences and such.

But I also VERY MUCH hope that quests will give us lots of actual options along the way.

Say some crime boss A hires us to steal an item from another crime boss B. We should have plenty of ways to deal with this.
The obvious simple route of going to the warehouse where the item is, sneak in, or bribe our way in, or fight our way in, or distract our way in (which would be different than complete stealth, as B now knows someone was around when his item was stolen and it could let them track back to us).
But then we might get options like having A make up a fake item, that we swap out with the real one, to try and keep B in the dark as long as possible.
And then we get the more intricate options. Say we decide to tell B that A wants to steal their item. We could get hired to deliver a fake to A. Or maybe we fake the destruction of the item, so B can hide it elsewhere and we report to A that it was blown up.
Or maybe we take the fake that A gave us, pull a switch, and THEN tell B. Trying to get what we can from both sides. Or maybe we keep the item for ourselves?

There's so many possibilities. Unfortunately most games just come down to the typical fetch/kill quests. Go here, get item or kill person, leave. With whatever random extra badguys show up in the middle and such. It really gets a little boring. You might have a rescue mission where the supposed victim is actually a bad guy, surprise! And then it just turns into the typical fetch or kill quest again. Why not have us talk to the non-victim, and find out why they don't want a rescue or why they faked their kidnapping, and maybe work with them now.

It's all about giving real options to quests instead of them being so straight forward.

 

[h0ly_danc3r]

I would love a possiblity to play the game with no implants, as i see in demo it is part of the quest to get one, but i think it should be a choice maybe.

 

[4RM3D]

Why don't we have some quests where you get also some "negative reward" when completed?

Looking at the demo play-through, it seems we got exactly just that. The video showed you could take an optional quest to gather more intel. Depending on your actions, the NPC dies, which might have a negative impact, like not getting a new quest.

About the quests, they shouldn't be obvious with an ! mark above the NPC's head. Instead, we should really look out for new quests by observing the environment. Maybe you see someone in need and can help them or maybe you witness a shady deal going on somewhere. It should be part of the exploration. Then it's even more awesome when you find such a "hidden" quest.

 

[otorobotx]

Can we screw things really bad?
-Hurting someone very powerful and coming to our apartment to see it rummaged with equipment gone?
-Being hunted by police actively, hiding at day and working exclusively at night?
-Our companions/allies leaving us forever (or even backstabbing us and confronting us with choices we made)
-Being in debt to corps/gangs ? (pay or we'll screw you up and we work hard to gather money)

Sorry if this was a stupid question

 

[Jarred_Blaauw]

One thing I had a problem with Witcher 3 is near the end of the base game when you are finishing off the last few missions I feel like some side quests near of game should be hard to find and very high level so that you leave for the game but when you do get to them they really make an impact on the world and story.

Also with choice in the Witcher series they did effect the storyline and change few things like kill off some characters but we it didn't change how world look from start to finish the world still look similar and yes there were those side quests where you would kill a clean and then villagers would return and give you some money.

But If you ever return to that place it still looks the same like look gta 5 and that construction site in the game through whole five year that has been on the market rockstar has never finished that construction site.

Plus we all know this game will be on market for an long time so night city should change over time with either choices in the game or by huge download able updates that change like adding new areas,people,vehicles,lore,side quests and changing how old area look.

Think about so say you buy the game at release but have now way of updating to the newest version so 2-3 years down the line you get Wifi Installed into your house so then you update the game and that shop that was a small place is now a supermarket and that part where there was nothing is now a race track and building in centre of town is destroyed and abandoned.

Stuff like make gamers come back and the last up to five years even if you don't have a online feature.

 

[Ipsofactor]

Huh i wonder If u can lose street cred at end of quest ? Is there lose-lose issues after making really bad choices ?
I mean if u lose eddies or street cred or possessions then u got some stakes right there.

kinda same questions as orotobotx asked.

 

[Heart Of Dawn]

Good question. Since it's based on reputation, it should be able to go down as well as up (if, for example, you start shooting random dirt girls and boys). But then what happens to the perk points that the level of cred brings? Do you un-spec your V?

 

[Ipsofactor]

I think by design you can't remove modifications or perk points already alloted.
But like merchants could refuse to serve you anymore. And if u removed a perk that was upgraded
u couldnt equip it anymore, and you would get the old back ? But equipement in inventory u could always equip.
And it would mean to to re-earn lost cred +req to get to nxt lvl.
U could do a lot of things but u'd have to balance actions with consequences. (kinda like in xuniverse games?)

But anyway if cred/money are obtained only by quest then itd be meaningless. There should be a way to make some eddies/cred even not a lot to give u freedom to mess around with the world and lose yourself in side activities and the like.
just putting it here to articulate whats behind the question.

 

[1veryFrustratedguy]

Leveling should be player gameplay based. Such as that of Skyrim
(My fondest memories of destruction and alteration magic)

 

[4RM3D]

Leveling should be player gameplay based. Such as that of Skyrim

So it takes 15 minutes to kill one Lich? No, thanks. The enemy hit point scaling was pretty annoying. If anything, the game should be more like Dark Souls. That is, a level 1 character can kill everything, if you know what to do. It's more about tactics than it is about stat points.

 

[Hoplite_22]

shouldn't be any levels at all. progress could be easily gated by cash for mod and a limited few items that will stat boost. Items should never have levels at all!

 

[Heart Of Dawn]

Cash is too loose though. One player might squander it all on prostitutes and end up too under-geared to progress. An other might take a sum meant to advance the plot (like the 50k for the Flathead) and buy the best of everything, and end up bored as now they are OP and the game isn't a challenge any more.