RPG General News - Side Quests stealing the Show

[HiddenX]

TheGamer is pondering about side-quests in current RPGs:

I'm Having Trouble Caring About The Main Quest In RPGs

Side quests are stealing the spotlight in all of the big RPGs of this generation.

I think we can all agree there is a lot to do in modern roleplaying games. In some games, like Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth or Like A Dragon: Infinite Wealth, there are a massive amount of minigames. True, you will need to play a few minigames to get through the main storyline, but you don't need to master them to finish the plot.

Other games like Baldur's Gate 3 (and, for that matter, those games I already named) have an endless series of optional side stories that take hours to complete. Some, like Tears of the Kingdom, just make it fun to screw around for hours. But all of it is making it hard for me to care about the main quest in RPGs.

I'm not saying I don't like the storylines themselves. Each of the games I've mentioned have incredible, fulfilling stories that take dozens of hours to complete. These are stories that make you laugh, make you cry, and make you go, "Wait, was that JK Simmons?". They're all intricately planned, beautifully written, and - in the case of Baldur's Gate 3 - do in fact feature JK Simmons. I'm being genuine when I say that I deeply enjoyed the main quests of these roleplaying games - when I got around to it.

[...]

Thanks Couchpotato!

More information.

 

[skally_wag]

Side quests really do vary from game to game. On one hand you can complete nearly all side quests and then find yourself just breezing thru the main quest because you've become just to powerful and on the other hand you leave some side quests and then find out you can no longer go back because you've progressed the main story to far.

 

[Greygore]

I'm that guy. The one who does all the side quests possible before working on the main quest. If the quest marker is telling me to go north, I definitely go south, east, and west before finally making it to the north. Every square inch much be explored, and every container opened. I try to teach my kids that this is the proper way to do things, but they don't always listen to their senile old dad

 

[Vaelith]

I love side quests, and even more, optional/secret content that's not pointed out to you and you can run into.

To me the only time it becomes a bit of an issue is when the game doesn't make very obvious in which direction will the main quest go, and you end up overlapping content, for example exploring a cave that's somewhere in the vicinity, and finding out that the end boss room is empty, or has a locked door because it's part of the main quest and you got there too early. Even worse when you clear it normally and hours later you pick up a quest that takes you back to the same place because the game doesn't give you credit for having already cleared it; everything just respawns and you have to do it all over again. Those side quests are mood killers, and it's often the point at which I stop playing games like the ones Bethesda usually makes, and it's usually not because the games aren't good, it's more that the developers fail to understand that you can't make a game that's all about exploration and then cripple and penalize people who explore.

Other than that, if side quests are done cleverly, and if you can get credit for them retroactively when you complete the task prior to actually doing the quest, then it's a very good and fun tool.

Not strictly related but kind of, games need to start making a standard practice of making very obvious to the players which items are "vendor trash/junk" and which ones might have some use at some point, either for some side quest, for crafting, cooking, or whatever. As much as I love BG3, I remember carrying 50 metal bars throughout the game hoping that at some point I could craft/upgrade my gear, and that never happened, and that's a big downer. Now, that's something that I can forgive from BG3, being one of the best RPGs I've ever played, but a game with more flaws, things like that build up the feeling that the game is almost purposely trying to not be fun.

 

[Carnifex]

I have to do them all, even if they look silly or shady from the very get-go. It's just all part of the exploration process for me.

 

[JDR13]

The Witcher 3 and CP 2077 come to mind when I think about games with good sidequests.

 

[Carnifex]

Indeed, and some of the Witcher three side quests were loaded with nice treasures.

 

[Shagnak]

There are a heap of RPGs where side quests are better than the main quest.
E.g., almost all Bethesda games I played.
And that's okay, as long as the you feel that your overall time spent was enjoyable.

 

[JFarrell71]

Side quests have long stolen the show in RPGs. This is not new. It's also completely predictable when RPGs are getting longer and longer and the main story is a smaller and smaller chunk of the overall game.

 

[txa1265]

Why does this feel like countless threads on Reddit where someone realizes something and instead of asking the obvious question, instead declares themselves as having 'discovered the new world'? (same for things from decades ago they discover and call 'underrated' since it isn't the main topic of every discussion.

 

[bjon045]

Side quests have long stolen the show in RPGs. This is not new. It's also completely predictable when RPGs are getting longer and longer and the main story is a smaller and smaller chunk of the overall game.

Agreed. I would also say that side quests are often becoming partially linked to the main quest as well, often giving some key background lore or revealing the motivations of a character. Sometimes sides quests may even give an advantage in the main quest line (like the final battle in BG3).

The days of fetch 10 bundles of wool or clear this location are thankfully mostly over except for in games like Dragon Age: Inquisition and some MMO's.

 

[rjshae]

I do enjoy it when multiple side quests link together to form a greater story, almost like a minor plot line.

 

[bkrueger]

I do enjoy it when multiple side quests link together to form a greater story, almost like a minor plot line.

Agreed! I also enjoy, when side quests add helpful information on the main quest or additional lore for understanding the game world.

 

[notdart]

I hope cp 2077 was as good as witcher 3 with regards to side quests (haven't played it yet); witcher 3 had some fantastic side quests - and in general i found them better than main story but perhaps because the main plot got dragged out a bit too long diluting its impact. To be honest the add on was the best i had ever played (not blood and wine which i found boring; but heart of stone).

I can't think of any games since then that i've played that had nearly the raw enjoyment. I'll play bg3 soon but if it is like ds-2 it will be fun from start to end but not have that raw impact of story telling that i found in witcher 3. Mind you a lot of witcher 3 quests were boring or fetch oriented but hte good ones were like really really good.

 

[Vaelith]

BG3's story is good, but it's still a game, you won't find best-seller quality. The best writers don't write videogame stories, they write real books or scripts. In any case, it also depends on how much you get into it, and in no small part, how much you relate/care for the companions, as they drive a lot of the emotional connection you'll build with the story throughout the game.

Act 3 has quite a few "oh sh--" moments linked to side quests, but again, it will depend on how much you care about the setting itself. It's not comparable to DOS in any case, it's not only a very different setting, it's also written differently, less tongue-in-cheek and generally more dramatic.

 

[soola]

I hope cp 2077 was as good as witcher 3 with regards to side quests (haven't played it yet); witcher 3 had some fantastic side quests - and in general i found them better than main story but perhaps because the main plot got dragged out a bit too long diluting its impact. To be honest the add on was the best i had ever played (not blood and wine which i found boring; but heart of stone).

I can't think of any games since then that i've played that had nearly the raw enjoyment. I'll play bg3 soon but if it is like ds-2 it will be fun from start to end but not have that raw impact of story telling that i found in witcher 3. Mind you a lot of witcher 3 quests were boring or fetch oriented but hte good ones were like really really good.

Witcher 3 had excellent, excellent villains. The villain in heart of stone was so frigging hateable. Wonderful story too; I loved that occult vibe.

I don’t know if I’ve ever come across a villain in a video game that was as or more hateable than ones I’ve encountered in movies though. Might not be fair to compare the two. Prime example probably being Matt Damon in Scorsese’s The Departed. Jeez the buildup to when

Spoiler: Act on villain near end of movie.

Damon’s character gets punched in the face was so pleasing. Isn’t there a Slavic word for “having a face that is punchable” or something? Anyway Scorsese has mastered villian character building to a beautiful art.