Does the perceived importance of a quest matter to you? How about the attitude of the quest giver?

[ZedClampet]

For instance, if an NPC asks you to search for their missing child while another one asks you to bring them a ham sandwich, do you look for the child first or does it not matter to you? What if one quest giver is polite and another one rude? Does that alter how you handle things? Have you ever just refused to do a quest for someone because you thought it was too frivolous or because you didn't like them?

I got to thinking about this after playing Dinkum when I abandoned a timed quest because someone asked for food, and when I brought it to them, they didn't like it. That's not my problem. That's their problem. Maybe that's just having a bad attitude, though

 

[mainer]

Quests vary so much in an RPG, from the simple "fetch quest" to the more complicated kind that affect an individual or group of people. I never play as an "evil" character or one that's interested in only profit or power. I play characters (or party of characters) that try to help people, especially those oppressed or impoverished, I've even turned down quest rewards because doing so would help someone else. It's kind of my own weird RPG persona, a game moral code, that I've maintained over the years. It's not always successful, and there are many variables in a complex quest, especially when there is no "good or evil choice", just a choice you have to make.

Fetch quests like, "I need 10 sheep pelts to finish this coat", or "I need the Amulet of Bigusdicus from the Tomb of Small Hands"; quests like those I always accept, but they tend to be on the backburner and those I'll do when I'm in the area.

Quests that take priority are those where someone, a group of people are dying or in danger. Some are immediate, some have a time limit, and some are ongoing; but all those types of quests take priority. There're many variables of course, and the best of those don't always have simple solutions.

The attitude of the quest giver doesn't really affect my decisions in most cases. I've completed quests for a nasty or rude person where I was able to convince him/her to my way of thinking or gain information that I wouldn't normally have gotten. Variables, choices, consequences are all part of a good quest.

I've also turned down many quests, not because of the quest givers persona, but because of his/her intent wasn't something I could live with, especially when it comes to slavers. I don't work for slavers, nor will I tolerate their existence, even if my character could personally profit from it.

Take for example a quest I got recently in Wasteland 3. I returned to my homebase and was confronted by a group of slavers that wanted me to retrieve a young woman (Halima? not really sure on the name) who was their "property" and had escaped. They offered the codes to get into the locked vault in my base (which is not accessible with skills). In a lengthy conversation the option became available to attack, and I took it because I don't deal with slavers. Maybe there was a better way, and maybe I lost my chance at the vault, but I felt good for destroying them.

 

[ZedClampet]

Quests vary so much in an RPG, from the simple "fetch quest" to the more complicated kind that affect an individual or group of people. I never play as an "evil" character or one that's interested in only profit or power. I play characters (or party of characters) that try to help people, especially those oppressed or impoverished, I've even turned down quest rewards because doing so would help someone else. It's kind of my own weird RPG persona, a game moral code, that I've maintained over the years. It's not always successful, and there are many variables in a complex quest, especially when there is no "good or evil choice", just a choice you have to make.

I'm exactly the same way. Always play the "good guy". I have difficulty sometimes in cRPG's when one or more party members is naturally against what I stand for, yet I have to keep them in the party and maybe even keep them happy. Usually developers account for this and give you an easy out to keep them happy, but I'm willing to lose people rather than perform evil.

I've also turned down many quests, not because of the quest givers persona, but because of his/her intent wasn't something I could live with, especially when it comes to slavers. I don't work for slavers, nor will I tolerate their existence, even if my character could personally profit from it.

This brings up a peculiar problem of mine, which kind of has two sides. One side is that I tend to interpret things in the most positive light possible and that leads to some significant misinterpretations. The other side is that I sometimes assume I've got an "out" that I can take later when sometimes I really don't.

A lot of it comes down to just over-thinking what is actually a simple game decision.

I'll just use Witcher 3 as an example because I've been in the mood to replay that for awhile now, but am waiting on the remaster.

Witcher 3 spoilers follow. I'm almost positive I remember you saying you've played it already. If not, don't bother reading any further.

Spoiler: first witcher example

During the encounter with Keira Metz, I told her I wasn't going to let her go through with her plan. My interpretation seems illogical in retrospect, but I honestly didn't think that was going to result in a fight to the death. I thought I was acting as a friend doing a sort of intervention. That's bothered me ever since.

and

Spoiler: 2nd witcher example

I knew I was stringing both Triss and Yennifer along, and I was very aware of making the final decisions for each, but I still somehow thought there would be a point when I could make the "real" final decision. Again, another stupid move by me that ended poorly for Geralt.

More recently, I made some bizarre choices in Dying Light 2. The game specifically tries to convince you to choose the opposite of what it knows you really want by encouraging you to over-think the situation. None of the choices were evil, though. Just not what I actually wanted.

 

[Zloth]

Wow, I don't know. Perceived fun is the biggest motivator - though I still won't do it if it's going to break character too much. Sometimes the quest giver can matter. A companion character I'm enjoying is going to get their quest done for sure. One that's not so interesting to me, not so much. (This led to quite a few deaths in Mass Effect 2.)

P.S. @mainer, I killed those slavers, too. Well... actually they killed me. A few times. But I got them eventually!

 

[WoodenSaucer]

Yeah, I think perceived importance and attitude do influence me. But I don't think they're the priorities for me, though. Here are some other priorities:

1) What is the reward for the quest? If I have multiple quests, better or more needed rewards are going to take priority, even if some kid is missing. I might feel a little worse about it, but that's a bigger priority in a game.

2) How will it advance my character or game? Will it enhance any of my skills or move me forward at all in the main mission. If so, that will add to the priority.

3) Which one is going to be more fun to accomplish? If the reward isn't a factor, then I'll decide by which one is more fun.

 

[ZedClampet]

I should point out that the Dinkum example I gave in the OP is an exception for me. I was already planning on quitting Dinkum for good when that guy said he didn't like the food. It just kind of put me over the top.

 

[Brian Boru]

I don't get morally problematic quests usually, so generally it's a strategic or geographic decision for me.

I'll target quests which advance my situation in some way first, and then second pick off the ones which are in the area I'm currently exploring. When heading for a strategically or tactically significant quest, I'll usually plot a course thru other nearby lesser quests.

 

[Colif]

I don't play Story games so quests to me are just a means to get more game. Too much story and talking just slows me down... probably why i don't play some of the more popular games.

Often i don't even read the request beyond knowing what they want done. I do quests based on where I am going.

Sure, there are exceptions:

• Timed quests
• Escort quests- require you to drop everything and finish them unless the AI following you is docile and doesn't get attacked by everything in the area (the complete opposite of Sacred 2)
• quests that will break if done after another. Often this requires playing game a few times to work out what breaks it.

 

[Ryan Blake]

Exactly, good gameplays with strong storyline grasps the player so hard that they actually feel the intensity of the story as it is actually happening right in front of the player. In the discussed case I would definitely go to find the missing child first. But, I will also find the 2nd NPC his sandwich

 

[mainer]

I'll just use Witcher 3 as an example because I've been in the mood to replay that for awhile now, but am waiting on the remaster.

Straying a bit off topic here, but I've been wanting to re-play W3 with the Hearts of Stone/Blood & Wine DLCs for a while now, and I was going to mod the game, but decided to wait for the remaster. I haven't heard a thing about that remaster in months now, I hope CDPR hasn't shelved that project. I know they've got many (or most) people continually patching CP2077 and working on it's DLCs, as well as pre-production on W4, but a quality remaster of W3 seems like it would be a good boost for the company's reputation.

P.S. @mainer, I killed those slavers, too. Well... actually they killed me. A few times. But I got them eventually!

Yeah, that one took me totally by surprise, thinking I'd just go back to base to resupply and talk to some of my new recruits, and that quest just sucked me in completely unprepared. I got wiped the first try, mainly because of their reinforcements that came in behind me, but I got them on the 2nd try.

 

[Frindis]

If the quest is both important and has several chains to them, then I'll be more interested than the typical "Fetch 10 cigarettes for Uncle Pete's smoking addiction". I like quests that change the surroundings, not necessarily large scale, but something like this experience from GW2: "You helped a young kid kill a wolf and you tell the father it was the kid that did all the work, and the next day you walk past the same house you'll see a wolf trophy hanging outside".

If the quest giver turns out to be kind of a dick, I tend to either use my barter skills to slap him in the face or make up a more evil scheme for revenge. I do try my best to stay away from any aristocratic quest givers or similar people who thrive on other people's misery. Reminds me of a quest in Fallout 3 where you meet a guy that gives you the option to nuke a whole town of innocent people for some easy money and your own flat. You have to be pretty coldhearted to accept it, even though everyone most likely saved their game just before so they could just have a look at what would have happened if they accepted the mission.

 

[Zloth]

You have to be pretty coldhearted to accept it, even though everyone most likely saved their game just before so they could just have a look at what would have happened if they accepted the mission.

Or on a second play-through. That lady with the shop that has you researching a book for her hangs around as a zombie!

Of course, there was also the time I killed my girlfriend to become a mighty warrior of legend in one of the Far Cry games. Guess that was kinda mean. (The decision was so stupid that I went for the stupid answer out of spite.)

 

[Pifanjr]

It really depends on how well the game manages to immerse me into the world. If I'm not immersed, I'm just going to do whatever is most profitable, even if it means selling someone into slavery. If I am immersed, I'll grind for a full hour just to help some poor guy get enough potatoes to survive the winter, or something like that.

 

[WoodenSaucer]

It really depends on how well the game manages to immerse me into the world. If I'm not immersed, I'm just going to do whatever is most profitable, even if it means selling someone into slavery. If I am immersed, I'll grind for a full hour just to help some poor guy get enough potatoes to survive the winter, or something like that.

Yeah, that's a great point. If I'm immersed and emotionally invested, what I said previously may not apply.