Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
Seriously, using a dead language for missions is messed up. With that aside, I love the game used ARG elements to solve in game quests/missions.
Yup. I'll do it if I want and you can't stop me!
I was doing it for BG3, not long ago - There are a number of critical points and decisions in the game and there's not much telegraphing of those to the player. I dislike that.. So, I often double check my decisions with a walkthrough/guide.
Anyone who has ever completed one of the old, classic quests - the ones from the early-2000s - will know that trying to do them without a guide is damn near impossible.
Put it this way: old quests in RuneScape were so badly designed, the developers straight up added in links to the wiki pages for them. You can right-click on a quest’s name and open its guide in your browser from inside the game.
The puzzles were sometimes just a pure guessing game, where you simply wandered the whole region and clicked on everything until you were given the key item. And you also always needed random stuff for certain stages of the quest, none of which you were warned about ahead of time and many requiring you to leave the quest area and go somewhere else, sometimes far away - even as far as the complete other side of the world - in order to get them.
Internet guides are great, don't get me wrong, and it does help that you can now include pictures in them, but back in the old days where internet guides were MOSTLY text-based, you REALLY had to be detail-oriented in order to follow some online guides because writers would need to describe what they saw in games with words and readers would also have to be able to see what the writer was talking about.
If the writer was proficient enough than it was doable. If not however, than yeah, it'd flop and you'd just end up having to get the guide book anyway. MOST of the time, the writer was proficient enough.
Old-school "EverQuest" was like that. Some quests... Well, there was just no way to figure out what to do and some of the quests were extensive, taking dozens or more hours of constant work to complete. Some secrets have yet to be uncovered, still.
Yet, many/most quests/etc were ferreted out by players... That was the amazing part. (Though, some few may have had a little help.)
For some, I printed out Allakhazam guide pages...
I like long quests with lots of different bits, but if they're not reasonably good at informing the player what's required, I nope out and grab a guide.