Future Games: Factions instead of Quests?

[CalibanX]

Consider a game world like Skyrim where the quests were (mostly) replaced with 25 Factions. There would be different Mages Factions, Thief factions, vampire Factions, Daedric Factions, Aedric Factions, Political Factions (like the Thalmor) etc. So, instead of a single, Mages Guild Quest Line, you'd have different, competing Mage Factions that you could join, eventually take over and go to war with other Factions.

 

Then, when you join a Faction, you'd rise up the chain of command not by doing scripted quests, but doing things like donating valuable items and gold to your faction. How cool would it be to then see the members of your faction wearing the items & weapons that you acquired for them and thus having a clear sense of your dungeon crawls contributing directly to the power & wealth of your faction? And instead of just taking treasure from dungeons claimed by monsters, you could also take treasure from locations controlled by other factions who would then declare war on you (and your faction) for your actions against them. Mess with too many factions and find yourself surrounded by enemies and hit squads coming after you all the time.

 

Of course, there would have to be restrictions on how many factions you could join and members of say, vampire factions would only accept vampire characters into thier ranks, the Thalmor might only accept Elves into the ranks, a xenophobic Orc tribe might only accept Orcs, Daedric Factions couldn't be joined if you belong to any Aedric Factions, etc.

 

If you could play an open world game like this would you care if you didn't get a Main Quest?

[JanusForbeare]

If you could play an open world game like this would you care if you didn't get a Main Quest?

 

Not at all. What Bethesda has going for them (and I wish they would realize this) is that they're consistently improving upon the entire 'sandbox' genre. The appeal of their games is the exploration of and interaction with a vast, virtual world. Instead of trying to one-up the makers of the more linear, cinematic RPGs (which we as gamers enjoy for entirely different reasons) by forcing the player into an inflexible MQ, they ought to be further consolidating their position by focusing on what they do best.

[Deleted1811414User]

If you could play an open world game like this would you care if you didn't get a Main Quest?

 

Not at all. What Bethesda has going for them (and I wish they would realize this) is that they're consistently improving upon the entire 'sandbox' genre. The appeal of their games is the exploration of and interaction with a vast, virtual world. Instead of trying to one-up the makers of the more linear, cinematic RPGs (which we as gamers enjoy for entirely different reasons) by forcing the player into an inflexible MQ, they ought to be further consolidating their position by focusing on what they do best.

 

 

Well said.

[abaris]

 

If you could play an open world game like this would you care if you didn't get a Main Quest?

 

Not at all, but with a caveat.

 

If all that would be as meaningless as with Skyrim it would be the most boring game on earth. In other words, the I in AI would be mandatory as would be excellent writing and fleshed out characters. Cardboards wouldn't do the job.

 

As far as restrictions go, I'm already annoyed by them removing them in Skyrim and every guild is open to every character.

[Dukkah]

Not at all, but with a caveat.

 

If all that would be as meaningless as with Skyrim it would be the most boring game on earth. In other words, the I in AI would be mandatory as would be excellent writing and fleshed out characters. Cardboards wouldn't do the job.

 

As far as restrictions go, I'm already annoyed by them removing them in Skyrim and every guild is open to every character.

 

Indeed.

 

For that matter, it's disheartening to hear adoration for the opening up of everything. It's being praised as though being able to do anything you want without consequences is the same as an open world. It isn't.

 

Freedom has two aspects: the action and the consequence. If you're allowed to do everything without consequences, you aren't in a free environment, since the absence of reprisals makes all options equally valid.

 

And if there's no difference between doing one thing or the other, how can one say he is being given a choice?

[CalibanX]

The whole point (hypothetically) of moving away from a quest based game to a more Faction based one is specifically to increase the player's interactions and consequences with the world.

 

Of course, it would be freaking awesome to have a game with the kind of satisfying, fleshed out characters that Dragon Age provided. The logistical/financial problem is that while Dragon Age did an awesome job fleshing out the 10 followers and a handful of other characters, these open world games have literally hundreds of NPCs. If you had game with say, 10 named NPCs for each Faction and have 15 or 20 factions, that quickly jumps to 150-200 named NPC's. So, that's a problem. (Personally, I would be okay if Faction NPC's were something like the Thieves Guild NPC's in Skyrim. They had a lot of flavor for me. Not so much the College NPC's though.)

 

Anyway, I'm just curious to see if other people find the idea of Faction-based gaming appealing or not.

[Ferodaktyl]

The whole point (hypothetically) of moving away from a quest based game to a more Faction based one is specifically to increase the player's interactions and consequences with the world.

 

Of course, it would be freaking awesome to have a game with the kind of satisfying, fleshed out characters that Dragon Age provided. The logistical/financial problem is that while Dragon Age did an awesome job fleshing out the 10 followers and a handful of other characters, these open world games have literally hundreds of NPCs. If you had game with say, 10 named NPCs for each Faction and have 15 or 20 factions, that quickly jumps to 150-200 named NPC's. So, that's a problem. (Personally, I would be okay if Faction NPC's were something like the Thieves Guild NPC's in Skyrim. They had a lot of flavor for me. Not so much the College NPC's though.)

 

Anyway, I'm just curious to see if other people find the idea of Faction-based gaming appealing or not.

 

you could just as well ask if we liked playing gothic :)

[Lachdonin]

I think increased use of factions has merits, but i don't think it could ever replace questing entirely. Attaching quests to the faction in order to faciliate advancement, but not cutting them out completely. Quests serve the important aspect of building a hero, as they push you towards enemies and villans which you must then vanquish, subdue or (sometimes) side with. Without the quest dynamic what you have is the loss of milestones. Yes you can put a Lich in a game and then go kill it, but with an associated quest it just becomes an enemy, and the closure to the villans existance doesn't happen.

 

The idea of a purely faction based system also runs the risk of becomming work. If your possition is based on your contribution to the materiality of the faction, rather than going out and acomplishing heroic tasks, it can quickly become a grind to fulfil the ends, rather than an adventure. I like mining and smithing my own armour, so i can go out and slay dragons, but if i had to toil in a mine for 6 days straight just to get enough Iron to outfit a bunch of snot nosed Stormcloaks, i'd quit.

 

It also runs the risk of conflicting with the Elder Scrolls dynamic. Yes, sandbox worlds are the cornerstone of the franchise, but they are not the driving force. That driving force is the story, of great heroes who rise up to stop impending doom. Killing Jagar Tharn, the Warp in the West, stopping Dagoth Ur, closing the Oblivion Gates, casting Alduin back into the timestream, these are defining story moments which require the questing experience. Without them, the game loses its story telling element, which is the heart of the RPG. Thus, it would become something else, something more like a life-simulator. I'm not sure about you, but i use games as an escape from life...

 

Still, i do think increase faction depth and involvement holds great promise for TES games. Imagine if you could use your influance with the Companions when confronting Alduin at the Throat of the World? Or your possition within the College of Winterhold when capturing forts for the Empire/Stormcloaks. Alas, the factions are losing a lot of their character and depth, so i tend to think this will be more the domain of modders than anything Bethesda does.