Forums

Quests in the Making (V2)

Quick find code: 16-17-584-65048986

of 159
Amascut
Aug Gold Premier Club Member 2013

Amascut

Posts: 21,616Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Rondstat said:
Sequels are always preferable to reworks.


I *hate* this line. I always have. Making a sequel to something that is bad (see A Soul's Bane) doesn't automatically make the original better. It just forces more people to suffer through the original to get to the good stuff.
@Fannygirdle on Twitter | Co-Owner of The Scrying Pool, a future updates and lore clan

23-Oct-2015 03:38:31

Pink Sheeps
Apr Gold Premier Club Member 2011

Pink Sheeps

Posts: 894Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I highly doubt by sequels he meant A Soul's Bane, but rather the 5th age quest we are missing. Such as gnomes, ele workshop, pirates, and desert quests. I agree I'd rather see these quests, or any new quests over a rework.

23-Oct-2015 11:55:16

Autumn Elite
Feb Member 2019

Autumn Elite

Posts: 3,464Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Amascut said:
Rondstat said:
Sequels are always preferable to reworks.


I *hate* this line. I always have. Making a sequel to something that is bad (see A Soul's Bane) doesn't automatically make the original better. It just forces more people to suffer through the original to get to the good stuff.


Interestingly enough (and topical), Mod Doctor was answering some questions about Elemental Workshop recently and the thing most seen as an obstacle for the sequel is Elemental Workshop III. People hit that point in the series and rage quit so even though the connection is Elemental Workshop IV is better, people still vote against it.

Thats probably more of an extreme example, considering I still haven't seen a explanation of how the puzzle was meant to work. But it proves a point.

Although I also can see Rondstat's point, in the sense most reworks don't add that much e.g. Cook's assistant so I wouldn't want too many resources spent on redoing stuff when it could be spent on adding new stuff to the game. Obvious exceptions include things like Death of Chivalry and the mining & smithing rework.

Also judging from Raven's twitter, I think it is 99.997% confirmed the Dukes are developing Nomad's Elegy.

What actually are your complaints with Dragon Slayer and what would you change? I get that compared to other quests, it isn't fantastic but compared to the rest of f2p its a suitable quest and servicable. It even has Stone of Jas foreshadowing and cutscenes.
Wake me up when Osborne resigns | Will not be renewing membership until Jagex deals with its toxic developer culture & has a new, better lead designer | *Soon TM” is not a fun joke, it is an admission the company is an embarrassment

23-Oct-2015 14:18:33

Iceey
Jan Member 2017

Iceey

Posts: 6,607Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I would not mind a Dragon Slayer Rework, keeping the basic idea, but give us more lore linked to the island and the village it was once as before destroyed. Or have a sequel to allow us to rebuild it or something, moving everything underground and making the dungeon bigger.

The quests are outdated and I am confident that Jagex has gotten better at writing quests.

I do not mind reworks, I enjoy most reworks. However, I would rather see more series be completed.

Pirate and Gnome both have like 1 more quest. Why not go ahead and bring them out?

Elemental Workshop series still has a while to go. If they continue to do 2 quests at ones, that makes at least 3 more quests in the quests line. Nature and Astral being next.

Nature/Astral - *W5
Law/Death - EW6
Blood/Soul EW7
Come the Sixth-Age, the world will need the World Guardian.

23-Oct-2015 14:27:51

Aquamancer
May Member 2011

Aquamancer

Posts: 2,037Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Autumn Elite said:
What actually are your complaints with Dragon Slayer and what would you change? I get that compared to other quests, it isn't fantastic but compared to the rest of f2p its a suitable quest and servicable. It even has Stone of Jas foreshadowing and cutscenes.


Well, for starters, how come Elvard, a mere green dragon, be able to wipe out an entire civilization as powerful as the other three kingdoms? While Crandor consisted of just one island, surely there should've been enough warriors in the island to kill Elvard, even without dragonfire protection. Likewise, Elvarg's motivation for the attack are left unknown: we don' know why it destroyed Crandor and proceeded to target the Crandorian refugees in Misthalin, and why it was on Crandor to begin with.

There are other parts of the quests that could use some work. Crandor does not look at all like it is able to support an entire city, there's no explination on why the Guildmaster has the key to Melzar's maze, why Wormbrain wants gold in exchange for the map piece when he is in prison and unable to use it is left unexplained, and in general the logic behind the quest starts to get wobbly when it is analyzed. Besides, there isn't enough content in-game to justify a sequel for Dragon Slayer if we want these questions addressed, so a rework is the only way to deal with it. In fact, a rework could be good for the quest: after all, old assets could be used a lot in the reworked quest, and new rewards could be added for the quest that are actually relevant and useful for players.

23-Oct-2015 15:12:18

Rondstat

Rondstat

Posts: 2,770Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Here's my perspective on reworks:

Every piece of content in the game is somebody's favourite. I respect that things need to change - change is good for the game, and keeps it healthy, and sometimes that change necessitates removing something older and out-of-date. However, IF it's possible for the new to sit alongside the old, co-existing and supporting each other, I think that's the wiser tack. I'm not against reworks - I'd take DoC over BKF in a heartbeat. But why retcon when we can expand and enhance?

Besides that, this game is built on a decade and a half of lore, world-building, and strangeness, and I always find it to be a supreme delight when the game pulls up some obscure piece of older content, something we've forgotten about, and gives it entirely new meaning. I don't think WGS would have had the same narrative impact if it hadn't so dramatically reframed the odd little narrative cul-de-sac of Temple of Ikov from 6 and a half years prior.

This is one of the problems I've had with so much of the 6th Age storyline. In using MPD as a reset for quest requirements (which I'm ok with), they've also often used it as a reset for lore (which I'm not ok with), and retconned, contradicted, or ignored many facets of the game's story from before 2013. Even pieces of story that seem engineered to fit perfectly into the premise of the 6th Age (Tower of Life immediately comes to mind) have fallen completely to the wayside, and this ultimately leaves many 6th Age quests feeling disconnected, and less fulfilling than they ought to, for the stories they're telling.

Besides that, it just doesn't seem budgetarily sound. To create a quest as long and engaging as Dragon Slayer, while meeting modern requirements for quest assets, environments, etc, would likely take several times more resources than it did to develop the quest in the first place. And I'd rather see those resources spent on new quests, rather than eliminating a perfectly good questing experience

23-Oct-2015 16:30:54

Amascut
Aug Gold Premier Club Member 2013

Amascut

Posts: 21,616Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Rondstat said:
But why retcon when we can expand and enhance?


Specifically replying to this question - I think it's always better to tell the best possible version of an existing story when possible, instead of shoehorning in a "follow-up" to something that is at best mediocre. Instead of just taking a bad story and giving it a sequel, they should make sure the bad story stops being... well... bad.

And Dragon Slayer isn't bad, mind, but it sure is sub par. Aquamancer hit on so many of the points that really bother me about the quest already - it's full of major logic gaps, absolutely illogical puzzle designs, awkward lore when it bothers, and even more awkward storytelling when it doesn't. The visuals don't match the story it's trying to tell, and more of the story comes from exterior source than from within the quest itself as well.

Dragon Slayer is the F2P finale, but we've got a whole slew of F2P quests that are better at storytelling, better looking, more challenging, more puzzling, and more exciting. For those reasons, I firmly believe the quest needs a rework, keeping the same base story, but making it just, well, better.
@Fannygirdle on Twitter | Co-Owner of The Scrying Pool, a future updates and lore clan

25-Oct-2015 07:53:51

Aquamancer
May Member 2011

Aquamancer

Posts: 2,037Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Amascut said:
Too long, had to cut the text


Indeed. Sometimes reworking a quest is better for the game than making a continuation quest for it, although sometimes it might be better to retcon the quest all together and start from scratch. Romeo and Juliet was just a copy of Shakespeare's play without any originality and offered nothing for the world of RuneScape, while its replacement quest, Gunnar's Ground, is actually tied to the existing story elements and in my opinion a significantly better quest. If Osbourne has his way, King Arthur storyline will eventually go through similar treatment as well, which might not be a bad thing at all: after all, how would Earth fit into RuneScape Multiverse? Simple answer: it doesn't.

In addition, with a quest rework rewards from older quests could be improved and brought up to date with newer quests. I'm going to use Dragon Slayer as an example once more, partially because I haven't finished with the issues I have with it. Ability to wear rune platebody after completing the quest doesn't really make sense: what is there in-universe that prevents you from doing so? There isn't any prestige left for having a rune platebody, and from game design perspective locking level 50 basic body armour behind a quest is just bad design. Instead, the rework should flatout remove the ability to wear level 50 body armour as a reward, and instead add a new set/sets of new mid-level armour, best-in-slot for f2p as a quest reward.
Likewise, reworking quests could allow us to get new uses for the areas they unlock and allow them to be used in future content more extensively, such as in Dragon Slayer's case, Crandor, which could be reworked as an end-game f2p training area with content for levels 40-60 in different skills and added plenty of post-quest lore about the island's history.

25-Oct-2015 21:16:03

Valancia
Dec Gold Premier Club Member 2018

Valancia

Posts: 287Silver Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Also I hope the Barrows Brothers quest doesn't add the sister as an actual part of the mini game, but probably will. I hated when the last one was added, sort of made doing Barrows not very enjoyable after finishing ROTM, hate fighting him.

Still calling them the Barrows Brothers though :P always been my term for it

27-Oct-2015 04:28:12

Quick find code: 16-17-584-65048986Back to Top