Do people actually like side quests? I always see games being praised for their inclusion, or panned for the lack of them. Heck, there are whole genres practically built around the idea of side quests, and use them as the bulk of their content. Most open world games for instance
But why? I can't stand them. I don't think I've played a single game where the side quests were good. They're almost always the most generic of filler content. Like right now I picked up Xenoblade X, and it seems like the bulk of the game is just running to waypoints and clicking on probes, or farming some drop, or hunting some monster. I don't get the appeal at all. Maybe if the quest activities had some sort of depth to them? But I don't think I've seen a game like that before. There's no plot progression, no interesting mechanics, rarely any cool boss fights (aside from post game stuff). I always almost ignore them
How does /v/ feel about side quests?
well in xiv's case you can play the whole story without needing a single side quest
if you do side quests it should be for gleaning more lore from the environment and not for the sake of exp
>>319284982
Everybody likes good side quests, m8.
What you've pictured there is a game full of fetch quests, not side quests.
An example of a proper side quest is like making chocobos fuck their siblings so they shit out fast chicks in FF7. Also stuff like fun optional dungeons, where exploring it is it's own reward.
'Please take this bag of t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶g̶a̶m̶e̶ chocobo dung to a guy standing 10 metres to the north' does not qualify as a true side quest.
MMOs have the lowest bar for quality of side quests.
I like them when they're truly optional (don't grant massive buffs making them practically required), inform and explain more about the lore and world and generally change up the gameplay a bit.
If it's just go here do X like you could be doing in the main story (or just fucking around exploring yourself, eg Bethesda games) i think they're pretty shitty.
Side quests add depth to the world.
>>319286086
>>319285449
I'm not really talking about XIV, was just a relevant picture I found on google
I've never played a game with decent side quests, except maybe Majora's Mask. Almost all of them fall into the fetch quest variety. Xenoblade is a recent example that I'm currently playing
I love good side quests with actual effort put into them. Off the top of my head Baldur's Gate 2 did a good job.
I was going to say I hate lazy kill x/ get y quests but even those are fine if you dress it up enough.
>>319285449
you haven't reached 50 yet, or worse, 60, the amount of sidequest requiered to get to 60 is stupid
I like unique quests the best and would rather have a small number of those rather than a bunch of generics.
>>319286280
I am playing Fallout NV right now (not because one of you idiots is making threads about it every day).
Side quests make up a good portion of the game.
Depends how they're done, obviously. Witcher 3 does them right. I even liked a bunch of the Nier sidequests, which were just fetch quests mechanically speaking, but the plot behind some of them was quite deep. Side quests that are just there for the sake of padding are not only boring themselves, but dilute the quality and focus of the core game/quest as well.
>>319286280
Never played Chrono Trigger? Nearing the end of the game you can basically choose to fight the final boss in a plethora of different ways at any time you want, but there are side-quests everywhere that explain a lot of plot details, are rich with character development, and give great loot. The best part is they don't even really feel like side-quests, just like another chapter in the game.
>>319284982
Depends on the side quest, really. I like the kind that can be very long but meant to be completed over the course of the game. Like in The Witcher 1, where you'd come across clues that progressed certain sidequests until late in the game when you had the option of completing them, or Akrham City where you'd run into phone calls or assassinated civilians and be able to piece together enough information over the course of the game to capture sidequests villains while still progressing through the main story.
I also don't mind the more repetitive kind of sidequest as long as you have the option of putting them off and picking them back up again whenever you like. Witcher 3's contracts tended to follow the same formula of "find scene of monster/human attack, scan the area for clues, follow a trail until you find the monster/identity of the killer/talk or fight to a resolution" but aside from one or two cuttoff points I was able to do them whenever I pleased, and the little stories for each one were just varied enough to keep me interested.
The non-contract side content in Witcher 3, though, was way too repetitive and boring for me to bother doing. The bandit camps, monster nests, and other random crap you'd come across while exploring which was always handled the exact same way and had no real significance or impact at all.
