The use of puzzles and fetch quests?

[xS]

Simple topic. What do you think about the use of puzzles in action/adventure games?

I might post my thoughts sometime later, as I want don't want this thread to be one sided.~_^

[ChaoofNee]

Puzzles: All for it. Keeps things interesting. Stupid, easy puzzles are diffrent, though.
Fetch Quests: If kept to a minimum, fine. Games like Donkey Kong 64 must die.

[Andy]

I used to hate puzzles in almost any genre, now I really like them for some reason. Fetch quests are fine with me too. I mean they're just objectives for the platforming, what's the big problem? It's not like there is any extra platform jumping found only in platformers that don't have fetch quests Treasure hunts are just goals for platforming in open-ended (ie not strictly level-based) platformers.

[Lordmrw]

I don't mind puzzles so long as some thought has gone into them. A game like Link to the Past and Alundra are good examples of puzzles that bring a smile to your face when you solve them. Soul Reaver is an example of bullshit puzzle design. About half way through it seems they gave up on making new ones and kept throwing box puzzles just for the sake of it.

Fetch Quests - Chaoofnee said it best. Donkey Kong 64 was fucking ridiculous with that. Amazingly enough, I didn't mind Star Fox Adventures that much. Hmmm.

[EightBit]

Like seasoning, they both need to be lightly sprinkled, while minding the flavor of the main dish.

[Captain Vegetable]

I dig a good puzzle and a good fetch quest. DK64 didn't bother me at all.

[flux=rad]

A heavy reliance on puzzles makes the game virtually unplayable after the first time. There's no real getting better at doing the puzzles, you figure them out and that's it (except for time attack type puzzles). A puzzle is almost always a one shot kinda thing. So if there's too many puzzles, then it's just a beat-it-then-throw-it-away game.

"Fetch quest" seems like too broad of a category, though. Many fetch quests are going to be tedious, but others are built in to the actual game. Metroid style games are just fetch quests on a grand scale. And I have no problem with that. I have a feeling you're talking about something different though, but I don't really know how to describe it. I assume you're referring to fetch quests like the tri-force hunting in Zelda:WW. Here, the fetching is almost separate from the entire game. You are using almost entirely non-essential gameplay elements (the boat hook, the triforce location maps, and the other maps). The essential gameplay elements (sword, other fighting items, basically the items used in the dungeons) are used hardly at all. This makes the fetching seem like a different game from the main game (the dungeons and other above ground activities). I personally hate the tri-force fetch quest, but I think fetch questing can be done well.

[Son of Bryce]

Originally posted by EightBit
Like seasoning, they both need to be lightly sprinkled, while minding the flavor of the main dish.

Yup. It's only a problem when they go overboard with these things.

Zelda's triforce pieces only seemed like a way to make use of the gimmick they had developed for the game, diggin for treasure in the ocean. It might've been cool if you actually had to find an island and find where X is on the map and dig with a shovel, that sounds a bit more interesting to me.

[James]

I didn't mind the fetch-quest Triforce piece thing at all, really. By the time I absolutely had to have them I'd already gotten 5 out of 8, with 7 of 8 maps in hand.

One of the worst fetch-quests I can think of was in Breath of Fire 2, where you had to clear your friend of some crime or other. It just kept going on, and on, and on. The story had started, the characters were introduced, and they just couldn't seem to put that plot line to bed.

I have yet to see an example of too many puzzles, particularly on games designed to be played through once. As mentioned above, Alundra is a particularly good example of making it work well.

James

[flux=rad]

Originally posted by James

I have yet to see an example of too many puzzles, particularly on games designed to be played through once.

In my opinion, the fact that the game seems like it was "designed to be played through once" means that something is wrong with the game. I very much despise the beat it, throw it away mentality in gaming (I mean in developers, I don't mind it in other gamers since it's just a preference). I would rather spend 200 hours with a deep, well thought out game than spend 10 hours each with 20 games. A good game is engaging for an extended amount of time. The better the game, the longer you want to play it. Too many one-shot puzzles is just bad game design.