4 ms·

> Convince yourself that all side quests are for losers without better things to do. That may or may not be true, but it's helpful to avoid spending way too muc

by Too 15y ago

> Convince yourself that all side quests are for losers without better things to do. That may or may not be true, but it's helpful to avoid spending way too much time on any particular game. Aim for the ending credits While I agree that side quests usually are waste, what is the purpose of your playing? Is it because it's fun or because you have to finish? One could argue that the main quest is also a form of side quest and only for losers without better things to do...

ChrisCooper 15y ago
I think his point is that you'll still have fun playing the main story, but it'll take far less time away from you, and still leave you with the satisfaction of completion. If you go for finishing side-quests, you may not feel satisfied until you've finished them all. That can take considerably longer and be considerably less worth-while than the main game. (e.g. saving princess and defeating nemesis vs. collect all 500 random blue hidden items. Both fun, one takes far less time, and is more "worthwhile".)
- archangel_one 15y ago
  Fair point, although it depends on the game; I enjoyed the sidequests in Oblivion more than the main quest and would submit that most players would be really missing out if they didn't finish them. Of course, that's quite a different thing to timesinks like "find all 400 hidden widgets" which can get pretty tedious...
  - mortenjorck 15y ago
    Assassin's Creed II has some good examples of worthwhile and non-worthwhile side quests. I cannot imagine completing the game to one hundred percent, but half of that is activity which reveals more about the story (tombs, "truth" encodings), while the other half is just numbers (collecting feathers, weapons, and paintings, although I admit to having taken interest in the last one having been an art history minor).
dkersten 15y ago
Agreed. Some games explain story elements in the side quests, for example. Others add additional gameplay experiences. When I buy a game, I buy it to enjoy it, not so I can ignore 50-75% of it, and as long as I'm enjoying the game (rather than playing purely because I feel I'm missing out on something, even though its not enjoyable), I want to get the most out of it. Especially if it was an expensive game (though I normally only buy games on offer). Besides, most games have terrible endings, so its more about the journey (the quest, the side quests) than the destination (ending credits). Its all about fun and enjoyment. Plying a game when you don't enjoy it is stupid. Also, if you have X amount of time to play games, then playing for longer than X is obviously bad, regardless of if you enjoy it or not, but the same is true for watching TV, playing sports etc etc. Everything in life must be balanced.
snprbob86 15y ago
I was referring mainly to side quests like those of Red Dead Redemption. It's those "Collect 20 Bear Pelts" side quests that can really sap your time for a lower endorphins dosage. Side-stories are A-OK in my book.

by Too 15y ago

ChrisCooper 15y ago

I think his point is that you'll still have fun playing the main story, but it'll take far less time away from you, and still leave you with the satisfaction of completion. If you go for finishing side-quests, you may not feel satisfied until you've finished them all. That can take considerably longer and be considerably less worth-while than the main game. (e.g. saving princess and defeating nemesis vs. collect all 500 random blue hidden items. Both fun, one takes far less time, and is more "worthwhile".)

archangel_one 15y ago
Fair point, although it depends on the game; I enjoyed the sidequests in Oblivion more than the main quest and would submit that most players would be really missing out if they didn't finish them. Of course, that's quite a different thing to timesinks like "find all 400 hidden widgets" which can get pretty tedious...
- mortenjorck 15y ago
  Assassin's Creed II has some good examples of worthwhile and non-worthwhile side quests. I cannot imagine completing the game to one hundred percent, but half of that is activity which reveals more about the story (tombs, "truth" encodings), while the other half is just numbers (collecting feathers, weapons, and paintings, although I admit to having taken interest in the last one having been an art history minor).

dkersten 15y ago

Agreed. Some games explain story elements in the side quests, for example. Others add additional gameplay experiences. When I buy a game, I buy it to enjoy it, not so I can ignore 50-75% of it, and as long as I'm enjoying the game (rather than playing purely because I feel I'm missing out on something, even though its not enjoyable), I want to get the most out of it. Especially if it was an expensive game (though I normally only buy games on offer). Besides, most games have terrible endings, so its more about the journey (the quest, the side quests) than the destination (ending credits). Its all about fun and enjoyment. Plying a game when you don't enjoy it is stupid. Also, if you have X amount of time to play games, then playing for longer than X is obviously bad, regardless of if you enjoy it or not, but the same is true for watching TV, playing sports etc etc. Everything in life must be balanced.

snprbob86 15y ago

I was referring mainly to side quests like those of Red Dead Redemption. It's those "Collect 20 Bear Pelts" side quests that can really sap your time for a lower endorphins dosage. Side-stories are A-OK in my book.