We really need an unaccepted quest list so that we do not to run aimlessly to somewhere in order just to find subquest.
-
Guest, please be noted that suggestions may not receive an official reply until the project state allows us consider them. For the majority of suggestions, this means after an alpha launch.
Suggestion Quest list?
- Thread starter Toby
- Start date
In the future, we may add markers above SOME NPCs that offer sidequests; however, I don't think it would be many or most NPCs that have that. Part of the sidequests is interacting with the NPCs to get them or triggering secret events. Having a list of uncompleted quests isn't really possible without revealing way too much.
I feel with the wiki getting updated having a built in unaccepted quest system would be meh. You should be exploring and talking to the towns folk to see if they have quests for you. If you don't wish to do that using a outside source like the wiki would solve that problem. Using the limited in game resources to add an unaccepted quest system seems like an inappropriate use.
The Quest wiki should have the starting npc listed with their coordinates for those wanting a quicker way to find what quest they are missing. this would also allow those to keep tabs using their own resources to know which quest they have missed or done with out using up in game resources.
The Quest wiki should have the starting npc listed with their coordinates for those wanting a quicker way to find what quest they are missing. this would also allow those to keep tabs using their own resources to know which quest they have missed or done with out using up in game resources.
I opted out of putting coordinates into the quest wiki because, well, everything is marked for you in-game most of the time. It's also not a cheat sheet, but a comprehensible area for quick information about the quest you are working on. An early draft of a quest on the wiki had detailed descriptions for each objective, but feedback suggested that is done away with.
A spoiler template should be added for this exact purpose then. A wiki is supposed to detail everything about a subject in depth, you will find spoilers in every wiki for every other game. There is no other appropiate place to describe everything in depth about the server than the wiki; if you don't want to be spoiled then it's as simple as not opening the page. I understand a lot of the appeal for the side quests is the discovery part and I also believe that players will have a better experience exploring the game world and finding these quests themselves, however, I still think they should be catalogued somewhere at some point in time since that is the entire purpose of the wiki in the first place.
I get the need for not wanting to spoil gameplay etc by not putting everything about a quest into the wiki but as Fatpigsarefat stated a wiki is usually a full break down of quests, skill mechanics, and comprehensive guides to classes. If people don't want spoilers well they wouldn't look at guides etc to help solve a lot of the problems they run into typically in games. Having the quest givers name in the wiki with its coordinates can easily be hidden behind a spoiler tag as well.
Plus what would giving the quest givers coordinates do? make it easier to find the starting quest.
Now if you tell me you do not want the coordinates for the item you are searching for but a general location I can get behind that a bit more. That would keep players a bit more immersed in the game play.
Overall wiki's are usually full break downs on what ever you may come into in a game. To leave out simple details like coordinates for finding npcs would be silly...
How ever not everything is marked in game.. Unless you are on a quest it will not show up in a marker. If you are looking for a vendor if you don't have a mini map enabled with waypoints good luck remembering all the shops locations a good percentage of time.
After I finish documenting all the quests on the wiki the first time around (should be done today) I'll go back and add more information. Keep in mind the wiki isn't a game guide, the point of the wiki is to find information not to find a detailed guide of getting through quests. If you want, you can make your own guide for quests and post it on the forum in Server Discussion or another category. I'll evaluate the quest wiki in a few hours and make changes accordingly.
Fully disagree, the wiki should provide encyclopedic level knowledge. Take a look at game wikis for popular RPG games such as Skyrim, The Wither 3, Fallout, or other MMORPG games such as Runescape, World of Warcraft and even our favourite other well-known Minecraft based MMORPG. They all have wikis describing quests/the storyline in immense detail, in most cases even down to the dialogue. The wiki is exactly a game guide and if you don't want to spend time contributing all that information then that's perfectly reasonable, but don't discourage other people from doing so.
I'm not discouraging nor am I cowering away from it, I have no problem with doing so. My first draft of the wiki quest had details for each objective and I showed it to a wiki team member and they said it's best if I stay concise and not make it too detailed, so I listened.
I guess this is getting a little off-topic from this thread now but the problem with the draft was that the details didn't describe the plot, rather it was instructions to the player. What I mean by that is it's written as if the player was doing the quest at the exact same time as they were reading it (e.g. points where direct instructions were given such as "don't forget to look for treasure chests along the way!", or simply irrelavent such as "this objective is relatively easy"). These aren't related at all to the plot of the quest, and should be put in a seperate section like 'Tips' or something, not with the objectives or plot. I would simply say regurgitating the quest log to list the simple objectives is descriptive enough, but after that in another section should full descriptions be given. When I say the page should have depth I mean: what is happening in each scene and most importantly what dialogue is being exchanged. A reader should be able to come in and understand what happens in the quest without having actually done the quest, I would suggest you read a couple of quests from the wikis I mentioned above to get a feel for what I mean. Apologies if most the things I say come across as disparaging or overly critical, I do say what I say in good faith.
First, I want to say I'm glad to see you guys passionate about this. It really warms my heart to see you guys break down and analyze and interact with the content like this - so thank you. Second, this is beginning to get off-topic, so I will provide my point-of-view and then we can discuss on discord or an appropriate forum thread in-depth (just tag me - Hittmana#1394 on discord, HittmanA here).
As for what you guys are saying; wikis should be as informational as possible. The point of a wiki is to be a resource providing the collected, curated, and collated information from many other sources. Wikis are not meant to be game guides, yet they are also not meant to be barebones for the sake of avoiding spoilers. Here is what I would recommend as a beginning "Wiki Community Guide":
- Spoilers and information: The wiki should absolutely provide information that would be considered a spoiler, including but not limited to, coordinates, secret encounter details, secret mechanic details, easter eggs, etc. BUT this information should be put into spoiler tags (if those don't exist yet, we can work on getting those). Any information that is not readily available or has the potential to provide insight that might not be readily apparent in-game MUST be spoilered. This allows users who really want it to see it and prevents the ruining of the game for others. What is considered a spoiler is obviously somewhat subjective, but use common sense. Rule of Thumb: if it is information not readily available or given in the game, it should be considered a spoiler.
- Neutral point of view: The wiki is not a game guide nor should it feel as though it is talking directly to the reader (things like "you will see" and etc.). To this end, only a neutral point of view should be used. It should feel like reading a Wikipedia page or a scientific journal. State things as they are, not as the player should see them or you see them. Example: "
For the next objective you will need to kill seven spiders. You will see the spiders in the left of the cave entrance."vs "The next objective is to kill seven (7) spiders. The spiders are to the left of the cave entrance when entering." Notice the second is objective and feels matter-of-fact? You should not be stating your personal opinion. Personal opinion has its place on forum posts but not in a wiki. An example of this is given by @fatpigsarefat
. This is personal opinion - IE it is not objective fact that this quest is easy nor is it objective that we should look for treasure chests along the way. Instead, the "wiki-way" to say this would be "Treasure chests can be found along the path," and "This quest has a recommended level of nine (9)." - Grammatical nitpicks: Everything should be in the present case UNLESS it is historical or in the future (IE it needs past or present). You should not say "The spiders will be killed to complete the objective", "The spiders were killed to advance the quest", and etc. Instead, use present tense to say "The spiders are killed to advance the quest." The only exceptions to this would be cases where past or future tense must be used - for example referring to a historical action or an action that takes place in the future. In short, everything should use Formal American English and adhere as much as possible to the AP Style Sheet. No, I don't expect you to spend hours editing and adhering religiously to that guide, but I do expect you to give it a skim and just try to stay as close as you easily/quickly can to that guide. Being consistent really helps make information understandable and accessible!
- Sources: Information should be sourced and available for the player to see where it was taken from. This can be as simple as a screenshot showing armor stats uploaded to discord and then linked to as a citation in the wiki. Not all things need citing like this, BUT any objective statistics or information should have a source/citation (eg weapon/armor stats, quest objectives, coordinates, etc.). I will be honest in saying this is not as important NOW, but it will become important when 200 people are editing the wiki and start making stuff up. It's good we start requiring sources now before we have to go and revise all the wiki pages to add sources.
Excellent, I would also suggest posting these guidelines on the contributing section of the wiki itself so future editors are also aware too, and so it’s not lost in some random unrelated thread on the forums. Most of my views are formed from Wikipedia’s own policies (which by themselves are so horrendously complicated it takes months just for editors to get used to them), which are usually informally adopted to some degree in public wikis across the Internet, so it’s great to see some clarity and own policies on here too. Thanks for your time.