I know this isn’t strictly related to patient gaming, but I think it fits the ethos of this community and I can’t think of a better choir to preach to.

The director of Dragon’s Dogma II made the following statement regarding limiting or removing fast travel

Just give it a try. Travel is boring? That’s not true. It’s only an issue because your game is boring. All you have to do is make travel fun

I think this is fairly compelling. Though I will say, I don’t think the answer is to limit fast travel. The real limitations developers should be placing should be on filler quests that have you traveling from point a to point b and then back with some slight pretext as to why you’re doing so. It’s not fast travel that’s the issue so much as mission design and the manners in which the player is compelled to cross the game world.

Metroidvanias are a great example of how to allow for fast travel while still making traveling around the game world compelling. The latest Metroid, Metroid Dread, was really fantastic in this aspect. You have this sense of progression and exploration even as you’re backtracking.

Would removing fast travel from Metroid Dread have made it any better? I don’t think so. The inclusion of fast travel feels thematic. You have to work for it so it feels like an achievement to unlock. It augments the game.

So in short, I agree with some of the sentiment expressed, with regards to lazy gameplay design being boring. I disagree with the opinion that fast travel necessarily is boring, or causes lazy desing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    145 months ago

    The guy’s got a point, but I don’t think it can be fully generalized as that “you don’t need fast travel, otherwise your game is boring.” I think there are legitimate instances where you just need to get to places quickly. I think the problem is less that fast travel exists, and more that a lot of games nowadays put so many fast travel points that you can go through the entire game without having stepped foot in 99% of the map.

    I like the concept of “limited fast travel.” Witcher 3 is a good one, where you can fast travel, but only if you’re at a signpost and you can only travel to other signposts. Hollow Knight does this as well. I’m also pretty partial to how Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom does it, where you can fast travel to any shrine at any time, but shrines are never perfectly where you want to go - you’ll still need to make a 1 minute jog to get to the town/point of interest that you’re trying to get to.

    • @MonkCanatellaOP
      link
      45 months ago

      Nice observation with regard to Zelda! I noticed it but I never put into words why I liked it. It is really nice that fast travel doesn’t just plop you down in the middle of the village.

    • BruceTwarzen
      link
      fedilink
      35 months ago

      To me it really depends. I didn’t really like read dead 2 vecause it was so slow. But i played online with a friend and we never fast travelled, because there was always something happening and we rather saved the cash.
      We played valheim with 4 people and we all have jobs and a life, so 4 adults finding time at the same time was pretty rare, and not being able to teleport materials for reasons was just making the game longer without adding anything. At the end we picked up material, went to a second server deposit it there, teleport and pick it up again. Now i play palworld and i like it, you have a choice, roaming around is fun enough and you find things, vut you can also just use a teleporter, because who cares.