There is already a thread about adventure game puzzles we hated. I almost posted there about what I actually don't like in adventure games, but I think it doesn't really belong there: QTE and timed reaction "puzzles" (or minigames)!
While I like playing some casual (mini) game now and then, and it can be fun, I don't like certain types of minigames when they are implemented in classic point & click adventures.
For example "Pillars of the Earth" was a really beautifully crafted game. I would have loved that very much, and play it more than once. If there weren't those reaction mini games. I don't know what's the best term for describing those. For me those games felt totally disconnected to the story and gameplay, not needed at all. But you had to "play" them to continue with the story, as far as I remember. Have you played that? And what did you think about them?
It was the same with "Silence", the sequel to The Whispered World. As far as I remember, the gameplay was actually very similar to the ones from Pillars of the Earth.
Then there are games like Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy), where you have to be quick, hacking your keyboard all the time.
The game and story was exciting, I would have liked the game but stopped playing because of this kind of gameplay. I watched a walkthrough of the second half (?) of the game then, didn't like the twist with the a**** (spoiler
) anyway ...
Those QTEs annoyed me, because I wasn't able to properly follow the story when having to look at the bottom of the screen all the time to check what keys to press.
It is kind of weird, since I actually also play more action based games as well if I want to, that's fine for me (hack'n'slays like Diablo, or a rpg like Skyrim).
But when I decide to play a point & click adventure, I want to play a point & click adventure - cozy, in my own speed, thinking, exploring, reading ... not having to be "skillful" or "quick" with eyes and hands.
What's your opinion on that?
I completely avoid games with QTE since I know about them. I was happy that in Deponia, you could skip minigames, although those games weren't the worst I encountered.
While I like playing some casual (mini) game now and then, and it can be fun, I don't like certain types of minigames when they are implemented in classic point & click adventures.
For example "Pillars of the Earth" was a really beautifully crafted game. I would have loved that very much, and play it more than once. If there weren't those reaction mini games. I don't know what's the best term for describing those. For me those games felt totally disconnected to the story and gameplay, not needed at all. But you had to "play" them to continue with the story, as far as I remember. Have you played that? And what did you think about them?
It was the same with "Silence", the sequel to The Whispered World. As far as I remember, the gameplay was actually very similar to the ones from Pillars of the Earth.
Then there are games like Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy), where you have to be quick, hacking your keyboard all the time.
The game and story was exciting, I would have liked the game but stopped playing because of this kind of gameplay. I watched a walkthrough of the second half (?) of the game then, didn't like the twist with the a**** (spoiler
) anyway ...Those QTEs annoyed me, because I wasn't able to properly follow the story when having to look at the bottom of the screen all the time to check what keys to press.
It is kind of weird, since I actually also play more action based games as well if I want to, that's fine for me (hack'n'slays like Diablo, or a rpg like Skyrim).
But when I decide to play a point & click adventure, I want to play a point & click adventure - cozy, in my own speed, thinking, exploring, reading ... not having to be "skillful" or "quick" with eyes and hands.
What's your opinion on that?
I completely avoid games with QTE since I know about them. I was happy that in Deponia, you could skip minigames, although those games weren't the worst I encountered.
This post was last modified: 11-07-2025, 03:08 PM by Hexenwerk.
I agree that they don’t belong in a point-n-click. A whole lot of adventure gamers play AGs because they don’t want to or can’t do things like that. Not to mention, they’re usually poorly implemented in AGs and usually just there as filler. Note to all you devs: if you’re going to put in QTEs, make sure you also put in a skip button.
(11-07-2025, 03:07 PM)Hexenwerk Wrote: It is kind of weird, since I actually also play more action based games as well if I want to, that's fine for me (hack'n'slays like Diablo, or a rpg like Skyrim).
But when I decide to play a point & click adventure, I want to play a point & click adventure - cozy, in my own speed, thinking, exploring, reading ... not having to be "skillful" or "quick" with eyes and hands.
What's your opinion on that?
I love quick time events when I expect it to be a core element of the games I'm playing. Two of my favourites unrelated to adventure games are Don Bluth's Dragon's Lair and Space Ace (cinematic action genre). I also enjoy the rush of cool action-RPG games like Alpha Protocol by Obsidian Entertainment. Which makes it all the more peculiar why I hate the following adventure game...
(11-07-2025, 03:07 PM)Hexenwerk Wrote: Then there are games like Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy), where you have to be quick, hacking your keyboard all the time.
The game and story was exciting, I would have liked the game but stopped playing because of this kind of gameplay.
I've been thinking about this recently. I hate Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophecy). It's the only adventure game I've ever played with absolutely no intention to ever return to. Briefly to be fair, I will say that I found the mental health bar mechanic to be an intriguing inclusion for things like playing the jukebox in the diner to get a positive boost. I lasted 25 minutes in this game before quitting.
They combined a 'Simon Says' style of gameplay with the rapid-fire pace of quick time events. Yes, it is as horrible as you can imagine. Was this meant to make the world feel more realistic and immersive? Spoiler alert: It does not.
Thinking about it, I guess Fahrenheit could have actually worked for me if there was for example just one button you had to press in the right moment.
Or ... like the Life is Strange games where you need to make a decision quickly. While I didn't like the stress, in the context those timed decisions at least made sense to me. Because it's the same in real life: when you are in a conversaion, the other person just expects some answer or you look weird when thinking to long about it.
I don't remember if it was Fahrenheit - there was some adventure game where you had to press keys in the correct order while playing a guitar. That was the only case where it made sense to me.
Games like Beyond two Souls or Detroit: Become Human look awesome and are exciting. They have moments that feel emotional and immersive. You could watch them as a movie (as I actually did with both games - Walkthrough/Let's Play instead of playing it myself). Maybe those wouldn't work if you weren't forced to make quick decisions either. But at least the decisions you make there (which button to press, or which option to choose) makes sense in the context of the game, other than in Fahrenheit.
I never played Heavy Rain, so I don't know if they improved in that aspect.
Or ... like the Life is Strange games where you need to make a decision quickly. While I didn't like the stress, in the context those timed decisions at least made sense to me. Because it's the same in real life: when you are in a conversaion, the other person just expects some answer or you look weird when thinking to long about it.
I don't remember if it was Fahrenheit - there was some adventure game where you had to press keys in the correct order while playing a guitar. That was the only case where it made sense to me.
Games like Beyond two Souls or Detroit: Become Human look awesome and are exciting. They have moments that feel emotional and immersive. You could watch them as a movie (as I actually did with both games - Walkthrough/Let's Play instead of playing it myself). Maybe those wouldn't work if you weren't forced to make quick decisions either. But at least the decisions you make there (which button to press, or which option to choose) makes sense in the context of the game, other than in Fahrenheit.
I never played Heavy Rain, so I don't know if they improved in that aspect.
I agree completely and in fact I'd go as far to say Quick Time Events, and stuff like button mashing to fill a meter, in almost any genre of game is annoying and very rarely fun. I'd say the only exception would be rhythm games as you're going in expecting that type of thing when you play them.
It's funny you mention Fahrenheit as that's the first example I thought of when I read the thread title. I played through around half of it a long time ago and I blame the QTEs becoming tiring as the main reason I dropped it, plus also being slightly worried I was going to break the keyboard of the laptop I was playing it on. I've not ruled out returning to it at some point but I'd need to play it from the start since it's been so long and I've forgotten what even happens in it...
A similar mechanic that also annoys me is timed choices in dialogue sequences/cut scenes. I know why it's done, to simulate quick spur of the moment responses as if it were a real conversation, but I just find it irritating, especially if done in a non voiced game where you're pressing/clicking through dialogue at your own pace otherwise. The most recent example of this that I've experienced is when I played through the original Sakura Wars for the Sega Saturn somewhat recently. In that game there are parts during dialogue where you're thrown timed choices as to how to respond to various things that other characters say. I found it especially jarring whenever it happened during one of the turn based battle sequences in the game where you've given all the time you want to plan your next strategic action, but are still are expected to make a quick reaction to some dialogue. However since I was playing this game in an emulator I just bound the emulator pause/play feature to an easy to access button and hit it whenever the timer started - cheating perhaps, but I might have never finished playing through the game otherwise.
It's funny you mention Fahrenheit as that's the first example I thought of when I read the thread title. I played through around half of it a long time ago and I blame the QTEs becoming tiring as the main reason I dropped it, plus also being slightly worried I was going to break the keyboard of the laptop I was playing it on. I've not ruled out returning to it at some point but I'd need to play it from the start since it's been so long and I've forgotten what even happens in it...
A similar mechanic that also annoys me is timed choices in dialogue sequences/cut scenes. I know why it's done, to simulate quick spur of the moment responses as if it were a real conversation, but I just find it irritating, especially if done in a non voiced game where you're pressing/clicking through dialogue at your own pace otherwise. The most recent example of this that I've experienced is when I played through the original Sakura Wars for the Sega Saturn somewhat recently. In that game there are parts during dialogue where you're thrown timed choices as to how to respond to various things that other characters say. I found it especially jarring whenever it happened during one of the turn based battle sequences in the game where you've given all the time you want to plan your next strategic action, but are still are expected to make a quick reaction to some dialogue. However since I was playing this game in an emulator I just bound the emulator pause/play feature to an easy to access button and hit it whenever the timer started - cheating perhaps, but I might have never finished playing through the game otherwise.
This post was last modified: 11-07-2025, 04:39 PM by ClusterLizard.
Quick Time Events in adventure games are design shorthand for either "we couldn't think of a puzzle here" or "we don't know who we're making this game for." Neither is acceptable.
(11-08-2025, 04:08 PM)Space Quest Historian Wrote: Quick Time Events in adventure games are design shorthand for either
There is a third reason from a developer standpoint. Artificially extending the game length as a result of the player failing the QTE sections.
(11-08-2025, 04:08 PM)Space Quest Historian Wrote: "we couldn't think of a puzzle here"
That is the primary motive for including QTE in adventure games, I am in firm agreement with this view.
(11-08-2025, 04:08 PM)Space Quest Historian Wrote: "we don't know who we're making this game for." Neither is acceptable.
There are always exceptions to the rule. I do think it's acceptable to have QTE in hybrid genres such as Adventure-RPG. The Council features QTE somewhat frequently throughout the game, but because it has the quality of life feature 'failing forward' to prevent any lasting repercussions for the player it ends up balancing out quite evenly.