Right & Wrong: QTEs

[Blacklightning]

Hey guys, BL here again. I've been thinking of taking something of a journalistic route these days, so I thought I'd start a bit of a mini-series on some of the boards I go to, along the lines of popular subjects in the gaming industry. That said, I played WET recently and it got me thinking about QTEs again - as much as I usually hate them, there IS a right way to do them and I have to admit that. So...

Right and Wrong - Quick Time Events

RIGHT: It should look absolutely ****ing spectactular

A QTE is the one time in the game you should rightfully be robbed of any control in-game. This loss of control, despite being a limitation in itself, completely scraps another limitation - allowing the game to showcase spectacular feats that aren't normally possible in normal gameplay. The least any dev could do to compensate for lack of interactivity is to make the scene unfolding as incredible to behold as possible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyQcqDNoUHU
The awesome starts around the 2:40 mark. Ordinarily I'd embed this but it appears this board doesn't have an option.

WET has perhaps the best example of this I've ever seen in a videogame, bar none. I **** you not, this is one of the most awesome levels I've ever played in anything. Initially it seems like a generic QTE sequence ala the first Krauser fight in Resident Evil 4, but... well, for one thing, you're on top of a ****ing car in the middle of a high-speed highway chase, and you still get to shoot things between QTE prompts - an improvement in itself, but besides the point. The main point is... for christ's sake, just look at it for 30 seconds and try telling me that **** ain't worthy. Cars crash, bodies fly, explosions happen, and you actually feel some sense of involvement in it all. That's exactly what a QTE should strive to achieve - now to be fair, I don't expect any of them rival WET's awesomeness in a long time, but unless there's something interesting going on, it ultimately feels anticlimactic - something a disturbingly large number of developers seem to neglect when using QTE sequences as a crutch. Speaking of which...

WRONG: QTEs should not be a substitute for gameplay

Have you ever seen a game hype up a prospective boss fight throughout the majority of the game, only for it to actually refuse you a chance to fight it directly? Well, sad to say, but devs actually do this from time to time to save themselves the trouble of actually programming a decent boss. To make a case in point, let me introduce the last boss of Sonic Unleashed - Perfect Dark Gaia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAakwnnGyqY
Moment in question is around the 4:30 mark.

Now, it's bad enough that you spend the majority of the fight bringing down a ****ing shield, but by the time you actually get a chance to do any real damage, control is completely robbed from you and the whupass consists merely of pressing random buttons until he dies. This is again, extremely anticlimactic and frankly, ****ing stupid, considering there's already a perfectly good playstyle outside of it that could easily have worked just as well. Now, a QTE can be an effective method of finishing a boss fight off, but for ****'s sake it shouldn't happen before we can even lay a single hit on them. Ironically enough, for all its showcasing of brilliant QTE usage WET ultimately succumbs to this eventually, too. The moral here is, at the very least actually allow the player to take the first and last few pops before using a QTE to finish the job, otherwise it completely defeats the purpose of having a boss fight and a major character to go with it.

RIGHT: Have a few QTEs that aren't actually QTEs

I can already tell I've lost some of you with this one. Well, the thing about this is, you don't always have to actually rob the player of control in order to tell them what to do next. Hell, sometimes it can even be something as simple as displaying an appropriate button when danger is approaching. And of all the things that Unleashed has done wrong in regards to QTEs, this is one thing it actually does perfectly right, at least in the early stages of the game.

Yeah, no video this time, sorry.

You see these pipes here? You grind along one of them. You can switch between them at will. Sometimes they end abruptly and lead into a bottomless pit, thus giving you incentive to switch poles strategically. But it's no big secret that Sonic's ****ing ludicrous speed can both obscure vision and leave much less time to react, which would ordinarily reduce these sections to horrible trial-and-error tests. But yet, a saving grace comes in the form of lesser-used "button prompts", a form of QTE which doesn't actually remove your control of the game, yet nonetheless offers a means of assistance that will likely save your life. If you're heading down a path that's likely to kill you, the game will display the main buttons that will divert you to a safe one. Given that there's only three, and you're locked to one of them at any time, this is easy. In other games, this has been used to avoid damage from powerful attacks (RE4 and 5 most notably), jump to offscreen locations (WET yet again) and sometimes even as an opportunistic counterattack (Mirror's Edge comes to mind) - all the same, allowing full player control and only interfering as deep as a one-dimensional button instruction can actually do the game a whole world of good, offering a chance of safety yet still allowing players to find their own way around if need be.

WRONG: Never use more than one button for a single action

Is your QTE a password? A game of Simon Says? An Ultra Combo? A Tony Hawk game? If you feel the need to use more than one button and answered "no" to all of these, you've already ****ed it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWsXqDM_xGM
Absurdities start at 1:20

This is really more of a common sense issue than anything else. Have you ever had to type in a ****ing password to access a move in any game? Well erm, there's always Mortal Kombat, but that was more of an optional finishing move than anything else - this is a mandatory method of progression we're talking about. If you never do anything even remotely that convulted and complex in standard gameplay, there's no reason for it to be done in a QTE, end of. Which brings me to another point:

RIGHT: QTE inputs should be consistent with ingame controls

No vids or pics this time, but if you really need a visual guide for this, refer back to the first YT I posted. If the character's required to jump, you press the jump button. If it's required to duck, you press the duck button. If it's required to attack, you press the attack button. Surely most of you can already see where this is going. But for some mysterious reason, this rarely actually applies to QTEs. It's almost as if the buttons are arbitarily picked out of a hat, and some games even go as far as to randomly generate which button is required to progress. Case in point, the previous vid (not that you can notice it, being only one pass through).

Now here comes the obligatory question: why? You've spent most of the game using very specific buttons for very specific tasks, why should the controls be any different just because we're watching a barely interactive cutscene? It's almost as bad as a typical Genre Roulette, serving little purpose than to throw the player off at the most inopportune of times. If you really want to "test reflexes" as other people have put it on occasion, it should actually be a test of reflexes, not a ****ing guessing game.


Now then. I guess this is the part where I let the rest of you discuss and expand on this until I feel again, it's time to move onto a new subject. Here's to hoping I can make a habit out of these.

 

[Chibs]

Brilliant dissection, I have a feeling a lot of people are going to like you for this. I agree with most of your points, and it actually does befuddle me quite a bit whenever game developers, whether out of laziness or lack of gimmicks and idea for a level or boss or the game in general, just shove pointless "Here, hit this random button that's not related to the control scheme at all!" sequences in the game. And this is a factor that applies to the Wii more harshly than on any other console.

 

[Blitzzo]

The issue with this logic is that, despite your claim about how "QTEs should not be a substitute for gameplay", you are making special case scenarios for games that, surprise, surprise, replace the normal gameplay with on-rails button pressing. The harsh reality is that QTEs are cutscenes, no matter how small they are. They do not follow the rest of the game's flow. They restrict freedom, and the bottom line is a game that requires less skill with actual movement, and either results in an easy game or in artificial difficulty.

You do not need QTEs to perform "spectacular feats". Super Mario 64 didn't force you to press a series of buttons in rapid succession during a cutscene in order to perform a Wall Kick. You simply learned the move on some in-game sign or the instruction booklet and you were given the freedom to perform this and many other moves whenever you desired to do so, within the game's movement system, to overcome obstacles where you were expected to use common sense to determine that you needed to execute a Wall Kick in the first place. The result was incredibly natural. Sometimes you could use these moves to find alternate solutions. Super Mario Galaxy was even more amazing, where you performed these moves while under pressure from flying Bullet Bills or sinking platforms. Bowser's last stage was a great example of this. QTEs can't do any of this in a way that simply "works".

I generally feel that QTEs are a technique employed by game designers who are too lazy to come up with anything better. If you can't fit a concept into the standard game flow, you should simply scrap it and move on to other ideas. Tossing such ideas would most likely make the game more fun anyway.

 

[Mystic]

If you can't fit a concept into the standard game flow, you should simply scrap it and move on to other ideas. Tossing such ideas would most likely make the game more fun anyway.

Or instead, simply make it a real cutscene and throw away the arbitrary button presses. You'd have a better game and keep the ideas intact.

I personally think QTEs are an outdated, awful idea that should go the way of passcodes for data saving.

 

[Blacklightning]

The issue with this logic is that, despite your claim about how "QTEs should not be a substitute for gameplay", you are making special case scenarios for games that, surprise, surprise, replace the normal gameplay with on-rails button pressing.

Do bear in mind that not all of these points are exactly compatible with each other though, and I don't expect every single one of them to be practiced in the same game at the same time. This is more or less a list of suggestions than anything else.

You do not need QTEs to perform "spectacular feats".

This is true too, but not once did I claim otherwise. Regardless though, it is impossible to make a game engine that can encompass every single conceivable action of the human body (and most games that try such a jack-of-all-trades approach generally don't fare well, if only for being overly complex), so it's hardly wrong to regulate some moments to cutscenes/QTEs where the game engine can't possibly handle it. Besides that, you also have to consider the game becoming a Genre Roulette if the player has to be dealing with too many different styles of play, and less/non-interactive means are an easy way to prevent that.

I generally feel that QTEs are a technique employed by game designers who are too lazy to come up with anything better. If you can't fit a concept into the standard game flow, you should simply scrap it and move on to other ideas. Tossing such ideas would most likely make the game more fun anyway.

Sadly, I agree with this too. But as I'm sure both of us are aware, developer rights and common sense aren't exactly exclusive to each other, so as long as QTEs exist there might as well be lines drawn and standards set to stop them from ruining games single-handedly.

 

[Mystic]

Sadly, I agree with this too. But as I'm sure both of us are aware, developer rights and common sense aren't exactly exclusive to each other, so as long as QTEs exist there might as well be lines drawn and standards set to stop them from ruining games single-handedly.

The proper standard is simple: Don't use QTEs, ever. Nobody will miss them when they're gone. It's simply bad game design.

 

[Chibs]

The proper standard is simple: Don't use QTEs, ever. Nobody will miss them when they're gone. It's simply bad game design.

"Why make a great game when good sells better?"

 

[Mystic]

In this case, it's "Why make a possibly good game when we can just not bother putting any effort into the game when the idiots will just keep buying this garbage anyways?"

People keep buying games with the same horrible design problems, but that doesn't stop them from being horrible design problems.

 

[Blacklightning]

The proper standard is simple: Don't use QTEs, ever. Nobody will miss them when they're gone. It's simply bad game design.

I guess one could say that. But one could also say that speed and platforming are completely incompatible, that licensed tie-ins will forever be utter tripe, that console-based FPSs are woefully clumsy and degraded in comparison to their PC origins, and that comic book heroes don't make good games anymore... but you know what? Arkham Asylum got released just recently, Goldeneye 64 is simultaneously a console FPS, a movie tie-in and one of the most renowned games of all time, and surely you of all people don't need a reminder that speed and platforming are the two key things this very franchise is founded apon. Do you think they got where they did by completely scrapping any sign of a concept that hadn't worked perfectly in the past? Of course not. This was achieved simply by - wait for it - improving on the mistakes that had already been made.

I'm going to be perfectly blunt here. I'm outright sick of seeing this utterly ass-backwards mentality that something that has caused bad things in the past, cannot be fixed and therefore must be scrapped. I made this thread (and consequently this mini-series, I guess) in the interest of improvement, so I'm going to ask nicely, just once. If making some constructive input is somehow beyond you, kindly take your bias elsewhere where it might actually be of use. Or at the very least make a proper attempt at defining and reinforcing your stance on the matter - what I've read so far isn't much better than "QTEs suk lol", and it's not exactly helping your case.

 

[Krabs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FChL3VOdjz8&feature=related

Worst. Stage. EVER. O_o
I gave up after 1 death on this level.

 

[Mystic]

But the problem with that argument is that a console FPS isn't by definition a bad idea, a game based on a pre-existing license isn't by definition a bad idea, and a fast platformer isn't by definition a bad idea. Frequently these ideas are done wrong, but it's perfectly possible to make a good, fast platformer (Sonic the Hedgehog 2), and a good console FPS based on a pre-existing license (Goldeneye 007). In fact, these ideas that normally hinder gameplay in bad games using the ideas work to Sonic 2 and Goldeneye's favor, making the game feel unique and awesome because they use non-standard ideas well.

QTEs are by definition a bad idea. It is not possible to make a good use of them because there isn't one, since it would be better to either make it a cutscene or rework it so the player can fully control it. Your argument is comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Scarbo the Black Sheep]

You're still not describing WHY. Your comment really is, well, kind of pointless without doing so.

It is possible to make derivatives of it that if done at the right spots, in weird enough games, it could be quite cool. Personally, if a QTE were executed such that it had a HUGE string of like 200 different buttons to press in 30 seconds, that honestly would be somewhat interesting. For graphical purposes, that should display not as a huge box of buttons, but instead a marquee that scrolls on every correct press.

Although the phrase QTE wouldn't QUITE apply, being as it isn't exactly "quick," that would be different. I've always seen games show sequences of about eight buttons or less.

 

[Mystic]

You're still not describing WHY. Your comment really is, well, kind of pointless without doing so.

I did so. QTEs are bad because all QTEs could be replaced by either removing the command entry and making it a cutscene or reworking the design so the player can do it in actual gameplay. I would rather just watch the character do it or do it myself with the normal game controls, not be forced to hit buttons out of context like some kind of controller whack-a-mole.

It is possible to make derivatives of it that if done at the right spots, in weird enough games, it could be quite cool. Personally, if a QTE were executed such that it had a HUGE string of like 200 different buttons to press in 30 seconds, that honestly would be somewhat interesting. For graphical purposes, that should display not as a huge box of buttons, but instead a marquee that scrolls on every correct press

This is not a QTE. This is a different genre of game. You call these "rhythm games", and generally they're set to music. DDR and Guitar Hero both use this exact design to great effect.

 

[BlueZero4]

I think the biggest drawback of QTEs is that you are never truly able to sit back and enjoy the cutscene.

 

[Wombatwarlord777]

I have just the opposite opinion; If you're going to include long, action-filled cutscenes in the story, why the hell not make them into QTEs? That way, it'll make the player feel more involved in (and consequently more aware of) the story as it unfolds.

Besides, if I had to sit back and watch WET's highway chase scene, I'd feel cheated more than anything else; I payed to play a videogame, dammit, not watch a movie.

That said, Sonic Unleased really did abuse QTEs.

 

[Mystic]

Well, to take it the other way, Wombatwarlord, you could do WET's highway scene without QTEs and without loss in player interaction just by making all of those jumps automatic. Hell, you could even use this to make the jumps even more awesome by requiring the player to shoot at things in the middle of them using the normal aiming controls. It could ALSO be done in the other way mentioned, reworking the controls so the player could actually do the jumps on your own using the game's normal controls. Both of these methods are far superior to using QTEs because they operate using the normal in-game controls, instead of providing a stupid exception where the player has to play whack-a-mole to look cool. Removing QTEs isn't about taking out player interaction, it's about giving players meaningful interaction with the game instead of pointless button mashing.

 

[Arf]

I'm not going to throw my opinion in here, because I'm sure it's not right, but I will do deploy a thought I've been having for a long time:
Isn't playing a videogame a sucession of timed button presses? The timing is determined by some arbitrary event, but in the end, it's still pressing a string of buttons to pull off stuff. Granted, I won't compare RE4's QTE to SM64's wall jumping, but it still makes me a little curios that THESE timed strings of buttons are much more different...

 

[Wombatwarlord777]

Well, you're free to do what you want within the parameters of the game's controls in non-QTE areas. To use Super Mario 64 as an example, there's a literally thousand things you could do without even entering Bomb-Bomb Battlefield (though, those thousand things are likely to be rather boring and similar. But what matters is the freedom of movement). In that sense, the normal game isn't as restrictive as QTEs, which essentially boil down to two outcomes: Succeed, or fail and suffer the consequences. And, if you're forced to replay the QTE until you finally get it right, that really only leaves you with one outcome: eventual success.

But I should mention that freedom of movement as I've described it is much more extensive in 3D games, where you have more options of navigating through hazards and achieving goals. To use SM64 again, there are dozens of ways to deal with a single Goomba using only the jump button and the analogue stick. You can jump on it, jump over it, veer to the right or left of it by several possible distances and trajectories, jump and veer to the right or left, ect. You can even see it in the distance and avoid it altogether.

Your options of dealing with Goombas in Super Mario Bros. are much more limited (jump on it, over it, fall on it, fireball it, shell it, invincibility it) and unlike most enemies in SM64, you're forced to confront them as you progress through the level. So yes, in that sense 2D platformers are more limited (although not to the extent as QTEs, of course). Even in the Sonic 2D series, with its branching multiple paths, you're already taking on predetermined enemies and gimmicks. The only thing that changes as you choose what path to take are the combination of enemies and gimmicks you'll be forced to confront on that path.

 

[Bobinator]

I used to actually be a fan of QTEs (mainly because I liked watching what happens if you messed them up), but, now they are getting kind of annoying. Honestly, I like the way God of War did them, using them to give you one more chance to avoid taking really big (if not fatal) damage. Not counting the 'Hit O 20 times to open this door' bits.

They work when they're more like 'Boss grabs you, hit buttons fast to escape'.

 

[Blacklightning]

QTEs are by definition a bad idea. It is not possible to make a good use of them because there isn't one, since it would be better to either make it a cutscene or rework it so the player can fully control it. Your argument is comparing apples to oranges.

My argument was that QTE's are not beyond repair and can be fixed for the benefit of the player. Frankly, if you think there's no right way to do a QTE you're either not looking hard enough or not even bothering to consider the possibility.

Besides, as I've already pointed out, QTEs need not even be bound by cutscenes, and can work as a gameplay mechanic in itself. Ever seen a character dodge in RE4/5? That's a QTE, and yet it comes as a compliment to the gameplay style rather than the typical detriment. You'd be surprised.

Well, to take it the other way, Wombatwarlord, you could do WET's highway scene without QTEs and without loss in player interaction just by making all of those jumps automatic. Hell, you could even use this to make the jumps even more awesome by requiring the player to shoot at things in the middle of them using the normal aiming controls.

It's already possible to shoot enemies in any context of the level, even in mid-jump, as long as it isn't a cinematic. Didn't the gameplay clip I linked to demonstrate that? =\

I should also mention, for the record, that platforming of this type is far too difficult to be even remotely practical, and in the context of most of the remainder of the game needlessly unforgiving and tedious. Let's assume for a minute that this is all accomplished with ingame controls - you'd be expected to miraculously anticipate whenever the car you're on is about to crash (which without the button prompts is difficult to predict, given how many extremely close near-misses occur), where exactly it is safe to jump just prior to one (again, unpredictable swerves and crashes easily screw this up), the exact sequence of moves required to get to safety (one of which requires you to wallrun along a truck cab, leap onto a nearby car and off onto another before it instantly crashes), and oh, did I mention that you're being shot at for the majority of the time, and that retaliation forces you to take your eyes off the road?

The QTE sequences aren't there as a developer crutch of any kind, it's there because doing stuff like this is too much tedium and trial-and-error to be fun in any sense.