By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

So, I'm playing Dead Island.  At one point, I have to liberate the pumping station so the church can have fresh water again.  No problem.  It takes me to a part of the city I haven't visited previously and adventuring is what games are all about.  I'm a badass, so I get the job done and return to the church to turn in the quest.

Then--THEN--one of the survivors, Bruno, is all like, "hey, Sam B, you know what, I need some tools to make the church stronger."

I say, "sure, just tell me where I need to go."

"They're in the pumping station."

"Wait, I just got back from--"

"You finished that job yet?"

"Look, Bruno, why didn't you tell me to get those tools before I went to the pumping station the first--"

"You finished that job yet?"

I sigh and walk away.  I want to kill him but I can't.  But you know what?  I do the quest anyway.  I complain and give Bruno the finger but I still bring back the tools.  I'm a hero, how can I refuse?  Also, that exp.

The game is full of these type of quests.  Lots of games are.  They're a way to extend game-play and keep the player immersed in the game-world longer.  They also serve to increase the perceived value of the game.  Still, many people, including myself, often complain about repetitive side quests and meaningless fetch quests.

I'm not a child, though.  I understand the economics of the situation.  They're in there because they're easy and quick to program.  The alternative for most of them would probably be the simple exclusion of anything at all.  If the majority of these types of quests were removed, there would likely be nothing put in their place.

So, what does everyone think?  Do you complain about filler quests?  Do you perform these quests or do you skip them?  Would you rather they stay in the game, even if they kind of suck?  Or would you take a shorter game with better quest structure?