QTE's and Action Commands: What do you think of them?

That depends. I prefer them outside of cutscenes and only in gameplay too. Though, they can be used for finishers. AS for instant-kill QT Es, that should depend on the difficulty.

I for one like Action Commands but usually hate QTE's. I'm generally with the "I like them if they're part of the gameplay, but I hate them when they're in the middle of a cutscene" crowd. But as far as I'm concerned, this is the exact distinction between an Action Command and a QTE: an Action Command is integrated into the gameplay, whereas an QTE merely interrupts a cutscene. There is often skill involved in an Action Command, usually as a matter of timing, but QTE's tend to only involve reaction time and add nothing to the game except for frustration and Fake Longevity by forcing the player to watch the same cutscene over and over until they get the QTE's.

That is not to say I hate the entire concept of QTE's. They just seem to have fallen victim to Sturgeon's Law with respect to implementation.

As I said, there should've been more QTE which are in events, yet take place in predictable parts, and are non-lethal

Action Commands are actually pretty cool. I like them because they can help you, but aren't outright required to win.

Quick Time Events are terrible and should die in a fire. :|

I don't see the need for them to die in a fire.

Eswpecially when they are done this way:

When it becomes Press X to not Die, there's a huge problem with their existence. When the only way you can deal damage is by inputting a complex command, or for that matter, to win the game, there's a problem. If they're not required to beat the game, sure. But otherwise, I can't justify the use of QTE's at all. They quite literally ruin a game for me.

That's exactly the kind I hate too.

Action Commands are great however. As I said, they aren't outright required to win except maybe against a few fights at best.

edited 25th Mar '12 4:45:50 PM by Hydronix

One of the worst examples of QT Es, in my opinion, is the final boss of Sonic Unleashed.

You have to mash X like 60 times in an incredibly short timeframe.

x3 The Wii is actually a great controller for QTE's, mainly because you actually feel like you're doing the action on screen. No More Heroes is such a game that actually benefits from such QTE's.

They quite literally ruin a game for me.

I honestly disagree, though I feel this line of thinking tends to make people that love being stylish in finishing off opponents via QTE's feel bad.

Then again, I tend to like the type of QTE's like these as well:

Unfortunately, Bayonetta's Torture Attacks seem to have quite a few of those "press button repeatedly" kind of QTE's that I absolutely loathe. That kind of QTE is actually what put a damper on the Itachi boss battle for me. That's another instance where Waggle QTE's are better, because "shake the remote" is much more easier for me than just pressing a button repeatedly at a rate that I'm not able to accomplish.

It depends on their difficulty. I like them for the cinematic feel, but if they are frustrating then I would prefer them gone. The Witcher 2 is the only game I played that has QT Es, and I always choose the option "disable difficult QT Es" because of the damned dragon. In one part a dragon attacks you and you not only have to press Right Mouse Button To Not Die but you have to move at the same time and take cover; I have died more times there than in some bosses. The rest of them are not frustrating so I don't mind them or I like them depending on the situation.

edited 25th Mar '12 5:21:40 PM by Anfauglith

Well, I guess i don't mind any QTE then, probably because I can react to them pretty quickly.

I like 'em well enough. I don't see them very often, so the vast majority of my exposure comes from Resident Evil 4, just an extra level of gameplay as far as I'm concerned.

Another thing:

If they're all a bunch of cache'd movements with random button presses, I'm turned off by how lazy the design is. (once again, God Of War).

Don't build a game around them, and don't throw one at me suddenly with no indication that they're even in the game.

Follow those two rules, and you can use'em however else you want in your game.

I get the feeling we're all using slightly varying definitions of AC and QTE in this thread - so what do the rest of you think is the distinction between the two, if any?

(My definitions were already mentioned in my previous post.)

The difference to me is that a QTE is a life-or-death situation. I personally don't think the "mash X sixty times" thing in Sonic Unleashed was even that hard, but you're pretty much guarenteed to fail it your first time because that kind of prompt never comes up before then. So when it does show up you probably pressed X once, started at the screen for a second or two to process that, yes, that 59 on the screen means you haven't pushed the button quite enough times, then failed miserably. I don't even remember if failing the QTE led to instant failure because it's hard to care about something so minor from years ago, but if it did that's total bullshit.

Where was I going with this again?

In Resident Evil 4, if you failed a QTE that was it for you, you had to do the whole sequence again. I don't know if they did the same thing in RE 5 because I don't play bad games. An action command, conversely, would be something that gives you an advantage, but that you can do without. If I remember correctly, you can totally beat the shit out of monsters in God of War without starting the QTE sequence, although you'd end up with less exp orbs than if you did. And they're mandatory for bosses, I guess. Or like the DS Glory Of Heracles game that let you buff up your attacks with shit on the touch screen. Those are nice, but you don't have to use them to win.

edited 26th Mar '12 1:17:55 AM by MrDolomite

I've only played a couple of games with these, and while I dislike them on principle, I think Kingdom Hearts 2 pulled them off well. Particularly in how they actually made the Sephiroth fight manageable in comparison to the original game.

Neutral. I don't hate them, but i would never snuggle with them at night.

It depends on the game really as well as the difficultly of them.

I like the ones like Kingdom Hearts II and Final Fantasy XIII 2 not hard at all and most don't cause a Game Over if you fail.

Unexpected ones like Mass Effect's in convo triggers though can get very annoying though.

edited 26th Mar '12 2:02:57 AM by Raso

What?

I'd say Mass Effect's Interrupts are an example done well.

They aren't life or death, usually last long enough for you to process their existance, add new routes you wouldn't get without them, and if you miss them, it isn't a game over.

I heard Resident Evil 4 got panned in the anus hard because of them, so most likely, they are bad.

Considering that RE4 is sitting at a 96 (GC/PS2) and 91 (Wii) right now on Metacritic, I don't think that's quite the case. QTEs aren't inherently bad, but if they're implemented poorly or overused, they run the risk of screwing over the product in question. That being said, I personally wouldn't want to play a game made up almost entirely as QTEs. That sounds... unappealing, to say the very least.

I would rather play a game like that rather than have a game that just puts them in out of no where when you don't know if they'll be in it.

if it very flashy then good