[Released] LiteQuest System — Lightweight, Zero-Dependency Quest Framework

Asset Store
1

Hi everyone,

I’ve just released LiteQuest System on the Asset Store — a lightweight, fully decoupled quest framework for Unity 2022.3 LTS+.

WHY ANOTHER QUEST SYSTEM?

Most quest assets tightly couple quests to specific gameplay systems. LiteQuest is built around one principle: quests shouldn’t know your game exists. Everything advances through a single generic progress API, so the same quest framework works with collectibles, combat, exploration, or anything else you build — no framework lock-in.

KEY FEATURES

  • ScriptableObject quest definitions: name, target ID, target count, description, completion message, optional auto-start
  • One generic call — AddProgress(targetID, amount) — advances quests from any gameplay system
  • Full lifecycle management (Not Started → In Progress → Completed) with automatic completion and duplicate-completion guard
  • Event-driven UI hooks: onQuestStarted / onQuestProgressChanged / onQuestCompleted — build any UI on top, fully decoupled
  • NPC quest giver component with ! / ? status markers and proximity-based interaction
  • HUD quest tracker built with Unity’s built-in UI Toolkit (no external UI packages)
  • One-click demo scene builder (LiteQuest > Build Demo Scene) plus a full playable demo with 3 sample quests
  • Zero third-party dependencies — imports and compiles in any Unity 2022.3 LTS+ project as-is

REQUIREMENTS

  • Unity 2022.3 LTS+
  • No third-party plugins required

Happy to answer any questions here. Feedback and feature requests are very welcome — I’m actively maintaining this (a Godot sibling version is also available under MIT if you’re curious about the design).

Thanks for reading!

2

As feedback there isnt a lot on the screens to show it working. While its inexpensive I think you could do well to have a short mock up in a webgl somewhere. (perhaps unity play)

3

Exactly. Nobody needs/buys those “lite” things anymore. Your statement is factually wrong, the quest systems on the store are not and cannot be bound to other systems - otherwise they couldn’t sell it as standalone asset.

I built a generic production-grade Quest system with AI in a day. Everyone can create a simple quest system within minutes. So don’t expect much in terms of sales: AI ate it.

5

Thanks for being straight about it — not what I hoped to read, but probably
the honest take.

You’re right, with AI a basic quest tracker isn’t much of a barrier anymore.
I’m still new to selling on the store, and honestly I picked this because it
was something I could actually finish on my own.

If you don’t mind me asking: is there a type of asset you think is still
worth building as a solo dev these days? I’d genuinely value your view —
you’ve seen this market a lot longer than I have.

7

Thanks for the feedback — fair point. The screenshots show the end result but
not the actual workflow, so it’s hard to tell what using it feels like.

I’m putting together a playable web demo (Unity Play) with the sample quests,
so people can click through it before importing anything. I’ll also add a
short GIF of the editor workflow to this thread once it’s ready.

If there’s anything specific you’d want to see in the demo (e.g. how quest
definitions are wired to NPCs, or the event flow), tell me and I’ll make sure
it’s in there.

8

Honestly, you need to stop responding to every new asset thread with whether you think the asset is worthwhile or not.

These threads should be for developers not to promote their own work, not for you to punch people down for simply developing something they thought was interesting or worthwhile.

Plenty of us are also not using AI to fart out code.

10

Appreciate you saying that @spiney199 — genuinely. And no hard feelings toward anyone in this thread; blunt feedback is still feedback, and there were useful points in it.

I’ll take the constructive parts, keep building, and let the work speak from here. Thanks again.

11

Thank you for the honest take — that’s fair, and it lines up with where I want to head next. A single quest script is a weekend project; a deep, well-integrated tool that saves people months is a different story, and that’s the kind of thing I’d like to get better at building.

If you don’t mind me asking: what’s the last asset you saw that hit that bar for you? I’d genuinely love to study a few examples of what ‘hard enough’ looks like — any pointers would mean a lot.

13

Any new asset you create today should IMO be verified against these criteria:

  • can AI do the same or similar job right now for an individual user?
  • will AI within a few years very likely be able to do that job by itself?
  • is it heavy on user interface (UI) or otherwise built with the notion of a human exclusively interacting with the asset?

If the answer to any of these is “Yes” then that’s not the kind of asset you want to create now and in the future.

Look for opportunities to build things that enhance the quality of agent output or decrease the token spending / time to completion. Design every asset to be agent-first, human-second. The human may only be reviewing and intervening, so UI may still be viable in terms of fast reporting where realtime (p)review is important or the data set is large.

Generally, new software built to be used primarily by humans has a hard time right now. Without any agent integration / skills such software is pretty much pointless.

Similar for new SaaS offerings because the whole friction of setting up such a service is next to nothing - previously it was a huge barrier to design and implement such services. Now they pop up everywhere. No one is paying for these subs. None of them are truly compelling must-haves (as far as I’ve seen).

Check various Youtube channels, skip over the flashy showcases, watch real developers talk (but not about slop). With the release of Opus 5.5 the opinion among senior engineers is practically unanimous: humans do not write code anymore (at large, exceptions remain).

Start with David Heinemeier Hansson speech a few weeks ago on a Ruby on Rails conference or something. Pretty much spot on. Timestamp 38:10 + a few minutes:

These days it pains me to see when AI is used to build software for humans only. We (as publishers) KNOW these things aren’t selling anymore and the store is being flooded with them. I can’t stop pointing that out as a fair warning. It’s valuable advice, not putting down (I’m not the best in relaying that nicely though). Most seem to appreciate it nevertheless, even though the revelation is harsh - but better than figuring this out after months of no sales and additional effort wasted.

AI isn’t farting out code. In 2026 it has become a competent programmer in a competent programmer’s hands, and it’s getting better fast so the competency requirement is moving down. Manually typing code has shifted to be a leisure activity like meditation or reveling in nostalgia, not as an activity that produces value. Source code is worth next to nothing now. Value resides only in factors only humans can judge: the quality of design and user experience, the creativity.

That’s where we’re at right now. We no longer need to pretend we speak one or more rigidly typed machine languages.

14

Source code was never worth anything even before AI. The value was in human expertise. And the more you offload your thinking to AI the more your expertise shrinks. The less valuable you become. You’re just feeding the machine designed to replace you.