Death in Games.

[Judgement101]

TL;DR

Ha! Take that! But seriously, I would probably say Mass Effect.

Spoiler

They basically made you choose between Ashley or Kaiden at the end, and you also had to kill Wrex if your persuasion wasn't high enough

Either that or Final Fantasy VII. Say what you will about the game, but you never saw Aerith's death coming. Also FFV with

Spoiler

Galuf

I have to be this guy but, what is a TL;DR?

Too lazy; didn't read or too long;didn't read.

It's what people right in a reply if a post is really long and they don't want the fact that they having nothing to say to get in the way of their posting.

Oh, thanks, I was so confused because a ton of people would say that all the time.

 

[Gigaguy64]

If i lost anyone, even characters i had just recruited but knew i probably wouldn't use, id just restart the chapter and rework my strategy.
I like the Perma-Death because it forces you to be smarter about your decisions, that is until you get you character to a high enough level.
But even then you needed to be careful, simply because the RNG hates the player in Fire Emblem.

It's interesting that you mentioned the RNG. You see, from FE6 (Sword of Seals, the one with Roy) onward, the RNG works by calling up two random numbers, averaging them, and checking the result against the posted hit rate. The attack hits if that average is less than the hit rate, and misses if it is equal to or greater than the hit rate.

This has the effect of making attacks with hit rates below 50% miss more often than they should, and attacks with hit rates equal to or greater than 50% hit more often than they should.

This chart [http://serenesforest.net/general/truehit.html] compares displayed hit rates to the actual hit rates.

That makes me feel bad actually....
Im playing Radiant dawn and iv never had so many opponents hit me with Rates that go as low as 8%.
I wonder if i just have bad luck...

 

[Rawle Lucas]

That makes me feel bad actually....
Im playing Radiant dawn and iv never had so many opponents hit me with Rates that go as low as 8%.
I wonder if i just have bad luck...

That bad luck thing is actually quite likely.

Also, the webpage in my previous post suggests that Radiant Dawn might not have the RNG averaging system. Can't say I've ever had a run of luck like that when I played the game.

But let's not let the topic drift too far, even though it is my fault.

 

[Gigaguy64]

That makes me feel bad actually....
Im playing Radiant dawn and iv never had so many opponents hit me with Rates that go as low as 8%.
I wonder if i just have bad luck...

That bad luck thing is actually quite likely.

Also, the webpage in my previous post suggests that Radiant Dawn might not have the RNG averaging system. Can't say I've ever had a run of luck like that when I played the game.

Interesting.
Really PoR and RD are the only Fire Emblem Games where it got as bad as i described, all the others were pretty fair with the occasional wtf hit or critical, but that's to be expected.
My luck must rest with my characters stats.
I have ridiculously good luck with them.
Hell, i talk to people and they say they hate Canas because of his average stats but, whenever i level Canas he gets close to maxing out almost every major Magic stat like RES and MAG.
Even his DEF and SKL get pretty high.
And for already good units like Oswin?
He gets maxed in almost EVERYTHING.
Except RES and SPD.

 

[archvile93]

TL;DR

Ha! Take that! But seriously, I would probably say Mass Effect.

Spoiler

They basically made you choose between Ashley or Kaiden at the end, and you also had to kill Wrex if your persuasion wasn't high enough

Either that or Final Fantasy VII. Say what you will about the game, but you never saw Aerith's death coming. Also FFV with

Spoiler

Galuf

Someone might have already told you this, but if you complete the mission he gives you, you don't need persuasion to convince him.

OT: Mass Effect 2 does this well in my opinion.

 

[Lerxst]

Ok, I'm dating myself but, Fallout 1 & 2 did character based deaths very well. You kill a character once and never see them again or hear anything from them afterward. They had a special mission for you? Too bad. They would have given you a key to unlock a super secret safe? Tough luck.

That's how death should be handled in games; the same as it is in real life.

 

[Snarky Username]

TL;DR

Ha! Take that! But seriously, I would probably say Mass Effect.

Spoiler

They basically made you choose between Ashley or Kaiden at the end, and you also had to kill Wrex if your persuasion wasn't high enough

Either that or Final Fantasy VII. Say what you will about the game, but you never saw Aerith's death coming. Also FFV with

Spoiler

Galuf

Someone might have already told you this, but if you complete the mission he gives you, you don't need persuasion to convince him.

OT: Mass Effect 2 does this well in my opinion.

What was the mission? Was it the armor thing or something else?

 

[ShakesZX]

TL;DR

Ha! Take that! But seriously, I would probably say Mass Effect.

Spoiler

They basically made you choose between Ashley or Kaiden at the end, and you also had to kill Wrex if your persuasion wasn't high enough

Either that or Final Fantasy VII. Say what you will about the game, but you never saw Aerith's death coming. Also FFV with

Spoiler

Galuf

But these are all story driven deaths. There is a purposeful, story intensive reason as to why these characters would die and impact the story as such.

As far as the Fire Emblem line of death goes, I really don't see how it's any different than any other game where a character dies during gameplay. Granted those characters don't come back, but that's more of a mechanic meant to enhance the strategic values of the game. They aren't really all that meaningful to the overall story or game, just how you play it.

The real premise of the main argument is that it's all in how much value you place on individual characters. Take Oblivion or Fallout 3 for an example. In those games you can go around killing specific NPCs and they will stay dead. If you don't care about their stories or their conceptual place in the game world, there is very little effect or significance applied to their deaths. If you really do care about why they are there in the world you are traversing, then when you kill them it will have a literal impact.
In Fallout 3, there is a portion :

Spoiler

where you can blow up an entire town with a nuclear bomb.

If you don't care about who the people inhabiting the town, then the event will be a meaningless continuation of a minor story arc, but if you do care then it will have an impact upon you.

Again, it all comes back to how much you, as an individual player, care about that extra info about those sorts of characters.

 

[Rawle Lucas]

But these are all story driven deaths. There is a purposeful, story intensive reason as to why these characters would die and impact the story as such.

As far as the Fire Emblem line of death goes, I really don't see how it's any different than any other game where a character dies during gameplay. Granted those characters don't come back, but that's more of a mechanic meant to enhance the strategic values of the game. They aren't really all that meaningful to the overall story or game, just how you play it.

Except for Radiant Dawn and Shadow Dragon, characters had "support conversations" that fleshed them out without interrupting the main plotline, allowing you to care whether or not they survived.

 

[ShakesZX]

I'll give you the Mass Effect, as it was technically gameplay driven, but there's no way in hell that Final Fantasy can be considered a dynamic story. You didn't choose, or fail through gameplay, to make Aerith die, she just did. Not that it was poorly done, I won't insult something that you found affecting no matter my own opinions of that series.

"Dynamic death" doesn't mean that, through your actions or inactions, you caused the acquired effect. Dynamic death is a death that is through character change, be it either in the character themselves (such as a character dieing after losing a battle they thought would be much easier), through the story (your antagonist is suddenly revealed to be the main character's best friend, and the supposed antagonist was working under orders from him), or through the player's actions (you failed to achieve "objective X" which resulted in the character's death).

All of these may or may not be independent of the story, but present a sufficient change.

 

[Xaknm]

2 words: Heavy Rain.

 

[ShakesZX]

But these are all story driven deaths. There is a purposeful, story intensive reason as to why these characters would die and impact the story as such.

As far as the Fire Emblem line of death goes, I really don't see how it's any different than any other game where a character dies during gameplay. Granted those characters don't come back, but that's more of a mechanic meant to enhance the strategic values of the game. They aren't really all that meaningful to the overall story or game, just how you play it.

Except for Radiant Dawn and Shadow Dragon, characters had "support conversations" that fleshed them out without interrupting the main plotline, allowing you to care whether or not they survived.

Again, it's all about how much stock you place in each character AS a character. They could have put the entirety of War And Peace as the character's backstory into those games, but if the player didn't care about any of it then that death would seem as impact worthy as dieing in a FPS and respawning.

I'm not saying there aren't ways of working that extra emphasis on character into games, but it's all up to the player to care.

 

[XT inc]

there's a problem with the death choice in mass effect one and it's because the game felt like it ended mere moments after. FF7 had hours and hours of content left before the game ends, and that wasn't really your choice. You get robbed literally of a character. After which every time after playing that game you treat her like a bench filler. Why level her ever again if she will die?

 

[Rawle Lucas]

Again, it's all about how much stock you place in each character AS a character. They could have put the entirety of War And Peace as the character's backstory into those games, but if the player didn't care about any of it then that death would seem as impact worthy as dieing in a FPS and respawning.

I'm not saying there aren't ways of working that extra emphasis on character into games, but it's all up to the player to care.

The important thing is that Fire Emblem gives you the option. The developer can't make any particular player care about anything.

 

[simmeh]

The purpose of this thread, as I am sure you were wondering about, was to collect your opinions of games where dynamic character death was done well. I put forward the Fire Emblem series. Characters there had individual histories, personalities, and relationships. They interacted with each other, and in some cases the player character. And damn near all of them were, in the end, expendable. Throughout a full campaign in FE, it was damn near impossible to not have a few of these characters die, and that can seriously affect you. You felt twice as much loss. Yeah, that Paladin you leveled up since the beginning of the game is gone forever, but you also know that his friends will miss him, he'll never return home, somewhere an orphan is created etc.

Y'know, I read the topic title and though, "yeah, someones going to mention Fire Emblem." Lo and behold, it happens in the first post. The series is well known for its permanent character death, and that's one of the reasons I love it so much. The characters are often well developed, or at least memorable, but they're all mortal (except in those rare instances where the character would just get seriously wounded and retreat).

Actually, there is one game in the series where you can revive characters (at great cost, after the first one): Seisen no Keifu (aka Fire Emblem 4). Of course, that game also...

Spoiler

...kills just under half the cast midway through the game as part of the story. Honestly, that scene made me feel far more sad than most character deaths in games (Aeris in particular didn't really affect me).

Also...

That makes me feel bad actually....
Im playing Radiant dawn and iv never had so many opponents hit me with Rates that go as low as 8%.
I wonder if i just have bad luck...

That bad luck thing is actually quite likely.

Also, the webpage in my previous post suggests that Radiant Dawn might not have the RNG averaging system. Can't say I've ever had a run of luck like that when I played the game.

Interesting.
Really PoR and RD are the only Fire Emblem Games where it got as bad as i described, all the others were pretty fair with the occasional wtf hit or critical, but that's to be expected...

Ever play #5? In that one, hit rate caps at 99%, and doesn't go lower than 1%. This means two things:

1) There is always a chance enemies will hit you, and there is always a chance you will miss
2) Your healing can miss

And you know what? That's only a small part of the reason its considered the hardest game in the series.

 

[MikailCaboose]

Though they're just minor characters, for some reason Cyan's Wife's and child's death thanks to Kefka just got to me. Then it only got worse when you see them on the Phantom Train.

 

[archvile93]

TL;DR

Ha! Take that! But seriously, I would probably say Mass Effect.

Spoiler

They basically made you choose between Ashley or Kaiden at the end, and you also had to kill Wrex if your persuasion wasn't high enough

Either that or Final Fantasy VII. Say what you will about the game, but you never saw Aerith's death coming. Also FFV with

Spoiler

Galuf

Someone might have already told you this, but if you complete the mission he gives you, you don't need persuasion to convince him.

OT: Mass Effect 2 does this well in my opinion.

What was the mission? Was it the armor thing or something else?

Yeah that's the one.

 

[Sovereign _909]

Gregorio from Skies of Arcadia Legends, couldn't beilve it when he was killed by Galcian! In the final battle vs Galician, I said "For Gregorio!" as Vyse struck the final blow!