Death mechanics in games...

[Andrux51]

I was playing one of the Castlevania games for the DS the other day, and I wasn't being too careful and ended up getting myself killed. After a marvelous "game over" screen, I got the sudden realization that now I have to start over from my last save. This means I lost everything I found between saving and dying, it made me put the game down and I haven't picked it back up since.

Do you think games like this could work with a less punishing death mechanic? What if instead of having to reset to my last save, I would just respawn at the last used save point with all my gear intact? It certainly would have made me feel like I wouldn't have to grind all over again... Personally, I'm ready for games to all move away from being "nintendo hard" - how about you?

 

[Twilight_guy]

Death mechanics are a part of all game design. Some games force you to go back to a save, some have check points, some just re-spawn you far away. Which one is best is a game design decision. The trade off between punishment for death and seeking to keep players playing is a delicate one and has been explored with numerous types of mechanics and no particular one is best. (Although I'm not a fan of ones I feel punish me excessively for screwing up or ones that are bullshit like Dead Space 2's hardcore mode).

 

[evilneko]

You think that's Nintendo Hard?

You're spoiled.

When playing Diablo in multiplayer mode, if you died and then ragequit, you lost all your gear and most of your gold. 'course if you played naked that didn't mean much, and if you played Beyond Naked that only made you more powerful, but still...

 

[Andrux51]

So, I see where you're going with that, but Diablo wasn't Nintendo Hard, it was hard based on a death mechanic that was purposely implemented to make the player spend time working to get back to their body (actually, it's pretty close to a mechanic that I grew to love/hate, the Everquest corpse run) Also, I appreciate the ad hominem dismissal of me being "spoiled" because I didn't explicitly mention that I too have played games with annoying death penalties. For me personally, I've moved past a point where I have 15 hours a day to blow chasing after the gear that I already earned.

When I say Nintendo Hard, I'm talking about oldschool games like Battletoads where if you got a game over, there was no room for a save feature on the cartridge, so welcome to the title screen. This is a feature that still carries over into games today, even though there's plenty of room for quicksaves/checkpoints/etc.

Basically, my question could be rephrased as how do you personally feel about losing progress in a game, and maybe if you're feeling chatty, how far can it be pushed before you ragequit? Try to think about how you feel about losing real life time in respect to how much progress you lose.

 

[LookingGlass]

Basically, my question could be rephrased as how do you personally feel about losing progress in a game, and maybe if you're feeling chatty, how far can it be pushed before you ragequit? Try to think about how you feel about losing real life time in respect to how much progress you lose.

It's obviously personal preference, but for me one of the things I love about some games is the sense of tension you feel as you make your way through an area. You can't create tension if there's no real punishment for death. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls were the masters of this... once I got a few thousands souls (or more as souls were of less value) I would take corners slowly, advance with my shield up at all times, etc. In other words, I'd play the game as if I was actually in the situation my character was in. Perfect. And when I'd complete an area and get to spend my souls... that exhale felt so good.

Yeah, it pisses you off when you fail, but without that I feel like games would be boring. They just have to try to strike a balance between the two extremes, so that it doesn't remove so much progress from you (without it being your fault, e.g. you didn't save at the most recent save spot) that it kills your desire to continue.

Personally, I stopped playing Super Mario Bros Wii because it has a stupid lives system where when you run out of lives, you have to restart the entire chapter (i.e. set of levels). I got sick of losing all my lives (you restart with 5) at the 4th or 5th level and redoing the same levels over and over.

 

[krazykidd]

I was playing one of the Castlevania games for the DS the other day, and I wasn't being too careful and ended up getting myself killed. After a marvelous "game over" screen, I got the sudden realization that now I have to start over from my last save. This means I lost everything I found between saving and dying, it made me put the game down and I haven't picked it back up since.

Do you think games like this could work with a less punishing death mechanic? What if instead of having to reset to my last save, I would just respawn at the last used save point with all my gear intact? It certainly would have made me feel like I wouldn't have to grind all over again... Personally, I'm ready for games to all move away from being "nintendo hard" - how about you?

That's not nintendo hard , that was you not being carful. Nintendo hard is ninja gaiden 2 or zelda 2 on the nes .

OT: no , i like wen death has meaning in a game . What the hell is the point of you "dying" if nothing happens? Why not just make you invincible then just so you see the story. I understand that you don't have time to redo everything , well save more often ( i haven't played the game your talking about so i don't know if thats possible , but in this age it would surprise me if it didn't). You said it yoursel , you weren't being careful , don't blame the game for your mistakes . I personally find that gamers have become lazy , they want everythinf done for them, they even want serveral autosave slots so they don't have to manual save! Seriously if you want to play a game mainly for story , play easy mode or read a book .

 

[Kahunaburger]

I'm currently having fun with several roguelikes - now permadeath is a nice death mechanic, if the game is balanced around it.

Castlevania is the way it is because of technical limitations at the time. Most modern games (for the PC, at least) will let you save anywhere.

 

[The Wykydtron]

I suppose Dark Souls' death mechanic is a weird one. If you have trouble with the first areas (Undead Burg) like me, you get the curious situation of not fucking caring about losing the paltry amount of souls you have at that level and just wanting to GTFO to the next area dammit!

"Oh joy i've died again with absolutely no consequences! Now to wade through the exact same horde for the billionth time!"

Once you get past the opening areas the game will make you care about losing all your souls, but i'd say you're well within your rights to sod the whole business and go home during the first areas.

Though I still can't bear to play my original character, maybe I should check out that new lizardman fortress place!- no, wait 45,000 souls lost.... Fuck now i'm depressed. I'm just gonna go back to my Drake Sword playthrough instead