....All I argue is that death penalties DO make the game harder because they force you to behave consistently skillfully.
Ultimately, I think this is the bit that some people are having trouble digesting. It's one of those things that is difficult to explain because it's usually life experience that teaches it.
Yep I agree. I mean, you really see the impact of a "failure penalty" on the relatively difficulty of a task everywhere in the real world.
Look at surgeons. The reason they have to get so much training is because the consequence of their failure is extremely high (death). So we call surgery difficult, even though the actual physical action (i.e. arm/hand movements) of performing a surgery may be fairly simple and not require much special training to perform.
If botched surgeries caused absolutely no harm and mistakes could be very easily undone, surgeons would not require nearly as much training. In fact, they would probably even sell DIY surgery kits!
When the consequence of failure (risk) in completing some task is high, more skill is demanded from the person performing that task, thus the task is more difficult.
Very good example there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I need to ask, does raising the stakes make counting cards more difficult?
Of course it doesn't. But that doesn't change the fact that it's more exciting to do it for high stakes.
It will make it more difficult. Because high stakes makes people nervous. And most people make more mistakes when they are nervous. Its common that people can do something when they are calm and perfectly relaxed. But when there is pressure and there is alot to lose or win they fail. This happens in sports, games and when people compete in general. Often they guy that can stay cool and calm will beat someone that is normally better but gets nervous.
The same people that fail in sports and other types of competition will get more nervous when raiding in a MMORPG. If they know they will need to do a 2 hour corpse run if they make a mistake they will feel pressure and get nervous. And they know the whole raidforce will need to do that 2 hour corpse run if they make a stupid mistake. And people in the raid will probably get angry if that happens. That pressure and potential drama will not be a huge problem if you can try the boss again 5 minutes later if you fail. And with no other penalty.
Imagine a very good guild that can learn how to kill a raid boss after wiping 5 times. Imagine a bad guild that need 50 tries to learn how to win. With 2 hour corpse runs they will have to give up... This means that only the best guilds can do that content.
So in a way it makes it more difficult because less guilds will be able to do it.
To Malcanis... Everyone doesn't get that thrill.
To Hurvath... So some people make mistakes under pressure and some people panic more easily that is true. At the same time, many people don't do that. And many people don't need further encouragement to do their best other than to succeed. Harsh death penalty just annoys them. Unlike tuning up gameplay difficulty which makes the game challenging for everyone.
Exp/money loss for death is just anal. You are forced to recouperate your losses usually by doing something that is unrelated to the task and in no way improves your chances with your next try. Even the military doesn't allow (atleast where I've been) unrelated punishment from a failed task anymore. The punishment should be related to the task i.e. most often you have to try again until you get it right and succeed. Otherwise it could be understood as hazing.
No indeed they dont, but you're the one describing people with a different preference to yourself as "anal". I dont mind at all that there are people who dislike death penalties on principle. There are games that cater to their preference, so they can be happy, and there are those that cater to those of us with a different preference, so we can be happy.
Shall I describe you as cowardly or childish or lazy because you dont want a death penalty? If I did, it seems to me that you have no room to complain. Honestly, you might as well call people "luddites" because they like black-and-white films, even though we can watch colour films these days. Or perhaps you would call climbers who choose to climb high mountains "suicidal" because they could safely and conveniently climb indoor rockfaces with full safety and padded floors?
Why does it offend you so badly that some people have a different outlook to their gameplay than you that you have to call them "anal"? No-one is proposing that you should be forced to play high death penalty games, after all, nor is there any shortage of MMOs with a fairly trivial penalty, so what does it matter to you if there are a few out there that have a stronger one? Are you on a crusade to save us? How noble!
Some people enjoy facing risk. It's not even uncommon, and it's not strange that many people would want an element of it in their computer games.
I need to ask, does raising the stakes make counting cards more difficult?
No, but that's only because you narrowly defined the "goal" to which the difficulty applies. Also, "raised stakes" isn't the greatest analog for death penalty because it implies increased reward...for sake of argument let's assume that "raised stakes" means you can lose more, but not necessarily gain more from winning.
Now ask yourself, is the goal of the person counting cards to count cards or to make money? I'm pretty sure it's to make money, otherwise there would be no reason for them to do this in a Casino, they could just count cards at home if they are doing it for fun. Put in this context, does raised stakes make it more difficult for the card counter to achieve their goal of making money? Yes.
Once again, this is because they stand to lose more money from failing, so in order to make money they need to win fairly consistently. Thus, the task becomes more difficulty.
Perhaps increased stakes does imply a reward but the gambler's rush is same for both games. Perhaps it was bad to bring up gambling since it is so widely misunderstood.
Counting cards is done to win money - it is a job. You do not gamble with your work. Sensible, successful, professional gamblers would only bet a portion of their bankroll. That portion is small enough that they can afford to lose to "bad luck" but high enough to make good money. Therefore even during a "down swing" (losing streak) they can still maintain their level of play and recover from their losses.
Card counter's task is to count cards and counting cards is difficult. If you succeed in counting cards, you will win in the long run. It is not a gamble. It is just mathematics and good memory. You raise the difficulty by adding cards, not by raising stakes.
Let's dispense with the cards analogy...it's too easy to just attack the analogy in an argument no matter how good it is.
Instead just consider this. Is it harder to...
1. Get max level in WoW as the game is right now.
2. Get max level in WoW with permadeath.
I don't see how anyone could argue that getting max level in WoW with permadeath would not be harder. If you die once...game over start from level 1. It would require extremely careful play where each encounter is thoroughly considered and very few (if no) mistakes are ever made. Doesn't this seem more difficult? Wouldn't you think that someone who gets to max level in WoW without dying deserves props?
Does this mean that permadeath is good? NO! It only means that HDP does make the game "harder."
In fact, permadeath in WoW would be a TERRIBLE idea. That doesn't change the fact that getting max level would be harder with permadeath.
Let's dispense with the cards analogy...it's too easy to just attack the analogy in an argument no matter how good it is.
Instead just consider this. Is it harder to...
1. Get max level in WoW as the game is right now.
2. Get max level in WoW with permadeath.
I don't see how anyone could argue that getting max level in WoW with permadeath would not be harder. If you die once...game over start from level 1. It would require extremely careful play where each encounter is thoroughly considered and very few (if no) mistakes are ever made. Doesn't this seem more difficult? Wouldn't you think that someone who gets to max level in WoW without dying deserves props?
Does this mean that permadeath is good? NO! It only means that HDP does make the game "harder."
In fact, permadeath in WoW would be a TERRIBLE idea. That doesn't change the fact that getting max level would be harder with permadeath.
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Let's dispense with the cards analogy...it's too easy to just attack the analogy in an argument no matter how good it is.
Instead just consider this. Is it harder to...
1. Get max level in WoW as the game is right now.
2. Get max level in WoW with permadeath.
I don't see how anyone could argue that getting max level in WoW with permadeath would not be harder. If you die once...game over start from level 1. It would require extremely careful play where each encounter is thoroughly considered and very few (if no) mistakes are ever made. Doesn't this seem more difficult? Wouldn't you think that someone who gets to max level in WoW without dying deserves props?
Does this mean that permadeath is good? NO! It only means that HDP does make the game "harder."
In fact, permadeath in WoW would be a TERRIBLE idea. That doesn't change the fact that getting max level would be harder with permadeath.
Yes, it would be harder. But permadeath is a rather extreme death penalty.
Making you loose all your gear or losing a level every time you die would really just make people grind more easy stuff.
Permadeath makes any game harder, I think everyone agree on that but the thread were not just about it but about all death penalty and if increasing it makes games harder or not.
Usually it just leads to more grinding and grinding do not make a game harder, it is just about killing pretty easy mobs fast.
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
Yeah, that example really only works if WoW required you to take on certain difficult levels of gameplay to reach higher levels.
In fact, you can pretty much be assured that anybody who reaches max level in WoW without dying did it the really easy (Though slow and deliberate) way
It's an odd idea that taking on only the easiest, guaranteed content can be considered more challenging. :<
Let's dispense with the cards analogy...it's too easy to just attack the analogy in an argument no matter how good it is.
Instead just consider this. Is it harder to...
1. Get max level in WoW as the game is right now.
2. Get max level in WoW with permadeath.
I don't see how anyone could argue that getting max level in WoW with permadeath would not be harder. If you die once...game over start from level 1. It would require extremely careful play where each encounter is thoroughly considered and very few (if no) mistakes are ever made. Doesn't this seem more difficult? Wouldn't you think that someone who gets to max level in WoW without dying deserves props?
Does this mean that permadeath is good? NO! It only means that HDP does make the game "harder."
In fact, permadeath in WoW would be a TERRIBLE idea. That doesn't change the fact that getting max level would be harder with permadeath.
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
Your analogy, and many others like it that have been presented, is horribly flawed. The gross error is seen once you identify what the goal is that will result in the penalty and what the obstacles to that goal are. Once you expand your argument beyond a tidy one-liner, you very easily see that your own analogy proves Creslin's stance correct.
The act of picking the apple has little at all to do with the scenario unless you are suggesting that the person will be shot unless he picks apples differently. Then again, that too would further reinforce Creslin's argument.
You present a severe penalty for failure. Now, what causes failure? In that scenario, depending on the condition for failure (shot if stopping, shot if slowing down, shot if not meeting quota) the difficulty is in managing stamina, pace, procedure (gather, basket, dump, repeat), tools, placement... pretty much everything except the actual act of picking the apple.
Without the harsh penalty, the person has no reason to be more efficient, more organized or more innovative in his approach to apple picking.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You present a severe penalty for failure. Now, what causes failure? In that scenario, depending on the condition for failure (shot if stopping, shot if slowing down, shot if not meeting quota) the dofficulty is in managing stamina, pace, procedure (pick, basket, dump, repeat), tools, placement... pretty much everything except the actual act of picking the apple.
Without the harsh penalty, the person has no reason to be more efficient, more organized or more innovative in his approach to apple picking.
... then wouldn't the argument actually be that death penalty doesn't increase the challenge, it increases the level of performance?
If somebody is trying harder, and performs a task better, that doesn't mean the challenge of the task has increased, just that the task has been completed more efficiently.
You present a severe penalty for failure. Now, what causes failure? In that scenario, depending on the condition for failure (shot if stopping, shot if slowing down, shot if not meeting quota) the dofficulty is in managing stamina, pace, procedure (pick, basket, dump, repeat), tools, placement... pretty much everything except the actual act of picking the apple.
Without the harsh penalty, the person has no reason to be more efficient, more organized or more innovative in his approach to apple picking.
... then wouldn't the argument actually be that death penalty doesn't increase the challenge, it increases the level of performance?
If somebody is trying harder, and performs a task better, that doesn't mean the challenge of the task has increased, just that the task has been completed more efficiently.
Performance is the result of of one's efforts at a challenge, the latter being the call to the task and the former the execution of it. Higher death penalty increases the challenge to perform better. So, yes, that is the inevitable result of taking on greater challenge.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
Yeah, that example really only works if WoW required you to take on certain difficult levels of gameplay to reach higher levels.
In fact, you can pretty much be assured that anybody who reaches max level in WoW without dying did it the really easy (Though slow and deliberate) way
It's an odd idea that taking on only the easiest, guaranteed content can be considered more challenging. :<
I have to disagree there. You can do exactly the same to reach max without any deathpenalty, permadeath will actually makes things harder as long as we assume you play on the same difficulty.
No one would force you to do the easy stuff.
perma death will make any game harder and it would turn battlegrounds into huge suicide instances.
I don't however think they would make the game more fun, at least not in the long run.
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
Yeah, that example really only works if WoW required you to take on certain difficult levels of gameplay to reach higher levels.
In fact, you can pretty much be assured that anybody who reaches max level in WoW without dying did it the really easy (Though slow and deliberate) way
It's an odd idea that taking on only the easiest, guaranteed content can be considered more challenging. :<
Yes which is why I said permadeath in WoW would be a terrible idea .
Regardless though, AFAIK there is no way to gain exp in WoW that doesn't incur SOME risk of death. Even if the player does nothing but kill green mobs, there is a chance that they get overwhelmed by the MOBs, or run into an elite traveling and die. So I still think that permadeath would make getting max level in WoW "harder."
Does this mean it's good? No not at all, it's absolutely terrible, but it does make the game harder...
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
If you don't like the WoW with permadeath example then replace it with EQ, UO, Eve, AC, AoC, ...
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
Performance is the result of of one's efforts at a challenge, the latter being the call to the task and the former the execution of it. Higher death penalty increases the challenge to perform better. So, yes, that is the inevitable result of taking on greater challenge.
... but even if the challenge is identical except for the death penalty (Literally in the case of being shot, I suppose), wouldn't performance still be increased by the threat of loss?
Actually, this is partially in response to all the people who keep saying that death penalty makes people play on their toes, die less, and generally be an all around better player.
In these cases, the challenge is a constant, but the performance is better.
It would be a lot easier to increase the difficulty of the apple picking by say... adding extra rules (You have to do all your apple picking on your knees), increasing quota (You have to pick twice as many apples in half the time) or something, rather than giving out a punishment.
Giving out punishments for failure seems more oriented towards increasing performance, rather than increasing difficulty, at least from my perspective.
You present a severe penalty for failure. Now, what causes failure? In that scenario, depending on the condition for failure (shot if stopping, shot if slowing down, shot if not meeting quota) the dofficulty is in managing stamina, pace, procedure (pick, basket, dump, repeat), tools, placement... pretty much everything except the actual act of picking the apple.
Without the harsh penalty, the person has no reason to be more efficient, more organized or more innovative in his approach to apple picking.
... then wouldn't the argument actually be that death penalty doesn't increase the challenge, it increases the level of performance?
If somebody is trying harder, and performs a task better, that doesn't mean the challenge of the task has increased, just that the task has been completed more efficiently.
Performance is the result of of one's efforts at a challenge, the latter being the call to the task and the former the execution of it. Higher death penalty increases the challenge to perform better. So, yes, that is the inevitable result of taking on greater challenge.
Yes exactly. This reminds me of when I was younger and I used to make my dad play Street Fighter with me. And let me tell you. I was a MASTER at beating my dad. My technique of doing nothing but sonic booms completely overwhelmed him every game. We played all the time and he could barely ever win.
Then I tried playing the game with some other kids my age and got DESTROYED. The reason being was that I was always fighting an opponent that wasn't much of a challenge (sorry dad!). If you don't push yourself, practice will only get you to a plateau where you cap.
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
It sounds like you agree with Creslin, myself and others that both harder gameplay and harsher death penalty can contribute to the challenge.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
It sounds like you agree with Creslin, myself and others that both harder gameplay and harsher death penalty can contribute to the challenge.
I think the harsh death penalty in itself makes for harder gameplay. With a harsh death penalty you have to plan more, make sure you have a good strategy. You have to weigh your risks, you can't just run in with guns blazing. Everything you do becomes more challenging because now instead of just having to do something, you have to do something while at the same time making sure you do not die.
It sounds like you agree with Creslin, myself and others that both harder gameplay and harsher death penalty can contribute to the challenge.
I don't agree categorically with either of you, though really I'm not sure I agree categorically with anybody here on this subject.
I still insist that the formula is way heavily weighted towards harder gameplay in general.
If you have a game with really easy gameplay, no amount of harsh death penalty will really improve the challenge.
If you have a game with really light death penalty (Retry the last encounter) but incredibly difficult gameplay (On the level of say... 'beat Big Blue at chess'), the challenge will be ridiculously through the roof.
Death penalty incentivizes many people to perform better (... or to quit if they're annoyed by the death penalty), but performing better doesn't automatically mean a greater challenge. It just means you can BEAT greater challenges.
If Creslin had a bigger incentive to beat his dad, that wouldn't really have meant he could now beat the kids in the arcades, since what he was practicing was still not sufficiently difficult to increase skill.
If he wanted to improve his skills, he needed a bigger challenge than his dad, not bigger punishments for failure.
It sounds like you agree with Creslin, myself and others that both harder gameplay and harsher death penalty can contribute to the challenge.
I don't agree categorically with either of you, though really I'm not sure I agree categorically with anybody here on this subject.
I still insist that the formula is way heavily weighted towards harder gameplay in general.
If you have a game with really easy gameplay, no amount of harsh death penalty will really improve the challenge.
Agreed. We're saying the same thing. Both can contribute to the challenge.The only difference is that you are making a point to insist one contributes more, which no one is really arguing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
If your argument is that a harsh death penalty doesn't automatically create a challenge then I completely agree with you.
It is very easy to design a poor death penalty that doesn't at all add to the challenge of the game. Any death penalty that punishes you in an area unrelated to your goals in the game does not increase challenge. For example, a lot of people brought up the hyperbolic example of being physically punished for dying in an MMORPG...this does not really increase the challenge of the MMORPG. It may increase the challenge of your life in general, but not the MMORPG .
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
If your argument is that a harsh death penalty doesn't automatically create a challenge then I completely agree with you.
It is very easy to design a poor death penalty that doesn't at all add to the challenge of the game. Any death penalty that punishes you in an area unrelated to your goals in the game does not increase challenge. For example, a lot of people brought up the hyperbolic example of being physically punished for dying in an MMORPG...this does not really increase the challenge of the MMORPG. It may increase the challenge of your life in general, but not the MMORPG .
Agreed. A death penalty that serves as a general deterrent to reckless abandon or conveys a need for immediacy would contribute far more to the challenge of a game than a randon DP that simply imposes something negative for the sole sake of punishing failure.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
And, of course, there can be long corpse runs without a money or xp penalty. IMO, if you can attack the boss, get killed, run back and attack him again over and over it removes the need for skill and thinking. If you faill you should have to do some work and prepare before you can get a new chance. Work as a team to kill respawns and protect everyone on the way back to the boss....
You didn't think that one through, did you? You are implying that trying again and again does not make you a better player. Even further, they don't need skill and thinking to pass the encounter. Really?
I might comment that often grinding to recouperate your losses is the stuff that doesn't need skill and thinking, but that is irrelevant, isn't it?
Yes I did. If you learn things faster you are smarter/better. A guild that can learn how to kill a raidboss after 5 attempts is better than a guild that needs to wipe 50 times before they finally figure out how to win.
Or perhaps they eventually get lucky and win after 50 attempts. And wipe again after that. Lets say most of the time someone in the raidforce makes a mistake that makes them wipe. Sometimes everyone is doing the job right without serious mistakes. But its rare... The raidleader gets frustrated because he knows that most of the time someone will do something stupid.
I mean if you try over and over slow learners will eventually learn. And other guilds that often make mistakes might eventually get lucky and win.
With long corpse runs you will have to be able to learn fast. You will not have time to try the boss 50 times...It would take forever...
Imagine that you could only try a raid mob 5 times. After that the boss would be locked for a month or forever. It would almost be the same thing. Guilds/players that cant learn fast enough will not get titles/rewards/loot and will not be able to progress and do harder content.
Running back to the raid boss and killing respawns are not difficult. You will not learn much from that. But it will have the same effect. Slow learners will not win and will not progress...
If your argument is that a harsh death penalty doesn't automatically create a challenge then I completely agree with you.
It is very easy to design a poor death penalty that doesn't at all add to the challenge of the game. Any death penalty that punishes you in an area unrelated to your goals in the game does not increase challenge. For example, a lot of people brought up the hyperbolic example of being physically punished for dying in an MMORPG...this does not really increase the challenge of the MMORPG. It may increase the challenge of your life in general, but not the MMORPG .
But even death penalties which punish you in an area related to your goals can fail to increase challenge.
XP penalty doesn't change the difficulty of a game; only the time consumption.
And clearly time isn't challenge, or else we'd be like "Man that level 85 WOW player just creamed that level 10 player. He's so skilled!" (well...we might still say that, but in this case we'd actually be serious.)
So even though the XP is related to a goal of reaching a certain level, the XP penalty isn't actually making that task harder, only more time-consuming.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Even though it's the most boring example. Yes even having to get exp back would be a challenge. Time consuming is a variation of the I don't like it logic
Even though it's the most boring example. Yes even having to get exp back would be a challenge. Time consuming is a variation of the I don't like it logic
Not at all.
Fail to walk a tightrope and you have to go back to the start to retry, but the task itself is exactly as hard as it was before; incurring the penalty only makes the task more time-consuming, not more difficult.
Even if I liked it, 'time consumption' is as agnostic a description as is possible.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Even though it's the most boring example. Yes even having to get exp back would be a challenge. Time consuming is a variation of the I don't like it logic
Not at all.
Fail to walk a tightrope and you have to go back to the start to retry, but the task itself is exactly as hard as it was before; incurring the penalty only makes the task more time-consuming, not more difficult.
Even if I liked it, 'time consumption' is as agnostic a description as is possible.
I have to disagree, time consuming is a not an agnostic description. It implies in my opinion a negative connotation, especially when used in relation to what we are here to talk about, mmorpgs.
I wish you would stick with game analogies, If you lose 2 bubbles of exp and you proceed to get those 2 bubbles back, there's probably a 99.99999etc% chance you will not perform the same series of events. There is fresh sequence of events and fresh challenge. The same can't be said for a tightrope where the options are infinitely less.
Comments
Very good example there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
No indeed they dont, but you're the one describing people with a different preference to yourself as "anal". I dont mind at all that there are people who dislike death penalties on principle. There are games that cater to their preference, so they can be happy, and there are those that cater to those of us with a different preference, so we can be happy.
Shall I describe you as cowardly or childish or lazy because you dont want a death penalty? If I did, it seems to me that you have no room to complain. Honestly, you might as well call people "luddites" because they like black-and-white films, even though we can watch colour films these days. Or perhaps you would call climbers who choose to climb high mountains "suicidal" because they could safely and conveniently climb indoor rockfaces with full safety and padded floors?
Why does it offend you so badly that some people have a different outlook to their gameplay than you that you have to call them "anal"? No-one is proposing that you should be forced to play high death penalty games, after all, nor is there any shortage of MMOs with a fairly trivial penalty, so what does it matter to you if there are a few out there that have a stronger one? Are you on a crusade to save us? How noble!
Some people enjoy facing risk. It's not even uncommon, and it's not strange that many people would want an element of it in their computer games.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Let's dispense with the cards analogy...it's too easy to just attack the analogy in an argument no matter how good it is.
Instead just consider this. Is it harder to...
1. Get max level in WoW as the game is right now.
2. Get max level in WoW with permadeath.
I don't see how anyone could argue that getting max level in WoW with permadeath would not be harder. If you die once...game over start from level 1. It would require extremely careful play where each encounter is thoroughly considered and very few (if no) mistakes are ever made. Doesn't this seem more difficult? Wouldn't you think that someone who gets to max level in WoW without dying deserves props?
Does this mean that permadeath is good? NO! It only means that HDP does make the game "harder."
In fact, permadeath in WoW would be a TERRIBLE idea. That doesn't change the fact that getting max level would be harder with permadeath.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Another very bad example. You can reach max level in WoW by killing smaller level mobs than yourself. Never taking any risks. I give no respect to people who would have played the game through without dying, because the game is easy and takes only time to reach the end.
Just like picking apples at gunpoint doesn't make picking apples hard, WoW is not hard even with permadeath.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Yes, it would be harder. But permadeath is a rather extreme death penalty.
Making you loose all your gear or losing a level every time you die would really just make people grind more easy stuff.
Permadeath makes any game harder, I think everyone agree on that but the thread were not just about it but about all death penalty and if increasing it makes games harder or not.
Usually it just leads to more grinding and grinding do not make a game harder, it is just about killing pretty easy mobs fast.
Yeah, that example really only works if WoW required you to take on certain difficult levels of gameplay to reach higher levels.
In fact, you can pretty much be assured that anybody who reaches max level in WoW without dying did it the really easy (Though slow and deliberate) way
It's an odd idea that taking on only the easiest, guaranteed content can be considered more challenging. :<
Your analogy, and many others like it that have been presented, is horribly flawed. The gross error is seen once you identify what the goal is that will result in the penalty and what the obstacles to that goal are. Once you expand your argument beyond a tidy one-liner, you very easily see that your own analogy proves Creslin's stance correct.
The act of picking the apple has little at all to do with the scenario unless you are suggesting that the person will be shot unless he picks apples differently. Then again, that too would further reinforce Creslin's argument.
You present a severe penalty for failure. Now, what causes failure? In that scenario, depending on the condition for failure (shot if stopping, shot if slowing down, shot if not meeting quota) the difficulty is in managing stamina, pace, procedure (gather, basket, dump, repeat), tools, placement... pretty much everything except the actual act of picking the apple.
Without the harsh penalty, the person has no reason to be more efficient, more organized or more innovative in his approach to apple picking.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
... then wouldn't the argument actually be that death penalty doesn't increase the challenge, it increases the level of performance?
If somebody is trying harder, and performs a task better, that doesn't mean the challenge of the task has increased, just that the task has been completed more efficiently.
Performance is the result of of one's efforts at a challenge, the latter being the call to the task and the former the execution of it. Higher death penalty increases the challenge to perform better. So, yes, that is the inevitable result of taking on greater challenge.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I have to disagree there. You can do exactly the same to reach max without any deathpenalty, permadeath will actually makes things harder as long as we assume you play on the same difficulty.
No one would force you to do the easy stuff.
perma death will make any game harder and it would turn battlegrounds into huge suicide instances.
I don't however think they would make the game more fun, at least not in the long run.
Yes which is why I said permadeath in WoW would be a terrible idea
.
Regardless though, AFAIK there is no way to gain exp in WoW that doesn't incur SOME risk of death. Even if the player does nothing but kill green mobs, there is a chance that they get overwhelmed by the MOBs, or run into an elite traveling and die. So I still think that permadeath would make getting max level in WoW "harder."
Does this mean it's good? No not at all, it's absolutely terrible, but it does make the game harder...
And that's really the point here. The whole argument is over "can harsh death penalties make MMORPGs more challenging(i.e. harder)?" So all you really need to do is show one instance of a harsh death penalty making a game harder and the argument's over.
If you don't like the WoW with permadeath example then replace it with EQ, UO, Eve, AC, AoC, ...
It doesn't matter. If any one single game can be made harder by adding a harsh death penalty, then it shows that harsh death penalties can (not will always!) increase the challenge.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
... but even if the challenge is identical except for the death penalty (Literally in the case of being shot, I suppose), wouldn't performance still be increased by the threat of loss?
Actually, this is partially in response to all the people who keep saying that death penalty makes people play on their toes, die less, and generally be an all around better player.
In these cases, the challenge is a constant, but the performance is better.
It would be a lot easier to increase the difficulty of the apple picking by say... adding extra rules (You have to do all your apple picking on your knees), increasing quota (You have to pick twice as many apples in half the time) or something, rather than giving out a punishment.
Giving out punishments for failure seems more oriented towards increasing performance, rather than increasing difficulty, at least from my perspective.
Yes exactly. This reminds me of when I was younger and I used to make my dad play Street Fighter with me. And let me tell you. I was a MASTER at beating my dad. My technique of doing nothing but sonic booms completely overwhelmed him every game. We played all the time and he could barely ever win.
Then I tried playing the game with some other kids my age and got DESTROYED. The reason being was that I was always fighting an opponent that wasn't much of a challenge (sorry dad!). If you don't push yourself, practice will only get you to a plateau where you cap.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I wouldn't actually argue that harsh death penalties CAN'T increase challenge, just that it doesn't automatically do so.
Also, look up. Above our posts. The name of the topic is 'does harsh death penalty really make the challenge, or does Harder Gameplay make the Challenge'.
My argument is it's more the latter, and the latter ALWAYS does so, while the former might, but it does so less efficiently generally (There are some exceptions, I've even mentioned a couple before in this very topic.)
... and while permadeath is a harsh death penalty, it's probably the most extreme you'll find in an MMO, and leaves a whole slew of other punishments that most people consider harsh death penalty.
I guess you might be arguing with some people over whether it's physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty, but my argument is whether it automatically does, whether you can have challenge WITHOUT it, and if it's the most efficient way of doing so, or even guaranteed to do so.
So yeah. if the argument was only 'Is it physically possible to create challenge with harsh death penalty', you wouldn't be hearing nearly as much out of me. :P The topic is a lot broader than that, and isn't actually that particular subject though.
It sounds like you agree with Creslin, myself and others that both harder gameplay and harsher death penalty can contribute to the challenge.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think the harsh death penalty in itself makes for harder gameplay. With a harsh death penalty you have to plan more, make sure you have a good strategy. You have to weigh your risks, you can't just run in with guns blazing. Everything you do becomes more challenging because now instead of just having to do something, you have to do something while at the same time making sure you do not die.
I don't agree categorically with either of you, though really I'm not sure I agree categorically with anybody here on this subject.
I still insist that the formula is way heavily weighted towards harder gameplay in general.
If you have a game with really easy gameplay, no amount of harsh death penalty will really improve the challenge.
If you have a game with really light death penalty (Retry the last encounter) but incredibly difficult gameplay (On the level of say... 'beat Big Blue at chess'), the challenge will be ridiculously through the roof.
Death penalty incentivizes many people to perform better (... or to quit if they're annoyed by the death penalty), but performing better doesn't automatically mean a greater challenge. It just means you can BEAT greater challenges.
If Creslin had a bigger incentive to beat his dad, that wouldn't really have meant he could now beat the kids in the arcades, since what he was practicing was still not sufficiently difficult to increase skill.
If he wanted to improve his skills, he needed a bigger challenge than his dad, not bigger punishments for failure.
Agreed. We're saying the same thing. Both can contribute to the challenge.The only difference is that you are making a point to insist one contributes more, which no one is really arguing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
If your argument is that a harsh death penalty doesn't automatically create a challenge then I completely agree with you.
It is very easy to design a poor death penalty that doesn't at all add to the challenge of the game. Any death penalty that punishes you in an area unrelated to your goals in the game does not increase challenge. For example, a lot of people brought up the hyperbolic example of being physically punished for dying in an MMORPG...this does not really increase the challenge of the MMORPG. It may increase the challenge of your life in general, but not the MMORPG
.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Agreed. A death penalty that serves as a general deterrent to reckless abandon or conveys a need for immediacy would contribute far more to the challenge of a game than a randon DP that simply imposes something negative for the sole sake of punishing failure.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Yes I did. If you learn things faster you are smarter/better. A guild that can learn how to kill a raidboss after 5 attempts is better than a guild that needs to wipe 50 times before they finally figure out how to win.
Or perhaps they eventually get lucky and win after 50 attempts. And wipe again after that. Lets say most of the time someone in the raidforce makes a mistake that makes them wipe. Sometimes everyone is doing the job right without serious mistakes. But its rare... The raidleader gets frustrated because he knows that most of the time someone will do something stupid.
I mean if you try over and over slow learners will eventually learn. And other guilds that often make mistakes might eventually get lucky and win.
With long corpse runs you will have to be able to learn fast. You will not have time to try the boss 50 times...It would take forever...
Imagine that you could only try a raid mob 5 times. After that the boss would be locked for a month or forever. It would almost be the same thing. Guilds/players that cant learn fast enough will not get titles/rewards/loot and will not be able to progress and do harder content.
Running back to the raid boss and killing respawns are not difficult. You will not learn much from that. But it will have the same effect. Slow learners will not win and will not progress...
But even death penalties which punish you in an area related to your goals can fail to increase challenge.
XP penalty doesn't change the difficulty of a game; only the time consumption.
And clearly time isn't challenge, or else we'd be like "Man that level 85 WOW player just creamed that level 10 player. He's so skilled!" (well...we might still say that, but in this case we'd actually be serious.)
So even though the XP is related to a goal of reaching a certain level, the XP penalty isn't actually making that task harder, only more time-consuming.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Even though it's the most boring example. Yes even having to get exp back would be a challenge. Time consuming is a variation of the I don't like it logic
Not at all.
Fail to walk a tightrope and you have to go back to the start to retry, but the task itself is exactly as hard as it was before; incurring the penalty only makes the task more time-consuming, not more difficult.
Even if I liked it, 'time consumption' is as agnostic a description as is possible.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have to disagree, time consuming is a not an agnostic description. It implies in my opinion a negative connotation, especially when used in relation to what we are here to talk about, mmorpgs.
I wish you would stick with game analogies, If you lose 2 bubbles of exp and you proceed to get those 2 bubbles back, there's probably a 99.99999etc% chance you will not perform the same series of events. There is fresh sequence of events and fresh challenge. The same can't be said for a tightrope where the options are infinitely less.