How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
Before dying, skill matters. That's challenge.
After dying, you're dead. You're suffering the penalty and there's nothing you can do to avoid the penalty. That's inconvenience.
You just listed factors which are skills used to beat the challenge -- none of them matter if you die. In a game with tough bosses and light DP, all of the factors you list would be just as important because they all take place before dying.
I think it's great you find a death penalty an inconvenience, however your logic fails to recognize the other side of the coin. The other side loves having to deal with the challenge of the death penalty after they have died. It's not an inconvenience to them, it's a challenge, and a challenge that they want. If you have to recover your corpse naked that's a challenge and a challenge that takes skill. Skill and challenge to deal with it, skill and challenge to avoid it.
challenge and harsh death penalty goes hand n hand
Really?
In an easy game you do't die so no death penalty makes the game harder.
A hard game is already hard.
I do agree that dying should feel bad but most death penalties just add more grind. Losing XP or gear will force you to grind new XP and gear, grinding is not hard.
Adding better AI to a game makes it more challenging and unlike taking away XP it actually makes the game more fun as well. I do think there should be some bad stuff with dying, but not because it adds more challenge but because it gives a adrenaline kick when things are close.
There is however one death penalty that really gives a challenge and that is perma death. A few others help as well as we discussed earlier but I don't think most people would consider them harsh. Perma death sadly doesn't really work because of the unreability of computers, servers and networks today.
I think it's great you find a death penalty an inconvenience, however your logic fails to recognize the other side of the coin. The other side loves having to deal with the challenge of the death penalty after they have died. It's not an inconvenience to them, it's a challenge, and a challenge that they want. If you have to recover your corpse naked that's a challenge and a challenge that takes skill. Skill and challenge to deal with it, skill and challenge to avoid it.
As I recollect from older days you usually got guildies to help you recover your corps, or you paid someone to help you.
I can't say I ever thought a corpse run was fun and there are enough boring things in MMOs today.
The classic games had many challenging things that I would love to have back, this isn't one of them.
Remember when darkness actually were dark and torches mattered? That was fun and challenging.
I think it's great you find a death penalty an inconvenience, however your logic fails to recognize the other side of the coin. The other side loves having to deal with the challenge of the death penalty after they have died. It's not an inconvenience to them, it's a challenge, and a challenge that they want. If you have to recover your corpse naked that's a challenge and a challenge that takes skill. Skill and challenge to deal with it, skill and challenge to avoid it.
As I recollect from older days you usually got guildies to help you recover your corps, or you paid someone to help you.
I can't say I ever thought a corpse run was fun and there are enough boring things in MMOs today.
The classic games had many challenging things that I would love to have back, this isn't one of them.
Remember when darkness actually were dark and torches mattered? That was fun and challenging.
That's why everyone's personal bias won't allow them to look at the concept fairly
Theres a whole lot of us praying that Diablo 3 will had in permadeath aka Hardcore servers like D2 had, so that will make alot of people happy.
Losing xp, sure thats just more grind if your looking at things like a grind, and your game itself involves alot of grinding
Losing gear shouldnt equal grinding in a game where crafted gear is the norm, and it also keeps the ingame economy going.( Which is a whole nother topic that needs to be addressed )
Honoestly just changing the way gear is delt with would be a huge death penalty to most people.
Random area bosses, area events, light and darkness having real diffrences, dropping gold when you die( Or for that matter, being able to drop anything anymore. The whole its gotta be destroyed if its not in your bags is retarded. ), making resistances and utility abilitys be needed and useful, or even just making creatures not drop aggro when your out of their "pathing" range would all add challenge to a game.
One way or another people are going to get Frustrated at a challenge, thats just how the MMo community is these days, they have no patience, they have no civility, and anything thats difficult more then 2 or 3 times in a row gets them Frustrated. This cannot be avoided by those who mess up alot, in any situation where a challenge exist. You should be able to cheer about other people getting frustrated about not being able to do something that you can, it stands you apart from them which is something MMOs have strayed away from and its had a huge effect on Difficulty.
Everyone wants to have access to the same shit, no one gets to stand apart, items arnt unique, it just seems everythings starting to turn into a socialist type game where everyone gets to have the equal amount because the majority enjoys that, and screw those who want to be diffrent.
Harder gameplay, by far. As said before, a harsh DP is just an aggravation that pisses a player off, and is a cop-out by a developer who can't truly make the monsters or quests more skillful, so has to tag on DP to slow it down(think Aion and Soul Healers!). It is in the same category as grind, as far as I'm concerned. Adding severe DP, like grind, is just another cheap way for devs to give the illusion of depth and challenge where there is none. Accepting it just gives them another way to cop out of creativity and skill in the game creation process, instead of creating a game with richness and vitality.
No offense OP but this topic has been hashed, rehashed, and once again. Some people want no death penalty. Some people--and I'm of this crowd--want a penalty but one that does not severely derail play or even resets you. Some people want hardcore death.
Hardcore death will come to me between 1 minute and 70 years from now, games can be a little more light on this issue.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
Harder gameplay, by far. As said before, a harsh DP is just an aggravation that pisses a player off, and is a cop-out by a developer who can't truly make the monsters or quests more skillful, so has to tag on DP to slow it down(think Aion and Soul Healers!). It is in the same category as grind, as far as I'm concerned. Adding severe DP, like grind, is just another cheap way for devs to give the illusion of depth and challenge where there is none. Accepting it just gives them another way to cop out of creativity and skill in the game creation process, instead of creating a game with richness and vitality.
I would argue that a light death penalty is a cheap cop-out for adding deep content that matters to players. Harsh death penalties foster a stronger community, in my opinion. Light death penalties lead to players not really caring about a game beyond the combat mechanics and rewards. Players who enjoy a light death penalty do not have the skills to survive or do not feel they should have to develop those skills, and therefore get agitated when they die. Perhaps that is why it seems like such an inconvenient grind.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Making death matter is important for a variety of reasons, the biggest one however is to make the player care. The player needs to care about living, if death is as simple as having to run back to your body or coming back to life on the very spot you died what point is there to even allowing the player to die? I think Darkfall handles death very well. On one hand if you die in combat with gear you lose everything you had on you. Be it loot from mobs or other players... and on the other even if you have nothing you may be bound across the world from where you died and you lost a time investment in traveling as far as you did from home.
Long story short the player needs to lose something when / if they die. Be it experience or items death has to be a bad thing.
Challenging Gameplay:
Without this players with any form of intelligence resembling that of a normal human being will get bored quickly. As a species we thrive on challenging ourselves and getting better. The only MMO that ever truly hooked me was Darkfall, why? Because it was a truly challenging game in every aspect.
How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
I think it's great you find a death penalty an inconvenience, however your logic fails to recognize the other side of the coin. The other side loves having to deal with the challenge of the death penalty after they have died. It's not an inconvenience to them, it's a challenge, and a challenge that they want. If you have to recover your corpse naked that's a challenge and a challenge that takes skill. Skill and challenge to deal with it, skill and challenge to avoid it.
As I recollect from older days you usually got guildies to help you recover your corps, or you paid someone to help you.
I can't say I ever thought a corpse run was fun and there are enough boring things in MMOs today.
The classic games had many challenging things that I would love to have back, this isn't one of them.
Remember when darkness actually were dark and torches mattered? That was fun and challenging.
I guess it's a matter of perspective. A corpse run may have interrupted what you were doing, but there was no fun quite like gathering your freinds around you to attempt a difficult one.
I was a very social kind of character and ran two co-mains who were specialists in this regard; a druid and a necro. Certainly I had no shortage of help coming back my way if I ever needed it.
Back then, server repuatation meant A LOT. If you played a wizard and didn't know how to control aggro, well then you may as well re-roll because you'd get blacklisted. A harsh death penalty, then, can also seem quite harsh even when you don't die. The fear of the event made it so groups simply HAD to know what they were doing rather than the sort of free-for-all grouping that is somewhat common today.
Another thing that was cool about the Druid is that you could come to someone's rescue without KSing them. Which all changed with the locked encounters of EQ2. So much for my style of play.
How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
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
How can you say avoiding the inconvenience of a death penalty does not take skill? Players use social grace (taking a team, or the right team, instead of going alone or with just anyone), suvrivial instincts (plotting escape routes and knowing when to run), and game experience (knowing what places and monsters to avoid in every situation) specifically to avoid a harsh death penalty. Those are skills in my opinion. Skills that become obsolete with light death penalties.
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Maybe in games like Pac-Man those skills are not affected by the severity of the death penalty, but in Online RPGs (especially ones that that are about more than just combat) they certainly should be, in my opinion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severeity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
I believe those aspects are determined long before a death penalty is experienced. A person already is who they are, socially. If a person is a douche who kill-steals, ninja-loots, or is just somebody who's a bit of a loner, that person isn't going to become Mr. Social to avoid a harsh DP. They'll either wait til' they're higher level to take one those challenges, or quit.
Folk only carry the social grace they brought with them, they use the survival instincts they planned to use based on the game's rule system, and their game experience is only what it is at the time of the encounter. Matter of fact, harsh DP's would hinder skill and player experience growth as they're forced to go back to easier challenges to grind back the loss.
I suppose we could go back to this old, tired back and forth:
"Wanna talk about 'survival instincts'? Here's the biggest one: avoid danger. If something has even a decent chance of killing you, avoid it."
Well think of what you two are discussing in a MMO world where there are no levels, in a game where you gain xp for something from doing it. What people call grinding is training in the real world.
This avoids your whole grinding to get back to where you were idea and opens it to alot more.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severeity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
I believe those aspects are determined long before a death penalty is experienced. A person already is who they are, socially. If a person is a douche who kill-steals, ninja-loots, or is just somebody who's a bit of a loner, that person isn't going to become Mr. Social to avoid a harsh DP. They'll either wait til' they're higher level to take one those challenges, or quit.
Folk only carry the social grace they brought with them, they use the survival instincts they planned to use based on the game's rule system, and their game experience is only what it is at the time of the encounter. Matter of fact, harsh DP's would hinder skill and player experience growth as they're forced to go back to easier challenges to grind back the loss.
I suppose we could go back to this old, tired back and forth:
"Wanna talk about 'survival instincts'? Here's the biggest one: avoid danger. If something has even a decent chance of killing you, avoid it."
Thus, Harsh DP kills challenge.
That depends on how much that player enjoys playing the game. If the game is about social activity and coordiantion, then of course a douche is not going to enjoy that kind of gameplay. Your argument actually quantifies the destruction of the social elements Online RPGs possess by having a light death penalty. One could add it to the list along with soloability and faster health/mana regen (less downtime between fights). I'm not arguing which is better or more popular. But I believe that in most cases you cannot have one without the other. Many people are going to behave better if it means they will have more success in the game, so long as they enjoy the game itself.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Maybe in games like Pac-Man those skills are not affected by the severity of the death penalty, but in Online RPGs that are about more than just combat they certainly should be, in my opinion.
Whether Pac Man or an RPG, those incentives(save social grace in 1 player games) already exist.
Survival instincts: Nobody wants to die/lose. Period. So anybody remotely interested in the goings-on of a game will understand how that games rules effect their gameplay, generally about an hour out of the tutorial. You'll know what your fight or flight options are, as well as where you're safe and where you're not. If you're playing Darkfall, you'll learn how to pee into a 2 litre, trucker style!
Experience: Even if you can trounce enemies, you're still inclined to learn how to do it as quickly as possible while receiving minimal injury. You'll learn based on mob behavior and abilities when to change your gameplan, and again, you'll consider your best options for getting out of Dodge when things get ugly.
I don't know what culture in the world doesn't feel the loss when they lose. Therefore I don't know what culture would require severe death penalties when they do. Only one that doesn't give a crap about losing, and needs some other form of external abuse to accommodate.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Maybe in games like Pac-Man those skills are not affected by the severity of the death penalty, but in Online RPGs that are about more than just combat they certainly should be, in my opinion.
Whether Pac Man or an RPG, those incentives(save social grace in 1 player games) already exist.
Survival instincts: Nobody wants to die/lose. Period. So anybody remotely interested in the goings-on of a game will understand how that games rules effect their gameplay, generally about an hour out of the tutorial. You'll know what your fight or flight options are, as well as where you're safe and where you're not. If you're playing Darkfall, you'll learn how to pee into a 2 litre, trucker style!
Experience: Even if you can trounce enemies, you're still inclined to learn how to do it as quickly as possible while receiving minimal injury. You'll learn based on mob behavior and abilities when to change your gameplan, and again, you'll consider your best options for getting out of Dodge when things get ugly.
I don't know what culture in the world doesn't feel the loss when they lose. Therefore I don't know what culture would require severe death penalties when they do. Only one that doesn't give a crap about losing, and needs some other form of external abuse to accommodate.
Hehe, well spoken. I don't consider a challenge to be abuse though. And I do consider abuse to be a challenge, even if only to avoid it. You are also correct that I do not care if I lose --when there is a light death penalty. In my case a light death penalty acutally detracts from my will to even bother.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severeity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
I believe those aspects are determined long before a death penalty is experienced. A person already is who they are, socially. If a person is a douche who kill-steals, ninja-loots, or is just somebody who's a bit of a loner, that person isn't going to become Mr. Social to avoid a harsh DP. They'll either wait til' they're higher level to take one those challenges, or quit.
Folk only carry the social grace they brought with them, they use the survival instincts they planned to use based on the game's rule system, and their game experience is only what it is at the time of the encounter. Matter of fact, harsh DP's would hinder skill and player experience growth as they're forced to go back to easier challenges to grind back the loss.
I suppose we could go back to this old, tired back and forth:
"Wanna talk about 'survival instincts'? Here's the biggest one: avoid danger. If something has even a decent chance of killing you, avoid it."
Thus, Harsh DP kills challenge.
You have an admirable faith in the humanity of human beings.
That aside, I think the biggest issue here is that we are looking at death penalty as the only penalty for failure. We could also broaden that further to incorporate the rewards of success and even proficient success.
Basically, the return of the task - and of the actions taken within the task - will affect the challenge of the task. A level 5 going through a level 5 quest has a challenging experience before him. If the penalty for failure is one that he wants to avoid, it can dictate how cautiously he proceeds through, how he tinteracts with others around him and even what objectives he chooses to complete when he is there. The penalty for failure affected the challenge of the task. If he goes to that level 5 dungeon as a level 20 or even as a twinked out and super-buffed level 5, the challenge has been lowered. He does not have to walk around the spike trap as it is no longer a threat. He does not have to fear the acid pools as his regen surpasses their DoT. He does not have to fear the flood rooms as the mobs can no longer harm him. Death, the penalty for failure and ineptitude, is no longer present.
The dungeon is now less challenging and the only thing that has really changed is the chance of failure/death.
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, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Maybe in games like Pac-Man those skills are not affected by the severity of the death penalty, but in Online RPGs that are about more than just combat they certainly should be, in my opinion.
Whether Pac Man or an RPG, those incentives(save social grace in 1 player games) already exist.
Survival instincts: Nobody wants to die/lose. Period. So anybody remotely interested in the goings-on of a game will understand how that games rules effect their gameplay, generally about an hour out of the tutorial. You'll know what your fight or flight options are, as well as where you're safe and where you're not. If you're playing Darkfall, you'll learn how to pee into a 2 litre, trucker style!
Experience: Even if you can trounce enemies, you're still inclined to learn how to do it as quickly as possible while receiving minimal injury. You'll learn based on mob behavior and abilities when to change your gameplan, and again, you'll consider your best options for getting out of Dodge when things get ugly.
I don't know what culture in the world doesn't feel the loss when they lose. Therefore I don't know what culture would require severe death penalties when they do. Only one that doesn't give a crap about losing, and needs some other form of external abuse to accommodate.
Well, unfortunately, the "draw" of a harsh DP actually has nothing at all to do with death or feeling loss. It's about feeling fear in the same way that we enjoy a horror movie.
So, after death occurs, I like a harsh death penalty about as much as those who oppose it. Think about it now, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT MAKES IT A THING TO BE SCARED OF. Or avoided if you prefer.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severeity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
I believe those aspects are determined long before a death penalty is experienced. A person already is who they are, socially. If a person is a douche who kill-steals, ninja-loots, or is just somebody who's a bit of a loner, that person isn't going to become Mr. Social to avoid a harsh DP. They'll either wait til' they're higher level to take one those challenges, or quit.
Folk only carry the social grace they brought with them, they use the survival instincts they planned to use based on the game's rule system, and their game experience is only what it is at the time of the encounter. Matter of fact, harsh DP's would hinder skill and player experience growth as they're forced to go back to easier challenges to grind back the loss.
I suppose we could go back to this old, tired back and forth:
"Wanna talk about 'survival instincts'? Here's the biggest one: avoid danger. If something has even a decent chance of killing you, avoid it."
Thus, Harsh DP kills challenge.
That depends on how much that player enjoys playing the game.
If they enjoy playing the game, then they probably already despise losing. Engagement does not require a harsh death penalty. If you like a game, you WANT to be good at it, and you don't like getting reminders that you can be pwned, aka lose.
If the game is about social activity and coordiantion, then of course a douche is not going to enjoy that kind of gameplay. Your argument actually quantifies the destruction of the social elements Online RPGs possess by having a light death penalty.
Light death penalty has little to do with a players desire to solo, or vice-versa. Those players were always solo'ers, and would be solo'ers whether the DP is harsh or not. That has always been my point.
One could add it to the list along with soloability and faster health/mana regen (less downtime between fights). I'm not arguing which is better or more popular. But I believe that in most cases you cannot have one without the other. Many people are going to behave better if it means they will have more success in the game, so long as they enjoy the game itself.
I wonder what you mean by "behave better". I hope I properly made the distinction between "douche" and "loner". The "douche" as I described, ninja loots and kill steals because that's who they are. Most games I've played DO NOT make one more successful by that behavior, and many have made it impossible. Those games that haven't, logically have the largest share of those players. Harsh DP would not change that behavior; actually, it would encourage it as that person would wait til' some other fool beat a mob to near death so they could finish it off and steal the loot while the other player recovered. The ripped off player would then hesitate to chase down the player due to being down in HP, and... IN FEAR OF HARSH DEATH PENALTIES.
As it goes to "loners" or "solo'ers", they aren't the cause of light DP's. Rather, groups who spend 3 hours in a raid to TPW at the final leg, that can't continue on because they have 30 minutes of "battle fatigue" and broken/stolen gear, or whatever, got fed up with it.
Who do you think is the more likely to complain? The folks I mentioned above? Or the solo'er, who'll never set foot in anything that takes more than a half hour, who, when they die has no one relying on them to come back, that can just on a whim hang out in town and craft for 30 minutes, or just log in with a different toon?
Well, unfortunately, the "draw" of a harsh DP actually has nothing at all to do with death or feeling loss. It's about feeling fear in the same way that we enjoy a horror movie.
So, after death occurs, I like a harsh death penalty about as much as those who oppose it. Think about it now, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT MAKES IT A THING TO BE SCARED OF. Or avoided if you prefer.
What's the death penalty in watching a horror movie?
IMO, the fear you seek doesn't come from a death penalty. It would more likely come from full world PvP, or dynamic mob systems. Where one minute you could be strolling down a merry country lane, and the next you're getting jumped by 3 other players/mobs.
Horror movie fear is of the unpredictable... unknown. Where's the killer hiding? What's behind that door? Was your adrenaline higher when the character turned the knob on the door, or when they showed them laying in the morgue the next morning?
Comments
I think it's great you find a death penalty an inconvenience, however your logic fails to recognize the other side of the coin. The other side loves having to deal with the challenge of the death penalty after they have died. It's not an inconvenience to them, it's a challenge, and a challenge that they want. If you have to recover your corpse naked that's a challenge and a challenge that takes skill. Skill and challenge to deal with it, skill and challenge to avoid it.
Really?
In an easy game you do't die so no death penalty makes the game harder.
A hard game is already hard.
I do agree that dying should feel bad but most death penalties just add more grind. Losing XP or gear will force you to grind new XP and gear, grinding is not hard.
Adding better AI to a game makes it more challenging and unlike taking away XP it actually makes the game more fun as well. I do think there should be some bad stuff with dying, but not because it adds more challenge but because it gives a adrenaline kick when things are close.
There is however one death penalty that really gives a challenge and that is perma death. A few others help as well as we discussed earlier but I don't think most people would consider them harsh. Perma death sadly doesn't really work because of the unreability of computers, servers and networks today.
harsh death penalty adds the thrill of danger nothing more. It adds no challenge whatsoever.
As I recollect from older days you usually got guildies to help you recover your corps, or you paid someone to help you.
I can't say I ever thought a corpse run was fun and there are enough boring things in MMOs today.
The classic games had many challenging things that I would love to have back, this isn't one of them.
Remember when darkness actually were dark and torches mattered? That was fun and challenging.
That's why everyone's personal bias won't allow them to look at the concept fairly
Theres a whole lot of us praying that Diablo 3 will had in permadeath aka Hardcore servers like D2 had, so that will make alot of people happy.
Losing xp, sure thats just more grind if your looking at things like a grind, and your game itself involves alot of grinding
Losing gear shouldnt equal grinding in a game where crafted gear is the norm, and it also keeps the ingame economy going.( Which is a whole nother topic that needs to be addressed )
Honoestly just changing the way gear is delt with would be a huge death penalty to most people.
Random area bosses, area events, light and darkness having real diffrences, dropping gold when you die( Or for that matter, being able to drop anything anymore. The whole its gotta be destroyed if its not in your bags is retarded. ), making resistances and utility abilitys be needed and useful, or even just making creatures not drop aggro when your out of their "pathing" range would all add challenge to a game.
One way or another people are going to get Frustrated at a challenge, thats just how the MMo community is these days, they have no patience, they have no civility, and anything thats difficult more then 2 or 3 times in a row gets them Frustrated. This cannot be avoided by those who mess up alot, in any situation where a challenge exist. You should be able to cheer about other people getting frustrated about not being able to do something that you can, it stands you apart from them which is something MMOs have strayed away from and its had a huge effect on Difficulty.
Everyone wants to have access to the same shit, no one gets to stand apart, items arnt unique, it just seems everythings starting to turn into a socialist type game where everyone gets to have the equal amount because the majority enjoys that, and screw those who want to be diffrent.
Mess with the best, Die like the rest
Harder gameplay, by far. As said before, a harsh DP is just an aggravation that pisses a player off, and is a cop-out by a developer who can't truly make the monsters or quests more skillful, so has to tag on DP to slow it down(think Aion and Soul Healers!). It is in the same category as grind, as far as I'm concerned. Adding severe DP, like grind, is just another cheap way for devs to give the illusion of depth and challenge where there is none. Accepting it just gives them another way to cop out of creativity and skill in the game creation process, instead of creating a game with richness and vitality.
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/game/dungeon/tomb-of-immortal-darkness =D
//
No offense OP but this topic has been hashed, rehashed, and once again. Some people want no death penalty. Some people--and I'm of this crowd--want a penalty but one that does not severely derail play or even resets you. Some people want hardcore death.
Hardcore death will come to me between 1 minute and 70 years from now, games can be a little more light on this issue.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
I would argue that a light death penalty is a cheap cop-out for adding deep content that matters to players. Harsh death penalties foster a stronger community, in my opinion. Light death penalties lead to players not really caring about a game beyond the combat mechanics and rewards. Players who enjoy a light death penalty do not have the skills to survive or do not feel they should have to develop those skills, and therefore get agitated when they die. Perhaps that is why it seems like such an inconvenient grind.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Both are needed Why?
Harsh Death Penalties:
Making death matter is important for a variety of reasons, the biggest one however is to make the player care. The player needs to care about living, if death is as simple as having to run back to your body or coming back to life on the very spot you died what point is there to even allowing the player to die? I think Darkfall handles death very well. On one hand if you die in combat with gear you lose everything you had on you. Be it loot from mobs or other players... and on the other even if you have nothing you may be bound across the world from where you died and you lost a time investment in traveling as far as you did from home.
Long story short the player needs to lose something when / if they die. Be it experience or items death has to be a bad thing.
Challenging Gameplay:
Without this players with any form of intelligence resembling that of a normal human being will get bored quickly. As a species we thrive on challenging ourselves and getting better. The only MMO that ever truly hooked me was Darkfall, why? Because it was a truly challenging game in every aspect.
Full Sail University - Game Design
It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one.
I will be the devil's advocate for a moment, and talk about the psyche factor.
It could be argued that "yes, a harsh death penalty DOES make a game more of a challenge." This is because of the natural fight or flight responses you humans have. If there's alot at stake in dying, then you have a greater chance at psyching yourself out, freezing up, and soon, dying.
It's the factor that makes jumping 3 feet, over a bottomless pit of eternal doom, different than jumping 3 feet marked with chalk on the ground.
So there is a point there. But that's not really talking about "skill" or "challenge"; it's largely about our biological makeup, along with our perceived viewpoint of the situation...
as there are a ton of psychological factors involved on the other side of the argument as well. For one, there's the tendency to actually FEEL a loss in the death of our characters, DP or not. This exists for most, if not all players. It's not the same as dying, but it feels the same as LOSING, because that's precisely what happened. So that fight or flight adrenaline response is already there for most players.
I believe there should always be SOME kind of death penalty, preferably one that stings, but does little to slow the action down. LotRO's 10 minute Dread is counterproductive, IMO, though I think their item damage is not. I don't have much of an issue with respawn points, either, as long as they aren't ridiculously far away.
I guess it's a matter of perspective. A corpse run may have interrupted what you were doing, but there was no fun quite like gathering your freinds around you to attempt a difficult one.
I was a very social kind of character and ran two co-mains who were specialists in this regard; a druid and a necro. Certainly I had no shortage of help coming back my way if I ever needed it.
Back then, server repuatation meant A LOT. If you played a wizard and didn't know how to control aggro, well then you may as well re-roll because you'd get blacklisted. A harsh death penalty, then, can also seem quite harsh even when you don't die. The fear of the event made it so groups simply HAD to know what they were doing rather than the sort of free-for-all grouping that is somewhat common today.
Another thing that was cool about the Druid is that you could come to someone's rescue without KSing them. Which all changed with the locked encounters of EQ2. So much for my style of play.
Everything you wrote makes sense except for the first line. Are you saying that social grace, survival instincts, and game experience do not factor in when considering whether or not a player dies? When you say, "It takes no more skill to avoid the inconvenience of a harsh death penalty than it does an easy one," The only way I can agree with you is under the circumstance that the player chooses not to play the game at all.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
No, I'm saying that Social Grace, survival instincts, and game experience are not effected by the severity of a death penalty.
Not only are those aspects affected by the severity of the consequences of one's actions, they are often dictated by them.
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
Maybe in games like Pac-Man those skills are not affected by the severity of the death penalty, but in Online RPGs (especially ones that that are about more than just combat) they certainly should be, in my opinion.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I believe those aspects are determined long before a death penalty is experienced. A person already is who they are, socially. If a person is a douche who kill-steals, ninja-loots, or is just somebody who's a bit of a loner, that person isn't going to become Mr. Social to avoid a harsh DP. They'll either wait til' they're higher level to take one those challenges, or quit.
Folk only carry the social grace they brought with them, they use the survival instincts they planned to use based on the game's rule system, and their game experience is only what it is at the time of the encounter. Matter of fact, harsh DP's would hinder skill and player experience growth as they're forced to go back to easier challenges to grind back the loss.
I suppose we could go back to this old, tired back and forth:
"Wanna talk about 'survival instincts'? Here's the biggest one: avoid danger. If something has even a decent chance of killing you, avoid it."
Thus, Harsh DP kills challenge.
Well think of what you two are discussing in a MMO world where there are no levels, in a game where you gain xp for something from doing it. What people call grinding is training in the real world.
This avoids your whole grinding to get back to where you were idea and opens it to alot more.
Mess with the best, Die like the rest
That depends on how much that player enjoys playing the game. If the game is about social activity and coordiantion, then of course a douche is not going to enjoy that kind of gameplay. Your argument actually quantifies the destruction of the social elements Online RPGs possess by having a light death penalty. One could add it to the list along with soloability and faster health/mana regen (less downtime between fights). I'm not arguing which is better or more popular. But I believe that in most cases you cannot have one without the other. Many people are going to behave better if it means they will have more success in the game, so long as they enjoy the game itself.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Whether Pac Man or an RPG, those incentives(save social grace in 1 player games) already exist.
Survival instincts: Nobody wants to die/lose. Period. So anybody remotely interested in the goings-on of a game will understand how that games rules effect their gameplay, generally about an hour out of the tutorial. You'll know what your fight or flight options are, as well as where you're safe and where you're not. If you're playing Darkfall, you'll learn how to pee into a 2 litre, trucker style!
Experience: Even if you can trounce enemies, you're still inclined to learn how to do it as quickly as possible while receiving minimal injury. You'll learn based on mob behavior and abilities when to change your gameplan, and again, you'll consider your best options for getting out of Dodge when things get ugly.
I don't know what culture in the world doesn't feel the loss when they lose. Therefore I don't know what culture would require severe death penalties when they do. Only one that doesn't give a crap about losing, and needs some other form of external abuse to accommodate.
Hehe, well spoken. I don't consider a challenge to be abuse though. And I do consider abuse to be a challenge, even if only to avoid it. You are also correct that I do not care if I lose --when there is a light death penalty. In my case a light death penalty acutally detracts from my will to even bother.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
You have an admirable faith in the humanity of human beings.
That aside, I think the biggest issue here is that we are looking at death penalty as the only penalty for failure. We could also broaden that further to incorporate the rewards of success and even proficient success.
Basically, the return of the task - and of the actions taken within the task - will affect the challenge of the task. A level 5 going through a level 5 quest has a challenging experience before him. If the penalty for failure is one that he wants to avoid, it can dictate how cautiously he proceeds through, how he tinteracts with others around him and even what objectives he chooses to complete when he is there. The penalty for failure affected the challenge of the task. If he goes to that level 5 dungeon as a level 20 or even as a twinked out and super-buffed level 5, the challenge has been lowered. He does not have to walk around the spike trap as it is no longer a threat. He does not have to fear the acid pools as his regen surpasses their DoT. He does not have to fear the flood rooms as the mobs can no longer harm him. Death, the penalty for failure and ineptitude, is no longer present.
The dungeon is now less challenging and the only thing that has really changed is the chance of failure/death.
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
Well, unfortunately, the "draw" of a harsh DP actually has nothing at all to do with death or feeling loss. It's about feeling fear in the same way that we enjoy a horror movie.
So, after death occurs, I like a harsh death penalty about as much as those who oppose it. Think about it now, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT MAKES IT A THING TO BE SCARED OF. Or avoided if you prefer.
What's the death penalty in watching a horror movie?
IMO, the fear you seek doesn't come from a death penalty. It would more likely come from full world PvP, or dynamic mob systems. Where one minute you could be strolling down a merry country lane, and the next you're getting jumped by 3 other players/mobs.
Horror movie fear is of the unpredictable... unknown. Where's the killer hiding? What's behind that door? Was your adrenaline higher when the character turned the knob on the door, or when they showed them laying in the morgue the next morning?