I like harsh death penalties. The sense of achievement is gone from most mmorpgs. No death penalties takes the excitement of a fight out of the game for me.
Played Eq, FFXI, and WoW (and some other boring mmos here and there). I couldn't play WoW more than a month. You rarely socialize with others. Most people don't want to group because soloing makes leveling faster. Most people don't know how to work as a group. I never played in the end-game raids but zerging has never been fun for me. I rather get 3 friends together and play gauntlet, because unless you come with your own guild into WoW, you will be pretty lonely until 60.
I have a background in marketing and a long history of PvP and MMORPG games thus my take on things might varry a bit from others.
To me the right death penalty for a game is the one which is tailored to achieve a specific objective for a specifc game considering its type of game (PvP, RvR, PvE) and the players who play it.
You can't just put UO's death penalty in any game and have it work because its success depends on weather the players like it and how well that game system allows you to recoever from it. For example the player base of WoW is primarly of casual gamers with some hardcore gamers that enjoy mostly PvE and like a side dish of PvP every once in a while they can partake in. The death system there targets time loss and monitary loss which are two of the most important things to a casual gamer. If you transported UO's death system into the game the time investment required to attain the max level and enjoy high end content would become far greater and many of those PvE loving casual players would be very fustrated with the game and their slow progression in the limited time they have causing it to become a second job and cause many to leave.
Dark age of Camelot is a RvR game which encourages team based conbat and holding/capturing territory in for your kingdom (Game faction not Player). In this game there are two death penalties but the main one you encounter in high end game is simply the time factor and likely loss of territory. This death system is not perfect but once again a UO system is not good for this game because of the style of combat it involves. If you had a UO death system then engagements with 10-400 players fighting it out will be highly discouraged and therefore Keeps and Towers will be ignored totally as they would become death traps which can never change hands. In that game nothing short of divine intervention will save you during a charge from the sting of arrows and spells from the defending realm. If your the unlucky target of 10 archers, your dead and there is nothing you can do about it. There are lots of extreamly competative players in DAoC and the biggest peanlty to them of all is loosing the fight and the reaward for their service is attaining ranks of prestige. For example a player by the name of Mistwraith gained global fame by hitting the maximum rank many times in her prime. There was also a point where her team of 8 defended a keep doomed to fall from an army 90 strong. Thats really fun to do, but there is no way you would attempt it if your going to loose everything at the end.
So what is a good death system?
Basically you need to first as a few questions to yourself when you design one...
1) How will my game deliver entertainment to its players?
You need to preserve this and make sure your death penalty encourages this style of play.
2) In playing this game what do my players value most?
This can be anything really from time to items, to money. This is important because it helps you identify elements of the game which can be used in your dealth penalty. You need a list of options because you want to discourage death enough to make the player value life, while delivering your games entertainment value. This means that if you encourage PvP, you shouldn't discourage people from participating in it with a huge death setback penalty.
This is also key to identifying game elements which can be used as a reward for players whom are victorious and gives you a range of options to choose from minor to major rewards.
3) What does the average player think takes away from the fun?
This builds a list of elements to avoid in designing a death penalty and any other game system. Your players will remain loyal as long as your game continues to provide entertainment for them. Just as finding out what entertains your audience is important, so is finding out what turns them off. The point of a dealth penalty is to discourage death, not make your players miserable.
Conclusions
Every game has an internal imbalance which makes them unique and intreseting. This is espically present in games which teamwork as a focus because every class has its weakness and strength and those strenghts often do not contribute to offensive power. In the same way every game also has its own source of entertainment in the eyes of the players and its own fair set of things which detract from the entertainment value of the game. The way the game delivers entertainment is the foundations to a successful MMO and any dealth penalty the game has must support and enjance the entertainment value of a game and never take away from it. Finally, every death penalty system must offer rewards for victory while discouraging death and defeat. This means using game elements valuable to players in order to offer them rewards, and penalize them in a way which penalize them in a way which they can easily recover from but still discourage death and defeat. Though it is key to remember that list of what takes away from the entertainment offered in your game in the eyes of your players because your death penalty should never touch there. The entire purpose of those penalties is to enhance entertainment rather then punish players.
I think it depends on the mechanics of the game aswell.
Took at look at two games taht have open pvp, Ultima Online and Lineage 2.
Now in UO (my fav mmorpg of all time) you lost EVERYTHING you had on you. However the game really was not an item dependent game. Losing a sword you could merely go get another one and still be viable. It wasn't a lv based game either, all swords were a sword. There was no "lv 13 sword/lv 50 sword."
However in lineage 2, it was EXTREMELY item dependent. Losing your weapon really gimped your character bad. You weren't viable without the lv of gear. You had to grind grind grind to get money to buy a new weapon if you didn't have it, and items were expensive. You didn't drop everything you had either, it was more of a random chance for "x" item to drop. However it was a loooooot more of a "sting" when you lost things because of it's extreme item dependency, your character didn't make himself, his items did.
IMO UO was a lot better designed for losing items when it came to looting and pvp, lineage 2 sucked.
As far as "exp" loss, I'm not really for that myself. I much prefer players to lose items (a la UO) and/or take a durability loss (with eventual breaking). This in turn also creates money sinks (which are good for the ecnomoy) among other things.
It makes you not want to do and gives you that rush when you think you might, but doesn't make you want to bludegon yourself with a nerf bat because of it.
I don't like WoW, I don't play WoW, I don't hate WoW. The game isn't for me, but it is setting a standard. I'd like an alternative (I see one on the horizon).
As more and more people point out, death must be implemented to complement the individual game. The game experience as a whole is what should determine how death is handled.
I have my own very strong preference: Rather realistic (meaning there is no such thing as level 60), immersive worlds that are significantly affected by the actions of players.
That does go far beyond the subject of death handling (penalties, if you want to call it that , but I see anything less than dying as a bonus). However, it has just been pointed out that the question of death implementation is not an individual matter than can be taken out of context.
Disadvantages of significantly "penalized" deaths
Frustration: Those who are big already when small people join can keep small people down forever. (However, I consider this the failing of the level system that makes top range characters god-like compared to the bottom level characters. Face it: A level 60 able to stand there an take ten swings from a level 1 without dying isn't "realistic" - although it may for some games be an appropriate reward for playing time)
Frustration. I just realized it is the only clear disadvantage I can truly see.
Advantages
Less people will randomly enter combat without a care for their fate. This also reduces the risk of being randomly killed, and so reduces some of the problem it causes. However, unless followed up by a strict griefing policy, it could attract more of them.
As long as you keep it at this level (which is very unspecific) I don't see many more advantages either. But if we take it further...
Permadeath disadvantages
Increased frustration
Possibility of actual loss of character (basically frustrating, though...)
Permadeath advantages / strong sides
The top-range players will sometimes be knocked out and start from below, keeping the game open to newcomers.
Allows a dynamic and immersive world, where people come and go.
Allows for a consistent storyline, which can greatly enrich the world.
Tricks to improve a permadeath game
Reduce the significance of grind: You've got that level 1-60 progression where the top couldn't get killed by the bottom even if they wanted to. That means that if you die, you have a looong ways to go before you're anywhere near where you used to be. (If you used to be high). If there is a battle featuring many high leveled characters, it shouldn't be pointless for a lower level to join the fray on either side. (This would even encourage higher levels to treat lower levels with respect, and take advantage of their friendship when needing help)
Make the most important aspect of a character his identity, and let the stats be only complimentary data to assist the identity in gaining uniqueness and usefulness.
Make the same gear available to everybody, and let anything be craftable. Of course, there has to be full loot. But if you attack only to loot, well: There isn't much encouragement. Most likely, you're as well equipped as your victim, and the loss won't be too aggravating as his new character can obtain reasonably good equipment shortly after coming into existence.
Some might complain that this system does not at all reward long timers who are devoted to the game, and that it isn't fair / realistic.
There are games abundant for those who feel this way
Did you ever see a real person with ten years of training take out ten untrained enemies in melee / brawl? I haven't seen much melee or brawl, but I am quite convinced that allies and good sense makes as much a difference as training and experience. At least, they're fairly even, all able to tip the scale.
You could reduce looting motivation (to have fewer [perma]deaths caused by looting alone) by having individual weapon skills rather than attack skill / level. The sword in the corpse's hand will be even less interesting when you've only really focused on the axe.
You could throw levels out the window and bring in skills, but now I'm not keeping it as general as I initially intended. If I keep this up I will be discussing Adellion - which is not the topic, but is exceptionally close to the ideal I seek. (No, that game is still in alpha and no schedules are published.)
I look very much forward to having a game that is tailored to needs like my own rather than the mainstream desires that so many find satisfied in the current games.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
In a game of skill the death penalty should be high but in a game of number crunching.. strictly gear nad levels the death penalty makes not much sense. I mean if you could get away from someone or fight off a mob or player much higher or geared then u then I can see a reason for a heavy death penalty because your just not skilled enough and should of not been playing with fire. When it comes to gaves like everquest.. lineage 2.. UO.. and whatever else you can name.. the power of the player is considered solely by his level.. gear and ability to spam skills making it extremely unfair.
I am with Frank, There should be a harsh death penalty. I loved UO until it went soft. Sure I got murdered a few times, but I also turned in a few heads for the bounty. You can't find the thrill anymore even on the PVP servers. There is no penalty and no reward. I love WOW, but it would be nice to have a SOF(Survival of the Fittest) PVP surver. The rules would be similer to the orginal UO PVP rules:
-Attack anyone at anytime or even some type of faction fighting, with flagged rogues attacked by all.
-looting(minimum all money and what ever you can carry from the bags, equipment from the body also, but add a long timer for removing it from the body, that way adds the fear that you might get caught)
-Murder counts and bounties to hunt down the murderers(I always thought this was a nice balance in UO, you kill too much and people will come hunting for you)
-pickpocketing(I loved pick pocketing in UO,never got into a house, but and proude to say I was able to steal a boat once . Would be nice to able to do it again. )
It seems to me that there are two "larger" camps of people.. those who like it.. those who don't.
Either camp finds it hard or "annoying" to live in the world that the other camp prefers...
seems to me that game companies should offer two types of servers.. one with the harsher death penalites, harsher pvp system etc and one that allows for players to play a more relaxed game.
Some games do have this .. seems to me if they take the time to allow each different portion of the player base to enjoy the game in the manner they would prefer there would be more retention of players.
More hardcore players are not going to want to stay in a more "carebear" world and the relaxed players are not going to want to put up with the attittudes of the hardcore... trying to cater to both sets at the same time on the same server just gets disillusinoned players or a waterered down game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Frank is right imo.. you gotta have penalties for death or it's no fun. I played Lineage 2 for over a year and believe me, with the grind in that game you didn't wanna die and lose xp! You thought twice about your actions whether hunting or deciding to pvp.
Well here is the thing. It is my opinion that a good PvP game should have a few things in common regarding the death penalty...
1) The death penalty though undesirable should be easy to recover from. Death is part of PvP as winning and loosing are both critical parts of the game and its learning expierence. It should make a close victory that much more rewarding and encourage me to use common sense before I engage. However if I die, it should piss me off some but I should be able to quickly recover and get back into the fight. However in such systems it is also important to have proportional penalites becuase you should learn from your mistakes and being a repeated dumbass should be punished.
2) Progression should be through PvP not PvE. Most pvp players play such games in order to progress in the PvP world. The PvE element is the part of the game we pain to get through asap and hopefully never return to. We should never be forced back into PvE over a simple PvP death.
Part of my above reasoning is that for a PvP game to be good battles should be frequent and they must conclude. There is nothing more distasteful for a pvp player then running around all day or playing a game in which your opponent always runs away and a battle is rarely won. PvP players often see victory through one side retreating hollow and unsatisfying for all sides. Its best if players are not so fearful of dieing that they will allow the battle to climax and fight to the bitter end. Those battles are the most fun because they open up opportunity for sudden reversals and desperate but amazing and close victory.
In my opinion there is NOTHING more satisfying in a game then getting into a hard fight which lasts a good bit and comes down to the wire, and yet you managed to pull through even if it has taken its toll on you. Its so much more better then rolling a group of people who don't have as much equipment, buffs, expierence, or levels then you.
TBH, that is obvious. You do not have to PvP ~ AT ALL ~ in EvE, unless you want to. I have 2 accounts. One is a PvP type guy. The other, who is an industrial/science type, has never seen anything more dangerous than a station or a asteroid in months.
Originally posted by Kvasir78
So, usually, when I look at a game, the first thing I look for is PvP option. If I am forced to PvP, then I will avoid that game altogether. (read: EVE online.) I love the idea of EVE online, but I will not tolerate getting someone elses play style forced on me when I just want to relax. So, I havent played EVE at all.
Originally posted by jacobR the most annoying part is when i go into ghost after being killed by a GRIEFER (always 20 lvls more than me) i have to run all the way back to my corpse again and than rez and be killed again? No i dont like that concept. Especially since i lose nothing. So Really i could come back a few hrs later and do whatever i was doing again and not worry.
This is a shoot yourself in the foot argument...
Think about that exact scenario, but now ADD a DEATH PENALTY too! How does having a death penalty STOP that 20 lvls ahead griefer doing exactly the same thing? And if you tell me, "oh communities build up to stop the griefers and it's all friendly and such"...I'll tell you...GARBAGE! All that turns into is a to-and-fro killing match that makes any sort of "game" that orginally existed turn into a sideshow for mob revenge killings.
Frank is wrong too, a death penalty doesn't deter the gerbils (because they actually GET their fun from the risks)...all the DP does is give gerbils POWER! The power to take away hard earned experience, hard earned loot and any other lost game time that the kill produces.
FIGHT the power...don't give in to the gerbils...after all, it's probably the gerbils themselves that are calling for the reintroduction of DPs in all the new games. Gerbil: [whine voice] "It's just no challenge, it's just no fun...I don't get anything from killing unsuspecting players anymore...bring back the DP so I can ruin people's day totally...please"
Go kill each other in UO or Shadowbane (or even EVE)...and watch as your puny populations of like-minded gerbils decrease until there's none of you left...and good riddance!
I like challenge and realism. A severe death penalty can provide that challenge. It worked in PnP RPG's just fine. Permadeath is not really a good idea in an mmorpg but heavy xp debt and severe but temporary stat loses are appropriate. The only major mmorpg I know of that has a reasonably severe death penalty is EVE online. The others make death a joke and that's sad.
I don't like having to make corpse runs because it doesn't seem realistic. Nor is it a feature of any fantasy or sci-fi literature that I'm aware of. There are other, more immersive ways to penalize defeat.
Well I have read pretty much of the debate (I did skip a few pages as it is getting late).
I was suprised to see only passing reference to Asherons Call and its death penalty system. Basically, when you died you were resurrected at your lifestone - wherever you were 'tied' to. You then had to make your way back to you corpse from which you could retrieve the one or two random items that you would drop n death.
Now those dropped item usually were the higher value items, so many players would carry 'death items' - ie high value low use items, like golden cups and the like. SO if you died and only dropped you death items you could pretty much not bother with corpse recovery. If however you dropped you favourite sword or breastplate, then it was imperitive that you recovered it.
I remember with great fondness many guild corpse runs, with guildies clearing the way for the recently deceased to reclaim their good.
Fun times generated by a reasonable death penalty.
For those of you that call others n00bs because you profess to be the cool "real death penalty" kids:
If you want a severe death penalty go smack a bear on the bum. Otherwise stop thinking you're an e-hero and get a life. Games are for entertainment. If you think you're better than the masses of players who play low/no penalty games because you played a game with harsher penalties, your goofy arse needs to go do something in real life that means something. Do something, anything, that matters. Do something that requires you to detach your rear from the chair and put in on the line. But don't act high and mighty, as if you're tougher or cooler because you think a video game death penalty means anything about your "e-skill" or you.
Games are about enjoyment. Real consequences, toughness, etc., are for the REAL world. Go get something done in real life you smack-talking goobers. Until then, enjoyment is the name of the GAME. Join the volunteer fire company. Join the Army. Step in front of someone hurting someone or something else. Do SOMETHING of consequence. At the very least stop being a raging tard about how "tough" you think you are, and how "n00b" you think other people are.
The most "carebear" people I've ever seen are the trash talkers who think they're PvP or MMORPG heroes. Pathetic.
I haven't played alot of MMORPGs but i have played MUDS and I can honestly say that I hate Harsh Death Penalties. I get to play WOW perhaps 2-3 hours a day during the week, I don't feel like spending my entire time getting killed by some kid who thinks that the fact that he is 60th level in a GAME means anything besides he has more time to play.
I am not going to go off like zham did but I can say that I play games for the community and enjoyment, not so I can ruin someone else's day. I like working cooperatively with people (guild or otherwise) but I am not willing to spend my time escorting or being escorted on corpse run after corpse run. I play WOW tactically, in 20 levels I have died 2-3 times tops...Because I still run if I find an opponent overwhelming. I don't like taking durability hits to my eq so I try to avoid it.
It is insane to expect casual players/gamers to pay $15+ a month for the pleasure of being owned by the hardcore gamers. And considering that most games are going to make more money from casual players I am not surprised to see extreme death penalties slowly going by the wayside.
After reading all these posts and replies, I have to wonder just how much from one "camp" is showing up here. I know that usually the "squeeky" wheel gets the grease, but I sure hope that isn't going to happen here. Just because one wheel squeeks, doesn't mean the others don't need attention.
As a councellor in UO (when UO was still allowed to do this) I knew the population was heavy on he non-pvp side, Trammel, over the pvp side, Felucca. This is most likely to escape the death penalty people would recieve at the hands of people who like to live in total anarchy with wanton killing just for the grief it would cause.
There are over 5 million people playing WoW at this time, more than any other MMORPG has ever had. Could all these people be wrong? It would seem that evidence speaks for itself, IMHO.
Too bad more from the other "camp" wouldn't see this or post more often. If I know the nature of that camp, the last thing they probably want to do is live and breath a game. Most likely they don't even know this site exists. I really didn't know either, except by accident. I didn't go search for it. Then this topic was, purely by chance, at the top of the page. Accident being my girlfriend showing me the site. :P Being something I am already pationate about, I couldn't help by drop my $.02.
As some have already stated, it is seems to be more based on the type of game, and the mechanics. I probably wouldn't have minded the death penalty in UO if people weren't free to attack anyone at any time. Thate invites rude behavior, in my experience. Again, this type of death penalty has already been explored and it would be something I'd support.
As for a game that that one could only advance via pvp, that would probably be a game short lived. Not only do you have the willingness factor, but you have the timezone issue, too. Advancement through PvP sounds more like a big FPS game and I would rather hook myself up with Battfield, or its ilk. That is why I left SWG in the first place. If I wanted FPS in massive form, there are plenty of servers around the world for that.
Those were some other issues I needed to get off of my chest. :P
Originally posted by icrigger Second on the direct issue of death and rez... put in the social controls that allow people to "police" their own world. Bounties, outlaws... if someone ganks in a town, lower their reputation until only the shadiest establishments in that town will deal with them... and they are in danger of being attacked by the town guard. Guilds are a wonderful thing. If you give the populace these social controls for towns, and political units (kingdoms etc..), you will get unique worlds of all flavors build player pride and loyalty in the world they play, and make all the gankers, griefers and other kiddies realize that if they want to play this cool game, they can not ruin it for everyone else, yet still have fun.
Dead on bro. Mmo's just don't have the feel of a real living and working world anymore.
I would like to find a game where death is...well death. Permenant end of your avator and you must try/start again (although you have your own human experience of the game to fall back on in future)....maybe a Western themed mmorg, where you can inherit only your dead (ex-character)'s money banked and any surviving heirlooms. Don't tell me it already exists? You could have quite an interesting family tree if you LEEERRROYYYED a lot!
Open record: I LOVE Permadeath and no alignment and no names. I resent the fact that people think that I'm ignorant or a sociopath. Some of the people here think my one goal as a permadeath advocate is to grief and make other gamers lives a living hell.
STOP.
Your judging me... you really dont understand the concept... Your annoying when your point to non Permadeath successes when there has been no Permadeath games to begin with! (Discounting muds) You dont understand the term realism do you? We dont want to play your casual catering POS game because it is a kids game! We want a game that more accurately simulates a world we would actually be in. Whether or not I want to be in that world is a decision all players will make with their credit cards but my card is waiting for a more realistic simulation. I dont want to play your crap hunt 12 apples and kill 15 goblin games anymore..... I could and have done that years ago. Your reinventing the wheel and no matter how many times your change the material or the rims its still a wheel and its not going to get me to alpha centauri is it? (Excuse my metaphors... I'm hooked on this new warp drive and have been reading a lot!) You want to know about Permadeath!
What is it? What does it mean? Will it work? If you follow the forums of any new MMORPG out there you have probably seen this buzzword brought up quite a bit. (Mayhaps even by me!) But though it is hotly debated it also very misunderstood. So lets define and discuss it.
Perma is a latin root which means to stay to the end, last or endure. Death is also derived from a latin root, most commonly Mort but other roots are related, namely: nex, mortalitas, mors mortis, letum, plecto aliquem capite, excessum, decessus. (As a side note many of those would make great character names). So essentially were talking about a word that means to stay dead.
In a permadeath MMORPG the idea is to implement a system where a character could end up in a permanently dead state. Some examples are:
PdoT: You will permanently die over time. This has two subclasses, Subclass A that accounts for skill and Subclass B that does not. In the first you are given X lives and when you run out of them you must reroll but in the latter you are given X time and irregardless of your actions or skill you will reroll when that time is used up. Iron Man Permadeath: You get one life. When you die you reroll. (There is the Dungeons and Dragons variation of this that allows you to be resurrected from the dead state by a friend but each resurrection uses up a hard limit. Commonly related to a physical attribute such as health or constitution.) Watch your step: This is actually a combination of both Subclasses of PdoT. You are given X lives for X time. Commonly it is X lives per 24 hours. Should you die more then X times in this specific time period then you will reroll, however every X period of times that number will reset. Some allow roll-over lives like a cell phone plan and some dont.
Permadeath is a great departure from current games that treat death like unconsciousness. You black out briefly and then awake at some distant spawn point. In fact there is no real death and the concept doesnt actually exist in most games.
The fact that most MMORPGs dont feature a state of permanent death is a big turn off for those that crave a virtual world. It is near impossible to accurately portray a virtual simulation of life that is missing something as common as death. It removes to a degree the concept of skill. Those with more time invested in the game will become more skilled and more powerful then anyone else. It indirectly places too much value on your avatar rather then your avatars actions and deeds. It allows players to win against other players.
Why are MMORPGs just now beginning to incorporate this exciting new feature? Well first of all its not really an exciting new feature. Anyone who has played pong or any other arcade game is familiar with the ancient feature. The question really is why has it taken so long for MMORPGs to begin to use it. Well likely because they are designed by older people who believe they will lose players if their Main Avatar permanently dies. MMORPGs are designed around credit cards and thus most make it impossible for you to lose. Death can only slow you down, it can never kill you and you can never lose thus you must stick around to win, bubble by bubble, dollar by dollar until the end. Game expansions are designed to be so tedious that even the most skilled player could not conquer it before the next planned expansion can release. Its a bait and hook tactic and it works for a large majority of the players. The rest get bored and move on to a new game. They normally attribute their move to a new game to boredom, graphics or their whole guild left so their going with them but few every analyze what it is they truly left for.
As a matter of personal opinion I like PdoT Subclass A in combination with unrestricted PvP and skill based character development. (As opposed to level based) I would like such a game to feature real world simulated physics. I would go so far as to say characters should have to eat, drink and keep their avatars appropriately dressed for their environment. Unrealistic features which turn games into chat rooms should be removed, that is things like Clan talk, Tell, gossip etc. Long distance communication should only be feasible through magic or messengers. The number of lives characters receive should be enough to compensate for lag deaths, network unreliability and bad decisions but few enough to bring about Challenge. Trials of Ascension is such a game that promises to offer this to us players and if it releases I will be there. Any real comments?
I have to agree partially on this subject, I commenced playing UO about 7years ago when there was only one island and PK'ing was rampant i know the feeling of being killed as a newb char and being looted. I played with friends for about 12 months and gave it away as a joke how the hell could i achieve anything if all there was was some asshole out there waiting to kill me with a gang of about 6-8 ppl when i leave the security of the town?. I did ultimatly (no pun intended) go back to UO but now find yes there is no penalty for death as you can insure everything you own on you body such as armour and weapon so really there is no penalty for dying in UO now really except maybe exp loss for the longer you take to get res'd. I personally find the type of person that gets there rocks off by killing people just for the hell of it bloody anoying and this will keep people away from MMORPG's as now in UO there is at least PVP and non PVP islands this had made a large change to the gameplay of the game in general (less annoying assholes). I strongly oppose any thought of penalising players for death, people that say"ohhh its a decision you have to think about" is crap im paying to play this game and i dont expect some snotty nosed little shit to just come along with his "payed for character" and his mates PK me just cause it lets him get his rocks off. Game developers should realise this if they are wanting to attract more people into this genre of game, that this will really put people off playinfg these games. This is probablly the main reason i have now stopped playing UO after nearly 7yrs and will just dump my accounts when the renewal expires.
I think this is my first post ever on here, and I haven't read much of this thread, cause It's late and I didn't feel like reading 11 pages of posts...anyways, to me I think the death penalty should actually be a penalty, and more than just a few minutes of reduced stats. That is one thing that WoW lacked, the only penalty is that you have to walk really far...which I think is just a waste of time, and for people that have way too much time on their hands...it isnt a penalty. That is why I'm looking forward to ToA, permant death...theres nothing like fighting for your characters life, it puts excitment into the game and you've always have to be on your toes. I'm also thinking back to when I played Runescape way back in the day...you never lost everything, but you always lost your three best items you were carrying, which if you were smart you wouldn't lose anything good, but it still gave you something to lose. If theres nothing to lose, there's no reason to play.
There should definitely be more of a penalty for death in MMORPG's than we have seen recently. If a player kills you he/she should be able to loot items/cash from your corpse, this can work one of 2 ways:
1) If a player kills you they should have the option of looting everything you had on your person, however, if a player has the option to loot everything you have you should have the option of looting every item any NPC you kill has - including clothing, armour, weapons, etc
2) If a player kills you they should be able to loot random items from your person, a character could also have a looting skill set to improve the chances of looting more/better items.
I dont agree with losing xp, although in a Sci-Fi MMORPG (like SWG) it could be feasable that you would lose all the xp you had lost since the last time you cloned. Losing xp is really annoying though.
I dont think there should be areas where players are unattackable but instead there should be 3 levels of zones:
1) Very safe - in Major cities there should be lots of extremely high level guard/police NPC's. So much so that in order for anyone to raid these cities they would need a huge group - and even then success wouldnt be guarenteed. It should be almost impossible to attack these cities.
2) Moderately safe - in Towns there should be lots of high level guard/police NPC's. A very large group would still be required to attack this city but it would be possible to get in, although it should be very difficult.
3) No safety - in the wilderness the only protection you should have is the people in your group or people of the same faction.
These are mainly my opinions but I have seen plenty of posts in forums all around the internet saying basically the same thing. I remember from my time in SWG going to huge battles and killing players only to be faced with the same player 10 minutes later because he simply cloned and ran back to the fight.
Leave most games as they are. They have systems designed and thought out (well or poorly) and shouldn't try to fit another system into their game - unless it actually cooperates better with the design.
We, those fellers who want permadeath / death penalties are a diverse bunch, just as those who don't want it. And there are probably griefers of both opinions.
Ultimately, if you're a griefer and you're caught on your own, permadeath can be used against you. But it also makes your every action more powerful.
I see myself neither as carebear, griefer or hardcore PvP'er. What I want is that real-world feel.
Every now and then people join these discussion saying "That is idiocy / People who say that are morons and don't know what the game is about / If you want risk go kick a bear, this is just a game - enjoyment not risk". Primarily I want to say it is uncalled for and pointless.
But I would like to state an opinion. I will take the following things for granted:
There are several games (MMORPG) in existence that will allow players to enter combat, die and reenter combat without having lost anything they'll miss.
There are few games with harsh "penalties" on death, even fewer with actual permadeath. (And if you want it well implemented you're looking for one particular needle in a rapidly growing haystack)
There are no technical obstacles in the way of permadeath.
The opinion:
You cannot ultimately defeat an enemy in combat if he can come back at you the day after (even with level loss). Therefore, lack of permadeath prevents victory.
You cannot make a deeply immersive and convincing world (with a continous storyline) without permadeath. At least, it won't be too good. If somebody assassinates the king, so what? The king is dead, long live the king!
Lack of permadeath causes dull and unrealistic combat behaviour. I'd much sooner have an enemy come back at me later because he fled me than because he rez'ed. Then, if killing him was a big deal, I'd have to give chase, but I'd also have a chance of actual success.
A little clarification: I would most likely not pursue and kill anybody unless they had been relentless annoyances or great threats / enemies. Also, I'd sooner gather those who fear getting ganked and make them my allies, protecting them from harm, than I would go killing them. Even in a level based game I'd eventually have allies who could make a difference. This point only applies if I am in a position to protect people.
I find it strange that victories where the enemy fled after suffering heavy losses are less satisfying than victories that occured when the enemy could no longer be bothered to return after death. (Can't hold the fort, mommy says dinner's ready).
And if one side is utterly unwilling to risk life, they will flee soon and grant an easy victory to those who dare. That would make fortune favour the brave. Currently, it doesn't. But those games are nice for their crowd, I'll let them keep everything. I just want something for myself too. And not a real world bear - I'm there for an interesting story, for heroics and for an adrenaline rush - not for actual risk.
Risk of real life and risk of character life are very different, and I suspect the remark about the bear was only a rhetorical trick, and not a very good one. Rather transparent, in fact.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Many MMORPGs include grinding which make playing the game look like a job. Most games don't start for real until you reach the maximum level and you will need to grind for 2-4 months to achieve it. Having a death penalty seriously lenghtens this time. That's why I oppose any form of severe death penalty. I personally thing WoW has dealt with dead the best so far - due to item repairs you often want to avoid it. If a game uses an XP penalty (or the new thing - XP dept, which is actually the same) then it's almost directly a no-no for me. I am looking forward to the new pirates game - no death penalty at all! I oppose any form of death penalties (both in MMORPGs and real life ). If a game already looks like a job (due to heavy grinding) then a death penalty makes the game annoying. I don't pay monthly to be annoyed.
While I sincerely think the "Games should be fun" argument speaks in favour of taking skill development to the background rather than taking skill loss out of the game. Make the advancement less of a chore.
Because, as you say: That is a chore.
And a chore is what people don't want, if I understand correctly?
It is a different issue than death penalties, but I think that the real problem with death penalties is the chore of rebuilding.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Comments
I like harsh death penalties. The sense of achievement is gone from most mmorpgs. No death penalties takes the excitement of a fight out of the game for me.
Played Eq, FFXI, and WoW (and some other boring mmos here and there). I couldn't play WoW more than a month. You rarely socialize with others. Most people don't want to group because soloing makes leveling faster. Most people don't know how to work as a group. I never played in the end-game raids but zerging has never been fun for me. I rather get 3 friends together and play gauntlet, because unless you come with your own guild into WoW, you will be pretty lonely until 60.
I have a background in marketing and a long history of PvP and MMORPG games thus my take on things might varry a bit from others.
To me the right death penalty for a game is the one which is tailored to achieve a specific objective for a specifc game considering its type of game (PvP, RvR, PvE) and the players who play it.
You can't just put UO's death penalty in any game and have it work because its success depends on weather the players like it and how well that game system allows you to recoever from it. For example the player base of WoW is primarly of casual gamers with some hardcore gamers that enjoy mostly PvE and like a side dish of PvP every once in a while they can partake in. The death system there targets time loss and monitary loss which are two of the most important things to a casual gamer. If you transported UO's death system into the game the time investment required to attain the max level and enjoy high end content would become far greater and many of those PvE loving casual players would be very fustrated with the game and their slow progression in the limited time they have causing it to become a second job and cause many to leave.
Dark age of Camelot is a RvR game which encourages team based conbat and holding/capturing territory in for your kingdom (Game faction not Player). In this game there are two death penalties but the main one you encounter in high end game is simply the time factor and likely loss of territory. This death system is not perfect but once again a UO system is not good for this game because of the style of combat it involves. If you had a UO death system then engagements with 10-400 players fighting it out will be highly discouraged and therefore Keeps and Towers will be ignored totally as they would become death traps which can never change hands. In that game nothing short of divine intervention will save you during a charge from the sting of arrows and spells from the defending realm. If your the unlucky target of 10 archers, your dead and there is nothing you can do about it. There are lots of extreamly competative players in DAoC and the biggest peanlty to them of all is loosing the fight and the reaward for their service is attaining ranks of prestige. For example a player by the name of Mistwraith gained global fame by hitting the maximum rank many times in her prime. There was also a point where her team of 8 defended a keep doomed to fall from an army 90 strong. Thats really fun to do, but there is no way you would attempt it if your going to loose everything at the end.
So what is a good death system?
Basically you need to first as a few questions to yourself when you design one...
1) How will my game deliver entertainment to its players?
You need to preserve this and make sure your death penalty encourages this style of play.
2) In playing this game what do my players value most?
This can be anything really from time to items, to money. This is important because it helps you identify elements of the game which can be used in your dealth penalty. You need a list of options because you want to discourage death enough to make the player value life, while delivering your games entertainment value. This means that if you encourage PvP, you shouldn't discourage people from participating in it with a huge death setback penalty.
This is also key to identifying game elements which can be used as a reward for players whom are victorious and gives you a range of options to choose from minor to major rewards.
3) What does the average player think takes away from the fun?
This builds a list of elements to avoid in designing a death penalty and any other game system. Your players will remain loyal as long as your game continues to provide entertainment for them. Just as finding out what entertains your audience is important, so is finding out what turns them off. The point of a dealth penalty is to discourage death, not make your players miserable.
Conclusions
Every game has an internal imbalance which makes them unique and intreseting. This is espically present in games which teamwork as a focus because every class has its weakness and strength and those strenghts often do not contribute to offensive power. In the same way every game also has its own source of entertainment in the eyes of the players and its own fair set of things which detract from the entertainment value of the game. The way the game delivers entertainment is the foundations to a successful MMO and any dealth penalty the game has must support and enjance the entertainment value of a game and never take away from it. Finally, every death penalty system must offer rewards for victory while discouraging death and defeat. This means using game elements valuable to players in order to offer them rewards, and penalize them in a way which penalize them in a way which they can easily recover from but still discourage death and defeat. Though it is key to remember that list of what takes away from the entertainment offered in your game in the eyes of your players because your death penalty should never touch there. The entire purpose of those penalties is to enhance entertainment rather then punish players.
I must say, after more thought.
I think it depends on the mechanics of the game aswell.
Took at look at two games taht have open pvp, Ultima Online and Lineage 2.
Now in UO (my fav mmorpg of all time) you lost EVERYTHING you had on you. However the game really was not an item dependent game. Losing a sword you could merely go get another one and still be viable. It wasn't a lv based game either, all swords were a sword. There was no "lv 13 sword/lv 50 sword."
However in lineage 2, it was EXTREMELY item dependent. Losing your weapon really gimped your character bad. You weren't viable without the lv of gear. You had to grind grind grind to get money to buy a new weapon if you didn't have it, and items were expensive. You didn't drop everything you had either, it was more of a random chance for "x" item to drop. However it was a loooooot more of a "sting" when you lost things because of it's extreme item dependency, your character didn't make himself, his items did.
IMO UO was a lot better designed for losing items when it came to looting and pvp, lineage 2 sucked.
As far as "exp" loss, I'm not really for that myself. I much prefer players to lose items (a la UO) and/or take a durability loss (with eventual breaking). This in turn also creates money sinks (which are good for the ecnomoy) among other things.
It makes you not want to do and gives you that rush when you think you might, but doesn't make you want to bludegon yourself with a nerf bat because of it.
That does go far beyond the subject of death handling (penalties, if you want to call it that , but I see anything less than dying as a bonus). However, it has just been pointed out that the question of death implementation is not an individual matter than can be taken out of context.
Disadvantages of significantly "penalized" deaths
Advantages
Permadeath disadvantages
Permadeath advantages / strong sides
Tricks to improve a permadeath game
Some might complain that this system does not at all reward long timers who are devoted to the game, and that it isn't fair / realistic.
You could reduce looting motivation (to have fewer [perma]deaths caused by looting alone) by having individual weapon skills rather than attack skill / level. The sword in the corpse's hand will be even less interesting when you've only really focused on the axe.
You could throw levels out the window and bring in skills, but now I'm not keeping it as general as I initially intended. If I keep this up I will be discussing Adellion - which is not the topic, but is exceptionally close to the ideal I seek. (No, that game is still in alpha and no schedules are published.)
I look very much forward to having a game that is tailored to needs like my own rather than the mainstream desires that so many find satisfied in the current games.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
In a game of skill the death penalty should be high but in a game of number crunching.. strictly gear nad levels the death penalty makes not much sense. I mean if you could get away from someone or fight off a mob or player much higher or geared then u then I can see a reason for a heavy death penalty because your just not skilled enough and should of not been playing with fire. When it comes to gaves like everquest.. lineage 2.. UO.. and whatever else you can name.. the power of the player is considered solely by his level.. gear and ability to spam skills making it extremely unfair.
I am with Frank, There should be a harsh death penalty. I loved UO until it went soft. Sure I got murdered a few times, but I also turned in a few heads for the bounty. You can't find the thrill anymore even on the PVP servers. There is no penalty and no reward. I love WOW, but it would be nice to have a SOF(Survival of the Fittest) PVP surver. The rules would be similer to the orginal UO PVP rules:
-Attack anyone at anytime or even some type of faction fighting, with flagged rogues attacked by all.
-looting(minimum all money and what ever you can carry from the bags, equipment from the body also, but add a long timer for removing it from the body, that way adds the fear that you might get caught)
-Murder counts and bounties to hunt down the murderers(I always thought this was a nice balance in UO, you kill too much and people will come hunting for you)
-pickpocketing(I loved pick pocketing in UO,never got into a house, but and proude to say I was able to steal a boat once
. Would be nice to able to do it again. )
GIVE ME BACK THE WILD WEST!!!!!
SNAKE
It seems to me that there are two "larger" camps of people.. those who like it.. those who don't.
Either camp finds it hard or "annoying" to live in the world that the other camp prefers...
seems to me that game companies should offer two types of servers.. one with the harsher death penalites, harsher pvp system etc and one that allows for players to play a more relaxed game.
Some games do have this .. seems to me if they take the time to allow each different portion of the player base to enjoy the game in the manner they would prefer there would be more retention of players.
More hardcore players are not going to want to stay in a more "carebear" world and the relaxed players are not going to want to put up with the attittudes of the hardcore... trying to cater to both sets at the same time on the same server just gets disillusinoned players or a waterered down game.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Frank is right imo.. you gotta have penalties for death or it's no fun. I played Lineage 2 for over a year and believe me, with the grind in that game you didn't wanna die and lose xp! You thought twice about your actions whether hunting or deciding to pvp.
Well here is the thing. It is my opinion that a good PvP game should have a few things in common regarding the death penalty...
1) The death penalty though undesirable should be easy to recover from. Death is part of PvP as winning and loosing are both critical parts of the game and its learning expierence. It should make a close victory that much more rewarding and encourage me to use common sense before I engage. However if I die, it should piss me off some but I should be able to quickly recover and get back into the fight. However in such systems it is also important to have proportional penalites becuase you should learn from your mistakes and being a repeated dumbass should be punished.
2) Progression should be through PvP not PvE. Most pvp players play such games in order to progress in the PvP world. The PvE element is the part of the game we pain to get through asap and hopefully never return to. We should never be forced back into PvE over a simple PvP death.
Part of my above reasoning is that for a PvP game to be good battles should be frequent and they must conclude. There is nothing more distasteful for a pvp player then running around all day or playing a game in which your opponent always runs away and a battle is rarely won. PvP players often see victory through one side retreating hollow and unsatisfying for all sides. Its best if players are not so fearful of dieing that they will allow the battle to climax and fight to the bitter end. Those battles are the most fun because they open up opportunity for sudden reversals and desperate but amazing and close victory.
In my opinion there is NOTHING more satisfying in a game then getting into a hard fight which lasts a good bit and comes down to the wire, and yet you managed to pull through even if it has taken its toll on you. Its so much more better then rolling a group of people who don't have as much equipment, buffs, expierence, or levels then you.
This is a shoot yourself in the foot argument...
Think about that exact scenario, but now ADD a DEATH PENALTY too! How does having a death penalty STOP that 20 lvls ahead griefer doing exactly the same thing? And if you tell me, "oh communities build up to stop the griefers and it's all friendly and such"...I'll tell you...GARBAGE! All that turns into is a to-and-fro killing match that makes any sort of "game" that orginally existed turn into a sideshow for mob revenge killings.
Frank is wrong too, a death penalty doesn't deter the gerbils (because they actually GET their fun from the risks)...all the DP does is give gerbils POWER! The power to take away hard earned experience, hard earned loot and any other lost game time that the kill produces.
FIGHT the power...don't give in to the gerbils...after all, it's probably the gerbils themselves that are calling for the reintroduction of DPs in all the new games. Gerbil: [whine voice] "It's just no challenge, it's just no fun...I don't get anything from killing unsuspecting players anymore...bring back the DP so I can ruin people's day totally...please"
Go kill each other in UO or Shadowbane (or even EVE)...and watch as your puny populations of like-minded gerbils decrease until there's none of you left...and good riddance!
I like challenge and realism. A severe death penalty can provide that challenge. It worked in PnP RPG's just fine. Permadeath is not really a good idea in an mmorpg but heavy xp debt and severe but temporary stat loses are appropriate. The only major mmorpg I know of that has a reasonably severe death penalty is EVE online. The others make death a joke and that's sad.
I don't like having to make corpse runs because it doesn't seem realistic. Nor is it a feature of any fantasy or sci-fi literature that I'm aware of. There are other, more immersive ways to penalize defeat.
Well I have read pretty much of the debate (I did skip a few pages as it is getting late).
I was suprised to see only passing reference to Asherons Call and its death penalty system. Basically, when you died you were resurrected at your lifestone - wherever you were 'tied' to. You then had to make your way back to you corpse from which you could retrieve the one or two random items that you would drop n death.
Now those dropped item usually were the higher value items, so many players would carry 'death items' - ie high value low use items, like golden cups and the like. SO if you died and only dropped you death items you could pretty much not bother with corpse recovery. If however you dropped you favourite sword or breastplate, then it was imperitive that you recovered it.
I remember with great fondness many guild corpse runs, with guildies clearing the way for the recently deceased to reclaim their good.
Fun times generated by a reasonable death penalty.
For those of you that call others n00bs because you profess to be the cool "real death penalty" kids:
If you want a severe death penalty go smack a bear on the bum. Otherwise stop thinking you're an e-hero and get a life. Games are for entertainment. If you think you're better than the masses of players who play low/no penalty games because you played a game with harsher penalties, your goofy arse needs to go do something in real life that means something. Do something, anything, that matters. Do something that requires you to detach your rear from the chair and put in on the line. But don't act high and mighty, as if you're tougher or cooler because you think a video game death penalty means anything about your "e-skill" or you.
Games are about enjoyment. Real consequences, toughness, etc., are for the REAL world. Go get something done in real life you smack-talking goobers. Until then, enjoyment is the name of the GAME. Join the volunteer fire company. Join the Army. Step in front of someone hurting someone or something else. Do SOMETHING of consequence. At the very least stop being a raging tard about how "tough" you think you are, and how "n00b" you think other people are.
The most "carebear" people I've ever seen are the trash talkers who think they're PvP or MMORPG heroes. Pathetic.
I haven't played alot of MMORPGs but i have played MUDS and I can honestly say that I hate Harsh Death Penalties. I get to play WOW perhaps 2-3 hours a day during the week, I don't feel like spending my entire time getting killed by some kid who thinks that the fact that he is 60th level in a GAME means anything besides he has more time to play.
I am not going to go off like zham did but I can say that I play games for the community and enjoyment, not so I can ruin someone else's day. I like working cooperatively with people (guild or otherwise) but I am not willing to spend my time escorting or being escorted on corpse run after corpse run. I play WOW tactically, in 20 levels I have died 2-3 times tops...Because I still run if I find an opponent overwhelming. I don't like taking durability hits to my eq so I try to avoid it.
It is insane to expect casual players/gamers to pay $15+ a month for the pleasure of being owned by the hardcore gamers. And considering that most games are going to make more money from casual players I am not surprised to see extreme death penalties slowly going by the wayside.
All a matter of opinion
=Dan
After reading all these posts and replies, I have to wonder just how much from one "camp" is showing up here. I know that usually the "squeeky" wheel gets the grease, but I sure hope that isn't going to happen here. Just because one wheel squeeks, doesn't mean the others don't need attention.
As a councellor in UO (when UO was still allowed to do this) I knew the population was heavy on he non-pvp side, Trammel, over the pvp side, Felucca. This is most likely to escape the death penalty people would recieve at the hands of people who like to live in total anarchy with wanton killing just for the grief it would cause.
There are over 5 million people playing WoW at this time, more than any other MMORPG has ever had. Could all these people be wrong? It would seem that evidence speaks for itself, IMHO.
Too bad more from the other "camp" wouldn't see this or post more often. If I know the nature of that camp, the last thing they probably want to do is live and breath a game. Most likely they don't even know this site exists. I really didn't know either, except by accident. I didn't go search for it. Then this topic was, purely by chance, at the top of the page. Accident being my girlfriend showing me the site. :P Being something I am already pationate about, I couldn't help by drop my $.02.
As some have already stated, it is seems to be more based on the type of game, and the mechanics. I probably wouldn't have minded the death penalty in UO if people weren't free to attack anyone at any time. Thate invites rude behavior, in my experience. Again, this type of death penalty has already been explored and it would be something I'd support.
As for a game that that one could only advance via pvp, that would probably be a game short lived. Not only do you have the willingness factor, but you have the timezone issue, too. Advancement through PvP sounds more like a big FPS game and I would rather hook myself up with Battfield, or its ilk. That is why I left SWG in the first place. If I wanted FPS in massive form, there are plenty of servers around the world for that.
Those were some other issues I needed to get off of my chest. :P
Lead with your face and role with the punches.
Open record: I LOVE Permadeath and no alignment and no names. I resent the fact that people think that I'm ignorant or a sociopath. Some of the people here think my one goal as a permadeath advocate is to grief and make other gamers lives a living hell.
STOP.
Your judging me... you really dont understand the concept... Your annoying when your point to non Permadeath successes when there has been no Permadeath games to begin with! (Discounting muds) You dont understand the term realism do you? We dont want to play your casual catering POS game because it is a kids game! We want a game that more accurately simulates a world we would actually be in. Whether or not I want to be in that world is a decision all players will make with their credit cards but my card is waiting for a more realistic simulation. I dont want to play your crap hunt 12 apples and kill 15 goblin games anymore..... I could and have done that years ago. Your reinventing the wheel and no matter how many times your change the material or the rims its still a wheel and its not going to get me to alpha centauri is it? (Excuse my metaphors... I'm hooked on this new warp drive and have been reading a lot!) You want to know about Permadeath!
What is it? What does it mean? Will it work? If you follow the forums of any new MMORPG out there you have probably seen this buzzword brought up quite a bit. (Mayhaps even by me!) But though it is hotly debated it also very misunderstood. So lets define and discuss it.Perma is a latin root which means to stay to the end, last or endure. Death is also derived from a latin root, most commonly Mort but other roots are related, namely: nex, mortalitas, mors mortis, letum, plecto aliquem capite, excessum, decessus. (As a side note many of those would make great character names). So essentially were talking about a word that means to stay dead.
In a permadeath MMORPG the idea is to implement a system where a character could end up in a permanently dead state. Some examples are:
PdoT: You will permanently die over time. This has two subclasses, Subclass A that accounts for skill and Subclass B that does not. In the first you are given X lives and when you run out of them you must reroll but in the latter you are given X time and irregardless of your actions or skill you will reroll when that time is used up.
Iron Man Permadeath: You get one life. When you die you reroll. (There is the Dungeons and Dragons variation of this that allows you to be resurrected from the dead state by a friend but each resurrection uses up a hard limit. Commonly related to a physical attribute such as health or constitution.)
Watch your step: This is actually a combination of both Subclasses of PdoT. You are given X lives for X time. Commonly it is X lives per 24 hours. Should you die more then X times in this specific time period then you will reroll, however every X period of times that number will reset. Some allow roll-over lives like a cell phone plan and some dont.
Permadeath is a great departure from current games that treat death like unconsciousness. You black out briefly and then awake at some distant spawn point. In fact there is no real death and the concept doesnt actually exist in most games.
The fact that most MMORPGs dont feature a state of permanent death is a big turn off for those that crave a virtual world. It is near impossible to accurately portray a virtual simulation of life that is missing something as common as death. It removes to a degree the concept of skill. Those with more time invested in the game will become more skilled and more powerful then anyone else. It indirectly places too much value on your avatar rather then your avatars actions and deeds. It allows players to win against other players.
Why are MMORPGs just now beginning to incorporate this exciting new feature? Well first of all its not really an exciting new feature. Anyone who has played pong or any other arcade game is familiar with the ancient feature. The question really is why has it taken so long for MMORPGs to begin to use it. Well likely because they are designed by older people who believe they will lose players if their Main Avatar permanently dies. MMORPGs are designed around credit cards and thus most make it impossible for you to lose. Death can only slow you down, it can never kill you and you can never lose thus you must stick around to win, bubble by bubble, dollar by dollar until the end. Game expansions are designed to be so tedious that even the most skilled player could not conquer it before the next planned expansion can release. Its a bait and hook tactic and it works for a large majority of the players. The rest get bored and move on to a new game. They normally attribute their move to a new game to boredom, graphics or their whole guild left so their going with them but few every analyze what it is they truly left for.
As a matter of personal opinion I like PdoT Subclass A in combination with unrestricted PvP and skill based character development. (As opposed to level based) I would like such a game to feature real world simulated physics. I would go so far as to say characters should have to eat, drink and keep their avatars appropriately dressed for their environment. Unrealistic features which turn games into chat rooms should be removed, that is things like Clan talk, Tell, gossip etc. Long distance communication should only be feasible through magic or messengers. The number of lives characters receive should be enough to compensate for lag deaths, network unreliability and bad decisions but few enough to bring about Challenge. Trials of Ascension is such a game that promises to offer this to us players and if it releases I will be there. Any real comments?
I have to agree partially on this subject, I commenced playing UO about 7years ago when there was only one island and PK'ing was rampant i know the feeling of being killed as a newb char and being looted. I played with friends for about 12 months and gave it away as a joke how the hell could i achieve anything if all there was was some asshole out there waiting to kill me with a gang of about 6-8 ppl when i leave the security of the town?.
I did ultimatly (no pun intended) go back to UO but now find yes there is no penalty for death as you can insure everything you own on you body such as armour and weapon so really there is no penalty for dying in UO now really except maybe exp loss for the longer you take to get res'd.
I personally find the type of person that gets there rocks off by killing people just for the hell of it bloody anoying and this will keep people away from MMORPG's as now in UO there is at least PVP and non PVP islands this had made a large change to the gameplay of the game in general (less annoying assholes).
I strongly oppose any thought of penalising players for death, people that say"ohhh its a decision you have to think about" is crap im paying to play this game and i dont expect some snotty nosed little shit to just come along with his "payed for character" and his mates PK me just cause it lets him get his rocks off.
Game developers should realise this if they are wanting to attract more people into this genre of game, that this will really put people off playinfg these games.
This is probablly the main reason i have now stopped playing UO after nearly 7yrs and will just dump my accounts when the renewal expires.
There should definitely be more of a penalty for death in MMORPG's than we have seen recently. If a player kills you he/she should be able to loot items/cash from your corpse, this can work one of 2 ways:
1) If a player kills you they should have the option of looting everything you had on your person, however, if a player has the option to loot everything you have you should have the option of looting every item any NPC you kill has - including clothing, armour, weapons, etc
2) If a player kills you they should be able to loot random items from your person, a character could also have a looting skill set to improve the chances of looting more/better items.
I dont agree with losing xp, although in a Sci-Fi MMORPG (like SWG) it could be feasable that you would lose all the xp you had lost since the last time you cloned. Losing xp is really annoying though.
I dont think there should be areas where players are unattackable but instead there should be 3 levels of zones:
1) Very safe - in Major cities there should be lots of extremely high level guard/police NPC's. So much so that in order for anyone to raid these cities they would need a huge group - and even then success wouldnt be guarenteed. It should be almost impossible to attack these cities.
2) Moderately safe - in Towns there should be lots of high level guard/police NPC's. A very large group would still be required to attack this city but it would be possible to get in, although it should be very difficult.
3) No safety - in the wilderness the only protection you should have is the people in your group or people of the same faction.
These are mainly my opinions but I have seen plenty of posts in forums all around the internet saying basically the same thing. I remember from my time in SWG going to huge battles and killing players only to be faced with the same player 10 minutes later because he simply cloned and ran back to the fight.
I say leave WoW as it is.
Leave most games as they are. They have systems designed and thought out (well or poorly) and shouldn't try to fit another system into their game - unless it actually cooperates better with the design.
We, those fellers who want permadeath / death penalties are a diverse bunch, just as those who don't want it. And there are probably griefers of both opinions.
Ultimately, if you're a griefer and you're caught on your own, permadeath can be used against you. But it also makes your every action more powerful.
I see myself neither as carebear, griefer or hardcore PvP'er. What I want is that real-world feel.
Every now and then people join these discussion saying "That is idiocy / People who say that are morons and don't know what the game is about / If you want risk go kick a bear, this is just a game - enjoyment not risk". Primarily I want to say it is uncalled for and pointless.
But I would like to state an opinion. I will take the following things for granted:
The opinion:
I find it strange that victories where the enemy fled after suffering heavy losses are less satisfying than victories that occured when the enemy could no longer be bothered to return after death. (Can't hold the fort, mommy says dinner's ready).
And if one side is utterly unwilling to risk life, they will flee soon and grant an easy victory to those who dare. That would make fortune favour the brave. Currently, it doesn't. But those games are nice for their crowd, I'll let them keep everything. I just want something for myself too. And not a real world bear - I'm there for an interesting story, for heroics and for an adrenaline rush - not for actual risk.
Risk of real life and risk of character life are very different, and I suspect the remark about the bear was only a rhetorical trick, and not a very good one. Rather transparent, in fact.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Many MMORPGs include grinding which make playing the game look like a job. Most games don't start for real until you reach the maximum level and you will need to grind for 2-4 months to achieve it. Having a death penalty seriously lenghtens this time. That's why I oppose any form of severe death penalty. I personally thing WoW has dealt with dead the best so far - due to item repairs you often want to avoid it. If a game uses an XP penalty (or the new thing - XP dept, which is actually the same) then it's almost directly a no-no for me. I am looking forward to the new pirates game - no death penalty at all! I oppose any form of death penalties (both in MMORPGs and real life
). If a game already looks like a job (due to heavy grinding) then a death penalty makes the game annoying. I don't pay monthly to be annoyed.
While I sincerely think the "Games should be fun" argument speaks in favour of taking skill development to the background rather than taking skill loss out of the game. Make the advancement less of a chore.
Because, as you say: That is a chore.
And a chore is what people don't want, if I understand correctly?
It is a different issue than death penalties, but I think that the real problem with death penalties is the chore of rebuilding.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)