Dying

apertotes · April 2008

hi, there is this trend lately on MMORPGs (and many other games, btw) that makes dying a very easy situation, and thus, the penalty for death is very light or non-existant.

i think we can all agree that dying very often and having a huge penalty dont go together very well, so it comes down to two options. which one do you prefer?

ps: maybe it is not clear enough, first option is that dying should not happen often at all, that it should happen only very few times, like once or twice a year.

Illius · April 2008

I vote for neither because I believe that a death penalty should have some weight to it no matter how often it happens. Making it almost impossible to die versus death that happens frequently but has no penalty is more or less the same thing for me. You're still protecting the player and not punishing him for mistakes that he/she makes. If for instance, you go into a dungeon and are not careful enough and happen to gather up more aggro then you can handle you die. It's not the games fault it's yours. Thus you take a exp penalty or some other penalty and you don't do it again because you know the consequences.

For instance, lets use World of Warcraft as an example since a majority of people have played it. I've had instances where people would come and jump me only to die repeatedly to me. They gain absolutely nothing from it as do I. Now if there was a harsh penalty for stupidity like that then I think we'd have a better game.

I will admit however that this might breed problems that I did not forsee but I just woke up and I'm writing this with no particular direction in mind.

Rayalist · April 2008

It highly depends on the game. When the focus is progression / leveling / loot, of course those players won't like harsh death penalties. If the game is about the experience / seeing what challenges you can take on, where gear is of little importance and leveling is easy, harsh death penalties can make it exciting.

I agree with the above poster as well, which is why I like harsh death penalites.

phatpetey · April 2008

Hi,

I know what you mean in some MMORPGs the dying system really sucks. In most japanese grinding games you will lose some experience. Here are the games of wich I love the dying system.

Runescape: If you die in this game you're really f*cked. You will lose all your items except for the 3 most valuable ones. When you died you will spawn to the beginning village. You don't lose any experience only your items.

Guild Wars: When you die in this game you lose a bit of your health and mana(15%). In my opinion that's a great system. The only way to lose those penalties is to gain your morale boosts or to enter a city.

World of Warcraft: Dying in this game isn't terrible although it isn't fun at all. You're equipment loses durability and you are send to the graveyard the closest from you. When dead you turn into a ghost and you need to run back to your body.

apertotes · April 2008

Originally posted by Illius

I vote for neither because I believe that a death penalty should have some weight to it no matter how often it happens. Making it almost impossible to die versus death that happens frequently but has no penalty is more or less the same thing for me. You're still protecting the player and not punishing him for mistakes that he/she makes. If for instance, you go into a dungeon and are not careful enough and happen to gather up more aggro then you can handle you die. It's not the games fault it's yours. Thus you take a exp penalty or some other penalty and you don't do it again because you know the consequences.
For instance, lets use World of Warcraft as an example since a majority of people have played it. I've had instances where people would come and jump me only to die repeatedly to me. They gain absolutely nothing from it as do I. Now if there was a harsh penalty for stupidity like that then I think we'd have a better game.
I will admit however that this might breed problems that I did not forsee but I just woke up and I'm writing this with no particular direction in mind.

you are right, but game development can promote dying easily or not. i mean, sometimes it seems that dying is a feature of a game, cause it just happens too often.

for example, dying on good old SWG or UO was something much more rarer than on WoW, GW or new upcoming titles like Warhammer Online. it seems that dying nowadays is just another part of the game that needs to be enjoyed and not avoided. thus, games are made so that people can die easily.

of course, there is the other side of the coin. games that have pvp try to cather to players that love to show their stats and ranks, and if killing someone is easy, they can show higher numbers on their signatures.

Czzarre · April 2008

One issue is that you make it seem that the death penalty currently used in many MMORPGs have been minimized by the decree of the developers alone. However, The minimalization of death consequences have changed over the last decade by player desires. In the days of UO and EQ1 with heavy XP loss, corpse loss, player looting, naked corpse runs (Often leading to further deaths) was not deemed desirable by the majority of players ..as such, the games have changed.

I dont believe that the diminution of the mmorpg death penalty is not bad, so long as there remains a death penalty (Most MMORPGs are now small loss of time, loss of xp, and minor fully equiped corpse runs).

Torrential

bahamut1 · April 2008

Originally posted by apertotes

you are right, but game development can promote dying easily or not. i mean, sometimes it seems that dying is a feature of a game, cause it just happens too often.
for example, dying on good old SWG or UO was something much more rarer than on WoW, GW or new upcoming titles like Warhammer Online. it seems that dying nowadays is just another part of the game that needs to be enjoyed and not avoided. thus, games are made so that people can die easily.
of course, there is the other side of the coin. games that have pvp try to cather to players that love to show their stats and ranks, and if killing someone is easy, they can show higher numbers on their signatures.

Your post does not correlate with anything. Old UO and EQ1 were death traps. We died all the time. In EQ2, except for raiding, where you're expected to die (same as old EQ1) we hardly ever die. Maybe once a week if we get unlucky, or in a bad group. When I played WoW I never died, EVER. It was 40th level before my first death. They even have contests for how long you can last till your FIRST death and people max level and play for months before first death, some never die, they just split the prize among the ones that don't ever die.

Old school games were more challenging. In EQ1, if you came across a solo mob same level, you had a very good chance of LOSING the fight. It took knowledge and skill to not die in that game. Now, you can take on Groups of same level mobs without breaking a sweat. You couldn't even run across Highkeep Pass without getting your butt handed to ya, now, you can crawl backwards upside down in a mud pit and not worry about agro in a game. In fact, EQ2 even displays EXACTLY which mobs you are going to get as they have linked groups and big neon signs with bold letters telling you their strength. Ooooo, real tough there.

Death penalties don't even exist any more. Used to lose items, levels, experience, brothers, mothers, and sister-in-laws when you died. They would actually come to your house and take your dog when you died in the game. Now, you respawn, wipe the dust off and go back to whatever you were doing. Heck, in EQ2, you are even better off dying sometimes as a means of travel. AH, a nice quick port to docks, and off we go.

Your poll is the exact opposite of what's really happening.

apertotes · April 2008

Originally posted by bahamut1

Originally posted by apertotes

you are right, but game development can promote dying easily or not. i mean, sometimes it seems that dying is a feature of a game, cause it just happens too often.
for example, dying on good old SWG or UO was something much more rarer than on WoW, GW or new upcoming titles like Warhammer Online. it seems that dying nowadays is just another part of the game that needs to be enjoyed and not avoided. thus, games are made so that people can die easily.
of course, there is the other side of the coin. games that have pvp try to cather to players that love to show their stats and ranks, and if killing someone is easy, they can show higher numbers on their signatures.

Your post does not correlate with anything. Old UO and EQ1 were death traps. We died all the time. In EQ2, except for raiding, where you're expected to die (same as old EQ1) we hardly ever die. Maybe once a week if we get unlucky, or in a bad group. When I played WoW I never died, EVER. It was 40th level before my first death. They even have contests for how long you can last till your FIRST death and people max level and play for months before first death, some never die, they just split the prize among the ones that don't ever die.

Old school games were more challenging. In EQ1, if you came across a solo mob same level, you had a very good chance of LOSING the fight. It took knowledge and skill to not die in that game. Now, you can take on Groups of same level mobs without breaking a sweat. You couldn't even run across Highkeep Pass without getting your butt handed to ya, now, you can crawl backwards upside down in a mud pit and not worry about agro in a game. In fact, EQ2 even displays EXACTLY which mobs you are going to get as they have linked groups and big neon signs with bold letters telling you their strength. Ooooo, real tough there.

Death penalties don't even exist any more. Used to lose items, levels, experience, brothers, mothers, and sister-in-laws when you died. They would actually come to your house and take your dog when you died in the game. Now, you respawn, wipe the dust off and go back to whatever you were doing. Heck, in EQ2, you are even better off dying sometimes as a means of travel. AH, a nice quick port to docks, and off we go.

Your poll is the exact opposite of what's really happening.

i think you just didnt understand it. i said exactly the same you said. some years ago death meant something, nowadays, it seams that death is just another game component, and not something to avoid.

about dying all the time on UO, well, i didnt. i just spend most of my time exploring and fishing and hunting tresures, and i died very few times. meanwhile, on wow, everything is designed to make you die. from raids to the aweful battleground pvp system. surviving is not rewarded at all.

on SWG i died even less than on UO, and certainly much less than on new games like city of heroes, wow or the upcoming WAR.

my poll was just trying to find out what system people prefer, dying a lot without consequences (ala FPS style), or dying less but with heavy consequences. why not dying a lot with heavy consequences? because that doesnt work at all.

daarco · April 2008

You need a MMO were you can choose to do dangerous things. If you are forced to "quest" and kill things. then death should be pointless.

But if the game says, "be careful of death...dont go and something dangerous!"

I think death should be a bad thing in MMOs. Something you want to avoid at any cost.

Katashi-kun · April 2008

I still love and prolly always will enjoy loss of a large chuck of ur XP, and loss of a lvl or lvls if you keep dying and not re-earn the XP u lost!

I like death to meaningful and it hits u with "frick, not gonna do that again in that way!" Makes you approach things differently and you learn more and more how to be better with your class or overcoming situations or events.

Just paying repair costs on your armor is not enough, you learn nothing and the repair costs are pretty low so if feels as if nothing happened. You died, so what......blah! Gimmie a reason for it.....

sepher · April 2008

Honestly, I doubt a lot of advocates for UO/EQ1-esque death penalties would actually enjoy it nowadays. Nostalgia makes a lot of things in retrospect seem like they'd be more fun than they actually would be today.

Not to take away from the fun of those days, but like everything, changes need to happen in order to keep things fresh. So it's not so much those old systems in paritcular as it is what they accomplished.

If a player went into Deceit in UO wanting to find Vanq weapons, only to die and lose a full set of Vanq and Invul, well that'd suck and the player would be set back a whole evening. But maybe player'd gotten the last 9 evenings right, and all the player would need to do is go home and rummage a chest to replace the items that he lost. That or go loot his corpse which is what'd happen most of the time anyway.

I use UO as an example because, even though players lost all of their items due to death, more than likely they had a lot more copies of that same stuff, or the ability to buy them or simply go pick the items back up.

Now imagine losing your Tier # in WoW...all of that takes months to get. So the penalty is just durability; its possible for your gear to be as useless to you the same amount of time as it was in those games. The two systems accomplish the same thing, punishment through downtime, but through two different means.

So as far as items go, losing items wasn't really all that vicious considering how easy they were to replace. An impossible system in modern MMOs given the proliferation of BOE/BOP systems and how difficult items are to attain through end-game raiding.

And fearing experience loss I think comes off as dull as watching experience gain. Keeping players attention nowadays is all a trick of making experience gain and loss not seem so obvious, because then it becomes a "grind". Experience loss is the most direct way of setting a player back in time; and needs masking the same way quest-driven gameplay masks experience gains. Sounds silly but punishments have to be as well designed for as boons are.

Currently, I'm 'bout tired of "debt" systems, a-la City of Heroes. Spirit runs are old as well. They all only accomplish the aforementioned wasting of my time, but I look for variety in the masking of it all, moreso than I do the obviousness of the punishment.

Illius · April 2008

I'm gonna toss this idea out to you guys. Back when I played DAoC when you died, you'd loose a good chunk of exp, and at the place you died a grave stone would be erected. When you rez you have to run back to where your grave stone was and pray at it's location to get only half of the exp you lost. Also, the fighting you do be it against people or monsters would slowly degrade your armor. You could repair it but not infinitely. Every time you repair a sword, it would be nice and sharp once again but it's condition would degrade. Once the condition of a weapon or armor went below 70% the magical bonuses would no longer apply, and the damage or mitigation would be lowered as well.

I thought that was a great system. This would mean that you can get your nice items and fight but they do not last forever. This would mean that eventually you'll have to replace them with another version of the same item or something else. And since in DAoC people would adjust their specs and abilities fairly often with minor and sometimes major tweaks this would mean that some of the previous items no longer fit or are just not as useful.

randomt · April 2008

Originally posted by Illius

I'm gonna toss this idea out to you guys. Back when I played DAoC when you died, you'd loose a good chunk of exp, and at the place you died a grave stone would be erected. When you rez you have to run back to where your grave stone was and pray at it's location to get only half of the exp you lost.

Thats pretty much how Vanguard does it.. and people whine about it.. go figure.. no pleasing everyone

(cept vanguard also lets you call your tombstone back to the rez point if you dont mind not getting the xp back, just your items)

Wharg0ul · April 2008

Old-school AO had a great system. You scan your toon's data at an "insurance terminal". If you then go out and die, you lost all xp gained since your scan, and if you were killed in PVP could be looted of all items acquired since said scan.

Insurance prices increased with level.

At higher levels..it would literally make me sick sometimes to die....hours of playtime wasted. You tried VERY hard to not die.

It also led to a bit of fun, since you could gank someone on the way to a team mission if it was in a pvp zone, loot their key, get into the mission, and pick them off one by one. ha! good times.

Unknown · April 2008

<blockquote>Originally posted by apertotes hi, there is this trend lately on MMORPGs (and many other games, btw) that makes dying a very easy situation, and thus, the penalty for death is very light or non-existant. i think we can all agree that dying very often and having a huge penalty dont go together very well, so it comes down to two options. which one do you prefer? ps: maybe it is not clear enough, first option is that dying should not happen often at all, that it should happen only very few times, like once or twice a year.</blockquote>

1. The fact you think it comes to two ways/options, shows you are not experienced enough in mmorpgs. You need to first play more mmorpgs, and different types of mmorpgs, to round out your mmorpg experience.

2. Some of the many types of dying. Many mmorpg's have one, some, or a mix of the following:

- Full xp lost, with option to retrieve corpse. IF you retrieve your corpse, you get some xp back.

- Automatically keep all your items. With some item wear and tear. Keep dying and your items break.

- All your items are on your corpse. You have to retrieve it to get them.

- ONLY your [insert number from 1-3] most valuable items are on your corpse. You have to retrieve your corpse to get them.

- Slight TEMORPARY reduction of all your stats, and health when you die. Keep dying, and more reductions. Keep dying and a level 1 rat can kill your level 5,000 warrior LOL! (WoW has this death feature. So does AO).

- You die, and absolutly nothing happens. You simply get teleported to a respawn area. You can run back into the action again and again.

- LOOTING. All your items are immediatly lootable by any player.

- LOOTING. [Insert number from 1-5] of your most valuable items are immediatly lootable by any player.

- INSURANCE. Have insurance in the game. A player can buy insurance before they die. Insuring items, their corpse, etc....

- DEVIL CHOICE/GOD CHOICE dying. When you die, you become a "spirit" and enter "pergatory" or the gates of hell, or the gates of heaven. A hell being, or heaven being, then presents you with numerous choices on which sting of death you pick. OR it can be randomly picked for you

- depending on how you role-played while you were alive.

- Can't play your character for X amount of time. A few hours, a day, a few days, etc....

- HELL PLAYGROUND/HEAVEN PLAYGROUND. After you die, you enter hell/heaven, and continue your adventures there LOL!!

- Good ole P-E-R-M-A-D-E-A-T-H !!! Only 1 mmorpg has this. Only 2 online games have this. Both Diablo 2 Hardcore mode, and Strive For Power, have shown perma-death in an online game can be successful, IS successfull !!!

Nightbringe1 · April 2008

Originally posted by Rayalist

It highly depends on the game. When the focus is progression / leveling / loot, of course those players won't like harsh death penalties. If the game is about the experience / seeing what challenges you can take on, where gear is of little importance and leveling is easy, harsh death penalties can make it exciting.
I agree with the above poster as well, which is why I like harsh death penalites.

Everquest, old school, Plane of Fear

People still remember it, still talk about it as the good old days.

Death had a harsh penalty, dieing was easy to do, leveing was slow, the game for those in Fear was about level and progression.

Death needs to be feared for progression to hold any real meaning.

JennysMind · April 2008

Since Eve Online hasn't been mentioned the death penalty in that game works. It works because what is lost can be repurchased with a little work. 99+ percent of the weapons or armor can be purchased on the open market. Everything can be replaced with a little mining, mission running, etc... I've never seen a death penalty like Eve Online where if it wasn't there the game would fall apart. The entire economy and why production is a viable path all depends on pvpers needing to replace their equipment. Mining ores are needed to make equipment. Specializing in mining can be very lucrative. But it would never happen without pvp.

altairzq · April 2008

Exp loss + corpse run... naked.

Good old school.

apertotes · April 2008

Originally posted by xplororor

1. The fact you think it comes to two ways/options, shows you are not experienced enough in mmorpgs. You need to first play more mmorpgs, and different types of mmorpgs, to round out your mmorpg experience.

everything you posted can be summed up on the two options i gave. either consecuences are bad and players are afraid to die, or dying has almost no consecuences. how many degrees of gray you may add in between is a matter of taste or preferences. but in the end it all comes down to: is dying a bad thing or another enjoyable part of the game?

ps: thanks for the useless advice . that is a great attitude. "god, is he a n00b!!!"

Lodeclaw · April 2008

Death should be something people don't take lightly. I'd like to see a way for players to have various trump cards to help them escape deadly situations, but in doing so sacrifice their potential gains. What I mean is, fleeing should be a viable option and should be possible to do without enemies chasing you down and smacking you in the back as you run. Give a warrior the ability to push back their enemies and knock them over so that they and their friends have a chance to run and escape. This ability would of course have penalties, so you couldn't use it in regular combat and expect to be able to continue fighting. If you do flee, then your ability for a strong come-back should be hindered. For example, allow the enemies to summon help since they've been alerted to your presence and have had time to organize since your party fled.

wolfmann · April 2008

I'd rather play a game that encourages me to not die, than a game where death is so trivial many people use it for easy travel...

See thats the problem with the MMO's after all these general whines changing them, nothing in the game means anything any longer. Nothing matters anymore in todays games...

And you wonder why the number of unhappy players grow every day, or why the number of veteran mmorpg'ers who leave mmorpg's behind also is on the increase.

Lydon · April 2008

It depends on the game really. In a game such as Guild Wars, where characters have low health and spikes are possible, then a high death penalty would be stupid. The majority of games I have played seem to deal with the subject of death pretty well. After all, I don't want to have to sit for hours on end replacing what I once had all because of a mistake. Sometimes I like to just enjoy the game, which dying doesn't really contribute towards.

Unknown · April 2008

Originally posted by apertotes

Originally posted by xplororor

1. The fact you think it comes to two ways/options, shows you are not experienced enough in mmorpgs. You need to first play more mmorpgs, and different types of mmorpgs, to round out your mmorpg experience.

everything you posted can be summed up on the two options i gave. either consecuences are bad and players are afraid to die, or dying has almost no consecuences. how many degrees of gray you may add in between is a matter of taste or preferences. but in the end it all comes down to: is dying a bad thing or another enjoyable part of the game?

ps: thanks for the useless advice . that is a great attitude. "god, is he a n00b!!!"

You missed my point.

Death can be good, with players afraid to die.

Death can be good, with players not afraid to die, but part of the fun.

For example, playing a game with perma-death brings up a player's skill to an incredible new level, and when a player makes it through whatever battle, mission, situation, there is no higher thrill. The player does not hate the perma-death. It simply adds tons more fun to the game.

Death can sting, and be fun at the same time. I can still remember the bonds made in AC when other players helped me get my corpse. I still remember when my guild came to rescue me in AO, when I got stuck in one of the deepest levels of a dungeon, with no chance to get out - unless I died. They succeeded in the rescue, and we all then re-battled our way back outside.

Dying done right makes the game very enjoyable, and rewarding. In a permadeath game, when you see a level 99 character walk by, you know, you KNOW, that guy is one skilled player. (Diablo 2 Hardcore). Or when you meet a vet player in Strive for Power, you know, you KNOW, he is a true vet - he instantly gets respect.

In a game like WoW, when one sees a high level player, there is no where near the same level if respect, or awe.

It's like seeing 2 guys/girls complete an arcade game. One does it with just 1 quarter. The other does it with 80 quarters.

There is just one option - Death done right.

p.p.s. you silly, willy, nooob!!!

(jk of course!!! I appologize if it seemed I was coming off that way. You, me, and everyoen else here are all gamers. That's what counts!

resonate6 · April 2008

Originally posted by apertotes

hi, there is this trend lately on MMORPGs (and many other games, btw) that makes dying a very easy situation, and thus, the penalty for death is very light or non-existant.
i think we can all agree that dying very often and having a huge penalty dont go together very well, so it comes down to two options. which one do you prefer?

ps: maybe it is not clear enough, first option is that dying should not happen often at all, that it should happen only very few times, like once or twice a year.

People play games for fun , not to try and worry about not dying all the time

apertotes · April 2008

Originally posted by xplororor

Death can be good, with players afraid to die.

Death can be good, with players not afraid to die, but part of the fun.

There is just one option - Death done right.

ok, now i understand you. but my question still aplies: what kind of death done right do you prefer? one that will happen seldomly but will have heavy consecuences, or one that happens all the time but without hardly any consecuence?

Unknown · April 2008

Originally posted by apertotes

Originally posted by xplororor

Death can be good, with players afraid to die.

Death can be good, with players not afraid to die, but part of the fun.

There is just one option - Death done right.

ok, now i understand you. but my question still aplies: what kind of death done right do you prefer? one that will happen seldomly but will have heavy consecuences, or one that happens all the time but without hardly any consecuence?

BOTH types of death you listed just now work. And at the same time do not work. Here's why:

1. There cannot be 1 game that pleases everyone. Which means there can never be a type of death that pleases everyone. This is why I say both types of death you list do not work, because neither type will please the majority.

It does not matter what type of death a mmorpg has, as long as that mmorpg gets a minimum of 50k accounts. IF it can get 100k accounts, then it is a bona-fid hit mmorpg. This is why I say both types of death you list do work. Both types have been in hit mmorpgs, which shows there is a market for both. No need to go with just one type..... So ALL types of death, are death done right - as long as the mmorpg has 50k accounts. Has 100k accounts. Now I, or some posters in this thread, on this site, might not play it, but it will have it's own fanbase that will play it, that will make it a hit. If someone dislikes the style of death in a certain mmorpg, they should shop around, and choose another (it's whiy I play Strive for Power, and Diablo 2 Hardcore).

It's just like music. No one group will ever please every consumer. A music artist has to simply make whatever music they want, and it will not matter as long as they sell 200k to 500k records. If they sell 1 million records then they are a bona-find hit.

2. If mmorpg "A" has perma-death, and it has enough accounts to make a profit, all is well. If mmorpg "B" has no death at all, and it has enough accounts to make a profit, all is well. "A" and "B" have carved out their own unique fanbase. There is room in the market for every type of mmorpg, with every type of death.

It is the moneymen, the suits and ties, the bean-counters, who are to blame for chasing after the idea that 1 single mmorpg can be made that ALL players will like. It will never happen. The same way no 1 single music group will cater to ALL listeners.

What is presently aggravating many players, is the lack of choice mmorpgs. Every mmorpg is now being forced to try to be like WoW (no real death) or EQ clone (harsh death... though EQ is drifting towards WoW territory.). What's really needed is more mmorpgs, with many, many, different types of death. Or at least, new servers in existing mmorpgs with different types of death. I'm still shocked to this day WoW does not open some perma-death servers! Their company has proven perma-death works, that there is a market for perma-death.

Howdy, Stranger!

Dying

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Dying

Comments