It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Homitu So wait, what do video games have to do with X-games style bike riding? There are people who want to play video games. Of these people, some want an extreme challenge, some want a relaxing leisure activity. There are people who want to ride mountain bikes. Of these people, some want an extreme challeng, some want a relaxing joyride through a scenic environment. I don't comprehend the premise here. Video games should exclusively be easy, and anyone who wants a challenge should not play video games but go do something else that they may not even be interested in instead? Could that make any less sense?
It must make sense to all large studios since that is where all games have come nowadays.
Just 10 years ago there were still plenty of hard games around, now all, both MMOs and single player games have become easy.
But as I said, death penaly is not the same thing as difficulty.
OP answered his own question, just as real life has physical consequences which encourage improvement and a striving for excellence (in order to avoid pain and win personal glory), so to with game worlds, we want challenge and reward, and are willing to suffer penalties for failure.
And as far as inflicting penalties on ourselves, that's as much nonsense as the OP deciding to crash his bike on purpose in order to make sure he does better the next time. No one purposely inflicts harm upon themselves, in game or otherwise.
Also on this same note, the rules of the game must be the same for everyone, if I'm paying a penalty for the consequences of my actions, so should everyone pay a similar penalty for theirs. It's just how games are designed, with the rules more or less the same for all players.
Now the issue is, everyone has a different idea of what an appropriate amount of penalty should be.
"Winning" at EVE Online since May, 2007!
In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Almost four hours later, I'm still scratching my chin each time I read the OP's post. I'm not sure how they made the connection they did there. The closest I can come, is that they are playing games to get away from risks - penalties - and difficulties - because there are enough of those in life.
I can get that. That's why I play games like Bejeweled while waiting on something to download/upload/update/etc. Just a simple little game to play to pass the time which can be fun.
I don't want my MMORPG to have the substance of Bejeweled though. I want more. I'm playing a MMORPG because I want to play in a virtual world. Yep, it may be a form of escapism - wanting to get away from this world - but that does not mean that I want to play Bejeweled.
Which is kind of funny, because when you get right down to it - most of those silly little games...lol, they actually have what is missing from MMORPGs.
Yep, they have that increasing difficulty and they have the death penalty. Lol, so I guess I want my MMORPGs to be more like some of those silly little games...lol.
Okay though, as an aside - I want to address death penalty (seems like this has been discussed to death over the years though).
Death Penalty is not Black & White. It is not a case of either wanting it to be completely meaningless or it being a case that your toon is deleted. There is a Hell of a lot of space between those two. Many folks simply want it to mean something - so that it is not like you are playing one of those silly games with a hack that gives you unlimited lives.
Some form of death penalty, although no guarantee, might stop people from doing some of the stupid things they do in games if they stopped to think about it first...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I do like difficulity in my gaming but up to a point. Just as I can't stand facerolling easy mobs I also can't stand games where you have to sit and rest for 3 min's after you killed a trash mob ~wash~repeat = lame
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I like challenge as much as the next guy, maybe more, but harsh death penalty does not increase difficulty or challenge.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Not all in a game should be hard. The delicate balance is a relative ease learning game-play while leaving room to "grow", learning nuances, like chess for example.
That said, I like to succeed in things not particularly attainable by every 13-year-old. Otherwise I get bored very quickly. If "doing well" in a game is a simple task of "going through motions", you can keep your bragging rights.
Originally posted by Quirhid I like challenge as much as the next guy, maybe more, but harsh death penalty does not increase difficulty or challenge.
You miss the point... it's not to do either.
DP isn't there to make the game more difficult, or increase the challenge. It is there to add a conequence to failure, to increase the risk, to play for higher stakes.
Sure, it provides lows, but lows are essential to emphasis highs... otherwise you have a even line of meh virtual knitting as you go through the motions safe in the knowledge it simply dosen't matter if you screw up or fail to improve.
Can I ask? Have you actually played a game with a real DP? I don't say this to knock you, just to understand your basis of opinion.
Originally posted by Vlad_Tepes You do understand that not everyone has the physical tools required to do the things you mention correct? And oddly enough, in your attempt at sarcasm, you yourself come off as somewhat elitist. And how in the end does it effect you either way? To each his own. Harcore, Carebear, whatever makes the gamer happy in the end is all that matters. Do I want my toon wiped each time I die? No. Do I want to be bored to tears playing an MMO any 6 year old can play to end game in 2 months? No. And trust me, I understand risk/reward. I get the rush thing. I do. But how one goes about getting it matters not to me. I spent 20 years in Army Special Ops, and have paid for it. My body is wrecked, my soul is darker, and my mind is tired. I have seen far to much, done far to much. Now I sit at my PC, with bits of metal in my spine that can't be removed, just trying to have some fun. So, your go ride or do something real instead of getting your rush in a game idea holds no water for me, and plenty of people like me. Not everyone is an athlete. Not everyone can do the things you do, or I have done. For many different reasons. That doesn't mean some people don't want to push themselves, in whatever way they can. Challenge is, challenge. Regardless of where we find it. And not all of us want our hands held in a game to the point where there is none. Sorry for the rant, but the if you want real challenge hit yourself or do something in the real world doesn't and can't apply to everyone. Such as myself. The body is ruined. I do my best to simply live through the discomfort, and find fun and challenge where I still can.
Before I start my Tirade, All I goto say straight off the bat... if its true, Thank you for the Service to this country and help Keeping it safe. That is what a True man, an Elitist does. Not playing on a bike or an mmo.
I play Eve-Online for exactly the same reason. Risk, I go red/black name (back in the day before the game took a shit) In Conquer online, why to piss people off and challenge them to come at me, If I failed they had a chance to get my gear, if I won.. Well Sorry I just stole your XP :P. NONE of my friends who I have brought to eve mostly trying to get them off the WoW Train have stayed with eve. They wandered into low sec and one even wandered into 0.0 lol. ALL died and lost there shit. They were heated at the game and quit it right on that spot. Calling the Game B.S. It's no fair that a game has that much risk to it. "Real games, Real MMO's shouldn't make you loose your stuff. Look how awesome wow is. If I die I respawn and go back to fighting the dude that nuked me" I was like, hey I do the same thing in Eve, and if I can't do it alone.. Well either I choose to wait till I skill up better ... OR.... I grab a few Corp mates and chase him all over new eden :P Alot of players who try eve for a decent amount of time either wind up as a miner, a mission runner, or a market player. But they are also the same group that complains there is no challenge to the game, just the same old things to run. A select few who want something more, a challenge, or eves version of a rush, become Pirates, start a corp and Dec others, or go into 0.0 join a corp and get involved in territorial wars, or at least they go into low-sec and try to secure a moon and build a Pos there.
If there is no challenge to a game after a while the game starts to get stale. If you want a game where you feel you need your hand held, you want as little risk as possible, you want to make sure somebody doesn't piss in your cheerios There is Always Maple Story for you. For those of us that want a challenge, that want to feel like we accomplished something, for those of us that want to go Damn, I'm glad I stocked up on extra pots and even gladder that I didn't have anyone run up on the Boss that appears every 30 mins, and thank God that asshole did not make me have to PK his ass and go hide and hope to hell no one Ganks me and takes my shit. We challenge makers to add a difficulty factor to the game, wether it be Death penalties, Gear risk, or grinding for resurection scrolls. Each to his own, But were not Elitists, Well some of us are when in the right element. But were Gamers, not casual Ones, But true ones, There is no point of playing a game unless there is risk involved. Remember back in the Days when Consoles gave you 3 lives or you were Screwed (not counting Contra and its Konami code :P ) even Tetris has risks if you don't strategize that game, even the slightest mistake is making you start all the way from the beginning.
Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Quirhid I like challenge as much as the next guy, maybe more, but harsh death penalty does not increase difficulty or challenge.
You are basicly correct. Death penalties are for people who do not have the willpower to challenge themselves and need an outside force to make the decision for them. They need the gambling aspect to compensate for the fact that they do not get a rush from challenging themselves. In turn they will never understand the gamer who attempts a difficult task simply to see if he/she can beat it. They need fear to motivate them since they lack the ability to be motivated by the challenge alon.
Originally posted by Torik You are basicly correct. Death penalties are for people who do not have the willpower to challenge themselves and need an outside force to make the decision for them. They need the gambling aspect to compensate for the fact that they do not get a rush from challenging themselves. In turn they will never understand the gamer who attempts a difficult task simply to see if he/she can beat it. They need fear to motivate them since they lack the ability to be motivated by the challenge alon.
That's basically it, then they need to impose their playstyle on others in order to validate their position. If everyone isn't forced to do it, they can't feel good about doing it themselves.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots moreRelatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots moreNow Playing: NoneHope: None
The only thing I would take issue with on death penalties is the idea that you just add a harsher death penalty to any game and it would improve the game. If you add an XP penalty to WoW, the game will improve. If you add player looting in WoW, the game will improve. Taken to an extreme, a harsh death penalty in Hello Kitty Adventure Island would somehow make the game 'better'. I'm all for applying game mechanics to games that make sense, and in some games, a harsh death penalty makes sense and even makes the game 'better'. It's just not a universally applicable game mechanic.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Vlad Tepes you a fan of Bones and Cat too ?
Eeek ! On topic games that are not hard make me get bored very easily. Need a challenge to get them red blood cells moving.
Originally posted by kitaradVlad Tepes you a fan of Bones and Cat too ? Eeek ! On topic games that are not hard make me get bored very easily. Need a challenge to get them red blood cells moving.
Yes but the penalty that is undesirable makes the chance of dying worse. It is psychological thing like sound that the dentist drill makes that makes your teeth ache even before it is your turn.
Originally posted by Trueforral1 People want harsher penalties or higher difficulties, because without the threat of failure there is no achievement in success. If success comes too easily and you have nothing to fear if you fail, every success will feel shallow. Certainly, it's "a game" and one can argue that your achievements aren't *real* anyway, and there's no denying that, but within the virtual space you've still managed to achieve that which your peers cannot, and that ensures a feeling of elation.
The threat of failure is important. (That's difficulty.)
What happens *after* you fail isn't. (That's death penalty.)
Most games and gamers understand this, and you only see complaints when companies take it too far -- like in Bioshock 1 where monster HP didn't reset upon death, so you could just graveyard-zerg anything to eventually beat it (the game would've been much better served with standard checkpoint-save and save/load systems.)
But yes, people obsess over difficulty because it makes the game. Unless things are difficult, skill isn't being challenged, and that's a huge part of why core gamers play games.
Why people obseess over harsh death penalty is a bit less clear, because it doesn't make the game harder, it only makes it less convenient (and usually fills the game with dull non-gameplay.) My assumption is they're gamblers and masochists. Niche personalities, but they're pretty loud about their demands for excessive death penalty.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
We all find different things fun. I run 20+ miles a week because I get a rush from it. The thing is with a game built to keep 500K or more people happy you're going to have to realize developers are looking for a sweet spot when it comes to difficulty and penalties. Too low and you turn too many people away, too high and too many people leave. I've learned a long time ago that if I want things my way I need to do something for myself and not depend on fitting into that ideal curve a game developer is looking for when making a game.
Well, first of all, penalty in real life and penalty in a game are two different things.
Secondly, not everyone is into thrill seeking and desires penalty in their real life endeavors.
I know that I'd love to go hang gliding and will eventually jump out of a plane. But in no way (NO WAY!) do I want to fail or have a penalty for failing. I want the experience of doing it.
Penalty and death in a game make it a bit more exciting for me. Nothing more.
Originally posted by Axehilt Why people obseess over harsh death penalty is a bit less clear, because it doesn't make the game harder, it only makes it less convenient (and usually fills the game with dull non-gameplay.)
There are people here with some pretty strange notions. Of course the death penalty is related to the difficulty of a game. It's the defining aspect of the difficulty of the game. The death penalty is what happens when you fail a game. Without it, there is no failure and the game immediately becomes trivial. Invulnerability is the most god-like cheat code, because no matter how weak your attack or problem-solving abilities, the inability to fail can generally provide eventual, if ugly and uneducated, success.
Having said all that, death penalties in MMOs should not be about difficulty or defining failure. MMOs are meant to be simulations, and so the death penalties are simply there to simulate what would happen. It's really that simple. The AD&D rule of losing CON due to a death was meant to simulate the loss of health that occurred due to being raised from the dead. It wasn't there because it made a good MMO game mechanic or increased the difficulty of playing the game (though that penalty clearly did make the game more difficult). It's pure simulation.
Future MMO developers would do well to realize that little piece of information.
Here is an idea for all those that want a harsh death penalty if a game doesnt have one.
when u die since u think equipment loss is just fine as a death penalty find the nearest person u can and give them all your gear and money and start over.
there u got yoru death penalty without forcing others who dont want a harsh penalty to deter from there fun in a game.
because in the end games should be fun first everythign else second.
I feel the opposite than this, with a harsh penalty for failing no one is going to try for success in the first place for fear of failing, for me a soft penatly is better as it lets me take those risks I would otherwise not take if I knew failure would result in massive loss.
Pretty much. If you want to see a game where there's insignificant penalties for being dumb, a good example is zerg rush PvP in an MMORPG. People rushing headlong into a fight with no regard as to the situation for the respective sides as well as their positions.
It's fine for an FPS like MW3 or BF3, but an MMORPG with PvP? No.
Personally, I want some middle ground. I don't want carebear / carefree gameplay, but at the same time, I completely dislike games with the opposite end of the spectrum; full loot.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Yes, but in practice, the games with harsh death penalty are but virtual knitting with harsh death penalty. It doesn't give me any rush. How 'bout you?
Oh boy... games I've played that have harsh death penalty... Any dungeon crawler (and there have been plenty), Dark Souls, Eve Online... if you count all the games that deduct a portion of your XP when you die then there is a lot of those.
Death penalty is usually just an annoyance unless it has some further meaning other than being punishment. For example death is very much woven into the gameplay of Dark Souls, and it is ordinary. In competitive PvP, there's usually a delay before you can respawn so that there is something to gain by killing your enemies. Then you can achieve your primary goal easier (capturing a control point for example).
But like I said, too often it is just punishment. And that is just plain annoying - certainly not exciting. Those who have tendency towards gambling may find it exciting. Not me.
Originally posted by expresso Originally posted by Trueforral1 People want harsher penalties or higher difficulties, because without the threat of failure there is no achievement in success. If success comes too easily and you have nothing to fear if you fail, every success will feel shallow. Certainly, it's "a game" and one can argue that your achievements aren't *real* anyway, and there's no denying that, but within the virtual space you've still managed to achieve that which your peers cannot, and that ensures a feeling of elation.
When you know of a player that has done the dangerous, risky things and was successful, they receive the proper accolades they deserve from other players. Because everyone knows doing whatever risky activity is not what many would try.
Who Dares, Wins
Originally posted by Warmaker Originally posted by expresso Originally posted by Trueforral1 People want harsher penalties or higher difficulties, because without the threat of failure there is no achievement in success. If success comes too easily and you have nothing to fear if you fail, every success will feel shallow. Certainly, it's "a game" and one can argue that your achievements aren't *real* anyway, and there's no denying that, but within the virtual space you've still managed to achieve that which your peers cannot, and that ensures a feeling of elation.
but he isn't incorrect.
I've been in pug's where I wanted to "try again" and they didn't because of the failure.
I'm all for continually trying if I feel that playing better will give results. lol, my roommate, while watching me play skyrim, will often say "maybe you should come back when you are stronger/better prepared" but I will continue and will eventually succeed.
But there are people who would just quit until they are assured success. just different strokes I imagine.
For me its simple. I like the element of 'danger' If something is too easy, I don't get that sense of accomplishment. Its like those people who use the cheat codes so that they can get through everything. Just doesn't seem fun for me. Also, death penalty is the same for me. Its adds the sense of danger. Like with all penalties, you try to avoid it. The greater the penalty (within reason) the greater the avoidance, and hense the sense of danger.
I know many don't share this belief, but it is mine.
Concentrate on enjoying yourself, and not on why I shouldn't enjoy myself.