I was just curious as to which people prefer:
- A point-and-click where the main character is unable to die. The focus is on experiencing the story and solving puzzles.
- A point-and-click where the main character could die at any moment for taking too long or doing something incorrect.
I can see pros and cons for both, I like the feeling of danger you get knowing that your character's life is in your hands, however I find games that you cannot die a lot less frustrating to play.
I'd probably side with not being able to die, all things considered. A more relaxing experience and you don't have to worry about when you last saved all the time :)
Just wondered what other people thought about this?
Cheers,
Lemmy
Personally, I enjoy a balance of the two extremes, a game where you don't die from walking off a cliff, but where you can die when entering a potentially life-threatening situation. You wouldn't just walk into a room full of heavily armed guards who wanted to kill you in real life, why would you do it in an adventure game and then not expect lethal consequences?
If you have a cartoony game where the main conflict is relatively harmless, then not being able to die is fine, but if the game is supposed to be dark and mysterious, with danger at every turn, not being able to die kind of takes some suspense out of it.
A good example of this, I think, is Gabriel Knight 1. In that game, it wasn't possible to die until the 5th day or so, and when you walked into trouble, you had a little bit of time to save your game before you died. Later in the game you could die in the dangerous situations, but this was a great contrast to games like Leisure Suit Larry where you die as a form of comedy. Annoying comedy, but comedy nonetheless.
I am pretty sure this topic was raised before... (I am too lazy to find thread)
In that thread I think the majority was dont die....
IMO you should be able to die. Then again it all depends on your style of game.
I agree with Lemmy and Grundislav on this topic. I think that there are good points and bad points for both.
If I wanted a more action-based point-and-click (like Broken Sword or something similar), I would definitely want to have the ability to die. But if it was a more relaxed game focusing on puzzles and such like (Monkey Island for example), then I would prefer not to die.
So, er... that's my opinion. ;D
That's German for 'the, character, the.'
I think deaths should occur rarely if at all in a game. For instance, in real life I don't have to think about not walking off cliff-edges, so I don't think it should be something I have to think about in an adventure game context.
Sierra games often err towards this kind of enragingly stupid death, but Grundislav is right that Gabriel Knight is a good example of well executed death (no pun intended).
It's particularly good because in GK its very obvious when you might be in danger.
I did enjoy Douglas Adam's IF Bureaucracy though, where too many mis-typed commands resulted in your blood pressure killing you.
Being a Space Quest fan, I love a good death. However, walking-deads are another matter. Those are a big no-no.
I'm all for it. This worked well for alot of games, like Broken Sword or Indiana Jones. It didn't, however, work too well with Leisure Suit Larry, where you could die from just flushing the toilet.
If you know your character's life is in danger, you'll probably
think before doing your next move, instead of using the "use-everything-with-everything" strategy. Hold on, I'll just quote myself from a few days back:
Quote from: HillBilly on Sat 18/02/2006 22:00:59
Your role as an adventurer(atleast in this game), is to GUIDE the main character. If you're a bad guide, your character will die. I'm using this to prevent people from running the "use-everything-with-everything-and-everyone-no-matter-if-it-makes-sense-or-not" strategy too much. The cliff was just an example. If you've ever played Broken Sword 1 & 2, that's the direction I'm going for. It's not smart to just walk in to a room with alot of potential dangerous and armed people, for example. But I'm still giving you the option, even if it'll kill you.
It creates suspension, and can be a great addition to a game in some cases. But with some games it just don't work. It's all about what you're aiming for, really.
i don't really mind dying that much in more "serious" adventure games, but in a game where you can store 20 large items on a character death seems out of place somehow.
other people dying in games however is totally acceptable :D
I agree that dying in a reasonable situation where your character might die is the best way to go about it, but sometimes you just want to see a character die after the millionth "I can't do that" when you try something that makes sense and should work. You should've seen all the deaths I forced upon Laura Bow in my day!
I agree with the bulk of what Grundislav said. If you are going to include death, make it relevant for heaven's sake. Don't just have the player die every minute and say 'LOLZ you love dis game don't j00'.
QuoteAnnoying comedy, but comedy nonetheless.
Oh, so THAT'S what it was? I just thought it was just a lame and often-infuriating attempt at giving artificial length to a game, like most Sierra efforts.
I sense fanboys approaching.
This is one thing why i did't play much of sierra adventure games, as they make some parts sooo frustrating, like strange deaths, ar even stranger puzzles !? You don't know if those games try to be funny or serious.
Ok to the topic. I think that if you use more serious subject it should include death possibility, but the player should know that he is approaching to that moment so he can do something about it, as i tried to make in my latest game ...
So the deaths a "yes" go. :)
My favorite example of LSL's approach to "death as comedy" was in Leisure Suit Larry 2
Spoiler
At the airport, when you eat the Blue Pate Special and you choke on a bobby pin inside. Then when you restore your game and this time look inside the food instead of eating it, it says something along the lines of "Feeling as though you may have choked on this food in a previous life, you decide to look inside it just in case."
I of course mean "favorite" with a heavy dose of sarcasm.
Yes.. this topic IS familiar.
Oh well.
I like having no deaths in adventure games. I like to put my feet up, get out the pringles and coke, and have a nice relaxing game. I want to be able to experiment with everything in the game without a fear of dying.
If I want to die I'll play ninja gaiden.
though I hate all the deaths in some sierra games, I can think of one game that maybe should have had a death or two. I m talking about grim fendango. There were a few "life threatning" situations, that wern't. If you ask this monkey, it took away from the suspence some what. btw how do you post spoilers?
I lean towards the prospects of not dying, although in some games i guess it's not too bad. I think it's mostly because i played all the Lucas adventures 1st and so i'm slightly biased.
What i don't like are games where you can reach a point whereby if you haven't done certain things at a certain time or collected certain items etc, you become stuck and have to start the game again. I think Darkseed was the one that sticks out for this mostly for me.
I agree, that is a royel pain in a whole bunch o' places.if I have ever wanted to kill a developer, its then.
If you ask me, I don't like the characters dying in adventure games because it's so frustrating if you do some mistakes or can't come up with anything before it's too late and having to restart etc. I rather prefer games where character doesn't die when doing something wrong. That's why I love the Lucas Arts games since MI1 and that's why you can't die in my games.
By the way, I don't recall that you could die in Grim Fandango. Sure there were some situations were you think you could die any second but after awhile you get out of the trouble and gets in saftey. The beginning of the Third Year, when threatened by the assisans disguised as custom officals, is good example of getting pressure but you won't actually die.
Der Character, der!
Well, I, too, like a good balance.
It's okay to die, if you do something quite stupid. Like jumping out of a plane without a parachute.
But it's not okay to die at every f***ing occasion, the programmers can just come up with!!!!
Like drinking a can of coke!
How many people ever died by drinking a coke?!?
I'm going to kill you game designers!
Do you like this?? Do you like dying?!?
No? Well, I figured!!!
depends what brand of cola it is...
Well, yeah, I'm just drinking a Pepsi and... AAAAAAAARRRGGGHHHHH! IT'S ETCHING THROUGH MY TUMMY!!!
Quote from: Mats Berglinn on Fri 24/02/2006 19:14:53
By the way, I don't recall that you could die in Grim Fandango. Sure there were some situations were you think you could die any second but after awhile you get out of the trouble and gets in saftey.
I didn't say you could die, (did I imply that? lousey boney fingers!)
I meant that there is a few places were I wish you could die. Now the custom officers part is a GREAT example of pressure with out dying, it feels like you JUST made it. but when you battle dom' it ( I think) would make that part more exciting, if you could die somehow. thats just my opinion.
Add an undo option after death and you'll have elliminated the tedious replays and the "Ouch, I haven't saved in the last two hours. Stupid game." problems.
Character death is essential.
I just remember a case, when the possibilities to die were balanced very strangely:
In The Secret of Monkey Island is exactly one occasion you are able to die.
I was very confused, when I found out.
There was? When was that? Do tell!
Hehe, I was afraid, everybody would already know! ;D
Well, try to stay under water for more than ten minutes.
(Y'know, after Shinetop pushed you in.)
Oh! 'Cos Guybrush always says he can breath underwater for ten minutes! How did the game end if you waited? (And who waited 10 minutes unintentionally?)
I recall waiting ages in MI2 to see if GuyBrush and Wally fell in the acid.
Quote from: ManicMatt on Sat 25/02/2006 18:38:29
Oh! 'Cos Guybrush always says he can breath underwater for ten minutes! How did the game end if you waited? (And who waited 10 minutes unintentionally?)
I recall waiting ages in MI2 to see if GuyBrush and Wally fell in the acid.
I believe that Guybrush and Wally does after about ten minutes. Also in the same game when you were underwater looking for the figurehead of the Mad Monkey (or what it was named again, it's been some time since I played MI2) you would also die if you stayed there longer than 10 minutes. I'm not sure if Guybrush could die in MI4 when walking at the bottom of the lake but I recall that I once waited to see if Guybrush did but lost my patience and got on with the gaming instead.
I too have seen this thread before before.....
It's what gave me the idea in my latest game (The Winter Rose) to do exactly what Trumgottist suggested: have an "undo" function so that dying didn't really cost you. I believe that dying is essential in any adventurous adventure game. After all, "conquest without risk is triumph without glory". I need the potential of death to make a dangerous situation seem real.
But that is not to say that death should be punitive. You really should feel free to try wacky stuff in an adventure game without being set back half-an-hour for dying. So the ideal compramise, in my opinion, was to have lots of dying opportunities but also a "retry" function that would put you back just before you got into the "point of no return" where you would either surely die or be a walking dead.
I guess that's enough plugging of my game.... I do wish more programmers would incorporate similar functions into their games however!
BaRoN
Quote from: Mats Berglinn on Sat 25/02/2006 19:46:50
Also in the same game when you were underwater looking for the figurehead of the Mad Monkey (or what it was named again, it's been some time since I played MI2) you would also die if you stayed there longer than 10 minutes.
No, you wouldn't die.
First, his face changes color, then he drops the figurehead and swims back to the surface.
I don't want to spoil, what happens, if you do it in MI1, but I can tell you: The game is definitively lost!
Better try it, it's better if you see it for yourself.