If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the
FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to
register or
login before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
| 31 JUL 2003 at 6:05pm |
EvaGuild Master
Posts : 3247
Joined: 5 NOV 2002
Status : Offline | As long as there is the auto-save before you get killed and skipable cut-scenes and no dead-end situations , I don't mind dying!
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 6:16pm |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Tough one, I think the main question would by "Why?".
It is of course nice to see different "ie"-animations (like the old Space Quest ones for instance). But what's the purpose if you just go back to the second before you did something stupid? It won't put the player on edge, simply because nothing can go wrong.
The old adventure games put you on edge because you could die and you'd have to do a whole lot of things again (unless you had a savegame) or you could forget something and not go back there at all. Not that I enjoyed that last bit a lot, but back then it was just part of the way games were.
So the only thing you'd accomplish is showing off some nice animations. And if they're more than just showing your characters unfortunate death, you could do some nice things with that.
It wouldn't put players on edge, I don't think you can without going back to the old ways. But it would encourage players to do stupid stuff, just to see the result of it
Just don't forget to implement the "skip cutscene" or "advance dialogue in cutscene" functions. I really hate it when those aren't implemented.
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 6:48pm |
dimidimidimiSchattenjger
Posts : 1784
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Baron_Von_Ungern (31 JUL 2003 5:49pm)
I'm currently working on the Next Big Hit (hope so... )
I have trust in you Baron and I am certain that your game will be the Next Big Hit.
So... what do you think about it ?
I think that a couple of situations where the player can die in the game if the right decision is not taken is suitable for adventures to raise the adrenaline a bit. Imo the Gabriel Knight games are a good example of that.
But if overdone then it could ruin the whole gaming experinece, by not leaving the player comfortable on their chairs and sometimes reaching the limit of an action/adventure.
So to sum up, if it is well integrated in the story and if it is not overdone it can be a positive addition in the long run.
PDF adventure magazine - The Inventory&&http://www.justadventure.com/TheInventory/TheInventory.shtm&&&&What would you give to know the truth?&&http://www.brokensaints.com
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 6:49pm |
mszvPrivate Detective
Posts : 751
Joined: 12 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Baron - nice to see you posting!
Initially, I would say that my preference is to not do it. I never want to die in a game. I prefer a happy ending, or an ending where I'm still alive, and not in big trouble. The story ends with me (or my character) still around, perhaps a bit "worse for wear" but I'm ready to begin another day. I've invested in my character, for the entire game, and I'd like us both to get out in one piece.
But then, I thought about Post Mortem, and how much I enjoyed all the endings, and the cut scenes. After I got one ending, I went back and played a few parts over, so I could get all the endings, and see all the cut scenes. There was a "good" ending, so I was happy about that.
So, I think the answer is, do what you think is best, for your game!
Regards, mszv
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 7:03pm |
Baron_Von_UngernIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 41
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Thanks for your analyse SCiV... but in the end, what would you prefer ?? G.O. or not ?
I have trust in you Baron and I am certain that your game will be the Next Big Hit.
Thanks Dimi. 3 in a row would be great !
So, I think the answer is, do what you think is best, for your game!
I sure will, mszv. Only curious to know the opinions of JA Forum members.
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 7:07pm |
KsandraSchattenjger
Posts : 2459
Joined: 2 APR 2003
Status : Online | Why not do it like the Myst games and make it so that you can only die/lose right near the end of the game? It would be fun to have some alternative 'bad' endings as well as the main one. You should also make it possible for the player to avoid death through sensible decisions, rather than having them randomly stumble off a cliff or something.
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 7:21pm |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Baron_Von_Ungern (31 JUL 2003 7:03pm)
Thanks for your analyse SCiV... but in the end, what would you prefer ?? G.O. or not ?
Depends on the game, if it's a comedy then do the whacky cutscenes and restart the game close to where the game ended.
If it has a serious tone, then let the player "die" and let the player hope he/she had a savegame nearby. Restarting nearby in a serious game holds no tension after the first time. You might want to put something early on in the game that will end the game I think (and in a way most players will do it), so the player knows the game can actually go "game over".
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 7:25pm |
MichalNGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7058
Joined: 14 SEP 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By SCiV (31 JUL 2003 7:20pm)
You might want to put something early on in the game that will end the game I think (and in a way most players will do it), so the player knows the game can actually go "game over".
That's a good point. I hate games where you can't die in the first 75% of the game and then suddenly boom, you're dead, and you haven't saved in a long while because you didn't think you needed to.
I forgot my sig.
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 7:46pm |
mszvPrivate Detective
Posts : 751
Joined: 12 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Ok - since you asked and I waffled on my answer before, my preference is for you to not do it.
Regards, mszv
|
| 31 JUL 2003 at 9:05pm |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By MichalN (31 JUL 2003 7:25pm)
That's a good point. I hate games where you can't die in the first 75% of the game and then suddenly boom, you're dead, and you haven't saved in a long while because you didn't think you needed to.
Yeah, happened to me several times. Plus, as a player you do have suspense since you now know that a premature end to the game is possible.
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:19am |
nytimesguyPrivate Detective
Posts : 684
Joined: 14 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Depends on the game, if it's a comedy then do the whacky cutscenes and restart the game close to where the game ended.
If it has a serious tone, then let the player "die" and let the player hope he/she had a savegame nearby. Restarting nearby in a serious game holds no tension after the first time. You might want to put something early on in the game that will end the game I think (and in a way most players will do it), so the player knows the game can actually go "game over".
I completely disagree. This just penalizes players depending on what kind of game they're playing. If you die, you've made the dramatic point that the player has done something foolish, but why make them suffer?
If a game has a good auto-save feature then I think dying is acceptable and often preferable. There are times in no-death games where someone does something that should kill them and doesn't. That works in comedies, where it is acceptable for nothing to kill you, as in Warner Brother cartoons, but in other games it can just seem odd.
Charles - Game Theorist
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:23am |
HelenGuild Master
Posts : 3436
Joined: 12 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Eva (31 JUL 2003 6:05pm)
As long as there is the auto-save before you get killed and skipable cut-scenes and no dead-end situations , I don't mind dying!
Im with Eva.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 2:51am |
| Deleted User | I also agree with Eva. I favour the games like in Nancy Drew games. It autosaves and ten there's a 'second chance' for us to play right before we died . But I would prefer a non-dying character in games.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 6:56am |
Steve IncePrivate Detective
Posts : 571
Joined: 7 NOV 2002
Status : Offline | What you've got to ask yourself is, does it arise naturally from the story or the gameplay at that point? If the hero has to get past a set of gun-toting thugs then not getting killed if you do the wrong thing would reduce the tension and would come across as artificial. However, if you let the player walk off a cliff by accident then that's a pointless death that no one wants to see in a game.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:29pm |
AyaGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7277
Joined: 16 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | dying in an adv game? well... if you can implement a manhunter type of restoring ("let's go back just before you made your fatal mistake" - of course this doesn't mean you should make dying as often as in mh! ) then i wouldn't say no (especially if the dying cut-scenes are really funny or really gory!)... no dying without such a feature though... oh, and like eva said, skipable cut-scenes and no dead-ends!
You have gotten the attention of the mysterious lady. She turns to face you. Her face is devoid of any flesh. You are frozen with horror as she begins ripping your body into a bloody mess.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:50pm |
alkis21Schattenjger
Posts : 2112
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: GR
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Eva (31 JUL 2003 6:05pm)
As long as there is the auto-save before you get killed and skipable cut-scenes and no dead-end situations , I don't mind dying!
I second that.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:50pm |
MissBSchattenjger
Posts : 2217
Joined: 15 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Some adventure game "death scenes" are kinda funny and add to the story. As long as you so kindly put an auto-save game just before, I think it'd be great!
My name is Bethany and I'm the daughter of Gamergal/Michelle.
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 12:53pm |
Agustín CordesGuild Master
Posts : 5696
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: AR, Buenos Aires
Status : Offline | Dying is OK as long as you somehow prevent the player. If the player senses the danger, he will most likely save the game. Automatic restore is OK but not strictly necessary IMO. What Steve said is also very important. I encourage you to do so - killing your character in nasty ways has always been fun and there hasn't been adventures where you could die recently.
And yes - skipable cutscenes, no dead-ends, and fast-walking characters
|
| 1 AUG 2003 at 2:41pm |
ShanyGuild Master
Posts : 3313
Joined: 19 JUN 2003
Status : Online | I've never liked it when your character could die in an adventure game. If you died too often, even if it did show some nice animation it was frustrating. Even if there was reason for dying, it was still very annoying. For example in king's quest 7, you died so many times, and though you came back to the point near where you died, and though there was almost always a good reason for the death (staying in the desert for too long, etc.) it's still very frustrating.
So, if you want there to be death/ game over, then at least don't do it for every part of the game. Even if in the game world the character might die, it should be clear for the person playing the game.
|
