Return to “Polls”

How should death be handled in LT?

Permanent Death
Total votes: 10 (5%)
Limited Respawn
Total votes: 18 (10%)
Unlimited Respawn
Total votes: 18 (10%)
Save/Load
Total votes: 66 (35%)
All of the above
Total votes: 70 (37%)
Custom idea
Total votes: 7 (4%)
Total votes: 189
Post

Re: Death in LT

#31
[ranty lash-out mode on]

Some days I wonder what the hell you're on.

Save / Load either creates a savestate, a snapshot of the current universe, or restores said snapshot. Reloading and finding your assets still blown to bits is something else. Having the assets blown to bits over the course of the gameplay is expected, but restoring a former savestate restores these as well. Stop being queer for queerness sake and trying to redefine things humpty-dumpty style. I don't give a flying hoot how YOU want to call it, the underlying principle has been a near-constant in over 30 years of games and game development.

Or: A savegame is a savegame is a savegame.

In before "because of H-Tech".

[/ranty lash-out mode]

As for your precious immersion: I couldn't care less. I see uses for a respawn mechanism in an "iron man" style game, but the purists would probably kvetch that this waters down the challenge.
Hardenberg was my name
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
Post

Re: Death in LT

#33
Hardenberg wrote:[ranty lash-out mode on]

Some days I wonder what the hell you're on.

Save / Load either creates a savestate, a snapshot of the current universe, or restores said snapshot. Reloading and finding your assets still blown to bits is something else. Having the assets blown to bits over the course of the gameplay is expected, but restoring a former savestate restores these as well. Stop being queer for queerness sake and trying to redefine things humpty-dumpty style. I don't give a flying hoot how YOU want to call it, the underlying principle has been a near-constant in over 30 years of games and game development.

Or: A savegame is a savegame is a savegame.
...I know? I never claimed otherwise. I'm pointing out the issues associated with an ordinary save/reload game mechanic. I'm saying that saving a snapshot of the game prior to death/destruction of your assets, dying and then reloading that earlier snapshot is not what I would prefer as the default means that death is handled. I'm not against the implementation of a save/load mechanic, I just want the default to be an in-game way of handling death. Do you see what I mean?
Hardenberg wrote:As for your precious immersion: I couldn't care less. I see uses for a respawn mechanism in an "iron man" style game, but the purists would probably kvetch that this waters down the challenge.
Different people value different things.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#34
Cornflakes_91 wrote:*nods to every third word of hardenbergs rant*
[out]

Some wonder hell.

Save creates, of universe, said and assets to something the to the the expected, a restores well. queer sake to humpty. I a how to, principle a in years and.

Or: is is.

In "of".

[lash]

As precious couldn't. I for mechanism "iron" game, purists kvetch waters challenge.
QFT.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#35
The whole idea behind LT is having your own unique, procedurally generated world and story within that world, that you play however you want. Isn't giving the player the ability to retry a difficult fight with a save/load mechanic conducive to that goal? Let the player choose their ending. Everything that happened between your last save and the point of death is no longer part of the story, and the telling picks back up from the last save. It is kind of like how death was handle in the first prince of Persia for PS2, except that players choose the save points. For this reason I don't think it breaks immersion. I'm personally in favor of a save/load system, maybe with some autosave customization, and then maybe a HardCore mode for those players that want every combat moment to be pumped full of adrenaline.

The other system I like was recommended by someone previously, and that's having perma-death with very expensive clones available. In a game that you'll pour 100+ hours into, it would be good to have a safety net for hardcore players, elsewise at some point it would be too scary to leave your space station for fear of losing your corporate empire. Opens up a new market too. Clones!
Post

Re: Death in LT

#36
MyNameWuzTaken wrote:The whole idea behind LT is having your own unique, procedurally generated world and story within that world, that you play however you want. Isn't giving the player the ability to retry a difficult fight with a save/load mechanic conducive to that goal? Let the player choose their ending. Everything that happened between your last save and the point of death is no longer part of the story, and the telling picks back up from the last save. It is kind of like how death was handle in the first prince of Persia for PS2, except that players choose the save points. For this reason I don't think it breaks immersion. I'm personally in favor of a save/load system, maybe with some autosave customization, and then maybe a HardCore mode for those players that want every combat moment to be pumped full of adrenaline.

The other system I like was recommended by someone previously, and that's having perma-death with very expensive clones available. In a game that you'll pour 100+ hours into, it would be good to have a safety net for hardcore players, elsewise at some point it would be too scary to leave your space station for fear of losing your corporate empire. Opens up a new market too. Clones!
I have to agree with this and Hardenberg.

Re-spawning is a gamy mechanic that should stay in multiplayer games. But I can get behind a very expensive way after lost of hours of play.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#37
I agree that LT is a game that the player is going to want to spend a lot of time in on a per universe timeline. When it comes to death I think that there should be a penalty for dying as well as forward progression in the game so that the player can learn from their mistakes and see how their mistakes effect other parts of the game.

Also, if the player died several options should be available. For instance the player could be able to spectate their NPC ships and control the flow of time, or the player could respawn as a owned NPC that was previously working for the now dead player and try to take over the corporation.

Death does not have to mean Game Over!
Image
Post

Re: Death in LT

#38
Neandertal wrote:I have to agree with this and Hardenberg.

Re-spawning is a gamy mechanic that should stay in multiplayer games. But I can get behind a very expensive way after lost of hours of play.
I'd say that save/loading are gamey mechanics that allow a person to effectively cheat, while respawning is a good way of avoiding broken suspension of disbelief and hence should appeal to simulationists.

If you just save and load, you aren't punished for dying - this makes Limit Theory feel cheaper and less challenging. I've heard many people talk about how they miss the good old days when games were challenging in one thread and yet many here seem to be in favour of a system that eliminates a great source of challenge or punishment at all - if you mess up, you can just keep rewinding and trying until you succeed, rather than needing to accept some kind of punishment and carefully re-think how you're going to handle whatever problem is causing you to die.

I understand the value of a save/load mechanic, so for normal-mode I'm in favour of allowing the player to save at arbitrary points and later reload, but I want the default to be an in-game, diegetic means of handling death as well - this helps avoid the need to interact with anything "outside" of the game world as it concerns gameplay, which I think is important for simulationists.

This should satisfy both camps - people are free to reload on death if they wish, but they don't have to since there would be an in-game death mechanic as well.
BFett wrote:I agree that LT is a game that the player is going to want to spend a lot of time in on a per universe timeline. When it comes to death I think that there should be a penalty for dying as well as forward progression in the game so that the player can learn from their mistakes and see how their mistakes effect other parts of the game.
This is a really good point as well - the player is likely going to impacted by the deaths of other agents in Limit Theory. With a respawn system in-place, this allows NPCs to be impacted by your own death as well, transient as it may be - this seems fair to me and should make for more interesting gameplay.
Last edited by ThymineC on Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#39
I prefer hardcore/permadeath games. Only in hardcore mode can make me feel afraid for my character and thus making combat and other risky activities 10 times more thrilling. :twisted:

For me the most interesting way to handle death is a combination permadeath with a benefactor system(Like in Star Citezen) and combine it with Katorone suggestion.
Katorone wrote:There could be this super advanced ejection mechanism that covers your body in some kind of space resistant resin, adds a tracker on you and shoots you off into space.
You could be found and "resurrected" years later.

This still means you're allowed to make mistakes when you play on hardcore, you'll just have to live with them. It's not immediately game-over.
Respawning years later in galaxy that has gone on by itself, in galaxy you might not even recognize. Very cool :thumbup:.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#40
Hardenberg wrote:I for mechanism "iron" game
As am I.

I also for mechanism immersive, like clone or other diagetic.

I also also for anytime save because exploration punished when knowledge progress lost.

I also also also for making any of these the default by setting a configuration option.

Or as I said a while back,
Flatfingers wrote:Reload + clone + permadeath seems to cover the bases very nicely.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#42
Victor Tombs wrote:Save/Load suits me fine. :think: Josh did use Save/Load for the LTP so maybe it suits him fine too.

Actually whatever Josh decides is best for Limit Theory suits me fine. :)
^ What he said. 'specially the last bit. :angel:
"omg such tech many efficiency WOW" ~ Josh Parnell
Post

Re: Death in LT

#43
Victor Tombs wrote:Save/Load suits me fine. :think: Josh did use Save/Load for the LTP so maybe it suits him fine too.

Actually whatever Josh decides is best for Limit Theory suits me fine. :)
Josh has spoken in favour of a cloning mechanic in IRC I think - it was a while ago so don't quote me, but I believe his idea was to have a variable slider for how costly cloning/respawning is, so that on the cheap end you effectively have infinite lives, and on the other it's straight-up permadeck. I guess he's interested in an in-game, immersive means of handling it as well.

I'd very much doubt that he didn't implement a save/load mechanic, though.
Post

Re: Death in LT

#45
Behemoth wrote:This game is going to have SO many sliders...
That's because sliders are the best means of reaching temporary conciliation among different members of the community who have vastly different opinions of how mechanics should be implemented in Limit Theory.

"Let's just agree to disagree and include a slider for it then".

Then I guess the dispute becomes what the default position of each slider should be. :P

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron