Originally posted by Boton

Few times in MMOs have I been excited as when I had someting to lose. It is a truely an exhilarating feeling. However, in these instances it wasn't all or nothing, so to speak. In other words, the penalty for failure wasn't overbearing. It's risk vs reward, also known as challenge.

A problem a lot of people have on this forum is this. "Lets apply this feature to my favorite or ideal perfect dream game, and see if it fits." Obviously, this will work about... never. This isn't the reader's fault though, its the poster's fault. If you are going to suggest a feature, you must also describe it's implementation.
Designing a game is like painting a picture, you don't paint the whole thing, then figure out how the light will work. Everything must be integrated in unison. A game is no different.

If your game takes a year to gain a level, and each death removes a level, most people won't like that. Thats an example of a bad death penalty. If it took a day or two to level, not such a big deal.

So many people cringe when they hear "full PvP loot", they think about the time spent gaining a certain item, just to lose it. If a system isn't so dependent on gear, its less of a problem. Its all relative
 

I play chess and card game regularly, no gambling.  Its always tremendous fun, even though losing a game does not cost anything.

The fun is in the playing, not in the outcome.  If you need an outcome to shape the gaming pleasure, you are not playing a game, you are chasing a carrot via the game mechanism.

---

Originally posted by lisubab

---

Originally posted by Mr.Hyde

LOL
Someone shot me,because I'd like to fill like I just had a $ 100.00 night in J.....  hoe house.
 
 
Death separates boys from men. A boy will run from death, a man will stand upto it and spit it in the eye.
Are you a boy or a man?

---

 
If you commit suicide the moment your avatar dies, you are a "man", stupid man.
If you reloads the game and plays again after a death penalty, you are a "man", pretentious man.
If you think a game defines a man from a boy, you are a "man", with no idea what a man really is.

---

This...

I'm not sure how much most of you friggin idiot gamers really get from this. But it means that you are a "boy" if you cannot realize a game from life...and a "man" can realize the difference....

It's really about coupling Risk and Reward.  One without the other is not as substantial.

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

---

This...

I'm not sure how much most of you friggin idiot gamers really get from this. But it means that you are a "boy" if you cannot realize a game from life...and a "man" can realize the difference....

No, both boys and men knows that. Morons don't know it and people with real mental illness.
 

But it has nothing to do with death penalty. If there is too little death penalty the game gets too easy  and you don't care if you die at all. If the penalty gets too severe you get too careful and avoid any danger. A good game is between those extremes.

But death penalty is just a small aspect of a game, it is neverless important.

Originally posted by pencilrick

It's really about coupling Risk and Reward.  One without the other is not as substantial.

Your reward from playing a game is the electronic pixel called loot?  So after playing tennis for 2 hours, you do not feel rewarded unless someone prints a paper saying "pencilrick played tennis for 2 hours and is doing fine"?

I do not.  I log on to play if I enjoy the process, whether I live or die, gain loot or lost repair gold.  Once I log out, I forget it completely.  Risk or whatever is just part of the whole package called gameplay.  A game need not be fun even if there are risk elements, a game can be very fun without any risks, or rewards for that matter.  Its the total package called gameplay (very personal and subjective) which dffers to each person, and for different person, risks and rewards are given different importance.

---

Originally posted by Loke666

---

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

This...
I'm not sure how much most of you friggin idiot gamers really get from this. But it means that you are a "boy" if you cannot realize a game from life...and a "man" can realize the difference....

---

No, both boys and men knows that. Morons don't know it and people with real mental illness.
 
But it has nothing to do with death penalty. If there is too little death penalty the game gets too easy  and you don't care if you die at all. If the penalty gets too severe you get too careful and avoid any danger. A good game is between those extremes.
But death penalty is just a small aspect of a game, it is neverless important.

---

no...they don't moron...read the news

The fact is...you people brought this above and beyond reality.

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

 

 

no...they don't moron...read the news

Yay! more nerdrage. It's not a real thread until somebody drops the 'M' word

IMO, Death Penalty is needed in a PVE game.

I played a game before called Rohan Online, Obviously a PVE game. There was no death penalty or maybe just a little death penalty on this game so it means when you get stronger you can bully lower levels without any hesitation on losing your items when you get killed whenever your name is pink or red (color used if your character PK'ed characters consecutively.).

The result of that, a lot of newcomers say goodbye to the game in a few days after starting because there was no death penalty for it. Eventhough you try your best to ask a high level character for help the bully won't stop because he has nothing to lose.

Give me the excitement I felt while playing EQ with its death penalty and I'll be happy.  I realize I'm in a catagory with a minority here but I think EQ had the best death penalty.  If I died it cost me real life time to get my corpse back which made me more than just a little careful or nervous when exploring.  The only issue I had with it was when I was playing on Dial Up when we first moved to our new house because there wasn't any broadband in the area yet and I wasn't about to shell out over $600.00 for a satelite connection.

Anyways, there is my opinion. 

/begins to imagine old EQ with new graphics and new servers

---

Originally posted by Fibsdk

---

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

 
 
no...they don't moron...read the news

---

 
Yay! more nerdrage. It's not a real thread until somebody drops the 'M' word

 
 

---

oh wow...hey look everyone....

Mr. No One speaks...and he must be right cause he wrote what he wrote...

The "M" word applies to you as well now. Don't open your epeen mouth unless you have something to say.

M'kay little "e"toon?

Originally posted by icaughtfire

IMO, Death Penalty is needed in a PVE game.

I played a game before called Rohan Online, Obviously a PVE game. There was no death penalty or maybe just a little death penalty on this game so it means when you get stronger you can bully lower levels without any hesitation on losing your items when you get killed whenever your name is pink or red (color used if your character PK'ed characters consecutively.).

The result of that, a lot of newcomers say goodbye to the game in a few days after starting because there was no death penalty for it. Eventhough you try your best to ask a high level character for help the bully won't stop because he has nothing to lose.

A lot of newcomers say goodbye to games when they got PKed in a PVE game?  A game allowing ffa pvp is usually not called a pve game.

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

 

---

Originally posted by Fibsdk

---

Originally posted by Gestankfaust

 

 
 
no...they don't moron...read the news

---

 
Yay! more nerdrage. It's not a real thread until somebody drops the 'M' word

 

 
 

---

 

oh wow...hey look everyone....

Mr. No One speaks...and he must be right cause he wrote what he wrote...

The "M" word applies to you as well now. Don't open your epeen mouth unless you have something to say.

M'kay little "e"toon?

That's right!! let it all out man. Get it out of your system

Now repeat after me 'Goos Fraba' 'Goooooos Fraaabaaa'...

Originally posted by lisubab

Originally posted by Boton

Few times in MMOs have I been excited as when I had someting to lose. It is a truely an exhilarating feeling. However, in these instances it wasn't all or nothing, so to speak. In other words, the penalty for failure wasn't overbearing. It's risk vs reward, also known as challenge.

A problem a lot of people have on this forum is this. "Lets apply this feature to my favorite or ideal perfect dream game, and see if it fits." Obviously, this will work about... never. This isn't the reader's fault though, its the poster's fault. If you are going to suggest a feature, you must also describe it's implementation.
Designing a game is like painting a picture, you don't paint the whole thing, then figure out how the light will work. Everything must be integrated in unison. A game is no different.

If your game takes a year to gain a level, and each death removes a level, most people won't like that. Thats an example of a bad death penalty. If it took a day or two to level, not such a big deal.

So many people cringe when they hear "full PvP loot", they think about the time spent gaining a certain item, just to lose it. If a system isn't so dependent on gear, its less of a problem. Its all relative
 

 

I play chess and card game regularly, no gambling.  Its always tremendous fun, even though losing a game does not cost anything.

The fun is in the playing, not in the outcome.  If you need an outcome to shape the gaming pleasure, you are not playing a game, you are chasing a carrot via the game mechanism.

I never said the only reason to participate was for the outcome. I don't NEED a reward or consequence for losing or winning, it just adds another level to the game.

Here is an example: I play Rugby, and the only thing you risk each game is a shot at a state or national championship. I play it because it is such a great sport and it's a lot of fun, however, the chance at a championship title takes it past "fun", and onto another level. I feel that through risks and rewards in gameplay, more depth can be achieved.

From a design perspective, consequences open options for more dynamic gameplay. A game with a strong economy will greatly benefit from some sort of loss in combat such as equipment deterioration or full loot:

in a matter of time, combatants will new need equipment, which is made by crafters. Crafters need resources, and the best ones are in areas that are scarce and contested over. Crafters employ fighters to gain control of these high-demand areas, creating a cycle that creates a perpetual bond between all players of the community. There is much stronger gameplay as the community is integrated to a higher level, than in one where combat is only about "fun" and has no consequences good or bad.

It's harder to integrate this into PvE, but it can benefit from risk/reward type systems that have death penalty. by making the benefits of defeating an enemy something more than just completing one-dimensional content (complete quest, get loot, repeat).

Lets say you can chose to take on one of two different enemies, one is standard in difficulty, the other is much harder. However, the rewards are better for the one that's harder; without a death penalty of some sort, whats the point of the easier one? Another example would be optional enemies you could chose to engage, which could be quite hard but give some sort of benefit by doing so. Maybe the "timer before the bomb blows up" is increased, or those enemies occupy a bridge which is more direct to the objective. A low death penalty time-sink (corpse run, respawn, etc), makes the whole rest of the level obsolete to some degree, because the most effective way is to take the shortcut, and since the consequence for failure is minimal, the only dissuading element is time, which is quite boring.

TL:DR version: Without Risk, you cannot truely have Reward, and therefore have less options.

Originally posted by Axehilt

You're right.

Nobody enjoys Dragon Age: Origins because of save/load (zero death penalty.)

...right? 

I want you to erase your data everytime you die. Then come back and tell me how stail DP is in Dragon Age

>:^(

Its fun like Crap

Boton the Rubgy example is exactly what good PVE should be:

• If you lose you lose nothing.
• If you win you gain access to the championship.
• If you win there, you get the trophy.

There is no strong penalty at stake here. It's a very light "penalty" of having to start over from scratch for your next attempt.  That's exactly what I'd call good PVE design: You can try again as many times as you want but it's the difficulty of the task which gives it the weight.

Also consider the fact that if you take a mediocre rugby team and let them play the top team a hundred games in a row, retrying as often and as quickly as they want, the mediocre team still isn't going to win the trophy.  They're simply not skilled enough to beat the challenge, and making the penalty for failure lighter won't changed that.

If the mediocre team lucks out and wins one, they have 1 trophy.  Congrats.  The other team has earned 99 trophies.

Although we're talking PVE.  So really the Top Team is the enemy AI, and we're comparing Mediocre Team's 1 trophy with the many trophies other teams are getting (by not being mediocre.)

So yeah, Risk vs. Reward.  Risk being the time cost (not a harsh cost) to attempt content.

Because I assure you Rugby would be a lot less popular and fun if the losing team was required to have their legs broken (thus incurring the same sort of harsh monetary and recovery time cost that certain players seem to want from MMORPGs.)

If I had my legs broken every time I lost a match in Rugby, would I play? Fuck no. Would I risk that if perhaps, our team could win 10 million dollars? Its possible, and the beauty of a virtual game is there isn't really much at stake. At the end of the day you can log off, and all you may have lost is some time.

Death penalties such as item loss will NOT work

Increasing the Risk without increasing Reward is a bad idea. If you just apply a big penalty to a current game, you won't get something fun. It won't be fun because the game isn't designed that way. It's not all about what you risk, its also what you can gain. 

Designing a game is like painting a picture, you have to create harmony. You don't paint the whole thing before you figure out how the light will work in the picture, and just like a game, you can't tack on features that werent incorporated in the design.

Increased risk, allows increased reward, which in turn allows more options, enhancing game depth. 

 in games with traditional RPG treadmill systems. These systems where "progession"  is so important, are not designed in ways loss can be incorporated. The game would have to be drastically different.

Its also why I'm not a fan of the "iron sword +5 damage, iron sword with jewel +10000 damage" systems. These systems instantly remove elements that could be in the game, such as penalties.

If every sword is an iron sword, all of a sudden, losing an iron sword isn't that big of a deal.