It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:03 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 4:19 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 87
<FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Ron Gilbert (the creator of <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Monkey Island</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->) has said that he could more than fill a magazine by ranting about death in adventure games. (But would it be printable...?)<br><br>Do you think you should be able to die in adventure games?</FONT><FORM method=post action="http://pub57.ezboard.com/froyalquestforumsfrm14.processVote?topicID=246.topic"><table border=0 cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 width="55%"><tbody><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>YES - There's nothing better than having to restart a game because you weren't supposed to pick up that knife.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="2"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>NO - I like knowing that if I click randomly on the screen long enough, I will eventually complete the game safely.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="3"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>I like games you can play almost to the end just to realize that you can't complete it because you didn't pick up that scroll in the first room.</FONT></td></tr></tbody></table><P><input type=submit value="Vote"></form><a HREF=http://pub57.ezboard.com/froyalquestforumsfrm14.showMessage?topicID=246.topic&pollResults=on><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=1>Show results</FONT></A> <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 6:34 am 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 8:28 pm
Posts: 11434
Location: The Netherlands
If the situation calls for it, then yes, you should be able to die. Save early, save often as Al Lowe said. (not to mention the fact that even Lucasarts games end prematurely when a power outage occurs) I don't think dying just because you pushed a rock from the wrong direction is a good thing, but if someone's pointing a gun at me I expect to be shot if I do something stupid instead of being told to "back off" 20 times in a row. Deaths can add to the realism if properly applied.<br><br>Your last option didn't involve deaths in games, btw. Just dead ends, but that's another issue.<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://httpd.chello.nl/c.vanempel/Nashswt.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 8:57 am 
Offline
Canadian Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 8:25 am
Posts: 445
Location: Ontario, Canada
I agree with Erpy.<br><br>A couple of years ago I was playing some Lucasarts-style game by Disney. About halfway through I realised that it was impossible to die. It took a lot of the fun out of the game knowing that no matter how badly I screwed up there was never any real risk to my character. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 9:29 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 87
There actually aren't that many games where you can't die at all. Even <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The Secret of Monkey Island</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> had a couple of ways you could kick it, though you had to try really hard.<br><br>One of the big problems with having potentially lethal situations in adventure games is that it discourages players from trying interesting things that might be dangerous. In a "safe" game, they're gonna go right ahead with that wise-ass comment to that dangerous-looking thug. Therefore, they don't lose out on parts of the game out of caution.<br><br>That said, there are ways to use the threat of death successfully in adventure games. <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The Dagger of Amon Ra</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> and <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>The Pandora Directive</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> have some really tense chase sequences that work because you can actually get killed.<br><br>And yeah, of course I realize my third option wasn't about dying. It's just that it's a similar, even more annoying issue. There really is no excuse for dead ends in adventure games. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 4:47 pm 
Offline
Infamous Sheik of Australia
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 3:43 pm
Posts: 1722
Location: Rockhampton Australia
I'm just replaying SQ4 at present, and it's been so long since I played it that I forget that I couldn't take the unstable ordinance into the sewers. That was funny. <br><br>Thats why I love playing these games, just to see the great ways the two guys wrote for Roger to die.<br><br>So I voted to let ego die. As many different and equally gruesome ways as possible. <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center"><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>There are sunsets over other oceans my friend. Mighty sights and great wonders to behold.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 5:22 pm 
Offline
Knight Status

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:05 pm
Posts: 364
I always thought the fact that you couldn't die in LucasArts games to be very silly.<br><br>Plus, they managed to leave a comedic goldmine untapped. There's a whole website devoted to Roger's deaths! <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://imagiware.com/puzzle/images/sandman.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 6:33 am 
Offline
The Master of All Things Musical
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 8:57 pm
Posts: 4025
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Maybe that's why most of LA's games are comedy oriented and sort of foolish. Because you can't die. Or actually, that would make more sense the other way around. But going ahead and saying something to a thug without worrying about dying was kind of the feel of the LA games. You could do these things and the games were still fun. It's just a different animal, IMO. But when it all comes down, I prefer being able to die more than 'safe' games. Not dying does have it's place. The Dig or DOTT would just not be the same if you could die, I think. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 2:14 pm 
Offline
Knight Status

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:05 pm
Posts: 364
I would have prefered instant death reversal, like in Sierra's later games. <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://imagiware.com/puzzle/images/sandman.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 5:26 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 1:26 am
Posts: 108
Anybody ever played The Longest Journey?<br><br>I had to consciously remind myself at certain points that I COULD NOT DIE. Situations seemed so dangerous at points, that even though it was truly impossible to die (there was that one bug that made me start over though), I felt that if I didn't do something, or did something wrong, the character would be killed.<br><br>The thing is that there were situations that I thought the character should be able to die in, but just a few. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 30, 2004 7:26 am 
Offline
Knight Status

Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2001 10:10 pm
Posts: 328
Any adventure game that you cannot die because you made a mistake stinks becuase by dying while making that error teaches ya not to do it again. Lucas Arts thinks they are perfect and they dont need the death stuff in their adventure games that they made. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 03, 2004 1:28 am 
Offline
Peasant Status

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 9:25 am
Posts: 24
In KQ7, I took Valanice far into the the desert without really realizing it. Soon I was lost. So I continued to wait for her to die of thirst. Didn't happen. So I made her walk from screen to screen for a long time hoping that would kill her off. Didn't happen. I couldn't quit my game because it would save where I was if I left. My point, games need death or at least not save when you quit! <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START >: --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/mad.gif ALT=">:"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> Errrr!<br><br>Number three. As much as I hate it, I like it at the same time because that could happen in real life to. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Player death in adventure games:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 05, 2004 5:41 am 
Offline
Peasant Status

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:38 am
Posts: 1
I like both. Sometimes it's a harder puzzle to solve when you can die, but sometimes it gets ridiculous for example, KQ3. That is the most impossible game- you can die every moment. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Hmmm...
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2004 1:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2001 6:01 am
Posts: 1718
Location: Bühlerzell, Germany
Personally, I like both.<br><br>TLJ is a wonderful game in which you can't die, but which doesn't lose any atmosphere at all because of it. The fact that you can't die or get stuck meant that I could win the game by myself, without any outside help at all. I liked knowing that it was still possible to win at any given point and that experimentation was okay and wouldn't get me killed.<br><br>However, games in which you can die can also be great. I liked purposefully getting myself killed in many sierra games (especially SQ) just to see the death message. It's just part of the humour.<br><br>Also, certain situations would entirely lose their atmosphere if you couldn't die. Picture yourself as the thief in QfG2, hurrying towards Ad Avis on your magic rope, with the city of Rasier far below you and Ad Avis about to finish summoning Iblis.<br><br>Now, suppose that you can't actually fall down. You can't run out of time, either. And, once you've disrupted the summoning, Ad Avis won't actually kill you with his spells. What would otherwise be one of the most intense moments in the game would then lose its entire edge.<br><br>That said, I do quite dislike senseless deaths. Dying from the same thing ten times in a row doesn't amuse me. From that standpoint, the above example could really be better. While eliminating the death entirely would be bad, having death practically unavoidable isn't better.<br><br>And random deaths or deaths that are unavoidable the first time through (such that you actually have to die and restore to get past) like the desert oasis maze of KQ5 are awful. If you know exactly what you're doing and are reasonably skilled (in terms of reaction times and such), you should be able to win a game without dying.<br><br>I think the Gabriel Knight series handled death very well. Most of the game was entirely safe. Just walking around won't get you killed, so you're free to explore and experiment. However, there are dangerous situations, and you know when you're in one. In these situations, you <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>can</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> die. These situations do have too high a die-and-retry rate, but the idea is solid; most of the game has atmosphere without death, while those parts that do need death to work have it.<br><br>So there are advantages to both death and the lack of death. The decision just has to match the game and every death should be considered carefully.<br><br>The third option isn't about deaths. It's about dead ends. I won't say anything in their defense. Dead ends of that scale are flat-out bad. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hmmm...
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2004 1:47 pm 
Offline
Knight Status

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:05 pm
Posts: 364
What he said... Although I still think that LucasArts should have been the one to invent the instant death reversal idea, honestly. <p><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://imagiware.com/puzzle/images/sandman.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br>Jesus saves... Early and often.</p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hmmm...
PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2004 5:49 am 
Offline
Knight Status
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 6:56 am
Posts: 492
Larry 6 types deaths (the instant reversal) was the best. <br><br>Not having deaths takes away potentially funny death sequences, but dying and finding u have no good restore games sucks. So it rocks when you can die but know you won't lose progress. <p></p><i></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hmmm...
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 9:05 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 1:26 am
Posts: 108
There is ONE and ONLY ONE dead end that I allow in an adventure game. That dead end is the one if you do not take the fish at some point in SQ6, you can't win the game. The thing is, that once you take it the first time, it's pretty darn near impossible to lose, and you get hammered in the face with how truly necessary it is for you to have it. Could someone refresh me on the conditions for gaining the fish in the first place? I believe that it was fairly obvious that you needed the fish. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub57.ezboard.com/broyalquestforums.showUserPublicProfile?gid=heirtoflash>heirtoflash</A> at: 2/16/04 2:09 am<br></i>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:11 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 8:19 pm
Posts: 89
Location: Germany
As a rule, adventure games should be able to be played from beginning to end without “dying” or saving the game if the player is very careful and very observant. It is bad design to put puzzles and situations into a game that require a player to die in order to learn what not to do next time.

Ron Gilbert


I totally agree. Ron Gilbert for president! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:05 am 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 10:13 am
Posts: 114
Location: Out of my mind
I used to hate deaths in games cause they scared the crap outta me when I was a kid. These days I like em so much, I even go look for em sometimes.

Though there should be some kind of warning of some kind that happens just before you get placed in a lethal situation. Like in Gabriel Knight, on day 5 (?) when you head into the Voodoo Museum, the snake attacks you and if you don't do anything about it, it's bye bye Gabriel. Of course, you don't need any objects to deal with the snake, but still.

I prefer to have it like in KQ6: the first time you visit the Isle of the Sacred Mountain, you get a chance to prepare for entering the catacombs, unless you already have everything you need. There also should always be some way to get to stuff you missed earlier; even if you missed the coins or the shield in the catacombs, you can always go back later to get them.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:55 am 
Offline
Insomniac Speed Demon
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 10:23 pm
Posts: 1193
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
Snake202 wrote:
I prefer to have it like in KQ6: the first time you visit the Isle of the Sacred Mountain, you get a chance to prepare for entering the catacombs, unless you already have everything you need. There also should always be some way to get to stuff you missed earlier; even if you missed the coins or the shield in the catacombs, you can always go back later to get them.


However, if you don't have everything the second time you visit, you're dead anyway.

*throws skull between gears*
CRASH :eek

_________________
Image
-------
Denying people their rights because the majority votes for it is not democracy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 1:03 pm 
Offline
The Heretic
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 12:03 am
Posts: 518
Location: Hoboken, NJ
I hate dead-ends in games. Where they'll let you do something stupid like drink the dispel potion in QFG and then you don't have one. Then again, if you're dumb enough... (oops, not going there... :p )

_________________
<o>

"The woman here depicted will possess unseen marks. Signs that she will be the one to bring forth my works...bind them with fury; a burning anger. Unless prevented, at vulgar cost, this woman will render the greatest power unto utter desolation."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:01 pm 
Offline
Royal Servant Status
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 10:13 am
Posts: 114
Location: Out of my mind
Spikey wrote:
Snake202 wrote:
I prefer to have it like in KQ6: the first time you visit the Isle of the Sacred Mountain, you get a chance to prepare for entering the catacombs, unless you already have everything you need. There also should always be some way to get to stuff you missed earlier; even if you missed the coins or the shield in the catacombs, you can always go back later to get them.


However, if you don't have everything the second time you visit, you're dead anyway.

*throws skull between gears*
CRASH :eek

Yes, but the point is, they give you a chance to prepare.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:29 am 
Offline
Peasant Status

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 1:55 am
Posts: 25
Want to talk about a dead end? How about disappearing forever without a trace behind woodcutter's cabin!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 6:49 pm 
Offline
Peasant Status
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 4:01 pm
Posts: 8
Duckzilla wrote:
Want to talk about a dead end? How about disappearing forever without a trace behind woodcutter's cabin!


LOL, what was that about?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:40 pm 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 8:28 pm
Posts: 11434
Location: The Netherlands
It's a bug that can turn up in KQ1VGA; the result of the wrong number in one of the newroom-functions. Duckzilla hammered the point in a couple of threads after Navynuke locked the one he initially started about it.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2004 11:10 pm 
Offline
Honorary AGD
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 1:19 am
Posts: 5362
Location: US of A
Erpy wrote:
Duckzilla hammered the point in a couple of threads after Navynuke locked the one he initially started about it.
And I'd do it again, I tell ya!!! *Laughs hysterically*


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group