Salem Dev: MMOs Without Permadeath Aren't Proper Games

[MoltenSilver]

While I respect anyone's right to consider games with permadeath and no saves fun, and even encourage others to play games that don't have such on an honour-system (like One Life To Live guilds in MMO's long before this one) or under whatever other self-imposed rules they wish, the gall of suggesting that he's the only one who knows the 'right' way to play games betrays a man who deserves no such respect; that kind of self-centric world view, the holding the very notion that all people experience everything the same way, betrays level of empathy and maturity most 4-year-olds I know would surpass.

I truly do get the appeal, all you have to do is watch any Let's Play of a pokemon Nuzlocke challenge to see why, but I would never find that fun, I would never find that entertaining or amusing. I don't find that kind of suspense and fear and loss fun, and I'm sure as hell not going to be told I shouldn't be allowed to play games just because my sensibilities are different.

Unfortunately this seems to be part of a larger trend; not specifically the permadeath bit, but developers these days seem obsessed with controlling the player actions, almost like they're desperate to make movies instead of games, but weren't lucky enough to squirm into that industry so they instead infest this one. To paraphrase Yahtzee, when you take a child to a sandbox you do not spend three hours discussing proper shovel etiquette! I will never understand how a developer can honestly think they know more about how I have fun than I do, much less the obscene levels they go to to achieve that goal, between DRM and steps to stifle modding communities and lacking console-codes and other tools and such, in singleplayer games.

No matter how much you insist on calling it a license, it's my toy and unless its a multiplayer game I'll play with it however I damn well want.

 

[zumbledum]

I agree completely on his point of needing a more severe fail state than most games and how a lot of games are more interactive entertainment than actual games now.

MMORPG's are the worst for this i think, nowadays all the main ones treat death as a merely inconvenient, But back in Everquest for example when you died you lost a bunch of XP and respawned at your bind point , which in itself was often a long way from your corpse, and all the money equipment and items you were carrying remained on you your corpse where you died and you had to run naked to get it back. it brought a very cool and enjoyable fear to dungeoning and raiding.

Its one of those cases where players will ask for the removal of a mechanic because its painful but it makes the game worse when you take it away , sure it sicked to die but risk makes rewards worth winning.

 

[CUnk]

If the game was compelling in spite of the permadeath and pvp aspects I'm sure a lot more people would put up with (or even enjoy) those elements. What I encountered in the beta (or maybe it was alpha) of this game was pretty much pure tedium. (And this is coming from a guy who enjoys Wurm Online.) There was no way I was going to put up with a boring game AND permadeath/pvp.

 

[Gameguy20100]

Um world of Warcraft IS still the MMO King and It doesn't have permaDeath

 

[shrekfan246]

Most people prefer a theme park to a world with consequences, however. Thus, this kind of game has become rare and niche. There aren't many around that I still play but I'm hoping one day I can get into a game with that kind of feeling to it again.

There's weight to be held behind the idea of having permadeath in non-roguelike games, but it really needs to be done well. In an MMO with freely-sanctioned PvP, I'd be personally rather devastated if I spent hours of my time grinding a character up close to whatever the maximum level might be, conquered hordes of unknown enemies and found the +10 Legendary Pendant of Awesomeness and then got smacked down and lost all of my progress, every single thing, because one day somebody decked out better than me and/or a higher level than me decided it would be funny to pick me off.

If it doesn't take that long to level and the game doesn't have the typical WoW-style gear tier structuring, then more power to them, honestly. We could use more MMOs that aren't the same standard fare. If the PvP is confined to special arenas where both (or all) players know the consequences for losing, even better. That would actually make PvP rather compelling, I feel.

But unless this MMO is going to break away from... well, practically all conventions and light the way to a new platform of MMOs, it's just arbitrarily punishing the players. As a few other people have mentioned in this thread, "permadeath" insofar as running out of lives and starting the game over from the beginning was fine back in the days when games were designed to suck the quarters out of everyone's pockets, and consequently only actually lasted about an hour or two under the fingers of a skilled player. Now, when games get knocked down for having campaigns shorter than ten hours long, though?

 

[Azwrath]

Heh. Its almost like his statement tries to be controversial. You know, like its trying to get attention, so it will be posted on various gaming sites or gaming forums, where people who are interested might hear about his game...

Well gotta hand it to the guy, he is using one of the cheapest marketing methods and its working. I'v been playing Salem ever since i read this and i like it.

 

[Akytalusia]

i know i'm in the minority here, but i've always maintained an alignment with his stance on saving. i'll keep using saves as long as they exist cuase i value time over the benefits of a saveless experience, but you won't find me complaining if a dev decides to implement a saveless system either.

 

[randomsix]

from what i was reading your character is permamently killed but then you play their descendent which is an interesting touch but what concerns me is that MMO's tend to be worlds where a good chunk of the population display all the behaviour and compassion of a psychopath with no restraint

At least the descendent bit allows for some transfer of skills/goods through an inheritance mechanism.

 

[Xarathox]

Permadeath should be an option, not mandatory. In this day and age, more people play games to relax and enjoy, having to constantly fear their fuck-ups will cost them severely isn't part of most peoples idea of fun. There are those who do enjoy that kind of game, but they are a minority these days. So, good luck drawing in large numbers with that mindset.

 

[beastro]

Permanent death doesn't sound very fun to me and neither does PVP.

He doesn't care about PVP, he's only concerned with letting Randian Ubermensch dominate the game and gank every new player in sight.

See SA's thread on the game.

 

[Drejer43]

some of us dont really feel like dying 2 times to the final boss and then have to start over...
nope fuck that

 

[Woodsey]

So all I learned from this is that a particular developer is possibly into virtual S&M; because you'd have to be a sadistic asshole or a diehard masochist to enjoy the prospect of permadeath in any online game let alone an MMO.

And as DayZ proved, there are quite a few of us.

OT: It's interesting to note quite how the general attitude amongst people turns from "There's nothing wrong with having a niche game" and "developers shouldn't bother trying to please everyone" to "You're an idiot, good luck getting anywhere near a noteworthy or sustainable number of players" as soon as its a niche that doesn't apply to them specifically.

 

[Atmos Duality]

And as DayZ proved, there are quite a few of us.

I know. I used to be in the "hardcore" crowd.
Though I can't picture myself enjoying this game all that much; lag and griefing would not blend well at all with any sort of progress-centric gameplay.

 

[grammarye]

I'll do you a deal, Mr Johannessen. You make a game with zero bugs and zero latency, and I'll play games with no saves. I'll also resist pointing out that we have this already - it's called 'life'.

The problem with even the Ironman style gaming is that it only takes one screwup by the developer and your effort is gone through no fault of your own. It's not about accepting consequences - the game & developer has to be perfect, because there's no margin for error.

Actually I'd say looking at the likes of DayZ it's had the exact opposite effect for a lot of players than the intended one. It's cheapened death, made effort meaningless; people value nothing because it could all vanish in the blink of an eye. Why care about anything when it might all go tomorrow? (Note, I am not ascribing this to all DayZ players, but I've seen plenty of it, especially if they're not very good at it and die a lot).

Why care about developing a character, putting thought into a name, making friends, building anything - it's all going the moment you die. It encourages nihilism in my view. Even EVE preserves your basic character development despite the ability to lose pretty much everything else. Characters online count for more than mere 'save points'.

Some may find this fun, which case I wish them & Mr Johannessen luck, but it's not for me. I'd rather do something I consider worthwhile & meaningful.

 

[Grabehn]

I would state a proper point here, but there are so many in this same thread that it would be basically useless, as many said, there would't be too many people playing a game that would make you lose everything after you die if you had to spend a long time with your character, for rogur-likes the perma death is ok, quick short games, or longer but still quite fast. Otherwise too many people would get annoyed and quit at the first or second death.

 

[Zeckt]

I used to be quite hardcore myself, but I have no desire to invest my time into a game to see it all blow away by some random ganker. I play games to put me in a good mood now.

 

[suitepee7]

permadeath: yeah this can work, in quite a few situations really, hardcore modes can be really exciting, and TBOI taught me that if the game isn't actually that long, permadeath is the best option. however it can quickly become frustrating if the game is several hours long, is a ***** to play and then you die, and takes you ages to get back to where you were.

Always on PvP: again, can work pretty well. personally if the option is there i always play on a PvP server. gankers annoy the hell out of me and i usually don't do it myself, but world PvP can be hugely fun, especially when it becomes huge crowds of people just fighting to the death. in these cases a LONGER respawn time should be in place, as being able to instantly revive takes the joy out of getting a kill in my eyes.

permadeath with always on PvP: well i hope they designed the starting zones well, because about 90% of players won't leave the fucking place. i get pissed off if i lose 2 hours worth of time in gaming, about 15 minutes of work and i'll be fuming, but putting tens to hundreds of hours into a character (several of my WoW characters are over 20 days of game time) and it being lost forever... fuck that shit

 

[Strazdas]

Permadeth in MMOS used to work. in fact there were whole guilds forming dedicating their life to attack people who attack others randomly to make their characters dissapear and disable them from doing that.
if your PVPing you must loose something. else its pointless. the games where you will "never drop your armor" are the worst games. your pvping, you may not have permadeath, but you certainly ahve to loose what your carrying and be donwgraded a level or two. you lost and you get punished for that.

As for Johannessen's opinion on things like "save points," I'd like to see him play through any modern game in one playthrough without dying. If he's so "hardcore," then I expect him to quit and select New Game from the menu every time he dies.

Thats not hard. i usually save because i dont have time to complete the game in one sitting, but i finished games like Stalker andm any shooters without dieing once.