Quote:

Original post by Konidias What you're describing already exists... it's called "real life".

Replete with space stations, blasters and alien life forms? You get an official arched eyebrow for this response, Konidias. Usually I see (and agree with) it when someone proposes a humongous MMO with zillions of skills and LARP activities.

But I'm talking about a space game which features lasting, persistent changes made through a few core forms of gameplay.

Quote:

You're bringing up philosophical questions about one's purpose in life.

I don't think people will see it that way if the game is set in a made up milieu. They're likely going to see death as a pain in the butt and interruption to their long term goals unless there's something that outweighs the annoyance of facing loss. That's what I'm trying to get at.

Quote:

Also, the idea your describing seems like an epic feat of development. Allowing players to totally change the game world requires some serious programming and content development.

It's not trivial, but I think you're putting way more on this than it deserves. I'm making a retro 2d/3d space game. My focus is on generating context from modifiable variables-- things like reputation, faction strengths and AI spawn rules, and overlaying it all on a procedurally generated game world. It's a crapload of work, but it's hardly epic.

Quote:

From what I've gathered from all of your threads, you're basically wanting to make "real life" the videogame. Which I think is absolute nonsense. People play games to escape the real world.

Don't take everything that I post as a roadmap for what I'm actually working on. Sometimes I'm just sounding out ideas.

Ok so you have some characters, which don't know anything about each other and follow different stories. But at the same time they have to pass through the same zones and kill the same monsters and unlock the same picks and so on. I think it is difficult to find a rational explanation for that.

It would be like multiple games in one, but using the same background.

They must use the same background because, if it is an rpg, I think it wouldn't be so nice to use one of your high level pc to kill the monsters in a far away zone just to help your other one.

"Hey, I just had a dream about this guy I don't know who has to pass through this dangerous zone; I think I'll go there abandoning all my businesses and kill all the monsters there so he, who again I don't know anything about, will be able to pass".

Or I missed something?

Quote:

What if, at all levels of the game, what mattered was beating down the bad guys, stopping world shattering plots and leaving your mark on the game world in some subtle or overt fashion? If you failed, you pay some resource penalty, your foes advance, go to ground or alter their strategy. The game world persists and progresses, and it's up to you to ensure that progression is to your liking.

Then it would be the first real massive multiplayer online role playing game, because it is actually about playing a role in a massive multiplayer online world.

Quote:

Original post by loufoque Then it would be the first real massive multiplayer online role playing game, because it is actually about playing a role in a massive multiplayer online world.

Just to clarify: MMO == No. Unfortunately I don't have the resources, time or (sadly) talent to pull off an MMO. I'm going for a single player RPG.

Quote:

Original post by Svalorzen Ok so you have some characters, which don't know anything about each other and follow different stories. But at the same time they have to pass through the same zones and kill the same monsters and unlock the same picks and so on. I think it is difficult to find a rational explanation for that.

Sort of. They pass through the same territory but that territory remains changed regardless of what player did the changing. So if you use a warrior character to destroy a powerful pirate clan, you can take him out of the game and switch to a merchant character and enjoy the benefits.

Now whether they know anything about each other is up to whether or not it's going to be important to the average player. Are they going to need a rational explanation? Or are they just going to play the game?

Quote:

"Hey, I just had a dream about this guy I don't know who has to pass through this dangerous zone; I think I'll go there abandoning all my businesses and kill all the monsters there so he, who again I don't know anything about, will be able to pass".

Yup, this is the classic problem of "player knowledge" versus "character knowledge." It's probably an area that can be abused, but I wonder if it even matters. Think about the conventions of party based RPGs: Usually character knowledge is ignored in favor of player knowledge-- for instance, maybe your thief, who's on the other side of the map, spots a bad guy sneaking up on your paladin, but the game still allows your paladin to defend himself. And nevermind that the thief's whole value system is in direct conflict with the paladin's. Players don't care. They just use the benefit of having multiple characters.

Quote:

Original post by dragongame if your character had a family you could switch to one of the other family members. This way one would try to create a big family. And also you have the impact on the rest of the family.

Thanks for the feedback. A family could work with this idea as could you playing a faction. But for the moment I want to keep it simple because families and factions introduce an extra layer of rules and complications.

Quote:

Original post by TechnoGoth The idea to build up something larger than a single character and make both success and failure interesting.

This is a cool idea. Science fiction allows a lot of possibilities here, although I often worry that they're too esoteric to be fun (or at least be thought of as fun immediately).

Cloning and the like are essentially in-game save/restore systems. If the player is heavily invested in leveling stats, then probably the setback would be loss of equipment (unless they've got that replicator you mentioned).

It would be interesting to integrate this idea fully into a game, though, and make it something to search for, pay for or otherwise achieve. But it might come across like token based save systems, which I don't think are well liked.

Quote:

Original post by Si Hao It is also better to make it optional, as players do not like the notion of losing everything they have worked for.

Yes it may really have to be optional given how controversial the subject is. But again I think this partly is a problem with the fact that the focus is entirely on the character. The world can't be changed in any meaningful way (outside of fixed narrative) in most games.

In terms of loss I wonder what does the threshold need to be? If I go with the idea that you have a stable of characters to chose from and you sacrifice your highest character to bring down some force that will drastically damage the game universe, is that worth it?

What compensation does the player need? (If I don't do families or factions, then the question of who gets compensated comes up as well.)

On the other hand, what if you could walk away from even threats that would drastically change the game universe? You tell Earth tough luck, the space monster sends Earth back to the Stone Age, and now fuel, upgrades and escorts are damn hard to find. (Although, counting on emergent gameplay, what if you want this to happen, because now Earth's a new, easy to exploit resource...? Possibilities for the nefarious players.)

Compensation will depend on individuals, one interesting way to reward players can be to include such actions into the lore of the game.

"Due to the self sacrifices of players xyz and companions from abc guild, the alien menace is stopped. But in the desperate battle xyz is killed and his body has not been found. Legend has it that...."

Ahh, my favorite topic.


As you pointed out, this topic has been discussed from all angles, let me list what I think are important points to consider.(My angle is from an MMO standpoint but many may apply to a single player RPG as well.)


What does perma-death bring you?

Higher level means higher competence, in a properly balanced game a high level character is either good or lucky.

Funerals! High level, renowned players that are killed are news around the realm. There is a social context involved here that can not be duplicated otherwise.

Challenge! This is often listed as a major negative, in that high level characters will be afraid to leave their safe spot. But someone will leave their safe spot, and that leads to...

Reward! Because your players are not immortal, they need not be micromanaged so much. Level cap? Why? A player well above the average level will be known, and that is a reward unto itself.





Things you must tackle before considering permadeath.

You should not die due to technical issues. If your client has a bug that causes a computer crash mid-combat, perma-death may well cost you a customer.

There must be a gain that is unrelated to the avatar. You are focusing on the change to the game environment, but some form of karma system that effects his next avatar rolled, or a family system that will have benefited from the previous avatar's labors are other mechanism to make sure the time spent was not in vain.

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator Players don't care. They just use the benefit of having multiple characters.

I disagree. It does add to experience when the actions of your characters make sense. I think it would be very cool to run into an "NPC" version of one of your alternate characters.

I'd like to see what you decide on for your design. Permanent death is something I’m trying to integrate into a game design as well.

Something I really enjoyed from Mass Effect was when you rode an elevator you'd often hear news reports of feats you accomplished. It gave me this sense that what I did was noticed by the world even though it was all hardcoded (considering game was linear).

Having said that, it would be really cool if you could play as simultaneous characters but only play one of them at a time. So say you make a politician and then a smuggler. The choices you make as a politician might affect your smuggler directly through tougher border control policies or other decisions. However these two characters might never come in contact but you could hear of them.

Another example would be playing as a pilot, have this pilot killed in action in a delivery mission to then have your next pilot get a mission to try and salvage the wreck.

Anyways it's a cool idea that Dwarf Fortress kind of does. Check it out if you're interested :)