Permanent consequences for failure that aren't death

[mushroom patch]

Sorry for the double post, but

Having the ability of choosing checkpoints, free-saving or whatever escapes permadeath at the beginning of the game IS STILL an option you have! But even if you can do it during mid play I still don't see a problem with it as you are NOT FORCED to use it. Yes you can delete a save-game of any game! Fraks you can play ANY game in the world as permadeath if you want to. What are you trying to say here?

I realized what you're not getting about the objectors here. You say it's okay to have the option not to die (or more generally, not to do whatever happens in the course of playing that they don't like between now and their previous save). It gives players options and options are good.

The problem with what you're suggesting is that it's not okay. Reloading your save file is cheating. If you give players the option to reload their save file through official, game-sanctioned channels, you're saying it's okay to do that. But it's not.

You can argue all day about how you feel, from a systems design perspective or whatever, a situation where you can circumvent the game's design and save scum anyway is equivalent to offering an in-game mechanism to do so, since, you believe, everyone's doing it anyway (or everyone should be free to, whatever). Well, good luck convincing roguelike fans of that.

And, by the way, it's not equivalent. Roguelikes should be played on third party systems that you don't own, not downloaded to your iPod or whatever. In this situation, you can't circumvent the game's design and there is an essential difference between providing in-game save file reloading and not doing so, as is the roguelike tradition.

[LazyCat]

Not if the choice most players will make sucks.

It does not concern you. You are not other people, you are just you. Wake up!

Think about it: They make the choice you think they want (and I absolutely agree that most will make that choice). They play through the game and they're like: "Hey, this was just a standard RPG with mediocre map design and very little structure in terms of monster placement etc.

You just said roguelikes suck and made no other point. Supposedly then it's permadeath which turns this otherwise awfully dull crap into tense and exciting games. Are you drunk?

I could still do the same saving and reloading crap I always do, but it seemed like everything was pretty much the same. A lot of time, all I had to do was keep reloading and doing the same thing and I could get past the hard parts. There was no story, no plot, nothing. This game sucks and I'm telling all my friends."

Your logic circuit seem to be broken. You would be reloading and doing the same thing whether you reload to a previous floor or all the way back. You will not be doing the same thing that killed you last time, unless you're stupid. If a game requires skill you will not advance until you start doing something different, until you get better. Rewinding all the way back only wastes more time.

[mushroom patch]

Not if the choice most players will make sucks.

It does not concern you. You are not other people, you are just you. Wake up!

It concerns whoever writes the game.

Think about it: They make the choice you think they want (and I absolutely agree that most will make that choice). They play through the game and they're like: "Hey, this was just a standard RPG with mediocre map design and very little structure in terms of monster placement etc.

You just said roguelikes suck and made no other point. Supposedly then it's permadeath which turns this otherwise awfully dull crap into tense and exciting games. Are you drunk?

I said what many people say about the role of save files in roguelikes: If you're going to let players replay content over and over to get it right, you should just design the content carefully, not leave its generation to chance.

I could still do the same saving and reloading crap I always do, but it seemed like everything was pretty much the same. A lot of time, all I had to do was keep reloading and doing the same thing and I could get past the hard parts. There was no story, no plot, nothing. This game sucks and I'm telling all my friends."1

Your logic circuit seem to be broken. You would be reloading and doing the same thing whether you reload to a previous floor or all the way back. You will not be doing the same thing that killed you last time, unless you're stupid. If a game requires skill you will not advance until you start doing something different, until you get better. Rewinding all the way back only wastes more time.

In your proposal, pseudo-roguelikes with arbitrary save file reloading, of course, you would expect to encounter the same situations every time you reload. Since there is a substantial degree of chance in combat and other mechanics, you could reasonably expect to get through a lot of those situations by using the same tactics repeatedly until they work -- by chance.

In fact, many RPGs are like that. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people replay losing Final Fantasy boss fights with no significant change in tactics -- and win. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. (And by the way, this was not stupidity on their part. They were correct to believe they might win giving the same tactics another try.) In the roguelike genre, you must survive every encounter or lose. It's a totally different and great paradigm, which would be ruined by what you suggest. If your tactics lose 1 in 10 tough fights (or even 1 in 100), you will never win the game. You see, consistency in the face of chance is a "skill" -- although I realize this might be lost on someone who doesn't see the difference between bowling 12 consecutive strikes and bowling 12 strikes out of 200 rolls.

[LazyCat]

If you're going to let players replay content over and over...

You consider rewinding back a little to be replaying content over and over. As if going all the way back is not that much worse.

In your proposal, pseudo-roguelikes with arbitrary save file reloading, of course, you would expect to encounter the same situations every time you reload. Since there is a substantial degree of chance in combat and other mechanics, you could reasonably expect to get through a lot of situations by using the same tactics repeatedly until they work -- by chance.

You are playing wrong roguelikes. For those that require skill, luck will not get you far.

In fact, many RPGs are like that. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people replay losing Final Fantasy boss fights with no significant change in tactics -- and win. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. (And by the way, this was not stupidity on their part. They were correct to believe they might win giving the same tactics another try.) In the roguelike genre, you must survive every encounter or lose. It's a totally different and great paradigm, which would be ruined by what you suggest.

You must survive every encounter or lose. Lose what? The only thing there is to lose is time.

If your tactics lose 1 in 10 tough fights (or even 1 in 100), you will never win the game. You see, consistency in the face of chance is a "skill" -- although I realize this might be lost on someone who doesn't see the difference between bowling 12 consecutive strikes and bowling 12 strikes out of 200 rolls.

Consistency in the face of chance is indeed a measure of skill. In the case of permadeath that skill is masochistic patience.

[mushroom patch]

If you're going to let players replay content over and over...

You consider rewinding back a little to be replaying content over and over.

Yes, that's right. If you can "rewind," you can and most likely will do it over and over.

In your proposal, pseudo-roguelikes with arbitrary save file reloading, of course, you would expect to encounter the same situations every time you reload. Since there is a substantial degree of chance in combat and other mechanics, you could reasonably expect to get through a lot of situations by using the same tactics repeatedly until they work -- by chance.

You are playing wrong roguelikes. For those that require skill, luck will not get you far.

Your attitude toward games you don't seem to be good at and your frequent, vapid use of the terms "skill" and "luck" suggest you might be what Sirlin calls a scrub. A link for you:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.html

I'm sure everyone's already read this article at some point. Obviously, it deals with slightly different issues, but I think the general notions there are relevant.

In fact, many RPGs are like that. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people replay losing Final Fantasy boss fights with no significant change in tactics -- and win. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. (And by the way, this was not stupidity on their part. They were correct to believe they might win giving the same tactics another try.) In the roguelike genre, you must survive every encounter or lose. It's a totally different and great paradigm, which would be ruined by what you suggest.

You must survive every encounter or lose. Lose what?

Your character, your attempt to win is lost.

The only thing there is to lose is time.

The implicit assertion here, I guess, is that you would win any roguelike if given enough time (as long as it's one based on skill, natch). Everyone has their beliefs. I would feel a little self-conscious inviting the natural comparison between myself and a monkey at a typewriter this way, but whatever.

If your tactics lose 1 in 10 tough fights (or even 1 in 100), you will never win the game. You see, consistency in the face of chance is a "skill" -- although I realize this might be lost on someone who doesn't see the difference between bowling 12 consecutive strikes and bowling 12 strikes out of 200 rolls.

Consistency in the face of chance is indeed a measure of skill. In the case of permadeath that skill is masochistic patience.

You have a tendency to argue from ignorance and tire people out with demands for explanation. Your line of argument here strongly suggests that you're a mediocre player who dies a lot, learns little, and is easily frustrated, but locates the blame in the games he is playing, rather than his own shortcomings.

My suggestion is the following: either 1) go get good and come back when you have ideas about something other than how cheap/sadistic/tedious/whatever roguelike games are or 2) stop playing roguelike games (if indeed you do) and stop regaling everyone with your sour grapes commentary about them. No one is going to write your pseudo-roguelike for you based on your insights as revealed on this forum.

[LazyCat]

Roguelikes should be...

As if it was written in some roguelike Bible. Roguelikes should... and if they don't, to roguelike hell they go. But there is no such thing as "roguelike", that word doesn't exist. It's just nonsensical mumble of some drunk nerd on LSD. You should not be trying to make your game like anything, especially not like Rogue. Instead, try to make it better.

[mushroom patch]

Roguelikes should be...

As if it was written in some roguelike Bible. Roguelikes should... and if they don't, to roguelike hell they go. But there is no such thing as "roguelike", that word doesn't exist. It's just nonsensical mumble of some drunk nerd on LSD. You should not be trying to make your game like anything, especially not like Rogue. Instead, try to make it better.

Wow, food for thought. Thanks, bro.

[rust]

You should not be trying to make your game like anything, especially not like Rogue. Instead, try to make it better.

Better as in "this thing I like is better than this thing you like"? You can't objectively measure whether the game is good or not.

[LazyCat]

Yes, that's right. If you can "rewind," you can and most likely will do it over and over.

By going all the way back you are playing over and over much more, and will need to star all over again just as likely depending on how good you play either way.

Your character, your attempt to win is lost.

You can not lose "attempt", it's a verb. You only lose time, there is nothing else to lose.

The implicit assertion here, I guess, is that you would win any roguelike if given enough time (as long as it's one based on skill, natch). Everyone has their beliefs. I would feel a little self-conscious inviting the natural comparison between myself and a monkey at a typewriter this way, but whatever.

Comparison is between you and you, not any other monkey. If you can complete a game with save scumming you should have enough skill to eventually do it with only one life too. But to actually succeed you will also need one other skill, different type of skill -- a masochistic patience -- because the only difference is just in the amount of wasted time. Deep down you know this is true. It's just that you have already wasted so much time, and to justify your own torture somehow you now want everyone to suffer. Admit it!

[rust]

But to actually succeed you will also need one other skill, different type of skill -- a masochistic patience -- because the only difference is just in the amount of wasted time. Deep down you know this is true. It's just that you have already wasted so much time, and to justify your own torture somehow you now want everyone to suffer. Admit it!

Tell that to world class bowlers.

[Vanguard]

Better as in "this thing I like is better than this thing you like"? You can't objectively measure whether the game is good or not.

You can.

[mushroom patch]

The implicit assertion here, I guess, is that you would win any roguelike if given enough time (as long as it's one based on skill, natch). Everyone has their beliefs. I would feel a little self-conscious inviting the natural comparison between myself and a monkey at a typewriter this way, but whatever.

Comparison is between you and you, not any other monkey. If you can complete a game with save scumming you should have enough skill to eventually do it with only one life too. But to actually succeed you will also need one other skill, different type of skill -- a masochistic patience -- because the only difference is just in the amount of wasted time. Deep down you know this is true. It's just that you have already wasted so much time, and to justify your own torture somehow you now want everyone to suffer. Admit it!

I hope you won't let me and other people like me force you into further suffering at the hands of roguelike games. Only you can emancipate yourself.

[Vanguard]

You are playing wrong roguelikes. For those that require skill, luck will not get you far.

Yo serious question here: which roguelikes have you beaten?  Without using saves, obviously.

Don't list ones you know you could beat because you've won them with saves or because you weren't willing to spend enough time or whatever.  Just the ones you've already ascended as of right now with no-save permadeath play.

[LazyCat]

Better as in "this thing I like is better than this thing you like"? You can't objectively measure whether the game is good or not.

Yes, as always. The only opinion that can be considered "objective" is the opinion of majority, which you don't accept. And that's fine, but any other opinion can be only less objective.

Anyway, the point of what I said is in the fact that what's the same can not be better. Better implies different. "Rougelike" is just a set of arbitrary restrictions, to make it better you ought to change some. Variety and evolution should be encouraged, instead of praising constriction to old dogma, which servers no purpose and has no actual reason.

[LazyCat]

Yo serious question here: which roguelikes have you beaten?  Without using saves, obviously.

Don't list ones you know you could beat because you've won them with saves or because you weren't willing to spend enough time or whatever.  Just the ones you've already ascended as of right now with no-save permadeath play.

Pixel Dungeon with all four characters. I wish I could have saved. Only once I knew all the enemies from all the depths was I truly enjoying the game and was playing to beat it. Until then it was tedious and repetitive struggle just to learn the rules and how it actually works.

I've also beaten Brogue once, after I did it with save-scumming. It took me three days, I will never again torture myself like that. But I kept playing it and completed it with save scumming many more times after that. For me that's not only much more fun, but playing it with permadeath is just plain torture.


Where are you going with this question?