Permanent consequences for failure that aren't death

[LazyCat]

wtf? Eat a donut and take it down a notch, human!

What is your objection about?

[LazyCat]

Top notch hypocrisy.

I accept your wickedness and unnatural desire to torture yourself with tedious repetition, I do not mind permadeath at all.

[AgingMinotaur]

wtf? Eat a donut and take it down a notch, human!

What is your objection about?

My great grandfather was a nazi, you insensitive clod!

As always,
Minotauros

[Krice]

or talking to Krice about women

I don't want to talk about women, I want to have one.

Since this topic is off anyway, I want to say about permadeath that there is something deeper in it that we don't always realize. For some people it means tedious replaying, but I think there is more to it for people with better imagination.

[chooseusername]

My interpretation of all this "give an alternative to permadeath" discussion that has been going on, is that the do-not-want-to-play-permadeath-faction couldn't provide any real alternatives that the not-anti-permadeath-faction found acceptable.

Is this a fair interpretation?

[mushroom patch]

wtf? Eat a donut and take it down a notch, human!

What is your objection about?

lol

My interpretation of all this "give an alternative to permadeath" discussion that has been going on, is that the do-not-want-to-play-permadeath-faction couldn't provide any real alternatives that the not-anti-permadeath-faction found acceptable.

Is this a fair interpretation?

Yeah, pretty much. Everyone wins given sufficient time does not have the universal appeal the everyone-wins faction seems to believe it has.

Everyone-wins doesn't seem to be able to conceptualize the fact that the absolute-lose-condition faction doesn't merely want other people to lose ("torture! Hitler!") but actually wants to lose too.

[reaver]

My interpretation of all this "give an alternative to permadeath" discussion that has been going on, is that the do-not-want-to-play-permadeath-faction couldn't provide any real alternatives that the not-anti-permadeath-faction found acceptable.

Is this a fair interpretation?

There can never be a "real alternative" if you dismiss each and every suggestion as "not being a real alternative" because it's not permadeath.

[chooseusername]

There can never be a "real alternative" if you dismiss each and every suggestion as "not being a real alternative" because it's not permadeath.

That's okay.  When you and the others who wish to play alternative approaches make your games, you can show them all how it can be done.  After all, all these threads weren't about telling other people they should stop making what interests them given that includes permadeath, and make what interests someone who doesn't like playing permadeath-based games?  Was it?

Otherwise, when people don't seem to by buying what you are selling, why continue to peddle it?

[Rickton]

My interpretation of all this "give an alternative to permadeath" discussion that has been going on, is that the do-not-want-to-play-permadeath-faction couldn't provide any real alternatives that the not-anti-permadeath-faction found acceptable.

Is this a fair interpretation?

The people who are actually posting on topic are providing some pretty good alternatives, or at least alternatives that would work in games designed around the mechanic.
A more accurate interpretation of the discussion would be that some people like to argue, and the ones who do will post incessantly several times a day, drowning out all other discussion.

[reaver]

That's okay.  When you and the others who wish to play alternative approaches make your games, you can show them all how it can be done.  After all, all these threads weren't about telling other people they should stop making what interests them given that includes permadeath, and make what interests someone who doesn't like playing permadeath-based games?  Was it?

Otherwise, when people don't seem to by buying what you are selling, why continue to peddle it?

At least *I* was not forcing my opinion down to the permadeath lot's throats, you can play what you like, I'm not your enemy ffs. When I make a game, I will use one of the alternatives, yes. Fortunately, many have been suggested  thus far and I have a few extra thoughts on my own. But I think extreme/stubborn opinions and generalisation of some posts here paint everybody in a bad light; both sides appear very argumentative and aggressive-defensive and therefore the climate is not extremely healthy for civilised discussion anymore. As rickton said, good posts and suggestions have been drowned by stupid arguments.

Also, Jesus was save-scumming, so it must be ok Happy easter!

[Quendus]

The people who are actually posting on topic are providing some pretty good alternatives, or at least alternatives that would work in games designed around the mechanic.
A more accurate interpretation of the discussion would be that some people like to argue, and the ones who do will post incessantly several times a day, drowning out all other discussion.

Remember when people used to talk about more than one thing here? Remember when if one topic was an uninteresting mess you could read threads on totally unrelated topics?

[Krice]

couldn't provide any real alternatives

I guess some people don't like permadeath. But.. it's an essential feature of a game type called roguelike. So in a way this discussion has no meaning. There are role-playing games without permadeath, they are often called "role-playing games" or RPG. However often those games don't have random game world, but it's again one of their traditional features. I think the best way to solve this problem is start to make your own rogue(or whatever)like game with all the features you think are missing from this world. Trying to troll in a roguelike forum is more likely making roguelike developers more convinced that their roguelike will stay pure. It's like the discussion about "better" user interface back a while. It made me realize that I need to make controls in my roguelike games more complex, just to show those idiots.

[mushroom patch]

My interpretation of all this "give an alternative to permadeath" discussion that has been going on, is that the do-not-want-to-play-permadeath-faction couldn't provide any real alternatives that the not-anti-permadeath-faction found acceptable.

Is this a fair interpretation?

The people who are actually posting on topic are providing some pretty good alternatives, or at least alternatives that would work in games designed around the mechanic.
A more accurate interpretation of the discussion would be that some people like to argue, and the ones who do will post incessantly several times a day, drowning out all other discussion.

You asked an unfocused question that deals in themes that were the topic of recent arguments in other threads and you want to put it on everyone else that the result is a continuation of that argument?

There's exactly one reason that this thread derailed (although it's rails were pretty rickety from the start) into a continuation of that argument and that reason has been (rather irresponsibly, in my opinion) encouraged by others who want to cut out a space for the "everyone wins" perspective in roguelikes.

[Rickton]

You asked an unfocused question that deals in themes that were the topic of recent arguments in other threads and you want to put it on everyone else that the result is a continuation of that argument?

Uh, yes, I want to put the blame for arguing on the people who were arguing. That's how things usually work.
You don't have to respond, especially when you know that it's futile because of the person you're dealing with.

There's exactly one reason that this thread derailed (although it's rails were pretty rickety from the start) into a continuation of that argument and that reason has been (rather irresponsibly, in my opinion) encouraged by others who want to cut out a space for the "everyone wins" perspective in roguelikes.

My intention wasn't "everyone wins," but come up with new ways to lose. You're right, though, maybe I should have been more clear at the start. But while we're slinging blame around, LazyCat wasn't just encouraged by the people supporting him. People don't say "don't feed the trolls" because it's catchy.
On the other other hand, you're right, this is all my fault, because apparently even mentioning permadeath is enough to send him into a frenzy.

[jim]

wtf? Eat a donut and take it down a notch, human!

What is your objection about?

My great grandfather was a nazi, you insensitive clod!

As always,
Minotauros

Heh. Your posts are always a pleasure to read.