The complexity of this game has surpassed non-optional permadeath

[pulsefrequency]

that post wasnt for hyena. it was for literally everyone else.

and rivet you are a zombie your only opinion is brains ;p

[Hyena_Grin]

[quote=“pulsefrequency, post:138, topic:5464”]this thread has prompted me to extensively research permanent death and quickloading over the last few days or so.
i will leave the three i found most relevant to this discussion here, here, and here.

removing permanent death will completely remove death for good. there will be no more death in cataclysm.
permanent death is a fundamental part of what makes cataclysm fun. without permanent death, there is ABSOLUTELY no challenge, every single one of your decisions are COMPLETELY meaningless, and there is no reason to play more than an hour or two.

if you remove permanent death from the game, then the game will not be fun. QEFD.[/quote]

Geez, I guess I better delete all the other games in my library since I guess they were never fun. Cataclysm doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. You do realize there are hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use permadeath and somehow manage to be fun regardless? Do I really need to point this out?

Either one of two things has happened here;

1. You have never played a game that doesn’t have permadeath, and presumably either don’t know other games exist, or
2. You have never played a game that doesn’t have permadeath, and enjoyed it.

So which one is it.

Also, wiki, RPS, and Edge do not constitute extensive research. If your goal were to say ‘hey, here’s some stuff that says permadeath can be an interesting feature’ then once again, you’re late to the party. Because I agree. I quite like permadeath being available as a feature, and I would use it. If I make the decision that I want to play a game ironman, it’s nice to have the game basically backing me up and not letting me weasel out of it. However, none of this provides any kind of rationale for not allowing people to choose to play the game without permadeath. Arguments in favor of one thing does not equate to arguments against another thing unless they are mutually exclusive.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Edit:
@BeigeSand, oops, misread your comment.

[pulsefrequency]

you are trolling hard bro

every single one of your statements are calculated to insult, yet pass as an innocent argument

honestly… fuck it thats really all there is to say

and if you seriously just went through and downvoted all my youtube videos… good job

[Chiko]

Geez, I guess I better delete all the other games in my library since I guess they were never fun. Cataclysm doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. You do realize there are hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use permadeath and somehow manage to be fun regardless? Do I really need to point this out?

Some of us eventually get bored of those hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use the permadeath challenge. Good thing roguelike or roguelike-ish games exist. :3

Gotta love variety in games. I get bored of roguelikes, I move to FPS games and then RTS games after that, etc.

[Hyena_Grin]

[quote=“Hyena Grin, post:142, topic:5464”]Geez, I guess I better delete all the other games in my library since I guess they were never fun. Cataclysm doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. You do realize there are hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use permadeath and somehow manage to be fun regardless? Do I really need to point this out?

Some of us eventually get bored of those hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use the permadeath challenge. Good thing roguelike or roguelike-ish games exist. :3

Gotta love variety in games. I get bored of roguelikes, I move to FPS games and then RTS games after that, etc.[/quote]

I definitely agree. I do the same thing. Variety is the spice of life, and I do play permadeath. Obviously, if I play a lot of Cata and Dwarf Fortress.

It’s just nice to have an option within the game. And again, I can’t see a reason not to have the option to turn it off. It’s not like it would prevent anyone from playing it with permadeath, as the default.

The graveyard thing may or may not be a good compromise. My hope is that they will save the previous save, and not just your ‘dead save.’ Fixing a dead character with debug and text file editing is not exactly the same thing as loading a previous save.

[pulsefrequency]

[quote=“Chiko, post:144, topic:5464”][quote=“Hyena Grin, post:142, topic:5464”]Geez, I guess I better delete all the other games in my library since I guess they were never fun. Cataclysm doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. You do realize there are hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use permadeath and somehow manage to be fun regardless? Do I really need to point this out?

Some of us eventually get bored of those hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use the permadeath challenge. Good thing roguelike or roguelike-ish games exist. :3

Gotta love variety in games. I get bored of roguelikes, I move to FPS games and then RTS games after that, etc.[/quote]

I definitely agree. I do the same thing. Variety is the spice of life, and I do play permadeath. Obviously, if I play a lot of Cata and Dwarf Fortress.

It’s just nice to have an option within the game. And again, I can’t see a reason not to have the option to turn it off. It’s not like it would prevent anyone from playing it with permadeath, as the default.[/quote]

the game is not a game without permadeath. it is masturbation. that is your reason.

[Chiko]

[quote=“Chiko, post:144, topic:5464”][quote=“Hyena Grin, post:142, topic:5464”]Geez, I guess I better delete all the other games in my library since I guess they were never fun. Cataclysm doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. You do realize there are hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use permadeath and somehow manage to be fun regardless? Do I really need to point this out?

Some of us eventually get bored of those hundreds, thousands of games out there that do not use the permadeath challenge. Good thing roguelike or roguelike-ish games exist. :3

Gotta love variety in games. I get bored of roguelikes, I move to FPS games and then RTS games after that, etc.[/quote]

I definitely agree. I do the same thing. Variety is the spice of life, and I do play permadeath. Obviously, if I play a lot of Cata and Dwarf Fortress.

It’s just nice to have an option within the game. And again, I can’t see a reason not to have the option to turn it off. It’s not like it would prevent anyone from playing it with permadeath, as the default.

The graveyard thing may or may not be a good compromise. My hope is that they will save the previous save, and not just your ‘dead save.’ Fixing a dead character with debug and text file editing is not exactly the same thing as loading a previous save.[/quote]
It would make a good option for the debug menu, actually.

Maybe it’s the thought of knowing ppl would abuse it. Survival games are meant to be enjoyed in a certain way and making the main feature optional could seem like a bad idea for the devs, who care about what the game should be about, which might explain why it has not been implemented, me thinks.

[Hyena_Grin]

Being able to turn off autosave on death in the debug menu would be perfect, actually. That’s an excellent idea. I wonder if Kevin/Gryph/Rivet et al would go for that. It would hide it from the main interface and make it clear that it’s not… the ‘intended’ way to play.

I wouldn’t mind going into the debug menu to turn it off at the start of a game. And it beats trying to resurrect a dead character from a graveyard folder.

[BeigeSand]

While a game does by definition, need a way to lose/win, maybe people play it as a simulator, or a medium through which to tell a story, or for creative fulfillment. I think that’s probably where communication is failing here. I agree that as a game, with a goal, cataclysm falls apart without permadeath, I can reasonably see someone playing cataclysm as something other than the typical definition of a game. A debug function is probably the most reasonable way to implement it, although I’ve yet to see the menu used as a turn on/off switch for something.

[KA101]

Use-cases for loading a file after the char’s Died:

a) testing something that requires destroying $STUFF that’s complex to duplicate via Debug, and kills the char in the process
(Solution: save and backup the world, paste it back over as needed)

b) Reversing an undesired RNG outcome
.1) Outcome from random item (undesired mutation, bad bionic install, etc): save first, X out of process, reload rather than Q->Y. Quit w/o saving has been around for a long while on Windows, at least. One advantage to not playing on Linux.
.2) Didn’t like that mapgen result: same solution, provided you knew about the reality bubble and saved before approaching within 3-4 overmap tiles of your target

c) Reversing that $THING_THAT_DIDN’T_GO_WELL
As b.

I don’t play DDA (or any other roguelike-kinda-game) for permadeath, but I know a solid workaround and I’m not afraid to use it. I’ve no objection to you using that workaround. I’ve no objection to a graveyard directory to streamline the workaround.

I object to making that workaround a part of the actual game interface. I agree that given the option most players would opt to keep their character and lose whatever progress they’d made since they last saved; that lost-progress is nevertheless useful information.

So yeah, in case there was any confusion, I’m in full agreement with Rivet, Kevin, and GlyphGryph.

(For those of you who questioned whether devs would lose time on this? This thread’s cost me at least an hour of time I could have been using to make “dig downward stairs” a construction-menu option. I think most players would welcome that. Do you mind?)

[kevin.granade]

serious question: would graveyard/playername.dead plus graveyard/playername.last-save do what you need? that’s a level of support I’m totally on board with.
stashing debug options in the debug menu instead of a section of the options menu is an interesting idea. it also adresses the clutter issue in the options menu somewhat (I care a lot less about the debug menu being cluttered)
regarding the issue of permadeath as a valid game mechanic, some thoughts.
many game mechanics simply break with the addition of quick save/load, some examples are mutagen, cbm installation, npc interactions, combat, monster spawns, mapgen, disease effects, medicine. yea, that’s most of the game. If this were a checkpointed game, I would put a lot of work into “hardening” these interactions against RNG maniputlation, which is wasted effort if permadeath is a given.
A more general issue is roguelike(-like)s and consequences. a concequence that more graphically* oriented games have is visceral, ascii games are totally lacking in this department and to some extent compensate by being harsher.
*insert as many "-like"s as you “like”.
**often literally viscera.

[Hyena_Grin]

Kevin;

Either graveyard/playername.dead plus graveyard/playername.last-save, or stashing an option in the debug, would be a perfectly generous compromise. Honestly, whichever takes less effort to implement, as this is obviously not a high priority for the team.

Re: Mutagen etc, you can already savescum this stuff with the method KA101 mentioned. Though I can certainly understand not wanting to make that easier or encouraged inside the UI of the game. For my part, I really don’t think a quicksave/load system is necessary. My issue has always been the instant autosaving on death, which can sometimes occur unexpectedly and render a situation unsalvageable.

Both of the above options address that nicely.

[CIB]

many game mechanics simply break with the addition of quick save/load, some examples are mutagen, cbm installation, npc interactions, combat, monster spawns, mapgen, disease effects, medicine. yea, that’s most of the game.

Though as you’ve said, it’s much easier to just use debug to cheat if that’s what you after. Having the ability to savescum, doesn’t mean you’ll do it whenever you can benefit from it.

I think this mostly boils down to: Do I play the game to give myself, as a player, a challenge? Or do I just want to immerse myself in the gameworld and create an interesting story, aka roleplay? Personally I fall into the latter category, so that’s why I don’t really benefit much from enforced permadeath.

[GlyphGryph]

[quote=“Kevin Granade, post:151, topic:5464”]many game mechanics simply break with the addition of quick save/load, some examples are mutagen, cbm installation, npc interactions, combat, monster spawns, mapgen, disease effects, medicine. yea, that’s most of the game.

Though as you’ve said, it’s much easier to just use debug to cheat if that’s what you after. Having the ability to savescum, doesn’t mean you’ll do it whenever you can benefit from it.

I think this mostly boils down to: Do I play the game to give myself, as a player, a challenge? Or do I just want to immerse myself in the gameworld and create an interesting story, aka roleplay? Personally I fall into the latter category, so that’s why I don’t really benefit much from enforced permadeath.[/quote]
Psychologically, it doesn’t work that way though. If players have the option to savescum as a regular menu option, they will see it as an intended part of the game. When it’s not an intended part of the game, this can cause a LOT of balance problems. There are things you can do to make it appear more or less so. Gunpoint is a great example of ‘savescumming’ being a part of the game that people wouldn’t even think of NOT using, to my knowledge, because of the way it is represented, and avoiding that sort of situation in Cataclysm is important.

[halberdsturgeon]

Not everyone likes to gamble. Doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be allowed to play a game of poker without throwing in a fiver. A dyed-in-the-wool poker player would probably think they weren’t getting the real poker experience without the risk. But if the ‘real poker experience’ is unpleasant for someone, why would they want it?

You couldn’t have made my point better if you’d tried. Have you ever played poker without any sort of a wager? It completely undermines the game’s mechanics. Raising, bluffing and calling become zero risk activities and they cease to be meaningful parts of the game.

All I can say in response to that, is ‘What if you simply didn’t have the time to play 17 characters to get to that point?’

What is this timer you’re referring to? The game isn’t going to delete itself off your hard disk just because you can only play it for half an hour a day and it might take you a couple of weeks to explore a given part of it. Or are you saying that the game should cater better to people who require rapid gratification or else they quit whatever they’re doing? Because that’s not a very sympathetic argument.

I think this mostly boils down to: Do I play the game to give myself, as a player, a challenge? Or do I just want to immerse myself in the gameworld and create an interesting story, aka roleplay? Personally I fall into the latter category, so that’s why I don’t really benefit much from enforced permadeath.

Why are these two things mutually exclusive? Do you find it impossible to roleplay in any situation where you know your character will die? Because I find a character’s death is often the most interesting part of their story.

Anyway, this thread is absurdly long. I couldn’t care less if a “DIE? Y/N” option was added via the debug menu a la wizard mode, but optional death should never be part of the game proper.

[Hyena_Grin]

You couldn’t have made my point better if you’d tried. Have you ever played poker without any sort of a wager? It completely undermines the game’s mechanics. Raising, bluffing and calling become zero risk activities and they cease to be meaningful parts of the game.

Yes, all the time. I have played poker for money exactly once, and I will probably never do it again, because I do not get any kind of satisfaction out of gambling. And yet I’ve got a poker set. We play for chips. No, it’s not meaningless. You can still lose the game without a meaningful wager. When you play Monopoly there is nothing at risk, yet you can still lose the game, and somehow the game works without replacing the rainbow-paper with real money.

I would not claim that games that traditionally involve some meaningful risk component are different when you remove it, but to make the assertion that these games are not fun or are somehow broken by removing the risk component is to ignore every single game out there that does not include money bets.

And there are tons of games that include bluffing and betting, but no actual money. In fact there is an entire genre of boardgames built around bluffing. You don’t need to risk anything to enjoy a game. Is it a different kind of enjoyment? Yes. Is one kind objectively better than the other? No.

What is this timer you're referring to? The game isn't going to delete itself off your hard disk just because you can only play it for half an hour a day and it might take you a couple of weeks to explore a given part of it. Or are you saying that the game should cater better to people who require rapid gratification or else they quit whatever they're doing? Because that's not a very sympathetic argument.

Start a family. See what kind of entertainment you tend to gravitate toward when you only have 30 minutes to an hour of time to play games in a day. This doesn’t apply to everyone - some people would still cheerfully play Cataclysm under those time constraints. But it is a commonly understood phenomenon that the aging generation of gamers who grew up on ‘hardcore’ gaming (anything that requires a large amount of time investment to enjoy), who now are holding down jobs and looking after their kids, are migrating to games which can be played and enjoyed in a shorter period of time. You hear people talking about this all the time.

Every game has what I would call a mean time to enjoyment. A grand strategy game, for example, is no fun in short bursts. You need to be able to sit down, dig in, and see the fruits of your labours. It takes time for decisions to pan out. A half an hour would just leave you unsatisfied.

You could ignore these people. Surely. But you wouldn’t be right in disparaging them their choices.

[halberdsturgeon]

Yes, all the time. I have played poker for money exactly once, and I will probably never do it again, because I do not get any kind of satisfaction out of gambling. And yet I’ve got a poker set. We play for chips. No, it’s not meaningless. You can still lose the game without a meaningful wager. When you play Monopoly there is nothing at risk, yet you can still lose the game, and somehow the game works without replacing the rainbow-paper with real money.

Now try playing Monopoly without the paper money, or poker without chips. Or for a more analogous experience, play those games with a house rule that if anyone makes a significant loss, or is eliminated from the game, or simply doesn’t like something that happened, they can undo their last few turns. See how long it takes for players to get bored when everyone knows that there’s nothing at risk and the game need never end.

Start a family. See what kind of entertainment you tend to gravitate toward when you only have 30 minutes to an hour of time to play games in a day. This doesn’t apply to everyone - some people would still cheerfully play Cataclysm under those time constraints. But it is a commonly understood phenomenon that the aging generation of gamers who grew up on ‘hardcore’ gaming (anything that requires a large amount of time investment to enjoy), who now are holding down jobs and looking after their kids, are migrating to games which can be played and enjoyed in a shorter period of time.

I fail to see what this has to do with anything. How would the ability to reload whenever you die make a game like Cataclysm appeal to the sort of people who’d not be interested in anything more complex than Angry Birds or Fruit Ninja in the first place? Are you really arguing that there’s a significant demographic of thirty-something family people out there whose decision to play a game like this hinges on whether or not it has a quickload feature? Let’s stop being disingenuous - the people who argue the loudest for quickload in a game like this aren’t people who don’t have the time to play a game without it, they’re people who have plenty of time, but would prefer their invulnerability complex be vindicated by the developers rather than to have to deal with the fact that they’re technically cheating and cheapening the intent of the game every time they save scum.

[Sean_Mirrsen]

[quote=“halberdsturgeon, post:157, topic:5464”]I fail to see what this has to do with anything. How would the ability to reload whenever you die make a game like Cataclysm appeal to the sort of people who’d not be interested in anything more complex than Angry Birds or Fruit Ninja in the first place? Are you really arguing that there’s a significant demographic of thirty-something family people out there whose decision to play a game like this hinges on whether or not it has a quickload feature? Let’s stop being disingenuous - the people who argue the loudest for quickload in a game like this aren’t people who don’t have the time to play a game without it, they’re people who have plenty of time, but would prefer their invulnerability complex be vindicated by the developers rather than to have to deal with the fact that they’re technically cheating and cheapening the intent of the game every time they save scum.[/quote]Now that last part is not necessarily true. People who don’t have much time to play definitely exist, and they could probably want to have that sort of rapid gratification from a game.

Perhaps it’s better to say that, as designed, Cataclysm is simply not a game made for such people? And honestly, if that’s the case, I do not see a reason why it needs to cater to them as well. The game has a right to its niche.

[halberdsturgeon]

I know that people who don’t have a lot of time for gaming exist. I’m saying that the type of people who demand a full game experience in thirty minutes of play aren’t going to be interested in a complex game like Cataclysm whether it has permadeath or not, and why should it cater to them anyway?

[Soyweiser]

FYI: I’m not reading this discussion anymore. If it yields any worthwhile conclusions I’m happy be informed later.