Death and what is actually costs ??? Needs to implement meaniful consequences ASAP.

I think there should be a slight to moderate XP/Cash gain on death.

On closer inspection of some of the skeletons I have encountered whilst adventuring, it appears some people have managed to get themselves killed in truly innovative and noteworthy ways.

Perhaps a box on corpses similar to the "Like" button used in these forums, that you can click on to recognize their outstanding achievement.

 

Can you please explain to me how that would make the game more fun to play? I'm not seeing it.

 

Its more fun than waiting out a timed death penalty, and more fun than dealing with XP drops and all other death mechanics I've seen suggested -- while being effective enough for players to lead them to try to avoid death, which also makes combat more fun and less about a grind -- and, at the same time, introducing a lot of role-playing elements which are also fun.

 

It would help a little since people can a) teleport, recall away after they bypassed hard area as ghosts and b) start on overworld map after relog if they are too encumbered to teleport. I still think we should all items or at least any of them (and all aquired in scene on top of that). Dying should slow people down not speed them up by effectively avoiding choking points in scenes full of NPCs.

 

Hilt for instance has ghosts at the ankh near the silver mine, but it's beside the point.
I see what your saying, death shouldn't be a power up, a way to cheese the system, train summoning, bypass obstacles, etc.

I have no problem with them eliminating the "benefits" of death, I wouldn't complain about that at all.
But most of the ideas suggested are not about taking away benefits they are about punishments for dying that makes the game "less fun" that's what I'm opposed to.

 

+1

 

It does, ankhs beig spawn camped by NPCs are just as bad as ankhs past them. Though I think this particular ankh is good to mention in this thread, it is quite possible to lure NPCs further away from ankhs, die, and respawn safely.

 

It's funny.

I backed it because I felt it was a bland promise to bring back the clock to when men were men.

Having a setback in the progression is NOT the end of the world. It's part of the path to success. I totally despise how games nowadays give you only one direction: straight ahead - even if you do absolutely, mindnumbingly stupid things. Rewarding you regardless of what you do, whether you deserve the reward or not. At times (the ghost "power up" at hand) rewarding you more for doing the wrong thing.

If you're rewarded, pushed forward, granted progress regardless of what you actually do, then rewards themselves are diminished, impoverished, devalued. You'd get them anyway. Dead or alive, you'll cross that Control Point. The false sense of accomplishment that you have when your playing session is over and you're not set back wrt when you started, means that you will never have a REAL sense of accomplishment for a true, setbacking hurdle to surpass.

Game designers are tasked with a choice. Reward everyone everytime, or putting hurdles in place where some will make it, some won't. I know fully well where the industry at large has moved. I regret when it took me many attempts (with VAST setbacks) to overcome the puzzle, the boss, the difficult area. Instead, everyone is entitled to every success automatically. It's a bland world when everything is measured up only against metaphorical diaper wearers (on both sides of the age spectrum).

 

At the moment, death is inconvenient.
Have to run and find an ankh (which sometimes you can't get to, and you have to log to world map, if there are closed doors/etc. between you and the ankh)
Have to wait at said ankh, an increasing amount of time with more deaths etc.
Then have to run back to wherever you were before you had to run to the ankh.
Costs you a bit of time and a bit of annoyance, which is all very fine.

I don't think death should be trivial, but given the serious overhauls that are still going on with combat and the repeated nerfs, I wouldn't call making the death penalty more punitive a priority. Certainly not until the combat balance has been more or less ironed out.

 

I think the original point of the OP is that it is easier to get players used to death mechanics now than to wait and bring them in later. It's more about perception than prioritizing mechanics.

I think there is a certain case to be made there but we'll see. Depends on what those death mechanics will be. I personally am sticking with injury. It's a lot more interesting and depending on balance won't necessarily feel so harsh unless you let them accumulate.

 

Wow EXACTLY, I d not care one little bit about what they do just that they need to do is, ASAP.

 

I think your post and mine are about two different things. You're looking at it from the perspective that everyone wants an award for participation, no matter what they do, they can pretty much faceroll everything and do just fine. I'm speaking more about putting too many punitive systems in place that make the game a chore, not just difficult. As far as feeling triumph after a setback, that's pretty natural I think. I feel that sense of accomplishment finally beating a difficult boss or area after some failed attempts. It's part of gaming. However, I will not agree that losing skill levels, possibly important items if corpse runs become necessary, is some how a 'setback' to be overcome. No one wants to spend time gaming (not doing mindnumbingly, stupid things) and log off worse off than when they logged in. UO did this in the beginning and then they added insurance on items you could buy after each death so you could make sure to hold on to certain important items rather than losing your entire gear at the bottom of some dungeon. It's worse when something silly like lag gets you killed and that happens.

I'm saying that there are many suggestions floating around about how to make the game more 'realistic', which usually amounts to either being harder, inconvenient or at worst, annoying. I'm fine when these things get added in measured doses to enhance the game in the long run but too many of them and the game is just punishing and not very fun. I'm surprised people would actually like corpse runs. To me, that's just masochistic. You want people to stop running through control points? Make the ankh only appear at the entrance to the zone they started at so they can't just res at the other end. I like Bowen's idea of injuries. I've seen it done in other games and that's what I would call a 'setback' rather than a punishment. You can keep pressing on but your effectiveness is just going to get progressively worse until you concede defeat, head back and get yourself taken care of.

In the end, it's about balancing the penalties. Not everyone is going to appreciate 'vast' setbacks for regular play and some will. There needs to be a middle ground to make this challenging without being needlessly punishing is what I'm advocating. Not everyone has tons of time to put into a single game and when they do, I doubt anyone wants to feel their time is wasted by losing too much.

 

And I agree with you.

Balance between two extremes is the ideal. But for the two extremes to be evaluated, there must be someone voicing the details and desires.

I'm the one advocating for one of the extremes - the psycho hardcore insane one.

And - as I wrote - I'll be glad with any sensible balance reached once the [remove by Berek] gamers with less flexible schedule voice their own.

As other pointed out, however, any balance meant to close the most blatant loopholes better be done sooner rather than later - no matter what choice will be taken. The more accustomed to one exploit the players are, the harder to change their habits without riots and angry mobs.

 

I remember doing corpse runs in Asheron's Call. That was hard because your corpse didn't display on the map and you rezzed at your recall point. I'd always lose my corpse and get tells from random people later asking if I'd misplaced myself. Plus if you died somewhere hard then you might have to rally a group to help you get it back. People carried expensive death items that they were prepared to lose since the system used item value to determine what stayed behind on the corpse. Items with no drop stats became highly sought.

Good (and horrible but fun) memories.

Not that I'm suggesting any of that here /peacesign

Would be nice for my rez spell to be more meaningful though.

 

I'd like to see what the devs thoughts are on it before stating any of my opinions. It'd be nice to have a baseline of where they are thinking. I can adapt to most anything so unless it's psycho hardcore insane rules, then I'll probably be fine with it.

Yes, using exploits to mitigate difficulty is definitely something that should be closed up sooner than later, I have no disagreement there.

I reread your post but I'm not seeing where you spoke about reaching a balance. It's mainly just saying how entitled gamers are that want a win button with every game. Where did you mention hearing others' voices?

To me, having been a power gamer and min/maxer earlier in my gaming life, I understand the need for challenge but I also know that I had a lot more time to become that powerful back then. More time is always going to produce better results if you're willing to forgo everything for one game. The downside is that you're always ahead of all the content and leveling curve so nothing ever seems hard enough. However, nowadays, I'm 'more' casual than I was but not what people would call a casual gamer. So I understand the need for keeping things moderate in the long term. If anything, I'd love to see difficulty sliders similar to D3 that increased the challenges and risks but also gave better rewards. I'm fine trying to go for something harder when I'm up for it but I'd also like to relax and just play after work somedays too.

As an aside, I've never quite understood why gamers needed to come up with terms that are meant to be derogatory of their fellow gamers. Carebears, for instance. Sure, you struck through it, but why not just delete it if you're going to reword it? Besides, does it really mean having less time to play? I always thought it was people who don't want to be sheep for the PvP crowd. *shrug* Either way, leaving it there speaks volumes to me about how you really feel about gamers not the same as yourself. I've seen hugbox too. Now, that's a newer one for me but I get the meaning. RPers get way too much grief for just playing the way they like, in my opinion. Diaper wearers? Yea, that just seems like a blatant insult so I'll just let that one go. I guess having been around so long and been on both sides of the fence, I don't see the need for these types of terminologies. They're no better than common slurs except they won't get your post moderated. Especially when someone advocates a certain point of view and then disparages others using terms like these. To me, your whole post gets deflated because you just told me how you really feel. If people want to argue points with me, fine. Keep the name calling out of it or you've already nullified your entire point in my opinion.

E.g. There's nothing wrong at all with carebears... oops! I mean, 'gamers with less flexible schedules'! Phew, thank goodness for strikethrough since my backspace key clearly doesn't work!