User Avatar Image

How should this game handle ingame deaths?

posted by Chyron8472 on - last edited - Viewed by 4.4K users
How should this KQ game approach dying? Specifically, should it have a "Restore/Restart/Quit" popup with only manual saves, should it have a "Try Again" popup with autosaves set right before encountering unavoidable death, or should it have less frequent autosaves and still require you to manually restore?

Do you have any different ideas?
193 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • It's not worth freaking out over that much, Chyron. :) He's as passionate and dedicated to the playing style he likes as you are to yours.
  • I'm not freaking out. His argument just makes no sense in this thread wherein we're talking about really what Telltale should implement in their KQ game. To say that TTG should make it more like Amnesia and less like King's Quest, especially without even having played a KQ game before, is just wrong in a number of ways.

    I think that he's coloring aspects of the KQ series as being worse than they really are primarily because he has a lack of experience with the games. If he actually played even the AGDI KQ remakes for long enough, he ought to see that it's not as bad as he says it is.... or if it was, he would have real experiences from which to draw in making his argument, rather than just saying that Sierra games suck and that you don't need to ever play a game with manual saves to know whether it's a terrible gameplay mechanic or not.
  • I played the first remake for like 20 minutes once. I didn't feel like the ability to walk off of cliffs by misclicking or sometimes having a monster randomly slowly walk towards me added any sense of danger to the game.

    I played the original Space Quest until I walked into a room and was shot to death immediately.

    The only Sierra adventure game I have ever actually completed was Shivers 2. I enjoyed it but there were very few places you could actually die, iirc.

    Also, it's not exactly a Sierra game, but I've played Hugo 3: Jungle of Doom to completion.

    Though, to be honest, I don't see how any of this makes a difference, because I spend probably more time than any other human on earth thinking about game design and mechanics, and manual save is nice to be able to do, but I really don't see how a game automatically saving after you complete some large task is anything but a convenience.

    Also, the "being mad at yourself vs being mad at the game" argument does not work for me, because I'm mad at the game if it's a cheap death, and mad at myself if it's my fault for being stupid/unskilled, it has nothing to do with who created the most recent save file.
  • MusicallyInspired;484752 said:
    I got just as much satisfaction from playing/solving DOTT and Myst as I did from KQ games.
    So did I. But for completely different reasons. I outlined those reasons above. LucasArts games had witty and funny dialogue and great storytelling to make up for it. King's Quest was great for completely different reasons. That's why there are fans of Sierra and people who hate Sierra. And the same for LucasArts and Myst games. You can't compare the two that way.
    I find the gameplay equally satisfying, there's nothing about the gameplay in Myst or DOTT that needs to be "made up for" as far as I'm concerned, and to me these games and KQ were all great for very similar reasons. (And in my book, story and dialogue can only go so far to compensate for gameplay deficiencies anyway.) That's why I characterized your post as sounding like the possibility of death with real consequences is necessary for you to be satisfied with gameplay, if not the overall game. Which is fine, lots of gamers would agree. :) I was just saying that I can go either way on the issue of death and consequences and wouldn't argue, in the abstract, that one style makes for more satisfying gameplay than the other.

    In this specific case, however, I argue that if you're renewing a franchise in which death and consequences were centrally important, those aspects of gameplay should be preserved at least as an option. But I think we're all agreed on the need for choice, so I'm enjoying the latter part of this thread as a more general discussion on death and consequences in gaming. It's an interesting one even if KQ is being used as the whipping boy by one side. :p God knows Myst gets used as a whipping boy by the opposite side (often by people who've never played it!) in these kinds of discussions all the time, so consider the table turned. :D
  • That's an excellent post you have there.

  • Heck, for me, some of the replay value came in trying to find the various ways to kill off Graham/Larry/Roger/Valanice/Rosella/Gwydion/Alexander after I'd played the game a few times already just to see the ways they would rip into me for failing. Personal favorite from Space Quest III: Deceleration Trauma: Its not the fall that gets you, its the sudden stop at the bottom.
  • Lol. Good times. Personally, I feel completely differently about Space Quest, though. Games where death is a huge source of the comedy I'd actually feel ok with adding retries. As an adventure game I'm against it, but as a Space Quest game at the same time I'm ok with it.
  • Yeah! Half the fun of Space Quest is seeing all the deaths! I know we put a lot of charm and effort into all the animations and other special fun stuff that accompanies dying in our SQ2 game.

  • How's that coming along, Blackthorne?
  • ScreamingFalcon;485275 said:
    How's that coming along, Blackthorne?
    Very well. The game is complete and fully playable. Just squashing bugs and adding polish. Work has slowed down lately as several of our team members are especially busy with work/school this time of year. Summer should hopefully see the last few kinks ironed out. We're very confident it will be out this year, sooner rather than later.
Add Comment