View Single Post
Old 04-29-2008, 11:10 AM   #5
LoD
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12
LoD is on a distinguished road
Re: What types of games are impacted the most by permadeath?

The overall question is, "What types of games are impacted most by permadeath?"

By the context of the argument, it appears that this question is asking what types of games are impacted in a negative fashion by permadeath. This question could delve into questions such as how permadeath systems impact player retention, levels of abuse, twinkery, boredom, etc...?

So the theory is, "AFS-type MUDs are impacted less by a permadeath system because there is less to lose that cannot be replaced since most people are interested in role-play and role-play is an ongoing trait of AFS-type MUDs."

I definitely believe that the coded focus of H&S games does cause permadeath systems to hit closer to home in terms of what it takes away from the player, but I also believe that's a fault of the H&S game design and that certain changes could help alleviate some of the issues. Issues that seem to help lessen the sting in AFS type games would be:
Both Hack and Slash and AFS, or RPI, games require an investment on behalf of the player.

The investment on part of the Hack and Slasher is contained almost entirely within their achieved coded successes. If asked to describe their character, they would probably respond by listing pieces of particularly glowy or humming gear that ***DEVASTATES*** you in the face since skill distribution is likely fairly similar at the upper echelons of each class choice.

The investment on behalf of the role-player is in both the coded success and the role-play experiences the character has attained. When asked to describe their character, they would probably provide you with a few personality traits, physical appearance, background story, current job, and perhaps a blurb about how proficient they are in some of their skills if that's been a focus of their character.

Losing either character would result in a sense of loss for losing that investment of time and energy. However, I would wager that AFS players would be slightly less frustrated because they still have a wealth of memories and experiences from which to draw when they remember that character. When people talk of their characters, they don't talkabout the leet gear they had, or how fast they downed Zone 27 -- they talk about the stories of which they were a part. They relay encounters and convoluted plots in which they participated. Something remains of that investment even after death, and that may also factor into why permanent death isn't quite as harsh to AFS type games.

Now, I mentioned that I wouldn't necessarily place H&S on a linear scale by default because it would be possible to create a H&S game that was better designed to support permanent death. You could increase the complexity of the classes and class choices, allowing for many varied paths to power and methods of improving that don't focus on the same grind day after day. It could still be fairly devoid of RP, but still be a more interesting interface so that repeat characters wouldn't swiftly become boring and/or aggravating. You could alter the world in some way so that the zones change or evolve somehow so that the experience of moving through them can be different from week to week, month to month, year to year.

So, my answer to the initial question would be this:

The games that are impacted most by permanent death systems are the ones whose game design and game world offers the least about of unique repeat play, complex character development, and most rigid linear ascension to coded power.

-LoD
LoD is offline   Reply With Quote