4 ms·

Vote yes to permanent death [1] in MMOs! Richard Bartle: "[without permanent death] Newbies (and not-so-newbies) feel they can never catch up. The people in fr

by wodow 14y ago

Vote yes to permanent death [1] in MMOs! Richard Bartle: "[without permanent death] Newbies (and not-so-newbies) feel they can never catch up. The people in front will always be in front, and there's no way to overtake them. The horizon advances at the speed you approach it." [2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_death http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_death [2] Designing Virtual Worlds, 2003

lnanek2 14y ago
Never catch up isn't really true, it depends on the game. I prefer perma-death games, and often you see a situation where you will reach max levels in the game in one month or less if you work really hard or have expert assistance. Of course item collecting might take a year if your guild doesn't equip you, and skill building might take a life time. Wow had to do what they do to build a never ending money sapping treadmill, but it isn't the only way.
glurgh 14y ago
Really, permanent death? PvP corpse looting? These are profoundly user-hating mechanics and their removal is likely among the factors that made WoW successful. There are other ways to allow newbies to catch up and to incentivize or disincentivize players that don't rely on 'ruining your month of gameplay'.
- tsumnia 14y ago
  I think its not so much user-hated as difference of taste. I love the perma-death aspect of a lot of the games I've played because I get to appreciate all I've earned. That being said, to balance it our, you remove the idea of 'epic loot' (things that take months to earn). Now, the hit of death isn't game-ending. Games like Realm of the Mad God, DayZ, and Minecraft (its survival based multiplayer) make this perma-death a part of the game (though Minecraft, you keep the character). You feel defeated, but not dissuaded towards playing. The way to keep newbies is to make the gear they can earn secondary to the gameplay.
- wodow 14y ago
  Yes, really - but it is a matter of taste as tsumnia says in the sibling comment In Monopoly, I can go bankrupt. In Nethack, I can (and often do) die. In Super Mario Bros 1, I can lose all of my lives. In football, I can get knocked out of the Champions League (by a red card). In all of these cases, the fact that I can "lose" creates meaning - I care more about the outcome and I appreciate my achievements more. And one never loses everything - the skills stay with you. "Next time I can do better." Counterbalancing, for a different mood: works like Ocarina of Time are still great, but they sit separately - they're about the journey, not about the achievements.
  - glurgh 14y ago
    I think the difference is that Monopoly, Nethack and Mario are intended to be played short term. Of course you can lose terribly in Monopoly and Nethack elevates dying to part of the gameplay. The stakes are a little different in a long-term, persistent world MMO. The Mario you died with is, for the most part, the same Mario you started with. This is not the case in an MMO. Punishing you, irrevocably, for dying in that situation is a dreadful, fun-destroying design choice. Even in platformers, it's probably telling that one of the most successful recent ones is Jon Blow's Braid where you not only don't die but you get to reverse time.
- warfangle 14y ago
  They wouldn't work in a carnival-lite atmosphere like WoW, because so much of your self-worth in said game is how much ph4t lewtz you have and whether or not you're at the level cap. PvP corpse looting works exceptionally well in Eve Online. You don't really have permanent death, there, though. And if a month of your gameplay gets ruined by getting instacane blapped in Eve, you're doing it wrong. Never undock with what you can't afford to replace.
columbo 14y ago
Agreed. I'd much rather play a MMO that included permanent death but the balance needs to be there. It can be a much more rewarding experience, especially the types of conflict that you can create (actually pkilling someone from a league and having that league come after you) If the entry point is too high (say several weeks of grinding to get even a mid-level player) people will be less likely to venture out and play the game. The reward is very low for the risk. If the entry point is too low then it'll just be a FPS. Striking that balance is really tough. In my opinion, a permanent death MMO it should take about 20 hours of grinding to reach the top 2%, 60 hours of grind to reach the top 1%, and 400 hours to reach the top %0.01 (and so on).
- Shivetya 14y ago
  Permadeath sounds cool, is great for many to boast about around the virtual water cooler, but in the end suffers from the simple fact, things go wrong and people cheat. You can self replicate perma death for yourself in any game you play but I know most people would not, they would rather be water cooler hard cores. Having recently played XCOM which has a perma death for your troopers I lost my taste real quick because of bugs. Players certainly won't pay for a perma death MMO where they died because of bugs or cheating; there will be cheating. A free to play perma death MMO might survive but even then its a fine line before the bugs push them over the edge. I really don't want to be in another MMO like Eve, where areas of the game are off limits or worse, certain groups go on nerd rages and just grief people who are no threat/not even interesting but convenient.
  - saraid216 14y ago
    > I really don't want to be in another MMO like Eve, where areas of the game are off limits or worse, certain groups go on nerd rages and just grief people who are no threat/not even interesting but convenient. Dude, if no one likes you, that isn't their fault.
    - outworlder 14y ago
      Besides, there are no "off-limits areas". You can venture that if you want to risk it. I know, because I enjoyed doing just that. There's nothing like invading a big alliance space, get chased by multiple pilots, and by some skilled (and lucky!) piloting managing to escape alive. All the while knowing that one screwup would cost the whole ship.
gavanwoolery 14y ago
I am a big fan of permadeath - in video games, not real life! Ramp up fast, die fast, no grind - that's the way I like it; Spelunky really taught me the value of this design.
saraid216 14y ago
There's so much more nuance to MMO design that seeing a blanket "yes to permadeath" request just feels wrong. Bartle got permadeath to work in a MUD where levels were social commentary on the British class system and individually meaningful rather than being one out of 70 or 80 or 120. Never add in features willy nilly because it sounds good. Figure out why they work well with your design.
outworlder 14y ago
This is only true if you are talking about level-based systems. UO had a skill cap, which you could reach rather quickly (less than a month if you had no life, a few months playing casually). After that, there was no difference. And you could even close the gap faster, by focusing on skills which made the most difference. You alchemy could wait. Also, there was a stat cap. There wasn't that much difference between a new player and a veteran. The veteran would have like 2x the amount of health compared to the newbie. This is in constrast to WOW, where it is not uncommon to have a 140x difference, or more. You actually had a decent shot against veterans, if you knew what you were doing.
AndyJPartridge 14y ago
It's a good concept if your Internet connection is reliable.
phaus 14y ago
I'm all for permanent death, but it absolute must be accompanied by rock-solid stability from the outset. Playing through Diablo III on all but the hardest difficulties, I must have died about 100 times due to extended lag spikes and only a few times due to my own mistakes.
__--__ 14y ago
I used to play a Star Wars MUD that had permanent death and a similarly aggressive PvP policy. As a result, there wasn't a single character that survived more than a few months. Considering the huge up front cost you had to pay in leveling, skill training and resource collection, eventually people got sick of having to start with nothing. Every time you died, you had to make the decision if it was worth starting over. The longer you played, the greater the chances that answer was "no." Player turnover was bad, especially for MUDs at that time. That's all my way of saying Permanent death may sound great in theory, but it takes a hell of a lot of balancing against to make it work well in the long term. Maybe making it easier to get up to speed with any single character? Or maybe making it worth your while to be altruistic to other players (I'm not sure what that mechanic would be, but it would be interesting to see something that make people more social as opposed to the antisocial element that PvP tends to foster).

by wodow 14y ago

lnanek2 14y ago

Never catch up isn't really true, it depends on the game. I prefer perma-death games, and often you see a situation where you will reach max levels in the game in one month or less if you work really hard or have expert assistance. Of course item collecting might take a year if your guild doesn't equip you, and skill building might take a life time. Wow had to do what they do to build a never ending money sapping treadmill, but it isn't the only way.

glurgh 14y ago

Really, permanent death? PvP corpse looting? These are profoundly user-hating mechanics and their removal is likely among the factors that made WoW successful. There are other ways to allow newbies to catch up and to incentivize or disincentivize players that don't rely on 'ruining your month of gameplay'.

tsumnia 14y ago
I think its not so much user-hated as difference of taste. I love the perma-death aspect of a lot of the games I've played because I get to appreciate all I've earned. That being said, to balance it our, you remove the idea of 'epic loot' (things that take months to earn). Now, the hit of death isn't game-ending. Games like Realm of the Mad God, DayZ, and Minecraft (its survival based multiplayer) make this perma-death a part of the game (though Minecraft, you keep the character). You feel defeated, but not dissuaded towards playing. The way to keep newbies is to make the gear they can earn secondary to the gameplay.
wodow 14y ago
Yes, really - but it is a matter of taste as tsumnia says in the sibling comment In Monopoly, I can go bankrupt. In Nethack, I can (and often do) die. In Super Mario Bros 1, I can lose all of my lives. In football, I can get knocked out of the Champions League (by a red card). In all of these cases, the fact that I can "lose" creates meaning - I care more about the outcome and I appreciate my achievements more. And one never loses everything - the skills stay with you. "Next time I can do better." Counterbalancing, for a different mood: works like Ocarina of Time are still great, but they sit separately - they're about the journey, not about the achievements.
- glurgh 14y ago
  I think the difference is that Monopoly, Nethack and Mario are intended to be played short term. Of course you can lose terribly in Monopoly and Nethack elevates dying to part of the gameplay. The stakes are a little different in a long-term, persistent world MMO. The Mario you died with is, for the most part, the same Mario you started with. This is not the case in an MMO. Punishing you, irrevocably, for dying in that situation is a dreadful, fun-destroying design choice. Even in platformers, it's probably telling that one of the most successful recent ones is Jon Blow's Braid where you not only don't die but you get to reverse time.
warfangle 14y ago
They wouldn't work in a carnival-lite atmosphere like WoW, because so much of your self-worth in said game is how much ph4t lewtz you have and whether or not you're at the level cap. PvP corpse looting works exceptionally well in Eve Online. You don't really have permanent death, there, though. And if a month of your gameplay gets ruined by getting instacane blapped in Eve, you're doing it wrong. Never undock with what you can't afford to replace.

columbo 14y ago

Agreed. I'd much rather play a MMO that included permanent death but the balance needs to be there. It can be a much more rewarding experience, especially the types of conflict that you can create (actually pkilling someone from a league and having that league come after you) If the entry point is too high (say several weeks of grinding to get even a mid-level player) people will be less likely to venture out and play the game. The reward is very low for the risk. If the entry point is too low then it'll just be a FPS. Striking that balance is really tough. In my opinion, a permanent death MMO it should take about 20 hours of grinding to reach the top 2%, 60 hours of grind to reach the top 1%, and 400 hours to reach the top %0.01 (and so on).

Shivetya 14y ago
Permadeath sounds cool, is great for many to boast about around the virtual water cooler, but in the end suffers from the simple fact, things go wrong and people cheat. You can self replicate perma death for yourself in any game you play but I know most people would not, they would rather be water cooler hard cores. Having recently played XCOM which has a perma death for your troopers I lost my taste real quick because of bugs. Players certainly won't pay for a perma death MMO where they died because of bugs or cheating; there will be cheating. A free to play perma death MMO might survive but even then its a fine line before the bugs push them over the edge. I really don't want to be in another MMO like Eve, where areas of the game are off limits or worse, certain groups go on nerd rages and just grief people who are no threat/not even interesting but convenient.
- saraid216 14y ago
  > I really don't want to be in another MMO like Eve, where areas of the game are off limits or worse, certain groups go on nerd rages and just grief people who are no threat/not even interesting but convenient. Dude, if no one likes you, that isn't their fault.
  - outworlder 14y ago
    Besides, there are no "off-limits areas". You can venture that if you want to risk it. I know, because I enjoyed doing just that. There's nothing like invading a big alliance space, get chased by multiple pilots, and by some skilled (and lucky!) piloting managing to escape alive. All the while knowing that one screwup would cost the whole ship.

gavanwoolery 14y ago

I am a big fan of permadeath - in video games, not real life! Ramp up fast, die fast, no grind - that's the way I like it; Spelunky really taught me the value of this design.

saraid216 14y ago

There's so much more nuance to MMO design that seeing a blanket "yes to permadeath" request just feels wrong. Bartle got permadeath to work in a MUD where levels were social commentary on the British class system and individually meaningful rather than being one out of 70 or 80 or 120. Never add in features willy nilly because it sounds good. Figure out why they work well with your design.

outworlder 14y ago

This is only true if you are talking about level-based systems. UO had a skill cap, which you could reach rather quickly (less than a month if you had no life, a few months playing casually). After that, there was no difference. And you could even close the gap faster, by focusing on skills which made the most difference. You alchemy could wait. Also, there was a stat cap. There wasn't that much difference between a new player and a veteran. The veteran would have like 2x the amount of health compared to the newbie. This is in constrast to WOW, where it is not uncommon to have a 140x difference, or more. You actually had a decent shot against veterans, if you knew what you were doing.

AndyJPartridge 14y ago

It's a good concept if your Internet connection is reliable.

phaus 14y ago

I'm all for permanent death, but it absolute must be accompanied by rock-solid stability from the outset. Playing through Diablo III on all but the hardest difficulties, I must have died about 100 times due to extended lag spikes and only a few times due to my own mistakes.

__--__ 14y ago

I used to play a Star Wars MUD that had permanent death and a similarly aggressive PvP policy. As a result, there wasn't a single character that survived more than a few months. Considering the huge up front cost you had to pay in leveling, skill training and resource collection, eventually people got sick of having to start with nothing. Every time you died, you had to make the decision if it was worth starting over. The longer you played, the greater the chances that answer was "no." Player turnover was bad, especially for MUDs at that time. That's all my way of saying Permanent death may sound great in theory, but it takes a hell of a lot of balancing against to make it work well in the long term. Maybe making it easier to get up to speed with any single character? Or maybe making it worth your while to be altruistic to other players (I'm not sure what that mechanic would be, but it would be interesting to see something that make people more social as opposed to the antisocial element that PvP tends to foster).