A plead to the Developer to reconsider forcing Permadeath on a playerbase which can easily work around it.

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1
A plead to the Developer to reconsider forcing Permadeath on a playerbase which can easily work around it.

While I am a huge fan of permadeath, forcing it on the player in a singleplayer game is ludicrous. The programmer has already implemented the save-anytime feature, so there is little reason to not allow players to load past saves. In the end, anyone who wants will scum-save anyway, and it is always best to not be like religious fundies and force your playstyle down other's throats like some developers do who actually spend dev time to prevent scum-saving, wasting precious dev time in a no-win scenario.

It is irrelevant whether you want to insult the player or not by making the non-permadeath mode with the naming of something insulting like "Difficulty: Coward" or "Difficulty: Loser". It is also not relevant how emotionally invested you are in forcing permadeath. It is far better to give the choice to the PLAYER than having thousands of players not enjoy the game as much as they could, simply because you wish to force your playstyle down their throats. Avoid the fanaticism which many permadeath-supporting developers fall into, for whatever reason, and give the power to the player instead. It does not hurt anyone to have a non-permadeath option, but it DOES hurt players to force permadeath or force them to scum-save. In the end, you lose either way. It is purely a matter of if the players lose or not.

You do not need to waste dev time adding a non-permadeath option. Simply adding another button to the options to "Save Game" which performs identically to the "Save & Quit" but without the Quit. Upon death or main menu, "Continue" simply reloads the last save.

This is coming from someone who supports permadeath and includes it in his games. However, I also do not force my beliefs down anyone's throats, as that is what irrational fanatics do. Rationally, making it an option is win-win-win. Keeping it without the option is lose-lose-win.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

First thing - while I understand that you have very strong beliefs and are very adamant in upholding them (ironic, given that it's not much different from those who exhibit same traits but believe the opposite regarding this feature) I'd like to ask you to lay off setting up connotations with religion and name-calling as people may find it plain offensive.

Second thing. We had discussion about that. In fact, more than once. Just searching 'permadeath' should show you arguments for and against your suggestion, including ones you've already made, while also showing that the matter isn't simply 'win-win-win' or 'lose-lose-win' like you claim.

Third, as you've mentioned yourself - if permadeath bothers you, you have an option of cheating your way through. However, officially the game - including it's balance and mechanics - was made with the concept of permadeath in mind and for community enjoying such. Bashing it for this, while the big part of target audience (and many beside) enjoy it - especially when you have alternatives already - is not far from the horrible concept of 'forcing beliefs down someone's throat' you mention.

I humbly would like to suggest for you to calm down, drop the mantle of self-righterous, search for threads mentioned, read them and then play the game the way you enjoy it, letting other users do the same. Given that - to repeat - there are tools and ways to help those who need to savescum I personally don't think we need any special change (especially one that would be officially supported thus requiring further balance changes) in the core game.

Pardon me for taking liberty in editing your thread's title. You can communicate your ideas in less provocative manner.

Edit: I've butchered one sentence in this post. Sentence should be more clear now. Pardon me.

I basically concor with what Scavenger says, the fact is the game is built around Permadeath. I mean think about it, you see a NPC nearby he is getting close to your camp your not sure if its the same guy you just made buddies with his clan or some random raider who wants to slit your throat. If we say removed Permadeath then who could just run up check if he is friendly or not and then reload, with Permadeath all the sudden your nervous "Should I kill him? Maybe he doesnt know I'm here" all those things are irreverent without permadeath. Therefore Permadeath adds to a game instead of taking away from it.

Let me just give you a good example of what just happened in my recent playthrough, I went to sleep like normal and something started combat. No Big deal I thought it would just be some human I could take out easily when I wake up, but noooooooo it was a damned Dogman who nailed my chest with a flurry attack. I stumble to my feet barely miss getting hit by another trip the thing and beat it to death taking another claw to the shins. Now see if I could just load this moment would have been so epic or nerve bitting I could have just kept reloading until I won. (Side note I then bled to death because I forgot to bandage and went to sleep :P but that was my mistake XD)

IMAGE(http://www.darkwoodgame.com/sigs/darkwood_sig_600x120.jpg)
Official Trained Dogman

Wow, just wow.
Mind you, you have already lost. There is also a tool to allow saving, which completely destroys permadeath.
This tool and be found HERE: http://bluebottlegames.com/main/node/1280

My request was nothing more than rational thought, pleading for developers to not be like every other permadeath fundamentalist. The reaction? Exactly the response, action, and attitude of a fundamentalist.

Wow, you are both as fundamentalist as you can get when it comes to this.
I am a huge fan of permadeath, and your only reaction is to shut down the plead for you to not be so forceful and close minded, and the result? You use force, turn the thread title into a complete lie, and then deny that you are being forceful.

You obviously did not even read or consider what I said, due to the simple fact it is plastered all over the OP that I am a big fan of permadeath. Editing the title to reflect the opposite of what I stated, only proves how skewed your perspective is, and how closed your mind is to anything someone has to say about permadeath which isn't in a positive light.

This is a perfect example of the exact type of fundamentalist types. But instead of being religious fundamentalists, you are permadeath fundamentalists.
This is absolutely sickening to witness.

If I find out that either of the two moderators are developers for the game, I will immediately be requesting a refund.
I do not support people who bully others, abuse their authority, and force their playstyle down other's throats.
I do not support irrational people who close their mind to the world outside of their own.

If you don't believe me that you are fundamentalists, then just test it. Go to different permadeath developers, and talk to them about having an option to turn permadeath off. No matter how rational your argument, no matter how much reason you give, no matter the evidence proving they already lost due to scum-saving or software like the link above- they WILL be completely irrational about it. They will not listen to a word you say. If you do as I say and test others, you will be able to see in them what you fail to see in yourself. Perhaps then you can lay down the fundamentalism and take up a more rational perspective, free of the bias that comes from fundamentalist perspectives.

Of course, you won't do any such thing. You will ignore this entire post, and write me off as a fool. Fundamentalists would never dare attempt anything that would shatter their fragile worldview by revealing their own personal faults.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

Mind you, this thread was not for either of your eyes but to read. This is directed towards the developer of the game, not the moderators who are such fanatics about permadeath that they see fit to attempt to rename the thread and edit the OP.

If you do not have any say in the game's development, then please refrain from spouting your opinionated noise.

I have changed back the title to abide by the rules (although there was nothing wrong with the title in the first place). The OP seems intact, so I left it as is.

I will also be emailing this thread to Daniel, along with my name, business number, and credentials.
I purposefully wanted it to be a thread, for it to be publicly read, perhaps discussed, and if he checks the forums to find it on his own time. Developers like us do not have time to check every email sent to us. However, if you feel you should change the title and edit the thread to fit your agenda, it is obvious I have no choice but to send it through email.

Be very careful in mistreating users in this thread, as Daniel has full power over this forum. It is his game, after all.
Silencing people who point out that you are the type to attempt to silence them, makes moderators look very poorly in the eyes of their superior. Especially when moderator actions reflects an extremely obvious conclusion that they did not even listen to or attempt to communicate with the OP.

If either of you read a single word of the OP, you would find that "I dislike permadeath" as a title is an outright lie. Of course, I do not expect fundamentalists to adhere to the same moral standard as the rest of us. Truth is so subjective to people like you, unless it fits in with your cognitive bias.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

The game doesn't force anything down anyone's throat, people are paying for a certain product and the onus is on the consumer to pick what he/she likes from the (let's face it) over-saturated games-marketplace. There's the question of artistic integrity to consider as well, the developer might want to paint a certain bleak picture that (subjectively) would not work without such harsh failure-states. When your investment is constantly secure, death becomes not a tragedy, but an annoyance, thus something not to be feared or bothered by.

Perhaps you might disagree, but I believe the developer is willing to stick to his guns, make and sell the game he'd want to play, more power to him.

I am somewhat disappointed. But let's try to clarify in the last chance of saving the thread before it'll spiral into flamewar.

Thus, I will address your response point by point, RonnyRulz.

Mind you, you have already lost. There is also a tool to allow saving, which completely destroys permadeath.
This tool and be found HERE: http://bluebottlegames.com/main/node/1280

Lost? We lost exactly what? I'd like to remind you that discussion about any idea is to find a consensus or debate one's standpoint, finding arguments to support and/or oppose those of others. It's not a race, not a fight nor a competition and treating it as such is hardly wise.

Moreover, tools like these are not a problem at all, in fact, they help - they allow people like you to play the game they want without forcing their idea onto others and changing core gameplay, which my standpoint would know if you'd actually read my earlier message without trying to be rude about it.

My request was nothing more than rational thought, pleading for developers to not be like every other permadeath fundamentalist. The reaction? Exactly the response, action, and attitude of a fundamentalist.

And here lies the problem. You forget that 'rational thought' is one stemming from logical deduction and consideration of facts surrounding the issue. However, you seem to base your arguments on emotions, subjective attitude posed as a fact, labelling and provoking of people. You seem to not even take into consideration what others, in good faith, suggest you.

We had rational threads regarding the issue of permadeath, where people also made some of your arguments but were open to dialogue - your posts so far shows little in comparison and I implore you to look at those threads.

Wow, you are both as fundamentalist as you can get when it comes to this.
I am a huge fan of permadeath, and your only reaction is to shut down the plead for you to not be so forceful and close minded, and the result? You use force, turn the thread title into a complete lie, and then deny that you are being forceful.

And again with aggresive labelling. I apologize if the title of 'I dislike permadeath' was not to your liking but while it possibly didn't sum up whole of your experience with such feature in general, I maintain it communicated well the message of your post - I did read your post (how else I'd respond to different parts of it?) and by the title I notified anyone interested that your idea has a basis in the fact you don't want the feature in this game, you think is bad, you dislike it being here. What's more important, it wasn't offending anyone.

It's kind of sad to see that it caused you such a great discomfort, especially when you seem now to use such a thing as a main point for your personal attack.

For the last time, I'd like to request you laying off offensive references bordering on bigotry - I don't know nor I am interested in your experiences with fundamentalists of whatever kind. I also suspect that even among certain groups there are individuals varying in attitude and you generalizing people like that, forcefully adding negative connotation is rude.

I want to believe we are open for all kinds of ideas here, even if personally we may not agree with them. That's why there are plenty of threads about all kinds of things. You seem to be the first person in a long time though who is unable to simply discuss the idea, but prefers lashing out, respond to everyone as if it they have attacked you personally while not having good grace to not do that to people on your own, but instead call them things. Is such attitude a mark of 'fundamentalist' you speak of?

If you don't believe me that you are fundamentalists, then just test it. Go to different permadeath developers, and talk to them about having an option to turn permadeath off. No matter how rational your argument, no matter how much reason you give, no matter the evidence proving they already lost due to scum-saving or software like the link above- they WILL be completely irrational about it.

Horrible leap of logic, here. Us talking to other people and them behaving in one of few ways makes us fundamentalists? I suggest never, ever using that as an argument in any debate when you want to be taken seriously.

Also, again you simply didn't take into consideration that attitude of whatever permadeath-game-creating developer may not be because of them being hostile toward the idea itself, but because, surprise, they wanted to make a game and it's reasonable that if permadeath is big part of the mechanics, they may be unwilling to mess is up as then there will be repercussions third-party modifications won't bring.

Additionaly, your dealings with any and all game developers are not our business. But be kind enough to again, not overgeneralize them all together again. If you have problem with any developer in particular and consider the person irrational, consult their communities or contact them directly, like a mature person would.

I do like the fact that you underline importance of rational and reasonable arguments well-founded in evidence. Hopefully, you will take that as a vital part of your future posts, instead of making demands based in preconceptions of how people would see what your ideas would cause - while I pointed out that it may not be the case as other permdeath threads suggested - and then treating them as a platform to insult others.

If you do as I say and test others, you will be able to see in them what you fail to see in yourself. Perhaps then you can lay down the fundamentalism and take up a more rational perspective, free of the bias that comes from fundamentalist perspectives.

Wonderful advice I can only clap at, minus the whole use of a word 'fundamentalist' as a negative in connotation label. Now then, should you drop your bias and kindly search for the threads I've mentioned then take more rational perspective, before you'll try to reassure yourself the problem lies in others, not in you?

I won't answer further, since this thread is already getting worse, and not even because of differences in opinions. While I absolutely dislike doing that - if you cannot listen just to a fellow user, as a moderator I ask you to refine your approach and learn at least basics of making an argument with respect and take into consideration what others tell you. It would be very nice if we wouldn't have to really enforce such things.

Don't take me wrong, we may become heavy-handed if you'll force that hand and turn it into blatant trolling, but I'd rather avoid the whole situation. In the future, if this thread will be locked either because of moderators or the developer, it won't be because we disagree with you, but because we tried to make it a working thread, but you still didn't try to meet standard of good manners and understanding (understanding of what others come from which doesn't necessarily mean agreeing) we expect of users here, prefering to go ad hominem instead.

Mind you, this thread was not for either of your eyes but to read. This is directed towards the developer of the game, not the moderators who are such fanatics about permadeath that they see fit to attempt to rename the thread and edit the OP.

You've used public forum to make this and I've treated it like any other thread and/or open-letter here - I've moderated it for the sake of maintaing certain degree of decorum.
Should you be unwilling or unable to handle to have your opinion under public scruiny in the future, consider not using public forum but send a message to the developer privately, as you've already done. We will have no need to respond. The way it is now, it's a public thread about suggestion community can (and should) have a say about if they're willing.

Alright, for the sake of continuing discourse and helping the community as a whole, I tried (and also killed some time before I'll have to take care of one thing IRL). I don't bear ill will toward anyone here nor I want the mess to scalate so if any of you folks think that there's no point and I simply cannot get through with this, let me know, I'll delete this - by which I mean the one you read right now - post. With Dcfedor aware of the thing, hopefully we'll have a decent conversation now.

(Removed remarks about "First World Entitlement" to play nice.)

...

Isn't the main objective in the game not to die?
The game is about survival. It's supposed to force you to move around and do whatever it takes to survive.

Removing the permadeath will not only remove the survival aspect of the game but also remove your ability to re-think a situation or the fear of taking stupid decisions since you could just load the game after death. Losing a fight wouldn't even have the consequences it has like losing your stuff or dealing with wounds coz, you know, loading to try again till winning.

There are too many games without permadeath in the market already.

Pew pew pew!

Hey RonnyRulz!

First of all, I apologize if you feel persecuted. I don't think anyone here is trying to silence you or dismiss your opinion.

In Scavenger's case, I think he was just trying to "minimize the fire hazard," so to speak. Your original title, 'Say to no religious fundamentalists who force their beliefs down your throat,' seemed a bit inflammatory, and as a mod, he was probably worried about an impending flame war. If you feel that was inappropriate, then please accept my apologies.

As for the topic of permadeath, I should alert you in advance that this is a feature that has been discussed at great length, and I'm pretty firm on my decision to build the game around it.

If you're interested in learning why, I put a lot of time and effort into soliciting opinions, weighing my options, and later, explaining my reasoning and goals in these posts:

  • http://bluebottlegames.com/main/node/36#comment-104
  • http://gamedevgonerogue.blogspot.ca/2012/04/sales-metrics-and-doing-right-thing.html
  • http://gamedevgonerogue.blogspot.ca/2012/10/thoughts-on-game-design-and-vision.html
  • http://bluebottlegames.com/main/node/2415#comment-9961
  • http://bluebottlegames.com/main/node/994?page=1#comment-4255

I get that there are some who prefer no permadeath. I really do. And in fact, I have save-scummed my fair share of permadeath games before.

However, often the games that I've enjoyed the most are those where permadeath is a core mechanic. And NEO Scavenger is a game I'm making because I want to play it. If it ends up sucking, it's because I have sucky taste and judgement. I'm okay with that. I'm also okay with limiting my customers to a niche market if it means I can make the type of game I enjoy.

I really do encourage you to read the above links, if this is important to you. There are a lot of reasons behind this decision, and it's more than just "being hardcore." There are some truly magical things that happen when you know every decision matters.

And if not, fair enough. If you prefer to play with save-scumming, I'm not going to stop you. I'm not putting any effort into thwarting save-scummers if they want to use the save management utility. If that's what floats your boat, then go for it!

Dan Fedor - Founder, Blue Bottle Games

Ah, so you are different than typical :P

"I get that there are some who prefer no permadeath. I really do. And in fact, I have save-scummed my fair share of permadeath games before."

Heresy! :P

I lumped the two moderators into the typical permadeath-loving fundamentalists (who have real hatred for people who dislike permadeath) but I believe it was quite accurate for me to assume they were among the fundamentalists for the following reasons:

1) The first line stated that I am a huge fan of permadeath
2) The OP included that not only am I "a huge fan of permadeath" and that I "like permadeath" but also that I include permadeath in my own game ideas and the game I am currently developing.
3) They renamed the title to "I dislike permadeath."

There was absolutely no reason for this, as there was nothing in my post to indicate that I dislike permadeath. Quite the opposite.

A person must be considered irrational if they read "I am a huge fan of permadeath. I like permadeath. I use permadeath in my own games." and thus conclude "I dislike permadeath.

There is a very strong, almost cult-like following among people who love permadeath. People will get very defensive when someone suggests making it an option, and there are a very, very large number of developers who DO actively work towards silencing people who want to play a game differently, persecute them personally for that very reason, start flame wars over people wanting to play a game differently, and a very large percentage of developers who are extremists about forcing their playstyle down other's throats. Klei, for example, spent many hours programming ways to prevent scum-saving, in a game where scum-saving wasn't very easily and was already incredibly annoying. Dean Hall, while not related to permadeath, is fanatical about singleplayer v. multiplayer to the point of bashing singleplayer gaming in public interviews, and publicly persecuting fellow Arma 2 modders because they wish to activate singleplayer mode- to the point of ACTUALLY silencing that modder, and then later demonizing him in a public interview as "one of the biggest problems in development."

So as you can see, it is not without reasoning that I believed it was worthwhile to plead with you as a developer to NOT be fanatical about permadeath. This was as much of a plead for reason as it was a question as to where you reside on the topic. I see that you are not fanatical, so the plead is not required.

However, the game has significant potential. Having an "EZ-Mode" difficulty for the game at release, or even calling it "Cheater-Enabled" difficulty, is still a great idea which I strongly encourage simply for the fact that a good design ENCOURAGES permadeath, but does not FORCE it.

I submit that it is the developer's responsibility to implement simple features (permadeath off option) for already-working features (saving) into the game, to cater towards a significantly large number of players who will desire said small feature. It is beneficial for the game, as more people will enjoy it and spread the word as well as have fun.

It is irrelevant if the game is designed around permadeath or not. Encouraging, would mean doing everything you can to get players to enjoy permadeath. Forcing, would require there to be no other option. Leaving players to poorly interfaced .bat command files to circumvent saving mechanics is just silly. The feature is not a large one, and would not require significant amounts of time to work on. This is especially true since the saving function is already fully implemented.

I am not asking for this to be high priority. I am pleading for you as a developer, to have both the integrity to say no to the fanatics and yes to the casual gamer, by doing something very small (but very worthwhile for your userbase), at release.

Primarily because there is no rational argument that implementing such a feature or "cheater mode" harms anyone's gameplay. However, it DOES enhance many player's gameplay. The player is free to play as they desire, and allowing one player to reload a save does not take away another player's ability to have that save erased upon death. It's a win-win-win for the permadeath lovers, haters, and the developer.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

Just wanted to point out, Dan is the only dev. He hires a few artists sometimes but thats about it. Us mods are simply people who chose to watch over the forums and make sure things run smoothly. I had zero intention of being hostile or aggressive in my post I simply wanted to stay why *I* thought permadeath should be the only option.

IMAGE(http://www.darkwoodgame.com/sigs/darkwood_sig_600x120.jpg)
Official Trained Dogman

I'd like to point out that unlike what the moderator insists of believing, just like I stated in the OP, I am a huge fan of permadeath. I cannot stress enough how in favor of permadeath I am.

I have absolutely no problem at all with permadeath being forced on me in this game. I do not, would not, and have not wanted an option to turn permadeath off for my own selfish desire.

I am pleading for others, because there is a very significant number of people who desire permadeath to be turned off, who enjoy the ability to save multiple times, or who are turned off by a game because of permadeath. This game seems great and has a lot of potential, so I want this large audience to be able to enjoy it as well. A feature like permadeath, when forced on users, can utterly destroy any fun some users would otherwise experience.

Among fellow fans of permadeath, I find them to be unreasonable. Many are irrational about this topic, even resulting in heavy handed moderation in almost violent (in speech) flame-wars. I side with those who support permadeath.

However, in noticing my fellow fan's irrational behavior, it comes to my attention that those who plead for permadeath to be an option that can be turned off, are often defenseless against developers who insist that people play games THE dev's way, as oppose to the player's way.

It may seem irrational that I defend those I disagree with, but they need a voice. And in the end, I side with the rational argument. Adding an option to turn permadeath off, does NOT degrade the experience to those who wish to leave it on. It is up to the player, and a developer should not be responsible for forcing a permadeath-loving gamer to have the willpower to not avoid permadeath in a permadeath game. Just the same as they should not be forcing a permadeath-hating gamer to suffer through permadeath.

Irrational moderators may read "I dislike Permadeath" but they did not listen to a single word that was said. Otherwise, they would know I personally do not care whether or not permadeath is an option. I enjoy the game as it is. I however am rational and able to empathize with others different than me, so I understand people who would not enjoy the game unless it was an option.

To the developer: As a gamer, how many times have you played a game that was ruined by that *one* feature, or that *one* annoying aspect? How many times have you thought, "If only [this] was in the game, or if only [that] changed. This game would be great." Why not give the player the option? It is not a significant feature that is being requested. It is a slight alteration of an already working save function.

Why deny a large majority of fans a small feature that does nothing to diminish the game from the other fans?
If you don't believe it is a large majority who wish it were an option, just look. Your game is in Alpha, and people have already programmed scripts to save their games, reload, backup, etc. They are quick to do so, because the lack of an option really hinders their fun.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

I was really trying to avoid this thread, but for the sake of potentially turning this thread in a more positive direction I did want to bring some attention to logical fallacies, to help people avoid them and avoid making them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

RonnyRulz your posts in particular seem like a bullet list of logical fallacies, strongly and carefully worded minefields stuffed full of traps designed to be inflammatory, get certain responses, and invalidate other's arguments or opinions. Between your style of posting and names you've gone by on Steam I'm of the opinion that you're doing it on purpose to troll and get a rise out of people. However whether deliberate or accidental you need to calm it down regardless, because even if you successfully skirt the edge of what you can get away with and don't get your posts/threads outright moderated you'll never start a good discussion this way. People will either actively avoid the thread (like I'm sure a lot are currently doing), or they're going to respond in kind with aggressive posts back at you.

If you're getting a inflamed replies from multiple different forums it's not because they're religiously fanatical and trying to stamp out your opinion, it's because of your writing style. That ad hominem derogatory labeling and personal attacks you're doing in particular need to stop. Your opinions are fine, the way you're presenting them is not. Some forums are more strict in regards to posters sticking to positive critique, and some people think they do this to be draconian and remove opinions they don't like, but really it's because that's generally the best way to promote real discussions and avoid threads spiraling into flame wars.

So if everyone could be more extra nicerer that would be great.

Let's pretend for a moment that NEO Scavenger isn't a game. Let's pretend that NEO Scavenger is a night club. The players are the patrons, and I am the DJ and club manager. Now let's say permadeath is hip hop, and non-permadeath is pop music. Neither hip hop nor pop music are objectively good nor bad. Each person has their own taste in music.

What you are doing is walking into a night club that plays hip hop. It's played hip hop for years now. And most customers come to this night club for the good hip hop music. Some people come here because they want to dance. Some just want to socialize. Some people actually hate hip hop. But this club's primary patrons are hip hop fans. You are asking it to play pop music.

This is what your original post looks like, with hip hop substituted for permadeath:

While I am a huge fan of hip hop, forcing it on the patron in a night club is ludicrous. The DJ already owns pop music, so there is little reason to not play pop music. In the end, anyone who wants to bring headphones will anyway, and it is always best to not be like religious fundies and force your music style down other's throats like some DJs do who actually spend time to take away headphones, wasting precious play time in a no-win scenario.

It is irrelevant whether you want to insult the dancer or not by making the pop music with the naming of something insulting like "boring" or "mainstream". It is also not relevant how emotionally invested you are in forcing hip hop. It is far better to give the choice to the PATRON than having thousands of patrons not enjoy the night club as much as they could, simply because you wish to force your music style down their throats. Avoid the fanaticism which many hip-hop-supporting DJs fall into, for whatever reason, and give the power to the patron instead. It does not hurt anyone to have a non-hip-hop option, but it DOES hurt patron to force hip-hop or force them to bring headphones. In the end, you lose either way. It is purely a matter of if the patrons lose or not.

You do not need to waste time adding a pop music option. Simply adding pop songs to the playlist. Upon finishing a pop song, the playlist simply plays hip hop again.

This is coming from someone who supports hip hop and includes it in his DJ sets. However, I also do not force my beliefs down anyone's throats, as that is what irrational fanatics do. Rationally, making it an option is win-win-win. Keeping it without the option is lose-lose-win.

Reading this from the perspective of a hip-hop club owner, the solution is simple: if you don't like hip hop, don't go to hip hop clubs. The sign on the door says "Hip Hop Club." The free sample album plays hip hop music. All of the reviews in the newspapers talk about how the club plays hip hop music.

Will it ever play pop music? Maybe. And I mean that. If I hear a pop music song that really knocks my socks off, maybe I'll play it. There is even one song that I am seriously considering. And maybe my patrons will thank me!

But for now, there's plenty of hip-hop music to choose from to keep each night interesting. And a hundred pop-music clubs just down the street. I am not doing this for the money. I don't want to please everyone. I am doing this because I love hip hop, and I want to share that with other hip hop fans.

For now, this club plays hip hop.

Dan Fedor - Founder, Blue Bottle Games

I am responding now, almost two years later, because I never realized I got a final reply from the developer. Also, I believe this is very important, and this thread appears in the top google results (so it is important for those seeking to read about permadeath in game design. I believe this means a necro is appropriate, exclusively because of Google.)

I am disappointed in the results of this thread. However, the developer seems like a very reasonable, intelligent person. He is someone I greatly admire as a fellow game developer. If anyone can be reasoned with, I honestly believe it is him. (I have failed to get any answer from other developers. They just say "Because....BECAUSE!" as if that is a valid answer. They seem a bit daft. Likewise, BlueBottleGames seems very intelligent and extremely reasonable.)

------------------
My Argument
------------------

Your comparison of this game to a Nightclub & DJ is a logical fallacy. It goes to prove how little of an argument there is to not make it an option. In fact, there is no argument as to why it should NOT be an option. There is no argument I have ever read as to how making it an option effects those who never turn that option off in the options menu.

Instead, you would need to have a more accurate example to compare this to. I will use the Nightclub, DJ, and Hip Hop / Pop Music example. However, I will make it accurate to show how this is a logical fallacy. (Too lazy to look it up which fallacy it is, but basically this is a horrible example that does not at all apply to this conversation.)

You own a Nightclub, in Virtual Reality. The DJ plays Hip Hop Music. However, whenever someone walks in, to hear any music they have to put on headphones. Whenever these headphones are turned on, the user disappears and are the only people in the room. (It's a horrible nightclub, but remember- this is a Singleplayer game. Not a multiplayer one. This is important.) When these headphones are put on, the default music is automatically Hip Hop. However, there is a switch! This switch can be pressed, and it will turn the music to Pop Music. The DJ is a Robot/AI and everyone who puts on these headphones are placed in their own instance, with their own personal DJ.

So for every consumer, there is no one else in the nightclub but them, a personal DJ, and headphones that play Hip Hop music UNLESS they click a switch to play Pop Music.

Now, where is your argument that those who listen to Pop Music in this Virtual Reality Nightclub harm the user experience of those who listen to Hip Hop? How does anyone harm another's experience, if they are all in their own virtual instance with their own personal DJ-AI? Why is it not 100% better for that to be an option, as opposed to not having the option at all? Why not make it an option, when you could pull in BOTH Hip Hop & Pop Music lovers to your Nightclub? Both who enjoy the nightclub for everything EXCEPT the music, but get the CHOICE which music to listen to? Why NOT allow that? It's all automated, you are not the DJ but program the DJ-AI, your Nightclub was made to have others enjoy themselves, making it an option increases many consumer's enjoyment AND it brings in ADDITIONAL consumers to the nightclub, and making it an option is elementary technically and requires very little work (wrapping the save deletion in a bool, with a single option to checkmark).

Thus is permadeath as an option in a singleplayer game.

So WHY NOT make it an option? Why...NOT...?

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

What a fantastic way to make the creator of the game a non-person, and remove him from an equation totally. Your entire line of thinking is 100% concentrated at yourself, completely forgoing the fact that what we're talking about is not a single person's experience, but a product.

And no product is ever a single-user experience. YOU are experiencing it personally, on your own - that's right. But the product isn't made for you exclusively. It is made for, potentially, millions of different customers - each of whom is different and each of whom will experience it on their own.

When designing his product, the developer had to narrow his scope, many times over - cause if something is for everything, it is for nothing - in order to create something that would, relatively safely, sell for a profit. He invested his personal wealth, time and sanity, expecting to gain profit in return. To secure that return, he chose a well tested method - aiming his product at certain demographic, rather than risking a danger of just making stuff and hoping it sticks. So, his idea, his materials, his risk.

When publicly aiming at a specific market goal, whenever it is to simply satisfy a group of people (i.e. make a popular survival game) or achieve a certain pre-defined outcome (i.e. make a good survival game), the producer of the product is always totally dependable on the collective reaction of the market (a.k.a. all the potential customers, the people who he thinks may be willing to spend money on his product). If his product satisfies his customers, he will succeed. If not, its a state welfare for him and his family ;(

He made a decision to build his game from grounds up around certain core mechanics. And he made it well enough that the market decided to reward him with decent sales and furthering his brand fame and recognition. Had he made one or more compromises, it might or might not be a case. He could have taken that RISK, but he decided to be faithful to his original design.

As you can see, there is absolutely no YOU or ME in that whole thing. Your experience with a single-player game may (and should) be yours indeed, but the decision to make the game the way it is, has nothing to do with it. Demanding that the developer break his design goals, and risk (to a bigger or lesser extent) the success of his project, for the personal satisfaction of someone, is not really reasonable.

Its is honestly the same line of thinking that leads people to demand that R.R. Martin would not kill/maim/hurt/cripple/rape certain characters in his books, because they like them or whatever. Had he caved in, and the started to write alternative versions/mild endings/whatever, he would probably be considered lesser of a writer and would probably ended up less successful in the end. But exactly because he stayed true to his original "design", he made not only a name for himself, but a lot of monies in the process.

So criticize the hell out of permadeath, suggest the ways the next games might be designed in order to suit you fine AND sell well, but don't be a communist/whiner - because "because I made such decision, to make my fans happy with my non-compromised designs" is a perfectly good reason to do so in a production of video games. And it is the sales that dictate if that worked for the creator or not.


<--Mighty (mini)Mod of Doom-->
DeviantArt Gallery of MoD Sprites

...what are you talking about?

This huge rant makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

But the product isn't made for you exclusively. It is made for, potentially, millions of different customers

That is my exact point. That is why making it an option is so awesome! So beneficial!

Without it as an option, you are taking that 1 million and preventing it from becoming higher. You are preventing more enjoyment from those millions of players.

This entire rant on "You You You!" makes absolutely no sense at all. I can only assume you are reacting emotionally, having completely misunderstood or perhaps not even read what you are responding to? (There is no other way I can understand why you wrote such a strange reply.)

Finally, I myself love the permadeath in Neo Scavenger. I am arguing in favor of making it an option for OTHER PEOPLE. This has nothing to do with "ME". That is why your response makes absolutely no sense. Are you drunk or something? Please re-read my post. Maybe you posted in the wrong thread? lol O.o

I am baffled by your wall of text. I honestly do not understand any of it, or why you are so upset.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

Nothing to do with yourself, so you say? Nothing is inherently altruistic, Ronald. And such an event as petty as this has no hope of echoing throughout the world and benefiting you in the end. So, clearly, you are lying about whom this concerns. The drivel that follows your statement in question only seems to prove this.

So, the question is, why are you continuing this thread after two whole years. Was the game not dank enough for you, Ronald? Are you seeking to rustle someone's jimmies? Or, do you really, truly want to play this game without the fear of death?

I have a confession for you, Ronald. You're right about permadeath in this game. It has nothing to do with you. Or me. That's because it is a page in the story that is this game. A story written by Dan. It's not the game's actual storyline, but the part of the story that determines how you feel. It is the undertone of a story, of a sort that makes you fear for the hero's life at times, and gets you absolutely pissed when he dies. Not like the tone of other RPGS, where the hero's infallibility is guaranteed no matter how hopeless the actual plot is. No, this, it is something fundamental to the game.

Ronny, what you're asking is for George R. R. Martin not to kill off any more characters in GoT. What exactly do you expect the answer to be?

I think the key problem here is that you may not understand the game genre.

What you are talking about is a Generic RPG (Role Playing Game). While NeoScavenger is a type of RPG, it is a sub genre inside another sub genre. It is a Rogue-Like, a game type that has been around for 35+ years (longer that I have existed in this world). Additionally, it is a Survival game, characterized by gathering supplies and information to survive.

I think you may be confusing the Rogue-Like aspect with other games that added in Perma-death as a "Hardcore" option later. These really aren't Rogue-likes and weren't actually developed with that in mind. They were built 1 specific way and in some cases make the permadeath options harder.

NeoScavenger is made into a challenging game because there is no way to save and reload and you get better not by knowing how to resolve every encounter because you reloaded, but by knowing how the world works by starting over, a key defining feature of Rogue-likes. You gain insight into how things work as you play and get better.

You learn that you need warmth to avoid freezing to death. You learn you need food to avoid starvation. You learn you need to boil water to avoid infection. You learn you need clean bandages to avoid infection. You learn you can't eat everything to avoid infection and poison. You learn that you can't just run into every fight and expect to win them all. You learn that RNG can be awesome or a jerk and it affects every character in the game.

Bottom-line, you can either play it as is, not play it all or figure out how to modify your save files. There are options out there to do what you want and the developer is essentially done with the game. It won't have sweeping changes done to it and odds are, the sequel will be pretty much more of the same.

I personally love Rogue-likes and it's the primary reason I have logged over 170 hours into the game. I would not have played nearly as much if it was just a standard RPG. I would have played it once after looking up a guide on the skills I need to get to make the most out of story encounters and played it once to get it all and never picked it up again. The reason we play Rogue-likes is because we know we won't win, we just get a little better each time.

Personally, I just reload my game if I ever get knocked out in combat. This saves me from everything but first-turn gunfire volleys and fights I should have fled from anyway.

----------------------------------------
I prepared Explosive Runes this morning!

According to many people, the fact that you reload your game (Scum-Save) means their singleplayer experience is ruined. Somehow. For some reason. Don't question it, it just makes sense. Because it does. It makes sense because it does.

There is no argument against making permadeath optional in a singleplayer game.
It effects absolutely no one negatively.
Don't be irrational. "Make it Optional" != "Get rid of it entirely, for everyone."

So you're arguing that we should ruin their game further, by making an in game option to save and reload without save scumming...

I fail to see how you have a leg to stand on, here.

Just let it go, man.

Okay everyone, PLEASE TONE IT DOWN.

Discussions and disagreements are fine in this forum, personal attacks are not.

So maybe we could all drop this now before it devolves any further. Thank you.


NEO Scavenger: FAQ
10 Ways (not) to Die - A beginner's guide

How hilarious

I came in here expecting busted lampshades and dirty underwear on the walls, but I don't think things have gotten too barbaric. However, in the interest of keeping it that way, and avoiding another epic, 2-year thread necro, I'm going to close this down.

I've heard your point(s) RonnyRulz, and I've done my best to engage your argument in good faith. However, it appears we're just going in circles now, and neither of us is going to convince the other. So let me just be clear and say this: permadeath is here to stay, and that is non-negotiable.

Dan Fedor - Founder, Blue Bottle Games

Topic locked