IMO:
If you can gain experience with an empty inventory, and all your equipped items stay with you, what's the actual penalty? Death becomes a travel mechanism for anyone willing to adventure with an empty inventory.
I mean, objectively, in that scenario, who is going to spend an hour+ fighting their way down to their empty body just to get a few XP when they can get infinite worry-free XP some other way?
The discussions surrounding an effective death penalty have already been had on these forums, and evidently, they were ignored by VR, as they're not considering them and/or have never mentioned they will be testing them. Ok. :) Glad the community went to the effort of crowdsourcing a solution for it to be ignored. heheh. Just like every other donation-funded development team that I've seen. The hubris is real.
The presumption that you must be in a full group to gain XP is, as far as I can tell, not accurate, given there is apparently going to be content consumable by solo players in Pantheon.
As such, solo'ing will almost certainly be more efficient or safer, especially for those players who can play many many hours per day.
In other words, the harsh reality is, if there is a full pug wipe, it's likely all the players that had ~empty inventories will just walk away and go back to soloing. That's a potential emergent behavior created by what they've outlined, and history says it's likely.
Stacking death debuffs (that can only be efficiently removed by consuming group content) are the way to go. Affects everyione equally at all levels, especially max level. Then, equipment/inventory has no bearing, and it makes corpse runs (a CSR burden) a non-issue. Customers being unable to reach, find, or otherwise recover their corpse was a drive to remove the overly punitive mechanic aspects from EQ1. Customers won't pay to be punished or victimized, indefinitely.
Such a mechanic will also keep max-level characters present & playing the game, rather than walled off in their guild halls logging in only to raid. " That's the 3rd Raid wipe, go work off your penalties and we'll try again tomorrow "
vjek said:The discussions surrounding an effective death penalty have already been had on these forums, and evidently, they were ignored by VR, as they're not considering them and/or have never mentioned they will be testing them. Ok. :) Glad the community went to the effort of crowdsourcing a solution for it to be ignored. heheh. Just like every other donation-funded development team that I've seen. The hubris is real.
Patently false, they've mentioned numerous times throughout the dev streams and VIP roundtables that they will be testing out death penalties, tweaking, changing, etc. They aren't settled on one thing or another, they're starting with one way and seeing how it works out. Don't be so dramatic, vjek. This discussion amongst us is mostly academic, VR is already intent on figuring out the best way to go about it via player feedback and testing lol.
TheWingless said:vjek said:The discussions surrounding an effective death penalty have already been had on these forums, and evidently, they were ignored by VR, as they're not considering them and/or have never mentioned they will be testing them. Ok. :) Glad the community went to the effort of crowdsourcing a solution for it to be ignored. heheh. Just like every other donation-funded development team that I've seen. The hubris is real.
Patently false, they've mentioned numerous times throughout the dev streams and VIP roundtables that they will be testing out death penalties, tweaking, changing, etc. They aren't settled on one thing or another, they're starting with one way and seeing how it works out. Don't be so dramatic, vjek. This discussion amongst us is mostly academic, VR is already intent on figuring out the best way to go about it via player feedback and testing lol.
We have known what the death penalty will be for years now (the only thing they haven't confirmed is lvl loss vs exp dept).
This last stream was just doubling down on what we already knew. Expect there to only be tweaks and balances.
First off, corpse runs ARE a time sink (generating effort toward re-establishing your LOST progress - but it does have the side effect of generating more stress for those that don't like effort). From a dev perspective, anything that isn't working toward progression is sustainment. Sustainment = time sink. There are timelines in which it is known that the "average" player will take to achieve certain milestones and timelines for new product development. In a subscription based game, time = money ~ money = development which requires more time. No time = no more development, so development sustainment (or time sinks) are required. A player without sustainment will accomplish the game's goal and be more likely to stop playing until more content is developed (insert horizontal progression to supplement here).
The fact that corpse runs contribute to a player's sense of "risk vs reward" or create a "sense of dread" are irrelvant to the fact that it is still a time sink. "I believe" the part that people don't like about time sinks is that most see it as a sink of "their time" and not the game's development cycle time (because it is designed for both but players obviously have little to no impact or interest on actual development timelines - only their own time). When a person "feels" that it is "required" to put time into something with no reward (recovering something taken from you that you previously earned is not a reward) then it "feels" less like "playing" a game, which offers rewards in exchange for time (which people need to understand that there is no "risk vs reward" but instead "time vs reward" in a game where "risk" is relative to one's perception of risk; time however is a static and unavoidable reality. Unless you are going to "risk" your job/finances, family or personal health playing a video game, there is no actual "risk" to you as a player, but there is actual "time" invested). So using "risk vs reward" as an argument for time invested into a game is misleading at best.
With that said, I'm indifferent on the types of time sinks that we have, but I would prefer ones which have horizontal "progression" instead of character "regression" (crafting or alternate experience are great examples of this). I'll invest "my time" however I see fit, so if I'm forced to regress instead of progress in a game that offers no alternatives and poor gameplay, I can choose to play another game; however if "gameplay" is fun enough that I would be "playing" it regardless of time invested in regression recovery, then the time spent "playing" will be irrelevant.
Just for the O.P., I think CRs are unnecassary in a modern MMO - and a hinderance in a game where it could take hours to get back to your corpse. Possibly hours spent "toward" "regression" if you fail at retrieval LMFAO. (It also discourages exploration).
Almost all of us will agree that death should have a significant penalty attached. Though there are many opinions as to just how severe the penalty should be.
There are many reasons for a corpse run system. Among them:
1. Make death sting. You can't just keep on doing what you were doing - and whereas at maximum level an xp penalty may not mean much (whether to allow losing of levels is yet another debated topic) having to get your corpse has meaning at any level.
2. Appeal to EQ veterans who are a large percentage of the pledge base. Nostalgia sells. After the game releases and we are reminded just how annoying many feathures of original EQ were it may not sell as well but it still sells.
3. Time sink. This may not have been the motivation for it in EQ but it is a good reason anyway. MMOs need time and currency sinks.
4. Incentive for social interaction. Perhaps the best reason in a game with Pantheon's goals.
5. Incentive for a well rounded party where some classes have skills valued for recovery from ...misfortune.
6. Add to the strategic nature of combat. Any significant death penalty makes most of us take fights more seriously but a corpse run adds a whole separate level - planning for corpse recovery in case of failure not just optimizing the chance for success.
There are good reasons not to have a corpse run system. Too severe a penalty many might say. Too discouraging to taking risks and doing things for the heck of it without being sure of success. Too much of a disincentive to sign-up for anything complicated. If I have two hours to set aside for content that should take an hour and forty-five minutes - all is well. But if a corpse run would take half an hour and so I *know* that if we fail in the boss fight at the end I will not be able to get my corpse - maybe I look for something shorter to do.
I remain more or less neutral.
Between perma-death and invincibility is the sweet spot. The sweet spot for many is an area for debate. Soon enough we will experience the first best attempt by the development team to find that sweet spot.
The main focus being, always, "is this fun? Grade 1-10 on the fun factor of being a naked Halfling by the side of the road begging for help vs just a teleport back to the begining of a dungeon or close safe area with all your gear and inventory, no change to XP. One feels overly harsh the other void of challenge.
In the middle is the testing and we are the test subjects, we should try and remember that the "fun" is the aim and not get too attached to any personal hypothesis.
"In the middle is the testing and we are the test subjects, we should try and remember that the "fun" is the aim and not get too attached to any personal hypothesis."
Absolutely. Pre-alpha testing is to get things to work so that there can be a game. Beta testing is to squash bugs and give final blessing to some of the design decisions but hopefully not to go back and start over on any major design features. Alpha testing is the place to see how the design features mesh together and whether as a whole they produce a game that is fun to play. Thus, how zones work and whether there should ba anything like traditional zones can be and has been debated. Whether "training" is a good feature or a terrible one can be and has been debated. Mob intelligence and personality as relevant to how hard they fight and how long they pursue can be and has been debated. Put all these together in alpha and the testers may love the result or may say that in the abstract they liked the idea of feature A but when combined with features B, C, D, E etc. it produces a game that is simply not fun to play.
Among the most important things that will be tested are whatever mechanisms for making death painful VR decides upon after pre-alpha. Probably but not certainly including some form of corpse run. Probably, but not certainly, including some way to bypass the corpse run in exchange for a sustaining a different form of pain.
Hellfiter said:For myself I usually hate the corpse running, but playing Valheim gave me an appreciation for it.
And it was due to corpse running, man.... running back to your corpse NAKED in Plains, and seeing mosquito chancing you give some good adrenaline rush.
Yes....I was starting to question my interest in corpse runs and if I really felt they were the "thing" that added the drama to the game. Then I had to do them again in Valheim and it reminded me to fear death, even though it was not impossible to recover a corpse, it was somewhat dramatic when you got spotted and were running naked as a jaybird through the zone, just hoping you could get your stuff and put up a fight.
Isn't the real question here about time sinks? Not corpse runs? Pretty much everything in the game is a time sink, if that's how you want to look at it. What you're asking is that the time sinks that they put into the game are the type of time sinks that you specificially enjoy. Killing 1000 mobs instead of 10 mobs is a time sink, but people tend to think that it's a fun time sink. Finding a group is a time sink, but people are ok with that (in general). Running from point A to point B is a time sink, but people seem to be ok with that as well (although there is plenty of discussion on just how much of a time sink it should be).
So the question isn't "should death be a time sink," the question is "how much of a time sink should it be, and *how* should that time sink be implented." How much exp should be lost, how much loot should be left on the corpse, how can those be recovered, etc. These are all questions that impact the how and the how much. It's probably important to think about how much before you start thinking about how. If you want a death to equal approximately 20 minutes of "lost time" then you can start determining how you accomplish that in hopefully fun ways.
Maybe people think corpse runs are fun, many people think they are not. There will be disagreements on this, any blanket statement claiming that one way is objectively better than another is stating an opinion on what you think is fun more than anything else.
Edit: Talking about the game as a time sink is not very productive in my opinion. It takes something that is supposed to be a fun form of entertainment and turns it into a negative. When you watch a movie that you really enjoyed is it fun to hear someone else say "Well that movie was terrible, what a waste of time."
"Time enjoyed wasting is not wasted time" - Some famous philosipher
philo said: We have known what the death penalty will be for years now (the only thing they haven't confirmed is lvl loss vs exp dept).This last stream was just doubling down on what we already knew. Expect there to only be tweaks and balances.
So the fact that they have a copyright on the phrase "anything can change®" is just a smokescreen to hide their unwillingness to change anything once it's implemented into the game, eh?
Though I do admit, once we hit the end of PRE-alpha, it will be awfully late in Developement to change anything of significance.
/sarcasm off/
Did In also see lots of people quit because of them? Yes.
I will always struggle with this as an argument. People will quit playing a game that they don't enjoy. There are hundreds of reasons why someone might not continue to play Pantheon after giving it a try. I hope the dev's don't change their design ideas much based on whether or not some people aren't going to like it. I'd hope they only make the design choices based on what they think is fun and good for the game in the long run (without worrying about how many people might try it and decide it's not for them).
Ranarius said:I hope the dev's don't change their design ideas much based on whether or not some people aren't going to like it.
hahahah....like that hasn't already happened any number of times.
Seriously though, that is the whole intent of testing: To change things that are broken, unbalanced, unfun, unchallenging, uninteresting, etc, etc etc. If the much larger Alpha testing population all complains about a given mechanic and VR doesn't change it? That's quite telling and quite likely a severe detriment to the longterm viability of the game.
Jothany said:philo said: We have known what the death penalty will be for years now (the only thing they haven't confirmed is lvl loss vs exp dept).This last stream was just doubling down on what we already knew. Expect there to only be tweaks and balances.
So the fact that they have a copyright on the phrase "anything can change®" is just a smokescreen to hide their unwillingness to change anything once it's implemented into the game, eh?
Though I do admit, once we hit the end of PRE-alpha, it will be awfully late in Developement to change anything of significance.
/sarcasm off/
You are right. When they say anything can change that is about the only thing we should take at face value...
How many times they say something holds no weight whatsoever.
Darch: First off, corpse runs ARE a time sink ... The fact that corpse runs contribute to a player's sense of "risk vs reward" or create a "sense of dread" are irrelvant to the fact that it is still a time sink.
The entire game is a time sink if you are taking this view. It takes time to find stuff, talk to NPCs, to kill NPCs, to get to places, to raise levels and skills, to craft and forage, to get equipment. etc. These mechanisms are not placed in the game with the sole intent to be time sinks though. You could code to reduce the time cost for all of these, but there is little enjoyment/risk benefit in doing so. Corpse runs are implemented as a mechanism to add a risk to taking on a mob, they are not implemented with the sole purpose to be a time sink (even if it does take time to recover from a death). In mho, it should take multiple resources to recover from being killed, including time.
Giving players the ability to immediately get back into the game gets rid of that jeopardy, reduces the emotional rewards for success and turns the game in to a killing fest with little regard for what you are going up against.
Darch: Just for the O.P., I think CRs are unnecassary in a modern MMO - and a hinderance in a game where it could take hours to get back to your corpse. Possibly hours spent "toward" "regression" if you fail at retrieval LMFAO. (It also discourages exploration).
I agree it could take a substantial amount of time to recover from a wipe. But the point here is that dying should be a big deal. I dont agree that it would discourage exploration at all and I have every intention of exporing everywhere I can. I will be more watchful of what is around me, that is all.
Ranarius: I hope the dev's don't change their design ideas much based on whether or not some people aren't going to like it
I wouldnt expect any system to be set in stone until well into Beta. We are guinea pigs to ensure that there is sufficient fun, risk and adventure to be had. If something is not working, then I would also expect it to change, possibly radically. What is the point in releasing a game if there is a fundamental flaw. (I hope) they wont. If corpse runs dont work, I would fully expect VR to address any issue.
"Is it fun?"
I argue that this is *not* the only, or even most important, question VR should ask themselves of individual mechanics/aspects, especially when it comes to death penalty, because some things are *not* simple 'fun', in-and-of themselves, but make other aspects much more enjoyable and meaningful, and to remove them because they are 'not fun' would be something that, in my not-so-humble opinion, has been the downfall of this, and other, game genres.
Not every aspect of a game has to be a delightful giggle-fest. It's like making a film where the hero/heroine never sees any meaningful peril or undergoes any arduous trial. Spectacular! And unsatisfying.
"Is it fun?" is certainly and important question VR should ask themselves about everything, but with the realisation that it is going to be far from the only metric for each individual aspect and that some aspects/mechanics simply 'support' others.
Time Sinks
Yes, as Renarius says, everything, effectively, is a 'time sink'. Playing the game at all is a 'time sink'. If you don't enjoy 'spending time' on a game, well... don't. I suppose, the question is, is the time you put in worth the satisfaction (I intentionally don't use the word 'fun') you get out? There is no reason a corpse run shouldn't be just as much 'fun' as the rest of the game. It is almost certainly as challenging and meaningful as anything else you could do. If it's not implemented in a way that is at least as interesting, then it should be changed, sure, but as a concept it has just as much - possibly more - potential to be as good as any other aspect of the game.
What is it you don't enjoy about corpse runs? The travelling through the world? The feeling of being in danger? The need for caution and thoughtfulness? The need for help from others? How is this different from the rest of the game?
TL;DR:
It's a particularly difficult concept to appreciate and debate. You need to look past the subjective feel of individual aspects and appreciate the more objective worth and potential of the whole. Removing something like corpse runs simply and objectively, removes challenge, complexity, meaning, interest, etc.
I've already said, but I'll repeat: Without 'fear' of death, life is less exciting. It's as simple as that. By its nature, it is difficult to appreciate at the time, and, sometimes, it truly will be frustrating and not 'fun', but without a serious, meaningful death penalty, the excitement of surviving an encounter and even simply of travelling the world, is significantly reduced.
One could write a scientific paper on it. I bet they have. The balance between fear and joy, frustration and progress and its effect on the overall enjoyment of games.
A thought: Talking about MMORPGs as a whole, there are some that feel the whole PvE game is a time sink and that end game PvP is the whole point. That is an opinon and not intrinsically 'wrong', but it is very subjective and personal from a particular type of player and defines a particular type of game.
Pantheon is not that game.
IM(NS)HO Death penalty is pretty much as fundamental a concept as PvP vs PvE and the worth of 'the journey' vs the rush to max level.
I really hope players realise that. Especially those going into Alpha and giving feedback on subjective things like 'fun' and 'satisfaction' and 'challenge'. Simplifying/neutering death penalty would have a massive effect on almost every aspect of the game as a whole.
Personally, I will be making sure I keep it in mind when testing and try and give useful feedback. It's hard to 'target' something so wide-reaching and to not concentrate on the direct aspects of the death penalty itself, but I will try. I hope everyone does.
chenzeme said:Darch: Just for the O.P., I think CRs are unnecassary in a modern MMO - and a hinderance in a game where it could take hours to get back to your corpse. Possibly hours spent "toward" "regression" if you fail at retrieval LMFAO. (It also discourages exploration).
I agree it could take a substantial amount of time to recover from a wipe. But the point here is that dying should be a big deal. I dont agree that it would discourage exploration at all and I have every intention of exporing everywhere I can. I will be more watchful of what is around me, that is all.
It might discourage *some* from exploration *shug*.
We are all probably aware there is a genre of games called Rogue-likes. They are very popular. If you die, you start all over again. Completely from the start. Some of them can take many many hours to 'complete'.
It embodies the concept we are talking about with as severe a 'penalty' as there can be for a game, really.
Is that concept flawed? Is it a waste of time? Clearly not. It's a very popular genre. Some don't like it. *shrug*
Corpse runs are nowhere near as 'severe'. If it truly discourages some from exploring, so be it. Not all games are suited to all people.
But I truly believe, as with many of the 'old school' mechanics that some might believe will put off modern gamers, that 'good' is 'good' and maybe *some* gamers will be put off, but some will realise the meaning and worth and most will simply enjoy the game and not appreciate why it has more meaning and worth.
"Is it fun" should never be considered with a Death Penalty. Not all game mechanics have to be fun just like not everything in life is constantly fun. The Death Penalty should not be fun at all, it should be a mechanic that players want to avoid because it isn't fun. If the Death Penalty is causing people to not explore, or fear going deeper in a dungeon etc. due to the fear of the penalty and/or corpse retrieval and/or lost time - then the mechanic is working as intended as long as the reward for the harder/riskier content is also in place.
I agree with Disposalist that the death penalty is one of the most fundamental concepts in an MMORPG, and I'd also agree with others that EQ trivialized it at higher levels, and if anything, I'd have made the penalty harsher at higher levels versus lower - let the lower level players ease into the penalty and by the time it takes full effect, you already have the players "hooked" at that point and much more unlikely to quit over it.
And, it's probably the 100th time I've linked this article on this site, but the Wolfshead article on Loss Aversion lays out the importance of the death penalty far better and more eloquently than I ever could:
https://www.wolfsheadonline.com/the-death-penalty-mechanic-and-loss-aversion-in-mmo-design/
Raidan said:"Is it fun" should never be considered with a Death Penalty. Not all game mechanics have to be fun just like not everything in life is constantly fun.
"Is it fun" is applied to the idea of risk. It's fun to get close to death, to risk the leap over the chasm, to poke the sleeping bear, to fight the big bad wraith and almost loose. The actual death isn't in and of itself fun, it's the risk of a penalty it one does die.
So the fun is directly dependant upon the penalty of death, thus death is now a component of fun or happiness , feel free to quote me at the next funeral you attend while cackling with laughter, the mourners will appreciate it. *
* Not good advice
Raidan said:The Death Penalty should not be fun at all, it should be a mechanic that players want to avoid because it isn't fun. If the Death Penalty is causing people to not explore, or fear going deeper in a dungeon etc. due to the fear of the penalty and/or corpse retrieval and/or lost time - then the mechanic is working as intended as long as the reward for the harder/riskier content is also in place.
This is the fundamental truth of every death penalty.