Death Penalty

[Frisque]

Because when you die you respawn at the last location. That is not a reward but a penalty because of dying.

And if you die right at the Aetheryte? (it happens, especially in leves) By your theory someone can get right the hell back up and just keep fighting. That's what people are referring to when they talk about "zombie-zerging".

Would you be OK if Square still slowed down your skills and then charged you money to return to the Aetheryte after you die? I'm only asking because this is from that link you posted regarding GW2:

Players who have recently been downed several times will take longer to revive each time (timesink, just like delayed use of abilities) If no one revives you, you can spend a small amount of gold to come back at a waypoint. (what FFXIV already lets you do....for FREE)

[geniusprime]

And if you die right at the Aetheryte? (it happens, especially in leves) By your theory someone can get right the hell back up and just keep fighting. That's what people are referring to when they talk about "zombie-zerging".

Would you be OK if Square still slowed down your skills and then charged you money to return to the Aetheryte after you die? I'm only asking because this is from that link you posted regarding GW2:

In context, the link to GW2 was specifically pointing to a view outside of mine about DP. Thats about it. The person I was replying to was implying that my view is extreme minority while you have a developer that is trying to get rid of death penalty.

And the quote you referring mentions or specifically states that the player has been down several times. I have indicated before that I am for alternative methods to death penalty that would give a greater sense of danger without taking the player out of the game.

[Viridiana]

I have indicated before that I am for alternative methods to death penalty that would give a greater sense of danger without taking the player out of the game.

So, you'd be up for, say, corpse runs, xp loss, and durability loss?

[VeranRamaden]

Death penalty is a good thing. Harsh death penalties? no, that's just cruel.
Something along the lines of a small exp loss. Even a small loss would be enough for people to plan out
before they blindly attack. But, for there to be a plan the new battle system has to be very fine tuned.

[Kailok]

Right, but as you so clearly stated, RTS don't have Death Penalties. RTS and MMO's are completely different on many scales. This isn't a build-your-defenses game where the only penalty IS death (game over). MMO's require strategy for a number of reasons:

1) To complete the mission
2) To receive the gear you want (if fighting a boss)
3) Time Saving
4) To prevent death and it's penalties.

[Frisque]

RTS and MMO's are completely different on many scales.

Not to mention that in most other types of games (single player, RTS, etc) when you "Game Over" the world usually doesn't keep going like it does in an MMO. It usually reloads from your last save point so you can try again. That's a big factor in why most of the other gaming genres don't impose "harsh" penalties on death.

[Kailok]

Not to mention that in most other types of games (single player, RTS, etc) when you "Game Over" the world usually doesn't keep going like it does in an MMO. It usually reloads from your last save point so you can try again. That's a big factor in why most of the other gaming genres don't impose "harsh" penalties on death.

Yeah, I was going to say that, but then I ended up just ranting about random stuff, so I cut it out of my post XD

[BeePee]

The OP is either trolling, or really doesn't understand how games create a sense of danger. Danger = Penalties.

RTS game create danger by offering the ultimate penalty, Game Over.

MMOs have death penalties, in the form of weakness, and usually something more substantial like exp loss.

You can't honestly stand behind the argument that dying is a good enough penalty. That's nothing, no incentive to play better, or to think twice about engaging some crazy enemy. Death does not equal game over, one just re-spawns and continues on one's way.

[geniusprime]

The OP is either trolling, or really doesn't understand how games create a sense of danger. Danger = Penalties.

RTS game create danger by offering the ultimate penalty, Game Over.

MMOs have death penalties, in the form of weakness, and usually something more substantial like exp loss.

You can't honestly stand behind the argument that dying is a good enough penalty. That's nothing, no incentive to play better, or to think twice about engaging some crazy enemy. Death does not equal game over, one just re-spawns and continues on one's way.

I have a pretty good understanding of the sense of danger. DP doesn't achieve that, more of an inconvenience than a sense of dread.

As far as RTS the sense of danger is not from "the ultimate penalty, Game Over", the sense of danger is simply losing. And in case you aren't aware, you can reload from last save in a RTS which equates to respawning in other games.

And yes I can and am standing behind the argument that dying is a good enough penalty. The incentive to play better should not be the penalty of dying but simply rewarding the player for playing better by staying alive.

[ChronicalSin]

I understand what OP is saying, but I simply do not agree.Call me old fashioned but when playing FFXI I LOVED that thrill of knowing that if I die now, I'll have exp-loss. With that said, I think that we need some kind of penalty for dying. Maybe not exp loss, but something that makes you think before heading into battle.