So anything I (or anyone else) says here has to have that massive asterisk next to it.
I think that it heavily depends on the kind of game we're talking about. I don't know much about SIFU though so I can't really comment on that I don't think any level of consiquence for dying is inherantly too much or too little, it just has to be right for the game. Heck if a game doesn't put you back far enough without thought that can also be bad. If a game just dumps you back a ways without considering how it will affect the gameplay that's bad. All of these have very different levels of consiquence but they are all very thought out in their approach. In Getting over It With Bennett Foddy the entire game is based around the threat of failure potentially setting you back to square one. In Celeste Dying springs you back to try again near instantly because the game wants you to keep trying until you get each little bit down right. Adding to the stress and consiquence that those games are going for. In a soulslike game losing spring upon you a challange to go and revover your lost souls/equivilent. Losing can be fun, or at the very least mechanicly thoughtfull. I think it's an important part of game design to at least consider the experience of losing or failing at a game. Should a game punish the players mechanically for "losing" the game? Does that inherently make it more rewarding? Does rewarding death take away from the final feat of beating the game? With limitless lives and checkpoints we know in modern gaming, I don't necessarily disagree with the opinion that punishing players for death can be bad, I just can't put a finger on why I think that. And that made me question why anyone should expect a reward for losing a game? Shouldn't the very idea of playing a game imply that the reward specifically comes from beating it? From winning? death allowing upgrades, ability to level up, etc.). When compared to games like Hades or Darksouls or Celeste in the comments I kept seeing the same belief that somehow those games don't punish or even reward player death (i.e. And I can definitely see why that would be off putting for some. But a lot of the flack I saw SIFU receive in reviews wasn't just that the game was difficult but that the game punishes the player "too much" for losing.īut what does that mean? I haven't played SIFU myself yet (emphasis on yet) but from what I can tell, the game seems very similar to a lot of roguelikes/lites I've played with one major difference: losing means harsh consequences for the player moving forward. And I have never been too put off by particularly punishing games.
But with the review thread of SIFU on r/games the other day, some of the conversations got me thinking about game difficulty and what death/failure in a game should mean for the player. Now, obviously I mean this in a general "we" as the community.
0 kommentar(er)
