[Neol]

Originally Posted by LadyLinda

Sorry but I seem to be missing the point of this post.

I don't think you're missing the point; my post just wasn't being clear. I wasn't actually concerned about the difficulty, but the overall mood and gameplay as we play an adventure game without death. Since most of the adventure games I've played did not have deaths, I did not have have a solid opinion about the idea before. Though instead of just hearing about them, I've picked up the King's Quest collection and its VGA fan remakes to experience adventure game deaths myself. Having completed the King's Quest VGA 1-3, death wasn't a big issue to the gameplay, although the third remake was still unfair about the deaths.

Spoiler:

Like when Medusa appears in the desert without warning.

Originally Posted by ozzie

Personally, I think deaths aren't appropiate to comedy adventures,

Deaths can actually add to comedy adventures when they're funny, as opposed to being unsuitable. In fact, there's a particular pun in KQ2 that I just can't enough of. It's only the random deaths that weren't so funny.

Personally, death isn't necessarily a bad feature in adventure games. When it isn't used appropriately, it would do more harm than good. But when done right, it can add to the mood and the gameplay.

Thanks for all the feedback, by the way.

[JKR]

For me, Adventure games are fun and relaxing. They aren't twitchy-stress-inducers like a FPS or something. So the fact that you can't really "lose" makes it more fun for me.

[crabapple]

Originally Posted by Neol

Since most of the adventure games I've played did not have deaths, I did not have have a solid opinion about the idea before.

Really? We must have played some very different games. It's a very rare game where you can't die at all. IMO "death" in an adventure game is generally a pain in the butt, with very few exceptions.

[Bonatto]

my name is bonatto, i am eleven years old, i like adventures, i am brazil, i do not like to die in game, i like go to beautiful places, i like to talk with the people in the games, i play full throttle, i do not like the ugly dog that try eat me, and i like to kill the dog, but not me. i also do not like game in german, because i do not have a dictionary, i like you stop translate game to german, and i like you put subtittles in all parts. i am here to make friends hello everybody.

[Collector]

I simply don't see what the big deal is about hating death scenes. Adventure games have this real nifty feature called "save game", the ultimate "do over." Even with the most death ridden Sierra games most of the ways you could die were easy to avoid, once you knew about them. How many really had that much trouble with drowning in King's Quest VI?

[Kazmajik]

Case in point: The Colonel's Bequest. It's a murder mystery, and throughout the course of the game your character will come across bodies. Adding to the atmosphere are a number of opportunities for your character to become one herself. I can think of a couple of examples where perhaps they were a little silly

Spoiler:

such as using the cane on the ring on the bell-tower, and using the oilcan on the suit of armor

but overall I think they were excellent at keeping you on your toes and giving the player a real sense of danger which added to the mystery. Some times it's better to take the training wheels off, disable the safety protocols, what have you. Besides, some of the opportunites for death were very amusing and without them the game would've been lessened.
Anyone who plays the game should definitely allow Laura to take a shower, just remember to save first!

[cwapitm]

I don't mind deaths in adventure games, as long as once I die I can return right back to where I left off. I agree that sometimes death can be humorous, and I will kill my character on purpose just to see what would happen, especially in KQ VII. Most of the Sierra games I never really liked though because of the many ways you could die.

[colpet]

I play adventure games for relaxing fun, so I prefer not having to worry about dying. However, I don't mind when you are returned to just before the incident or if the dying adds fun to the game (eg. Secrets of the Luxor).
What I really hate is when the 'death' occurs after a timed/dexterity puzzle. The swinging axe pendulum sequence at the end of GK3 nearly ruined the game for me. It took me over 2 hours to get past that sequence. That is not fun gaming.

[Collector]

Originally Posted by colpet

What I really hate is when the 'death' occurs after a timed/dexterity puzzle. The swinging axe pendulum sequence at the end of GK3 nearly ruined the game for me. It took me over 2 hours to get past that sequence. That is not fun gaming.

This is the one case in which I don't like it, too. But this is more of a matter where it becomes an action game instead of an adventure game, not that death is involved.

[Banderwocky]

In adventure games, I usually do not want game over scenes. I play adventure games to relax, and this can ruin it for me. Also, I do not need to see the character die to feel sympathetic towards him/her/it. Usually all of the thinking I have to do to solve puzzles puts me in the shoes of the character enough.

However, in other genres...it's usually what makes the game. So I do not mind it there.

[Tobriand]

Death in adventure games is sometimes justified. In the recent Tale of Two Kingdoms, almost every death was as a direct result of the player doing something silly, and, because of the setup of the game, it wasn't too hard to get back to where you were.

However. However however however. I wasn't so keen on Sierra's policy of death. I remember eventually giving up on Kings Quest 2 because of the darn 2-pixel scorpion that followed you from screen to screen at twice the speed you moved, and showed up aparrently randomly. At the time, I didn't have a mouse. Escape was nigh impossible.

SQ2 had some wonderfully obscure deaths. Again, escape from a certain cleaning bot some way into the game was frustrating to say the least.

I think the crucial thing comes down to warning. If a game gives you a warning that x is a really stupid thing to do, and you do it anyway, then the game is entitled to embarass you through death. If it just arbitrarily kills you because you hadn't considered something that the developers did, then to an extent fair play, but it definitely reduces the fun in a game.

If it just generates random deaths (scorpion-style) that are almost inescapable, then in all honesty, I don't see the benefit of that piece of code over, say, a bug that causes the game to crash. In both instances you have to start over from your last save, and both cases are annoying as anything.

[noknowncure]

The only problem I have with deaths in AG's is this: When you're so focussed on not dying you're not able to think about solving the various puzzles* and advancing the story.

For example, Broken Sword's deaths were great. They were simply little obstacles that added extra tension and drama. If you got it wrong and died, getting it right the next time never took too long.

Dreamfall's 'Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings' Troll maze was tedious and sprawling - the inclusion of deaths meant that I couldn't even begin to invest my interest in solving the actual puzzle; all I could focus on was trying to avoid the 'Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings' Troll. I lost interest as the problem lost momentum with each subsequent death.

If it inteferes with the pacing of the story or involves lengthy problems, I can do without death sequences.

*For people who associate this word solely with slider puzzles and the like, I use it in the broadest sense - fetch quests, inventory usage, dialogue trees, mazes... the lot.

[Erwin_Br]

As an amateur adventure developer it surprised me how difficult it actually is to design a game in which you can not die. But that's another story. Continue...

--Erwin

[Catbert]

Look at it logically. People complain about FPS's being rollercoaster rides but adventure games are much worse than that, generally. If you're not doing something the way the developers wanted you to, would you like to keep on doing and having to reload? I mean in 99.9% of the games out there you have one solution to each puzzle, why make it even more frustrating?

[Squinky]

Originally Posted by Erwin_Br

As an amateur adventure developer it surprised me how difficult it actually is to design a game in which you can not die. But that's another story. Continue...

I decided to continue this discussion here. Hopefully, someone will indulge me.

[Thom_]

I'm a firm believer that adventure games shouldn't include deaths. It's for this reason I've never really managed to 'get in' to any of the Sierra games (and I have tried to get in to them).

I like to be able to think about a puzzle and try many different methods etc. and go back over things I may have missed. This in itself is what an adventure game is about to me, and dying just adds an annoyance.

And it doesn't make the games easier, I struggled a lot with both of the first two Monkey Island games - there may not be deaths but the puzzles are god-damn confusing (but addictive ).

[nazao]

Actually i like if the game has some death sequencies in...Especially in horror or detective games because for me the idea that i might die any minute makes me always feel on edge and contributes to the whole gaming experinece...I dont find it so bad because in adventure games,especially,you can save when ever you want...So even if you die you always have a chance to play again close enough at the moment you died...

I find annoying when my character dies and then the game automaticaly loads the game just before i died..It is just too easy..I really enjoy the unexpected.What makes you think more and try harder.And no i am not an fps fan

On the other hand i dont like death on humorous adventure games.I find that really unappropriate and NOT that fun

[TheTwelve]

I don't think that death in an adventure game needs to be as unfair as many people think. I think the preference for no death in adventure games has grown out of many many games mis-using death.

Death doesn't have to be a penalty for not thinking the same way as the designer. The player should never be punished for trying other ideas. It should never be:

Designer: "How you gonna get out of this one?"
Player: "Um... let's try this!"
Designer: "NOPE! DEATH! Hope you saved!"
Player: "Uninstall."

But death can be used responsibly by the designer to keep the feeling of danger but without frustrating the player. It doesn't have to be (as Squinky put it in her spinoff thread) "Do the right thing or die." It should be "Do the wrong thing and die. " To be clear, there are several things that you can do and try that aren't the "right" thing, or the thing that solves the puzzle, but they're not the "wrong" thing, or the thing that causes death, either.

So the player should still be able to experiment and try all the things that come to mind, except the things that would obviously cause death.

Lets say the player is on one side of an electrified fence, and the button that disables the fence is on the other side, in plain view. You can try to talk the guard into pressing the button, you can try to throw a rock at the button, you can use the rubber chicken on the fence. One, or maybe more, (multiple solutions yay!) of these solutions will be the "right" thing that allows you to bypass the fence, but none of them should kill the player, even if they're not the right solution. However, using the metal crowbar on the electric fence certainly should.

To increase the fairness, the game must adequately convey the sense of danger to the player, letting him/her know to be on guard. If you're playing a game that's all roses and gumdrops with a sudden electric fence in the middle, that might not be fair.

So I think that games like these can use death in a way that is fair to the player and also beneficial to the game since it creates tension and suspense, which also helps to build a connection between the player and character since you start to become worried for the welfare of your character.

Regarding it being harder to design a game without death (sorry to avoid the spin-off thread, Squinky, but I didn't want to rend my post in twain) putting a puzzle like the electric fence example above in a deathless game would be difficult to avoid death responsibly. It would need to be either:

A) A comedic/cartoony game. Touching the fence turns your character all black and sooty and they shake it off. Try again.

B) Cleverly avoiding the dangerous situations. Maybe the electric fence isn't electric, and pressing the button just opens a gate. But again, you're now missing out on the potential building of suspense and tension that could add to your game greatly.

or

C) Full of stubborn characters. "I'm not gonna do that, do I look like I want to get fried like an egg?" I generally don't like characters refusing my commands, but sometimes I recognize that it's necessary irregardless of the type of game your making, since otherwise you'd never finish programming in all the permutations of item use and interaction!

All of that said. Death also needs to have appropriate punishment, and I don't like having to constantly worry about saving, which is why the game I'm currently making allows three options regarding death. You must choose one at the start.

A) Classic mode: If you die, load a save. This is the usual adventure game way to deal with death.
B) Rewind mode: If you die, the game lets you rewind to a point where you can try again. This is fun (and looks really cool too!) and is fast and easier than going into a reload menu, but may be too easy for some who want challenge.
C) Points Rewind mode: As you play the game, you accumulate "points" for solving puzzles and being thorough (optional side puzzle give lots of points). When you die, you spend a certain number of points to rewind to a point where you can try again. This mode adds some challenge, since you can't rewind indefinitely, but I recognize that some players might not like the points system (even though it doesn't get in the way of normal game play).

Hopefully one of these penalty systems, coupled with a fair approach to character death, will make the game enjoyable to play. Phew. That was a long post...

[Periglo]

Originally Posted by noknowncure

Dreamfall's 'Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings' Troll maze was tedious and sprawling

I have mixed feelings about death in Dreamfall. It added tension in some instances, but after a while it could end up interfering, as at the Border House, and, specially, at the maze. I actually cheated in this part, as a reaction to the very annoying design of this part of the game. I think I liked the inclusion of death overall, though, and the way it was handled (simply, "game over", black screen, try again with no reloading).