Apparently, there is a game in the wild called “One Life” (originally named “Cyclop”) which appeared on Steam Greenlight quite recently. To put it simple:
Yes, you heard right: If you die, you won’t be able to play this game anymore. Never.
What are your thoughts on this? Let’s discuss (if allowed)!
Since reducing your customer base is really not good business, My guess is that actually getting permanently dead will be pretty difficult to have happen. However just the threat of that possibility could end up working for them. But I do think it turns the uphill slog of marketing into a bloodbath.
If the game was very cheap, and I knew that it had a solid tutorial BEFORE you cross the point of no return (where death becomes permanent), then yes - I’d be tempted to try it. One of the key elements in storytelling and in gameplay (when specifically discussing video games) is the concept of the “Stakes”, and really this game takes that to the most extreme level. Surviving in a game like this would give players an incredible sense of accomplishment. It would also invoke some very real-world emotions… I’d be nervous as hell every time I logged in, and the game’s value would just increase the longer you survived.
I think this is a great idea, but I don’t think it will succeed as a commercial product. I think it’s unlikely that people would be willing to gamble their money on purchasing it. If it were F2P? Absolutely, I could see it being a huge success.
Sometimes you die because of lag or a glitch. So it’s a very tricky business.
It’s also be hard to maintain a customer base. Every time a player logs in there’s a risk that you’ll be the one to break off the relationship.
I like the concept from a game point of view, though. I think that personally I’d lock out characters rather than players, and maybe put a long cooldown on the creation of new characters (so that people don’t spam kamikaze starter characters).
You could make actual death very difficult to achieve. Injury could be common, as could incapacitation. From memory of games like Dungeons and Dragons death is generally considered permanent or at least very significant, but campaigns can still go on for months of weekly sessions with frequent combat because there’s so many steps on the path to death - from memory you become “incapacitated” first, and then your party (or passers by C.O. your DM) get plenty of opportunities to do something about it.
dying and starting again is one thing.
locking a player out of a game is another altogether (and a stupid gimmick IMO)
Never?? That is sort of silly, in my opinion. I am all for perma-death in games, but it is the character that dies, not the player. At the very least allow the player to respawn as another character.
I can just imagine a troll group of elite players going around killing everyone off and destroying the entire player base… that can’t end well.
You know, given how much control and power is given to the players judging by the descriptions.
There will be a very small niche market for this. But expect it to stay small and niche.
But those players who jump on it will probably be very dedicated.
Very bad idea from my perspective. If I buy a game then I want to be able to play it. If I’m in there for 30 mins and get killed then that’s it game gone. I’d be putting in for a refund on steam.
I could see this working with your character dying permanently (as happens in many games) and there’s a timer before you can create another one. Possibly even make people wait a week, or have “seasons” where everyone can spawn once, once they die they’re out for the season.
Would need alternate game modes so people can continue to play when they’re waiting a week or more to create another character to avoid them losing interest and just quitting the game. Any game with a focus on multiplayer has to keep an active community participating or the game will tank.
Its marketing. Some people will hack it.
What I expect, is they will do a complete u-turn when their numbers literally die off.
People could assume what customer base or blah blah blah. I could assume too. I won’t. Instead I’m stealing the idea and I’m going to design it to work with in-app purchases.
You can create a custom player when you first start off. If that player dies that’s the end of him/her. You will then be given the opportunity to purchase a new character which is in fact a totally new character. Until you do purchase a new character the app will sit on your device or whatever its installed on and do absolutely feck all.
When you purchase a credit via in-app purchases you are then able to play.
It stinks of psychological manipulation, well, if you design it like that.
You could goad people to purchasing a new character with phrases like “Are you sure you don’t want to purchase a new character to see what comes up next?” or “Damn, it’s a shame your player died especially when the good parts were coming up. If you bought a credit for a new character…”.
It will become pay for more lives, like every other game these days.
This was always going to exist, and now it does.
Well it got people talking about the game – otherwise this game would have been a dime a dozen
I saw that game on Greenlight, and I am curious to see what happens with it. The perma-death that prevents you from playing the game again if you die in the game seems like a stupid (and possibly temporary) gimmick, but it might provide a perfect experience to a certain type of player. It is possible that some people might savor the experience even if it ends up being cut short. Some people really want a simulator where everything is like real life including perma-death.
I definitely won’t buy the game myself. I have no interest in playing a game that locks me out if I die in game, and I have no interest in urinating on other players or torturing people in game. I do plan to check YouTube periodically to see gameplay videos. I am curious to see if players will play cautiously and really savor the moment instead of hurling themselves at bullets every chance they get in most FPS games. I did Yes vote it on Steam Greenlight, since I am very curious to see what happens with it.
Regardless of what ultimately happens with the game, the game definitely got everybody talking about it. It is going to sail through Steam much faster than most games. So strictly from a buzz building point of view, I have massive respect for this. This will be Greenlit in a matter of days instead of the typical months required for many games. Will that translate into sales? How many of those sales get quickly refunded? It will be interesting to see how this all turns out. No matter what happens, congratulations to the developers for generating so much buzz and absolutely blazing through Steam Greenlight.
Makes me wonder if it’s just a marketing tactic to get people talking about it. And then they’ll “listen to feedback” and change how it works at some point so that it won’t be truly game over when you die.
It would not shock me to see that happen. But either way, they got a lot of people talking about their game, and that is really hard to do these days. I put my game on Greenlight only a couple days after they put their game on there, and yet they have 30 times as many comments on Greenlight regarding their game. Even if One Life’s perma-death is only a temporary marketing ploy, it worked awesome for getting tons of buzz for their game.
What I am guessing they will actually do is include a single player campaign that takes significantly longer to complete than Steam’s time limit for refunds. That way, they could still have the perma-death feature in their multiplayer mode if they wanted to. Most gamers would play the single player mode before diving into the multiplayer mode, so they could get familiar with the gameplay mechanics before risking their One Life in multiplayer.
It’s going to be interesting to watch what happens, but there’s no way I’m paying $10 to wander around for half an hour then get shot in the back.