Permadeath, Hardcore, Iron Man

[SpellSword]

I've found that without permanent death enabled in games like Diablo, Torchlight and Grim Dawn they don't provide me with much entertainment. However while playing with a single life and limits on saving, victory is no longer a foregone conclusion and the challenge keeps me interested.

Do any of you guys also favor this kind of gameplay, or is the potential loss of save data just a waste of your time?

[Oyster Sauce]

I see it as a feature that encourages degenerate, meta, and boring gameplay.

[Tweed]

I see it as a feature that encourages degenerate, meta, and boring gameplay.

Mad cause bad.

[Tweed]

Certain games benefit because without some kind of punishment for failure it's too easy. Stuff like XCOM plays much better when you have actually think about each move instead of trial and error until you get the perfect round.

[Xenich]

It is contingent on the type of game it is and its design focus. Arcade/roguelikes are all about that life cycle of play, so it makes sense.

If it is a deep RPG with long term development and play, I don't care for it at all and tend to look at it similarly to @Oyster Sauce as being detrimental to that style of game as it drives the design.

[Rienen]

Like Xen said, game type and design matter. For games where it's only meant as a challenge, it's never been something that appealed to me. Whatever "emotional highs" I'd get from close calls will never balance the feeling of realization of time wasted when my character dies. This multiplies exponentially for online hardcore modes where you're subject to lag and disconnections. But if that's your jam, more power to you.

[J1M]

Even in a single player context with no network involvement I don't trust the designers enough to waste time on that.

Consider even something as old as Diablo 2 and Duriel. The game wasn't built for it.

[SpellSword]

Even in a single player context with no network involvement I don't trust the designers enough to waste time on that.

Consider even something as old as Diablo 2 and Duriel. The game wasn't built for it.

Yeah, I remember that.

► I'm surprised to see that this bug is still present in the remake.

I get that they wanted Duriel to be on top of the player the moment you enter the fight, but the "died while loading problem" could have easily been fixed without altering the engine or the boss fight itself.

When loading Duriel's map, they could have placed the player in a sealed room outside of the boss room. Have a teleporter, perhaps styled as a hole in the ground to jump into, that when clicked changes the player coordinates to the boss fight room on the same map. Levels already loaded, so no death during buffering.

You're right about the bugginess problem. It has already ruined some games with this feature. For example The Nightmare of Druaga: Fushigino dungeon on the PS2 only allows you to save at specific moments and overwrites the previous save when it does. Sounds fine on paper, but what happens if the game crashes before you can make a new save and you end up having to reload from the previous save?

► The Nightmare of Druaga: Fushigino dungeon detects you loading an old save game.

And unfortunately it was buggy enough to crash often even on the original hardware, so if you play it, get used to seeing that scene. I think it actually deletes your inventory if it happens a few times as well...

So, yeah. I agree the likelihood of bad code bricking the game does put a major damper on trusting what you expect will be a long playthrough to a save data destroying permadeath mode.

[WhiteShark]

However while playing with a single life and limits on saving, victory is no longer a foregone conclusion and the challenge keeps me interested.

There are two ways to make victory not inevitable:

• Permadeath
• Very high difficulty fights

I like both. In, for example, a tactics game with fixed missions, I had rather each fight be extremely hard and be able to reload from the beginning of the fight. Same goes for plot-focused games. In arcade and proc-gen games, permadeath is the way to go. Roguelikes are the closest cRPGs can get to the real thing.

[Valter]

I usually keep a separate playthrough for permadeath, and another playthrough for ******* around. Depends on what I'm in the mood for

[Val the Moofia Boss]

I think permadeath only works in short games, as in one or 2 hours. Beyond that, it becomes too exhausting and stressful to be constantly on edge and careful, and the anxiety of having poured in so much effort for so long knowing I could lose it all in an instant. That is not enjoyable. Games are meant to be fun.

[Oyster Sauce]

I see it as a feature that encourages degenerate, meta, and boring gameplay.

Addendum: this is in relation to MMOs or single player RPGs where a playthrough is expected to last many hours that have tacked on hardcore modes the game isn't built around. I'm assuming SpellSword didn't mean games with disposable party members like KA:KT or Fire Emblem.

[Vergil]

I see it as a feature that encourages degenerate, meta, and boring gameplay.

I ultimately agree with this.
I understand wanting an additional challenge but nothing will ever be perfectly fair, balanced, or unbuggy enough that the chance of losing hours of gameplay to some random unforeseeable action screwing you over is just too high.

Especially if it's a challenge that involves not being able to save and come back later at any time. I don't have the time or mental energy to play an entire game in one sitting or wander aimlessly for a save point for an additional hour because I just want to go to bed only to die from some random encounter I had no desire to partake in, in the first place.
Speaking of saving like Oyster said in pretty much every game that has had some sort of "iron man" or "restart on death" mechanic the community immediately finds an exploit to get around it anyway and all it does is add another layer of tedium to the process.
People who play on ironman in EUIV will copy their save from closing the game and press alt f4. Halo LASO runs use the quit exploit to avoid the iron skull restarting the level.

Looking past the save issue the way it trains you to play the game is also pretty unfulfilling and boring. If you put your foot on the risk vs reward scale to the point where combat, exploration, experimentation etc. are too risky to bother doing what's the point? Inevitably you either play so overly cautiously that it becomes a slog to get through. Then you just find what the community meta is to get the *** blaster 9000 sword within the first 5 minutes of the game.
Which at that point what's the point of playing on super duper iron man hardcore survival difficulty if you're just going to use the meta cheese to get through everything? You might as well just play with cheats or better yet play on a difficulty that has a normal balance of challenge-fun that doesn't make you restart the entire game over one **** up (either your own or the game's).

[Stack of Turtles]

I don't have that form of autism where some people just can't help themselves from ruining the game for themselves, so I don't need ******** gimmicks.

[Norfleet]

There are two ways to make victory not inevitable:

• Permadeath
• Very high difficulty fights

The real way: Fight OTHER PLAYERS. Permadeath, "very high difficulty", all these are ultimately just static problems to solve. Fighting other players, that's a moving target.

[Classix]

I love me some 1 life action. Having to restart over again doesn't bother me. Brother and I playing Hardcore D2, just hit 22 on a Pally combo. We have a thing going now to level a couple 'secret' classes to 20 or so and duel each other eventually to see who survives for a laugh. He's been quiet but I'm sure he's rolling a Bone Spear necro or Bowzon to try and stay away from me lol.

[Tangerine]

I'll do permadeath if I really like a game and want to try something different. Otherwise why bother with the frustration?

[rusty_shackleford]

unless the game was designed for it from the start, and it therefore is a roguelike, it's poop and I have no interest in it

the issue is loadscumming, not savescumming.

[Havitner]

Like Xen said, game type and design matter. For games where it's only meant as a challenge, it's never been something that appealed to me. Whatever "emotional highs" I'd get from close calls will never balance the feeling of realization of time wasted when my character dies. This multiplies exponentially for online hardcore modes where you're subject to lag and disconnections. But if that's your jam, more power to you.

I was going to upvote this but then I got to the part where you respect other people's opinions.

[Demonic Fate]

If I'm only playing the game once, I want unrestricted F5/F9 spam so I can try as many different options as possible.

Most games I will only play once.

If I'm actually doing multiple playthroughs, I prefer if there is some friction on saving/reloading. Just enough hassle that I would rather think about the "correct" course of action for my MC and stick with it, instead of quickly cycling through every option.

XCOM "bronzeman" (no save/reload during missions, only at the strategic level) is a pretty good middle ground for my tastes. Or KCD1 "save on sleep/schnaps".

I still wouldn't do full ironman on a story-based RPG, because I don't want to throw away the save because of genuine mislick or because of a bug (it's a CRPG, of course there will be bugs). Though the point is a bit moot 'cause I can't remember the last single player game I played where you couldn't just make a manual backup of your "ironman" save in case.

Quick roguelikes with no story and heavy RNG-based are of course fine and fun in Ironman (I play Shattered Pixel Dungeon on occasion).

[rusty_shackleford]

I want unrestricted F5/F9 spam so I can try as many different options as possible.

why

[Decline]

Playing LE hardcore as I type.

[Demonic Fate]

I want unrestricted F5/F9 spam so I can try as many different options as possible.

why

"Do you have the macguffin that will allow you to bypass this fight?"

1- Yep, I did all the sidequests and I have it right here
2- Nope, **** you, give me the best you've got

Unless I know I'm going to replay the game later, I'll often go F5 - (2) - "huh, so that's what the fight is like. Ehh, I'd rather do it peacefully" - F9 - (1).

[Tinky Winky]

permadeath is for nerds and virgins who have too much time on their greasy hand.

[rusty_shackleford]

I want unrestricted F5/F9 spam so I can try as many different options as possible.

why

"Do you have the macguffin that will allow you to bypass this fight?"

1- Yep, I did all the sidequests and I have it right here
2- Nope, **** you, give me the best you've got

Unless I know I'm going to replay the game later, I'll often go F5 - (2) - "huh, so that's what the fight is like. Ehh, I'd rather do it peacefully" - F9 - (1).

Who cares tho?
Embrace the wyrd, take what you get, and move on.

[Demonic Fate]

why

"Do you have the macguffin that will allow you to bypass this fight?"

1- Yep, I did all the sidequests and I have it right here
2- Nope, **** you, give me the best you've got

Unless I know I'm going to replay the game later, I'll often go F5 - (2) - "huh, so that's what the fight is like. Ehh, I'd rather do it peacefully" - F9 - (1).

Who cares tho?
Embrace the wyrd, take what you get, and move on.

No.

[TKVNC]

I'm not opposed to it from a gameplay perspective. It encourages emergent gameplay, and really makes you think, and problem solve.

The issue is that it's a waste of time.

[WhiteShark]

I'm not opposed to it from a gameplay perspective. It encourages emergent gameplay, and really makes you think, and problem solve.

The issue is that it's a waste of time.

Assuming the game is designed with permadeath in mind, it's no more and no less a waste of time to play it more than once than it is to play it the first time.

[J1M]

why

"Do you have the macguffin that will allow you to bypass this fight?"

1- Yep, I did all the sidequests and I have it right here
2- Nope, **** you, give me the best you've got

Unless I know I'm going to replay the game later, I'll often go F5 - (2) - "huh, so that's what the fight is like. Ehh, I'd rather do it peacefully" - F9 - (1).

Who cares tho?
Embrace the wyrd, take what you get, and move on.

Sometimes exploring how the game was constructed is more interesting than the game itself, but not interesting enough to play multiple times (Bioware products).

[J1M]

I do like the idea of a sports game or sports RPG making you live with the outcome of a particular match. A season should have many matches, playoffs can be best-of-5, the game can span multiple seasons, etc.

In typical RPGs losing one combat = game over. But if I was making a Sports RPG I would go so far as to introduce a special type of XP or other progression that you can only progress when you lose a match to make players more willing to accept the outcome.