   Death detection == Resolution Screen
What if, rather than kill you, a game detected your manner of death and instead presented some sort of resolution screen which kept you in the game?Imagine these situations:1) You die immediately due to damage (most likely case: combat; but could include poison or some other progressive effect, like radiation)2) You will die in a few seconds (likely either due to falling, or being struck by somthing that will collide with you)3) You will die as a result of some long term mistake (rarely happens, but could be "walking into the desert with no food" or not bringing enough health restoration, etc.)What if, instead of death, you experienced some sort of resolution that made you lose something you cared about, but let you stay in the game? Take example 1: The enemies pick your carcass clean of all the cool stuff you've acquired, and leave you (the hero) to die. But you're able to stagger your way back to help.Exmple 2: Maybe instead of falling, you lose your weapon but are shown hanging on to the ledge you should have died going over. Or instead of colliding, you're knocked aside with some gameplay modifying injury.Example 3: Harder to compensate for, but maybe the game generates a cache of stuff around the corner as you're advancing.I can see two responses, based on the type of player: Either you want to have won the game because of your own skills, or you're in it for the experience. How many do you think are in each category?   
  The second I read this I thought "the classic movie hero 'underdog' position," and I thought it was a good idea.  But the more I think about it, I realize that its good in a movie because everything is controlled.  The movie hero will never experience more than one or two of these situations...Games are "uncontrollable."  What happens when the player walks off the cliff for the 15th time, and somehow manages to hold on?  Or when the enemy shoots him for the 45th time, but he somehow manages to play dead and sneak away? Sometimes, you just have to die.   ;  Not entirely related, but I don't know if you've looked at Prey.  When you 'die', you don't go back to a screen right away, instead, you get a chance to fight your way through a sort of purgatory, back to life(if you die here, you go back to the menu as I understand it), and I thought that was a good idea.   ;Quote:Original post by visageThe second I read this I thought "the classic movie hero 'underdog' position," and I thought it was a good idea.  But the more I think about it, I realize that its good in a movie because everything is controlled.  The movie hero will never experience more than one or two of these situations...Games are "uncontrollable."  What happens when the player walks off the cliff for the 15th time, and somehow manages to hold on?  Or when the enemy shoots him for the 45th time, but he somehow manages to play dead and sneak away? Sometimes, you just have to die.Good point, repetition is a problem. However, it raises the question, "are you playing to beat the game, or are you playing for the experience of playing?"What if your focus was on the latter? You just want to see more stuff, experience more plotlines, go on more adventures.Also, what about a mix of both systems: What if you have some sort of "karma points" that you collect, save up, and can spend (depending on the death)? I haven't really thought that out, but my guess is that mixing the two systems could be fresh and new or monstrously confusing.;Quote:Original post by HemoGlobenNot entirely related, but I don't know if you've looked at Prey.  When you 'die', you don't go back to a screen right away, instead, you get a chance to fight your way through a sort of purgatory, back to life(if you die here, you go back to the menu as I understand it), and I thought that was a good idea.Okay, based on a scene I saw in the video, I wonder what happens if you're fighting one of those huge monsters, cut him down to 1/2 health, escape purgatory, then come back? Do you have full health? What if you died because of low ammo?(I think it's cool that such a hard fought game concept is finally getting to be born, btw. Things like that give me hope! [smile])   ;  I like the idea of having some sort of last ditch effort type of gameplay where I can avoid death.  It would be nice if there was some player interaction involved in this.  So if I'me shot in the gut by a mugger in an alley, I'm switched to the near death UI. Where I can make an attempt to save my life. The UI might present me with several options and 60 seconds to make a choice.  The options might be fire back, press the panic button on my PDA, try and walk to the street, and dive through the nearby window.  In this way I have some control on the outcome.  Perhaps this could be abstacted into a symbolic choice rather then a literal one.Hopefully this could result in something more interesting then just waking up at the last temple/hospital I visited.   ;Quote:Original post by TechnoGothI like the idea of having some sort of last ditch effort type of gameplay where I can avoid death.  It would be nice if there was some player interaction involved in this.  So if I'me shot in the gut by a mugger in an alley, I'm switched to the near death UI. Where I can make an attempt to save my life. The UI might present me with several options and 60 seconds to make a choice.  The options might be fire back, press the panic button on my PDA, try and walk to the street, and dive through the nearby window.  In this way I have some control on the outcome.  Perhaps this could be abstacted into a symbolic choice rather then a literal one.Hopefully this could result in something more interesting then just waking up at the last temple/hospital I visited.Or, because so many of Wavinator's posts involve a technologically-more-advanced future, maybe the UI you mentioned could be a timed "hacking" interface, as seen in System Shock [2] (which I'm currently playing through for the first time and enjoying to death).  Maybe this hacking interface could be explained by the player's mind making a last-ditch effort to preserve itself, and, of course, being available no more than a minute or so.Also, if this was implemented in an RPG-like environment, a luck statistic could actually be useful, unlike so many others; Fallout games, specifically.  Now, I understand that the Fallout games did change a few events based on luck, but not usually more than a "saving throw" or two.  Luck may determine, again using the System Shock 2 example, the player's chance to successfully activate a "box", combined with their general hacking skill.Quote:Original post by WavinatorImagine these situations:1) You die immediately due to damage (most likely case: combat; but could include poison or some other progressive effect, like radiation)2) You will die in a few seconds (likely either due to falling, or being struck by somthing that will collide with you)3) You will die as a result of some long term mistake (rarely happens, but could be "walking into the desert with no food" or not bringing enough health restoration, etc.)I'm not sure I understand some of your examples -- I'd re-categorize poison under the second example (die in a few seconds), and radiation poisoning as a result of a long-term mistake (exposure).I wouldn't suggest the neural "brainhack" for the third example, because it may discourage players with high hack skill from simply ever bringing enough food for any journey.Oh, there's an idea: what if the player's current mental state/awareness affected their ability to revive themself?  If a player is shot in the head, for instance, I doubt they'll be hacking much of anything; stabbed in the gut, however, would give them at least a little bit of a chance to dwell on the fact and do something to repair the damage.And...let's say enemies are given this same ability.  Enemies are naturally able to brainhack themselves back to life.  In-game politics may suggest body shots as a more "humane" way of waging war against enemies, disabling rather than killing soldiers who trained in this brainhacking.  Also, obviously, if the player intended to kill an enemy, they would attempt more headshots, and use bodyshots to incapacitate targets who may be useful (such as bounties).Just an idea.  But I like it.   ;  All good observations.  I'll weigh in with the standard caveat about not making it worthwhile to just quickload whenever one of these things happens.  If I get shot, and collapse, and my enemy takes my armor and weapons and items (which comprise the vast bulk of the rewards I've received for the last few hours of play), and then I recover somewhat, and limp to the nearest town, I'll be miffed.  It would be like scraping together enough money in Escape Velocity to buy that Kestrel, sailing it into space, and immediately having it blow out from under you by pirates.  Now I'm in a cargo shuttle with 2,000 credits and a roster of enemies that are armed to fight me when i'm flying a corvette.  Crap.Suffering a loss is okay.  Getting boned just makes me cheat.   ;  Perhaps a system combining bonus points and a purgatory-like world.  Purgatory could be very similar to the current world, and you could acquire life points there. Once at a certain life point amount, you can be resurrected.  You can also save up life points found elsewhere to avoid a trip to purgatory (if you so choose).   ;Quote:Original post by Iron Chef CarnageI'll weigh in with the standard caveat about not making it worthwhile to just quickload whenever one of these things happens.Given how the player doesn't lose anything when they load a saved game, any system which does make a player lose even a smallest thing sounds like system that's never going to be used since it's the worse option. Unless it somehow manages to inflict the loss but at the same (or later) time reward a player in way that'll make the system 'worthwile' for them to use it. (but then you have to balance it for people who'll intentionally keep dying to milk the system for its rewards... tricky)