Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Propose new game/software design concepts or new game/software ideas. They can be as whimsical as you like, just be careful you don't ask someone to make it for you...
Lady Eklipse
Drutt
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Lady Eklipse »

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course we should have infinite lives and (if relevant) continues!
The concept of lives itself is archaic. I like old games, but I like the good aspects of old games, not replaying the same level, or worse - screen, for infinite hours. I choose infinite lives instead.
Life is hard enough to handle. Why should enternainment also be hard?
When I played ZX Spectrum and (later) console games, I used to literally dream about a possibility to have infinite lives, savestates or something like that, which would let me actually play the game, not just exercise in failure. Instead, I always liked to explore the game, to see the world of the game, to see what's on the next screen, on the next level etc. Lives are just a hinderance.
Thankfully, not only we have save states, I'm also able to play hacked games on original hardware, which is awesome!
That was actually my philosophy behind creating ZX Pokemaster. I want even access to cheat codes be easy. Life should be easy and so should be games.
If you are a developer, please make infinite lives at least an option.
ZX Pokemaster - cheat management and file sorting tool for ZX Spectrum
Nomad
Manic Miner
Posts: 600
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:38 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Nomad »

There is a lot to be said for the philosophy of the games, where a user would be given the choice of 'stay in a sea of fail or get good.. your choice bro.' :lol: Once you get past the cryptic games or ones with sparse player bases. Its the mindset that is different in players now compared to before. Sure you always had people sharing pokes but the challenge aspect was a big part of why people played the games. To be able to say you beat a title.

When someone completes a game on inf lives thats more a person resigning themselves to not being good enough to complete the game as intended.

What does it say about us today - that we don't have the skills or patients that people back in the 1980s did (probably), that we expect everything to be made easy (again probably). Nobody wants to be 'triggered' by a task that might have a failure state (probably). Is it so hard to accept that perhaps some tasks are beyond us without a significant amount of effort? What does that say about modern society? :lol:

Its hard to say as we have accepted enforcement of the lowest common denominator as a norm rather than the exception. Perhaps content was denied to plebs to make it all the more sweet for the ones that spent the time to master the game? If you let everyone see the content that was predicated on skill before then it removes the achievement from those who go their by regular means.

Any snowflake, with no time mastering the game can just lay bare the content for everyone to see for the P?s? poor youtube videos, blog posts in a cynical attempt to get Patrion welfare or ad revenue. Lost in a sea of simplistic, bottom of the barrel gameplay - hundreds of flappy birds clones, one screen puzzles or 5 nights at fredies creative abominations. It would seem that when your average player wants everything handed to them with no effort what is the point in developing games with deep elements or challenging game play? You might as well just focus on shovel ware that is a thin veil to promote whatever hipster pseudo science is the flavor of the day and get on that virtue signalling hype train to indie success. :lol:

But one thing that has not really been considered is everyone (well most of us) are that much older and have more things to take up our time than we did back in the day. So perhaps there is not the free time necessary or the motivation to get good.. Could that have been a major reason for games having an expectation of a cakewalk option? If you pay for content do you have a right to see it all as part of your purchase? :lol: They are hard questions I am not sure to be honest. It's not like a whole new generation of kids is waiting to pick up these titles and use them in the same way that kids back in the 80s did. Hmm...
User avatar
Ast A. Moore
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ast A. Moore »

Nomad wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:58 am There is a lot to be said for the philosophy of the games . . . Hmm...
Agreed. Or, to condense the above to a more succinct and technical term: grow a pair. :)
Every man should plant a tree, build a house, and write a ZX Spectrum game.

Author of A Yankee in Iraq, a 50 fps shoot-’em-up—the first game to utilize the floating bus on the +2A/+3,
and zasm Z80 Assembler syntax highlighter.
Ralf
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Poland

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ralf »

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course we should have infinite lives and (if relevant) continues!
Well, the world has certainly changed. Games become mouch easier than they used to be in the 80s.

How many gamers actually completed Knight Lore or Manic Miner? 10%? 1%? That's the numbers I believe. And today everybody is expected to be able to complete his purchased game and see the ending.

But infinite lives still may be a fun killer, I believe. The game should be easy enough to be possible to complete but you still should be able to lose if you are totally careless.

A game is a game. And a part of a game is a challenge ;)
Post Reply