Would you play a game with only 1 life (ie. New Cap City)

[Neonchameleon]

Here come the griefers. Terrorism, anyone?

I'd be happy with a single session game wehre if you died, that was it. Hell, it's how Dread works. An open invitation MMO is just going to attract griefers, working out how to kill people. Newbie gank-fest. And "accidental" pushes...

 

[Janx]

well, as wingsandsword explains, the show's game had no lag, no point, and you could jump out.

I'm more interested in thoughts on the idea of a game you can't come back to.

From the perspective of game design, why would you make a game with that limit? Especially when in the showm, if the player jumps out, they avoid the death (and can then jump back in). The latter part is a mechanic of the show, which I think a real game designer wouldn't allow if they had a mortality rule.

 

[Jhaelen]

I'm more interested in thoughts on the idea of a game you can't come back to.

Such a game wouldn't make any (business) sense. You need at least to be able to start the game again with a new character. Otherwise I'd consider it a complete waste of money - or is that game supposed to be free?

Even a game where I'd have to start from scratch all the time doesn't appeal to me. Even if the game was best game ever, I'd eventually become too frustrated to feel like investing more time into playing it.

I know several fans of the Diablo2 hardcore mode. It's never been my thing but for them it kept the game interesting for a long, long time.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Hmm, I watched the pilot episode but did not spot that if one died there was not going back in. It make no sense to me from an economic prespective.
I could only see it working if you have save areas and pvp areas and even then you could come back with a new character.

I might play it in those circumstances.

 

[delericho]

Presumably, you can still play D&D with other people, just not that group or campaign world.

Or it really is an MMO (WoW?) with strong user validation, to prevent sock puppet or multiple users per account.

Would this kind of game appeal to you?

I wouldn't be interested in playing a tabletop RPG like this. I might be interested in playing an MMO like this (if I played MMOs, that is), but for such a game, some sort of starter area/tutorial would of course be a must.

Would it really bother you if you died in the game?

Would depend on how long I'd been playing and how invested I'd become in the game.

Would it change your tactics in the game?

Yes. When playing a tabletop RPG, I treat my characters as much less disposable than when I'm playing Neverwinter Nights (where I can just revert to a saved game). Remove the ability to reload/respawn, and I will reverse this trend. Remove the ability to even start over with a new character, and I'd be much more careful still.

 

[kitsune9]

I wouldn't play such a game where I get one life and if I die, well, I'm banned. It just wouldn't appeal to me unless the game was free. But if there is some risk to the playing (i.e. pay money), then I doubt seriously I would be persuaded to join.

 

[SiderisAnon]

People are leaving out the incentive for playing this game in the show. You seem to be able to earn real world money in the game. One of the episodes had this big plot where they are robbing another player and the character's little datapad shows currency accumulating. Their criminal organization seems dedicated purely to stealing/hacking various games so they can make money in the real world. (Or maybe they're gold farmers.)

Ultimately, I can see a lot of people giving such a game a try, especially hardcore gamers with something to prove. It would be the hedonists who log out at the first sign of trouble that would survive over time. Anyone who actually does dangerous stuff would sooner or later fail and die.

As for the griefer gangs, while I could see them existing, I don't know that they'd be big or last long. How long can you maintain your fun when the moment your target sees you they can log off and if someone gets in a good shot you are gone from the game forever? I honestly think most of those gangs would devolve into killing each other and be gone from the game.



As for doing this as tabletop, I don't think it would work. Tabletop is about socializing with your friends. I have heard of "play until you die and they you're out" events at gaming conventions, though. These I can see working for pen and paper quite well.

 

[Sorrowdusk]

Nope, not voluntarily- the one I'm in right now ("My Actual Life" Tm)- I didn't have a choice of joining.

No.
NO.
NO.

I would NEVER voluntarily join such a game either. I mean-never play with the group again? On the server that would totally be annoying I'd do it only if the game was FTP but an at table group? Thats just stupid. You could play a great character for so long only to be killed by some random trap, or some idiot newby who just joined your group and thought it would be funny to kill you in your sleep. IMO whoever would run such a game is as poor a DM as the jerkoff who killed Black Leaf and made their player QUIT.

[MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION]

(Dam I want her DM screen though, that looks wicked. Is that a Marilith or a Myrmixicus on the cover? Also probably pretty cool being in a group made almost entirely of chicks. No pun intended. The whole thing is an inaccurate depiction of course, but its hilarious if you actually play the game. I personally read it as a story of nepotism/favoritism and the DM being afraid they were losing their new friend to Marcie who they wanted out of the picture. Lesbian undertones too I think, but I think its really a friendship thing whether the author meant it to be read that way or not.)

 

[I'm A Banana]

(Dam I want her DM screen though, that looks wicked. Is that a Marilith or a Myrmixicus on the cover? Also probably pretty cool being in a group made almost entirely of chicks. No pun intended. The whole thing is an inaccurate depiction of course, but its hilarious if you actually play the game. I personally read it as a story of nepotism/favoritism and the DM being afraid they were losing their new friend to Marcie who they wanted out of the picture. Lesbian undertones too I think, but I think its really a friendship thing whether the author meant it to be read that way or not.)

Oh, probably. Zealotry is often bound up in surprisingly simple Fruedian causes.

And then there's the other side of the coin...

 

[JRRNeiklot]

No. Why would I throw a friend out just because his character died? But I would like a game where every time your pc died you started another at level one.