Should Dying In Games Have More Consequnces?
Back in the
good old days of Super Mario Bros. and Sonic: The Hedgehog, games were more
about the skill of the player then trial and error. The reward came from
finally clearing a world, rather then making it to the next cut scene. The
reason being, if you died you started the world all over again and you tried
and tried until you made it to the end. Today if you die you simply appear back
where you fell, with no consequence to the story at all. The result of this is
that players don’t put as much effort into a game because they know they have
unlimited tries. Games today are so life like that it seems odd that developers
leave out the most inevitable thing in life.
There has been much debate as to whether games today are to easy, and to answer plainly, yes they are. The main reason being, that after being killed in a game you simply spawn back where you fell, or at least to a very close checkpoint. The down side of this is that it causes players to become lazy, adapting a trial and error method instead of working out the problem beforehand. This then leads to a very unsatisfied feeling when you finally beat the game. No bigger culprit of this is Call of Duty, where even in the campaign; after you die you simply pop back to life. While this is not bad, it has grown a new species of online gamer, who is basically a kamikaze. Even extremely realistic games stick to the familiar pattern, such as Drakes Fortune. Despite taking on the persona of Drake, you still fall short of it being totally realistic when you warp back to a checkpoint. On the contrary games such a Skyrim tried to change it a bit by spawning you back to where you saved last, and depending on that, it could cause you to go back quite a ways. However, this causes you to be much more involved in the game, working out strategy to defeat all the enemies that are surrounding you.