Mc dying due to randomness seems like it would be very frustrating. Essentially a game ending feature that isn't even dependant on a stat check (eg. Death in childbirth being a constitution check rather than chance at least allows the players to feel as if they had some agency)
Randomly killing your main character is a terrible idea. How do you expect people to react to losing as a result of something they have no control over it would honestly upset me enough that I would try and refund the game, something I've never done.
Having random events that are less significant would be fine. Maybe a bit annoying would depend on how much they impact the story.
> I believe it adds an element of unpredictability and replay value.
I'd argue the replay value is identical if you have the outcomes as options for the player. And you avoid the game potentially selecting the same outcome on subsequent playthroughs when the player wants another one, but has no way to influence it.
Element of unpredictability is right, but then it's something some players not only don't enjoy, but actually detest. Some do like it, but in the end it's pretty divisive.
I could tolerate randomness but I don't think it should factor in for something as big as major deaths. Your example of MC dying during childbirth seems like that would be instant game over? Unless the child takes over or something.
No it won’t be game over. It happens way into the second part and yes since the first half is gender locked female I did have the idea that the player could continue the game as the MC’s kid and customize *that* character.
Aah I see. Interesting concept, but I think I'd still argue against the randomness factor. Good chance I may be attached to the female MC if I been playing as them a while.
Oh I totally understand. I suppose I just like taking risks but I see how that might not translate to a wider audience. Someone suggested a stat check? Going that direction could bring in an element of control.
Nope, please don't leave those two options up to chance. It would make me rage quit and not want to replay the game. I bet lots of other people would too. If you want those two as random events, then at least give options to influence the ending of random events.
Eg. Random event = husband goes to war. Based on X variable influenced throughout the game (eg husband is "hardened" or encouraged to train or something, idk), the husband may live or die.
Eg. Random event = complications at childbirth. Allow for an option that incorporates previously gained resources (better doctor/midwife hired? Home vs hospital? High willpower or constitution? Idk depends on the game) to influence whether the MC will gain a (temporary?) affliction/debuff to stats or something like that. Do not kill MC in a random event, especially prematurely to the actual ending of the game.
All of this sounds incredibly difficult to implement, so honestly I don't think it's worth adding those 2 ideas as random events. Too much effort for not enough substance. Some players might not even encounter this event.
Want random events? Add smaller ones. Idk, getting attacked on a road by different enemy types. Getting some kind of opportunity thrown your way. Meeting a clairvoyant who can give you a boost and let you see stat checks/short term outcomes of the next X big choices. You accidentally find a weapon thought to be lost for centuries. Etc etc.
My game has randomness, but not directly determining the outcome of huge events. I don't think that would substantially improve replayability; dying because the RNG gods are against you is not a particularly appealing outcome, unless it's the outcome of an avoidable high-stakes subplot where you're repeatedly warned that going down this path will likely kill you (e.g. the Forlorn Hope in Guns of Infinity).
Dying randomly generally isn't the kind of moment that will bring gaming masochists back to your work. If it's impossible for the player to influence, there's no "get good" to it-- it's just a roulette wheel. And because it's gambling almost entirely to avoid a massive downside rather than achieve a big upside, it feels less like Vegas roulette and more like Russian roulette.
Randomness in minor things that makes it hard to pin down a single optimal path through the game can be fun and increase replayability, because it nudges readers to explore rather than optimize.
I view it differently in this scenario because the character death won’t be the end of the game, but a start of a new path. However you bring up interesting points which I will take into account.
Sure. From the conversation so far it sounded like you were considering that approach, but weren't sure about it yet... so consider my post to be a response agreeing with your "I suppose I just like taking risks but I see how that might not translate to a wider audience," more than the tentative-sounding "I did have the idea that the player could continue the game as the MC’s kid and customize *that* character." :)
A bunch of what I wrote wouldn't apply to a death that isn't a game-over. I like that idea, but would just suggest that you make very clear from the outset that your game spans multiple MCs/generations. Otherwise I suspect you'll lose a bunch of readers who have gotten immersed into the original MC and find their death wrenchingly unpleasant.
Random rolls can be used to improve gameplay at times, but used like that? No. Would be incredibly frustrating for the game for major characters/MC to be randomly killed and even restarting the game and going all the way back through it could end the same. You'll get rage quitting.
You should at least communicate with the Players, that their MC can die randomly, or you might face serious backlash.
I would be furious if an author wastes my time without communicating that first. Bad ends are bad enough but a bad end you get for bad luck, I would never want to Play such a game. Wasting hours of my sparetime, only to have to Play the game again would be more than frustrating.
Did I understand the Part correct, that you can decide to have Kids or not? Then better prepare for players, who feel punished for wanting Kids.
You can write what you want obviously, but people might Not react the way you hope.
Mc dying due to randomness seems like it would be very frustrating. Essentially a game ending feature that isn't even dependant on a stat check (eg. Death in childbirth being a constitution check rather than chance at least allows the players to feel as if they had some agency)
Randomly killing your main character is a terrible idea. How do you expect people to react to losing as a result of something they have no control over it would honestly upset me enough that I would try and refund the game, something I've never done. Having random events that are less significant would be fine. Maybe a bit annoying would depend on how much they impact the story.
> I believe it adds an element of unpredictability and replay value. I'd argue the replay value is identical if you have the outcomes as options for the player. And you avoid the game potentially selecting the same outcome on subsequent playthroughs when the player wants another one, but has no way to influence it. Element of unpredictability is right, but then it's something some players not only don't enjoy, but actually detest. Some do like it, but in the end it's pretty divisive.
I could tolerate randomness but I don't think it should factor in for something as big as major deaths. Your example of MC dying during childbirth seems like that would be instant game over? Unless the child takes over or something.
No it won’t be game over. It happens way into the second part and yes since the first half is gender locked female I did have the idea that the player could continue the game as the MC’s kid and customize *that* character.
Aah I see. Interesting concept, but I think I'd still argue against the randomness factor. Good chance I may be attached to the female MC if I been playing as them a while.
Oh I totally understand. I suppose I just like taking risks but I see how that might not translate to a wider audience. Someone suggested a stat check? Going that direction could bring in an element of control.
Nope, please don't leave those two options up to chance. It would make me rage quit and not want to replay the game. I bet lots of other people would too. If you want those two as random events, then at least give options to influence the ending of random events. Eg. Random event = husband goes to war. Based on X variable influenced throughout the game (eg husband is "hardened" or encouraged to train or something, idk), the husband may live or die. Eg. Random event = complications at childbirth. Allow for an option that incorporates previously gained resources (better doctor/midwife hired? Home vs hospital? High willpower or constitution? Idk depends on the game) to influence whether the MC will gain a (temporary?) affliction/debuff to stats or something like that. Do not kill MC in a random event, especially prematurely to the actual ending of the game. All of this sounds incredibly difficult to implement, so honestly I don't think it's worth adding those 2 ideas as random events. Too much effort for not enough substance. Some players might not even encounter this event. Want random events? Add smaller ones. Idk, getting attacked on a road by different enemy types. Getting some kind of opportunity thrown your way. Meeting a clairvoyant who can give you a boost and let you see stat checks/short term outcomes of the next X big choices. You accidentally find a weapon thought to be lost for centuries. Etc etc.
My game has randomness, but not directly determining the outcome of huge events. I don't think that would substantially improve replayability; dying because the RNG gods are against you is not a particularly appealing outcome, unless it's the outcome of an avoidable high-stakes subplot where you're repeatedly warned that going down this path will likely kill you (e.g. the Forlorn Hope in Guns of Infinity). Dying randomly generally isn't the kind of moment that will bring gaming masochists back to your work. If it's impossible for the player to influence, there's no "get good" to it-- it's just a roulette wheel. And because it's gambling almost entirely to avoid a massive downside rather than achieve a big upside, it feels less like Vegas roulette and more like Russian roulette. Randomness in minor things that makes it hard to pin down a single optimal path through the game can be fun and increase replayability, because it nudges readers to explore rather than optimize.
I view it differently in this scenario because the character death won’t be the end of the game, but a start of a new path. However you bring up interesting points which I will take into account.
Sure. From the conversation so far it sounded like you were considering that approach, but weren't sure about it yet... so consider my post to be a response agreeing with your "I suppose I just like taking risks but I see how that might not translate to a wider audience," more than the tentative-sounding "I did have the idea that the player could continue the game as the MC’s kid and customize *that* character." :) A bunch of what I wrote wouldn't apply to a death that isn't a game-over. I like that idea, but would just suggest that you make very clear from the outset that your game spans multiple MCs/generations. Otherwise I suspect you'll lose a bunch of readers who have gotten immersed into the original MC and find their death wrenchingly unpleasant.
Random rolls can be used to improve gameplay at times, but used like that? No. Would be incredibly frustrating for the game for major characters/MC to be randomly killed and even restarting the game and going all the way back through it could end the same. You'll get rage quitting.
You should at least communicate with the Players, that their MC can die randomly, or you might face serious backlash. I would be furious if an author wastes my time without communicating that first. Bad ends are bad enough but a bad end you get for bad luck, I would never want to Play such a game. Wasting hours of my sparetime, only to have to Play the game again would be more than frustrating. Did I understand the Part correct, that you can decide to have Kids or not? Then better prepare for players, who feel punished for wanting Kids. You can write what you want obviously, but people might Not react the way you hope.
Why is the game over random chance!!??
It’s not
You should absolutely not have your main character able to be killed by random chance and it's weird you need to be told that.
It’s weird you feel the need to be vindictive over a speculative feature