Respawning

[Nghtingale]

Some people around here are pretty silly in their belief that a multiplayer version of DS could work with full permadeath.

 

Yeah, it sound really fun to be playing with your newbie friend who gets randomly killed 20 minutes in and now you either have to start a new world or keep playing alone. A multiplayer game that only worked that way would get shereded appart by reviewers, regardless of how "true" it stayed to the spirit of the single player.

 

Some people seem to fail to understand that most gamers seek different things from SP and MP modes; SP modes are often about immersion, lore, themes and consistency while MP modes are usually about competition or camaradery. Thefore DST can't just be DS with more than one player, it has to be rebuilt, rebalanced and reimagined in order for the mechanics of it all to fit in with what people expect from a multiplayer game.

 

There's just no way the Devs can make a single mode that it's acceptable for everyone so chances are there will be different types of game modes; full PvP, conditional PvP, Co Op, full permadeath, partial permadeath, reviving other players, etc.

 

Does that break the "spirit" of the game?, perhaps, but if you want that you can still play SP as much as you want and perhaps stop trying to get everyone to play a game only the way you want to.

[jbeetle]

Some people around here are pretty silly in their belief that a multiplayer version of DS could work with full permadeath.

 

Yeah, it sound really fun to be playing with your newbie friend who gets randomly killed 20 minutes in and now you either have to start a new world or keep playing alone. A multiplayer game that only worked that way would get shereded appart by reviewers, regardless of how "true" it stayed to the spirit of the single player.

 

Some people seem to fail to understand that most gamers seek different things from SP and MP modes; SP modes are often about immersion, lore, themes and consistency while MP modes are usually about competition or camaradery. Thefore DST can't just be DS with more than one player, it has to be rebuilt, rebalanced and reimagined in order for the mechanics of it all to fit in with what people expect from a multiplayer game.

 

There's just no way the Devs can make a single mode that it's acceptable for everyone so chances are there will be different types of game modes; full PvP, conditional PvP, Co Op, full permadeath, partial permadeath, reviving other players, etc.

 

Does that break the "spirit" of the game?, perhaps, but if you want that you can still play SP as much as you want and perhaps stop trying to get everyone to play a game only the way you want to. And that already happens in SP but only to the people that manage not to die.

I see what you're saying, but I also think that making death trivial makes the whole game pointless, from both a MP and SP. Otherwise, the only way people will be ending rounds is by running out of resources or realizing they've done everything there is to do - that already happens quite enough even with the threat of death. 

[Maz]

No respawns, this isn't Minecraft.

[Ridley]

No respawns, this isn't Minecraft.

 

There is a option for that in Minecraft. 

[RobotAccomplice]

Boy this was a hot button. Permadeath would of course happen if everyone on your team dies, and there would be severe penalties to dying, but not booting you from the server. That wouldn't be fun. I hope klei at least gives us an "Easy Respawn" option. Then some people could play permadeath and others play with something like the skull thing that has been previously discussed.

[Zeklo]

Hmmm... there are always full moons. They are creepy enough, maybe just place the players head into an empty grave during a full moon. I'm just spewing out all possibilities at this point.

[mrtwoface]

I personally like the idea that your team can resurrect you but it uses up a method of resurrection for everyone. As in, your team digs up a Life Giving Amulet on Day 1, you goof up and die from the darkness on Day 2, your team can use it on you to resurrect you. Same with touchstones and other SP resurrection methods.

 

But if you don't have any resurrection methods, you die, game over man. That's kind of a big point of the game. Your skull or skeleton or whatever can stay on the ground until your pals find another resurrection method. 

[Zeklo]

I personally like the idea that your team can resurrect you but it uses up a method of resurrection for everyone. As in, your team digs up a Life Giving Amulet on Day 1, you goof up and die from the darkness on Day 2, your team can use it on you to resurrect you. Same with touchstones and other SP resurrection methods.

 

But if you don't have any resurrection methods, you die, game over man. That's kind of a big point of the game. Your skull or skeleton or whatever can stay on the ground until your pals find another resurrection method. 

I agree with this, but I don't think it should take more than 5 days to revive your friend. By then your basically just playing singleplayer.

 

Maybe when you die you can "play" as a ghost and only do minimal interactions until you are revived. My only worry with this is then Wendy would be even more useless.

[mrtwoface]

I agree with this, but I don't think it should take more than 5 days to revive your friend. By then your basically just playing singleplayer.

 

Maybe when you die you can "play" as a ghost and only do minimal interactions until you are revived. My only worry with this is then Wendy would be even more useless.

A five-day in-game wait seems fair if you can't find any other methods of resurrection, but people might use that as an excuse not to find any methods of resurrection at all and just resign themselves to waiting five days. It just seems non-DS somewhat that way. 

[Zeklo]

A five-day in-game wait seems fair if you can't find any other methods of resurrection, but people might use that as an excuse not to find any methods of resurrection at all and just resign themselves to waiting five days. It just seems non-DS somewhat that way. 

I didn't mean that after five days you revive, I just meant that I don't think someone should have to take like ten days to get the required stuff to revive a friend. So it would need to be not too hard but not too easy either.

[Maz]

There is a option for that in Minecraft.

I know I play the game. ...

[Flare2V]

That could work, if you do want it to be player friendly ,which after reading this makes sense.

 

An alteration to my original idea could just be: drop the players head into an empty grave. As simple as that. Then you revive where ever that grave is, thus the down side is finding an empty grave.

 

If you wanted to make it a bit more harsh, then make it so graves that people have been revived from cannot be dug up and reused meaning limited revives. Using all the graves in a world could happen and then result in you needing to use the teleportato but that is unlikely. Anyway like I said this would be a slightly harder alternative to the more friendly respawn.

This is much too based on the Webber unlock implementation, and would even get confusing if ever a team found webber's skull. Not likely. When a character dies, they should respawn via any means they normally would (touchstones they activated, meat effigies they built, life amulets they wore). In they case any of these things aren't available, they drop everything they have on them except for any character specific items, and are removed from that map. Next time don't let your comrade die.

Going more into this, effigies or touchstones need to be defined per character, for example, effigies in the shape of the character that built them or outlines of the given character on the touchstone. Any and all other players witnessing a death would be put to sleep and awoken just as if they had died, without any penalties as the deceased respawn.

Then again, this brings in the whole idea of a meat effigy in the form of WX-78, which is absolutely ridiculous. Nerf time, Klei?

[Flare2V]

Some people around here are pretty silly in their belief that a multiplayer version of DS could work with full permadeath.

 

Yeah, it sound really fun to be playing with your newbie friend who gets randomly killed 20 minutes in and now you either have to start a new world or keep playing alone. A multiplayer game that only worked that way would get shereded appart by reviewers, regardless of how "true" it stayed to the spirit of the single player.

 

Some people seem to fail to understand that most gamers seek different things from SP and MP modes; SP modes are often about immersion, lore, themes and consistency while MP modes are usually about competition or camaradery. Thefore DST can't just be DS with more than one player, it has to be rebuilt, rebalanced and reimagined in order for the mechanics of it all to fit in with what people expect from a multiplayer game.

 

There's just no way the Devs can make a single mode that it's acceptable for everyone so chances are there will be different types of game modes; full PvP, conditional PvP, Co Op, full permadeath, partial permadeath, reviving other players, etc.

 

Does that break the "spirit" of the game?, perhaps, but if you want that you can still play SP as much as you want and perhaps stop trying to get everyone to play a game only the way you want to.

You're straight up insulting and disregarding the majority of the Don't Starve community because they want the game to retain its survival and permadeath elements which is what everything in the game is based around, not to mention the genre in which it is categorized.

http://tinyurl.com/tuoteg

[kxdx]

The simplest answer is always the best, I suggest trying to streamline your respawn solution to the point where it's obvious, the mechanics in play.

 

If the above sounds confusing, I mean, the death/respawn mechanic shouldn't feel like trying to solve a rubix cube attached to a 5 minute clock and you're a colour blind dog. You should die, realise you're dead, and quickly realise how to revive yourself (or how allies revive you) without having to take a trip to the wiki to figure it out. (e.g. when you die and revive at a touch stone, you go "oh that's what that does" and continue playing)

[kxdx]

You're straight up insulting and disregarding the majority of the Don't Starve community because they want the game to retain its survival and permadeath elements which is what everything in the game is based around, not to mention the genre in which it is categorised.

He may of been rude going about it but his point is still valid, multiplayer will have to depart from its single player standards to cater to its new audience or it will fail.

[jbeetle]

He may of been rude going about it but his point is still valid, multiplayer will have to depart from its single player standards to cater to its new audience or it will fail.

not by making the whole point of the game null and void, that's for sure

[kxdx]

not by making the whole point of the game null and void, that's for sure

How would you imagine multiplayer to play out when someone dies and can not rejoin their friends, in effect being excluded from the game because the mechanics of play forced them out?

[RobotAccomplice]

Permadeath would of course still be in DS, but it would be more team oriented. If one person dies, their team can resurrect them, but it would lose valuable time. If two or three people died, the last person would have to frantically try to resurrect their teammates. If everyone died, game over. That's it. The fat lady has sung (Wigfrid). 

[RobotAccomplice]

It's also interesting that everyone arguing for easy respawning is using concepts like "gameplay" and "fun-ness" while everyone arguing against easy respawning is using the "no true scotsman" logical fallacy. 

[jbeetle]

How would you imagine multiplayer to play out when someone dies and can not rejoin their friends, in effect being excluded from the game because the mechanics of play forced them out?

Find a middle ground, ideally, but I don't disagree with everything you've said. I agree that it shouldn't be some contrived/unnecessarily complicated process that annoys more than it balances.

[ThePreChewedTree]

Don't Starve shouldn't become a Minecraft. Like 'O noe ai died ai must get back to get mah stuf bak'

 

In DST if you die you should stay dead. Or maybe respawn after waiting like 3 hours or something.

[RobotAccomplice]

Another aspect of easy respawn is the effect it would have on the overall community. If a noob player dies repeatedly and uses up all the touchstones on a server, more experienced players would probably get angry and possibly kick them. It would make it so that only elite players would want to play and noobs would stick to single player where they don't get yelled at every time they die. People would only play with friends near their skill level, and no one would ever play with a stranger.

[GentlemanFridge]

What, if a player dies and drops everything; ould the other players like collect the items wich the dead  player dropped and bury it in graves? And the dead player would like be thrown out of the sky or something after 2 days? and all the other stuff would be gone? I know that's a lot like minecraft but it could be different. Like when you can put a limited amount of stuff in the graves, or just only food? The food could also determine (is that spelled correctly?) how high the stats could be. Example: if the player dies, and the alive players could drop a "turkey dinner" in the grave, the resurrected player has some sanity, a lot of hunger and quite some health to go with?

[JustA4ever]

maybe by giving them a blood transfusion at the cost of some of their own health

I like this idea. All players that are alive must give 75% of max health that they can have: like if you are playing as Wilson and at the have 130 hp, then you still have to give 112.5 hp, not 97.5 hp. Or if we want to make this very costly and very risky, then we can get this up to 95% of health, so other teammates would have to be at nearly full health if they don't want to die because of blood loss. Dead player resurrects with 25% of they health. (No mater how much health you would have, but after blood donation you still would loose 95% of their life, so if you would have less, then you are going to die and donation would count as not successful)

[orian34]

interesting, not overpowered andwhen you die, you can revive but you're close to death...