mocking the player for
their failure. The best
example was Space
Quest, which included
dozens of humorous
ways in which you
could kill yourself, after which the narrator
berated you. Highlights
include "Thank you for
playing Space Quest.
Too bad you've failed
miserably and doomed
all your people to a
horrible death at the
hands of the Sariens.
If you continue playing
as skilfully as this, we'll
never have a chance
for a sequel. Better luck
next time." Not saved
your game? Tough. Go
back to the start.
LucasArts, a rival,
always looked down
on Sierra for their eagerness for character
death and dead ends,
viewing it as a bad design choice. When the
industry was relatively
new, there was perhaps a willingness to
accept the authority of
the game and the parameters it placed on
you. Needing to keep
the custard pie so you
can throw it at a yeti
later in the game (Kings
Quest V). Needing to
die at least once so you
can understand the intentions of the designer. Those were just the
rules. Now they seem
like shoddy work.
That’s not to say that
death as a mechanic is
inherently a bad idea.
Many games would
not exist without death.
Those who used cheat
codes to gain infinite
health on first person
shooter games such as
Doom would quickly
find that all the tension
had been sapped from
the experience. Playing
God might be cool for
a while, but it doesn’t
necessarily make for
a satisfying game –
unless you’re actually
playing a God game
like Populous.
"The death of a character
distances a player from them,
devalues their life, and reduces
replayability"
7
A twist on the mechanic are those games
that carry on in the face
of death. The original
Wing
Commander,
Aliens:
Infestation,
the recent Until Dawn
and most RPGs kill off
characters if they die in
battle or as part of the
narrative. If a character
dies, the plot is reconfigured to take this into
account. What is constant is that if the player character dies, or is
knocked out, the game
will often end without
the player being able
to resurrect them.
Some
designers
have chosen to break
from the regular hero
narrative structure and
have killed off their
main character at the
end of the game. This
is an interesting twist,
and invariably has
led to funeral scenes
in the epilogue where
the characters’ life
is remembered, and
supporting characters
turn up to pay tribute.
Sometimes the players’
choices in the game
influence who is there.
This is fair - literary
heroes don’t always
triumph, so why should
the hero in a computer
game?
The two issues with
killing off the protagonist both involve the relationship between the
player and the character. First, a player
may feel hard done by
when a character acts
in a way in a cut scene
that is contrary to how
they might have handled the situation had
they been in control at
the time. The second
is spoilers. If a player
finds out the ending before they get there, the
fact that your character
dies often makes the
whole journey appear
pointless.
Is it time for a new
direction? The death
of a character distances a player from them,
devalues their life, and
reduces replayability, because you know
the twist in advance.
The Dark Souls games
have developed an interesting take on death
and rebirth that has
been well received,
for example, with your
character being reborn
as a Hollow. Some
games, such as Spelunky and Rogue Legacy redesign their levels
every time you die. The
latter even changes
your characters’ traits.
In Shadow of Mordor,
orcs that kill your character become stronger
and rise up the ranks
of Sauron’s army, and
even remember that
they killed you before.
Death will always be
a part of video games.
But after so many
years, perhaps it’s time
to think of new ways to
punish gamers for their
failure.