Are Lives Outdated Game Design?

  • Publisert 3 måneder siden

    Game Maker's Toolkit

    Runtime: 08:44

    Are lives an outdated relic of the arcade era, or are they still relevant to game design in 2020?
    Support Game Maker's Toolkit on Patreon - www.patreon.com/GameMakersToolkit
    Crash Bandicoot 4 game code provided by the publisher
    Sources
    [1] Super Meat Boy's McMillen Explains 'Why So Hard?' | Gamasutra
    www.gamasutra.com/view/news/119093/Super_Meat_Boys_McMillen_Explains_Why_So_Hard.php
    [2] Sonic Mania’s Save System Sucks | USGamer
    www.usgamer.net/articles/sonic-manias-save-system-sucks
    Gear I Use (Affiliate Links Help Support GMTK)
    🎙️ My video microphone - amzn.to/3n36r45
    🎤 My streaming microphone - amzn.to/38F5UjA
    ⚙️ My audio interface - amzn.to/3puaLL3
    🎧 My headphones - amzn.to/2KYL728
    🎬 My capture card - amzn.to/3mOqCCA
    Games shown in this episode (in order of appearance)
    Crash Bandicoot 4: It's About Time (Toys for Bob, 2020)
    Fire Emblem: Three Houses (Intelligent Systems, 2019)
    Battletoads (Dlala Studios, 2020)
    Pac-Man (Namco, 1980)
    Super Mario 3D World (Nintendo, 2013)
    Super Mario World (Nintendo, 1990)
    Sonic Mania (Sega, 2017)
    Kirby Star Allies (HAL Laboratory, 2018)
    Donkey Kong (Nintendo, 1981)
    Donkey Kong Country (Rare, 1994)
    Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze (Retro Studios, 2014)
    Rayman Legends (Ubisoft Montpellier, 2013)
    The End Is Nigh (Edmund McMillen & Tyler Glaiel, 2017)
    Super Mario Odyssey (Nintendo, 2017)
    Super Meat Boy (Team Meat, 2010)
    Streets of Rage 4 (Dotemu / Lizardcube / Guard Crush Games, 2020)
    Mega Man 11 (Capcom, 2018)
    Disney's Aladdin (Capcom, 1993)
    Castlevania: Rondo of Blood (Konami, 1993)
    Super Mario Bros. 3 (Nintendo, 1988)
    Mega Man 2 (Capcom, 1988)
    Super Mario Bros. (Nintendo, 1985)
    Celeste (Matt Makes Games, 2018)
    Mega Man 3 (Capcom, 1990)
    Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy (Vicarious Visions, 2017)
    New Super Mario Bros. U (Nintendo, 2012)
    Furi (The Game Bakers, 2016)
    Kero Blaster (Pixel, 2014)
    Sonic Generations (Sonic Team, 2011)
    Spelunky 2 (Mossmouth, 2020)
    The Messenger (Sabotage Studios, 2018)
    Shovel Knight (Yacht Club Games, 2014)
    Panzer Paladin (Tribute Games, 2020)
    Ori and the Blind Forest (Moon Studios, 2015)
    DoDonPachi Resurrection (Cave, 2008)
    Sonic Forces (Sonic Team, 2017)
    Trials Evolution (RedLynx, 2012)
    Bloodstained: Curse of the Moon (Inti Creates, 2018)
    Music used in this episode
    Music provided by Music Vine - musicvine.com/
    Contribute translated subtitles (and see translation credits) - amara.org/en-gb/videos/rKJAzfAyhTel/

Game Maker's Toolkit
Game Maker's Toolkit

If this video gets 50,000 likes in 2020 I’ll record myself reading the entire Crash 4 software license and privacy policy

3 måneder siden
noTmiZ
noTmiZ

@49k now

5 dager siden
Smudge
Smudge

>.< We lost....

13 dager siden
Game Maker's Toolkit
Game Maker's Toolkit

@HomeSchool Guitar Lessons close but no cigar

17 dager siden
HomeSchool Guitar Lessons
HomeSchool Guitar Lessons

So sad. We didn't make it 😥

17 dager siden
tony
tony

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

18 dager siden
Fused Toast
Fused Toast

Stupid question to ask. It's like asking if two dimensional gaming is outdated. Some games it's right, some games it's not right. Art and entertainment is subjective.

17 timer siden
Briar
Briar

Somehow watched this video when its very brief clip of Celeste was showing the exact point I'm currently stuck on. :p

Dag siden
Anthony T.
Anthony T.

I kind of like the concept of failing so many times and having to start from the beginning. It can be annoying, but I find myself getting better and better at the beginning and getting to the part I can't complete faster. Then over time I master it completely.

Dag siden
jknifgidfui
jknifgidfui

It depends

Dag siden
Michael 23
Michael 23

Most modern kaizo mods do away with lives.

Dag siden
Evilpimp
Evilpimp

I miss games like Jak and Dax, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Rayman. Games feel so stale today

Dag siden
Mean Pee
Mean Pee

Some times, I find it hard to stop playing games. Losing a few lives makes me realize I need a break.

2 dager siden
Junkyard Productions
Junkyard Productions

I think an interesting concept would be a game that uses lives but you can use them as currency too. Similar to soul's but instead of being THE currency it's a trade-in for more bells and whistles. You can stockpile lives to give yourself that edge in attrition or trade them in for more in-game currency or bonuses if you're confident enough to give yourself more skill/power-up choices.

3 dager siden
Mabra
Mabra

tl;dr: Yes they are.

3 dager siden
NP OP
NP OP

Yes

4 dager siden
Marco the dragon
Marco the dragon

I say both are good

4 dager siden
Captain Aardvaark
Captain Aardvaark

I would add that permadeath games add a whole extra dimension to this. You don't lose progress, there's no "going back to retrace steps", the character is dead. In the case of survival games, _your_ character is dead. It's one of the most important elements to what makes the survival mode in "The Long Dark" so much more compelling than the story mode.

5 dager siden
Alex Force
Alex Force

Well no matter if its lives or coins or rings , some sort of loss, a penalty system for playing the game badly is an easy way to make the player be more engaded in the game. Just to lose your "life" and to start over from a checkpoint is very simple and obvs way to do it. Most people dont play games to make a perfect score or to achive some meainingless "You are awesome!" moral reward in the end of the level. But no one wants to suck at a game. And for most people - just not dying till the end is good enought.

5 dager siden
epicgamersaurus
epicgamersaurus

I really like how Doom Eternal has extra lives as an automatic revive when you die. They make a great collectible and raise the stakes even more because you obviously don’t want to lose your limited amount. In an already very high skill game, extra lives reward exploration instead of punishing repeated failures.

5 dager siden
Trimint Pikachu
Trimint Pikachu

And this is useful for beating the game in Nightmare difficulty, because if you die, you had to start all the way from the beginning. An Iron Man mode, basically. And you had to do everything in one shot.

Dag siden
WilliaMusic Chorski
WilliaMusic Chorski

I was hoping you would mention the Wairo series

6 dager siden
Keaton Hatch
Keaton Hatch

I just wanna go back to the original Nintendo - to about ps2 days where when I bought the game it was mine and I had access to it without paying for unlockables or lives, or watching ads between scenes. Oh good times

6 dager siden
Michael Tan
Michael Tan

I like life systems as optional systems that encourages more careful play. The best example is shoot-em-ups, which are often less about shooting and more about dodging the bullet hell. With no regard to your life count (i.e. no care put into dodging), these games aren't nearly as interesting. However, repeating content is frustrating so modern shoot-em-up always give you the chance to practice with infinite lives, even though trying for a 1cc is the more interesting way to play (this does runs the chances of player not getting the message though. I initially didn't). Another example is playing NES games on emulator. A game like Contra can be beaten in less than half an hour. However, trying to beat it with 3 lives and 3 contiune require one to very carefully learn each levels. With practice, what initially seemed impossible becomes a fun goal to shoot for. This short and trial-and-error type of gameplay is often criticized but I actually found it a lot fun cuz I play these games on an emulator with save states and rewinding. I can practice the game with them (essentially infinite lives) and only shoot for a legit run (3 lives 3 continue) when I feel like it. Additionally, since these NES games are short anyway, I don't even lose a ton of progress no matter what

8 dager siden
Joseph Douek
Joseph Douek

No mention of Eternal, where “lives” are simply ways to continue the action as it is instead of dying and re-starting the encounter

10 dager siden
Conkelipede
Conkelipede

Ughh.. The new Battletoads game is sooo hard to complete! Even just the first speeder level is soo hecking looong!! If is fun, though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

11 dager siden
Goat
Goat

I loved celeste's take on it. You don't get punished at all for dying, you respawn in the same screen. The point is to beat short but hard platforming challenges and permanently save afterward. The difficulty doesn't come from being concentrated for long periods of time but rather from actual platforming. It still counts every death and shows them after each level so you will see exactly how bad you are.

11 dager siden
Weston
Weston

i love the Souls method - you can die as many times as you want but you’re encouraged to make your way back through the level untouched so you can regain your lost souls

12 dager siden
Christopher Herrera
Christopher Herrera

I’m cool with lives, but the one hit deaths can go die.

12 dager siden
Snowfloof Cathug
Snowfloof Cathug

Lives is kind of just another version of HP

13 dager siden
Captain Alieth
Captain Alieth

"rewarding players for not dying" King of Thieves

14 dager siden
Captain Alieth
Captain Alieth

god i hate lives/energy in mobile games

14 dager siden
Rotog
Rotog

To answer the question in the title: yeah pretty much.

14 dager siden
Jorge Zaldivar
Jorge Zaldivar

Lives are NOT outdated!

14 dager siden
Jorge Zaldivar
Jorge Zaldivar

@Lone Ranger Minecraft doesn't have much action. But Super Mario Odyssey removed lives for a good reason. It focused on open world exploration, so it's understandable.

Dag siden
Lone Ranger
Lone Ranger

@Jorge Zaldivar how bout games like mario odyssey, or minecraft?

2 dager siden
Jorge Zaldivar
Jorge Zaldivar

@Shrimp Lord Celeste isn't my cup of tea. It looks bland to me...

13 dager siden
Shrimp Lord
Shrimp Lord

They are tho. People shouldn't need to do parts they have already done. And Celeste doesn't have lives and it's still challenging and rewarding

13 dager siden
Catreece MacLeod
Catreece MacLeod

There's a similar issue with tabletop RPGs which is only really just being looked at now, and it's one of hardcore mode being the default model and has been for decades. Essentially, one life, that's it, if you die it's game over, make a new character. The problem with this... is people who like hardcore mode games are a tiny minority of players in general, under 10% of the population. For games like tabletop RPGs where the story is a big part of the game and your progression over a very long period of time matters, this is especially an issue. It's not just going back to the start of the game, it's never being able to see the ending of the story. Ever. This has been around since the start of tabletop RPGs, where you die and that's it, and it's become so standard for so long that many players can't even grasp the idea of there being alternatives in the first place. The primary argument is that there has to be some penalty for dying or you'd just take mindless risks and this directly goes against the willing suspension of disbelief as a game where you can't die is unbelievable. The problem here is though, that killing the character and having to make a new one doesn't punish the character for their mistakes, it punishes the player in a permanent way. If the character dies permanently... well there's not much reason to put much effort into your next character if they're just going to die. This leads to many players' first encounter with a tabletop RPG being that they put a lot of time and effort into making a character they want to play as, only to die horribly due to a bad roll of the dice, a critical hit, and poof they're dead through no fault of their own, and simply having no interest in continuing to play after that point. Personally, I found the solution through one of the spoony experiment videos though - namely that death isn't the worst thing a player can face. There are other penalties that are far, far worse in player psychology that they will absolutely loathe more than their character dying and will avoid far worse than even a plague. In particular, the concept of level drain is one players hate with a burning passion, where their character permanently loses some of their character's strength, making them regain that lost time. It's surprisingly similar to having lives in a video game, as per the video here, because you have to replay part of the game over again basically. Another strong one is losing items, or NPCs the player liked, or other things that they're attached to. This made me realize that the idea of having one life and that's it is completely outdated and wrong in a tabletop RPG. It's not even particularly effective at what it's supposed to do. Rather than end your character's story entirely, it's vastly more interesting and effective to force the character to face the consequences of failure. The story continues, but perhaps in a direction the player didn't want. For example, the players are supposed to assassinate the king of a rival nation! ...Well if they die, and that's the end of it... well, not the player's problem anymore. If some survived, oh well, make a new character, they're expendable now, and the new character doesn't have to deal with the consequences of the previous character's failings. If all characters die, the game's over, start a new game, and no one has to deal with the events that transpired because it's a new set of events. At least... that's the old way of handling things. What about a new method? Your character dies, but gets revived after a time lapse. In the meantime, their failure to assassinate the king means the king has dug up dirt on them and has taken one of the NPCs the player liked hostage to prevent further attempts on his life. Worse yet, the player's character is crippled by their death, weakened until they overcome the trauma by having to face down the thing that killed them. The player can no longer simply ignore the consequences of their actions, or just ignore the king, but rather now they absolutely have to face their fears in a weakened state, so they actually can't brute force the problem any longer. The story continues, the character suffers the consequences, and the player is even more loathe to die than in the previous methodology. The concepts are much the same for why lives exist and why hardcore mode exists, though this is taken to a bit more of an extreme case scenario in tabletop RPGs compared to video games since video games don't delete the game and prevent you from ever playing it again if you get one bad roll. I am of the personal opinion that this is an outdated method of gameplay which has lingered for far, far too long in that particular medium, and probably is a large part of why that style of game hasn't gained more mainstream acceptance in so long - it's catering only to a very tiny fraction of players. Seriously, how many players do you know who will only ever accept a game if it's on hardcore mode, and they have to beat it with 1 life or it's game over? There's definitely an audience for such, but it's a fairly small, niche audience to cater to. It seems really weird to have an entire genre which has never even considered branching out from that tiny niche, and yet this is where we've been for 40+ years and are only now starting to move away from such. In any case, it's an interesting example of game design outside of video games which has taken the concept of having "lives" to the most extreme value possible (short of killing the player themselves, I suppose), and which has remained stagnant in that manner for so long.

16 dager siden
Rosie
Rosie

I always get frustrated by the system of shovel knight, I'm not very good, and losing the money every time makes me quit the level altogether :(

17 dager siden
David Njihia
David Njihia

Here commenting so YT algorithm can see Mark's video so he'll read the entire software license and privacy policy

21 dag siden
Auvisome
Auvisome

Regarding the point of "lives instil purposeful gameplay decisions unto the player"—that isn’t mutually exclusive from a infinite checkpoint system. The idea of meaningful decision making should be intrinsic to the challenge. There is a reason why you're not progressing past this point, and are dying. If a player is able to brute force their way through, then the level design itself is too lenient. There is no need for lives. Mastery is intrinsic to progression, at least for well-designed challenges. Moreover, one up collectibles are fine and all, but they only provide solutions to a problem that never needed existing in the first place. A life/continue system just adds artificial difficulty, independent of the intrinsic challenge of the level design itself. I should just be able to try a challenge again.

21 dag siden
MaZGiD
MaZGiD

Mark, that Sonic Forces reference in a positive way is really was a bad one. On paper, this really sounds like good choice to get good in game and trying to finish the level perfectly, but just to know - when you are dying in the beginning of the stage, you could not get S rank in the end in no circumstances. Thing is - game just rejects to think, that player died in the beginning, and would not give S rank, no matter of the performance. Basically if we look at Sonic Generations and Sonic Forces game, all you have to do is basically do not kill himself till the end and not to slow too much - which is pretty hard not to, because level design is very automated to be fast. So to get an S rank is not about to be masterful, its about being maximally mediocre and unexpirienced, so very child could feel like he's good. If you want to see a different take to this - Sonic Adventure 2 and other PS2/Xbox/Gamecube Sonic games, that had platforming in it - you have a score to make to get an A rank, and if you die , your score will resets at checkpoint. In SA2 you need to get 15000 scores, and if you playing normal and without style and risk - you'll probably get B rank, but if you collect enough rings and stuff , you probably will get an A rank, BUT if you die, say, after second-third checkpoint, and you want to get good ranking, you still can get good rankin, if you will collect and keep rings, kill a chain of enemies and find rare ones, perform tricks, and also be fast - that's how it was working, and for me this is much and much more fascinating playing style, that applies to a Sonic game style, than just don't die and you get S rank. If you look at Colors, you get score after making quicksteps, jumping and probably breathing - this is not good game, to talking about good game design, as much as Forces. Hope one day you'll get to play older Sonic games.

26 dager siden
ragreenburg
ragreenburg

I think having lives directly leads to people finding the least fun way to play because you don't want to take risks and have to start all over.

26 dager siden
Indigo Fenix
Indigo Fenix

I think that among all genres, the one that would benefit the MOST from a lives system is ironically the one LEAST prone to using one - the roguelike. Lives can work well in a game with the following conditions: 1. The game is short but hard, and the point is to improve your skill to the point where you can beat it in one sitting. 2. There is a high skill ceiling in early stages, and playing well in the early game can earn you a large number of extra lives. In such a case having to replay the early stages again when you get a Game Over isn't a chore - it's an opportunity to improve your skill and in doing so earn more lives to survive the later stages. It also prevents the fatigue that comes from having to replay the same boss over and over again until you finally beat it, with no breaks. This system would be perfect for a roguelike! In fact, a roguelike with randomly generated levels adds another dimension to this - losing a life means retrying the stage from the start, but now you know what's coming and will have an advantage. But I think that because the original roguelikes leaned heavily on "only one life", that mentality is "traditional", so if roguelikes implement lives at all, they hand them out extremely sparingly. Meanwhile it's progressive platformers that is only now beginning to shake itself free of the lives system that has followed it since the arcade era.

27 dager siden
BurnBird
BurnBird

How are lives any different than hit-points? Just as hit-points are meant to give you a number of chances before you die and have to return to a checkpoint, lives are meant to give you a number of chances before you have to return an earlier checkpoint. It's the exact same system, just at different scales.

27 dager siden
jyoder1
jyoder1

Image a resource based shmup where one of the things you can spend money on elite pilots that get randomly generated. Also you have limited bullets.

28 dager siden
Sarthak Salunke
Sarthak Salunke

Which game is that at 0:40 ?

28 dager siden
PineapplePenguin 175
PineapplePenguin 175

Battletoads

6 dager siden
Totally a Human
Totally a Human

It says in the top left corner

19 dager siden
Sipho Bosa
Sipho Bosa

It's a nice option.

28 dager siden
CaseBuster
CaseBuster

"But great games aren't made by thoughtlessly copying trends and tropes. The most amazing games come about when every single system is added with intention, thought and care" - So true! IMO, copying is the biggest cancer of the industry.

29 dager siden
Luka the person
Luka the person

Ooooh so that’s why I didn’t get anywhere in Shovel Knight...

Måned siden
Yuzuru
Yuzuru

Bloodborne has a "live system" of sorts in the blood vials - you are trying to beat a boss and then have to retreat all the way to gain echoes and buy them or farm at an easier level. But I remember only yahtzee complaining about that shit

Måned siden
Monkey Robots Inc.
Monkey Robots Inc.

KOOL VID

Måned siden
dddmemaybe
dddmemaybe

In-game trophies are rewards, and losing more than a few minutes of progress are punishments. That then begs the question: When do you punish or reward the player? I often come back to comparing both the Pokemon games and the game Superhot when I think of this. Pokemon as a franchise often congratulates the player and acknowledges the bond the player might have made within their game or their mostly-personalized team, throughout their experience. While on the other hand Superhot constantly berates you to close the game and metaphorically smacks the player for their purchase. I make the comparison to showcase my perspective, that I think it's best to avoid putting your players in an abusive relationship with your game, when considering anything outside of the game's foremost intentional _gameplay_ mechanics. The Dark Souls developers never put a message in saying "you're a big loser, don't play". So the challenge in these games isn't a social-brain one, but a mechanical, logical and spiritual one.

Måned siden
11clock
11clock

I think that lives are important to Crash Bandicoot because the games have dynamic difficulty. Without a consequence for dying beyond just going back to the last checkpoint, you can intentionally make the game easier by jumping off the cliff repeatedly. Lives discourage this behavior, and also add a reward of sorts for having a lot of lives (allowing more room for dynamic difficulty to kick in). That said, I would prefer it if Crash games ditch dynamic difficulty altogether. The point of the system is to help players struggling with the game, but there are already two different ways of beating a level for different skill leveled players: clearing the level normally, and clearing the level while breaking every box. I don’t see a point in dynamic difficulty when players can already set the difficulty for themselves based on whether or not they want the gem from an all boxes run.

Måned siden
PineapplePenguin 175
PineapplePenguin 175

"You can intentionally make the game easier by jumping off a cliff repeatedly" No you cant lol wtf are you talking about

6 dager siden
Totally a Human
Totally a Human

How does intentionally jumping off a cliff make it easier?

19 dager siden
mmm _mmm
mmm _mmm

Rain World has no lives. And you can only save if you are full. But it also doesn't let you die by just touching an enemy. Also an enemy only has a percentage chance to kill on bite, it can drop you if you wait on the game-over screen. You have to maneuver around enemies to get their weak spot, because only a part of them can hurt you. I feel like GMT might hate Rain World's game design though:D Love the game, but still...

Måned siden
Ramon Pastrana
Ramon Pastrana

4,000 likes left, we can do this.

Måned siden
v
v

How do I like a video twice

Måned siden
Vladimir Dolapchev
Vladimir Dolapchev

Yes, lives are OK. Having unlimited lives is nothing more than excuse for a bad game design.

Måned siden
tobias arevalo
tobias arevalo

Sonic forces, really? I thought you were going to mention a platinun game for that system, having pure platinums runs is the best feeling on a videogame

Måned siden
Vita Cookie
Vita Cookie

I think lives are a bit outdated. As i think you may have stated during the video, they were simply invented to make players have to spend more money back in the arcade. When you just buy a game instead of playing it in an arcade, the only money the developers make is from the initial purchase and any ads you see or dlc you buy. If the devs aren't making you pay for your failures, having a lives system in the first place is just a bit strange.

Måned siden
wax cat
wax cat

7:05 what is this cursed sonic oc?

Måned siden
Nicholas Long
Nicholas Long

They should bring back passcode related saves/checkpoints. Tired of trying to beat a level, just look up the code that loads you into the final boss level and your golden lol

Måned siden
Cody Ramey
Cody Ramey

dude you might be one of my new favorite YouTubers. most s videos like this I don't stay to the end but with your videos I do

Måned siden
Noé PERARD
Noé PERARD

Lives can have a really meaningful impact on games like BroForce, where each life will be a different character and on hard core you only have as many lives as you have characters in the game.

Måned siden
VixYW
VixYW

Idk... for me, the whole lives thing was about stocking them up on parts where you're good to make up for your losses in parts you struggle, and it works really well for me as I sit somewhere in the middle of the skill gap. Now, getting trough the levels without worrying about lives feels way too casual, while having to beat them with few deaths feels too hardcore. Crash 4 kinda lost me there because of that. I know I'll be in a hell of a frustration time when I start going for the 100% completion because of it. Really makes me bitter when I managed to store about 20 or 30 lives by playing carefully just to the game to tell me that they doesn't matter if I want that gem. On all levels. Every. Single. One. *Sigh*

Måned siden
dash4800
dash4800

I like lives, they make you build skill to be able to beat games. I recently have been playing more arcade games and its just way more addicting having a li.ited number of lives to beat a level and restarting over and over to master it. Contrast that with a couple modern games I've been playing where you get unlimited tries and it just becomes a boring slog. I can just beat my head against the wall without really mastering any mechanics and eventually win.

Måned siden
ramiel555
ramiel555

I absolutely despise lives, and I wouldn’t mind if they disappeared completely from gaming. Every single ’pro’ argument can be achieved in some other way without having to worry about the drawbacks of having lives. Most importantly, at least for me, it comes down to my free time being both limited and valuable, and if a game is gonna make me waste it by making me replay a bunch of levels I already beat just because I sucked at ONE, then...well I’ll just go play something else. They’re an antiquated system from arcade games anyway-imagine how pissed off people would be if a modern game had a ‘either lose all your progress, or pay a micro transaction to keep going’ mechanic :)

Måned siden
Johnny
Johnny

Lives and continues are a relic of arcade machines, forcing players to put more coins in the machine at the smallest mistake.

Måned siden
ColdCandor
ColdCandor

I always thought of lives as an interesting differentiator between PC and Console games. PC games nearly always had save states or quick saves in some form, letting you save almost anywhere in a mostly permenant fashion, where console games typically had either lives and continues (and even running out of continues if you go way back), or fixed save locations that enforced certain amounts of mastery to make it from progression point to progression point. I definitely don't see lives as a critical part of that design difference, but it is a slightly more dynamic way to implement it than simply spacing out your save points in specific ways.

Måned siden
Jack Taylor
Jack Taylor

If your game has a “game over” screen, that’s the point at which you are telling the player to stop playing. That’s not game design, that’s just stupid.

Måned siden
Nicolas Pablo Angel Legros
Nicolas Pablo Angel Legros

For me personally, lives in video games have taught me a lot about resilience. You try, you fail and you try again, even if that means going through parts you didn't have trouble completing. You can even spot things you hadn't seen during your first playthrough.

Måned siden
Le Cerveau Lent
Le Cerveau Lent

My first game was Alex Kidd. Lives haven't taugh me resilience, only frustration : I learned I'll never see the end of the game (well, until emulation and savestates made it possible). There are no need for live counts to make challenging levels that will require a lot of resilience to complete. Take Zelda BotW DLC for example. The 3 sword trials are very challenging and quite long... And of you die, you restart from the beginning. It's not mandatory to do them but the reward is very appealing. In my entire life, there is no game that taugh me resilience more than Guitar Hero. I've have quite similar vibes in Rayman Legends, especially the speedrun levels that takes dozens of attempts to complete...

Måned siden
Richard Gallimore
Richard Gallimore

I'm oldschool. I've stopped playing games because they don't have things like "lives" or are too easy. I couldn't play through Mario Odyssey, it was just too easy, I never got to feel the excitement of finally beating a level I couldn't before. To me my favorite games are also the ones that piss me off the most. I want to lose and lose and lose and lose and lose and lose for days. Then finally I beat that level and I'm pumped, that's what I personally play video games for.

Måned siden
Liam Scott
Liam Scott

I think rayman 3 got lives right, they're plentiful throughout the beginning of the game but become subtly more scare in each level and at different parts, it also makes it interesting because some sectiond give you the last breath opportunity to collect lives and stop yourself dying when facing a boss, but getting sent back to the last checkpoint in that instance gives you a chance to replay another part of the level, and hold 8nto more lives as well as collect them.

Måned siden
Liam Scott
Liam Scott

One of the final parts of the game is extremely frustrating due to laclk of. Lives, however it doesn't send you ages back, the lives are just hit points, and you're only sent back to the beginning of that section of the level, and when there's a difficult part, I think that's a good approach

Måned siden
Love Mercy
Love Mercy

I love modern mode cause it's not hard capping the end goal.

Måned siden
Classicos Nostalgicos
Classicos Nostalgicos

One thing that Crash 4's retro mode showed me was a new perspective on the lives system. In the original trilogy the lives counter caps at 99 lives, and so do it on Crash 4. Having 99 lives on the original trilogy made collecting more lives basically meaningless because I would never die that many times in the game, so I was kinda of uninterest in collecting them anymore. However the same cant be said about Crash 4 , I noticed that in the middle of the game I was dying like 15 -60 times per level, heck I heard some people dyed more than 100 times in a level. With that I noticed that my lives were running out like crazy in the middle of the game, even if I had 40+ or 50+ lives I was actually afraid of running out of them, so even if I had that many I was still encouraged to collect more.

Måned siden
Controller Type: A
Controller Type: A

Lives aren't outdated and neither are health packs Freaking love those things What's all this auto health recovery stuff

Måned siden
sai sameer
sai sameer

Health Regen is terrible for anything that is not focused on a cinematic experience.

Måned siden
Eduardo Dias
Eduardo Dias

Little big planet's live system is perfect in my opinion. You even get a reward if you complete the whole level without dying

Måned siden
sai sameer
sai sameer

Nope

Måned siden
Leevi Kämäräinen
Leevi Kämäräinen

I love the system in Ori and the Blind Forest.

Måned siden
Unreadable_jp
Unreadable_jp

uh-... can i watch future this video with Japanese subtitles?

Måned siden
Nathan Carver
Nathan Carver

I think that lives are just something that the game developer chooses to or not to do, and shouldn't be the same across all games. For example, I really like Celeste's system of keeping track of deaths & frequent "permanent saves," while also keeping a high difficulty in platforming. That doesn't mean, however, that I dislike games like Mario or Crash Bandicoot that feature a lives system, because as pointed out, they make the player think strategically so they have a chance to complete the given stage.

Måned siden
kdhlkjhdlk
kdhlkjhdlk

I'm not replaying anything. If you have save points, lives or similar, I'll have to replay stuff. No thanks. I'm done.

Måned siden
King of geese
King of geese

IDK, 1 hit kill steve seems a bit flawed (ik this is for platformer, level based games, this is a joke)

Måned siden
OmnissiahZelos
OmnissiahZelos

no

Måned siden
XxterpzxX
XxterpzxX

Hope title pisses me off so fucking bad. Fix it

Måned siden
Ben Jeck
Ben Jeck

Lives are indeed outdated. The new way to do that is an energy-bar where you have to wait 24h or pay 5 bucks to keep playing ;)

2 måneder siden
wanderingCrisis
wanderingCrisis

I think it all comes down to the gamer's mentality when it comes to what they seek out of games. Having lives generally suits gamers that seek hard challenges and skill based games.

2 måneder siden
Carlos Alfonso Lubrico
Carlos Alfonso Lubrico

This is so accurate. That is really a positive spin on the lives system, (and love it personally when I 1-life a stage)

2 måneder siden
Il Ma.Le.
Il Ma.Le.

Someone is finally talking favorably of Ori and the Blind Forest'choice to leave to the player where to save. I no longer thought I'd have seen this.

2 måneder siden
Monster Finger Games
Monster Finger Games

Really great video, I have found what I did with Alien Scumbags to be pretty popular with players. Instead of lives you have a life bar with a health pack slot, when you die to continue you use your current score as currency which means you can get a lot of continues but will only get a great score if you don't use too many.

2 måneder siden
Katea Jurors
Katea Jurors

I'm an old school gamer I actually miss the live system. Used to be if one thing was too hard for you and cost you all alive that you had saved up and built up there at the game then you wouldn't be thrown right back into that one thing that you kept messing up on. Yes it would be frustrating to be thrown back further but for me at help me clear my head and almost regain my momentum and my coordination and gaming. Or when it's an area that I'm going to rage quit on anyway with or without the live system the live system allowed are you to go back further whenever you did pick up the game again and it would catch you up if you well. Not like there was a lot of dialogue or story necessarily but just to get the feel of the game again before getting to that tedious area that caused so many problems

2 måneder siden
Patrick Kelly
Patrick Kelly

It depends, does it have replay value? No? Ok then don't add lives. Yes? Ok can you also make it near impossible towards the end of the game? I live for that shit.

2 måneder siden
Fabbrizio Plays
Fabbrizio Plays

I like the Celeste method. Not only are "lives" archaic, they're just straight up not the best way to keep a player playing. If I get sent all the way back for failing, I'm not going to pick myself back up very easily. I'm going to forget a lot of what I learned, fall out of the swing of things, and conclude that I'm just not good enough. This happened to me a lot as a kid and as a result there are several childhood games I didn't beat until well into adulthood. In Celeste, because you get infinite tries, there is no element discouraging you from diving in with both feet. The fact that everything is difficult and you can easily die 50 times in the same spot, is punishment enough without also sending you to the start of the level after every third death. I found myself binging on Celeste, playing it very rapidly in a short period of time, because it encouraged me to keep trying, even after 1000, or 2000 deaths (I think my first file clocked in at 2500 by the end?) I didn't care that I had died a billion times. I could see my mistakes laid out before me. I could see the consequences of certain maneuvers. And I could plan a route around my mistakes. The evolution from not feeling like you're skilled enough, to doing the thing, is ABSURDLY satisfying. And it is made possible by not being sent back - by being able to focus on the task at hand, and tell yourself "I just gotta do it once". Not only is this a mechanically satisfying way to build a platformer, it's also really in line with the story's core message - that while letting fear take the wheel is defeatist, ignoring fear is reckless. Only by listening to fear while setting your eyes on a goal, can the road to success become clear. Let your doubts refine your path, not inhibit it.

2 måneder siden
Speech Fennel - Social Skills for Introverts
Speech Fennel - Social Skills for Introverts

Wasn't it in old games that when you run out of lives you have to start the whole game from the beginning? Anyway, great video, as always! 😁

2 måneder siden
sai sameer
sai sameer

That's not entirely true. Some games, sure, but for a lot of games like castlevania for example, you just respawn at the beginning of the level with no power ups.

Måned siden
Austin Fraser
Austin Fraser

No, they're not, when their implementation helps the gameplay.

2 måneder siden
Apfelpepsi
Apfelpepsi

The memorys of tyring to beat a hard level, only to fail at the same spot over and over... and being punished by having to restart from the beginning. Wasn't fun, but annoying.

2 måneder siden
T Y
T Y

Those arguments for lives... Raising the stakes for fear of lossed progress sounds like something you’d just play a rogue like for, which you mentioned. And making every level count rather than Bashing one’s head against a trial again and again to get to the next part kinda sounds like speedrunning, although that part isn’t exactly equivalent. I feel like these sorts challenges will always be self imposed by players who are up for the challenge. Which is why players sometimes challenge themselves with damage less. I don’t believe the game needs to enforce such things, since if the player chooses to give themselves the challenge, they aren’t forced to do it by anyone except themselves. Those other implementations of checkpoints sound quite nice though.

2 måneder siden
NerdStorm A
NerdStorm A

No

2 måneder siden
SwordOfAslan
SwordOfAslan

*sees my name in the Patreon supporters list...gets MADLY EXCITED* I've KNOWN that YouTubers with Patreon supporters do this. I just NEVER bothered to WORRY about seeing my name in the credits list like this. But then I saw my name and I felt so excited and honored to be a part of the production like this. Because you really do make AMAZING videos, Mark. It's one of those "that happens to that OTHER guy" feeling...only to realize this time I AM the "other guy"! Thank you for this wonderful honor, Mark. Thank you. It's a simple thing, maybe, but it still means a lot to me to be recognized this way.

2 måneder siden
Milantique Studios
Milantique Studios

No they arent but if a game gives you too many then they dont serve their purpose. The whole point is to have a consequence. To give your stress and fear. And to teach you to try try and try again. But if you take that away or having death not really set you back then it loses all meaning. Just like death in real life, the game of life is only fun because death exists. So yes Crash 4 made it too easy not to get a game over

2 måneder siden
Kainlarsen
Kainlarsen

I think younger gamers are spoiled now, and there's all sorts of mental gymnastics to try and justify making many games easier and easier. Even veteran gamers like myself have become used to save-scumming and checkpoints, which makes revisiting older games with the lives system a jarring wake-up call to our complacency. I'm not saying it should only ever be lives in games; there are certain genres which are far more suited to indefinite tries and save points, but I don't believe that the lives system is outdated, and should remain as a choice of gaming mechanics.

2 måneder siden
Kaba
Kaba

Look at the way Doom Eternal integrated bonus lives.

2 måneder siden
TheDark Dragon
TheDark Dragon

I don't like that you imply regular players can't understand the difference

2 måneder siden
Brendissimo
Brendissimo

Yes.

2 måneder siden
TheJadeFist
TheJadeFist

Lives aren't expressly outdated, but the game has to be designed with them in mind.

2 måneder siden
Manu Vyas
Manu Vyas

No mention of doom eternal??!

2 måneder siden
Aytida Irudok
Aytida Irudok

Create a game where the checkpoints are the last cadence in the music that's playing. This would ensure the player always stays in the rhythm. If the player dies too often, then they'll go much farther back in their progress.

2 måneder siden
SixGames
SixGames

can you make a video on apex legends

2 måneder siden
monke e
monke e

Or like ikaruga, infinite life but you keep track of death and progressively seeing those numbers decreased, it's really really satisfying

2 måneder siden

Neste

The Psychological Trick That Can Make Rewards Backfire

11:27

Who Gets to be Awesome in Games?

14:02

Who Gets to be Awesome in Games?

Game Maker's Toolkit

Ganger 389 k

I Actually Didn't Laugh

12:31

I Actually Didn't Laugh

JJ Olatunji

Ganger 5 mill

How NOT to make an indie game

22:01

How NOT to make an indie game

Patch Quest

Ganger 810 k

The World Design of Hollow Knight | Boss Keys

40:00

The World Design of Hollow Knight | Boss Keys

Game Maker's Toolkit

Ganger 1,3 mill

How Level Design Can Tell a Story

18:11

How Level Design Can Tell a Story

Game Maker's Toolkit

Ganger 491 k

The Two Types of Random in Game Design

19:18

The Two Types of Random in Game Design

Game Maker's Toolkit

Ganger 1,7 mill

The Challenge of Cameras | Game Maker's Toolkit

12:03

The Challenge of Cameras | Game Maker's Toolkit

Game Maker's Toolkit

Ganger 792 k

What Makes a Good Combat System? | Game Maker's Toolkit

17:25

I Actually Didn't Laugh

12:31

I Actually Didn't Laugh

JJ Olatunji

Ganger 5 mill

I PACKED A 5M+ ICON!! (FIFA 21 PACK OPENING)

21:07

The Cave Lady

18:13

The Cave Lady

penguinz0

Ganger 277 k