Do you miss the lives system?
>>321168525
*life
no it works in some games and for some respawn is a better option
"Lives" worked better in small games. Repeating stages over and over because you Game Over'd several times wasn't seen as much of a chore.
However, if you had lives in a modern game and getting a game over meant you lost two to three hours worth of progress, that would be brutal.
The lives system should never have existed outside of arcade games in the first place.
Lives started being pointless once Game Overing in a video game started making you lose only about ten seconds of progress.
>>321168525
No. Outside of rogue-lites, specifically designed around dying and restarting, lives make no sense. Especially not when it's possible to go back and grind in order to have enough to progress. It just becomes a pointless hassle.
>>321168525
No
Literally only Mario makes it work
I'm glad to see that lives is one of the things that moved on
>>321168525
Name one game outside of arcades that it actually benefited the overall design or player enjoyment.
>>321169086
Any game with small stages.
If you lose all your lives in something like Megaman or Castlevania, you really only lose 15 minutes of progress at the most.
>>321169193
>megaman or castlevania
this
In Megaman especially, it forces you to get good and adds the right amount of tension when you have no life and you and the boss are low health and you're one hit away from dying or killing the boss. It's a rush
>>321169193
>>321169397
Agreed. Basically, you can do it right or you can do it wrong.
>>321169193
I could've sworn the MMZ and ZX levels were longer than that. Genesis, SNES, GBA games etc. having lives systems but much longer levels than their arcade ancestors makes it much more galling when you game over. Maybe I'm overestimating the level lengths of those games though, it's been a long time since I played them.
>>321169397
Try this one. Try to beat it on YOLO mode.
>>321169586
You could certainly take longer, but iirc the longest S-Rank times in Zero were 10 minutes. And that was the boss re-fight stages. ZX was about the same, if you ignore the metroidvania-lite exploration between areas.
>>321170078
>You could certainly take longer, but iirc the longest S-Rank times in Zero were 10 minutes.
You're probably right. Someone as shitty as me would probably take quite a bit longer though.
>ZX was about the same, if you ignore the metroidvania-lite exploration between areas.
I remember those requiring a lot of faffing about and the tedious commute between the hub zones and actual levels got old pretty fast. I'm mostly just griping though.
>>321169086
I'd be interested if more games had lives only come into effect on replay/new game+ once you've already finished the damn thing. Having games with repeatedly collectable lives is just stupid though.
>>321170337
Yeah, that's why I mentioned the exploring in ZX and S-Rank timer. You can easily spend a lot of time in Zero's stages, especially if you die, and there's a lot of room to fuck around in ZX if you don't just count the boss areas. I can't even come close to S-Ranking the 10min stages on hard without abusing the ranking system, bosses just take way too long without element chips.
>>321168525
nop
>itt: casuals who don't want a punishment for dying
MARIOS
A
R
I
O
S
>>321170813
I don't mind death having a penalty, what I resent is repeating a bunch of tedious and trivial shit just to get back to difficult part where you fucked up in the first place. It's unnecessary padding.
>If you take a hit, you lose points from your HP bar and are otherwise unhindered. If your HP drops to zero, you have to restart from the last checkpoint.
>"This is a fair and reasonable system"
>If you take a hit, you lose a life and respawn immediately. If you run out of lives, you have to restart from the beginning of the level
>"This is an unfair relic of the arcade system"
Point is you have to consider mechanics taken as a whole. Arbitrarily deciding that lives=bad in all contexts is silly.
>>321171505
I doubt restarting the level bothers many people in games where it makes sense. Restarting the entire game when you're out of lives is the real offender.
>>321171505
>If you take a hit, you lose a life and respawn immediately. If you run out of lives, you have to restart from the beginning of the level
This is just one implementation and not the one most people think of, it's tantamount to the hearts in a Zelda game which is functionally identical to HP. Most cases people are thinking of is if you lose a life you start from the beginning of the level, if you lose all lives you start from the beginning of the game.
>>321168525
No.
They never made sense to me. There was never an actual penalty for losing all your lives.
>>321171658
Limited continues are the fucking worst. There is no defense for them.
>>321171658
>Restarting the entire game when you're out of lives is the real offender.
Literally no modern games do this though. At this point you're arguing against nothing and no one.
>>321172434
You have to start from the beginning of the game again. That's penalty enough. Or did you only play games with save systems?
>>321173327
I'll admit the only games I've ever played with lives were Mario gameson gameboyand the only thing losing all your lives ever did was put you back to the beginning of the level, which is what happened when you died and had extra lives anyway.
>>321173197
>Literally no modern games do this though.
The point of the thread was if we missed them or not, i.e. the ones from old games. Also you're not entirely correct, a fair few modern shmups still do that.
>>321173447
>the only games I've ever played with lives were Mario games on gameboy
fucking how
>>321173671
Shmups are about the only one genre where limited amount of lives and continues works to this day, honestly. Of course, some kind of free play mode could be nice for getting a feel for the game before trying to attempt the 1CC runs, but not strictly necessary. Eschatos unlocked more credits the more you played, which I liked.
>>321173893
I never liked Megaman, Sonic, Metroid, or any of those types of games growing up.
>>321168525
Not necessarily that one. Super Mario World's livessystem in the GBA port was God-tier, though. It felt like you were being rewarded for gathering as many as you could, because you also got points for that shit. And if you lost all your lives, your score started all over again.
>>321173902
I honestly agree with you, I was just using it as an example of the system still being implement in current games. It helps that in most cases the entire game isn't going to be much longer than half an hour, not allowing for seperate extra modes anyway.
>>321173954
Metroid doesn't even have lives, the first one had passwords and the rest had save points.
