Moments where you are supposed to lose/die - Is it actual good game design?

[Infinity Times Two]

As I'm typing this, I find myself out of examples, but you know, a boss battle where you are just getting destroyed and then you discover that it was intentional and actually part of the progression of the game.

Beyond feeling bamboozled by the game, I'm not sure if I like it or not.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

I've never enjoyed that kind of thing. I get what they're going for in avoiding just giving you a non-interactive sequence, but it just never works for me.

It's the cousin of another thing I don't enjoy - the "win the fight in gameplay, but lose in cutscene" thing.

 

[plusaflag]

No, I am playing the Labyrinth of Refrain and died storywise at some point. It was obviously a bad ending,
After that happenned I didn't touch the game for days. I realized later by chance that you could actually pick up your save file and go on with the story.

It was stupid.

 

[Dr. Caroll]

No, it's poor design. Often a result of excessive abstraction and priority of narrative over mechanics.

Games should be designed with consistent rules. If the player manages to break those rules or perform better than typically expected, run with it. Remember when you played Call of Duty: Black Ops 2? Remember the nightclub fight? Remember how you ran as fast as you could after the abducted hacker through the mall, and then your tiny mind was blown into a thousand tiny pieces when you ran fast enough to catch her abductor before he could get away?

That's a good feeling. Losing because you're tightly scripted to lose is bad design that should be avoided wherever possible.

 

[Rocketz]

I wish they were more obvious

I kept trying to stay alive in

Spoiler: Spoiler

Hellblade

during the final part but it wasn't until I realized that enemies kept respawning I wasn't suppose to. I think I fought waves and waves.

 

[hanmik]

I think it is stupid.. I played Kingdom Come Deliverance. And early in the game there is a part where you fight three guys in a town. 2 of them can be killed, but not the main brute who starts the fight against you. I did not know he couldn't be killed. I fought him for 45 min. before I gave up and let him kill me. He was so easy to dodge and hit, I staggered him and everything, but his health never went down.. Fuck this made me angry...

 

[butman]

If it's supposed to happen because a story standpoint why not?

 

[Demileto]

As I'm typing this, I find myself out of examples

Click to shrink...

*cough*Devil May Cry 5*cough*

 

[FakePlasticTree]

If like say.. in Dragon Age Origins, where you infiltrate the Arl's manor I think it was? And you somehow survive the onslaught against the army of archers and the game progresses because of that, effectively skipping the whole prison break in section, then it's fine by me.

 

[Xiaomi]

Spoiler.

Click to shrink...

Why would you only hide the title of the game but not the rest of the spoiler...

 

[TheBaldwin]

Im only annoyed when the game still lets you use important items against the boss.

Jrpgs are the worsed at this.

Otherwise, as long as the boss is really difficult and kills you in one hit for story purposes, and the cutscenes keep you going, i dont see why not

 

[Lukemia SL]

No it's a waste of my time and I'd prefer the game make an outcome for if I win or lose that fight.

 

[Ahti]

I don`t really like it but I don`t think, that it`s bad game design. Depends on how it`s done.
Let`s take DMC5 for example: you can see immediately that it doesn`t make sense to fight that certain enemy...that`s not really "elegant".

 

[Rurmelly]

I like it when games have a contingency where you can defeat the (almost unbeatable) enemy and get a special item/xp or something. Something like a Souls tutorial boss.

 

[Deleted member 1102]

I remember as a kid fighting a boss in Star Wars: Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast for fucking ages. Like, I spent an hour fighting this guy and he just wouldn't die and I had no idea why, eventually ended up not playing the game for a couple of days. I later found out that you have to lose that fight to continue the story and the only reason I didn't was because I had invincibility cheats on because I was a scrub.

 

[Dusk Golem]

Like most game design decisions, I think it can be executed well and poorly. I think it's important to make conditions if the player DOES win, but not make it easy by any stretch and most will die.

The very beginning of Devil May Cry 5 you 100% are and almost definitely will die to the first boss, who's the main antagonist of the game and in story you're supposed to lose to him (and they do so through gameplay). However, it's actually not impossible to beat him, and you can go back later and do it with upgrades once you've beaten the game more easily, but if you beat the main villain right at the start of the game they do a little "easter egg" alternate ending since you've beaten the big bad before the events of the game, a text message springs up that they all lived in peace as they vanquished the evil, and the game ends.

I like that example, and there's others I am fond of. I think execution needs to be played very carefully to make this work, however.

 

[Servbot24]

Saying it's "bad design" as a rule doesn't make sense. It can be used effectively.

 

[TheMoon]

Saying it's "bad design" as a rule doesn't make sense. It can be used effectively.

Click to shrink...

This is the only real answer.

 

[egg]

The way they did it in Ninja Gaiden Sigma is weird. In vanilla NG and Black there's a cutscene where Ryu gets fucked up by Doku, the main antagonist and the game progresses. In Sigma they turn it into an actual boss fight that you win but it still ends with a cutscene of you getting fucked up. It was really pointless.

 

[Deleted member 24079]

Far cry 5 had this and I was annoyed to get abducted constantly out of nowhere

 

[Lazlow]

I like the concept but feel it works better as an ending

Spoiler

Halo Reach

than something at the beginning; saying that, Demon Souls works well.

 

[celitus]

I don't mind it so much, It annoys me much more when you need to win a fight, then the cutscene after is you losing...

 

[Tayaya]

The only time I have a beef with it is when it's done in a survival horror game or similar game where resources are scarce. When you don't know you aren't going to win and then use every resource you've been scraping together, then don't get them back after the fight..... yeah that sucks. Usually forces me to reload my save and go through the agony again just so I don't waste a bunch of stuff on a lost cause.

Double jerk points to the developers that then also put a condition in where you still fail if you just get pummeled, forcing you to find that line where you do enough to progress before finally dying.

 

[shaneo632]

It's horrible in long battles where the fight will just keep going until you're at zero health, so if you know it's a no-win battle it just makes sense to let yourself die.

But if the fight is interrupted with a squad wipe at a scripted point I'm OK with it, because that can sell how tough the enemy is.

 

[Nec]

It really depends for me, it don't bother me that much when you have a slight chance of winning, like the prologue in DMC V. It's design for you to lose but you can win if you're good enough (it's not canon, but you know, it's a cool easter egg). But I really hates when I beat the boss and I lose on the cutscene or the boss just run away after I take 70% of it's HP

Spoiler

looking at you again DMC V

 

[Deleted member 45130]

In a game where there are actual game mechanics introduced upon death, sure, that's fine. I keep thinking of Legacy of Kain when I think of death mechanics, like it should be there even though it likely isn't.

 

[Tedmilk]

I'm OK with it as long as it's a boss or something you haven't fought before. If you just randomly get beat by a low level enemy in a cutscene it sucks balls.

 

[Bjones]

I think the worst was in a FF game where you beat a very hard boss by not fighting at all.

 

[adinsx]

If the enemy is so strong he just wrecks you I think it's fine.
Just think it's cheap when you think you can win and there's a cutscene of you getting beated.

 

[Infinity Times Two]

The very beginning of Devil May Cry 5 you 100% are and almost definitely will die to the first boss, who's the main antagonist of the game and in story you're supposed to lose to him (and they do so through gameplay). However, it's actually not impossible to beat him, and you can go back later and do it with upgrades once you've beaten the game more easily, but if you beat the main villain right at the start of the game they do a little "easter egg" alternate ending since you've beaten the big bad before the events of the game, a text message springs up that they all lived in peace as they vanquished the evil, and the game ends.

Click to shrink...

If the enemy is so strong he just wrecks you I think it's fine.

Click to shrink...

With the thread, I'm not including bosses/enemies that are ridiculously hard, or the BotW scenario.

I only mean bosses/enemies/moments that are impossible, because the game decided so beforehand.

 

[1080peace]

I think the worst was in a FF game where you beat a very hard boss by not fighting at all.

Click to shrink...

Type 0? Biggest problem with that fight was that every character had to die (all twelve of them) and by the time I had three left I reloaded my save. Again and again and again.

 

[Glio]

If done well generates a feeling of helplessness in the player that makes them empathize with the one that suffers the character.

So yes.

 

[Hydeus]

*cough*Devil May Cry 5*cough*

Click to shrink...

You can win this fight.

 

[Spenny]

Only if there is a way I can technically beat it and it leads to a different ending (i.e. Grandia 2).

 

[JustAnotherOne]

There's one certain 360 game that comes to mind...

Spoiler: Spoiler

I'm talking about Halo Reach's epilogue of course,that was a very powerful scene with the just 'survive' objective

 

[Salamiaddict]

Wasn't something like this in Golden Sun for the GBA? It ruined me forever - each hard passage nowadays I'm like: I think you're supposed to die here, over and over again

 

[kubev]

This only bugs me when it's not obvious that you're supposed to lose, because I hate wasting consumable items on battles that I can't win. I have to say that there are some battles that you have to win within games that do such a poor job of communicating that you're winning the battle that it feels just as bad, though.

 

[DaveB]

I hate when a game does that and doesn't make it abundantly clear that you are supposed to lose; especially in RPGs where resources, like potions, can sometimes be hard to come by. Break your game's logic and code in an exception that no matter how much health the player has, the hit(s) are deadly. Don't make me have to figure out that I shouldn't be wasting my inventory.

 

[Midas]

Like all designs; it can be good and it can be bad. 😴

 

[Cyn]

I think for the most part it's executed poorly, but it can be pulled off well if it's part of a tutorial or something.

It reminds me of those boss fights that you win, sometimes absolutely destroying them, then it cuts away to some pre-rendered nonsense where you get absolutely destroyed by the very person or thing you just beat the crap out of. It feels bad wrestling the control away like that and doesn't hit those reward centers.

 

[PsionBolt]

The end of Shadow of the Colossus (2005 PS2 masterpiece) is perfect. Using this trope makes it hit way harder than having it happen in a cutscene.

It's also pretty awesome in the beginning of Fate/Extra (2010 PSP RPG). At first, you don't even realize you're not playing as the protagonist; you're just one of countless people who get eliminated from the opening rounds of the game's tournament structure. After you're forced to lose, you get a bizarre bit of narration to the effect of "That man's story has ended. But what of yours?" Cue character creation screen. It really helps set the creepy, glitch-in-the-matrix tone that the game is going for.

As always: don't dismiss design elements just because you've disliked their execution before. Almost nothing is absolutely good or absolutely bad.

 

[shadowman16]

DMC5 I felt did it well enough, at least I had no problems with how it handled it.

Yakuza Kiwami though, has one optional boss fight against

Spoiler

Hanaya Man - who is totally Majima

but you have to use your incredibly weak (at this point) Dragon of Dojima style to beat him (he gets a ton of health). You can heal, it feels like a normal fight. Only when you win (if you win) do you get Komaki say "never thought you'd win, I'd have taught you the move even if you lost". Which was a good 5 minutes wasted. Worst part is, I fell for this not once but twice. Dammit. On the brighter side soon after this fight you get the Tiger Drop, so nothing dares get in your way again.

 

[RockmanBN]

Might as well make the whole thing a cutscene than contradicting what happened in gameplay

 

[Orbit]

If it's just in a cutscene - No, I am ok with it.

But actually making me FIGHT the dang battle, 'beat' the boss', and still get my butt kicked is poor design and I hate it.

 

[Zephy]

I'm fine with it as long as it's absolutely obvious that you can't win. For example, if your attacks deal 0 or 1HP damage. And the fight must be short, no point in making it drag.

 

[Demileto]

You can win this fight.

Click to shrink...

That's not the only fight you're supposed to lose.

 

[Deleted member 11832]

Make the boss super tough and also have a timer. If by a certain time the player still did not lose, advance to the next cutscenes automatically.

Otherwise you end up with dumb situations where the player thinks he can keep at it.

 

[Hydeus]

That's not the only fight you're supposed to lose.

Click to shrink...

I don't know. I finished the game after this apparently so I sold the game.

 

[Runner]

I hate the ones that dont seem unwinnable- you may end up using consumables as a result.

 

[808s & Villainy]

It can be good as long as

1. Gameplay wise and narrative wise, it makes sense (ie. You don't lose for BS reasons)
2. Consumables aren't lost

Take Golden Sun. It was done early enough before you had anything to have spent money on and lost so it was no big deal