It's even more ridiculous in modern day games like Super Mario Bros. Wii, Super Mario Galaxy, and Donkey Kong Country Returns because games are saved after every level or whenever the player chooses, so the game over screen has no power over them. They lose absolutely nothing from the game over. They already have to start a level over either completely or part way because they lost a life. I think they even realize this since in a lot of cases you can either buy extra lives (DKCR) or there are some easily obtainable ones scattered around the world (every Mario game). So what's the point of even having the life system other than nostalgia purposes?
What's even more ridiculous is that with the more recent Mario games, every time you start up the disc, you start with 4-5 lives, no matter what you had when you quit the last session, which means that if you quit before the final world, then you get to start the (generally) hardest part of the game without the stockpile of lives you had worked hard to earn. But Eric, if lives don't matter than why does it matter that they aren't saved along with your progress? Well, most of the time, 1-Ups in the levels of these games are either well hidden or hard to get. So getting them takes skill and the 1-Up is your reward. So every time you quit the game, you lose all the rewards and proof of your hard work. Also, even though the game over screen doesn't affect your progress, it's still a big "YOU SUCK" to the player when it happens, which is why players don't need to see that on the harder levels - they're already going to be frustrated enough without the game reasserting how awful they are.
I can't really think of any other modern games that have this same concept of lives other than Nintendo games. Most games give you a health bar and a single life before the Game Over screen (which makes sense). So other than the fact that it would make coins/bananas and 1-Ups completely pointless, I can't think of a single reason why Nintendo keeps them around.
But Cap'n, what would a Mario game be without mushrooms? And why tread on the negative psychological effects of the game over screen? I always considered it a challenge, not a failure. That's when I ended up with 'lightning bolt' lives in SMB World 3.1> I jumped on that turtle's back on the right stair and then left to get dinner. I came back and Mario was still knocking that shell around like wifebeater. Because that's what digital plumbers do, right? So I played on and found out 20 something lives later that I still had 99 lives. I think I was 8, and I was fiercely trying to beat it on my second run through the game without using warp points. I should write a book about it - 99 ways to kill a plumber in an extra-dimensional reality.
ReplyDeleteI always thought the life bar and saving, while more logical, was also a big handicap. The pros: you can leave and do something else if you need too without fearing a re-start, you won't lose all the awesome stuff you gained when you get killed. The cons: Death is no longer a challenge, there's no fear of actually losing your stuff to a death. I kind of think saving in the middle is like a big cheat code. Applying this to sociodemography, it could be a reason why our generation is the most sensitive to loss and the most irresponsible - none of us really want to take accountability for the things we do in life. So people either stop taking risks altogether, or they file lawsuits when the results aren't in their favor. That would be a cool video game - Life without Saving. You play a guy, and when you die, you have to play another character. I'm not saying I haven't taken advantage of the 'save' feature - LoZ, Eternal Darkness, Twizted Metal, Legend of Dragoon, but I also know those games no longer really appeal to me beyond sentimental reasons. Not much of a challenge. But, damn, that original SMB side-scroller. I love that. And Tetris, too.
Mario would still have mushrooms, you'd just have to come up with a new reason to strive for the 1-Up variety. You're definitely right about the challenge part and I rambled about that here.
DeleteI think my problem comes from the fact that the lives in these more recent Nintendo games just seem really out of place. Donkey Kong Country Returns would be no less challenging if there weren't lives in it. Mario games (since Super Mario World if not Super Mario Bros. 3) were never all that challenging to beat, but had lots of ways for players to challenge themselves (play every level, collect all the star coins, find all the secret exits to the levels, etc.).
Personally, they annoy me because as a crazy OCD gamer, all lives add is this feeling that once I get below 10 lives, I have to find a place to easily get more 1-Ups until I feel safe. This doesn't add challenge to anything, it just adds a chore to the game.
This seems relevant to what I was saying about multiple ways for players to play the same game.
DeleteI think it's the 1-Ups. That 1-Up mushroom is kind of a Mario staple, so they need some excuse to give it to you. That's all I got.
ReplyDelete