So apparantly you can't die...

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by BBQBram (2198 posts) -

Just a minute ago I heard on some other site's video review that when you reach zero gems, it's not game over, you can just keep going. Does this bother you guys at all? I figure this isn't the kind of game you play for the challenge anyway, and you could always go for perfect runs, but is anyone seriously turned off by this?

#2 Posted by JJOR64 (18881 posts) -

Really?  Wow, I guess this game will be a cake walk.

#3 Posted by PrivateIronTFU (3874 posts) -

I don't give a shit. You can't really die in Mario Galaxy, either, and that's the best game of the year. 

#4 Posted by SuicidalSnowman (396 posts) -

Does it really matter?  Most games let you continue endlessly, and in a game such as this where there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of challenge, it probably makes little difference in the long run.

#5 Posted by Kjellm87 (1728 posts) -

So it will be kinda like Wario Land 2 and 3 then, I suppose you win extras if you get through with alot of gems.
 Kinda bummer, but I'm ok with it.

#6 Posted by GunstarRed (4992 posts) -

No different to the lego games really.
#7 Posted by wrathofconn (1460 posts) -

A lot of people liked that horrible, horrible Prince of Persia reboot, and you couldn't die in that game either. So no, doesn't bother me that much in a better game.

#8 Posted by BBQBram (2198 posts) -
@SuicidalSnowman said:
" Does it really matter?  Most games let you continue endlessly, and in a game such as this where there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of challenge, it probably makes little difference in the long run. "
Oh I totally agree, was just wondering what the consensus was on this one.
 
@wrathofconn: What was so horrible about it? It was really easy and streamlined yeah, but the production values were undeniably great, even if you didn't care for the artstyle.

#9 Posted by SuicidalSnowman (396 posts) -
@BBQBram said:
" @SuicidalSnowman said:
" Does it really matter?  Most games let you continue endlessly, and in a game such as this where there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of challenge, it probably makes little difference in the long run. "
Oh I totally agree, was just wondering what the consensus was on this one.
 

Ah!  Thanks for clarifying!  Well then, I would say, no, it doesn't bother me personally.
#10 Posted by MooseyMcMan (10332 posts) -
@wrathofconn said:
" A lot of people liked that horrible, horrible Prince of Persia reboot, and you couldn't die in that game either. So no, doesn't bother me that much in a better game. "
What the hell do you mean, "horrible, horrible"? That game was great! And it got pretty good reviews from most critics, if I remember correctly. 
#11 Posted by Hailinel (23659 posts) -

No, you can't die, but you do run the risk of losing the gems you've been collecting if you get hit by an enemy or fall down a pit.  The challenge is in making it through each stage with as many gems as you can.  The fact that death is impossible doesn't matter.

Online
#12 Posted by Popogeejo (601 posts) -

I just see that as more freedom to fuck about with all the cute shit. Now I can torture waddledoo's all I want with no fear of meeting the reaper.

#13 Posted by kingclaw (757 posts) -
@Kjellm87 said:
" So it will be kinda like Wario Land 2 and 3 then
This is  the first time I wish I had a Wii since Umbrella Chronicles
#14 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

but i saw spikes in the QL.. dont they kill you?

#15 Posted by Hailinel (23659 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" but i saw spikes in the QL.. dont they kill you? "
Nope.  They make you lose gems, but nothing in the game can actually kill you.
Online
#16 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

It's a game for children so it seems about right.

#17 Posted by Ignor (2372 posts) -

Yay, I'm a child again!

#18 Posted by BraveToaster (12590 posts) -
@HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
#20 Posted by UnlivedPhalanx (473 posts) -

I've been playing the game for the last 2-3 days and it's true. You just lose all the gems you currently have (since the last time you "died") and you get rescued by a little flying yarn thing.

#21 Posted by Gamer_152 (14049 posts) -

I'm not really surprised, it's a game aimed at kids and if you can't die I'm cool with that.

Moderator
#22 Posted by RYNO9881 (625 posts) -
@MooseyMcMan said:
" @wrathofconn said:
" A lot of people liked that horrible, horrible Prince of Persia reboot, and you couldn't die in that game either. So no, doesn't bother me that much in a better game. "
What the hell do you mean, "horrible, horrible"? That game was great! And it got pretty good reviews from most critics, if I remember correctly.  "
Yea Prince of Persia was an awesome game. And I'm of the opinion that anyone who thinks differently is just an idiot and their wrong.  
 
Anyways; what's people's big deal with, "oh man you can't die, this is a bad game". Games these days reset you at checkpoints 30 seconds from where you died anyways, so what's the fuss? 
Just another pointless thing to complain about.
#23 Posted by wolf_blitzer85 (5250 posts) -

So basically those who don't care will still play and love their game regardless.
 
Those who do care, won't play the game anyway, but will continue to write mean things about it.

#24 Posted by OldMouse (57 posts) -

It's impossible to not love that game.

It's. So. Damn. CUTE!

#25 Posted by scarace360 (4828 posts) -

Does it look like a give a shit they made a good kirby game thats all im looking for. Bonus is that its super cute and i dont have to worry about dieing. Fuck now i can just play it 1 handed.

#26 Posted by BeachThunder (11630 posts) -

Dying is overrated...

#27 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -
@HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
I guess Prince of Persia 2008 was too then? 
#28 Posted by Romination (2774 posts) -

You know what this does? Cuts down on the load times, makes the game more playable because you don't have to restart some very long level, but still keeps a level of playability because you want a good gem rating in the level. 
 
Very similar to the Lego games, yes.

#29 Posted by rjayb89 (7716 posts) -

... I'm sure Brad will find a way.

#30 Edited by wrathofconn (1460 posts) -
@BBQBram: I don't think high production values automatically equal something good, but I can't argue that they were indeed high. That game was easy to the point of almost not being a game anymore, since there were only a handful of enemies in an entire playthrough, and not even any gems etc. to lose when you were not quite dying.

Seems like I'm looking for the wrong things in my Prince of Persia games though, judging by these responses.
#31 Posted by DukesT3 (1888 posts) -

HE'S SO CUTE!!!!111!! 

#32 Posted by c1337us (5751 posts) -

I wasn't going to get it anyway so its not an issue for me.

#33 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7240 posts) -
@Axxol
@HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
#34 Edited by WinterSnowblind (7613 posts) -

Yoshi's Island didn't really let you die either (even if you somehow did) and was still one of the best 2D platformers ever.
And like others have said, the Lego games are like this too and are still very, very fun to play.
 
Most games have checkpoints spaced 10 seconds apart these days.  Not having a game over or death screen just cuts out the waiting.

#35 Posted by BBQBram (2198 posts) -
@wrathofconn: Hey man, I can totally agree that game doesn't hold a candle to Sands of Time, but in general, not dying just equals more checkpoints and no load times, as pointed out before.
#36 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:
" @HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
I guess Prince of Persia 2008 was too then?  "
Pretty much. There's no way I can even think about that game without being super cynical about it.
#37 Posted by Icemael (6305 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:
" @HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
I guess Prince of Persia 2008 was too then?  "
"It's a game for children, so it makes sense that you can't die" =/= "You can't die, so it's a game for children"
#38 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" @SeriouslyNow said:
" @HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
I guess Prince of Persia 2008 was too then?  "
"It's a game for children, so it makes sense that you can't die" =/= "You can't die, so it's a game for children" "
My feelings exactly.
 
Death in games needs to be in context.  There is no reason for Kirby to die.  It's a cute experience and death isn't cute.
#39 Posted by blazerx9x (648 posts) -
@Hailinel said:
" No, you can't die, but you do run the risk of losing the gems you've been collecting if you get hit by an enemy or fall down a pit.  The challenge is in making it through each stage with as many gems as you can.  The fact that death is impossible doesn't matter. "
Now THAT, was very clever.
#40 Posted by Atlas (2428 posts) -
@BBQBram:  I have absolutely no opinion on this game, but you have a Mars Volta avatar, and that's pretty cool. As you were.
#41 Posted by valrog (3671 posts) -
@HandsomeDead said:
" It's a game for children so it seems about right. "
#42 Edited by Ghostiet (5208 posts) -

You couldn't die in Prince of Persia 08, too, and people voted that crap GOTY, so I don't see how it's relevant when KEY looks clearly better.

Also, I don't see why the beef about dying here, since the point is that you lose gems if you get hit. And gems are your points. And the goal is to get as many points as possible.

#43 Posted by Chaser324 (6245 posts) -

Are people really going to come to this game looking for a challenge? I don't think so...it's all about the adorable.

Moderator Online
#44 Posted by Tylea002 (2295 posts) -
@Atlas said:
" @BBQBram:  I have absolutely no opinion on this game, but you have a Mars Volta avatar, and that's pretty cool. As you were. "
I came into this thread to say the exact same thing.
#45 Posted by JackSukeru (5897 posts) -

So I won't die playing a Kirby game? Business as usual then. 
 
Really though, I think this makes it a perfect kids game. It's definetly something I would've wanted to play with my kids, had I had any.

#46 Posted by zudthespud (3281 posts) -

You couldn't die (as in game over, load last save) in Fable 2 and that turned out  fine.

#47 Posted by Tomkang (251 posts) -

Wow, doesn't mean it won't been fun though. Look at Fable 2

#48 Posted by MagusMaleficus (1033 posts) -

I wonder how butt-hurt some of you folks would be if the game was on the opposite end of the difficulty spectrum (i.e. insanely hard)...

#49 Posted by Kibblez (702 posts) -
@BBQBram said:
" Just a minute ago I heard on some other site's video review that when you reach zero gems, it's not game over, you can just keep going. Does this bother you guys at all? I figure this isn't the kind of game you play for the challenge anyway, and you could always go for perfect runs, but is anyone seriously turned off by this? "
Your Amputechture avatar makes me happy
#50 Posted by mazik765 (2315 posts) -
@wrathofconn said:
" A lot of people liked that horrible, horrible Prince of Persia reboot, and you couldn't die in that game either. So no, doesn't bother me that much in a better game. "
That game was actually better than most of the Sands of Time games...I liked how they just had an autosave that they managed to incorporate into the story

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.