Maaaaaan when developers don't replenish your supplies and consumables at all after failing a challenge/attempt/wave it's the absolute worst, creates that garbage feedback loop of "oh you failed now you have less resources for next try so you're more likely to fail again."
It's not inherently a bad design choice. The question is "How long will it take the player to recover from the loss and be back where they started?"
In this scenario, recovering from the loss really means restarting the entire game. In a 2 hour game, that's kind of appalling. It's also unfortunate that this game lets you keep hitting your head against failure, rather than cutting you off. This is the kind of crappy situation I used to find myself in back in the NES days.
Letting the player recover from the loss quickly is fine. Not letting players recover at all by ending the game entirely is also fine (although more players will be upset by this). Letting you continue when you really shouldn't is just bad design.
@rasrimra: Oh, the grind is real. That's why I stopped playing it before getting to the last stage. I can conquer shooters, but this one... bleck. It's just playing the same stages over and over again.
I don't think Dan's quick looks are bad at all. He just gets to the crux of a game quickly and goes "yeah, this is what this game is" and then beats feet. As much as I love a good long quick look, I really don't want to sit through one every day.
TravisMccG's comments