I think one of the primary tests of good game design should be "is it still fun when you lose?"
@InspectorCaracal Agreed. There's also "have we made this thing *too* %$&#*@ hard to win?"
@skquinn I dunno, there's also the completely viable design direction of Failbetter Games, which is essentially "progressing in the game is to lose less badly and in different ways".
@skquinn I like the attitude that the FATE RPG system takes when advising you on when to roll for challenges: losing should be an interesting option to play.
But the originating thought was, if your gameplay isn't fun enough to still be fun when you lose, then maybe it isn't actually a fun game.
@InspectorCaracal @jaycie dwarf fortress passes with flying colours
@nev @InspectorCaracal @jaycie I don't neccessarily agree. Many players just drop the game very shortly after starting. The "losing is fun" part is behind the massive entry barriers
@Shotagonist @nev @jaycie the only game I've played where actually losing is fun itself is Sunless Sea
@InspectorCaracal @nev @jaycie Monster Girl Quest ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
@InspectorCaracal this was one of Valve's design philosophies, at least when making TF2
@InspectorCaracal I want more games like the Karoshi series where losing is inverted to being the objective.
@InspectorCaracal Relatedly: did the designers give any thought about what happens when you die, or do you just have to reload a save and try, try, again