@Captain_Cy_kun
That makes sense. I guess it depends on the story, though. In my gamebook, Trial of the Demon Hunter, or ones like Sabres of Infinity, it’d be unrealistic to not be able to die.
I’m somewhere with @Reaperoa and @Captain_Cy_kun. I’m definitely not a fan of cheap deaths in the middle of the game, particularly when there’s no checkpoint system to speak of. For me, I prefer a failure state that influences the story and/or supporting characters over a straight “game over, retry” message.
If I’m going to die I want it to be in the goriest most stomach wrenching most blood filled and sick way ever that would make people feel like a stoner given whiskey
Nya
@Captain_Cy_kun: An innocent choice that kills you a chapter later is pretty unfair. Something that locks you out of a romance option, I’d probably consider just part of the roleplay. If you do things that turn the person against you, or if you decide to stay in studying arcane tomes instead of going out to the bar where you see your coworker after hours… Faint heart never won fair lady, and all that.
I’m struggling with the game-ending choices in my WIP. They mostly come from turning down multiple opportunities or from doing enough “bad” things to get caught at them (although sometimes being bad impresses people who’ll protect you…). But I’m being won over by the “no death” style of game.
I’m not a fan of pointless deaths, but immortality makes the game boring. When I’m making a choice, I want to feel as though I’m in actual danger. If we’re going to continue going with fluke survival scenes, then I might as well start jumping off cliffs for a bit of money because I’m going to survive by some lucky fluke. I quite like what Way Walkers did; that being, you were given multiple lives. I’m more a fan of paths that work in such an order as there are multiple paths and one (let’s say out of fourteen) will conclude with your death. That would require three mistakes in a row, which means you logically should have died. No one gets lucky three times in a row.
@Carolyne I’m more talking about something like, you chose to go to school when you could have gone to a party and now when you meet a potential love interest the romance is locked out because you missed something that would have happened if you went to the party, or something like that. Something where there was literally no way you could have known you were cutting yourself off from something. I have no problem with choices having realistic impacts, I’d just like to have some kind of idea of what those impacts are going to be.
As for what you’re struggling with, I think that there are definitely “right” ways to do game-ending choices. Making it totally the player/readers fault as opposed to the gamebook pulling a “gotcha!” moment out of nowhere is one of them. I’d just suggest some kind of a save system since I think the most frustrating thing about dying in these kinds of games is having to go allllll the way back to the beginning, which in some cases is several hours of reading.
In interactive fiction, the player’s reward for good play is seeing the story progress and resolve, and the penalty is being denied story progress or resolution. The easiest way to keep someone from continuing their story is to kill them (or stump them with a hard puzzle). But more interesting (and complicated) is to force them to choose between different progressions/endings, with clear consequences to their actions, but conflicting desired outcomes.
In The Walking Dead and The Wolf Among Us games, the important decisions weren’t about whether you died or not (usually), but about saving one character over another, trusting someone, following someone or parting ways, etc. (There were the quicktime events you could fail, but those weren’t choices, per se).
Certainly, there is room for killing off the player if they “deserve” it. But usually stories where the main goal is to keep the PC alive wear thin after awhile.
Well thought out @HoraceTorys
I love deads, due i came from hardcore table rpg games where if your character dies remain dead. People are too used modern computer games old games like first zelda hadnt save at all. Paper gamebooks are known for their original deads. Modern player wants to be hug by games and start yelling like Emma this is too hard :(( :(( .
In a love sim real life game i couldnt understand no deaths. By in a fantasy action game with zombies in it?? if player without ammo zero athletics skill try to shoot a horde of zombies has to die for stupid. and a text you Havent ammo lol did you read the text! and inteligent players has to be rewarded . But replay all game is unfair, this is why i use check points . Also make dead diferents and give a hint what mistake player make help and add replay value.
I have the first 3 sonic games and sonic 1/2 doest have a save and i died in the last level of sonic 1 and i just started crying
@P0RT3R welcome to the old-fashioned videogames nightmare difficult , the actual nightmare difficult is easiest than the tutorial in older ones. That maybe is unfair but when you end game you feel you have achieved something in most actual games reached the ending has zero challenge. That is what i love in Unnatural and Trial of the Hunter they have challenge, they make thinking what you must do to survive.
@Nocturnal_Stillness I was thinking in a solution modern games use a in app purchase with a Hardcore mode for 0,99 dollars with awesome deads and a original exclusive mission and/or more challenge battles . Metro and many shooting games do that maybe even include a achievement trophy list.
@MaraJade
Thanks for the mention 
I like that sonic goes suicide if you wait for longer than 120 seconds