Proposal: Game losing mechanics

[frosty lava]

Currently, you really cannot lose in Shadows of Doubt: even the most incompetent detective will eventually solve enough cases (through sheer dumb luck if nothing else) to accumulate enough social credit to get put out to pasture retire to The Fields.

So, let's introduce a couple of ways for detectives to actually lose the game. These suggestions may require the implementation of other mechanics into the game.

1. Social credit level can go down to -2, but still starts at 0. Players lose anytime their current social credit level is two below their max obtained social credit level in current game. To maintain the sandbox, players successfully reaching retirement level can no longer lose social credit. Players lose social credit score anytime they do anything that is considered a witnessed crime.

2. Detectives have a chance to be selected as a murder victim, just like any other NPC. Moreover, some of the killers the player put away during the game have a chance to break out of jail and attempt to exact their revenge. The chance of them breaking out prison is dependent on difficulty level, and is a fixed chance independently applied to each killer put away -- so the more murder cases solved, the higher the chance. Players have to defend themselves by knocking out their would-be killers and handcuffing them. Current combat mechanics may make this quite easy to do, but this could be more challenging if a more comprehensive combat system is introduced.

These are just two suggestions. I'm sure there are other ideas possible out there!

[dry trout]

I think a very cool way to lose would be if you don't catch the killer after enough murders (should be random), the player becomes the next target. So, if you don't know what they look like, they could just come out of an alley and shoot you or something. Even if it's not proper game over, I think the negative social credit idea is REALLY good. Something very easy to turn off as well.

[frosty lava]

I’m not quite sure how the killer would be able to ID the player and then mark them as a threat: unless it’s an edge case like a partner kill (and even then…), most killers won’t hang around the crime scene and notice who is trying to investigate them.

[dry trout]

It's a common pulp trope, where the killer begins to target the "detective" or people they know. I can provide examples if needed.

[woven crown]

How would this serve the game? It's pretty rare for a title to let the player lose the whole game, and it's usually a part of some bigger message.

[frosty lava]

I’m not certain that your assertion that it is rare for a game to let the player lose the whole game is entirely accurate. I can think of at least five games that do just that off the top of my head, and probably can come up with a few more if I put more effort into thinking.

As for how losing would serve the game, it serves as the ultimate multiplier of risk in the calculus of utility. Since there is no way to currently lose, any action with negative utility has limited consequence, a mere inconvenience in the inexorable march to victory. Having a lost condition greatly magnifies the potential negative risk and repercussions, and forces the player to think and consider more before making a move.

[woven crown]

Of course there are plenty of games that let you lose completely. The Shrouded Isle, Yes Your Grace, Beholder, and Papers Please are all management games, which is typically very low-tension, so the stakes need to be pumped to the max in order to keep the player engaged. Pathologic 1 & 2 are all about gut-punching the player and making them feel terrible. Roguelikes, of course, are designed completely around permadeath.

But they’re quite outnumbered by games that don’t let you lose. Dark Souls is widely considered a difficult game because it’s hard to win, even though it’s impossible to lose. Every death is, as you said, a mere inconvenience in the inexorable march to victory. Most games work like this, because they don’t need the threat of making the player re-play the game in order to be interesting.

I guess my question is, what makes Shadows of Doubt the kind of game that would actually benefit from permadeath or a bad ending?