I really wanna avoid endorsing “meta-game” strategies such as that because it inherently suggests that our game is not built well enough to be above such a brutish solution. Since numerous generations of world development and events would be eliminated by loading a previous save, we would also be basically permitting players to readily consider any challenging events that occur to them as illegitimate, to the point that something like loading a prior save is valid. If we don’t present a playthrough as being legitimate enough to not warrant save resets, then that can lead to a slippery slope of players thinking everything they struggle with is broken.
It’s obviously something that gamers will do regardless, but it’s not something we should encourage in my opinion. I can also easily imagine players thinking that it’s a sign of an unpolished game if something so non-gamey was recommended: “I’m dying and this is the best you can recommend to me?”
If there were another solution to the death loop, I would think it would be an automatic free trip to the editor after 2 or 3 consecutive trips. But that also has an issue, since potentially not every build can be fixed with only 100 MP points - so we’d offer them a free trip to the editor, and then they could just spawn right back into a death loop. That’s why I think species switching could be better.