[quote=PyroDash888]I was not talking about RP players here. More about the general playerbase. Cities become wastelands because nobody lives in them anymore and the more players die the harder the "endgame content" becomes, no?[/quote]
As Clocktower stated, NPC’s exist. The game world is likely not entirely populated by players or GMs. 

[quote=PyroDash888]Also... I have no idea why even somebody would do such a thing as to kill players IRL when they are killed in game. Makes no sense to me. Maybe the standard answer to that question. "Because he is evil". I dunno, I'd find it tricky to find a proper reason, but this is of course a weak argument against this.[/quote]
I think SAO is the only time it was done on “purpose” or stated to be as such— even in the godfather of the genre, .HACK, it was a result that ended with the player falling/remaining in a comatose state in the real world. The reasoning can be done several different ways beyond “chaotic evil”— I could probably conjure a dozen of them if I tried.

[quote=PyroDash888]And what do you mean, there can't be any depth without consequences?[/quote]
Without consequences, tone and conflict take a backseat to idealistic slice of life where there is no greater meaning and as a byproduct no depth to be taken out of. The characters in the story could be well-rounded, three dimensional, and dynamic but they would be in a situation much like the first two seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation— no conflict, no tension, no anxiety; everything is idealized as it is and there is little framing to write something interesting or with great depth. You need consequence, conflict, and these other elements to keep things interesting and meaningful. 

[quote=PyroDash888]Even with consequences SAO was as deep as a dried up lake in the desert, whereas Log Horizon had that depth. A meaning. [/quote]
The fault is in the execution, not the concept.

[quote=PyroDash888]I have another idea for "death" that is not actually dying, but might as well be.
When you die, you start all over. Level 1, starter town, starting gear, no money. The higher you become in the level, the less you want to actually die. That way the huge "half of the players die withing the first week" thing is solved, too xD...

To make that work, we would have to make levelling up a very rewarding process, so that you feel the loss of those rewards even more when you die. And you will die, eventually. We can't all be Kirito :D

Somebody who lost everything they had will also be driven into this despair and the more it is known around the playerbase what a shitty thing it is to start all over, maybe even with some more penalties to slow your initial progress, especially with the huge bulk of players not around the starting area to help you anymore, people will try to avoid dying as best as possible.

How is this for an idea?[/quote]
Once again, I agree completely with Clocktower.