Hello friends, I am a game developer and I made many games, tested them and published them. Despite my games, I have reached an advanced stage and I can make a complete game. I started thinking about a game and it would be a shooter/platform/puzzle game and now I am writing a story and inventing codes to solve it inside a game

And the subject of the story is that there is an American person storming Area 51 to destroy a terrorist weapon that destroys the world

And when you reach each stage, a part of the story will appear, and at the end of the part of the story, it will be a puzzle with or without choices. If you fail to solve a puzzle, you will return to zero point and restart the game. This is a game of hitting fire with gas that must be solved

What do you think of this idea of ​​my new game, is it good or bad?

Sorry but English is not my mother tongue. What do you mean by "This is a game of hitting fire with gas that must be solved"?

Are you in making this game with a team.

I do not believe, that there are bad game ideas. But for every player there is stuff that is insufferable or appealing. Some like the permadeath or nintendo hard difficulty or inability to save the game.  Some strongly dislike   artificial  cruelty to the players, like   unskippable video or missing save options. One could even argue, that missing save options to increase difficulty is bad design.

I  do not think that returning to start for failing a puzzle is appealing to players that like puzzles.

Speaking of puzzles, I recently played a sokoban type game. It is a puzzle game, so  I very much liked the back functionality, because without it, you would have to restart the level, when you push yourself in a corner (literally). This is in contrast to, say, Tetris, wich could be described as a puzzle game as well, but  here that is more of an arcace action puzzle