New information, some of everyone's questions answered!

[Enoch]

So which is worse, no save points or 20 character alpha numeric codes that never seem to work properly?

Are you referring to CD-Keys? Am I the only one who has never had a problem with these?

 

Anyhow, the 'back-in-the-day' copy protection schemes that asked you to verify something from the other in-box materials every damn time you loaded the game (and, in some cases, at intermittent points during gameplay) were far more annoying.

[Matthew Rorie]

So which is worse, no save points or 20 character alpha numeric codes that never seem to work properly?

Are you referring to CD-Keys? Am I the only one who has never had a problem with these?

 

Anyhow, the 'back-in-the-day' copy protection schemes that asked you to verify something from the other in-box materials every damn time you loaded the game (and, in some cases, at intermittent points during gameplay) were far more annoying.

 

I think he was more referring to the lengthy save codes for games like the original Metroid on the NES.

[Enoch]

Ah. That's a fair point, then.

[hortys]

i guess they forgot to ask if the crouched walk animation was placeholder? that is one of the most rediculous 'stealth movement' animations i've ever seen. anyways, i dunno, i saw some gameplay footage from e3 & i'm still on the fence about this game. i'll gamefly it, but i dunno...

[funcroc]

Stealth movement animations are not that bad in 1UP video.

[Solivagant]

Stealth movement animations are not that bad in 1UP video.

 

That video is really nice, hardly any animation fibs at all. Matthew doesn't use hand to hand very much, just a couple of takedowns / kills, but the quality of the video itself is much better than the other videos, so you can notice details in the animation that you couldn't previously.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

I like the throat punch. I think perhaps Rorie gravitates towards the takedowns vs. pummeling because they look much cooler.

 

Also, the gunplay showed off looked pretty decent (though that could be seen as just being "generic" or "run of the mill," it beats "subpar").

 

I think the crouch walk looks equally ridiculous in all videos, but that's just me.

[Matthew Rorie]

I like the throat punch. I think perhaps Rorie gravitates towards the takedowns vs. pummeling because they look much cooler.

 

Also, the gunplay showed off looked pretty decent (though that could be seen as just being "generic" or "run of the mill," it beats "subpar").

 

I think the crouch walk looks equally ridiculous in all videos, but that's just me.

 

I really like the throatpunch and the takedowns in general. The animation team put some really cool stuff in there that's fun to use.

[Akka]

Save points discourage some metagaming aspects/the creep-n-save playstyle. Similarly, it some games, it also encourages the use of consumables that are otherwise hoarded.

The problem is, save point also ENCOURAGE much more irritating meta-gaming, as in "rushing toward the next save point without bothering to actually do something in-between, because after hacking a computer and disabling three guards, you really would be annoyed to get a nasty surprise while exploring and as such prefer to play safe".

 

Seriously, save points are a wart on the face of gaming. My AP game has come full-stop because of the unability to save and precisely how "out of the game" it put me to be constantly more worried about "the next save point" than about what actually happens in the game.

It also makes stealth a pain to play.

[Ausir]

You do realize this is a year-old thread?

[Akka]

You do realize this is a year-old thread?

God, sorry, no

 

I feel particularly dumb about it as I tend to HATE digging up old thread. I even was careful to look at the date of the message I answered to check if it was old or recent.

Saw the day, the month, and thought "hey, cool, it's barely few days old".

And failed to look up the actual YEAR...

 

/hide in shame

My only excuse is the amount of irritation and frustration that the lack of quicksave have built in me. I basically abandonned playing after banging my head on the wall. Must have had some bad consequences on my brain.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Akka

[Tigranes]

It happens.

 

I agree that a real save system is preferable to checkpoints and it sucks that AP went with the latter. But if you're going to play the game, just play the game - don't worry about saves and that kind of 'meta-stuff'. If you get caught while sneaking, deal with the consequences - use tranquiliser ammo on your pistol and martial arts to take them out, disable alarms, or hide until the storm blows over. You'll still be reloading in some places, but unless you find the game very very difficult, it won't screw you over that much.

 

I think any mechanic becomes more and more flawed and more and more frustrating the more you try to fight it.

[Akka]

It happens.

 

I agree that a real save system is preferable to checkpoints and it sucks that AP went with the latter. But if you're going to play the game, just play the game - don't worry about saves and that kind of 'meta-stuff'. If you get caught while sneaking, deal with the consequences - use tranquiliser ammo on your pistol and martial arts to take them out, disable alarms, or hide until the storm blows over. You'll still be reloading in some places, but unless you find the game very very difficult, it won't screw you over that much.

 

I think any mechanic becomes more and more flawed and more and more frustrating the more you try to fight it.

The problem is when the flawed mechanic is making the game irritating to play from the start.

I really don't feel like dealing with an alarm which starts because the fugly controls of the hacking minigame for example (seriously, what's up with the mouse-controlled number serie ? It seems to randomly move on-screen on its own, without bothering too much about the actual mouse input I gives it).

I HATE to have spent a good 10 minutes slowly bypassing/neutralizing guards, only to be discovered because of the sudden choppiness of the control, too.

Add the insanely idiotic bug where you checkpoint has you standing right in front of a guard, meaning you're discovered before even being able to input any command to your character - I can't believe such an obvious bug could pass the QA department, I mean it happens on the VERY FIRST checkpoint on the VERY FIRST mission... - which means that if you want to have a fair go at the mission, you have to sit through all the previous briefing and introductory scene - and you've got a wallbanger.

 

And more than anything : as I answered (with one year late...) to Sawyer, knowing that I can't save and that I'm liable to lose every progress since the last checkpoint, tends to creep up on me and push me to only care about "the next checkpoint", which puts MUCH more meta-gaming than simply being able to save/load whenever I want. I really, really, really LOATHE to feel constrained by this artificial funneling. If the point of removing quicksave and only allowing checkpoint was to prevent meta-gaming and allow a more natural flow of the game, it had UTTERLY failed and had the exact opposite effect.

When you know you can lose the last 15 minutes of gameplay, you tend NOT to let if all flow naturaly, and just want to "validate" all what you've done before - hence the checkpoint-hopping, which is the very definition of meta-gaming.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Akka

[Hassat Hunter]

Wait, where is 15 min. between savepoints?

 

The longest stint I know of is the Omen Deng fight in Taipei. Man, it sucked getting to the red stairs and then die, having to redo all stages again.

[Akka]

Wait, where is 15 min. between savepoints?

 

The longest stint I know of is the Omen Deng fight in Taipei. Man, it sucked getting to the red stairs and then die, having to redo all stages again.

When you want to actually play the infiltrator, taking a LOT of time to avoid detection, even a short part can take a large amount of time.

Especially if you wish to explore every corner of a place.

Having to do it again because you died before reaching the "next checkpoint" means UNGODLY amount of irritation and annoyance. And not the "good irritation" of challenge, just the totally negative irritation of "bad design".

[Alpha]

Of course, if checkpoints are extremely common why not just allow the player to save anywhere to begin with? Is this a limitation of the console or something? Or a game design decision?

I imagine that it's at least partially related to discouraging players from save-reload gaming the dialogue system (as well as the hacking/lockpicking/whatever minigames).

yeah i can deal with checkpoints but not with one slot to save; if i commit a mistake i need to start the mission from the safehouse. Ex: when you need find Mina or Scarlet if the door get blocked your only option is start from the safehouse or end the game without finding them.

[Hassat Hunter]

Having the 3 last checkpoint saves would be a good idea yes.

 

The "block path behind" annoys me more than the checkpoints IMO.

[Orchomene]

If that helps, I do also have a profond hate for the check point system. But I managed to get around the issue by simply ignoring it.

With this, going the stealth way is a bit tedious and I'm now more and more using EMP grenades to avoid an alarm trigger because I'm facing a too difficult hack/lock/electronic bypass. With a good gear allowing lots of gadget and the perk that allow you to carry one more EMP grenades per slot, you can easily have 12 EMP on you per mission.

[Nepenthe]

Of course, if checkpoints are extremely common why not just allow the player to save anywhere to begin with? Is this a limitation of the console or something? Or a game design decision?

I imagine that it's at least partially related to discouraging players from save-reload gaming the dialogue system (as well as the hacking/lockpicking/whatever minigames).

yeah i can deal with checkpoints but not with one slot to save; if i commit a mistake i need to start the mission from the safehouse. Ex: when you need find Mina or Scarlet if the door get blocked your only option is start from the safehouse or end the game without finding them.

 

Uh.... "Save last checkpoint"? Or you want it spoon-fed to you, multiple autosaves?

 

I sure had way more than one slot to save.

[Tigranes]

Sure, there are clunky controls for hacking, checkpoint bug, etc, which are annoying. But they'd be annoying no matter what, anyway.

 

At the core of the issue, I think it's stupid not to have 3 previous checkpoints if the saves are going to be so small. In fact, this becomes a problem because checkpoints are *too* frequent. 15 minutes - that's what you might feel but that's a massive exaggeration. I'm playing on Hard as a stealth/gadgets man, and even taking the time to look at enemies' patrol movements, setting bombs, sneaking up on them and such, you rarely lose more than 5 minutes when you die.

 

Hell, if you do well, you can finish some of the smaller missions in 15 minutes.

 

Anyway, my point isn't that the checkpoint system is great. It's not. My point is that now we're stuck with it, the best way to live with it is stop metagaming and thinking so much about the save system. Honestly, from your descriptions, it seemst o me like you want to have 'perfect' games and are inclined to reload when you make a mistake, when Alpha Protocol is *built* to react to your mistakes and give you consequences.

[Akka]

Anyway, my point isn't that the checkpoint system is great. It's not. My point is that now we're stuck with it, the best way to live with it is stop metagaming and thinking so much about the save system.

Well, my point is that the save system MAKE ME metagame. I don't metagame so much when I know I can save after a particularly tedious/hard part and not be forced to redo it later if I die before the "next point".

I want to be able to play "naturally" and not feel pushed to rush to the next save point.

 

And the problem is : no I just can't live with this idiotic save system. I tried. I banged my head against the wall. And I've put the game on the shelf for now. And I'm waiting for a patch/crack/cheat code/whatever that will allow me to play like I feel it and not endure the frustration of a stupid system.

Honestly, from your descriptions, it seemst o me like you want to have 'perfect' games and are inclined to reload when you make a mistake, when Alpha Protocol is *built* to react to your mistakes and give you consequences.

I may accept my mistakes.

I can not accept "mistakes" caused by clunky interface/hard-drive loading lag and the like. In such case, I feel I have been cheated.

If I miss a line of dialogue for whatever reason, I don't want to have to redo 10 mn of gaming session to be able to read what was said and I missed.

 

I understand, respect and acclaim the idea of "making the player takes responsabilities".

I just can't accept the "checkpoint" method - and I'm not convinced that it's truly a conscious design choice and not a simple case of lazyness. It's just bad design. Player should be able to save when they want and not be artificially constrained.

Edited June 9, 2010 by Akka

[Ulicus]

I understand, respect and acclaim the idea of "making the player takes responsabilities". I just can't accept the "checkpoint" method

How else could you do it? I'm genuinely curious, here.

 

I found the checkpoint system to be the only thing that ensured I continued to roleplay my character as my character during the gameplay segments. Had I been able to quicksave whenever I wished, there wouldn't have been any sort of tension at all. I'd have saved before every safe/alarm/computer and never have to had to worry about alarms at all.

 

In short, without checkpoints, where's the real risk in doing anything?

[Akka]

How else could you do it? I'm genuinely curious, here.

Let the player be adult and not quickload everytime something goes awry.

 

If you're REALLY intent on forcing the hand of the player... Well, prevent to be able to save more than once every 5 minutes. Sure, if the player REALLY wants to, he'll wait five minutes between every obstacle, but I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority of people won't bother with that and just follow the flow.

[Hassat Hunter]

Congratiolations... you suggested a system worse than the checkpoint system now.

 

No thank you sire.

[Tigranes]

Therein lies the problem Akka. I'm not saying it's your fault or your complaints aren't justified - the checkpoint system does have its disadvantages, big ones. The issue is that you happen to be the type of player who is most bothered by the checkpoint system, but there will be other players who benefit from it (i.e. encouragement to roleplay and run with their mistakes).

 

If Obsidian went with your suggestion there will be players who find the game equally 'unplayable' because the way they play is compromised by the save system. Any save system will impact the way you play and will have ups and downs.

 

To be frank, I struggle to understand how it makes the game 'unplayable', and why you can't just say to yourself "meh, I'll pretend there are no saves" and just play on. I guess it's just too different from me.