Minimizing Save scumming. Or is it too much of a hassle?

[ogrezilla]

Only that he is too weak willed to resist save scum mind.

dude he doesn't even do it. but knowing it is there ruins his experience.

[AlphaShard]

Only that he is too weak willed to resist save scum mind.

dude he doesn't even do it. but knowing it is there ruins his experience.

 

There are much worse things that people do like spending hours re Rolling and min maxing their character stats. Life is too short to worry about what others are doing with their games. And he still hasn't given an example of what feature of the game has been ruined due to "save scumming". I didn't even know that term until this thread. I thought it was just normal to want MANY saves as possible. Save often and frequently was the Sierra motto you could die at any time.

[Ieo]

As for your "that's what mods are for", so there you go. Maybe a mod can be made that will allow you to play the game with the limited saves system that you want.

 

Indeed. But every sane man campaigns for the game to be to his liking, and the other guy should mod the game to get what he wants.

If the sitation was reversed and hte devs said they will go with checkpoitn based save -system, I could point you to mods too.

so it's kinda a moot point.

 

This is hilarious.

 

Delterius started this thread after Update 9, which had the three additional difficulty modes. Including Trial of Iron.

 

So you already got what you want. At the very beginning. The game is thus to your liking.

 

And still you want normal default mode to cater to your whims at the expense of other players. Despite Trial of Iron. You continue to claim gameplay corruption by the existence of other save modes yet cannot give any actual examples.

 

How incredibly petty.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Ieo

[GhostofAnakin]

It is irrelevant because the "playstyle" is irrlevant.

Frustration is relevant.

Why should I play the game that rustrates me?

 

I honestly don't understand how being able to save, but not being required to save, at any time frustrates you. I can understand perhaps if the game forces you to save every minute. But the save system is completely and entirely up to the player to use.

 

I just don't understand how something that is optional and which the player doesn't even have to use can frustrate someone. It's like saying that having those console cheats in BG where you could enable "God mode" frustrates you, even though you didn't bother to use it, and aren't forced to use it.

 

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

So Baldurs Gate, PS:T, etc. don't fit a design of what a true cRPG should be, then? It's been a bit since I last played them, but I recall that you can save at any time in those games. You seemed to love those games, yet the option of being able to save at any time in Project Eternity seems to frustrate you (your word). That doesn't make sense.

 

How about a hypothetical scenario.

 

Not beign able to sell loot whwnever I wnat frustrates me.

Therefore the game should allow you to sell everything directly from the inventory.

Naturally, because o this hte loot drops would probably have ot be balanced differently, but who cares, right?

 

If you want to onyl sell at shops and limit your inventory and $$$ gained, you can. No one is forcing you to use the sell system.

 

And therefore, you have no right to complain that it's a bad system and shouldn't be in the game.

If you do, you are taking away my holy options.

 

What? I wouldn't have an issue with that hypothetical situation, because it still gives me the option to sell at merchants. And while it's not my ideal situation, it's not game breaking for me. Nor would it "frustrate" me.

 

It seems like a weird system, but it wouldn't bother me like this save anytime thing seems to bother you.

 

Indeed. But every sane man campaigns for the game to be to his liking, and the other guy should mothe game to get what he wants.

If the sitation was reversed and hte devs said they will go with checkpoitn based save -system, I could point you to mods too.

so it's kinda a moot point.

 

You're the one that originally brought it up. So if it's moot, why did you mention it in the first place?

 

Anyway, you've already got somewhat what you want (Iron Man mode), and people who want to save at any point have gotten what they want. Win-win, no?

Edited October 12, 2012 by GhostofAnakin

[Slaunyeh]

 

I honestly don't understand how being able to save, but not being required to save, at any time frustrates you. I can understand perhaps if the game forces you to save every minute. But the save system is completely and entirely up to the player to use.

 

 

He's not saying that being able to save any time is a problem for the player. He's saying that the 'save anytime' functionality automatically causes inherently broken game mechanics in every part of the game due to it's very presence (like the corruptive nature of the dark side, I guess). Which is why this functionality will affect him even if he doesn't "abuse" it himself. And then he promptly ignores any requests for examples of this ever happening in a game.

[Osvir]

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

I'm curious bro, what is a true cRPG according to you? Let's drop the save-system thing for now (unless that is what defines any game for you).

[TrashMan]

Do you have an example from an actual game where the option to save anywhere has been the basis for changes to the design that you find unacceptable? I'm talking single player game, not multiplayer as I can see multiplayer issues of balance affecting the single player game, but I am having a hard time thinking of any single player game that has been affected in the way you describe, ie classes being changed drastically due to save scumming.

 

Yes and no. Exmples aplenty, but not actual proof.

Because this is not the sort of thing you CAN prove. After all, how can I prove that X is what lead to change Y, even if it makes 100% sense?

 

After all, how is a game balanced? Trough testing.

How does one test a game? By playing.

How do people play? However tehy want. Will testesrs save-scum? Most certanly. Will that affect their view on the blance/usefulness? Most certanly.

Will that feedback influence balancing? Defiantely.

 

Can I prove it? No.

Do I care if I can prove it or no? No.

What does that mean for you? No examples. Deal with it.

Edited October 12, 2012 by TrashMan

[TrashMan]

So you already got what you want. At the very beginning. The game is thus to your liking.

 

Unless you somehow got hte abiltiy to read minds, you dont' get to say that.

 

 

 

So Baldurs Gate, PS:T, etc. don't fit a design of what a true cRPG should be, then? It's been a bit since I last played them, but I recall that you can save at any time in those games. You seemed to love those games, yet the option of being able to save at any time in Project Eternity seems to frustrate you (your word). That doesn't make sense.

 

Doesn't make sense to you, because you have trouble listening. Or reading.

Specificly that you are reading too much into what I want.

 

Like I said..I can argue for any viewpoint if I fee like it.

 

 

Anyway, you've already got somewhat what you want (Iron Man mode), and people who want to save at any point have gotten what they want. Win-win, no?

 

Not really. Maybe. Depends.

Edited October 12, 2012 by TrashMan

[TrashMan]

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

I'm curious bro, what is a true cRPG according to you? Let's drop the save-system thing for now (unless that is what defines any game for you).

 

A perfect cRPG would IMHO, try to emulate the PnP experience as close as possible.

[Osvir]

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

I'm curious bro, what is a true cRPG according to you? Let's drop the save-system thing for now (unless that is what defines any game for you).

 

A perfect cRPG would IMHO, try to emulate the PnP experience as close as possible.

 

And how would one go about to do that?

[Solid Sage]

I'm still fairly new to CRPGs, having only started Fallout, Arcanum, and Planescape, so I'm not even going to pretend to be particularly knowledgeable on this subject but I think not being able to save everywhere all the time is a good idea. I also want to add that I haven't read through all of this thread.

If you make certain bad decisions, you should be punished for it, not just able to reload your save. Dark Souls does this well, but that's a different type of game.

There's always going to be the "just don't use it!" argument, but it's honestly pretty hard not to when it's readily available. Maybe something like what Hitman does, where you only have so many saves each level (each map/town/dungeon?) would work.

 

I think what someone on the front page said is a good idea with different difficulty options allowing and disallowing this.

[mute688]

Do you have an example from an actual game where the option to save anywhere has been the basis for changes to the design that you find unacceptable? I'm talking single player game, not multiplayer as I can see multiplayer issues of balance affecting the single player game, but I am having a hard time thinking of any single player game that has been affected in the way you describe, ie classes being changed drastically due to save scumming.

 

Yes and no. Exmples aplenty, but not actual proof.

Because this is not the sort of thing you CAN prove. After all, how can I prove that X is what lead to change Y, even if it makes 100% sense?

 

After all, how is a game balanced? Trough testing.

How does one test a game? By playing.

How do people play? However tehy want. Will testesrs save-scum? Most certanly. Will that affect their view on the blance/usefulness? Most certanly.

Will that feedback influence balancing? Defiantely.

 

Can I prove it? No.

Do I care if I can prove it or no? No.

What does that mean for you? No examples. Deal with it.

 

lol, I see. No problem. I'll deal with it. I sorta figured that's where you were at but it's nice to get confirmation. Feeding time is over.

[Slaunyeh]

Can I prove it? No.

Do I care if I can prove it or no? No.

What does that mean for you? No examples. Deal with it.

 

That's... fair. I guess. It doesn't really help us understand why you think "save-scumming" is the Dark Side of game design though.

[ogrezilla]

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

I'm curious bro, what is a true cRPG according to you? Let's drop the save-system thing for now (unless that is what defines any game for you).

 

A perfect cRPG would IMHO, try to emulate the PnP experience as close as possible.

 

And how would one go about to do that?

drop the graphics for starters. text based or bust

[TrashMan]

Your words Slaunyeh...not mine.

 

I guess you never played PnP?

And if you coudln't understand by now, I don't know that to say. Fantasy adventure is all about atmosphere. AFAIC, save-scumming hurts that atmosphere.

 

 

And how would one go about to do that?

 

By trying to re-create the atmospehre and the broadness of possibilities PnP offers.

You got some imagination.

I don't think I have to give you all the answers on a silver platter.

[ogrezilla]

You know what you can do in a PnP RPG? Stop whenever you want and everything can be saved. You know what the only thing stopping you from reloading is? A DM making that decision to stop you. There is nothing in the mechanics of a PnP RPG to stop a group from save scumming; only the choice of one of the people involved.

 

And you need to factor in that PnP RPGs are by design multiplayer games whereas this is being designed as a pure single player game. Multiplayer games typically have a save/load system that doesn't interrupt the other players. Single player games don't have to worry about that.

Edited October 12, 2012 by ogrezilla

[elminster]

Im against a saving limitation for several areas in the whole game. Maybe at certain, storyrelevant points. Than you could make these interesting points more challenging and increase the motivation to play throung that points. But reloading every time the last savepoint which is one hour ago when you accidently run unprepared in a difficult battle? No, that would lower the fun of the game and be quiet frustrating.

[codexer]

You know what you can do in a PnP RPG? Stop whenever you want and everything can be saved. You know what the only thing stopping you from reloading is? A DM making that decision to stop you. There is nothing in the mechanics of a PnP RPG to stop a group from save scumming; only the choice of one of the people involved.

 

This is an amazingly ignorant argument. Never in my life have I heard of a DM letting their players "reload" and replay an event. Saving is simply not something that is part of the pen and paper-experience of roleplaying. Period.

 

Also. I would ask of you to stop using the term "save-scumming" when it doesn't apply. Save-scumming is when you prevent the game from deleting your save.

[Ieo]

Well, I can argue that save everywhere doesn't fit a design of what a true CRPG should be.

 

I'm curious bro, what is a true cRPG according to you? Let's drop the save-system thing for now (unless that is what defines any game for you).

 

A perfect cRPG would IMHO, try to emulate the PnP experience as close as possible.

 

So really by all logic, you shouldn't be here at all since there won't be multiplayer/co-op mode.

[ogrezilla]

You know what you can do in a PnP RPG? Stop whenever you want and everything can be saved. You know what the only thing stopping you from reloading is? A DM making that decision to stop you. There is nothing in the mechanics of a PnP RPG to stop a group from save scumming; only the choice of one of the people involved.

 

This is an amazingly ignorant argument. Never in my life have I heard of a DM letting their players "reload" and replay an event. Saving is simply not something that is part of the pen and paper-experience of roleplaying. Period.

 

Also. I would ask of you to stop using the term "save-scumming" when it doesn't apply. Save-scumming is when you prevent the game from deleting your save.

fair enough, I had never heard the term until this thread

 

and I'm sorry, but saving is a part of the roleplaying experience. replaying content isn't and getting 2nd chances isn't, but its not at all uncommon for people to stop in the middle of something and continue later.

[jivex5k]

Players that don't care about reloading saves shouldn't be punished by those who do but lack the discipline to stop themselves.

[Loki Ador]

 

This is an amazingly ignorant argument. Never in my life have I heard of a DM letting their players "reload" and replay an event. Saving is simply not something that is part of the pen and paper-experience of roleplaying. Period.

 

 

THIS is an amazingly ignorant argument. Precisely because the key features regarding PnP RPGs is the fact that you can do whatever you want, provided the tableagrees (either actively or by letting the decision be). And, well, you CAN "reload", e.g. replay a scene. I have already seen that in the past. In rare occurences, for sure. Sometimes for perfectly good reasons. There is no such things as "never" in a PnP RPG.

[codexer]

You know what you can do in a PnP RPG? Stop whenever you want and everything can be saved. You know what the only thing stopping you from reloading is? A DM making that decision to stop you. There is nothing in the mechanics of a PnP RPG to stop a group from save scumming; only the choice of one of the people involved.

 

This is an amazingly ignorant argument. Never in my life have I heard of a DM letting their players "reload" and replay an event. Saving is simply not something that is part of the pen and paper-experience of roleplaying. Period.

 

Also. I would ask of you to stop using the term "save-scumming" when it doesn't apply. Save-scumming is when you prevent the game from deleting your save.

fair enough, I had never heard the term until this thread

 

and I'm sorry, but saving is a part of the roleplaying experience. replaying content isn't and getting 2nd chances isn't, but its not at all uncommon for people to stop in the middle of something and continue later.

 

Saving is a natural part of it, yes. However, no one is suggesting that we remove it. The first post in this thread made sure to add the caveat that a save&quit-function was part of the suggestion.

 

It's very frustrating to see so many people post in this thread without having grasped this; it really makes you wonder if there's a point in engaging here.

[LadyCrimson]

Saving is a natural part of it, yes. However, no one is suggesting that we remove it. The first post in this thread made sure to add the caveat that a save&quit-function was part of the suggestion.

 

It's very frustrating to see so many people post in this thread without having grasped this; it really makes you wonder if there's a point in engaging here.

My main personal point is that I want multiple save slots. I certainly don't think anyone, on either 'side', has suggested that you can't save at all or something.

 

But multiple save slots/files ... where I can choose to save in this slot, play for an hour, then choose to put the next save in a new slot, creating a new file. There are numerous reasons why I like/prefer multiple save files, and most of them have little to do with wanting to "cheat" the game/combat all the time, every 5 minutes or whatever. Anyway, that is what I want, and that is what I've had the impression that the 'anti-save-scumming' folk do not want. Thus, we will never see eye to eye. If I'm wrong on this, please correct me.

[PsychoBlonde]

If you make certain bad decisions, you should be punished for it, not just able to reload your save.

 

So, your idea of fun is to have the game hurt you whenever you deviate from the script?

 

I play to enjoy myself, not to get slapped around by a computer program. If the purpose of any design element is "hurt the player", that is a bad design element. The focus should always be on what the player CAN do not what they're "not allowed" to do.