I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
Why is this a bad thing compared to playing recklessly because you know you can go backtwards in time at any point?I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
My point about discouraging risks still stands.
If you have only one save and can't exit without saving, you're not gonna experiment with shit that will likely result in screwing up your game, therefore making you play more conservatively.
Why is this a bad thing compared to playing recklessly because you know you can go backtwards in time at any point?I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
My point about discouraging risks still stands.
If you have only one save and can't exit without saving, you're not gonna experiment with shit that will likely result in screwing up your game, therefore making you play more conservatively.
Permadeath doesn't really suit some games, especially when the game in question linear, so you really want permadeath to go with something that creates unique situations.When people talk about permadeath, they talk about us three being mean. 'Oh, they wanted to make it extra hard, so they threw in permadeath.' … permadeath is an example of 'consequence persistence.' … Do I read this scroll, do I drink this potion? I don't know. It might be good. It might be bad. If I can save the game and then drink the potion and—oh, it's bad-then I restore the game and I don't drink the potion. That entire game mechanic just completely goes away. So that was a whole reason why once you have taken an action and a consequence has happened, there's no way to go back and undo it.
…
The good stuff is just as permanent as the bad stuff.
I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
Why is this a bad thing compared to playing recklessly because you know you can go backtwards in time at any point?I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
My point about discouraging risks still stands.
If you have only one save and can't exit without saving, you're not gonna experiment with shit that will likely result in screwing up your game, therefore making you play more conservatively.
... systems that promote consequence persistence?
Do they make the game more enjoyable?
My largest issue with something like only having exit-saves is that modern game developers don't produce code of sufficient quality to prevent data loss. Games crash, and I don't have the patience to deal with buggy software, so I'd be fairly unwilling to play a game with exit-only saves.
What you're proposing restricts game design though. There are untold legions of games with garbage design aspects because they're all made with the assumption that the player will just reload if something really bad happens in the short term. Combat with massive variance in enemy damage leading to unavoidable instant death, retarded enemy/quest layouts where you can just randomly walk into a dragon and die without warning, stupid branches in quests where one path has an inexplicably shit outcome because you can just reload, total lack of replay value so everyone can do everything on a single runthrough just by reloading 5 minute segments to try it all- these are all symptoms of this kind of design.It restricts certain playstyles. If you wanna ironman, add in an optional ironman mode that those who need the threat of permanent save deletion upon character death can use, while everyone else plays normally.
While games crashing has consistently been an issue for a long time, data corruption is exceedingly rare, I've never had it happen. And even in games where it does, it's often just as bad for conventional saving anyways. Having checkpoint and exit saves means even in the event of the game crashing you're not losing any more progress than you would normally- dark souls works just fine that way.
Nobody really uses that system though. Roguelikes appear to work that way but keep checkpoint backups in case of a crash.While games crashing has consistently been an issue for a long time, data corruption is exceedingly rare, I've never had it happen. And even in games where it does, it's often just as bad for conventional saving anyways. Having checkpoint and exit saves means even in the event of the game crashing you're not losing any more progress than you would normally- dark souls works just fine that way.
1st poll option: Save and exit only, exit save deletes upon continuing
So your save gets deleted when you start playing again. And then the game crashes while you're playing so ALL save progress is now lost. The first poll option is entirely unusable.
I swear this site is full of illiterate people.
Read it again. "Exit save".
That's a lot of words to say "I like to cheat"All this talk about discouraging players from this or that frequently mentioned in this itt makes for a comprehensive image of Codexia - a cabal of old women, hateful and spiteful, unable to accept people half their age would also like to have fun every now and then
If you sincerely believe that sacrificing software flexibility that is the concept of save on demand is worth it due to your personal views on fun, then you have very little reasonable ideas to share probably on a much wider array of topics
It's a non-issue, a phantom Codexers conjured to lose in fight against it - there is nothing wrong in quicksaves, they were never wrong in the first place, a quicksave free system makes no sense in 2020
The single save slot of Dragon's Dogma was a design decision, not a console limitation, but the PC port has the virtue of easily being able to copy the save file, allowing the player to maintain as many backups as he likes, whereas in the console version the backup process necessitates copying the save file onto an external USB drive and then from the USB drive to a computer, too irritating a procedure for frequent use.Welcome to Dragon's Dogma, a PC port so shit you get a single save slot, and so buggy that you can lock the progress of the game by valid player decisions.
I'll take an actual save system. I'm not a fucking console peasant.