fantadomat
Arcane
I am old now and have more than enough shit in my life,don't have the time to replay generic gameplay because of retarded tryhard devs. Also i don't think that beating a game on any difficulty is some kind of achievement in life.
Games in which consequences of your choices become aparent much later, like a dozen or two hours after the choice was made.
The Witchers have several moments such as this. Most players will just accept the results and move on.*
*Although I replayed like 15 hours of Witcher 3 after I learned that casually fucking Triss will not allow me to fully romance Yennefer
Dragon's Dogma allows you to save at almost any time when not in combat, and has a secondary 'checkpoint' save in addition to the main save (although each has just one save slot). Moreover, it's possible to create a backup of your save file even on PS3, and quite easy to store as many back-up saves as you want on PC. I played through Dragon's Dogma 3 times on PS3 and 3 times on PC without any save issues.Save on exit is why I haven't finished Dragon's Dogma or Shadow of Mordor. Because of bugs and corruption a single save slot is just asking to fuck people over.
So Quicksave, because I'm not going to replay the game from the start when it shits the bed.
I know it sounds dumb but I hate consequences in games. I don't think I have ever continued when I lost a soldier in the XCOM series because I always press F9 the moment something goes wrong or my shot misses. That's probably why I never finish any Roguelike because at some point I become too lazy to do everything from the start again.
A vital aspect about Dark Souls' system is that it actually saves all the time, rather than being your typical checkpoint system. When you die, you go to the last bonfire, but it doesn't just reset everything to the way it was. The real kicker is that you can't just load a previous checkpoint and try again — if you happened to use a unique item in a failed attempt to get past a tough boss fight, that item is gone for good.Dark Souls wouldn't be anywhere near as tense and frenetic if you could save anywhere.
Therefore, I’d like a game where the whole game was designed around a save on exit system; but then later they also patched in a save anywhere system as a recourse for bugs.
The key word is persistence. I think the best case design is one that eliminates player initiated saves altogether. Instead, each step, every action is automatically saved to a master data file that also gets saved upon exiting the game. If the party wipes out, then the player is warped to a hub, whether it is an inn or a temple or anything context appropriate. From there, they can retrieve/raise their characters with a heavy penalty, run rescue missions, or have the option to create new characters and pick up where the old ones left off.
The key word is persistence. I think the best case design is one that eliminates player initiated saves altogether. Instead, each step, every action is automatically saved to a master data file that also gets saved upon exiting the game. If the party wipes out, then the player is warped to a hub, whether it is an inn or a temple or anything context appropriate. From there, they can retrieve/raise their characters with a heavy penalty, run rescue missions, or have the option to create new characters and pick up where the old ones left off.
It was fun back in the days but it only works once, or only for masochists and "defensive" players.
Just to clarify, the method I was advocating in the post above is not permadeath or an ironman mode. It simply sends a defeated party back to a destination with a consequence such as losing gold or experience, while allowing them to keep playing.