The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I posted this in the PC forum but theres hardly anyone there! So maybe I'll get more opinions in here.
It's only been in the last four, five at the earliest, years since quicksave has become commen in gaming, notably in PC gaming.
Many a time have I been saved from a plummet of death or a hidden baddie by quicksave. At the stroke of a button (F5 is usually the culprit) all fears are crushed in gaming.
...But does anyone remember a time before the Quicksave?
The good old days when the slight mistep meant being set back to the beginning of a level or even the game. The fear...the sweat...the reward of beating the big boss just to be confronted with a bigger big boss. Now its dead.
This occured to me when I was playing AVP2. By constant use of a quicksave I had completed it in one weekend. But if I hadn't had quicksave it would have lasted me all week for sure.
Games are now, even the best ones, easy in a sense. Sure theres harder difficulties but wheres the real challenge of completing the level with in a sense something at least close to death in the fear it produces. Every level was painfully saw through.
Games began to use save features, most were crude but soon all games had some save feature which could be activated all the time by getting to the menu. Many games still harken back to the arcade style with saves only halfwaythrough a level or every episode or such.
Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D shooters???
It's only been in the last four, five at the earliest, years since quicksave has become commen in gaming, notably in PC gaming.
Many a time have I been saved from a plummet of death or a hidden baddie by quicksave. At the stroke of a button (F5 is usually the culprit) all fears are crushed in gaming.
...But does anyone remember a time before the Quicksave?
The good old days when the slight mistep meant being set back to the beginning of a level or even the game. The fear...the sweat...the reward of beating the big boss just to be confronted with a bigger big boss. Now its dead.
This occured to me when I was playing AVP2. By constant use of a quicksave I had completed it in one weekend. But if I hadn't had quicksave it would have lasted me all week for sure.
Games are now, even the best ones, easy in a sense. Sure theres harder difficulties but wheres the real challenge of completing the level with in a sense something at least close to death in the fear it produces. Every level was painfully saw through.
Games began to use save features, most were crude but soon all games had some save feature which could be activated all the time by getting to the menu. Many games still harken back to the arcade style with saves only halfwaythrough a level or every episode or such.
Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D shooters???
I remember reading an artivle about this a while back...
The guy was saying that although the frequency of game saves he uses are up to him, that because they are there he tends to use them more reguallry thanhe would really like...
And that it tends to encourage lazier gaming, since he can save a game, try something out, if that doesnt work, re-load the game and try something different...
If means people dont have to take (in the gameing world at least) respocibility for their actions, and that for many games it can often ditract from the abience, atmosphere a game may be trying to present.
I seem to remember he used 'Desu Ex' as an example, of how although still a good deal of fun, constant save point did mean that much of the tension from many of the missions were lost, that it would have been a more exillerating experience for him to have been wandering the corridors, with his ammo depleted, hiding from the guards, actually concenred about being found out, as opposed to being able to constantly reload until he found out where the guardswent and were they missed...
The opposite problem being that not being able to save a crucial moment can be particuarly frustrating... Having fought your way through the final level to be confronted by the end of level boss, who, if you fail to destroy, you must re-play the final level again, ad again, and again...
I think (I could be wrong) that he surmised that some games actually worked better with the user definied saves, while otherswould feel tighter without them... and that although no game has ever been broken by having too many save points, there were plenty who, those otherwise fine, have been made too frustrating by having too few...
That positioning save points in a game is an artform in itself, and that maybe user-saves should be given as much thought by games designers?
Bearing in mind save points are much more the domain of the console, and less that of the PC.
Maybe a game could give you the option or either usersaves or gamepoint style saves before playing?
The guy was saying that although the frequency of game saves he uses are up to him, that because they are there he tends to use them more reguallry thanhe would really like...
And that it tends to encourage lazier gaming, since he can save a game, try something out, if that doesnt work, re-load the game and try something different...
If means people dont have to take (in the gameing world at least) respocibility for their actions, and that for many games it can often ditract from the abience, atmosphere a game may be trying to present.
I seem to remember he used 'Desu Ex' as an example, of how although still a good deal of fun, constant save point did mean that much of the tension from many of the missions were lost, that it would have been a more exillerating experience for him to have been wandering the corridors, with his ammo depleted, hiding from the guards, actually concenred about being found out, as opposed to being able to constantly reload until he found out where the guardswent and were they missed...
The opposite problem being that not being able to save a crucial moment can be particuarly frustrating... Having fought your way through the final level to be confronted by the end of level boss, who, if you fail to destroy, you must re-play the final level again, ad again, and again...
I think (I could be wrong) that he surmised that some games actually worked better with the user definied saves, while otherswould feel tighter without them... and that although no game has ever been broken by having too many save points, there were plenty who, those otherwise fine, have been made too frustrating by having too few...
That positioning save points in a game is an artform in itself, and that maybe user-saves should be given as much thought by games designers?
Bearing in mind save points are much more the domain of the console, and less that of the PC.
Maybe a game could give you the option or either usersaves or gamepoint style saves before playing?
I see your point, but most people (including me sometimes) abuse it buy constantly tapping F5. Some kind of controlled measures as mentioned earlier would be better in some games.
It IS very annoying though, when you've been playing for ages, got dead far, only to die by accident like by falling off a cliff while trying to jump or something. You have to go through it ALL again, and usually it's just pointless pathfinding, no real action. THIS is where quicksave comes in handy, to help keep this kind of thing to a minimum
Am i the only person who hates quicksaves in games? Doesn't it really annoy you when you are watching someone playing a PC shooter and they pretty much wear out F5 saving after every enemy they kill. Quicksave although useful in long levels takes the skill out of gaming. if you can think ill quicksave now and run out and hope for a couple of lucky shots and if i fail who cares i can quickload. Quicksave makes games short and arguably less monotomous but games with quicksaves need sanctions. One of my favourite games Project IGI has no save feature, you can only save by completing a level, this works well as each level must be well thought out and planned for well, this improves technique and adds to the realism. Shooters such as wolfenstein or Medal of Honour which are both excellent games have instant quicksave features which can remove the skill from the game as dying is not a problem. What solutions are there I hear you ask.
1. Limited Saving- this is a viable option. To save you from having to do the whole level again the designers add a feature which means you can only save twice (or a low number of times) per level this means that people have to save appropriately and cannot rely on quicksave to get them through levels.
2. autosaving- This means you cannot quicksave and the game saves for you at certain points in each level after a suitable amount of progress.This means less monotomy whilst keeping the skill
3. Time delayed saving- Time delayed saving which is being used in the forth coming Project IGI 2, is where you have to give the game 5 seconds notice before it saves. This means you cannot just save in the middle of a fight but rather you must wait and be in a safe place.
4. Savepoints- Save points are as they sound: you must reach this location to save such as in resident evil with the type writers. This kind of saving is similar to autosaving but can be fairly irritating because you never know how far you must continue before you can discontinue playing.
Overall it think that normal quick saves can reduce the enjoyment and length of games especially with regards to shooters it destroys tension and therefore mades games worse value for money. I think the best solution is limited saving per level as this gives the player a chance to progress whilst still allowing skill and technique to show through.
1. Limited Saving- this is a viable option. To save you from having to do the whole level again the designers add a feature which means you can only save twice (or a low number of times) per level this means that people have to save appropriately and cannot rely on quicksave to get them through levels.
2. autosaving- This means you cannot quicksave and the game saves for you at certain points in each level after a suitable amount of progress.This means less monotomy whilst keeping the skill
3. Time delayed saving- Time delayed saving which is being used in the forth coming Project IGI 2, is where you have to give the game 5 seconds notice before it saves. This means you cannot just save in the middle of a fight but rather you must wait and be in a safe place.
4. Savepoints- Save points are as they sound: you must reach this location to save such as in resident evil with the type writers. This kind of saving is similar to autosaving but can be fairly irritating because you never know how far you must continue before you can discontinue playing.
Overall it think that normal quick saves can reduce the enjoyment and length of games especially with regards to shooters it destroys tension and therefore mades games worse value for money. I think the best solution is limited saving per level as this gives the player a chance to progress whilst still allowing skill and technique to show through.
The trouble with quicksaves, or autosaves as they're often called, is that they're usually too frequent, and usually autoload when you lose a life in a game.
I try to turn them off and save when I want to if I can.
I try to turn them off and save when I want to if I can.
MoJoJoJo wrote:
> No-one's forcing you to USE quicksave
So? I never said anyone was.
> No-one's forcing you to USE quicksave
So? I never said anyone was.
Protoss wrote:
> Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D
> shooters???
In short, yes. If it's used effectively however (like in MOH:AA although that's too short anyway) it can be fantastic, because in MOH AA it only saves when you've completed an objective, which stil leaves you plenty of time to die between the last and next objective.
> Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D
> shooters???
In short, yes. If it's used effectively however (like in MOH:AA although that's too short anyway) it can be fantastic, because in MOH AA it only saves when you've completed an objective, which stil leaves you plenty of time to die between the last and next objective.
No-one's forcing you to USE quicksave
I posted this in the PC forum but theres hardly anyone there! So maybe I'll get more opinions in here.
It's only been in the last four, five at the earliest, years since quicksave has become commen in gaming, notably in PC gaming.
Many a time have I been saved from a plummet of death or a hidden baddie by quicksave. At the stroke of a button (F5 is usually the culprit) all fears are crushed in gaming.
...But does anyone remember a time before the Quicksave?
The good old days when the slight mistep meant being set back to the beginning of a level or even the game. The fear...the sweat...the reward of beating the big boss just to be confronted with a bigger big boss. Now its dead.
This occured to me when I was playing AVP2. By constant use of a quicksave I had completed it in one weekend. But if I hadn't had quicksave it would have lasted me all week for sure.
Games are now, even the best ones, easy in a sense. Sure theres harder difficulties but wheres the real challenge of completing the level with in a sense something at least close to death in the fear it produces. Every level was painfully saw through.
Games began to use save features, most were crude but soon all games had some save feature which could be activated all the time by getting to the menu. Many games still harken back to the arcade style with saves only halfwaythrough a level or every episode or such.
Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D shooters???
It's only been in the last four, five at the earliest, years since quicksave has become commen in gaming, notably in PC gaming.
Many a time have I been saved from a plummet of death or a hidden baddie by quicksave. At the stroke of a button (F5 is usually the culprit) all fears are crushed in gaming.
...But does anyone remember a time before the Quicksave?
The good old days when the slight mistep meant being set back to the beginning of a level or even the game. The fear...the sweat...the reward of beating the big boss just to be confronted with a bigger big boss. Now its dead.
This occured to me when I was playing AVP2. By constant use of a quicksave I had completed it in one weekend. But if I hadn't had quicksave it would have lasted me all week for sure.
Games are now, even the best ones, easy in a sense. Sure theres harder difficulties but wheres the real challenge of completing the level with in a sense something at least close to death in the fear it produces. Every level was painfully saw through.
Games began to use save features, most were crude but soon all games had some save feature which could be activated all the time by getting to the menu. Many games still harken back to the arcade style with saves only halfwaythrough a level or every episode or such.
Has quicksave ruined the passion in many of our games, especially 3D shooters???