Comments on: Save Game Systems

by: Lesenswert im Juli | halozination.de

Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:35:31 +0000

[…] Save Game Systems: Interessanter Artikel über Speichersysteme in Videospielen von sirlin.net. Es werden verschiedene Arten von Speichersystemen von knapp einem dutzend Spielen vorgestellt und verglichen. Von absolutem Müll bis wie ein solches System am Besten aussehen sollte. […]

by: RPJesus

Mon, 28 Jul 2008 06:23:53 +0000

While I generally agree, autosaving is not something I’m fond of. I tend to be a bit neurotic when it comes to other people playing my games. I mean, I’m more than willing to let others experience the brilliance that is No More Heroes, but I don’t want the game autosaving on me (if somebody were to catch a single pokemon that I already had pokedex data for and saved, I would probably start a new game.)

by: Mystic

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:00:13 +0000

The GBA Fire Emblem games have the best save system I’ve ever used.

by: rich

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:45:55 +0000

EVERY game should have a save system like BioShock
that save system was perfect

by: Chuck

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:09:19 +0000

ALso Dragon Quarter is not to be compared with Dead Rising.

The entire game is based around the idea of restarting from the start, but keeping your progress. In fact, the game REQUIRES it. You CANNOT beat it in one go.

by: Chuck

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:54:12 +0000

“If someone cares enough to dodge the game’s mechanics in a single-player game, why do you care? Did the existence of the SNES Game Genie ruin your ability to enjoy the games on that system, even if you didn’t use it? “

As a player I don’t care.’ As a game designer, i definitely WOULD care. I would not give someone an exploitable save system.

I’d have a quicksave in any DS game I made. But it would be a save and quit. And when the save is loaded, it would vanish. I’d also have saves at fair checkpoints which CAN be reloaded, if the genre supported it.

But on a ps2 game, if I allowed quicksave, i’d have to let you quicksave yourself into a corner without realising it to keep the challenge in the game. and that’s really cheap. It’s the adventure game equivalent of having a hidden item only available during the opening scene that is required at the end of the game, with no clues given that it is needed. I’d rather forgo the quicksave, and have reasonable checkpoints. I wouldmak eit impossible to checkpoin tyourself into a corner.

A great example of the latter is Out of This World. There are checkpoints, but if you reach them and didn’t do what you needed to first, the checkpoint doesn’t function. WHen you die you ALWAYS get sent back far enough to undo your mistake.

by: Terrabull

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:46:13 +0000

There are several console games that use quicksave features. KOEI’s series of “Warriors” titles use it. The Evolution series of games used it.
I can’t remember more off the top of my head, but that’s quite a few considering the number of games in the “Warriors” line of games.
There is no reason quicksave features can’t be on any and all games. Some don’t really need it (Mario Bros), but other than those it would almost always be a nice addition.

by: WoeIsYou

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:22:04 +0000

And the fact is… quicksaves in a game that isn’t meant to be played in short 10 minute bursts are a must feature (games like Tetris for instance). Your game isn’t complete without them. Not providing them or getting as close as possible to that (in MMOs for instance you can’t exactly quicksave) is simply a game design failure. Just because some PC games that have a quicksave are designed to kill a player not doing a perfect run doesn’t mean the quicksave system is the problem, it’s the problem of the developers being fixated on the idea that the player must die X amount of times during their game.

And really, I personally just don’t think the developers should be deciding when the player can quit the game without being punished for it. Thas’all.

As for the Little Jimmy argument, I’d say Little Jimmy has way more time to put into those games than the regular adult does and probably has a lot more patience with that stuff too. As a kid, I remember had no problem with the Megaman games killing me over and over again. Today…not so much, I’d love to spend a day doing nothing but playing a game, but the sad fact is that I don’t have the luxury to do that nearly as often as I used to. Work, hobbies and a girlfriend who also wants her share with the PC/console…it can get tough to squeeze some of that time in.

Me? I’m a PC gamer. I want the save system to have a mix autosaves AND quicksaves. Unless it’s Tetris or a versus multiplayer game.

Oh, and yes, unlocking fighting game characters sucks not only because it delays the time till you get to the actual game, but also because the single player portion of the game usually sucks all sorts of goats. SSE in SSBB tries, but it’s woefully mediocre compared to…well…any other game that’s solely a platformer.

by: Claytus

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 06:05:49 +0000

You’re equating two things that aren’t the same, terrabull. Noone said Dead Rising should change it’s entire style to allow “perfect game” type saves. Save markers would be perfectly fine in that game. But instead, we got no markers… and therefore, we got a game that you couldn’t easily turn off any time you wanted to, and you could also potentially lose hours of gameplay if you had just forgotten to save recently. Fixing these problems is actually not that hard, and doesn’t require comprising the gameplay in any way.

The point about save markers being unusual, is more that they’re incredibly underused. It’s an idea that you say exclusively in handheld systems, and even then, only on really top quality games. Every system could benefit these… it isn’t just handheld players that sometimes unexpectedly need to stop playing without time to go find a save point.

by: Terrabull

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:48:38 +0000

If Dead Rising or Dragon Quarter didn’t have the unusual save systems they wouldn’t be anything special. The whole point of those games was that you build up a strong character through trial and error. Not through a “perfect game.”
I really wish I had the instruction manual for “Elder Scrolls: Daggerfall.” In it they had a very compelling article about the “perfect game” theory, and how flawed it is. Not to say this is always bad, Mario games can have “perfect game” saves and be fine.
Would you have even mentioned Dead Rising on this site if the save system wasn’t unique? No. You never would have because it would have just been “another game where you blast zombies.” Ho-hum. The game was not made for “little Jimmy” anything, it has a mature rating. It is like Viewtiful Joe, not made for the average gamer, and making no qualms about it. The game is a great example of how game evolution has allowed designer freedom, and games can be made for anyone. You don’t have to be stuck with all “Carnival Games” or “Grand Theft Everyone Can Beat Me” because you have a choice about what level of games you want to play.
One last question “Save Markers” are old. I was using them back on the Original Game Boy (and possibly the NES.) Why do you claim Castelvania and Fire Emblem are so unusual for using them?