Checkpointing frequency in Games

Ike_009 said:
O no, another gamer doesn't agree with my personal preference on that a autosave save feature isn't more convenient for my gameplay style. How will I ever live with myself.
Click to expand...

Awww... poor baby. Did teh big scary rational argument hurt your wittle feeling again? Does it help if I write in baby? Is that within teh wittle limits of your wittle comprehenshunz?

For the record, I was trying to understand your point of view and trying to get you to understand that a proper save system doesn't take anything away from you, whereas a checkpoint system takes the freedom of choice away from me. Hence, giving people the choice is the ideal compromise.

But, alas, this seems to be the extent of your comprehension so I think we'll draw the line here tonight. I have better things to do with my time than waste it on whiny little pissants who still can't even figure out the difference between "you're" and "your."
 
I guess for some people hitting the F5 button every few minutes is such a major inconvenience that they would rather put up with the inconveniences brought about by checkpoint save systems. :rolleyes:

Ike_009 said:
Also games that checkpoint save do so more frequently than games that don't and have the quick save feature (based on my experience). So instead of a 15 min replay it's an hour replay unless I pause to save the game where a checkpoint would have saved (which isn't convenient (convenience once more being subjective) IMO).
Click to expand...

Hogwash. Most games with manual saving systems autosave very frequently, so unless you're crawling through the game at a snail's pace (read: moving your character forward one foot per minute) you're very unlikely to find a game where dying sets you back an hour of progress. At most the average game will autosave at least every 5 to 10 minutes, because autosaving is essentially a replacement for the checkpoint system.
 
How the EFF is a quick save ability akin to cheating?? also, why the hell would that ruin YOUR feelings if ANOTHER player wants to spam save in HIS singleplayer experience???

Multiplayer doesn't have saves, only singleplayer...and I know a few people (I myself don't see the point, but then I practice FREEDOM OF CHOICE and just choose not to do it) that get more enjoyment out of a game turning on the cheats that the developers usually include in the game. If thats how they enjoy their game, by all means, have infinite ammo dude! go have fun. Telling me that quicksaving after say, every single enemy encounter, compared to YOU quicksaving after, say, every time you find a scarce health pack, has no bearing on the matter. Each player will CHOOSE to do whatever the hell THEY enjoy most. Why care what OTHER people are doing in THEIR stories, play your own damn game.

Bottom line: I completely agree that not even offering me the CHOICE to save a game (and we're not even talking about those *&#^#$ moments where QUITTING doesn't even autosave) when I want to, is removing a functionality of the game, whereas having the ability to save when I want does absolutely NOTHING to the quality of YOUR game should you choose not to use it

tl;dr, quicksave rules, checkpoint-only is gay
 
I particularly hate it when a game indicates "saving" or checkpoint reached upon exiting. But, coming back to the game - only to find out 'what series of exercises were completed' - are now, to be re-done.

Also -- a quicksaving option is useful for those who want to take a quick break from whatever, play 30+- mins of a game, save (quicksave), and return to previous activity.

A game like:
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:
Shadow of Chernobyl only autosaves as per area (the position you were by the last time after you saw a load screen),but they added a quicksaving option, as a convenience to the player.
 
In my view, checkpoints making game easier and harder at same time. Depends on implementation.

First time I encountered checkpoints, it was Farcry 1. It really made game more challenging than usual.

In most recent games like CoD, it saves at every step and it made game too easy.
In contrast, Battlefield 3 used checkpoints sparingly. That made game more challenging than CoD.

I remember back in Tomb Raider 3, PS version had "consumable" saves. Player had to collect crystals as game progressed. Played could use them anytime to save game, but number was limited.

At some points I prefer to have "autosave", like at beginning of mission or between cutscenes. It always annoyed me in GTA that I had to load from safehouse and travel through entire city for 10 minutes just to fail hard mission within 5 minutes at same place... and then spend another 10 minutes travelling to mission marker. That's useless waste of time.

Generally, I'm for manual saving function.

Now, let's remember time, where there's was no save function...
 
Tsar said:
Come now dude being gay isn't a bad thing......
Click to expand...

I believe you need to watch the Southpark episode "The F Word" (S13E12) to understand that I don't use the word in the context of homosexuality, in that the meaning of the word has changed and it is now generally considered to mean stupid or unfortunate (Urban dictionary definition). Yes I'm aware that they focus on the word fag, but the same logic applies.

I have no issue with homosexuals, just don't be all gay about it... :P
English is a highly bastardized language in that it continually changes and adapts. Keep with the times :D
 
mottamort said:
I believe you need to watch the Southpark episode "The F Word" (S13E12) to understand that I don't use the word in the context of homosexuality, in that the meaning of the word has changed and it is now generally considered to mean stupid or unfortunate (Urban dictionary definition). Yes I'm aware that they focus on the word fag, but the same logic applies.

I have no issue with homosexuals, just don't be all gay about it... :P
English is a highly bastardized language in that it continually changes and adapts. Keep with the times :D
Click to expand...

Personally I think amongst friends this logic is fine, not on a public forum. As much as I enjoy south park I don't think you should use it as your moral guideline. If you have no problem with homosexuals how about using a word that has no chance of offending someone?
 
Touché

...

(must just add/point out that I don't necessarily use Southpark as a moral guideline, but that that episode is just an easy way of putting my point across, because they illustrate the idea quite well. Semantics I know, just want to put it out there :))
 
Last edited:
Grievous said:
If you have no problem with homosexuals how about using a word that has no chance of offending someone?
Click to expand...

I agree with Grievous here. If someone on a public forum were to say "don't be niggers about it," he wouldn't get away with it by saying the meaning of the word has changed and doesn't mean black people any longer.

If the word is generally accepted to mean 'stupid' or 'unfortunate,' why not just use the word 'stupid' or 'unfortunate?' :confused:

Anyway, that's my 2cents. The thread has probably been derailed enough for now.
 
rootworm41 said:
I don't mind dieng and going back a bit. But those games where you go back like 15 minutes make me mad! :p
Click to expand...

Yeah, it really does go down to the specific game. It really depends how the game has been balanced and certain game mechanics. I like mass effect where it doesn't allow you to save while in combat but you can save pretty much any other time, but I hate games with checkpoints before cut scenes.
 
Best example of checkpointing/saving that I have found was Final Fantasy XII. Each Save crystal was intuitively placed and very rarely did it feel like they were placed just for the purpose of being placed.

Even the time it took to get from one to another was the perfect amount of time to make it feel both like a breather and as a precursor to an even greater adventure beyond this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top