Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Locker
Play ListsSTATUS
The ultimate anti-frustration mechanic is not saving everywhere or healing after battle
JosephSeraph- 08/28/2015 03:53 PM
Posts 
Pages:
1
Close
yup yup! /agree
Yea, I think it one of the most important things you can do while designing is to make sure the stuff you add makes sense for what you're trying to do with the game! I think that maybe it sounds obvious but I see lots of games that just kinda add stuff willy-nilly...
Yea, I think it one of the most important things you can do while designing is to make sure the stuff you add makes sense for what you're trying to do with the game! I think that maybe it sounds obvious but I see lots of games that just kinda add stuff willy-nilly...
Exac! Game overs are frustrating not because you can't save everywhere and not always have the miraculous light of post-battle healing at you, they're frustrating simply because the game didn't give you a coherent reason for you death.
People should stop putting post-battle healing and save everywhere as the holy grails of rpg design and simply start treating them as they are: valid alternatives that may or may not help accomplish your design goals.
People should stop putting post-battle healing and save everywhere as the holy grails of rpg design and simply start treating them as they are: valid alternatives that may or may not help accomplish your design goals.
author=JosephSeraph
Exac! Game overs are frustrating not because you can't save everywhere and not always have the miraculous light of post-battle healing at you, they're frustrating simply because the game didn't give you a coherent reason for you death.
People should stop putting post-battle healing and save everywhere as the holy grails of rpg design and simply start treating them as they are: valid alternatives that may or may not help accomplish your design goals.
I'm a huge fan of post-battle healing and free saving as design tools, but I totally agree! They're just tools; they won't make an unfair game any less unfair. Maybe they lower the frustration, but that's just treating the symptom. You gotta design your fights to be fun and make them feel as fair as possible if you want don't want people to get mad and quit.
ubon
66
someone once described saving to me as just a necessary means of respecting your player's time, and it's stuck with me as a basic design rule. having limited save points can be stylish, but it's also good to expect that your player is going to be pulled away suddenly at some point. it's a basic quality of life thing, not an answer to issues of difficulty or unclear consequences.
that said, I guess a lot of people see some appeal to the kind of game that necessitates a lot of saving and reloading, so who knows? games are broad enough that I try to stay flexible with what my own 'rules' are.
that said, I guess a lot of people see some appeal to the kind of game that necessitates a lot of saving and reloading, so who knows? games are broad enough that I try to stay flexible with what my own 'rules' are.
there are other ways to pull it off though! For instance, Azure Dreams was a game where you could actually save very little -- only once you finish each trek, with raising and raising stakes the more floors you explore. It's a mechanical part of the game that the stakes rise each floor and it's up to you to take the risk -- differently from regular roguelikes though, there's no permadeath nor gameover, you just lose all your items and get thrown out of the tower. Then the game autosaves.
If you wanna take a break you CAN save inside of the dungeon, BUT once you load it's goodbye save. The same thing can happen in other games! The console FFs had the quicksave feature which for some reason was saved in the RAM and then lost if you turned the console off which is plain dumb BUT
You can still have "quicksaves" that autodelete if you load them up so safeguard against such things. And you don't need to make save points hours apart from eachother too.
There are many many ways to NOT give in to the save everywhere thing people are just tacking on their games because it's less frustrating and admittedly much easier to implement.
Really, I have nothing against saving everywhere but it is NOT the holy grail of RPGs and some games are just meant to be played on rather long sessions and not on tiny bursts! there's nothing wrong with that either. Your game's saving system -- and everything else -- has to be designed around what your game wants to accomplish. ;w;
jsdjfgsjhbfjhndvsdjhvnfvsdfv wow that was kinda big sorry *runs*
If you wanna take a break you CAN save inside of the dungeon, BUT once you load it's goodbye save. The same thing can happen in other games! The console FFs had the quicksave feature which for some reason was saved in the RAM and then lost if you turned the console off which is plain dumb BUT
You can still have "quicksaves" that autodelete if you load them up so safeguard against such things. And you don't need to make save points hours apart from eachother too.
There are many many ways to NOT give in to the save everywhere thing people are just tacking on their games because it's less frustrating and admittedly much easier to implement.
Really, I have nothing against saving everywhere but it is NOT the holy grail of RPGs and some games are just meant to be played on rather long sessions and not on tiny bursts! there's nothing wrong with that either. Your game's saving system -- and everything else -- has to be designed around what your game wants to accomplish. ;w;
jsdjfgsjhbfjhndvsdjhvnfvsdfv wow that was kinda big sorry *runs*
ubon
66
yeah, quicksaves are a very good way to deal with that while still disincentivizing savescumming. I've heard other examples that have fixed saves, but allow you resume from the start of a failed battle. Mother 3 has maybe the kindest method -- you resume from the last save point you saw (not used) with everything you had before the failed battle. that's the sort of thing that has a slightly larger footprint, though, since you'd have to make sure the player can't take things 'back in time' with them.
it's the kind of balance that's gonna be different for each person's project, more or less. it seems like a decent starting point to make saves available in some form should the player need them, but at the same time design the game so that they're not strictly needed for smooth progress.
it's the kind of balance that's gonna be different for each person's project, more or less. it seems like a decent starting point to make saves available in some form should the player need them, but at the same time design the game so that they're not strictly needed for smooth progress.
yeah! That's very kind and nice, and fun too!
The only argument left against it is that there might be a power outage or something. Pity you! Buy a nobreak. 99% of applications WILL have you lose all progress if there's a power outage. That's not fault of the software, it's fault of the power outage XD
Although autoquicksaves can prevent that too!
The only argument left against it is that there might be a power outage or something. Pity you! Buy a nobreak. 99% of applications WILL have you lose all progress if there's a power outage. That's not fault of the software, it's fault of the power outage XD
Although autoquicksaves can prevent that too!
There is also the difference between enabling to step out and designing around it.
SMT IV is a great game, but the "dungeons" are cut so short, they lose about any impact they could have.
The last dungeon literally was three rooms. Easy to pick up and stop, yes, but sadly losing all the tension curves inbetween bar a few moments.
SMT IV is a great game, but the "dungeons" are cut so short, they lose about any impact they could have.
The last dungeon literally was three rooms. Easy to pick up and stop, yes, but sadly losing all the tension curves inbetween bar a few moments.
have those things been slapped around as a fix-all solution? i typically use them in my games because they're exploratory and i don't want people to have to redo the duller parts (see: wine & roses walking around)
have those things been slapped around as a fix-all solution? i typically use them in my games because they're exploratory and i don't want people to have to redo the duller parts (see: wine & roses walking around)
I'm not against saving everywhere as a mechanic, but I've saved myself into oblivion enough times in games of all genres to know that it's not objectively the end-be-all of save systems.
Your games are the perfect example of a game that absolutely gain from it, Craze!
The save anywhere function in your games mostly synergizes very well with them!
And yeah there's that too @Felds, but that's mostly once again incoherent and outright bad game design~
I don't think you can save yourself to oblivion in craze's games -- or at least I never have -- for example.
There are things and things that can be done, and many ways to do things. Building something concrete that synergizes well with itself is very very important. Saving everywhere will not always be the best option. But sometimes it will! It is equally as good as having save points or any other save system -- it just depends on the situation.
The save anywhere function in your games mostly synergizes very well with them!
And yeah there's that too @Felds, but that's mostly once again incoherent and outright bad game design~
I don't think you can save yourself to oblivion in craze's games -- or at least I never have -- for example.
There are things and things that can be done, and many ways to do things. Building something concrete that synergizes well with itself is very very important. Saving everywhere will not always be the best option. But sometimes it will! It is equally as good as having save points or any other save system -- it just depends on the situation.
author=Feldschlacht IVI think when the merits of a game mechanic are being discussed, it should be a free assumption that egregiously poor implementations of it have little to do with the merits of the mechanic itself.
I'm not against saving everywhere as a mechanic, but I've saved myself into oblivion enough times in games of all genres to know that it's not objectively the end-be-all of save systems.
Nowadays, I just kind of avoid games which have save points, flat out. I tend to play games on the go and I don't have the luxury of being able to keep playing until the game designer has deemed I'm allowed to stop. More and more gaming is done on the go nowadays and not allowing players to save everywhere is a red flag that the developer is way out of touch with the needs of their players.
I've been considering ways to work in mid-battle saving for just that reason. If the random seed at the start of battle is saved with the game, then no amount of save-scumming will allow the player to just reload if they got an outcome they didn't like.
I don't mind things like quicksaving, though.
I never play games on the go and I'm big into playing games from the comfort of my home setup, so I think it's a matter of subjective perspective as well.
I never play games on the go and I'm big into playing games from the comfort of my home setup, so I think it's a matter of subjective perspective as well.
Pages:
1
