Here''s something I''ve just thought up. How about an RPG that never let you save? The game would allocate storage space for each new game started. When you exit the game, the program would save your current progress. When you run the game again, the program would pick up where you left off. You would not be able to save or load mid-game. The program would not exit without saving the current position (except in the event of a crash). There would be no multiple saves for a character - any other saves would be for other characters. Obviously there would be various technical problems to address. In gameplay terms though, everything would suddenly become more serious. You could not turn back the clock, any actions you make would be accompanied by the full consequences - and you would have to live with it. If you kill someone, he''s dead - no matter how much you need him back. If you get caught thieving, you''re marked for life, and cursed to live in the shadows. Diplomats would take on a whole new dimension, allowing the charismatic character to try to smooth over old wounds and seek to remove the stains of the past. Obviously, there would have to be something that ensures that when the character dies, the player needn''t totally restart (after all, there''s supposed to be risk in whatever you have to do to complete the game). Perhaps some pact with the necromancers... ...perhaps you awake on some altar, bereft of all equipment except perhaps that which is magical, with a week''s game time having passed (perhaps that city you were supposed to help protect by poisoning the enemy army''s commander has now been destroyed due to your failure - things could become really quite epic in their consequences). What do people think?

The suggestion made at the end there is similar to what happens in Planescape Torment. Diablo 2 allows you to play this way on Blizzard's server, also. An interesting idea, and I'm wondering if we won't see more of that in the future. If someone could capture the essence of games like Nethack, which has this type of save game feature, and put some interesting graphics and keep Nethack's intricate game play, I think they'd have a winner. Diablo has some of those elements, but does not contain anything near the intricacies of Nethack when it comes to game play.

I mean, how many games do you know where you can accidentally kill your pet dog with an egg while hallucinating and levitating?



Edited by - Mandrake2112 on January 22, 2001 10:29:34 AM

Firstly, I do think it''s a decent idea.

There are, however, many things to think about.

First, I think we''d all agree that this would work best w/ a "story-based" game.

Secondly, I believe it work best with a game that gives the player many ways to complete a single goal, and many possible goals to complete. In other words, if a game is terribly linear, then it''s just plain boring to keep going over the same steps every time you have to restart (assuming you were to die).

Also, I think that a game that utilizes this sort of system should not use random combat encounters that could result in death. If anything results in death it should be part of some larger story/quest/mission, or it should be a result of the player initiating the combat.





"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

This is the way most MMORPGs do it, isn't it?

JoeDark

Edited by - JoeDark on January 22, 2001 1:33:05 PM

quote:
Ravanon:

Obviously there would be various technical problems to address.

The one that I would point out is how easy it is to turn the computer off when you realise you''ve made a poor decision. The time it takes to reboot the computer and reload the software isn''t a big deterant. I seem to remember doing this over and over playing older RPGs from the mid 80s.

I understand the reson for doing this though. It''s not a bad idea. I would say the critical thing would be the ability to undo the effects of your previous actions. Especially if they were the result of luck over the players skill. If I know full well that every action I take can''t be undone, then I''d like to know before hand if I can disarm that trap ahead, rather than leave it up to some ''dice'' roll I never see behind the computer.

This does bring us to another issue. Should we as designers be so dictating as to force players to stick w/ their decisions, or should we just allow them to be "hard-core" and choose to save or stick w/ decisions on their own.

I remember a notice in the manual for Daggerfall that mentioned that if something in the story happens it''s usually more fun just to go w/ it. If you get killed because of some monster in a dungeon then saving & restarting is fine, but when something happens in the story to just go with it.

Some people will listen to them, some won''t. Is it our job to force them?



"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

You could also think of the game experience as a "Sitcom" type experience. The example you gave, only stores when exits game, is a save game of some type.

What about absolutely no kind of save whatsoever? Instead, the game is designed so that any experience lasts for no longer than 30 minutes. The player can come along, play for 30 minutes (a decent amount of time before their mind starts to wander) then leave and forget about it till next time.

Whether you design it so that 30 minutes is a mission in a story (like the bold and the beautiful etc) or if each 30 minute session is totally different and is downloaded from the net when you fire up the game is optional IMHO.



Drew "remnant" Chambers
Game Designer
Irrational Games

I think I suggested something like this before, not being able to Save&Continue. A similar alternative is a limited number of Save&Continues, just in case there''s a place which is too hard to get through attempts (which hopefully won''t happen). I didn''t think of the reboot thing, though. Even if progress was saved almost very often, that might make the player all the quicker going for the fat button.

My favourite experiment with the save game feature was with Resident Evil. Handing out the ability to save as a reward for accomplishing tasks was an excellent idea. This can be taken further and should be in my opinion. A characters stat or xp could be a modifier for saving somehow or something. Just babbling now. Maybe you can have different types of saves too.

A designer doesnt need to know everything about code, they just have to have an appreciation for its limitations and how those limitations affect features they may wish to include in their design. - Drew

Good thinking!

(((((((ZULU)))))))