Save game is the mark of weak game design

declspec · 2002-05-24T08:27:59

i submit a perfect game would have no save/load feature. it would be designed such that somehow the player sucked up loss as part of the game thought of it as actually fun. a toy. But the perfect game has yet to be found and i also submit _isnt_ possible. but based on the above i invoke that a games design can be measured by how little you have to save/load. less theoretical and more practically speaking. Baldurs gate is ruined by the save anywhere feature. Contrast BG with FF1. In ff1 you had long walks from saves to key battles and the entire _fun_ after wards was not the battle but getting back to where you could save. the drama was intense. every step was carefully considered after doing something good. Baldurs gate however was save fight save fight save fight load fight save. Somepeople say well you didnt have to do that. but fighting to death without save forces you to do that. also the game designers job is to hand a consistant experience to the players imo. Consider the early nintendo wizardry. this is nintendo 1. AUTO SAVE. i now submit there is a certain element of _balls_ in early game design. In that first wizardry death was death. a party that was wiped was lost unless you formed some back up to go get them. "ya but i didnt like that" I now finally submit that some of the popularity of online games comes from the sense of consequence. the sense that you dont get another shot adds drama to the experience. And lastly i would like to point out there is truth to what im saying. That its sort of a design cop-out to make your work into save load save load. there is no faith in the entire game experience. the challenge and the fun. BG is the finest example its so strong in my mind. there is no doubt in my mind that BG would have benefited from a "save only in town" rule that was prevalent in early gaming. [edited by - declspec on May 11, 2002 8:47:34 PM]

Game Design and Theory Game Design

Started by declspec May 11, 2002 07:47 PM

161 comments, last by declspec 22 years, 9 months ago

MadKeithV

992

May 24, 2002 07:48 AM

Joe, please read the thread before responding, because that particular point has been covered in-depth on several occasions within the thread already.

Save and continue is not an infraction upon gameplay, it is perfectly acceptable in all circumstances. It''s Save/lose/reload that''s under discussion.

Try finding my first post in this thread, I think that''s a good starting point for an objective analysis followed by my own personal subjective ideas.

It''s really good subject matter that goes a lot deeper than just "you can''t live without saves".

It's only funny 'till someone gets hurt.And then it's just hilarious.Unless it's you.

Bitmeizer

122

May 24, 2002 07:56 AM

quote:
Original post by Joe Lacko
The busy modern intrusive technologically advanced world of today makes "save anywhere" features absolutely necessary... I'm not interested in playing for 20+ minutes, being summoned suddenly from my PC and unable to immediately return, without the ability to resume playing from where I left off.

I don't think anyone is disputing the need for the ability to resume real life mid-game. The issue under debate is (primarily) whether allowing players to save arbitrarily and reload to those savepoints at will is a good thing.

------------------
Never play leapfrog with unicorns.

[edited by - Bitmeizer on May 24, 2002 9:17:17 AM]

------------------Never play leapfrog with unicorns.

Anonymous

May 24, 2002 08:27 AM

It seems all the people who used to post at fatbabies now visit gamedev alot. nice.. very nice..

Save game is the mark of weak game design

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Save game is the mark of weak game design

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines