For what it's worth, I am now reinstalling Deus Ex.

Games should be less fatal -- have a wider range of consequences when the
player blunders or is faced with a no win situation. The Hero in the story isnt supposed to die like a fly every other moment. A good game might have a whole selection of amusing/spectacular results and warped situations instead of the usual death result (and reload).

If the game then offered interesting opportunities to get out of the resulting (non-fatal) negative situation then there would be no need for reloads as most consequences would only be temporary (any reloadong would only waste player time).

If the player could creatively use more objects at hand then loss of 'inventory' due to bad choices, wouldnt matter as much.

Of course, the game makers already have enough trouble making a fixed plot line work and trying to not have the player feel like they are being lead by the nose thru the game. More adaptive scripting in future games might be able to achieve
the needed flexibility.

Quote:Original post by Conner McCloud
No, I said that nothing you had said thus far would discourage me from using the feature if it were available.

Then what would discourage you from using it?

Quote:If that's your only reason to implement them, I don't see why you would bother. People who want to still will, and people who don't want to still won't.

Well, by "people", you mean "I". You're looking at it from one perspective. Some of these elements would definitely help me avoid using it. Like I've mentioned, if the game simply acknowledges awareness of quicksave misuse, I'm sold. I don't use reloads to cheat games. I use reloads when games are designed to work with them. If a fun game simply 'tells me' not to use it because it will ruin the experience, I would personally stay away. But if players like you need it to be gone to enjoy it, then I don't see much reason to keep it around.

Quote:You've accomplished nothing except given yourself a warm and fuzzy feeling over pulling one over on those evil cheaters

I could have sworn that I spent several paragraphs making it extremely clear that I don't care about cheaters. If players want to cheat, I want to let them cheat. But I want to make it obvious what cheating is, and what cheating isn't. If someone isn't mature enough to understand how cheating will ruin the experience, then they are not someone who will enjoy my game in the first place.

Quote:That's not to say that all of your ideas have no merit beyond discouraging save/reload cycles. Minimizing the "death penalty" may stand on its own, for instance, as does working death into the overall plot. If you're designing without quick saves in mind, and those make the game more fun, then great.

They're not really my ideas. I may have made them all a little more specific. But all of them other than the last one I accumulated here in this forum in previous topics. I just wanted to share what I've gathered, and sneak in the last one to see how a few people react. Even though death is an important element in my game's plot, it became so out of my original designing needs to avoiding resetting the player.

Quote:But things like adding functionality for people who don't make use of quicksaves doesn't make the game more fun...it makes the game less fun, for people who use quick saves. That benefits nobody.

The idea of giving an incentive for not using reload to rewind I will stick to. Just that it seems impossible to do without having the game world acknowledge the existence of the continue interface, and that definitely can not happen in a serious-mood game like mine.

Quote:But if you do, don't add pointless features just to punish people who chose to make use of it.

I wouldn't. I would add features that continue to expand because of a death. That itself would punish those who want to reload, because they can't use it if they want to see what's going to happen.

Quote:

Quote:Original post by Kest
I'll assume you mean the closest you can do.

Yes. The closest you can do. Just like I said.

...
There's countless things the player can do to "ruin" the game for themselves without going out of your way to rub their faces in it.

You should relax, man. I'm only in here to discover what works and what doesn't. Not to flaunt my all-knowing ideas. There's no reason to become unhinged. And if you're not unhinged, you might want to work on your people communication skills, because you appear to be. I've disagreed with everyone on this forum at least once. If we all agreed, we would all be making the same game. We surely don't want that.

Quote:

Quote:Original post by Kest
By the way, was there actually an incentive to avoid killing everyone in Deus Ex?

It was fun. What more incentive do I need?

I only mentioned it because I've heard of many players attempting it. I myself attempted it after I heard about so many others doing it. I can't remember if I pulled it off or not. Geez, now I'm going to end up reinstalling it too.

Quote:Original post by Kest

Quote:Original post by Timus
Make it so in order to save they have to quit, thats the best way to prevent save/reload/save/reload.

What happens if it crashes?

Could you say that about any save and reload system?

You could also have the game save itself along the way, and keep it in a file that is deleted as soon as you exit the game (without it crashing).

I think you should implement save points. Spread them out far enough that they actually excite the player when he/she reaches one.

Then, allow a "pause & leave" function, where you can pause the state of your game and exit out, but you can't technically save and then keep playing and then reload the state. This way I'm not screwed if I need to run to the bathroom or I simply want to take a break and I haven't reached a save point, but I'm still in jeopardy of dying when I play.

Quote:Original post by Kest
I could have sworn that I spent several paragraphs making it extremely clear that I don't care about cheaters. If players want to cheat, I want to let them cheat. But I want to make it obvious what cheating is, and what cheating isn't. If someone isn't mature enough to understand how cheating will ruin the experience, then they are not someone who will enjoy my game in the first place.

This quote caught my eye, but I've read over most of what you've posted, Kest.

First, I'm curious; Who are you designing this game for?

I'm getting the impression that you want to discourage saving and reloading. I'm not exactly sure why you want to discourage saving and loading, though. From what I can tell, you want death and negative consequence to have a significant impact in your game. But something you have to remember is that not everybody is, well, you. If you make a game that doesn't allow saving and reloading in certain circumstances, that may make the game really intense for you. It might also make it really frustrating and irritating for somebody who's not at the game's "designed" skill level.

What baffles me the most is the attitude you seem to have towards saving and reloading, though. You seem to be fine with it, just so long as it degrades the person using it. Sorry for being blunt, but that's really what it seems like. Making it "cheating". Making it so that "Jack can mock the player". Making it a "Play mode with a degraded name". Making it "immature". On one hand, you're arguing that you've got no problem with cheaters, but on the other hand, some of your arguments seem to revolve around negative association with cheaters. It's one thing to base a design choice around, well, good design. It's another to base a design choice around personal feelings and preferences. Be very, very careful of that.

But, this is mostly opinion rambling, with very little actual advice. That's not very helpful of me, so, here. If you want to discourage saving and loading truly because you believe it'll have a negative effect on the enjoyment of the game (and not just because you feel certain play styles should be looked down upon,) the key is to give yourself reasonable ground to stand on. How about this; Reduce the frequency and severity of the consequences of bad decisions. A bad decision should be rectifiable. A bad decision should be survivable. A bad decision should not be punished brutally. But it really does depend on your game, I guess.

But please, whatever you do, either allow saving and loading, or disallow saving and loading, but don't allow it, and then degrade the people who want to use it. Aside from deterring potential customers and players, it's also extremely distasteful, and, as some might even argue, unethical.

Best of luck.

Postal 2 (a game that, funnily enough, is illegal in New Zealand. I believe the consquences for owning it are on the same level as child pornography. This infomation got to about 0% of the population before the demo was freely available on the internet) mocked players for saving too often. It kinda fit the tone of the game though. It definately broke the forth wall.