• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

What is it with console ports and bloody check points

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

thejunglegod

Golden Member
Feb 12, 2012
1,356
34
91
Opposite is true for me, nothing takes me out of the game more than dying, being put back 10-15 minutes and having to re-do the same section over and over, the flow of the game and story become non-linear, imagine having to watch the same part of a movie or read the same part of a book, over and over...it makes for extremely bad immersion.
No game puts you back 10-15 mins. Atleast not these days w.r.t console ports. What it does though, is put you back in the beginning of a fight sequence which IMO is pretty good so that you can get the continuity and feel as it is a complete sequence. Now if you quicksave, then it's a terrible tragedy if it's a firefight and you're in the middle of a mess. You kill 2 guys, F5, jump to cover, F5, Poke ur head out and shoot, miss, F9, reshoot, kill, F5....that is just utter nonsense and it feels like shit. As i mentioned earlier, the best savegame system was in ME3 and all games must incorporate the same IMO.
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,085
105
106
Both the quick saves and check points systems have their advantages and disadvantages, of course mostly depending on the game itself, rather than the systems as a whole. It also has to do with the death penalty in gaming. In some games, quick saves shouldn't have been possible, but in PC games how can you prevent players from saving at any time and anywhere other than by "forcing in" a check point system and pretending as a developer that it was all part of the 'artistic vision'?

Will gamers claim it's unjustifiable or inexcusable when it usually takes so little space on their hard-drive in today's standardized 1TB+ HDD space? Will they (gamers) be able to objectively exclude space on their HDD as a seperate technological aspect of PC hardware that has nothing to do with the vision that the developers had (or might have had) when it comes down to "how they want you as a player to play the game"? Did the devs implement a check point system in that last game you played because they thought that it'd make it more challenging? Or because on the other hand they thought that a quick saves system would have made it blatantly too easy?

Fictitious conversation between a player and a development team guy...

---
Player: "Dude! Why can't I quick save?!"
Dev: "Because we created a check point system for this game."
Player: "It sucks! My hard-drive is like... 1TB large why can't I just quick save?"
Dev: "Because we created a check point system for this game."
Player: "Look man you don't get it, if I want to save like... 'between' your stupid check points 'cause my mom made me dinner and I got to go eat, I mean can't I just like... just save?! My HDD man! MY Freak. 'In. H. D. D. is 1 Tera. Freakin'. Bytes large!"
Dev: "Because we created a check point system for this game."
Player: "K... cool... alright, so you're saying it's like part of your 'le vision is carved in rock' artistic decision shenanigan blabbing mumbo jumbo stuff?"
Dev: "Because we crea- ... oh, yes, indeed it was part of our vision."
Player: "Your game suck!"
Dev: "We cannot make games that will please all gamers."
Player: "Whatever man..."
---

This subject brings me back when I was playing Mario Brothers, in all honesty. To this day, I still remember when missing a jump and falling down that space between two platforms leading to my poor Mario's death, that how "fun" it would be if we'd be able to just "pause" the game and save it there (before any tough jump) for later attempts. I often associated the "fact" that "most" console games seemed (or literally were) usually more difficult than most games today (be it on PC or not, although on PC today games are mostly console ports) exactly because we couldn't just "come back at it" whenever we felt like it because we'd been able to save our progress at will and save our game right before a boss fight, or anywhere we wished. We usually "had to" complete most games under one hours-long sitting, or if not to complete it, it'd be to reach "the next check point". And, of course, we had to rely on map codes for progression, much like or identical to the Mega Man series for example.

Curiously enough it seems that back in the days (say... during the 8-Bit and 16-Bit days mostly) it just wasn't an issue in itself, we were used to it since of course it was pretty much the only way we had to progress in our games, save for a few exceptions here and there. If we died, we'd be sent back at the start of the level, or back at some "far away" check point. When the whole "saving anywhere and anytime" buzz became more common and got implemented in more games then the check point system started to get frowned upon... but it wasn't that bad of a deal prior. So... what did people want "from the start"? To save time and never realized it until the quick saves opened their eyes? Did they find their games to be more enjoyable or easier and therefore "better" because they could save, and move away from their monitor and come back whenever they felt like it rather than feeling "obliged" to play?

I suspect that this whole debate concerning which one of the progression-saving systems are the best is due to the fact that most of us gamers are simply getting older and just can't find the will, motivation, or can't in ourselves find enough patience as much as we might have had in the past to just sit there in front of our monitor (or television) for hours and "just play" until you need to go pee. That, and, of course, also because as time passed and as we grew up our life style changed, most of us have a job even if it's a partial time job, we don't have as much free time to burn out "just for the heck of it" to play a game as much as we used to. We have other obligations, or occupations, etc. When many of us sit down to play a game we want to play knowing that whenever we have to, or feel like it, that we can just press F5, stand up, stretch our poor old muscles a bit without breaking bones or snapping a ligament or two and go wash the dishes, take the dog out for a walk or go check if our meal isn't about to get torched in the oven.

There's that article I read recently that claimed that most gamers today are in their late twenties (28+) if not already thirty or even past that by now... that brings most of us to the Atari and 8-Bit days when we were those little kids able to sustain a sleepless night or two and laughing at our bed thinking how useless it was to sleep while playing our beloved games. It's not the same now is it? The point is, we had time, and energy enough to sell some back for the third world countries to help their growth. But there's something interesting to consider, of course, and that is the technology in relation to memory capacity in the hardware of the time. So, I have to ask myself and just randomly throw out this question that's now stuck in my head for you guys to scratch your heads with if you want... well it's a couple of questions mixed in for a general idea and I'm wondering now...

If during those 8-Bit and 16-Bit days (example) our consoles (or cartridges, whatever) had the space capacity to hold any amount of saved game files, do you think that the developers back then would have relied on the check points and passwords-to-progress systems as much as they did, if at all? Or would they have still kept their check points system intact exactly because technological limitations never was part of the whole scheme of things and in fact the only thing that ever mattered for them was to provide a "better challenge" via the famous (or infamous) check points system?

I'll leave on these words.
 
Last edited:

Whirlwind

Senior member
Nov 4, 2006
467
0
71
No reason for any game not to have a quick save option, IMHO.

Check points saves make the game seem longer , as you have to replay stuff that shouild not be necessary.
 

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,695
3
0
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it kept on both? First and foremost it's saved to your HD, and then the save is uploaded to the cloud. If you play the game on another computer, the save downloads from the cloud to your HD. Vice versa, versa visa.
When I try to load a game the only option to load from is "Steam cloud",
 

darkewaffle

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2005
8,152
1
81
I think both styles have their place in game design. Freely saving at any time is so easily abused and I think forces developers to adjust encounters as such. Ninja Gaiden wouldn't have been Ninja Gaiden with a quick save and I think it would have had an overall negative impact on the game as it's design could have been compromised to account for one if it existed. I think for action oriented games, part of the challenge is being able to complete an entire obstacle/encounter in one go without the luxury of that safety net.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Quicksaving definitely takes you away from complete game immersion. I remember how i kept hitting F5 over and over and over in the golden days till a point that it became an integral part of my keyboard.

Well placed checkpoints are brilliant, something like what Mass Effect does, you can quicksave in the open world, but in between battles, there are checkpoints.

And about MP3, lets not just rant about it more please. The enemy AI was scripted and blended well with the cinematic feel of the game. Adding a quicksave option would've seriosuly spoilt the fun IMO.
they did an experiment at Princeton wherein they installed a micro-chip in the brain of a male chimp. When activated, the chip stimulated the pleasure center of the chimp's brain causing the effect of an orgasm. They wired the chip to activate when a red button in the Chimp's cage was hit. Once the Chimp figured out that he could hit the red button, it was a very short time before he died of a pleasure over dose.

See that red button in your cage marked F5? Don't hit it.

Personally, I don't always have as much free time as I would like. The Quick save anywhere allows me to get into and out of the game at a moment's notice. so if I all of the sudden realize that, oh say. The Cat is on fire, I don't have to worry about losing the last 20 minutes of game play.

I still play my DS. I am currently going through one of the Castlevania games where the save points are few and far between. I can't tell you how annoying it is that I have to re-do over and over again the same areas because either I get killed or simply don't have the time to find the next save point before I have to shut the game off.
 
Last edited:

GrumpyMan

Diamond Member
May 14, 2001
5,692
201
106
I don't like having to go back and re-watch the cut scene before you can replay the level if killed. Like in DEx HR. Hated that, just let me fight the Boss again without having to press Escape or some nonsense like that.
 

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,695
3
0
I don't like having to go back and re-watch the cut scene before you can replay the level if killed. Like in DEx HR. Hated that, just let me fight the Boss again without having to press Escape or some nonsense like that.
Tell me about it. When I first played ME it was on the 360, and I went to see Benezia much too early. I must have played that battle 10 times one night and died every time.

But that wasn't the most frustrating part. Having to go through the cutscene/dialogue before every attempt made me want to bash my head in with the controller.

When I did eventually replay ME on PC I did every other quest (+ all of the sidequests I could find) before finally heading to Noveria.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Tell me about it. When I first played ME it was on the 360, and I went to see Benezia much too early. I must have played that battle 10 times one night and died every time.

But that wasn't the most frustrating part. Having to go through the cutscene/dialogue before every attempt made me want to bash my head in with the controller.

When I did eventually replay ME on PC I did every other quest (+ all of the sidequests I could find) before finally heading to Noveria.
I had a similar experience with ME. Got caught having to go through this cut scene over and over and over because I couldn't win the battle and I couldn't just leave and come back later. I get that cut scenes usually happen just before major battles, but..... Auto save just after so you have the choice to skip without a lot of surpassing the cut scene.
 

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,695
3
0
Can you save during combat in ME? I don't remember, but I can't believe I wouldn't have tried to do that.
 

PrayForDeath

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
3,489
0
76
Mafia 2 and Max Payne 3 are both the same. I love the games, but on a hard level, I just have to turn it off. I end up having to do about 10 minutes of level I've already done because it kicks you back miles.

Compare this to Crysis and Half life etc where you get selective save points. I believe this is much better. OK so it makes it easier but I believe much better.


Surely it can't be hard to integrate a save game option?

Just downloaded dues X from steam the newer one. Hopefully this will be more save friendly.

End rant/, lol. Anyone else frustrated with this, or do you believe it just adds to difficulty and encourages more realistic, staying alive, type behaviour?
Luckily for you, Dues Ex: HR has quick save/load.

I think Hard Reset handled checkpoints extremely well.
 

CountZero

Golden Member
Jul 10, 2001
1,796
36
86
No game puts you back 10-15 mins. Atleast not these days w.r.t console ports. What it does though, is put you back in the beginning of a fight sequence which IMO is pretty good so that you can get the continuity and feel as it is a complete sequence. Now if you quicksave, then it's a terrible tragedy if it's a firefight and you're in the middle of a mess. You kill 2 guys, F5, jump to cover, F5, Poke ur head out and shoot, miss, F9, reshoot, kill, F5....that is just utter nonsense and it feels like shit. As i mentioned earlier, the best savegame system was in ME3 and all games must incorporate the same IMO.
Then don't do it? If you don't like playing that way then don't. The mere existence of that system does not compel you to use it. If you can't resist the urge then I don't know what to tell you.

A similar situation are the presence of cheat codes/console commands. The existence of them is something some people like to mess with but you don't have to use them.

The best system is to have both. Autosaves/checkpoints and the ability to save whenever. When I know there is an autosave/checkpoint system I rarely manually save except when exiting the game but if I am having issues somewhere I can cut out the retry time by saving closer to the problem.
 

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
When I try to load a game the only option to load from is "Steam cloud",
Right, which it has to download from first in order to access. There is a little file saved in your Steam folder that gets downloaded from the cloud in order to be used. Once you save and exit the game, it gets re-uploaded again.
 

Wyndru

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2009
7,318
4
76
I abuse saves in skyrim. Way too many saves. And not even quick saves because I'm worried during a battle I'm going to save it after I kill somebody I shouldn't have.

So I basically have gigs of save files for the game, and yes I do feel like I'm cheating but I don't have the time to keep doing large segments of the game over and over each time I die.
 

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,695
3
0
Right, which it has to download from first in order to access. There is a little file saved in your Steam folder that gets downloaded from the cloud in order to be used. Once you save and exit the game, it gets re-uploaded again.
Where is the save then? Now I'm curious.

I checked my steam folder and I can't find it. It's not in documents either.
 

Pray To Jesus

Diamond Member
Mar 14, 2011
3,642
0
0
Yea who cares if a gamer spoils himself by quicksaving.

It's his game. Let him do as he pleases!
 

exdeath

Lifer
Jan 29, 2004
13,679
10
81
I still play on my DS from time to time. I am currently playing through one of the Castlevania games (can't remember which one) and am encountering this exact thing. I can't save anywhere I want and there are LONG stretches between save points in this particular game. Means, if I die (and the game is designed to be tough-ish). You have to go and re-do it all over again.
Wait what?! You mean the boss doesn't kill himself in a FMV anyway, give you a gold star, and refill your life for you if you f**k up?
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
Half-Life 1 had some fairly tough battles and it was save anywhere.

Save anywhere doesn't always mean cakewalk.
 

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,695
3
0
Now that I think about it: The checkpoint system in the original Tomb Raider with the floating blue crystals made the game more fun and intense than the "save anywhere" option in the later TR games.

I thought they spaced them out really well.
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,038
12,816
126
I abuse saves in skyrim. Way too many saves. And not even quick saves because I'm worried during a battle I'm going to save it after I kill somebody I shouldn't have.

So I basically have gigs of save files for the game, and yes I do feel like I'm cheating but I don't have the time to keep doing large segments of the game over and over each time I die.
Yeah theres way too much busy work in every section of the game. I dont wanna have to loot everything all over again, thats not fun. Killing bad guys is fun. Fucking your wife (with the right mods) is fun.
Inventory management is a pain, whether buying, selling, or just shuffling items around in your house.

Still waiting for a good Sort mod.
 

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
Then don't do it? If you don't like playing that way then don't. The mere existence of that system does not compel you to use it. If you can't resist the urge then I don't know what to tell you.

A similar situation are the presence of cheat codes/console commands. The existence of them is something some people like to mess with but you don't have to use them.

The best system is to have both. Autosaves/checkpoints and the ability to save whenever. When I know there is an autosave/checkpoint system I rarely manually save except when exiting the game but if I am having issues somewhere I can cut out the retry time by saving closer to the problem.
I think you are missing the point. clearly the mere existence of these things DOES compel that poster to use them. it's called lack of self control.

And I agree, the BEST system would be something that auto saved at key points spaced far enough so that some people can derive a challenge from them without auto saving, yet still allow others who want to save every 3 steps that option. It's a game. Not life or death. If people WANT to cheat or use OP Strategies (particularly in single player mode) let them. More fun for them and no skin off everyone else's nose. Live and let live.
 

thejunglegod

Golden Member
Feb 12, 2012
1,356
34
91
they did an experiment at Princeton wherein they installed a micro-chip in the brain of a male chimp. When activated, the chip stimulated the pleasure center of the chimp's brain causing the effect of an orgasm. They wired the chip to activate when a red button in the Chimp's cage was hit. Once the Chimp figured out that he could hit the red button, it was a very short time before he died of a pleasure over dose. See that red button in your cage marked F5? Don't hit it.
You are very learned and smart to put that in, aren't you? Something that is completely irrelevant to whatever the thread is about. That is all that you do here, isn't it? Undermining everyone else and posting ridiculous stories about monkeys and orgasms just to show how well read you are. I've always wondered why all your posts constitute at least two paragraphs. Now I know why. I'm not making this personal. You did by comparing me to a monkey, whereas you could've just not agreed with my opinion or could've been more normal about it.

Again, you mentioned that you don't want to go and replay 20 mins of gameplay. I want to know which game this is that doesnt have a checkpoint within a max of probably 5-10 mins or before there is a big firefight where death is apparent. Can I please know? Because there hasn't been a single game which forces you to go that far back. If there is then I do not know about it, please enlighten me. But please no more comparisons to horny monkeys.
 
Last edited:

thespyder

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2006
1,979
0
0
You are very learned and smart to put that in, aren't you? Something that is completely irrelevant to whatever the thread is about. That is all that you do here, isn't it? Undermining everyone else and posting ridiculous stories about monkeys and orgasms just to show how well read you are. I've always wondered why all your posts constitute at least two paragraphs. Now I know why. I'm not making this personal. You did by comparing me to a monkey, whereas you could've just not agreed with my opinion or could've been more normal about it.

Again, you mentioned that you don't want to go and replay 20 mins of gameplay. I want to know which game this is that doesnt have a checkpoint within a max of probably 5-10 mins or before there is a big firefight where death is apparent. Can I please know? Because there hasn't been a single game which forces you to go that far back. If there is then I do not know about it, please enlighten me. But please no more comparisons to horny monkeys.
So I was trying to be ironic and to point out the flaw in your logic. Not be insulting as you have chosen to be. My story was intended to say exactly that if you don't like the instant save any time, don't use it. don't force others to play as you do merely because you have no self control.

As for picking a game, does it really matter? Pick Tomb Raider. Or any other game that has a fixed save point scheme. Regardless of if it is 2 minutes or 10, if you have to play that same 2 minutes over and over again, it can get frustrating. and I have played games that have resulted in hours of extra game play merely because of a fixed save point. No exaggeration. It is an artificial extension and nothing more.

I am sorry that I offended you. That was not my intent. But it doesn't change the fact that fixed save points appeal to one type of player and save any time (with potentially an addition of fixed save points) can appeal to all types of players. It's a game. Don't get over emotional about it. Play the way that makes you happy and let others play the way that makes them happy.
 

thejunglegod

Golden Member
Feb 12, 2012
1,356
34
91
So I was trying to be ironic and to point out the flaw in your logic. Not be insulting as you have chosen to be. My story was intended to say exactly that if you don't like the instant save any time, don't use it. don't force others to play as you do merely because you have no self control.
You advised me not to hit that red F5 button, and w.r.t to your story, I do not see how that is NOT insulting.

Regardless of if it is 2 minutes or 10, if you have to play that same 2 minutes over and over again, it can get frustrating.
So you do keep hitting the F5 button over and over again as per the quoted statement above, so how are you different from me bashing th F5 button repeatedly?

I did not want you to apologise my friend. It was just that your story about the monkey was something totally out of the blue and the comparison pissed me off to no end. I mentioned in my earlier posts that there are certain games that use a save option very well, something like ME3 or The Witcher2. It allows you to quicksave as well as there are standard checkpoints before the start of a boss battle or in between stages of a boss battle.
I don't want this to be blown out of proportion as it happens in every other thread.
PEACE.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
COWCAT PC Games 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY