Ghad - checkpoints but no game save why

[gorfias]

Just wondering why y'all think there are games with checkpoints but no way to save some games. In particular, I just picked up Killzone for PS4 for $17 used from Gamestop. I was forwarned:


I figure that cheap, what the heck. I'll enjoy it for what I can get. So far, using a wingman is a little complicated, I have to learn a new control scheme but gameplay is fun and satisfying early on and it is gorgeous. A real chance to see what, even this early on, the PS4 is capable of. BUUUUUUT

I'm a family guy that may have to stop what I'm doing at any moment. I need the ability to save a game fast. And yet, games like this will not let me.

Why do you think that is? The Killzone single campaign should be as long as most FPS games. Is this done to make the game seem longer by making me replay over and over again every time I start up because I couldn't save the game previously? Is there something about the programming that necessitates no saves?

I'm wondering because I have to think, the inability to save the game has to hurt sales. Seems so stupid. It chases people like me away from paying full price anyway. Your thoughts?

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

It's been a thing with first person shooters for awhile now. You could save whenever you wanted in the classic FPS of the 90's, but I remember around the time of Medal of Honour and Call of Duty became the popular franchises, there were no longer any options to save in the middle of missions. Halo probably did the same, but I'm not familiar with those games.

As for why it happened. I dunno. Maybe it was an attempt at creating an artificial difficulty? Perhaps there was some limitations on the old PS2/Xbox software that prevented manual saving during missions? (I highly doubt it). I couldn't really tell you. But just like regenerating health and arbitrary weapon limitations, it's an evolution from the 90's FPS games that certainly was not beneficial.

EDIT: Related to the topic, does Shadow Warrior 2013 and the new Wolfenstein have the option to save mid-level? I'd imagine so as they're both new games of classic 90's FPS series and have been recieved better than Duke Nukem: Forever was.

 

[ZeroFarks]

Answer: Because every computer FPS made in the last ten years has been a cheap console-port afterthought.

 

[gorfias]

Halo probably did the same, but I'm not familiar with those games.

At least Halo had generous checkpoints. You lost almost no time ending where you were. Other FPS in the new millennium have had save and quit. You couldn't save and continue, but that was something missing from KZ4

 

[DoPo]

Answer: Because every computer FPS made in the last ten years has been a cheap console-port afterthought.

Wolfenstein The New Order
Hard Reset
Sniper Elite
E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy
Left 4 Dead
Planetside
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
Black Mesa
Team Fortress 2
Payday
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Natural Selection 2
Half-Life 2 Episode 1,2
Quake Live
Tribes: Ascend

Off the top of my head, in no particular order.

EDIT: Actually, I now realised Quake Live may or may not qualify, depending on the definition of "made".

 

[Recusant]

Perhaps there was some limitations on the old PS2/Xbox software that prevented manual saving during missions? (I highly doubt it). I couldn't really tell you.

I seriously doubt this was it; the original Phantasy Star had save-anywhere capability, and that was on Sega Master System (that predated the Genesis) in 1987. Granted that those machines didn't have loading screens, either, but I don't think we've regressed that far, technologically speaking.

 

[WhiteWolfe]

I wonder if the highly scripted cinematic nature of modern FPS's requires some sort of checkpoint system to ensure that everything works properly. If you could save at anytime, perhaps there's a problem with being in the middle of a script and the game not being able to handle it?

That's sounds more like poor programming to me, but I make web pages/databases not video games so I'm not going to judge.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

It's a console affectation. Big publishers evidently don't trust console gamers to be able to save a game for themselves so they do it automatically. And since the majority of games now are cross-platform/console ports, it carries over to the PC.

There is *one* valid reason I can think of for checkpoints vs. allowing the player to save their own game. It forces the player to complete a given section of the game in one go. Now that can be both a good and bad thing. It can mean that a player who successfully gets through said section did so from the checkpoint and completed the challenge as it was "intended". OTOH, it can also mean a player has to repeat a particularly difficult section again and again and again since they are unable to save their progress partway between starting it and finishing it (eg. if the hard part comes later on, many minutes after the checkpoint).

Personally, I loathe checkpoints and autosaves as a sole source of saving progress. I do not mind if there's an autosave supplementing a manual save option but I absolutely hate it when a game doesn't let me save when I wish. It is poor design that forces me to replay content I've already played. I resent games that lack manual saves and am automatically less likely to play one and think of it negatively for it. If the checkpoints are generous and frequent, it's not quite so bad but I still hate it.

Not having a manual save option is however only the second cardinal sin game developers can make. In order of how bad they are, my biggest gripes with poor design choices are:

- No option to change FoV (stuck on console FoV): I won't even play this game. If I cannot play at a reasonable FoV, I don't care how good the game looks or what reviews said about it, I won't touch it and the developers can shove it up their arses.
- No manual save: Stupid design choice, but happens too often to write off all games that commit this sin. If I have to repeat anything too often tho, it's uninstall for you.
- Can't remap buttons/no extra mouse buttons: Why for example, can most games recognise my mouse's thumb buttons, but many do not? Because developers of these games are incompetent and can't code a PC game properly. The irony here is that they likely used a PC to code the thing in the first place, which actually makes their incompetence even more amazing.

PS. I suppose it does also prevent "save-scumming" by simply eliminating the save system entirely.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

I've never played the game, so I'm a little unclear about how the check point system works. Is the problem that it doesn't allow you to save at any arbitrary time with, for example, a quick save key? Or is the problem that it doesn't even load up the last check point when you turn off the game? As in, even if you get half way through a level and pass several check points, restarting the game will force you back to the start of the level.

If it's the lack of being able to just save the game at any time, that's not really a problem at all. Many games don't have that feature, and with games that do it basically becomes Save Scumming: The Game. Plus, it does often make it more difficult to program, since you need to be able to completely recreate the state from the save file. This means it needs to be able to handle any strange situation, (right in the middle of entering/exiting a vehicle, in the middle of animations, in the middle of AI tasks etc.) Many games do provide this feature, but it can be a lot of work just to let people cheat.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Just another ancient development direction that lazy devs don't want to make better.
Oh but it's so hard... ya PC devs have only figured it out about 30 years ago, couldn't possibly keep up with that blistering speed of progress.
Oh but you could cheat, that would be the players choice, and they could just as well add an option where you can't load your saves at will. But that is just far too outlandish when the devs can't even figure out what a fucking save state is.

 

[Chester Rabbit]

I don't know but it sure pisses me off when playing Bioshock Infinite!

 

[Crash_7]

I don't know but it sure pisses me off when playing Bioshock Infinite!

Yep, that was a game that immediately came to mind when I saw this thread. You don't die a lot in that game, but if you do, the checkpoints are so far apart that you're pretty much forced to allow Elizabeth to revive you.