On saving; Where's the line?

[Maxtro]

"Quick saves" were the only way I was able to get through Dark Souls.

PC version. Right before a boss I'd tab out and copy my save file and I was sure to have multiple copies of my save file. There was simply no way I was going to run from the bonfire to a boss that I would need multiple attempts at to finally beat it. I thought of it as the same thing as having a save point right before the boss room.

I also had a program that would auto-save every 10 minutes. Just in case something happened and I lost all my souls.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Uh...

Save States: (snip)

Not really. What you're talking about is 'save scumming', which admittedly is generally what save states are used for, but that doesn't alter the probability of the game itself, which... I'll touch on later.

i was under the impression save scumming was an unofficial saving technique wherein you copy a save file out of a permadeath game, and paste it back in to manually save in a game without official saves? though i guess it's definition has evolved to the modern definition of 'abusing save states'. i'll update my vocabulary. -.-;; but as far as i'm aware save states and the modern definition of save scumming is pretty equatable. since as we agree, that's pretty much what they're used for.

Save scumming refers to the practice of saving and reloading in order to achieve a favorable outcome. This is largely used before an event that is randomly generated. For example, in the Fallout New Vegas expansion Honest Hearts, there exist a set of boxes that have the potential to spawn a number of items the most valuable of which, arguably, are skill books. Saving before entering the cave that holds the box allows you to reset the contents of the box in an attempt to get a favorable drop of supplies.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Thats a good way of explaining why hardcore players are almost always the best...they keep trying and learning until they can get past the problem. The reason they end up on a higher table is because many other people try to take whatever advantage they can and skip parts of a games challenge wheras the hardcore player has intimate empyrical knowledge of every section having bashed their heads against it enough times.

I can see your opinion...you 'could' do it but don't have the time...but that doesn't compare with 'has' done it and that is why hardcore players always come across as the best.

Wait...I'm confused here.

How is it that they are getting better because they keep playing the part until they finally get past it but when I do the same thing (I just save right after getting past the problem so that I don't have to keep doing the same problem over and over and over again), I'm not? We've both completed the same exact section with the same exact skill sets.

Unless our definitions of save stating are different, save stating doesn't let me skip past the challenging parts...

Nope, it lets you break down, for example, a 20 guy combat into 20 single guy combats. I have no idea if that is what you meant with your post but it was my inkling of that idea that sparked my response. I know enough people who will happily kill 3 guys, run round a corner and quick save until they can work out how to kill the next set of guys and then repeat to get past tough sections. This is more a problem with PC gamers than console simply because most PC games have the 'cheating' save system i love to berate

The reason i mention the hardcore gamers is because they will work with the checkpoints or even do the whole level in one go and restart if they die. That type of gameplay improves your overall skills wheras 'gaming' your way past a challenge means the next time you get there you are basically starting from scratch. I do wonder if that is why most people don't replay their games...the second playthrough, even on hardest setting, is always easier than the first simply because you know where people are, how they will react and how you can counter it.

The other reason i mention hardcore gamers is because it pisses casual gamers off no end

 

[CannibalCorpses]

"Quick saves" were the only way I was able to get through Dark Souls.

PC version. Right before a boss I'd tab out and copy my save file and I was sure to have multiple copies of my save file. There was simply no way I was going to run from the bonfire to a boss that I would need multiple attempts at to finally beat it. I thought of it as the same thing as having a save point right before the boss room.

I also had a program that would auto-save every 10 minutes. Just in case something happened and I lost all my souls.

*gasps*

You played a game that was 'supposed' to be really hard and then cheated your way past the thing that makes it so harsh and annoying...

...at least your honest about it though. *applauds*

 

[Vegosiux]

This is more a problem with PC gamers than console simply because most PC games have the 'cheating' save system i love to berate

This is pretty much the only thing anything interesting might develop out of...I'd wonder just why you love to berate it? I mean, what's it doing to you and stuff?

The other reason i mention hardcore gamers is because it pisses casual gamers off no end

Ehhhh, not so sure it's a good idea to be so blunt about it...

 

[MHR]

You make a line. A hard line. Developers should make save points, but enough so people with lives can stop playing in under 5 minutes without losing progress otherwise if a player can do it, they will. I can't respect any save-scumming behavior unless it's for the purposes of science.

What would happen if I go berserk in Skyrim and try to kill the whole town? Would I be able to take them? Would all the women lament over you having killed all their husbands and sons, would it screw your relations with everyone, break all your quests, and put a permanent bounty on your head? You have three options in this scenario, you can either reload the save after you find out no, you can't take them, the ugly way, or irreparably screw over yourself due to your curiosity, or never find out. Obviously you take the save-load option for science.

Fire emblem did saves the best. The outcomes of all possible moves for your current turn were pre-calculated so shutting off the game and loading the save again did absolutely nothing to help you. Obviously most games can't use that, but it was a hard limit that forced people to actually play the game as intended.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

This is more a problem with PC gamers than console simply because most PC games have the 'cheating' save system i love to berate

This is pretty much the only thing anything interesting might develop out of...I'd wonder just why you love to berate it? I mean, what's it doing to you and stuff?

The other reason i mention hardcore gamers is because it pisses casual gamers off no end

Ehhhh, not so sure it's a good idea to be so blunt about it...

I consider games to be a challenge and that seeing the end credits is the reward for seeing the challenge through to it's conclusion. I hate any system that allows people with less than the required skill to beat the game. But most of all i hate it when people who have 'cheated' or 'gamed' their way past a tough challenge try to have a conversation with me about it. They haven't beaten it, they have got past it and they should realise the difference is vast and that i'm not going to accept anything they have to say about it...i only deal with people on even terms. I dislike feeling superior or inferior in equal measures.

Too many times i have struggled and beaten a game, only to find a friend did it easier...the game was 'too easy'. Imagine my lack of suprise when it turns out they cheated, not to see the end of the game but to try and pretend like they can compete with me. Be it a character editor or a walkthrough, breaking npc AI or extreme save abuse...it's all a form of cheating. So i have become vocally hostile to any form of challenge removing tactics to iterate the point that cheats never beat and that i rarely succumb to such practices (but acknowledge that i have in the distant past).

 

[Vegosiux]

I consider games to be a challenge and that seeing the end credits is the reward for seeing the challenge through to it's conclusion. I hate any system that allows people with less than the required skill to beat the game.

There any way to see what's "required"? I mean, officially, objectively, so that we can all agree that everything below that is "cheating"?

Because if no such official checklist exists, it's down to opinions, and well, I see no reason to have any of those elevated to a special status.

But most of all i hate it when people who have 'cheated' or 'gamed' their way past a tough challenge try to have a conversation with me about it.

Don't have that conversation with them, then? Walk away? Bring up something else?

They haven't beaten it, they have got past it and they should realise the difference is vast and that i'm not going to accept anything they have to say about it...i only deal with people on even terms.

Depends on who you ask.

I dislike feeling superior or inferior in equal measures.

I believe you on at least one of the two.

Too many times i have struggled and beaten a game, only to find a friend did it easier...the game was 'too easy'.

Me too, but I don't resent my friends or their playstyles for it.

Imagine my lack of suprise when it turns out they cheated, not to see the end of the game but to try and pretend like they can compete with me. Be it a character editor or a walkthrough, breaking npc AI or extreme save abuse...it's all a form of cheating. So i have become vocally hostile to any form of challenge removing tactics to iterate the point that cheats never beat and that i rarely succumb to such practices (but acknowledge that i have in the distant past).

Must have been one vicious rivalry. I tend to wave such stuff off, because, frankly, gaming is the last thing I want to deal with "competition" in, got enough of that in my off-screen life; my gaming is mine, and while I might have a case of perfectionist OCD going, I'm not in the least interested in "competing" with people.

 

[Magix]

I consider games to be a challenge and that seeing the end credits is the reward for seeing the challenge through to it's conclusion. I hate any system that allows people with less than the required skill to beat the game. But most of all i hate it when people who have 'cheated' or 'gamed' their way past a tough challenge try to have a conversation with me about it. They haven't beaten it, they have got past it and they should realise the difference is vast and that i'm not going to accept anything they have to say about it...i only deal with people on even terms. I dislike feeling superior or inferior in equal measures.

Except games don't have to be a challenge, they can be an experience. Or at least a challenge not in the typical sense of skill.

Too many times i have struggled and beaten a game, only to find a friend did it easier...the game was 'too easy'. Imagine my lack of suprise when it turns out they cheated, not to see the end of the game but to try and pretend like they can compete with me. Be it a character editor or a walkthrough, breaking npc AI or extreme save abuse...it's all a form of cheating. So i have become vocally hostile to any form of challenge removing tactics to iterate the point that cheats never beat and that i rarely succumb to such practices (but acknowledge that i have in the distant past).

So it sounds like you don't have a problem with people "cheating", you have a problem with people lying about "cheating"

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I consider games to be a challenge and that seeing the end credits is the reward for seeing the challenge through to it's conclusion. I hate any system that allows people with less than the required skill to beat the game. But most of all i hate it when people who have 'cheated' or 'gamed' their way past a tough challenge try to have a conversation with me about it. They haven't beaten it, they have got past it and they should realise the difference is vast and that i'm not going to accept anything they have to say about it...i only deal with people on even terms. I dislike feeling superior or inferior in equal measures.

Except games don't have to be a challenge, they can be an experience. Or at least a challenge not in the typical sense of skill.

Too many times i have struggled and beaten a game, only to find a friend did it easier...the game was 'too easy'. Imagine my lack of suprise when it turns out they cheated, not to see the end of the game but to try and pretend like they can compete with me. Be it a character editor or a walkthrough, breaking npc AI or extreme save abuse...it's all a form of cheating. So i have become vocally hostile to any form of challenge removing tactics to iterate the point that cheats never beat and that i rarely succumb to such practices (but acknowledge that i have in the distant past).

So it sounds like you don't have a problem with people "cheating", you have a problem with people lying about "cheating"

I take the simple path...if nobody cheated then there wouldn't be a problem...so i take the view that any form of cheating is a bad thing. I can't think of any positives to cheating either...generally you can achieve the 'cheated' status in a game just by playing it properly. God mode...you don't need it, you can play a game well enough for it to be like playing in god mode. Extra ammo cheats are again avoidable through carefull play. Getting to the end of a game is a foregone conclusion so save system cheating is pointless aswell as walkthrough use. Most bosses have weaknesses your designed to be able to overcome so AI pathing cheating is often pointless aswell.

I think the best way to explain my position is to mention doping in sports. Some people take the path of constant training and personal improvement to the exclusion of everything else. Some people take performance enhancing drugs to cheat their way to victory. One is held up high as a pillar of society and how things should be done and the other is banned and laughed at...I know which i would rather be.

 

[Magix]

I think the best way to explain my position is to mention doping in sports. Some people take the path of constant training and personal improvement to the exclusion of everything else. Some people take performance enhancing drugs to cheat their way to victory. One is held up high as a pillar of society and how things should be done and the other is banned and laughed at...I know which i would rather be.

You mention doping in sports, but sports are basically multiplayer games. You're competing against other people, your results directly affect the results of other people. Of course cheating in multiplayer is bad. But singleplayer is just about you, you're not affecting anybody else with that.

I take the simple path...if nobody cheated then there wouldn't be a problem...so i take the view that any form of cheating is a bad thing. I can't think of any positives to cheating either...generally you can achieve the 'cheated' status in a game just by playing it properly. God mode...you don't need it, you can play a game well enough for it to be like playing in god mode. Extra ammo cheats are again avoidable through carefull play. Getting to the end of a game is a foregone conclusion so save system cheating is pointless aswell as walkthrough use. Most bosses have weaknesses your designed to be able to overcome so AI pathing cheating is often pointless aswell.

Yes, you can play a game without cheating. But this post reeks of narrow mindedness and lack of empathy. You don't get anything out of playing a game the way it isn't intended, I get that. But consider the possibility that not everybody is like you. Some people get a kick out of cheating the system. Some people enjoy running through a level without taking any damage. Some people enjoy unlocking content that they would otherwise lack the time or skill to unlock. Because people have different values and goals than you do. People enjoy different things.

"If nobody cheated then there wouldn't be a problem" - but how is there a problem when people DO cheat? YOU'RE creating that problem. But it's not even affecting you. I do assume that you're speaking about singleplayer here, MP is of course a different story.

 

[Strazdas]

Personally my favourite system is ability to save anywhere, any time, except inside encounter. Inside encounter needs no saving. I dont mind people savescumming on singleplayer, but i never do it myself because i find it equal to using trainers. Many games have effectively combatted this by using random salt that saves with the game, so if you reload and do same action you get identical results. you have to change tactics for save scumming to work.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

I think the best way to explain my position is to mention doping in sports. Some people take the path of constant training and personal improvement to the exclusion of everything else. Some people take performance enhancing drugs to cheat their way to victory. One is held up high as a pillar of society and how things should be done and the other is banned and laughed at...I know which i would rather be.

You mention doping in sports, but sports are basically multiplayer games. You're competing against other people, your results directly affect the results of other people. Of course cheating in multiplayer is bad. But singleplayer is just about you, you're not affecting anybody else with that.

I take the simple path...if nobody cheated then there wouldn't be a problem...so i take the view that any form of cheating is a bad thing. I can't think of any positives to cheating either...generally you can achieve the 'cheated' status in a game just by playing it properly. God mode...you don't need it, you can play a game well enough for it to be like playing in god mode. Extra ammo cheats are again avoidable through carefull play. Getting to the end of a game is a foregone conclusion so save system cheating is pointless aswell as walkthrough use. Most bosses have weaknesses your designed to be able to overcome so AI pathing cheating is often pointless aswell.

Yes, you can play a game without cheating. But this post reeks of narrow mindedness and lack of empathy. You don't get anything out of playing a game the way it isn't intended, I get that. But consider the possibility that not everybody is like you. Some people get a kick out of cheating the system. Some people enjoy running through a level without taking any damage. Some people enjoy unlocking content that they would otherwise lack the time or skill to unlock. Because people have different values and goals than you do. People enjoy different things.

"If nobody cheated then there wouldn't be a problem" - but how is there a problem when people DO cheat? YOU'RE creating that problem. But it's not even affecting you. I do assume that you're speaking about singleplayer here, MP is of course a different story.

It's hard to take anything but a narrow view when the method you use works almost every time and the method other people use fails most of the time. I've only managed to get 2 of my friends to adopt any of my gaming methods and they both now get into top 100 leaderboards where before they could barely finish a game without using a guide. The ones that take the advantage of cheating (in any form) struggle more with new games and never excell.

It could be coincidence or it could be ideology. One thing is for certain, i give them a damn hard time if they cheat on something while i'm there that i know i could do without cheating. I bought a fucking 360 so i could prove to my friend that dead rising wasn't hard. I've finished almost every title on the 360 to prove to another big mouth that he isn't the best gamer, just good at a game. I've even competed with a guide user for achievements to prove the point. All their 'advantages' are disadvantages, all their cheating removes their ability in the next game, and the next one.

I don't do anything in my life to stagnate, i do it to improve. When i sing i want clearer stronger notes. When i read i want more new words to learn, better ways to say things. When i play games i want to be faster, more efficient, higher up the leaderboard. When i'm at work i want to improve my method, be faster than my peers, walk away with more strength left at the end of the day. That may be arrogant but that is what getting better at things becomes...self assured belief.

*shrugs*

Since most people seem happy to do the little cheats then perhaps i'm talking in the wrong place.

 

[tippy2k2]

I know enough people who will happily kill 3 guys, run round a corner and quick save until they can work out how to kill the next set of guys and then repeat to get past tough sections. This is more a problem with PC gamers than console simply because most PC games have the 'cheating' save system i love to berate

[small]My apologies for the late reply. I saw the quote at work...then I forgot about the thread until it just popped back up [/small]

I think I see where the problem is (and these later posts after mine seem to confirm that); You don't hate Save States as a concept, just people who abuse them, correct?. To go off of your example, I love me some save states but I would never save in the manner that you are referring to (I see that as save scumming, though "Technically" I don't think that is).

The reason I like Save States is the convenience factor they give me but I use them to save right where I'm at when I'm done playing the game, not when I killed one guy. That seems like it would absolutely kill the flow of the game (though I'm a console gamer so the "quick save" button is not an option).

Either way, in single player, I think people can do whatever they want. However, cheating the system is just cheating yourself out of an experience. If you're fine with that (or if you want a different experience), I have no problem with it.

 

[Magix]

It's hard to take anything but a narrow view when the method you use works almost every time and the method other people use fails most of the time. I've only managed to get 2 of my friends to adopt any of my gaming methods and they both now get into top 100 leaderboards where before they could barely finish a game without using a guide. The ones that take the advantage of cheating (in any form) struggle more with new games and never excell.

It could be coincidence or it could be ideology. One thing is for certain, i give them a damn hard time if they cheat on something while i'm there that i know i could do without cheating. I bought a fucking 360 so i could prove to my friend that dead rising wasn't hard. I've finished almost every title on the 360 to prove to another big mouth that he isn't the best gamer, just good at a game. I've even competed with a guide user for achievements to prove the point. All their 'advantages' are disadvantages, all their cheating removes their ability in the next game, and the next one.

I don't do anything in my life to stagnate, i do it to improve. When i sing i want clearer stronger notes. When i read i want more new words to learn, better ways to say things. When i play games i want to be faster, more efficient, higher up the leaderboard. When i'm at work i want to improve my method, be faster than my peers, walk away with more strength left at the end of the day. That may be arrogant but that is what getting better at things becomes...self assured belief.

*shrugs*

Since most people seem happy to do the little cheats then perhaps i'm talking in the wrong place.

All you're talking about is proving yourself and improving and leaderboards.. But there are a lot of people, I would guess the majority, that don't care about any of that. I'm in it to have fun, and for a singleplayer game, that is far from equal to being skillful.
The people that "cheat" in singleplayer games, they're not doing it to appear better to other people, or to delude theirselves into thinking that they're improving, or because they can't complete the level otherwise - they do it because it ENTERTAINS them.

If I want to improve, I'll go to multiplayer, where I can actually utilize my improved skills against enemies. I don't look for skill in Assassin's Creed or Portal or GTA, I look for skill in Counter Strike and League of Legends.
Of course there are exceptions, i.e platformers like Super Meatboy, where cheating would be kind of pointless, although I could probably get a kick out of being able to move faster or to be invulnerable for a while.

You play for different reasons, and that's completely fine, what I'm arguing is you should stop trying to dictate how others should play, or hate them because they play differently to you.

 

[Eve Charm]

Well to be honest using an save system for anything other then continuing your game is cheating the system one way or another. If you get a game over and it returns to title be it a small game or an 100 hour RPG you should start over, if you missed that pokemon either never have it or start over. The thing is no one does that, everyone cheats, So stop bothering looking to people to see of your brand of cheating is acceptable or not.