There's something I've been thinking about on and off for a while now, and I seem to be unable to reach a satisfying conclusion. I decided to call upon the collective wisdom of the escapists to help me gain some insight into the problem, and to discuss any possible solutions.
The problem is that most gamers will not accept bad results in singleplayer games. This isn't really such an unexpected thing. I myself often reload the game when a team member perma-dies, when I fail a pickpocketing attempt, or when that last boss didn't drop the item I was after. If I know that a game has multiple endings, I will usually reload the game if I did something that keeps me from getting the 'best' one.
However, I can't shake the feeling that I'm cheating, that I'm not playing the game right.
So what if I won't get the best ending, I'll still be getting an ending. What's more, I'm getting the ending I deserve, the ending that best reflects my actions in the game. And when it's not a matter of what ending I'll get, what's the big deal? Losing a character in Fire Emblem or Jagged Alliance won't get me a bad ending or seriously mess with my game. Failing to pick a pocket in Fallout or Baldur's Gate might get me in trouble, but it's nothing I won't be able deal with ingame.
What's more, who says that the 'best' ending is the only one worth getting? By reloading every time something goes wrong, I'm essentially avoiding part of the gameplay experience: The part where stuff goes wrong. And for all I know, that part is just as good as the 'right' path, or maybe even better. In Sim City you can unleash a tornado on the city you spent so much time on, just so you can have fun repairing the damage it did. Correcting mistakes can be a fun challenge, so why would I want to avoid those mistakes?
Still, the save/reload mentality seems to be just as strong with most gamers as it is with me. Traditionally, console games haven't had to deal with this as much since they often relied on 'save points', but this only made reloading slightly more time-consuming and certainly not impossible. At this point even most console games have done away with the antiquated save points in favor of a save-anywhere system, which means that reloading the game when something goes wrong is just as easy.
What I'm wondering is two things:
How far are you willing to go in accepting a bad result, and why? What's the point where you go "fuck it" and hit the reload button?
Perhaps more importantly, what could make you accept a bad result you'd otherwise reload the game for? How could a game make it less attractive for you to reload whenever something goes wrong?
The problem is that most gamers will not accept bad results in singleplayer games. This isn't really such an unexpected thing. I myself often reload the game when a team member perma-dies, when I fail a pickpocketing attempt, or when that last boss didn't drop the item I was after. If I know that a game has multiple endings, I will usually reload the game if I did something that keeps me from getting the 'best' one.
However, I can't shake the feeling that I'm cheating, that I'm not playing the game right.
So what if I won't get the best ending, I'll still be getting an ending. What's more, I'm getting the ending I deserve, the ending that best reflects my actions in the game. And when it's not a matter of what ending I'll get, what's the big deal? Losing a character in Fire Emblem or Jagged Alliance won't get me a bad ending or seriously mess with my game. Failing to pick a pocket in Fallout or Baldur's Gate might get me in trouble, but it's nothing I won't be able deal with ingame.
What's more, who says that the 'best' ending is the only one worth getting? By reloading every time something goes wrong, I'm essentially avoiding part of the gameplay experience: The part where stuff goes wrong. And for all I know, that part is just as good as the 'right' path, or maybe even better. In Sim City you can unleash a tornado on the city you spent so much time on, just so you can have fun repairing the damage it did. Correcting mistakes can be a fun challenge, so why would I want to avoid those mistakes?
Still, the save/reload mentality seems to be just as strong with most gamers as it is with me. Traditionally, console games haven't had to deal with this as much since they often relied on 'save points', but this only made reloading slightly more time-consuming and certainly not impossible. At this point even most console games have done away with the antiquated save points in favor of a save-anywhere system, which means that reloading the game when something goes wrong is just as easy.
What I'm wondering is two things:
How far are you willing to go in accepting a bad result, and why? What's the point where you go "fuck it" and hit the reload button?
Perhaps more importantly, what could make you accept a bad result you'd otherwise reload the game for? How could a game make it less attractive for you to reload whenever something goes wrong?
