Save Scumming and You

[Pink Gregory]

Alright, so outside of specific cases like harder difficulties in level based games e.g. Hitman; let's first acknowledge that unlimited, save-anywhere PC style save systems are probably the ideal.

Now, of course it's more convenient, but the one downside is a personal one. I talk of save-scumming.

Now what do I mean when I mean save-scumming?

Personally, I use it as a way of erasing my own mistakes. Quickloading before death.

Thing is, I don't want to do that, I do it almost automatically.

The magic of a game in which I'm doing this is dealing with the consequences of, says, a mistimed or misdirected jump in Tomb Raider, accidentally getting spotted and slaughtering three guards in a stealth game. Unfortunately, I have this urge which says 'no, that didn't feel right', and I'll just go right back, reload the save, and play it (so-called) better, but missing out on the organic experiences of dealing with the first slip up.

So, in the interest of stimulating discussion, tell me of your experiences with save-scumming; do you do it? Do you like it, or try to avoid it? How do you avoid it?

EDIT: Jeez, you chaps are touchy. I am not at any point conflating 'save-anywhere, unlimited saves' mechanics with save-scumming, and I only use the term as a self-deprecation comment. I don't care how you play your games, but I'm just discussing something that I wish I didn't do.

Lawd.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

Well for one, i think it should be re-named. The word "scum" is way too serious sounding for such an innocent action.

Anyway, I generally don't reload if I make a wrong decision on a moral or strategic standpoint. If I lose a battle, or one of my party members gets taken out et cetera, then I'll usually reload but in games where there are prominent choices to be made (Witcher, Mass Effect et cetera) then I'll stand by my decision.

 

[briankoontz]

Save scumming, or "choice without consequence", is one of the reasons I'm against save anywhere in games - the ideal for me is "save on exit" combined with the game auto-saving periodically to avoid too much lost progress if the game crashes or your computer/console loses power. In certain games like difficult platformers save checkpoints are fine.

One really nice thing about getting rid of manual saves is that the developer gets creative in dealing with it - Dark Souls is designed around the understanding that the player will die and avoids over-punishing the player.

The idea of manual saves is that the player never dies because he just reloads whenever something bad happens. This leads to a lack of consequence for actions taken in a game, which in turn helped fuel the popularity of multiplayer games which don't have reloading.

Games where save scumming is nearly a requirement are poorly designed.

 

[Pink Gregory]

Well for one, i think it should be re-named. The word "scum" is way too serious sounding for such an innocent action.

I feel like it's a knowingly self-deprecating remark, rather than any real condemnation.

 

[krazykidd]

I don't do it. I usually just live with my errors. In a game like Xcom ,( the new one) i would save before and after my mission, never during. I let the fight play out. If i win the level i keep it regardless, if i lose well i start over from scratch. I made me a lot more careful with my troops because permadeath. But no save scumming.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well I never even look into it unless I hit some designers derp moment where they have you repeat the same 10-20minute section countless times, possibly with unskippable cutscenes. And as long as those derp sections exist so should a quick save feature, not a quick load feature however... that is where people get tempted to just press it for every stray bullet. Put the loading option in the regular menu with 5+ steps to get it and people will start avoiding that inconvenience over the inconvenience of bad decisions.

But most importantly it's everyone's own call because it is your own experience, some people love the restarts and some can't stand them so make up your own damn mind. Personally I will never finish Dark Souls unless there is a mod for quick saves.

 

[Rozalia1]

I try to avoid it these days as otherwise things get too easy. Pretty much don't bother with it anymore outside a couple of cases where I'd just restart the game if I didn't do it (like my day 1 war justifying being found out a day later hitting me with 22 infamy in Victoria 2).

I don't think all games should have it, as not having it can have its own...uses shall we say. Some games difficulty is completely mauled by quicksaving/loading.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Save scumming, or "choice without consequence", is one of the reasons I'm against save anywhere in games - the ideal for me is "save on exit" combined with the game auto-saving periodically to avoid too much lost progress if the game crashes or your computer/console loses power. In certain games like difficult platformers save checkpoints are fine.

One really nice thing about getting rid of manual saves is that the developer gets creative in dealing with it - Dark Souls is designed around the understanding that the player will die and avoids over-punishing the player.

The idea of manual saves is that the player never dies because he just reloads whenever something bad happens. This leads to a lack of consequence for actions taken in a game, which in turn helped fuel the popularity of multiplayer games which don't have reloading.

Games where save scumming is nearly a requirement are poorly designed.

This pretty much covers it for me.

By allowing gamers to save anywhere and everywhere there is inherently less consequence, and this leads to bad game design. Basically, if a game is designed in such a way that it encourages or even requires save scumming, then it's a poorly designed game. Using a single save state that clears when reloaded similar to what many mobile games do plus a well implemented checkpoint/savepoint system is the best way to go.

 

[Zhukov]

Depends on the game.

I save-scum like a ************ in Mount and Blade for example. Took a random javelin to the face? Quit and load! Lost a battle? Quit and load! Knocked out of a tournament? Quit and load! Tried to recruit from your prisoners and none of them were biting? Quit and load! Managed to recruit from prisoners, but they all ran away as soon as night fell? Quit and load!

I even save-scummed my way out of a declaration of war a couple times. Already had three other factions gangbanging me, just wasn't in the mood for a forth.

Oh, I also found a way to save-scum in XCOM: Enemy Unknown's "Iron Man" mode. As in, the specifically-non-save-scumming mode. That felt wrong though, so I only use it to take back misclicks and such.

 

[gargantual]

I agree with Zhukov. If devs are worried about save scumming, some of them should just paint hit box areas in the critical areas of level design where you can't auto save, and decide what area is fair enough to reenable the F5/F6 key. At least fairly. No sense in replaying cut scenes after you just got pwned.

I mean what if you're cooking, your pet's chewing on the carpet, you have surprise guests, have to change diapers or get your son's head out of the stove or something? God forbid.

Life's important too. *shrug*

'sides it don't help everybody....

Exhibit A: 2 min 27 sec

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

I save-scum in Bethesda games for two reasons.

The first is that the type of game practically demands it. It's just fun to go and branch out at each choice one makes. Also, I don't want to have to trek my ass all the way back out because I died at a bad moment.

The other reason is I play on PS3 and Bethesda games tend to not get along very well. Crashes and lag are common, if not part of the gaming experience.

EDIT
I don't have a problem with saving at every opportunity. If you make a mistake, you can go back and get it. I know that some will take this as a loss of immersion since your actions don't actually have consequences, but some people just don't value that immersion all that much. It does make games like Zombii U quite novel when you can lose your character and never get them back.

 

[Jason Rayes]

I think turning that kind of thing on should be a difficulty option rather than something forced on players. Checkpoint systems don't bother me, I play quite a few console games so I'm used to it, but I know many PC gamers would find not being able to save anywhere a kind of infuriating restriction. I tend to only quickload it I die or do something really stupid (Like accidentally destroy an item or something equally derpy). Apart from that, so long as I live through an encounter I'm happy to just keep playing, no need to get it "perfect". In any game I will make lots of save games outside of quick save though. If you screw up enough that you've essentially painted yourself into a corner, at least you can go back to an earlier point and try something different (like screwing up less).

 

[Madner Kami]

Everyone should save when and where he wants. Don't like people loadsaving as often as they feel like? Big deal, not your business. You don't want to do it? Don't do it. There's nothing scummy about it, except for those people who want to prevent other people playing the game how they like. **** you, if you think you have the right to dictate the saving behaviour of other people.

 

[Odd Owl]

Save-scumming does do something to negate consequence, and I personally love it when games somehow account for player death in a way that doesn't break immersion (e.g., Dark Souls, the newer Prince of Persia). I only play XCOM on Iron Man mode.

With that said, when playing games where consequence really does matter, sometimes I save-scum (or wish I could save-scum) to avoid consequences that feel unfair. For example, I remember an escort mission in Fable II where the NPC's AI bugged out and he got himself killed by running BACK into the dungeon, but I didn't notice until I was out and got the "bad" ending to the quest.. Since Fable II used the constantly-saving model, there was no way I could reload to avoid the glitch.

Sad story, bro.

 

[balladbird]

Everyone should save when and where he wants. Don't like people loadsaving as often as they feel like? Big deal, not your business. You don't want to do it? Don't do it. There's nothing scummy about it, except for those people who want to prevent other people playing the game how they like. **** you, if you think you have the right to dictate the saving behaviour of other people.

pretty much my view on it. I save as frequently as I have to to have fun with minimal frustration. Yeah, that means when I'm playing dishonored there are hardcore periods where I'll save after every guard I slip past. Why shouldn't I? Because some internet gatekeeper will call my "hardcore" cred into question? I'll try my hardest to get over that.

as for where I personally draw the line when I play/save... well, generally I save as often as I want when the game's mechanics are the cause of my trepidation, but I always own my story decisions. No saving before deciding whether to save the orphanage or save my parents and then loading again if I don't like the resolution. More fun for me that way.

 

[MysticSlayer]

I don't really do it. I may abuse the quick save feature in games where you can lose a lot of progress with any death, which is just natural in any open-world game no matter how good the auto save system is. Otherwise, it is just to make up for idiotic game design or writing. However, I really don't rely on it to make up for my mistakes. If I make a mistake, then I live with the consequences, no matter how unpleasant they are.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I mean what if you're cooking, your pet's chewing on the carpet, you have surprise guests, have to change diapers or get your son's head out of the stove or something? God forbid.

Life's important too. *shrug*

'sides it don't help everybody....

yupp, there are hundreds of random reasons why you would need to save on the fly, hell one reason even being if your power is about to go out for some reason (storm,tripped breaker,etc..) so I don't have to backtrack very far if anywhere at all depending on how recently I had (quick)saved last. It is a single player function that is user friendly, if you don't want to use it, then simply don't, but don't try to force that shit on other people because we don't want to or literally can't play the game like you (generalized you, not you personally)

 

[AmberSword]

(cowers in shame

I'm a chronic save scummer when it comes to certain games, especially FPS types where saving anywhere is common place. I'm playing through the original half life right now, and one of my fingers will always be stuck on the F5 key (F6 default changed). I save EVERYTIME I complete something, or before entering a new area, basically once every 10-20 seconds on average. Then if I enter the next area and a firefight ensues, I'll make it as perfect as possible. took more than 10 damage? Reload. Used more ammo than needed? Reload. Sub Optimal performance? Reload.

This is why I've almost never really "died" in this game apart from "unforeseen circumstances", even when accidentally falling down a cliff I usually managed to hit the F9 key so fast out of instinct that I don't die.

Besides the above, I did this in Skyrim, I did this in Dishonored, I did this in Far Cry 3, starting to notice a pattern?

Even games like The Witcher or Dragon Age... Conversation didn't go the way I wanted? Reload. Quick Time event failed so I got a sub optimal result? Reload. Fight didn't go the way I wanted? Reload.

It actually gets even worse for me in stealth games where saving anywhere isn't an option, if I screw up I will restart from checkpoint, without fail! Unless of course that means I'll lose more than half an hour of progress. This is why I could never get myself to enjoy Metro Last Light or Hitman: Absolution.

This is why I truly appreciate it when a game comes around that doesn't take away your ability to save anywhere, yet has a snowball effect of repercussions so small that you don't notice until its too late, any game that manages to do this gets an A+ in my book. The detective arc in the Witcher 1 is a shining example, the quest logs during the investigation can basically be summarized as YOU NAILED IT! No matter what choice you took, what decisions you made during the autopsy, the game made it look like you did the right thing. Only in the literal end of the chapter do you realize how much you've screwed up if you didn't read the proper books and do the proper research.

Civilization and most 4X games also do this well. Go ahead, save any time you want, then you realize 30 turns later that you started constructing something 1 turn later than someone else, and he beat you to it. Reload? That's an hour of tedious work and progress gone.

Of course, games like Dark Souls which run like online games basically saving every second also count.

I understand some people hate this, they want their way all the time. I may have sounded like a hypocrite when I said that, but its actually refreshing sometimes to know that you've been (in Soviet Russia), played by the game!

 

[Something Amyss]

There have been a couple of games where I basically was pissed off to the point of deciding I'd win by any means necessary. Otherwise, save scumming feels empty and pointless.