POLL: Possibility for mappers to create missions where you cannot save manually, but use checkpoints or other systems instead.

[New Horizon]

But if most people think it does no harm to add it independent from whether they will like it themselves, what are we arguing about?

 

Well, exactly. I haven't been arguing against it. I'm 100% for having the additional option. My only request, and I see others making the same request, is that it players can opt out.

[grayman]

The request many have made is that the player be allowed to opt out.

 

Excuse me if it's already been described, but what would the mechanism be for opting out?

[OrbWeaver]

But if most people think it does no harm to add it independent from whether they will like it themselves, what are we arguing about?

 

Presumably the purpose of this thread is to establish if players actually want to see maps that use this feature. Obviously nobody is going to prevent developers from implementing it or mappers from making use of it, but if there are hardly any players that actually want to play the resulting maps, this might indicate that mappers shouldn't spend time making them. On the other hand, mappers may be quite content developing maps that only a small minority of players are interested in playing, and this is entirely their choice to make.

 

Well, exactly. I haven't been arguing against it. I'm 100% for having the additional option. My only request, and I see others making the same request, is that it players can opt out.

 

And if the opt-out isn't implemented as an actual override, at least the maps using this feature should have appropriate metadata to allow them to be excluded by players at the point of download.

[New Horizon]

Excuse me if it's already been described, but what would the mechanism be for opting out?

 

I think one option was to perhaps reserve the easiest difficulty level as the opt-out selection.

[Springheel]

There are two proposals for opting out, that I can see. One was to make a menu option. Players could choose from "no saves", "unlimited saves" and perhaps other options. The other proposal was that it be treated like a no-kill restriction, and the mapper controls which difficulties (if any) restrict saves. The two are not mutually exclusive either.

 

[Sotha]

There are two proposals for opting out, that I can see. One was to make a menu option. Players could choose from "no saves", "unlimited saves" and perhaps other options. The other proposal was that it be treated like a no-kill restriction, and the mapper controls which difficulties (if any) restrict saves. The two are not mutually exclusive either.

 

I think it fits perfectly into the mission difficulty settings. Save restriction is the cousin of a "no kill" and "X KOs allowed" objectives.

[Springheel]

The benefit of a menu option is that players can choose to apply it to existing maps if they wish. Though there may not be enough players who would be interested.

[HMart]

1. Yes. This is a direction that deserves to be explored. More options to mappers is good. I personally think save limits were good thing in hitman games.

 

2. Unknown as I have not played such a mission with TDM. I would definitely want to see one and I would be very eager to try it out and see what my opinion would be. I am shocked how people are all in "no-no" without giving it a chance at all without even testing. It is like refusing to eat food without even tasting. They could be missing an excellent meal. I thought we had an open minded community here.

 

I speak only for myself but the problem with my "not excited" stance is that i know how a checkpoint game feels like, i have played hundreds of them, none of them felt better because of it and some like i already said many times even became worse. But again include them if you want i will play your mission nonetheless you can be sure of that.

[grayman]

The benefit of a menu option is that players can choose to apply it to existing maps if they wish. Though there may not be enough players who would be interested.

 

I'm seeing two features being discussed:

 

1 - checkpoints w/an opt out

 

2 - limiting saves

 

The second feature can be applied to existing games, as long as it's "no saves", because that requires no map changes. Limiting saves to a specific author-determined number can't be applied to existing games. (Though, as Lux said, players can use the "no saves" feature today, with no code changes, by choosing not to save.)

 

But the first feature can not be applied to existing games, since it requires new entities and/or script commands and/or worldspawn settings, none of which exist in existing games.

[grayman]

==deleted due to silliness==

[Springheel]

I don't think 1 is under discussion. If mappers want to add checkpoint saves to their map, no one is going to object. It's limiting saves that is contentious. However, I think the majority opinion seems to be to let mappers have that option, with the caveat that some players may not like or play those missions if there is no opt out option. Seems like it's up to the mapper to decide if they care to be accommodating on that issue.

[esme]

At the end of the day if you want to implement this to give mappers more choice then go for it, it's your time and effort, you can spend it how you like.

 

Just don't get upset if you put man years worth of effort into a mission that very few play because they don't want the restriction on saving.

 

Personally I think that we should look for gameplay related solutions to making missions more challenging, more complex puzzles or smarter/more capable AI rather than altering the save game system.

[Deadlove]

Checkpoints / save gems ruined the initial shipping copy of DAIKATANA (worse than the not intelligent AI partners), only after it was patched and save was restored was I able to really get into and ended up beating the game. Very underrated game, if played patched up. Too bad was a nightmare upon shipping.

 

So I vote for save whenever the player wants to. More control to the gamer. It wouldn't hurt to make some auto-checkpoints that go off in addition to manually saving, as sometimes I get immersed, forget to save and then when I reload I realize I am many steps behind and have to redo a bunch of things, that's usually always frustrating.

 

And I'm also a quicksave whore, so I would like to see the saving system stay the same but also add the ability for checkpoints as well.

[Melan]

Something that has not been brought up extensively (apologies if I missed it) is difficulty. The people who post on these forums or TTLG tend to take it for granted that the difficulty of our FMs are just fine, or they need to be just a bit more challenging. However, that's the perspective of people who have been at it for 15 years, and are scary-good at Thief. But on its own, Thief is a pretty damn unforgiving game even to regular FPS fans, and TDM, while adding extra features that make the experience smoother (like error-free mantling), is even harder. The general view on the game seems to be that this is a mod for ultra-hardcores; you often find opinions like

Tried it, and it's pretty enjoyable. Only problem is that it's made by some of the spergiest tryhards you could find in the Thief fandom, the kind who think the blackjack is for babbies because you can remove guards without it costing you resources. Highlights include being able to mess up a knockdown, because somehow you can be positioned in such a way your elbow hit the guard before your blackjack, alerting the guard.

Now you can say this guy is incorrect about blackjacking (he is), but this is the way we look like to outsiders.

 

So when we consider limiting savescumming, we should take it into account that on its own, TDM is already a hardcore experience. Most of the time, I've got to think of ways to make my own missions easier and more accessible, not more challenging, because they are hard, hard, hard. Not to say we can't have some genuinely hard missions; Penny Dreadful 2 is deliberately difficult, and tries to get you out of your comfort zone. I'd be okay with an experimental mission that limited saves, or whatever.* But we should not think our tastes are representative of even the broader Thief fandom.

____________________

* Although I would love to see all that energy put into refinement - like making one of those really big, really complex, really rewarding missions which are common in Thief but still scarce in this project.

[demagogue]

My idea for opting out was a popup at mission start that serves the dual purpose of also informing the player of the changed mechanic. But I grant that a special objective for the Normal & Hard difficulties, with Easy the opt out version, is a much cleaner & intuitive way to do it.

[esme]

...So when we consider limiting savescumming...

Seriously ?

 

Is that what we're calling it ?

 

I feel so much better hitting the save button now I know some people think I'm a savescummer

[Lux]

My idea for opting out was a popup at mission start that serves the dual purpose of also informing the player of the changed mechanic. But I grant that a special objective for the Normal & Hard difficulties, with Easy the opt out version, is a much cleaner & intuitive way to do it.

 

This sounds ok to me but not for "Easy" only. Unless Medium was more lenient, one would think only the hard difficulty level would limit saves unless we have varying degrees of save limiting. Easy - save at will, Medium - allowed 5 saves, Hard - not allowed to save at all (or whatever the devious mapper minds are planning).

 

I certainly don't think "Easy" should be the only difficulty devoid of save limiting. Main reason for that is -- I play all the FMs on the most difficult option first. For a player like me, now I have to deal with save game rations because they're always going to be on the most difficult option (if the mapper chooses).

 

That really sucks if you ask me. When no AI are around and the map has vertical elements to it and I want to climb up to some place or "see"/"test"/"experiment" with trying to jump from light pole to light pole or flag pole to balcony to roof top, not being able to save at each successful landing REALLY puts a damper on the amount of fun I'm allowed to have by "trying things the average player might not"...

 

If anything it would be nice if we don't see rampant use of save limiting on maps that are suppose to encourage exploration.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Lux

[161803398874989]

Seriously ?

 

Is that what we're calling it ?

 

I feel so much better hitting the save button now I know some people think I'm a savescummer

Oh no, people on the internet might call you out for being a dirty savescummer! Obviously that means you're a worthless human being!

 

Fuck that noise. Play like you want to and own it. Personally I'm a fan of the "I wanna be hardcore and not savescum but then end up doing it anyway, and maybe I'll noclip too"-playstyle. And I don't give a rat's ass about what anyone thinks about that. I'm having fun and the rest can go fuck themselves.

[Springheel]

//If anything it would be nice if we don't see rampant use of save limiting on maps that are suppose to encourage exploration. //

 

Given the number of people who seem to be apprehensive about the idea, I suspect we're not going to see widespread use. But it's no different than a map that forces you to ghost. They're rare, and some players will skip them, but mappers occasionally make them and some really enjoy playing them. If nuthief taught us anything it's that trying to please everyone is a doomed enterprise. It's therefore up to mappers to set their own target audience and deal with the consequences.

[esme]

like I said, do it but don't be upset if your hard work isn't appreciated.

[SteveL]

I'm really liking the suggestion of using hard difficulty for a no-save or limited-save option. One thing that tdm does lack is a meaningful difference between the difficulty levels*, and people don't tend to add "achievements" either (which in TDM would mean hard optional objectives). Both those things give me a lot of replay value in other games.

 

*for someone who explores everywhere and always gets the loot goal any difficulty, that is

Edited August 22, 2014 by SteveL

[Obsttorte]

Something that has not been brought up extensively (apologies if I missed it) is difficulty. The people who post on these forums or TTLG tend to take it for granted that the difficulty of our FMs are just fine, or they need to be just a bit more challenging. However, that's the perspective of people who have been at it for 15 years, and are scary-good at Thief. But on its own, Thief is a pretty damn unforgiving game even to regular FPS fans, and TDM, while adding extra features that make the experience smoother (like error-free mantling), is even harder. The general view on the game seems to be that this is a mod for ultra-hardcores; you often find opinions like

 

Now you can say this guy is incorrect about blackjacking (he is), but this is the way we look like to outsiders.

 

So when we consider limiting savescumming, we should take it into account that on its own, TDM is already a hardcore experience. Most of the time, I've got to think of ways to make my own missions easier and more accessible, not more challenging, because they are hard, hard, hard. Not to say we can't have some genuinely hard missions; Penny Dreadful 2 is deliberately difficult, and tries to get you out of your comfort zone. I'd be okay with an experimental mission that limited saves, or whatever.* But we should not think our tastes are representative of even the broader Thief fandom.

____________________

* Although I would love to see all that energy put into refinement - like making one of those really big, really complex, really rewarding missions which are common in Thief but still scarce in this project.

To clear a little misunderstanding I want to say some words to that post. Nothing you said is wrong, though.

 

I have the feeling that in current games the choice which kind of save-mechanism is choosen is a relatively random one. Some developers who choose to use a checkpoint system may use it to make the game more difficult, nothing more. From that perspective it may be a dumb feature, although it could allow a mapper to turn down the difficulty in other regards.

 

However, from my personally view I do not want this feature to make a mission more challenging. I think that this mechanic can also have additional usage beyond that point. It's nothing surprising that most modern games do not tend to be very creative when it comes to game mechanics. Almost all that was published in the last ten years was something that we have already seen before. From the save-mechanics only Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time was a remarkable newelty, as it does not restrict your saves but your loads via the turn-back time mechanic. A feature that later on was used in racing games like Grid, too.

 

When we are talking about "save-scumming" as a negative habit of players, I don't think it always mean that this is a newbie behaviour. At least I don't think so, as I do it myself

 

I always do everything a game allows me to do to make my life (the game) easier. If it is easier to knock out half the guards in a mission instead of bypassing them, I'll do so. If objectives are optional Idon't do them, unless I have the feeling it would be beneficial. Some players play a game like they think it is intented to be played, other players like me play it like it is the easiest way. This is simple because it is the most comfortable way to go, and I expect the mission author to put me out of this comfort zone.

 

This causes that I often miss things which other players, which belong to the first category get. I enjoy the mission or game less therefore. So obviously such missions were not designed for players like me, but I don't see why I should design missions in a way so that they please a type of players, which I don't belong to. That's weird.

 

As I said before the fact that you can save, even if you may not want to overdo it, gives you a certain degree of safety. ou are in your comfort zone. If I would use a checkpoint system in a mission I would surely not place the checkpoints in a way tat you have to replay 15 minutes just because you made a mistake. As said, difficulty is not my aim. But I can use this feature to affect the feelings the player has while playing my mission. To which degree this is possible I don't know, I would have to test it.

[New Horizon]

I have just figured out how to monetize TDM. When you first install TDM you are given 50 free saves. When those run out, you can purchase save bundles to replenish your supply. People eat that stuff up on all these tablet and phone games I test here at work. lol

[Obsttorte]

You Sir, be funny.

[New Horizon]

I also be severely sleep deprived. There has been wave after wave of cold and flu bugs hitting the kids, my wife and me for a few weeks.