Any info on save system?

[idbeholdME]

Does anybody know whether there will be the standard save system or the retarded "checkpoints only"? I'm okay with a combination of both (in that case they're actually convenient if you forgot to save for a long time), but only CPs sucks beyond belief. I want my quicksaves...

I'm asking simply because this game will be on consoles too and I hope they don't defile the PC version with their BS.

[snapshot]

There are only checkpoints, that's all i knew .

[idbeholdME]

DMGUYDZ64 said:

There are only checkpoints, that's all i knew .

Well damn... Do you have a source or did you just hear some rumors? If it's definitive, let's at least hope they will be frequent and well placed. I hate replaying the same part over and over just because there is a harder part 5 minutes from now and no checkpoints in between.

[snapshot]

I've seen it in the corner of screen from the latest gameplay released by the Conan guys , though that's not enough .

It looked like the game saves automatically at some specific Locations .

[LkMax]

Chackpoints doesn't automatically exclude manual saving (e.g. Serious Sam 3) but it's yet to be confirmed.

[magma86]

Perhaps checkpoint-system is only used on the easier difficulties?

[Orchid87]

I don't think that manual saving is a good thing. It makes the game much more easy IMO. I prefer Dark Souls approach where every checkpoint feels like a grand prize.

[Johnatone]

magma86 said:

Perhaps checkpoint-system is only used on the easier difficulties?

In the now closed alpha source thread it was revealed that on Nightmare you only get one go through it; you die, game over.

While that implies no checkpoints I would think there'll be a save system because let's be honest, they can't reasonably expect anyone to do an entire 13 hour campaign (by their estimates) in a single go through. Not that it can't be done, just that it would be pretty stupid IMO.

[magma86]

Johnatone said:

In the now closed alpha source thread it was revealed that on Nightmare you only get one go through it; you die, game over.

While that implies no checkpoints I would think there'll be a save system because let's be honest, they can't reasonably expect anyone to do an entire 13 hour campaign (by their estimates) in a single go through. Not that it can't be done, just that it would be pretty stupid IMO.

Maybe something similar to WTNO?
Some parts worked flawlessly with checkpoints, other parts not. The one at the hangar were quite inforgiving. Had 2 restart the whole level.

[Koko Ricky]

What's the big deal about checkpoints? Just don't suck at the game.

[Chubzdoomer]

Johnatone said:

In the now closed alpha source thread it was revealed that on Nightmare you only get one go through it; you die, game over.

While that implies no checkpoints I would think there'll be a save system because let's be honest, they can't reasonably expect anyone to do an entire 13 hour campaign (by their estimates) in a single go through. Not that it can't be done, just that it would be pretty stupid IMO.

In the GameInformer Q&A video, Marty Stratton said that on Nightmare difficulty your game is saved between levels, but not via checkpoints like on all of the other settings. So you don't have to beat it all in one sitting (which, like you said, would be ridiculous and damned near impossible for most normal human beings).

He also brought up an Ultra Nightmare mode, but didn't elaborate on how it was different aside from saying that it offered a whole new challenge. I imagine you must first complete the game on Nightmare difficulty to unlock it.

[idbeholdME]

GoatLord said:

What's the big deal about checkpoints? Just don't suck at the game.

Orchid87 said:

I don't think that manual saving is a good thing. It makes the game much more easy IMO. I prefer Dark Souls approach where every checkpoint feels like a grand prize.

The big deal is when they are badly placed, so that you have to replay 5 or more minutes of easy parts only to get to the problematic area and dying there, forcing you to replay the 5 easy minutes all over again just to have another go at it. If they are well designed, placed and balanced not to be annoying instead of useful, the problem is pretty much gone. But so far, there was only ever one game where I felt checkpoints were very good and didn't miss manual saving at all and that was Star Wars: Republic Commando.

Having an issue with CPs doesn't automatically mean you suck at the game. I play all games on the hardest or second hardest (if I'm feeling wimpy) difficulty and checkpoint save system more often than not, detracts from the experience and unnecesairly pads the playing time. I really felt that in the new Wolfenstein.

CPs are mostly good as an insurance if you didn't save for a very long time. But the possibility of manual saving should be default IMHO.

LkMax said:

Chackpoints doesn't automatically exclude manual saving (e.g. Serious Sam 3) but it's yet to be confirmed.

Exactly. As I said in my initial post, the combination of both is actually the best option and as you mentioned, SS3 is a prime example of that.

[AirRaid]

I think there needs to be a distinction here.

When you say "checkpoints", you actually mean "autosaves". This has been a thing in games since at least Half-life, maybe earlier than that.

These are fine. The game automatically saving your progress once you get past a certain chapter or bossfight or whatever is a good thing. Loss of progress due to a death is a mechanic which needs balancing like any other, and there's actually a whole genre of games built around the one shot, die and you start over ethic, Roguelikes.

Having said that, the "bad" kind of checkpoints are the ones you see in games like Hard Reset, where you hit a checkpoint and can immediately not backtrack because a door has locked or you jumped down a ledge or some other dumb arbitrary thing has blocked your path back. This is really lazy level design, and totally ruins any ideas your game had about exploration. You want to fight everything and then go look for secrets but you're worried you'll hit a non-returnable checkpoint and any secrets in the previous area are permanently lost.

So yeah there's nothing wrong with the game autosaving for you, and having nothing but the autosaves to rely on is also not really a bad thing if it's balanced well, so you never feel like you've lost loads and loads of playtime because you made a mistake and got your legs ripped off by a Baron.

[LkMax]

GoatLord said:

What's the big deal about checkpoints? Just don't suck at the game.

Sometimes you want to test something (e.g. maybe there's something in this dark pit?... nope, dead), other times you just want to screw around and save first, either way this assumption that who likes manual saving are bad at the game is just wrong (and it's the first time I've ever heard someone imply that, like what the hell?).

AirRaid said:

Having said that, the "bad" kind of checkpoints are the ones you see in games like Hard Reset, where you hit a checkpoint and can immediately not backtrack because a door has locked or you jumped down a ledge or some other dumb arbitrary thing has blocked your path back. This is really lazy level design, and totally ruins any ideas your game had about exploration. You want to fight everything and then go look for secrets but you're worried you'll hit a non-returnable checkpoint and any secrets in the previous area are permanently lost.

Damn this is so bad, specially bad in games that are supposed to be oldschool like Hard Reset, Shadow Warrior Reboot (that's basically Hard Reset with a katana) and the newest Rise of The Triad.