[UseSkill XY] In Dialog lines - yes/no ?

[Awor Szurkrarz]

attempts to fix savescumming exploits

Nothing to fix. You don't like save scumming, have the fucking balls not to do it. Maybe if game developers wasted less time idiot proofing their games thay could add some better gameplay.

Except that most games are designed to be savescummed. A game that doesn't include savescumming needs different design.

 

[DraQ]

I'd rather have improvements than ability to savescum freely.

And how small a brain does it take to assume the two are mutually exclusive?

Well, whenever anyone proposes a way to limit try-die-reload gameplay (nevermind that exiting and restarting would generally circumvent any reasonable implementation which would serve more as a way to limit reloading during gameplay, than keeping saves you'd want to come back to for whatever reason), consequences extending beyond 10' mark past branching point or some way to make quest design more flexible and interesting than mere flowchart it's generally you who bawws to high heavens, so I'd guess it takes a really minuscule one.

The reason you can't have this is that unless done on a quality level never seen before, the results will have more of a negative impact on a game than a positive. Otherwise 'delayed consequences' are just moronic 'gotchas' and 'emergent gamepaplay' is synonymous to 'boring and repetitive with nothng interesting happening'.

How so?

Do you have anything to back it up apart from your particular brand of herp-a-derp?

Nothing to fix. You don't like save scumming, have the fucking balls not to do it. Maybe if game developers wasted less time idiot proofing their games thay could add some better gameplay.

You seem terribly confused.
That somebody has balls to houserule hopelessly broken mechanics away doesn't make this mechanics any less of a mess, for example I can control myself perfectly well when playing TES and you can trust me to not hop up and down for hours and to not boost my stats to over 9000 with cheesy alchemy, but it doesn't automatically make TES implementation of skill-based learning or alchemy any less flawed. And it doesn't matter if mechanics in question happens to be widespread or not. Problems introduced by reloading are real and detrimental to player and designer alike, so any solution that isn't worse than the problem is welcome and penalizing reloads specifically and exclusively fits the bill.

 

[Shemar]

Except that most games are designed to be savescummed. A game that doesn't include savescumming needs different design.

And in what universe the solution in fixing a design that requires savescumming is to prevent savescumming? People with intellect would concentrate on developing game designs that do not require savescumming instead of wasting time and money trying to prevent it. Besides, I have finished plenty of games without savescumming.

Unless having to occasionally reload 2-3 times adjusting tactics to get through a tough fight counts as savescumming to you. The last thing I would ever want to see is a game so easy that this is not necessary.

How so?

Do you have anything to back it up apart from your particular brand of herp-a-derp?

The epic failure of every RPG ever created that attempted it (for example there has never been a single example of anything non combat related ever happening in an RPG that would qualify as interesting, that was procedurally generated) and 30 years of software development experience. Hell, even procedurally generated combat is usually boring and pointless; actual interaction is a technological impossibility. Unlike you, I am quite aware of the kind of effort and resources it would take to do it right, and rather than encourage certain failure I would rather get things that work. I would rather have ways of circumventing bad design decisions than trust a game to be perfect.

Problems introduced by reloading are real and detrimental to player and designer alike, so any solution that isn't worse than the problem is welcome and penalizing reloads specifically and exclusively fits the bill.

Maybe to weak willed sheep. To me having the ability to save anywhere under any circumstances has never had a negative impact in any game I have ever played, while at the same time having to replay pieces of games over and over because of moronic save schemes has, so any solution that limits saves clearly is worse than a problem that, for me, does not even exist.

 

[shihonage]

Yeah, I'm against targeting save/load mechanism explicitly. Whatever the implementation is, the punishment has to be indirect, and maybe not even framed as punishment.

When a Shelter alpha is released I'll get to fuck with people by testing various "innovashuns" in this department on them.

On you.

Or your grandsons, rather.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Except that most games are designed to be savescummed. A game that doesn't include savescumming needs different design.

And in what universe the solution in fixing a design that requires savescumming is to prevent savescumming? People with intellect would concentrate on developing game designs that do not require savescumming instead of wasting time and money trying to prevent it. Besides, I have finished plenty of games without savescumming.

Unless having to occasionally reload 2-3 times adjusting tactics to get through a tough fight counts as savescumming to you. The last thing I would ever want to see is a game so easy that this is not necessary.

I mean shit like 180 hours long linear games. You die and you have to replay the whole thing with the same shit everywhere.