Save Points are for sissies

[Eschaton]

Full disclosure:  my project is meant to be a love letter to NES-era RPGs (without the graphics).  I'm aiming for it to be difficult.

This thread is meant to solicit opinions on the idea that dungeons, no matter how long or grueling they may be, will not have save points. 

This thread is not asking for approval because I'm doing this, it's happening.

Hehe... Thoughts?

 

[Diego2112]

IN the dungeon, fine.  Outside the dungeon, not so much, if it's going to be a longer game.

I'm not even saying have 'em on the overworld-but surely in towns.  Long games tend to get frustrating if you have to start over from scratch.

In the actual dungeon, though, I can't even remember the last game I *PERSONALLY* played that had a save point/crystal/whatever physically IN the dungeon.

So yeah, I say go for it.

 

[Vox Novus]

One of the aspects behind save points besides providing a security to the player is to allow the player to quit/ halt progress on a game, not allowing them a way to stop when necessary could be bothersome (unless the dungeons are short or have floors that let you return to the surface and then go back to the deepest floor).

 

[Milennin]

It's going to put off people not able to play for long times in one go, or aren't sure how long they'll be able to play. Depends on the length of your dungeons, though...


I don't think I would bother with a game that doesn't let me save in a dungeon at all, just because something in real life might happen that requires me to be away from the PC for a while. Nor am I going to continue playing an RPG Maker game when a friend on Skype asks me to play a co-op game with him.

 

[Tai_MT]

How can it be a love letter to NES era games when most of them didn't have save points ANYWHERE except the town Inn?

Ha ha.

All joking aside...

I would say this likely depends on difficulty of the game in question.  It was easy in games like Final Fantasy 1 to get wiped out, have to restart back at the town you were just at, walk back to the dungeon, then try to conquer the dungeon and get back to save again.  This, my friend, was incredibly frustrating and lead a lot of people to simply abandon wizards in favor of a full party of warriors.  I was one of those people.

When you remove save points, you have to remember why they exist in the FIRST PLACE.

Save points serve two purposes:  The first purpose is that they allow you to more easily save your progress so that you can quit anytime you like, instead of only at points the game lets you.  The more save points the game allows you, the easier it is to find a save point when you need to quit for the night or whatever else.  The second purpose is to cut down on player frustration within the game.  Frustrated players tend to hate a game they are playing as well as anyone who has said they beat the game.  These players also tend to hate anyone who says they didn't have any problems with the game or its features.  Frustration breeds animosity towards your game as well as other players.  If it's too frustrating, your game will often go unfinished as a result.  I am proud to say that I've dropped SEVERAL games that were complete BS by difficulty and frustration factors and concluded that nothing in them was WORTH completing the game for.  Especially in the age of YouTube where if someone wants to see everything in your game, they can watch someone ELSE be frustrated by it instead having to suffer through it themselves.

Anyway, that's my two cents.  Do it if you want, but you should know going in just what kind of game you're making as well as how it might very well be received.

 

[Quigon]

I like how Dark Souls does it - no save points whatsoever, but there's an autosave pretty much any time you do anything (and several checkpoints per stage). Meaning you can't save scum, you can make crappy decisions that'll give you a crappy time, and it makes players think about what they're doing. Of course that game is balanced well enough to negate you getting so stuck you need to completely start over, so if you ever went down this route you'd need to balance everything very. very well.

 

[Chaos Avian]

It also depends on what style of dungeon you're going for. Persona 3 does this quite well, you have a save point just outside the dungeon but at certain "checkpoints", you can return to start and start over from there. P3's Tartarus was one big dungeon crawl so it may not be the type of dungeon so yeah. But having no saves is fine in a dungeon.

 

[Eschaton]

Hmm... reading these responses gives me an idea.  Maybe I'll find an Achievements Script.  I'll include save points, but also include an achievement that can be earned by not using them.  I'll call the achievement, "Save Points Are For Sissies."

 

[GrandmaDeb]

The issue is not whether you are in a dungeon or just listening to endless cutscene blather.


A game that is so inconsiderate of my time that it asks me to re-play meaningless things because someone decided to refuse to allow saves for no good reason loses my respect quickly.


One of the Aveyond games has a level where you have tough monsters and no saves, and that is a challenge level. I get that. Build up until you can beat the whole thing.


But just indiscriminately forcing me to play the game in one hour increments just because?


Trash can.

 

[Eschaton]

All right!  I get it.  Save points exist for a reason, and they don't not-exist for that same reason.  And there obviously isn't a niche market for NES-throwbacks, either.

 

[Diego2112]

Nobody said there wasn't a market for that kind of game-just that it would be frustrating as hell on most gamers TODAY.  We don't live in a world where we can fire up the NES for a few hours at a time after we get our homework and chores done anymore-now we live in a world where even finding a half hour to play a game can be considered a luxury (at least for me).  Between work, school, family, and then playing games with friends, time is not something to be had.

Hell, I'm still on board with the "No Saves in the Dungeon" bit.  That's fine by me.  So far, nothing I've designed have had a save point in a dungeon, and what's more, the baddies respawn after you leave the room anyway!  But you've got to remember your audience.

 

[Chrome]

The ability to save anywhere is a very easy system to implement but you still see triple A title games still using save points. If save points were objectively bad then you will see every game with the feature to save anywhere. Having the ability to save anytime will most likely hurt the gaming experience for most games. 

 

[Espon]

If you're going to do no saves in a dungeon then you should consider adding a quick-save option.  Basically its purpose would be to allow the player to quit at any time and resume playing later.  The file would be created when you quit the game, and then will be erased when its loaded.

 

[Berylstone]

If your goal is to make players have to re-do a dungeon from scratch when they die then I would at least add some kind of system that allows them to save the experience and items they gained, especially if you plan on making them long and grueling.  Because it would be very frustrating for me to have to re-do a dungeon over and over with no sense of progress while I did it. 

I'm sure there are some hardcore players out there though who would probably like it.

 

[.notsafety]

save-points aren't inherently good or bad and your idea could very well work out, but you need to think first. exactly how is this going affect gameplay?

can the player lose because of something completely out of their control (random crit, pure RNG BS, etc)?

will any part of the dungeons demand a response from the player that they may not be able to provide right off the bat?

will the rules of your dungeons stay consistent? if they change, will the player be aware of it before a challenge arises?

how long are dungeons going to stretch?

I'd ask myself stuff like that before I settle down on this idea, unless you just want to create a brutal game with little leniency.

punishing the player by forcing them to redo the entirety of a dungeon potentially because they made one mistake or had a streak of bad luck sounds more frustrating than difficult and could very well lead to RQ'ing.

 

[amerk]

All right!  I get it.  Save points exist for a reason, and they don't not-exist for that same reason.  And there obviously isn't a niche market for NES-throwbacks, either.

I think part of the niche is still there (primarily in terms of the classic graphics), but games have changed so drastically in the past 30 years that it's hard to appreciate the frustrating challenges they once presented.

Not to go off topic, but it's the same with random encounters vs touch, and grinding versus not. Most people today wouldn't be able to stomach playing the original Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior game (even though DQ at least allowed you to keep your EXP if you died).

My advice is to decide what kind of game you're making. If you're looking to make one that is difficult, then removing saves in all but towns is a way to go. But you may not draw in the crowd for it.

If it's just to get back at the roots of what made these games fun, then there are other options:

1. The DQ method to retain EXP even if you die and have to start back out of the dungeon, with 1/2 of your gold removed.

2. Include a Quick Save feature for people who need to quit.

3. Allow one save point in the middle of the dungeon, if the dungeon is especially large.

4. Have people buy "Save Items" that can be used for areas when they are not on the World Map. Make them relatively expensive (500 Gold?) so people don't horde these. It allows the player to still save anywhere in a dungeon, but they'll be mindful of when they're used and how often, because they can be expensive.

 

[Eschaton]

Honestly, I want to make a throwback to NES and SNES RPGs.  I specifically have in mind the Ancients' Maze to the Sylx Tower to the Dark World gauntlet from the NES Final Fantasy III.  It was a grueling hell which I will never forget.  I felt like a badass when I finished it.

That's the kind of game I want to make, one that makes the player feel like a badass once the finish the high challenge.

 

[Lars Ulrika]

I say go for it but think about people who don't have much free time. Imo don't make something that would require more than 30 minutes to complete without including some ability to save. Or the quick save feature (and the hell do I know how we do this) would be a way to go.

This said, I really like the idea you have for your project. 

 

[SLEEP]

Save points are for sissies, my brother never uses them. He lost a bunch of progress once, and was like "Sis you gotta show my how to use save points". I tried to teach him, but alas, he just couldn't. Because save points are for sissies, bros wouldn't understand.

Save points often balance difficulty, or how long you expect a player to be able to play competently. An easy game can have less save points, because it's less stressful to play competently. However, RPGs are largely RNG (Random Number Generator, luck based) games. What this means, is luck plays a huge part in how stressful it is to play. A game like Dark Souls has no RNG, everything is predictable and competent play is solely the player's responsibility. Although a very different game, the first Super Mario Bros game is the same. Nothing is RNG, enemies behave predictably, Frick ups happen because you weren't good enough. However, in an RPG, enemies are unpredictable and Frick ups happen because you're not psychic. How do you reliably know if your opponent will tackle, ultima, or defend against you? You really don't. You can know their move pool, but not what they'll choose from it. Of course, competent play is involved in an RPG, but they usually have save points like an easy game would, to balance for competence and RNG. A hard RPG is going to want some enemy AI scripts (reduce RNG) and enough save points to balance difficulty (because a player can only play competently for so long).

NES RPGs are dated, and come from game developers who were only learning how to make good games in the genre, they were beginners themselves! SNES RPGs are when RPG developers really mastered the art, if you're looking for some retro-inspiration, don't look at beginners, look at what happened when those beginners got good at what they were doing, and became the masters!

 

[Chad Sexington]

If I were playing your game, I think I would want at least some indication on how long each dungeon is before going inside. If not an exact length in time posted, but maybe a Short, Medium, Long nomenclature. Or maybe you could make it part of the lore with made up names that count for length. Or maybe just NPCs near the dungeon entrance that gave hints through normal dialogue about how long it took them in the dungeon.


I would want something.