Savescumming, respeccing, and cheating in RPGs

[Xenich]

One thing I don't understand.

Design a game for a certain intent and play.

People can then play it, but some may not enjoy it in that manner... its a single player game, I really don't care about how you enjoy the game, even if it is ********.

What I care about is how you enjoy the game becoming the standard of development, "forcing" a certain play style because you think it is best (ie bouncing ball markers, infinite respecs, never a negative element in play, etc...) as a core forced design.

I have mentioned this before, but I hated D:OS because of the change they did to "save the game from save scumming" the chests. Their implementation for loot was absolutely ******** and ruined the game (RNG garbage generated loot is atrocious). The game should have been designed with static loot, hand placed and tailored to the encounters, areas, etc... (similar to BG2), but tantrum throwing HOA ******* were worried about people rerolling the chest to get something even remotely relevant to their build (an actual reward for the tough encounter) and this was created due to the same ******* demanding "RNG loot" because "muh replability". They created the problem, then turned around and whined about people rolling a few times to get something useable.

So the game I played was ****, boring, pointless in character development because I had poor rolls which seemed to always give me gear that my builds had no use for. I didn't mind the difficulty of the game because of it, but the risk vs reward was horrible in my play through and I really didn't enjoy the game that much because of it (I enjoy building my character, tailoring gear to builds, etc... RPG statistical gaming play).

That was the way the game was designed though, and the game was **** because of it, all because someone thought it would be wrong for someone to "reload" the game a few times to get something relevant and so they had to "change" it to certainly stop that poor behavior!! I played the game through, but it was extremely boring and it was the reason I never could go back to playing it again. Don't get me wrong, I love the games mechanics and over all play, but the loot system is beyond ********.


"Hey drood, just play it 500 times, maybe you will get some relevant loot this time!"

[Faceless_Sentinel]

People need to learn to accept what they got and go on. Your game doesn't need to be a series of perfects, just take what you get and go on with it.
I rarely ever reload a game outside of when I get a gameover or encounter a bug now. Got an outcome you didn't like? Too bad, suck it up and move on.


There's a strong aversion to letting go, and people need to learn it now rather than later.

It's a different playstyle and often depends on the game design. In Tides of Numenera your "fails" can lead to a more interesting narration or outcome. It's not a failure per se, it's a different outcome, different path. But in many games, a bad roll is a punishable failure with negative consequences for something you could not control. Considering most gamers go through an RPG once, no wonder they want to see the best (the "right") outcome during that single run.

Different styles of gaming.

Why not just read a book or watch a movie instead then?

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things you do in games in real life?

[Acrux]

Well,I think there's a correlary with playing out scenarios:

Don't play games with bad design.

All I'm saying is try being a little more simulationist when you pay a game. It is rewarding and if you are "bored" with rpgs, it can really change how you feel about them.

[Acrux]

It's a different playstyle and often depends on the game design. In Tides of Numenera your "fails" can lead to a more interesting narration or outcome. It's not a failure per se, it's a different outcome, different path. But in many games, a bad roll is a punishable failure with negative consequences for something you could not control. Considering most gamers go through an RPG once, no wonder they want to see the best (the "right") outcome during that single run.

Different styles of gaming.

Why not just read a book or watch a movie instead then?

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things in real life?

But you are reducing the interactivity if you keep reloading to get the "right" outcome.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Why not just read a book or watch a movie instead then?

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things in real life?

But you are reducing the interactivity if you keep reloading to get the "right" outcome.

I never played a game, where failing some check open another outcome rather then just ending event or chain of events.

[Trickster]

God you people are disgusting. A fundamental part of a game is that it's played within the boundaries set by its rules.

Listen, the whole point of playing a game is to have fun and get immersed in it, right? So if something happens in the game that ruins that experience, there is nothing bad to load an earlier save and start over. Hell, the games are even designed with that in mind—safe features are baked into the rules. And don't even get me started on those parts where they expect you to lose and come back with a more powerful character.
By your logic, the real 'playing within the boundaries set by its rules' is when you quit the game after you die or start over. Why on earth would anyone want to do that and spoil their fun? Just to show off that they're "playing by the rules", even though they're just placing unnecessary restrictions on themselves? That's absolutely absurd.

[Xenich]

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things in real life?

But you are reducing the interactivity if you keep reloading to get the "right" outcome.

I never played a game, where failing some check open another outcome rather then just ending event or chain of events.

There are tons. Dialogue results are a big one people save scumm and honestly, I agree with them on that one, that is just shaping the story based on the outcome, not based on your decisions. In those cases, you accept what you get and play through as that was the decision you made. (though there are some arguments that are valid concerning extremely poor dialogue writing).

[PixiGreen]

Wow! At least two people here are ready to play emotional support for *****-qunari and crippled black elves in Failguard, because - you can not argue this! - this is definitely "A fundamental part of a game" and "within the boundaries set by its rules."

Guess, mods like No Alphabets should not be used either - definitely affects game's rules.

Enjoy your games, I suppose

P.S. With all seriousness, though, what other fresh subject should we discuss next? I suggest Alignment in DnD.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

But you are reducing the interactivity if you keep reloading to get the "right" outcome.

I never played a game, where failing some check open another outcome rather then just ending event or chain of events.

There are tons. Dialogue results are a big one people save scumm and honestly, I agree with them on that one, that is just shaping the story based on the outcome, not based on your decisions. In those cases, you accept what you get and play through as that was the decision you made. (though there are some arguments that are valid concerning extremely poor dialogue writing).

Give me some example, please, all that comes to my mind is leading to "you fail" in your questlog.

[Trickster]

Give me some example, please, all that comes to my mind is leading to "you fail" in your questlog.

Just imagine the exciting and groundbreaking consequences we get to experience if we happen to caught pickpocketing! Right from the masters of innovation, the creators of Daggerfall. Truly a once in a lifetime gaming experience!

[Xenich]

I never played a game, where failing some check open another outcome rather then just ending event or chain of events.

There are tons. Dialogue results are a big one people save scumm and honestly, I agree with them on that one, that is just shaping the story based on the outcome, not based on your decisions. In those cases, you accept what you get and play through as that was the decision you made. (though there are some arguments that are valid concerning extremely poor dialogue writing).

Give me some example, please, all that comes to my mind is leading to "you fail" in your questlog.

Well, failing a quest would be a natural element of play. You should win some, lose some.

My position is not about "fixing" an outcome, rather the issue where you can't recover (ie you are eventually going to die because of the encounters, so you either accept death and start over the game, or you reload and take a different approach). This is what I mean when I say "recover" in most cases.

In terms of "Well, I chose this dialogue line and it ****** of the NPC, so I failed the quest", well... in those cases I just accept the failed quest and move on in play, and if the game is well designed, those failures will produce different outcomes and branches in the games progression, which is a good thing.

I also like aspects of play where the characters become... injured to some irreversible means (outside of maybe a rare situation, item, or case where it can be fixed) which may hamper game play, but not end the game (ie the character becomes useless and the party can not move forward).

As for people choosing to constantly change the outcome to ideal? Honestly... as long as that mentality of play doesn't force design standards where I am then forced to play that way, I really could care less what people do in their own games.

[Roguey]

Cheaters seething at being called out for cheating

I will happily cheat if that makes the game more enjoyable for me.

[Xenich]

Give me some example, please, all that comes to my mind is leading to "you fail" in your questlog.

Just imagine the exciting and groundbreaking consequences we get to experience if we happen to fail a lock pick! Right from the masters of innovation, the creators of Daggerfall. Truly a once in a lifetime gaming experience!

Well, I fought them, ran, escaped and became an outlaw in that city. If I had quests there, I had to sneak in and do business under the cover of darkness or via secret entrances.

Those were good times.

[Acrux]

"Games aren't innovative anymore and choices don't seem to have any influence on outcomes."

Also, "I'm going to keep reloading until I get the outcome I want."

Maybe bad game developers are just responding to how you already play games.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

In terms of "Well, I chose this dialogue line and it ****** of the NPC, so I failed the quest", well... in those cases I just accept the failed quest and move on in play, and if the game is well designed, those failures will produce different outcomes and branches in the games progression, which is a good thing.

I agree, only I never played a game, where failures produce different outcomes and branches in the games progression, only "you fail" in your quest log. Shepard interview from mass effect 1 comes to mind with 3 different outcomes depending on lines of dialogue you choose, but it doesn't affect anything beyond this quest.

[Nooneatall]

@WhiteShark you have to move all these posts to a new thread now, sorry

[Faceless_Sentinel]

"Games aren't innovative anymore and choices don't seem to have any influence on outcomes."

Also, "I'm going to keep reloading until I get the outcome I want."

Maybe bad game developers are just responding to how you already play games.

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

[Xenich]

@WhiteShark you have to move all these posts to a new thread now, sorry

Can't do that, that would essentially be reloading the thread. We must play it where it lies.

[Acrux]

"Games aren't innovative anymore and choices don't seem to have any influence on outcomes."

Also, "I'm going to keep reloading until I get the outcome I want."

Maybe bad game developers are just responding to how you already play games.

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

"Games aren't innovative anymore and choices don't seem to have any influence on outcomes."

Also, "I'm going to keep reloading until I get the outcome I want."

Maybe bad game developers are just responding to how you already play games.

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

It is not necessary, just when it is clear that event is self-contained and its successful or unsuccessful completion will have no impact on future events, why replay whole game to see all options?

[Statesman]

@WhiteShark you have to move all these posts to a new thread now, sorry

Can't do that, that would essentially be reloading the thread. We must play it where it lies.

Not really. Reloading a thread would be something akin to deleting all posts (up to a certain point) and trying again. Moving everything relevant to a new thread would simply create a branching topic (something that should be familiar to any RPG player) without resetting the event timeline.

[Oyster Sauce]

"Games aren't innovative anymore and choices don't seem to have any influence on outcomes."

Also, "I'm going to keep reloading until I get the outcome I want."

Maybe bad game developers are just responding to how you already play games.

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

[Acrux]

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

No. I would wait several months to start playing it.

[Nooneatall]

Maybe if choice wasn't between "move event forward" or "fail and end event" players wouldn't reloading until they get what they want.

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

Yes of course because I always do whatever my software tells me to do. I would never imagine modifying it to do what I want it to do. That would be sacrilegious.
Modifying software should be illegal. I would never condone someone modifying their game to remove stupid **** that's just there to pad it out so players will buy stuff from the cash shop for example.

[Acrux]

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

Yes of course because I always do whatever my software tells me to do. I would never imagine modifying it to do what I want it to do. That would be sacrilegious.
Modifying software should be illegal. I would never condone someone modifying their game to remove stupid **** that's just there to pad it out so players will buy stuff from the cash shop for example.

I have no problem with modding. I mod things all the time. So, I think you're argument here must be with someone else.

[Nooneatall]

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

Yes of course because I always do whatever my software tells me to do. I would never imagine modifying it to do what I want it to do. That would be sacrilegious.
Modifying software should be illegal. I would never condone someone modifying their game to remove stupid **** that's just there to pad it out so players will buy stuff from the cash shop for example.

I have no problem with modding. I mod things all the time. So, I think you're argument here must be with someone else.

That's cheating though. You aren't playing the game as originally created by the game designer.

[Oyster Sauce]

Why is "all events completed" necessary? In a tabletop rpg - which crpgs are ostensibly derived from - that would never be an option.

You discover a 150 hour RPG months after it came out. You're confident that you'll have a great time playing it. After installing, you see that the devs posted on Bsky that there's going to be a cool new companion and questline released for free tomorrow. It looks really fun, however, it requires players to start a new game for it to be available.

Do you start the game today anyway and go through the entire 150 hour campaign knowing you won't get to experience the extra content you'd enjoy?

Yes of course because I always do whatever my software tells me to do. I would never imagine modifying it to do what I want it to do. That would be sacrilegious.
Modifying software should be illegal. I would never condone someone modifying their game to remove stupid **** that's just there to pad it out so players will buy stuff from the cash shop for example.

what

[rusty_shackleford]

It's a different playstyle and often depends on the game design. In Tides of Numenera your "fails" can lead to a more interesting narration or outcome. It's not a failure per se, it's a different outcome, different path. But in many games, a bad roll is a punishable failure with negative consequences for something you could not control. Considering most gamers go through an RPG once, no wonder they want to see the best (the "right") outcome during that single run.

Different styles of gaming.

Why not just read a book or watch a movie instead then?

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things you do in games in real life?

Just pick up a controller and pretend you're playing, as you'll always win and get everything anyways what's the difference?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Why not just read a book or watch a movie instead then?

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things you do in games in real life?

Just pick up a controller and pretend you're playing, as you'll always win and get everything anyways what's the difference?

Just pick up a stick, wave it like a sword and pretend you killing enemies, what's the difference?

[Nooneatall]

Stupid question, books and movies not interactive. The one can ask, why not just go and do same things you do in games in real life?

Just pick up a controller and pretend you're playing, as you'll always win and get everything anyways what's the difference?

Just pick up a stick, wave it like a sword and pretend you killing enemies, what's the difference?

This thread has all the energy of "You're having fun wrong! Play pretend the way I want you to play pretend or you are cheating! I'm telling Mom!"
I would know having lived with my mom into my late 30s.