Savescumming, respeccing, and cheating in RPGs

[cleansingcarnage]

On the topic of save scumming, I have done my fair share of it but I always do know and feel that it is cheating and that I'm cheating myself out of having a more meaningful experience with the game. I always enjoy a playthrough more and feel that the consequences and endings are more earned when I stick with what happens, and it makes subsequent playthroughs more rewarding, as well.

I wouldn't have enjoyed BG3 anywhere near as much if I didn't play it blind and just stick with the way it played out my first time.

[Acrux]

That argument doesn't resonate with me anyway, as game designers are all - to a man - mental midgets and extremely degenerate.

Even Sid Meier?!?

Sid Meier

Sid was one of my programming heroes growing up, but if you look around him there's a lot of chaos. MicroProse bought out and scuttled, Firaxis is a mess, his proteges like Soren Johnson have gone full SJW. Maybe Brian Reynolds - I can find almost nothing about him for the past several years and it sounds like he only consults.

Not to mention Sid is - Miyamoto forgive me - a Lutheran.

[Oyster Sauce]

*A warrior fights an ogre. He fails because his combat stats are too low. He dies, loads a save, and fights the ogre again until he wins.*
Ah perfect, life goes on

*A thief breaks into a home. He fails because his stealth stats are too low. He gets caught, loads a save, and breaks in again until he wins.*
NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT

[rusty_shackleford]

*A warrior fights an ogre. He fails because his combat stats are too low. He dies, loads a save, and fights the ogre again until he wins.*
Ah perfect, life goes on

Being able to reload right outside the fight is also save scumming.

[The_Mask]

Josh Sawyer prebuffing to beat a map is savescum metagaming.

Josh Sawyer is to blame for all of this.

[Xenich]

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.

Can you explain this? What did they do to the chests?

Before the change, you could reload a save and the game would act like you opened the chest for the first time, giving you a random roll.

After the change, if you opened the chest, the game would remember you did and so even if you opened the chest again after reloading, it would still be the same crap from before the reload.

The RNG had a horrible time (at least in my game) of giving me complete crap gear, even after a really major encounter. I would often get gear that was useless to my builds or focus (ie getting a staff when I had ranged, etc...).

Before it wasn't too bad as if I got a horrible roll, I could reload once or twice and at least get something usable and to be honest, I only did this on the major encounters (it would be tedious and pointless to do this on every chest).

Like I said, they should have hand crafted loot in the game and placed them accordingly to encounters, giving the items names and likeness to their encounters and locations. The RNG system was just phoned in garbage.

[Xenich]

The solution to savescumming isn't to modify other mechanics, it's to get rid of savescumming. Anything else is a bandaid.

So make every game a roguelike?

[rusty_shackleford]

The solution to savescumming isn't to modify other mechanics, it's to get rid of savescumming. Anything else is a bandaid.

So make every game a roguelike?

Have you never played a game with anti-save scumming features?

[Rand]

The solution to savescumming isn't to modify other mechanics, it's to get rid of savescumming. Anything else is a bandaid.

So make every game a roguelike?

Have you never played a game with anti-save scumming features?

I have. Then I downloaded and installed a mod to make it stop that fascist **** with the savegames.

[Xenich]

The solution to savescumming isn't to modify other mechanics, it's to get rid of savescumming. Anything else is a bandaid.

So make every game a roguelike?

Have you never played a game with anti-save scumming features?

D:OS, chest loot mechanic is my experience. Do you have an example of one?

[rusty_shackleford]

So make every game a roguelike?

Have you never played a game with anti-save scumming features?

D:OS, chest loot mechanic is my experience. Do you have an example of one?

I already used dork souls, it has no discrete saves but instead the game is constantly saving.
KCD requires you to sleep to save, and otherwise has a 'save & quit''(suspend game) option.

[Xenich]

Have you never played a game with anti-save scumming features?

D:OS, chest loot mechanic is my experience. Do you have an example of one?

I already used dork souls, it has no discrete saves but instead the game is constantly saving.
KCD requires you to sleep to save, and otherwise has a 'save & quit''(suspend game) option.

KCD yes, didn't like it... another example of spending a while doing things, hitting pause, sitting back to play a bit, getting distracted, etc... then not making it to a sleep and losing hours of play if I remember right.

I can live with a game generated auto-save feature that is on a timed limit that is reasonable, but for FFS, losing hours of play is not game play, it is ******** punishment over stupid ****.

[rusty_shackleford]

I can live with a game generated auto-save feature that is on a timed limit that is reasonable, but for FFS, losing hours of play is not game play, it is ******** punishment over stupid ****.

it has an autosave, and it even has a consumable you can craft to be able to save wherever you want.

[Xenich]

I can live with a game generated auto-save feature that is on a timed limit that is reasonable, but for FFS, losing hours of play is not game play, it is ******** punishment over stupid ****.

it has an autosave, and it even has a consumable you can craft to be able to save wherever you want.

Yeah, looks like auto-save is 5 mins (can be tweaked in the ini as well).

I want to say it was this game I had issues with... had to be something that ****** me off...

Wait, it doesn't stagger auto-save does it? It uses the same save? I remember something really annoying me that kept screwing up my games about it. Been too long though.

[PixiGreen]

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

Could you expand on this argument?


To be clear, I don't consider cosmetic modifications to be 'cheating'. With regards to your original post about changing your appearance, I'd be fine as long as there's a good reason for it to exist in the gameworld. My issue with it and 'respec' features is it's just plopped in the game with little care given for it having a reason to exist, and in the case of respeccing, whether it negatively harms the game's intended difficulty.
Mods like 'No Alphabets' are actually the inverse: the gamedevs have purposely made a gameworld that is internally inconsistent, and the mod is an attempt to fix this.

---

IIRC, in Runescape you could change your appearance by going to a wizard who used magic to do it. That's a perfectly valid explanation in a high fantasy world.

My point is, that the lines people draw about what is acceptable and what is not are very personal and arbitrary. We all have them and they are all different. You do not want an option to change the appearance unless it is somehow built into the game world. Some people demand a complicated cumbersome inventory system, because "if you do not pick up every item individually - it does not feel real". Someone is against respec on principle even if you misclicked choosing a new feat, another does not mind partial respec but only with a special trainer. Someone needs to change the look of an NPC because that look was not justified (Wyll, for example) and another feels offended by the idea because that will be insult to the artistic vision.

It's all personal, all individual, all subjective.

My position is - as long as it only affects your character (in the single-player game) - bring it on! All QoL options there are!

[rusty_shackleford]

My point is, that the lines people draw about what is acceptable and what is not are very personal and arbitrary.

I've drawn the line at: "What can and should happen in the gameworld?"
That's not arbitrary in the least. That's just simulationism.

(To be clear, this is a response to your entire post, but I quoted the relevant bit.)

[Xenich]

I can live with a game generated auto-save feature that is on a timed limit that is reasonable, but for FFS, losing hours of play is not game play, it is ******** punishment over stupid ****.

it has an autosave, and it even has a consumable you can craft to be able to save wherever you want.

Yeah, looks like auto-save is 5 mins (can be tweaked in the ini as well).

I want to say it was this game I had issues with... had to be something that ****** me off...

Wait, it doesn't stagger auto-save does it? It uses the same save? I remember something really annoying me that kept screwing up my games about it. Been too long though.

OK, started looking into this because I couldn't remember why I got ****** at KCD concerning saves...

The auto-save system was... problematic because it was not consistent. It didn't work as it should, often saved at odd times while not saving at all for long periods or after significant times. It was behaving pretty badly when I tried it and this apparently was a common complaint back then.

I would imagine if it consistently saved in the intervals that is claimed (5 mins) then it wouldn't be a big deal, but because of its problems, you would often end up having to use a main save that could be hours before because the auto-save didn't trigger or for some reason decided to fire off at the dumbest of times.

I would think if it were 10-15 min auto save and shared a rotation with a couple of slots, it would be fine, but from what I remember it was such a pain that I got tired of it and DL the save anywhere mod so I could make sure I didn't lose large amounts of progress.

[rusty_shackleford]

No, which is why you see cool things like cursed equipment or traps that actually do something.

Though many of them allowed saving anywhere.

The only way to save in most of the Wizardry games is to go all the way back to town.

Most Ultima games didn't gameover when you died, by the way.
https://wiki.ultimacodex.com/wiki/Character_death

[Vaako]

Save scumming I find justified if it is to beat ridiculous rng. In games like metaphor refantazio you sometimes have a few cut scenes/dialogue after events where it makes sense to savescum before that you probably wont over do it there anyway unless you play on console maybe. Because its a waste of time and easier to just use a trainer anyway and set your cooked stuff to 99 max. But thats even less fun and pointless and takes away any challenge. But on the other hand if you want all gear for all characters and you dont plan on playing through the game like 7 times, cheats are a nice time save.

[AliciaDurge]

I agree to disagree tbh. Yeah I don't like savescumming much either, but it doesn't touch me if another player uses it. There is an option just not to use it because you do you in playthroughs. I like BG3 honor mode a lot due to not savescumming tho.

[Lord of Riva]

A game in which I want to savescum is a game badly designed.

[NotAI]

There is currently no good solution to just letting the player save whenever they want. Specifically in long games.

If you only autosave, you have to really eliminate all bugs, because the entire playthrough can easily get soft locked. You need some item, didn't get it, autosave overwrites your stuff, can't go back to area for story reasons, that's it, restart from the beginning. Not fun.

Also the issue is the same as ppl buying characters in MMORPGs because there are plenty of professionals who lack free time but earn a lot more than the country's average paycheck. Result they will pay 5K-20K for a 3/4 leveled up character to start with. WoW had this and nearly any MMORPG does and now companies just do it explicitly by design, which is usually the only reason their monetization ******** works at all.

The issue is that people who have limited free time will strongly prefer games with save anywhere anytime. Losing progress for outside-the-game reasons is not fun. Especially if the player is a careful type that explores everything. The problem with with type of play is that it makes losing progress and replaying A LOT LESS fun. Even though it's a much MORE fun way to play the game ONCE. See. Tradeoffs. No solution.

[Vaako]

There is currently no good solution to just letting the player save whenever they want. Specifically in long games.

If you only autosave, you have to really eliminate all bugs, because the entire playthrough can easily get soft locked. You need some item, didn't get it, autosave overwrites your stuff, can't go back to area for story reasons, that's it, restart from the beginning. Not fun.

Also the issue is the same as ppl buying characters in MMORPGs because there are plenty of professionals who lack free time but earn a lot more than the country's average paycheck. Result they will pay 5K-20K for a 3/4 leveled up character to start with. WoW had this and nearly any MMORPG does and now companies just do it explicitly by design, which is usually the only reason their monetization ******** works at all.

The issue is that people who have limited free time will strongly prefer games with save anywhere anytime. Losing progress for outside-the-game reasons is not fun. Especially if the player is a careful type that explores everything. The problem with with type of play is that it makes losing progress and replaying A LOT LESS fun. Even though it's a much MORE fun way to play the game ONCE. See. Tradeoffs. No solution.

There is a pretty good solution dont have random loot drops from unique enemies for example. Most games nowadays will give you an auto save anyway before a bossfight or a dialogue choice which might kill you anyway. Other stuff like saving before chests so you dont lose lockpicks, can also be bad game design if lockpick supply is too low or it is too hard. People dont like to backtrack to chests and take mental notes. At least not in huge openworlds where the content of these chests is often just garbage you sell anyway.

[Xenich]

There is currently no good solution to just letting the player save whenever they want. Specifically in long games.

If you only autosave, you have to really eliminate all bugs, because the entire playthrough can easily get soft locked. You need some item, didn't get it, autosave overwrites your stuff, can't go back to area for story reasons, that's it, restart from the beginning. Not fun.

Also the issue is the same as ppl buying characters in MMORPGs because there are plenty of professionals who lack free time but earn a lot more than the country's average paycheck. Result they will pay 5K-20K for a 3/4 leveled up character to start with. WoW had this and nearly any MMORPG does and now companies just do it explicitly by design, which is usually the only reason their monetization ******** works at all.

The issue is that people who have limited free time will strongly prefer games with save anywhere anytime. Losing progress for outside-the-game reasons is not fun. Especially if the player is a careful type that explores everything. The problem with with type of play is that it makes losing progress and replaying A LOT LESS fun. Even though it's a much MORE fun way to play the game ONCE. See. Tradeoffs. No solution.

There is a pretty good solution dont have random loot drops from unique enemies for example. Most games nowadays will give you an auto save anyway before a bossfight or a dialogue choice which might kill you anyway. Other stuff like saving before chests so you dont lose lockpicks, can also be bad game design if lockpick supply is too low or it is too hard. People dont like to backtrack to chests and take mental notes. At least not in huge openworlds where the content of these chests is often just garbage you sell anyway.

I don't mind being locked out of content if I take a risk, or make a major mistake, but the problem with many games is that the risk vs reward isn't balanced well. If you are going to tell a person who takes a risk that they are completely shut off for taking the risk, the reward shouldn't be lack luster. A real risk should provide a real reward or direct benefit to the progression. Though as you pointed out, a lot of this is solved with hand crafted content and well thought out and placed elements of play that build off not simply the success, but failure as well.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Rusty already told all of you, that you are playing games wrong, you should stop plaing and delete games when you die instead of loading saves.

[asf]

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

[Xenich]

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

Yep, forcing is always stupid. Make a design and intent for play, promote it, etc... tell people this is the way it was designed, if you play it outside of that design, it is your problem, don't ***** about it if the game doesn't live up to your expectations if you do such. Past that, leave it alone.

Simply putting in a option at the start of the game with a disclaimer is all that is needed.

"For the full benefit of the games design, we don't allow "save anywhere", it is recommend that to get the most enjoyment out of our design that you play it with our designed save system. Note that selecting the option to save anywhere could greatly effect the overall games enjoyment process". Then make the option perm for the games stating config (for people like me so I don't get tempted with an easy button.

Done, move on.

Those who throw tantrums at that, well.. go pick up your libtard badge and seether in the corner.

[rusty_shackleford]

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

Yep, forcing is always stupid. Make a design and intent for play, promote it, etc... tell people this is the way it was designed, if you play it outside of that design, it is your problem, don't ***** about it if the game doesn't live up to your expectations if you do such. Past that, leave it alone.

Simply putting in a option at the start of the game with a disclaimer is all that is needed.

"For the full benefit of the games design, we don't allow "save anywhere", it is recommend that to get the most enjoyment out of our design that you play it with our designed save system. Note that selecting the option to save anywhere could greatly effect the overall games enjoyment process".

Done, move on.

Those who throw tantrums at that, well.. go pick up your libtard badge and seether in the corner.

"This game expects me to play it without cheating?? The designers are stupid!"

[Xenich]

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

Yep, forcing is always stupid. Make a design and intent for play, promote it, etc... tell people this is the way it was designed, if you play it outside of that design, it is your problem, don't ***** about it if the game doesn't live up to your expectations if you do such. Past that, leave it alone.

Simply putting in a option at the start of the game with a disclaimer is all that is needed.

"For the full benefit of the games design, we don't allow "save anywhere", it is recommend that to get the most enjoyment out of our design that you play it with our designed save system. Note that selecting the option to save anywhere could greatly effect the overall games enjoyment process".

Done, move on.

Those who throw tantrums at that, well.. go pick up your libtard badge and seether in the corner.

"This game expects me to play it without cheating?? The designers are stupid!"

"Your doing something I don't like! It upsets me! There should be laws!!! I hate when people do things I don't like!! The horror!!!!"

Libtard

[rusty_shackleford]

devs trying to force players to play in the way they think is the 'right' way to play is always such a good idea

Yep, forcing is always stupid. Make a design and intent for play, promote it, etc... tell people this is the way it was designed, if you play it outside of that design, it is your problem, don't ***** about it if the game doesn't live up to your expectations if you do such. Past that, leave it alone.

Simply putting in a option at the start of the game with a disclaimer is all that is needed.

"For the full benefit of the games design, we don't allow "save anywhere", it is recommend that to get the most enjoyment out of our design that you play it with our designed save system. Note that selecting the option to save anywhere could greatly effect the overall games enjoyment process".

Done, move on.

Those who throw tantrums at that, well.. go pick up your libtard badge and seether in the corner.

"This game expects me to play it without cheating?? The designers are stupid!"

"Your doing something I don't like! It upsets me! There should be laws!!! I hate when people do things I don't like!! The horror!!!!"

Libtard

Yeah, imagine a game having rules, how horrifying.