Save Game systems... thinking out loud.

AD

AD

Finder of things, Doer of stuff
Ok, so here I was on IRC and I was mentioning that I tried and quite enjoyed the game Mirror's edge. It's a little like a FPS crossed with an oldschool platformer in the vein of the original super mario bros. The notable exception I take to the games is that it has a merciless save system attributable to it's longer level length and checkpoint save system. When you get into the really tough later chapters it becomes really frustrating when the checkpoints are further between and also since since it won't save your last checkpoint if you turn the game off! It will only save at the end of the level.

I'm curious about how people would feel about Wing Commander's save system if it were released today... It's not exactly like the parallels don't exist... racing games make you re-race the whole level/track if you fail. Would it bother your friends to have to play a whole mission over again when they die? Having navpoints act like checkpoints is doable, but at what point does the save system make the game too easy? Do you think you should be allowed to save anywhere in a Future WC game?

I could see this being a greater issue in a privateer style game too where dying could mean hours lost....
 
I am honestly torn on this. I really feel that if you allow people to 'resume' a mission in the middle you're breaking the flow of the mission. Missions are designed to run from beginning to end to tell a whole story. Sure, you CAN stop in the middle of a chapter, but isn't it much better to read to the end of the chapter and THEN put the book down?

On the other hand, I've played Starlancer, and anyone whose played Starlancer will tell you that space sims need mid-missions saves - especially when just one person in your group died and you're trying to play the co-op campaign.
 
Jason_Ryock said:
On the other hand, I've played Starlancer, and anyone whose played Starlancer will tell you that space sims need mid-missions saves - especially when just one person in your group died and you're trying to play the co-op campaign.
Click to expand...

Dang it why did you take the one example I had in mind. I'd disagree about reloading in co-op making it too easy but then again my friend who plays isn't so great... so whatever.

I think for SOME missions it would be nice to have mid-game reloading. Kurasawa anyone? I don't really want to do the asteroid fight everytime I go to the Ralari.
 
For me it depends on how far apart the save points are. Everything >10 minutes is usually a problem, especially if the game in question is a 'fun' game rather then a simulation. I often like to play only one save point of those between some work and it really sucks to have to replay that part because you couldn't save when you needed to turn off the machine.
 
It depends on the size of the mission(and the feel), a simple respawn at the nearest nav-point should do the trick(ofcourse there should be a catch, while your friends are flying ships that have been blown to bits you shouldn't be able to just fly in with a brandnew ship and a full missile loadout - " Guys, I'm outta torpedoes, blow me up please?" )
 
Mace said:
It depends on the size of the mission(and the feel), a simple respawn at the nearest nav-point should do the trick(ofcourse there should be a catch, while your friends are flying ships that have been blown to bits you shouldn't be able to just fly in with a brandnew ship and a full missile loadout - " Guys, I'm outta torpedoes, blow me up please?" )
Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea - one that isn't dissimilar from what a lot of other genre online games incorporates. But here we are also kind of splitting what to expect into two subgroups. I'm sure noone would disagree that respawing in such a manner wouldn't quite work for single player.

Games such as Counterstrike which are match based usually only respawn at the start of each match with monetary penalties for dying and losing a round. Something like deathmatch usually lets players respawn until the round either ends or time is up, usually without any upgrades the player may have found.
I'm not sure I entirely agree on this model for a co-op mode. I'd rather see players that die be able to switch to non player ships in your wing that haven't been destroyed yet. Part of the objective of Co-op modes in a Wing Commander game would be to reward the players for actually playing as a team. I don't think respawns do that.

On the other hand, if we're playing a straight proving grounds style multiplayer match or a space deathmatch of sorts then respawning would/should happen in some fashion. I think WC Arena handled this well enough. Plus, an ofline mode where players compete for leaderboard rank wouldn't work if you could save anywhere, since the results wouldn't really be useful for anything.

To sum up, I think we've identified three unique situations that should probably each handle dying differently
  • Single Player - mission based
  • Multiplayer Co-op - mission based
  • Multiplayer - deathmatch etc.
 
I think longer missions ( in singleplayer) should have a possibility to save mid-game.
And even shorter ones: Why don't automatically save at a waypoint (always overwriting)?
I think I would like it, although it would make the game a lot easier and faster to win. So you should have harder missions then, perhaps like those in UE and Standoff (which are really hard sometimes)

Of course there should be additional saving with slots, as we know it. But not in-flight.


Multiplayer Coop-mode:
Saves: Yes.
Respawn: No.

Miltiplayer Death-match, CTF or similar MP-games:
That depends on the game mode.
something like Counterstrike: No saves, no respawn.
Last man standing: as above.
CTF: Respawn
Deathmatch: Respawn
 
Games such as Counterstrike which are match based usually only respawn at the start of each match with monetary penalties for dying and losing a round. Something like deathmatch usually lets players respawn until the round either ends or time is up, usually without any upgrades the player may have found.
Click to expand...

Rune handled this very well. Originally the campaign was singleplayer, but a later mod allowed for a co-op campaign(they also beefed up strength and number of the enemies dynamicly depending on the number of players in the game). If you die, you fall back to the last checkpoint that was hit by any player in the game, but without weapons or other upgrades you had gathered in the mean time(these were however dropped by you when you got killed, so your fellow players could pick them up and use them or you could pick them up on your return(and sometimes it would be a long walk).

In WC it would make sense that you would respawn/jump in at the nearest navpoint, but to make it fair have your ship status reverted to the state of the last navpoint you visited(this might also lead to the fact that you could be taken way out of the battlefield and that you would have to race back towards it to help out your friends, or catch up with them after the battle while flying manually in realtime to a rendez-vous(say the battle is nearly over at nav 2, so you'll head for nav 3 and wait there) point(autopiloting on individually and crossing a large distance in a few minutes wouldn't make sense)
 
I suppose it depends on what form the next game takes.

If it's a single player story game then I see two options -- stay the course with between-mission saves (better, go back to cool gameflow saves like guys in beds) or develop a flight recorder system with a 'jump in' feature. I believe the Lucasarts sim games had this (and did anyone ever use the WC2 flight recorder for anything?) -- it let you watch your mission from various angles and then re-enter at any particular point. A good example of this system working well is the XBLA version of Duke 3D, oddly enough -- it records your whole gameplay on a particular level and lets you pick a point to go back to if you die.

If it's a multiplayer game or an MMO then we need to do some more thinking. One of the awkward things about Privateer Online has always been, in my mind anyway, figuring out how to deal with player death or ship loss. This is as much a question of fiction integration as it is mechanics. (I'll go right out and say it -- I think the 'Attempt 2' concept with pilot clones was fairly lame -- it added an uncomfortable layer of story that shouldn't exist in Wing Commander's world.)
 
I did use the WC2 recorder on occasion, but I thought it only let you watch up until the point in the mission you were up to. Once you were finished with it, you were back in the cockpit at the same point in the mission where you started watching the recording in the first place.
 
I think the way it is now is fine tbh.

In Mirrors Edge/Tomb Raider style game, there are several hard bits per level - the levels themselves are split up into a series of miniature levels and usually a checkpoint.
Classically WC games are/were split into groups of missions within a system and it depends on how you do in all the missions to how the system turns out, so in effect there is little difference.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
A good example of this system working well is the XBLA version of Duke 3D, oddly enough -- it records your whole gameplay on a particular level and lets you pick a point to go back to if you die.
Click to expand...

I loved this feature about Duke 3D for XBLA.
 
This is one of the elements that will make or break the next WC game. I think it is fair to say that a good, well written multi player co-op will be essential. In my mind, you incorporate the traditional elements of WC that made it so great - story, gameplay, interactive engagement - and combine them with multiplayer teamwork.

I envision something supporting, perhaps, up to 6 players. The name of the game will be simplicity - let's do a few things great, instead of everything kind of good. So, while the variety of missions and their objectives should be diverse, the focus should remain on keeping the gameplay as intuitive and 'un forced' as possible. (Maybe this means maintaining restraint, such as keeping the number of player controlled fighters to a minimum so the ones that exist are really well thought out - ditto for space environments/planets.)

As mentioned, the issue of regeneration will be a crucial factor. Let's say you have your 5 buddies flying with you - maybe you all don't even participate in the same mission together. Hypothetically, let's assume one two-element flight (or wing, in wc speak) patrols to the carrier's starboard, the other wing to port, and the third stays behind guarding the carrier. To begin, let's go ahead and remove the possibility of death from the occasion. Let's be honest; none of us ever really died playing any of the WC games. Even if you *didn't* eject, you watched your funeral and started again. Why bother with that complicated variable in multi player?

This leaves automatic ejection - a concept which has already been around for some time. (I think either X-Wing or Tie Fighter introduced it.) So you didn't dodge that Paw and you lose your ship - what then? Presumably, we need to come up with an activity that keeps the player from becoming bored. I, personally, am not a big fan of simply regenerating in this kind of a game situation. Unfortunately, I don't see that there are many alternatives. I don't think many gamers would be content with rudimentary control of their character in deep space while they wait for S&R to pick them up.

On the other hand, maybe there's a creative way around this. If, once you eject, you can 'stay out of trouble' for a period of time, say, 30-60 seconds, maybe you get to re-launch from the carrier - but there would be a catch.

Let's say there's only a finite number of fighters embarked on your carrier for this particular campaign. How many do you waste on this mission? It could even be less complicated than that; due to other fighters launched elsewhere, your squadron only has X number available at any time.

I like this because there still is strategy - you're not simply respawning at the nav point and going at it. Let's say you eject; one of those other players guarding the carrier might rush to the nav point while you re-launch after your 60 second delay and sit tight by the flattop.

Someone brought up autopilot - an interesting situation when there are multiple player characters involved. I actually think Wing Commander already gives us an out here. Several cut scenes show the characters linking their nav systems up before going to autopilot. Presumably, once you and your buddies are clear of the launch tube, you could go through a similar process. Once everyone reports ready, say, by pressing the 'y' key, the flight lead could strike 'a' and you'd be on your way.

Now, this absolutely becomes difficult if different players are assigned different missions (see scenario above.) There again, maybe that's too complicated for the first release. I really do think simplicity will win the day with a new sequel. Maybe it only supports 4 players, but it's an awesome, fast-paced campaign where close teamwork is critical from start to finish.
 
Flashpoint said:
I think the way it is now is fine tbh.

In Mirrors Edge/Tomb Raider style game, there are several hard bits per level - the levels themselves are split up into a series of miniature levels and usually a checkpoint.
Classically WC games are/were split into groups of missions within a system and it depends on how you do in all the missions to how the system turns out, so in effect there is little difference.
Click to expand...

My issue with Mirror's edge isn't the checkpoints exactly, though some of the later ones are pretty punishing especially if you are trying to not shoot anyone. The biggest complaint is that you ***cannot save at all*** until the end of the level. If you quit, you don't restart at the checkpoint next time you play, you have to replay all the points in the level until you get to the next level. That's not so bad early on. However, when you barely make it through by the skin of your teeth, only to find the next section just as tough, it becomes a chore when you must turn it off because you need to sleep or it's time for work or something.

This is more like having to actually play every mission in a given system in a WC game (3 to five missions ) before being able to save. If you turn off the game you have to replay them all instead of just the last one that you are having trouble with.

I don't personally have a problem replaying individual WC missions ( I do remember some of the tough ones taking 30 - 45 minutes back in the day) but I can see where some people might want at least the option of mid mission saves on some of the longer missions. I don't know if the Duke3D system would be necessary but it's an interesting option. In the classic WC games you only ever really had a lot of trouble at one or two nav points anyway, so letting the player save after he clears a nav point and autopilots wouldn't be making it so much easier as less tedious. And they're limited to their ship's/missions's state at that giving time of saving as opposed to given a fresh ship.

One thing that peeves me at times though is having to sit through a really long cutscene, perhaps in the middle of a mission and then not being able to skip it if you have to replay the mission. It may be a cool cutscene, but by the 3rd and fourth time it gets annoying, so they either need to let you skip it or autosave your mission as soon as the scene is over.

I'd have to give coop some thought, thought, though I like the idea of having multiple wings with different objectives. WC4 has something like this though it wasn't fleshed out much beyond comm chatter. The developers did tout the new features as being special with the world living beyond your own mission. A quick example is catscratch's satellite recovery mission, where you have to abandon your own objectives to save him, though there are also secondary mission assignments listed in the computer for hawk and other on many of the speradon missions among others...

Theoretically, the wings were supposed to be litterally doing their missions while you did yours with potentially you being able to find the other wing and watch them going about their objectives, whereas practiaclly I'm not so sure the game ever actually acheived this, though I remember doing badly on the capture the carrier mission once and another wing coming to assist me... maybe I imagined that though.

A similar system could be used for coop, but I think their objectives would definitely need to intersect to make it worthwhile. On pair sweeps ahead and clears out navpoints for a the pair in a bombers or something... or a two point ambush with one pair attacking a carrier group from opposite sides where it's essential that it be coordinated so that you attack at the same time, or one wing is a diversion to draw the enemy fighters away from the actual target... I'm sure you can think of more creative examples.

I don't really see saving in Coop being that different than in single player though. whoever hosts would have all the relevant save info on his PC Or console, with multiple save slots you can go back to whicheveer mission you saved at. But while you are playing the mission, might be nice if there was a way in coop to at least save at certain navpoints ore something like that.
 
I did use the WC2 recorder on occasion, but I thought it only let you watch up until the point in the mission you were up to. Once you were finished with it, you were back in the cockpit at the same point in the mission where you started watching the recording in the first place.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was referring to the SWOTL/X-Wing/etc. recorder that let you jump back in... Wing Commander II didn't have that feature.


This leaves automatic ejection - a concept which has already been around for some time. (I think either X-Wing or Tie Fighter introduced it.)
Click to expand...

TIE Fighter may have had this, but X-Wing sure didn't -- once you "died", your character was stupidly locked. And of course there was no point to dying *or* ejecting, since the game made you do the same mission over and over before you could progress anyway.


Let's say there's only a finite number of fighters embarked on your carrier for this particular campaign. How many do you waste on this mission? It could even be less complicated than that; due to other fighters launched elsewhere, your squadron only has X number available at any time.
Click to expand...

Another option would be to have the dead player replace one of the AI wingmen engaged in the same battle (like in Battlestations Midway). Players could select the number of wingmen in a particular flight as the number of 'respawns' allowed.
 
It's probably been said, but I think the best way would be to have the game autosave after each navpoint or completed objective without overwriting.

It's like in Standoff, where you after a long, tedious patrol, difficult in itself, get raped by 13 gothri at the last navpoint, forcing you to replay everything. It would be pretty sweet to be able go back to last navpoint, or any previous nav to change your tactics before things went downhill. WC3's saving Flint mission was annoying in the same way. That way you could replay the entire mission if you felt it was necessary, but still jump right into the latest part of the mission before you messed up.
 
It doesn't actually matter what the save game system is - what matters is that it's integrated into the game (though I do think allowing saving only between missions is better for the gameplay overall).

If a game allows saving mid-flight, the missions will be different than they would be with a save-between-missions system. Once, back in the 1990s, I tried playing through WC1 with one of those utilities that allow you to save a game by taking a snapshot of the computer's memory. The feeling was significantly different. Since I was able to save anytime, anywhere, no mission represented any significant challenge. Even the "Save the Ralari" mission was pretty simple. It took me a few attempts, but I didn't have to repeat the rest of the mission first, so I just kept on replaying that navpoint until I got it done - when otherwise, I would have given up after several attempts and simply moved on to Rostov.

Missions like that Flint rescue in WC3, or the Standoff mission Dyret mentioned (I can certainly vouch for that one :p) are designed specifically with the current savegame system in mind. The Flint rescue was a pretty unremarkable mission - as I recall, you went out, shot down a few fighters, killed a capship, and that was it. The thing that made it so memorable was the fact that it was tacked on to the tail-end of an already difficult mission. It was frustrating as heck, but it was *good* frustration, the kind that gives you a lot of satisfaction after you finally get through the mission.

(WC4 was worse, though - with the increased missile firepower, every second mission was *that* frustrating, at least in my eyes. The taunting restart/load/quit menu didn't help either :p )
 
Point is taking on a fleet with a battle-damaged starfighter against all odds is part of the gaming experience. You are a hero remember? You refitted your strike fighter with torpedoes to take on the bad guys singlehandedly. My ancient 386SX had over 20 minutes of reloading time when i failed a mission, die a few times, and damn sure you will get it right soon enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top