General > Discussion
Saving game & replacing units
garthos:
I'm with the developers on this one and tend to favour less of a save game feature. Infact I would like to see the replay battle option be tuned down some. I also think the battles would deliver better gaming experience with more casualties sustained.
I'm also more likely to replay the game again if I was beaten or financially ruined where I'm left to consider I think I could do a better job a second time around and are left with that yearning to see how the game unfolds.
As a big fan of turn based strategy games, I'm in favour of the player losing again and again until they they improve there strategy. (I certainly wouldnt have played the number of hours I have in the civilization series if it wasnt for getting my ass kicked).
I understand the argument of frustration of replaying the same level, but don't agree with a save game option as a solution. This would impact negatively on the game play experience of each battle. Loss of fear and amphosphere.
I also feel that losses need to be sustained to apply pressure on the other strategic elements of the game, geoscape management etc.
Punkiee:
--- Quote from: The Dude on December 24, 2006, 08:43:10 pm ---While I would prefer a save feature and optional iron man, I fear the developers decided already against. But what about an autosave evertime you exit battle which gets deleted after loading? I don't think any sane person would abuse this consequently by copying the file.
--- End quote ---
Well, i would edit the code to make such a copy automatically for me :P
I dito that both systems could be used simultaneously.
Mattn:
there will be an autosave feature before you enter a battle.
poldy:
Ok, after reading the previous posts I couldn't help myself from commenting on it. Especially the argument about "the original":
The original UFO had in-mission-saving, yes. (And I used it heavily :)
BUT on the other side the missions were much longer, more aliens, more soldiers (especially with the bigger dropship, ~26 wasn't it?) In Terror from the Deep the missions were even more time consuming: very large and complex maps AND most missions had even 2 maps. - Just remembering the missions on the cruise-ship where you had difficulties just finding the aliens, the save-function was a must after playing for an hour. (BTW I hated that about Terror from the Deep.) I don't want to talk about the titles after TftD, they had maps that really took the fun out of the game.
UFO:AI strayed from the path of "the original" already when the team size was capped at 8 members. The whole game is made around smaller, faster missions. I understand the argument of the "pro-in-mission-save-faction", they want a more original-like UFO:AI and in-mission-saving is only one point of that. But UFO:AI is not the original in high resolution. It is a game of it's own. Some people think that is good others do not - that is ok.
So my oppinion is, that the devs should make it easier to mod the game. In the long run even split the project into an engine- and a game-part like other projects have done. So the argument of the devs "do it yourself" is more realistic than now. In the mean time I have no problem with a missing in-mission-save.
- Poldy
Robrecht:
I have to agree with Derrida...
Because with all due respect, but whether or not someone wants to save in mid-mission is not your concern. You have absolutely no right to tell people how they should or should not play the game, within it's own limitations.
Deciding not to add an easy-to-implement feature is your right as the makers, but trying to explain objections to that away with 'we don't want people to play the game using it' is not a good excuse.
There's more reasons to save during a mission than just perfect-scoring yourself through...
Let's say for instance (and this is a very dramatic example) I'm playing the very last mission of the game's story.. I'm almost through and I've killed all the aliens except one and all of a sudden I get a call from the hospital telling me my mother was in a serious accident and her situation is life-threatening and I should go over there as soon as I can. With your current system this means I have to either: a. quit the game and start all over again or b. leave my computer running UFO:AI for however long it takes me to get to the hospital, see whether my mother is ok or not and eventually get back.
Now in my example above, whether I finish the mission or not is no longer a real concern as my mother is dieing and for all I care the computer and UFO:AI can go screw themselves. But in less dramatic situations (for instance: I get an unexpected visitor or there's a thunderstorm and the power could go out at any minute) I'm pretty much screwed...
So yeah 'do we like it?' is the LAST thing you should considder when designing a game. The first thing you should ask yourself for every feature is a ratio of 'do people want it?' to 'how hard is it to implement?', with the in or out of the feature being determined by whether enough people want it to justify the time you have to spend on it.
But that's just my advice and opinion, not an attempt to convince you of anything. Do with it what you want.(The advice/opinion, not the post, so don't delete it and use 'you said do with it what you want' as an excuse).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version