I guess we all know what I'm going to talk about, modern games don't feature save state systems anymore. I've been told it's not a big deal before, but it's kind of ruining my gaming lately.

Most games since the beginning of this generation of consoles use a checkpoint based save system, typical in console games from the previous console generation. That is, the games save automatically when the developers decide it's the moment to save, without letting the player make any decision for themselves. But, even companies that are focused on PC have started to put obstacles to the traditional save state systen. For example, The Witcher games do not let you save with close enemies and Amnesia always takes the player to the beginning of a room for whatever save game made inside that room. So, why exactly does this happens? Anybody knows? Why suddenly all developers are conspiring against the traditional save state system? I really want to know, because I'm wasting countless hours of my life replaying the same sections of different games because the developers don't see any reason to either put checkpoints more often or just let me save whenever I want.

I'm playing Alice Madness Returns and I'm stuck. There is a point in which you have to fight a couple of waves of certain enemy that kills you in two blows. I would like to save between the first and second waves, so I don't have to repeat the first wave again and again. And the first wave is hard enough to manage to pass through two without any saving in between.

Just to make this clear, I'm sick of video games treating me as an idiot that cannot be allowed to make any decision and that need a continuous guidance on what to do next, and this is becoming a fucking cancer in modern game design. I think checkpoints are just another one of those situations. If my suspicions are correct, this occurs because developers think this makes the game more dynamic and they don't have to bother their stupid player with a button to save the game. Either that, or as most games are just console ports these days they are too lazy to add a save state system to the PC version (wait!, I though consoles had hard discs too).

Besides, the gameplay from modern video games has been reduced to a series of rooms that are loaded with enemies after the closest checkpoint has been reached. Instead of living worlds we have linear maps with opportune turns, small corridors or doors that hide the fact that the monsters in the next room are still not ready to appear. It is pathetic that this is the best video games can do.

Now, in order to be productive, I'll propose an alternative. Hey!, game developers, remember the Sands of Time? That game that would store the last 10 seconds of gameplay and let you rewind through them at will? Why not do that as a save system, letting the player go to the exact point of the walkthrough the want to go? After all it's been 8 years since that game was released and most of the games I'm playing now are much less complex in terms of gameplay than that one, how hard would it be to save a complete walkthrough of a modern game by now? At least, that would be technological progress in game making for a change.

Amen to that.

I want my world map back where I can stumble into areas with enemies that murder my entire party and then I keep going back for a slow experience grind and a challenge. The only video games that I can think of recently with actual world maps were all on the Nintendo DS. Dragon Quest IX comes to mind immediately, but beyond that I'm hard pressed to remember anything with a map that wasn't just a couple of symbols you walk to and maybe have a random encounter as you watch your footprints casually stroll to the next location.

Elder Scrolls 5 can't come soon enough, although with the current trend that is likely to be a let down as well.

Thankfully GOG exists to let me relive the glory days.

In some games it makes it more suspense I guess. But that's consoletalk. Games in PC do crash now and then and sure is hell in many games when there's only those checkpoints. If witcher 1 had only checkpoints.. I wouldn't have survived that ordeal. Mentally.

I don't even get why quick saving was never used in console gaming. It worked fine for Half-Life 2 on the ps3.

Ummm... Saves worked like that since forever, it is not a modern trend. I mean, you couldn't save in Baldur's Gate with enemies nearby! You can just find out which games use which system and play based on that.

I understand where you're coming from, auto saves and checkpoints have been standard for a long time, but I think he is specifically referencing (I could be wrong) games where that is the only option, where you aren't given the chance to save at your leisure.

Lunar Silver Star Story is an excellent example, there was no auto save function, it was purely dependent on the player to save whenever and where ever they wanted (except in the middle of combat). I thought that was a superb system because you only had yourself to blame if you forgot to save, died, and realized it had been 3 hours since you last bothered.

I think it has to do in part with game design. Games that allow you to save between kills need to be designed differently than ones that require you to get to a checkpoint.

Personally, I often found AC and AC2 to be annoying because of the way the save system worked, if I couldn't conveniently find a flag or a cross it could take ages to get to save the game.

I like the quick save in Final Fantasy 4 for the DS. You could save in any part of the game but you could only load the save game once. Also you couldn’t keep playing the game. You could stop playing at any time and not lose your place like when your airplanes about to land.

The Precursors and White Gold: War in Paradise from Ukrainian developer Deep Shadows both feature large open worlds and allow you to save pretty much where- and whenever you like (at least The Precursors does, I haven't played White Gold).
Vehicles, items, possibly corpses in The Precursors remain in place even after you travel between planets or save and load your game.

White Gold was originally released in 2008, The Precursors in 2009.

I think the STALKER series allows you to save whenever you like as well.

Basically what I'm tryng to say is, not all modern developers rely on annoying checkpoint-based save systems.

I agree. Sometimes you just gotta go.

Occasionally, too, a game starts functioning erratically or freezes. It might be because I'll be connected to the internet and something tries to update itself in the background, or even starts downloading before asking if I want to install an update (Firefox does this a lot, and so does Adobe Acrobat and other programs). That's when I'm glad I save pretty regularly in a game, especially after getting through a major fight or decision point of some kind. I can come back to the game not too pissed off.

It makes sense to give people options and not be overly controlling. Let them make what they like of their own gaming experience. No need to hang over them like some all-knowing dark puppeteer.

Don't say that, Bethesda, Pyranha Bytes and GSC Game World are the only ones that make adventure games the way I like it. STALKER 2 will be a console game too so, I wont get very excited on that one for now. But, if Bethesda falls too, I don't know what I will do. That's too bad (especially since I have to play that game eventually), but I don't understand where is the difficulty in saving while in combat. Just have to save positions, actions, states of all characters and that's that.

So, how did it work, if you are at some hostile zone, you have to clean the whole zone to be able to save?
Checking The Precursors right now, thanks for the tip.

Yep!, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series does, and so does Risen and there is some games here and there, but they are very scarce.

I totally agree. I hate, I HATE, I HAAAATE fixed save points. Okay, I can understand that during some events in a game saving is temporary disabled. But generally, I want to save when and where I want. Even having plenty of savepoints available (like Dead Space), is NO excuse. Every game should have a quick save key that is available (almost) everywhere.

The enemies just need to be far enough away (and you need to not be "in combat", so the last enemy you angered need to either have died or lost you).

I've played Far Cry recently, and I think the fixed save points really add to the challenge, which is a huge part of the interest of the game after all.

Saving after every difficult part in a game for me feels a bit like cheating honestly.

If we could save anytime, the game would need to be harder to be still challenging, but then we would HAVE to save everytime which would be annoying too.