Posted July 23, 2018
1) When and if I can buy it on GOG in a $25 sale--as I cannot see paying more for it--no reflection on *this* particular game, necessarily.
2) When and if the developers integrate a save-anytime/anywhere savegame function--I make a point of refusing to buy games that do not offer this convenience to the player/customer. It is a *major* point with me.
3) OK, I might be able to tolerate a "save and exit" savegame capability, *provided* that it isn't gimmicked up in some nutty way as a *part of the game itself.* Save-games are always the province of the player and should always, always remain outside of the game itself, in the same way that game developers do not ask potential customers/players of their games to "earn" things like high display resolutions, high-quality musical scores, voiced-over dialogue, etc. These are all *expected* when one buys a quality game--and a reason to part with even $25 of the customer/player's hard-earned cash...;)
Basically, I loathe games in which the developer is concerned about the complexity, depth, and breadth of his game, and so he wants to gin up the "hours played" and "difficulty" or "tension" part of his game experience by making the player go round his elbow to get to his thumb in order to simply *save* a game--or he invokes artificial time limits, etc.! I've heard that the exit/save is not really even on demand, and that you have to get some sort of silly plant or something before you can even save your game...?..;) WTF? It seems like such a cop out. I do not consider a player/customer-friendly savegame system to be an outlier...! Hard to believe the subject has to be discussed.
I welcome correction! But I am certainly not going to pay for software based on the fallacy that the mere act of saving the game is somehow a part of the RPG game itself...! All this stuff about "scum-saving" and so on...;) Who cares? It's a silly argument, since a save-on-demand system forces no one to scum-save at all...! But it's always nice when the developer gives his customer the choice of how to *save his frigging' games," eh? I'll say...;)
2) When and if the developers integrate a save-anytime/anywhere savegame function--I make a point of refusing to buy games that do not offer this convenience to the player/customer. It is a *major* point with me.
3) OK, I might be able to tolerate a "save and exit" savegame capability, *provided* that it isn't gimmicked up in some nutty way as a *part of the game itself.* Save-games are always the province of the player and should always, always remain outside of the game itself, in the same way that game developers do not ask potential customers/players of their games to "earn" things like high display resolutions, high-quality musical scores, voiced-over dialogue, etc. These are all *expected* when one buys a quality game--and a reason to part with even $25 of the customer/player's hard-earned cash...;)
Basically, I loathe games in which the developer is concerned about the complexity, depth, and breadth of his game, and so he wants to gin up the "hours played" and "difficulty" or "tension" part of his game experience by making the player go round his elbow to get to his thumb in order to simply *save* a game--or he invokes artificial time limits, etc.! I've heard that the exit/save is not really even on demand, and that you have to get some sort of silly plant or something before you can even save your game...?..;) WTF? It seems like such a cop out. I do not consider a player/customer-friendly savegame system to be an outlier...! Hard to believe the subject has to be discussed.
I welcome correction! But I am certainly not going to pay for software based on the fallacy that the mere act of saving the game is somehow a part of the RPG game itself...! All this stuff about "scum-saving" and so on...;) Who cares? It's a silly argument, since a save-on-demand system forces no one to scum-save at all...! But it's always nice when the developer gives his customer the choice of how to *save his frigging' games," eh? I'll say...;)