It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
The Witcher 2BIG problem with the SAVE system...(33 posts)(33 posts)
(33 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 12, 2011
avatar
soot00: Seriously complaining about hard drive space? I can see 5-10 years ago, but now? A 1 tb hard drive can be had for 50 bucks or so, cheap!
Well, it could be an issue if, like me, you have your drives set up with a really fast SSD for the OS, and big drive(s) for data.
When games decide they want to save themselves somewhere on C drive, I'm going to run out of space.
Posted June 12, 2011
avatar
soot00: Seriously complaining about hard drive space? I can see 5-10 years ago, but now? A 1 tb hard drive can be had for 50 bucks or so, cheap!
avatar
Danceofmasks: Well, it could be an issue if, like me, you have your drives set up with a really fast SSD for the OS, and big drive(s) for data.
When games decide they want to save themselves somewhere on C drive, I'm going to run out of space.
Reading and comprehension are such lost arts today i think like you in my post i mentioned SSD where windows 7 is installed because it is faster way to run a PC. My Kingston SSD is 64 GB and the only thing on it is windows and related windows files. Everything else is saved to a 2 TB drive broken up into 3 parts. A pro move, yes i said it and i meant it.

Asai
Posted June 12, 2011
avatar
Danceofmasks: Well, it could be an issue if, like me, you have your drives set up with a really fast SSD for the OS, and big drive(s) for data.
When games decide they want to save themselves somewhere on C drive, I'm going to run out of space.
avatar
Asai: Reading and comprehension are such lost arts today i think like you in my post i mentioned SSD where windows 7 is installed because it is faster way to run a PC. My Kingston SSD is 64 GB and the only thing on it is windows and related windows files. Everything else is saved to a 2 TB drive broken up into 3 parts. A pro move, yes i said it and i meant it.

Asai
Well, to be fair, nobody is obligated to read through a thread.
Perfectly reasonable to read the OP and reply, so they may not have read about your setup.
Posted June 12, 2011
Fair enough if the OP had mentioned SSD but the first one i the thread to do so was me, so they did read enough to get to that part and then promptly forgot everything or does not know what a SSD is which i would have been and still am willing to explain if asked. Just to be fair. :)

Asai
Posted June 12, 2011
I love the save system. I can pretty much start over from any point of my play through. load any save ans continue :P I just wish the auto saves got a proper screenshot instead of the generic ones.
Posted June 12, 2011
avatar
Asai: Fair enough if the OP had mentioned SSD but the first one i the thread to do so was me, so they did read enough to get to that part and then promptly forgot everything or does not know what a SSD is which i would have been and still am willing to explain if asked. Just to be fair. :)

Asai
I don't think you know how this forum works.
See, if the person I was replying to only read the OP, then they won't have seen your post, and is unlikely to ever see your post.

In contrast, I replied to their post, and this gives them a notification.

Sure, your post was more informative than mine, but the other person never knew you existed.
Posted June 13, 2011
avatar
Asai: Fair enough if the OP had mentioned SSD but the first one i the thread to do so was me, so they did read enough to get to that part and then promptly forgot everything or does not know what a SSD is which i would have been and still am willing to explain if asked. Just to be fair. :)

Asai
avatar
Danceofmasks: I don't think you know how this forum works.
See, if the person I was replying to only read the OP, then they won't have seen your post, and is unlikely to ever see your post.

In contrast, I replied to their post, and this gives them a notification.

Sure, your post was more informative than mine, but the other person never knew you existed.
See the problem with that logic is to be relevant to participate in the conversation you must read what every one before you typed. If you are not willing to read what they typed why should they read what you typed? If that is the case why bother typing anything at all because no one is communicating with anybody. Sure it can be quite tiring to enter into a forum thread with 10 or more pages but to fully understand the conversation one MUST do the requisite reading. It can make for very interesting reading how a discussion starts and in the course of several pages where the conversation winds up. About the only time this reading is not necessary is if the posts are specific purpose like bug reports which are not really meant to be read by anyone but the developer and the curious. Even in that case it could be considered interesting, or at least i thing so, as to how many folks are having similar bugs, or what kind of bugs folks are having.

In any thread i have posted in i have read EVERY post before mine to ensure that i am timely and relevant to the current discussion having the consideration for all posters by trying to add to the discussion. I even go back to check to ensure that in the time it takes me to type my post and when it is posted that someone did not slip something relevant in a post they made just before i clicked reply, especially in busy threads. If that situation arises and it has a few times here and on other boards i will edit my post to reflect the new information. Communication is a lost art especially when folks do not take the time to listen.

Asai
Posted June 13, 2011
avatar
Danceofmasks: I don't think you know how this forum works.
See, if the person I was replying to only read the OP, then they won't have seen your post, and is unlikely to ever see your post.

In contrast, I replied to their post, and this gives them a notification.

Sure, your post was more informative than mine, but the other person never knew you existed.
avatar
Asai: See the problem with that logic is to be relevant to participate in the conversation you must read what every one before you typed. If you are not willing to read what they typed why should they read what you typed? If that is the case why bother typing anything at all because no one is communicating with anybody. Sure it can be quite tiring to enter into a forum thread with 10 or more pages but to fully understand the conversation one MUST do the requisite reading. It can make for very interesting reading how a discussion starts and in the course of several pages where the conversation winds up. About the only time this reading is not necessary is if the posts are specific purpose like bug reports which are not really meant to be read by anyone but the developer and the curious. Even in that case it could be considered interesting, or at least i thing so, as to how many folks are having similar bugs, or what kind of bugs folks are having.

In any thread i have posted in i have read EVERY post before mine to ensure that i am timely and relevant to the current discussion having the consideration for all posters by trying to add to the discussion. I even go back to check to ensure that in the time it takes me to type my post and when it is posted that someone did not slip something relevant in a post they made just before i clicked reply, especially in busy threads. If that situation arises and it has a few times here and on other boards i will edit my post to reflect the new information. Communication is a lost art especially when folks do not take the time to listen.

Asai
It is NOT a conversation, though.
The OP makes a statement, and anyone can reply to that.
Whether or not you think everyone should read what you type is irrelevant, because it is neither necessary nor sensible in a lot of cases.

If, for instance, a tread asks "how do I find <blah> weapon?"
It is perfectly reasonable to have 30 people say the exact same thing if they are being drowned out by incorrect answers.
Posted July 15, 2011
will patch 1.3 make smaller saves?
Posted July 15, 2011
You could've read the changelog before digging a dozen threads from their respective graves...

And what do you mean, smaller saves? Below 2mb is already small enough for a game like this.
Posted July 15, 2011
avatar
dnna: You could've read the changelog before digging a dozen threads from their respective graves...

And what do you mean, smaller saves? Below 2mb is already small enough for a game like this.
I think the later is making some 500 saves for a single playthrough :D..so close to a GB of save files (0.97GB to be precise).
Post edited July 15, 2011 by Anarki_Hunter
Posted July 15, 2011
Savegames are already compressed. We can compress them further and then players will have problem with longer loading times.

Andrzej Kwiatkowski
CD Projekt RED
Posted July 15, 2011
avatar
TsunamiZ: will patch 1.3 make smaller saves?
1MB isn't small enough for you? You can't really go any lower than that in modern games, without suffering consequences. How is this a problem, again? :/
Post edited July 15, 2011 by Kindo
Posted July 15, 2011
Seems Tsunamiz has resurrected dozens of necro-threads from May without reading anything else. Must be a comprehension thing.

He'll be asking for a Kayran save, next...
Posted July 15, 2011
avatar
Asai: My compalint is that i can not label them.

I would like to be able to label them according to what choices i made in the game like Roche path or rescue Anais etc. In the end i have to pare the list down on occasion as i run win 7 off a 64 gb SSD so space on C drive is a premuim. I have a 2 TB drive where all the stuff and games are kept so with the current save system i have to pare the saves down which is not the developer's fault. What is annoying and what i am taking them to task for is i have to guess which saves represent what decisions, and that is trickier than it has to be or should be, and was pointed out as an issue with TW and never addressed.

Asai
I would like to be able to label them as well. But my question is if I delete them in the menu, using the delete key, doesn't that get rid of the BMP files too?

@ Andrzej. I sense you tire of our bitching. :P
Post edited July 15, 2011 by scampywiak
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2BIG problem with the SAVE system...(33 posts)(33 posts)
(33 posts)