Nowadays I don't like speedrunning unfortunately, I see the appeal because I enjoyed them when I was younger but I suppose for its purpose I can see your point. If the levels are shorter than 10 minutes then it's likely excluded too, I don't mind replaying that low amount but when it starts to rise to maybe 15 to 30 minutes and it happens repeatedly it does decrease my enjoyment of a game.

As far as Bioshock Infinite goes I would argue its issue is the simple AI and linearity before its save system.

That's fair enough. I should mention that I wasn't responding to your post at all, just giving my impression of the game that I am currently playing. Yes, reusing names, especially for reboots and sequels does hamper smooth discussion!

I am personally, very much in favor of Saving anywhere and when I want. I will play for hours without saving, but I think it was Half-Life-2 where I was truly stuck. I had tried for days to get thru a particular part and was not able to do it. I died so many times that I lost count. So i decided to go just so far and if I made it there, I Saved. Then proceeded, died a few more times, finally made it and Saved. I continued this until I could move on. The first few times dying are a challenge and fun, trying to figure out different ways to succeed, but so many times, it's the same scenario over and over and gets mighty frustrating. That's when it isn't fun anymore. Altho, I do keep trying cause I want to finish.

There should also be a law against bad autosaves. I don't want to mess up the playthrough of a game because it overwrote its single save slot in a no-win situation.

Financial reimbursement for time lost would be good!

Anyone here ever make what they think is a brilliant Quicksave right before the big stunt/jump only to realize you hit the button a nanosecond too late and now every time you reload you just see your character dying?

Can happen all the times. Rise of the Triad Romhack Edition (Extreme Rise of the Triad) had something more brilliant though; if you tried to make too many quicksaves, the game would revert to a previous quicksave! Much fun to be had.

Funny...I'm picturing that. And so you have to go all the way back...Boo

In American McGee's Alice (first one) I did exactly this! I successfully took a running leap off a ledge over a bottomless pit, and instead of hitting Quick Load while falling, I hit Quick Save instead...


Aaaaaaaah!
Dead.
Reload.
Aaaaaaaah!
Dead.
Reload.
Aaaaaaaah!
Dead.
Reload.
Aaaaaaaah!
Dead.
Reload.

Rinse and repeat! :-D

I may be in minority on this one but I wouldnt like it becoming standard. Games are mostly way easier now and with chackpoints being so often making it even easier would be a hard pill for me to swallow. On the other hand creating other difficulty or option like the Bioshock vita chambers on or off would be pretty cool.

I've done that a few times. That's why I keep a hard (regular) save once every 20-60 minute or so. This is usually mitigated by games that offers at least 2 slots for quick saves but unfortunately not many do.

I do that NOW! :P Countless times I had to watch poor Lara wind up in a twisted heap on the canyon floor because of my poor keyboard skills. OY!

The only one that I know of was Max Payne 1 and 2 (haven't played 3, so don't know if they do there or not). Two quick save points was bloody useful there though!

My next treasure hunt game is going the horribly brutal route. No saves, no potions, no healing. Just hang on and hope for the best. Should be fun!

There are tons of games out there. And games where the story is of utmost importance should have the option to enter invulnerable mode or easy mode or something so that if you love the story but lack the skills to finish it, you can at least get through it all. (Baldur's Gate did this nicely -- just turn down difficulty a lot if you get in a pickle [note for non-native speakers: "get in a pickle" is an idiom meaning "Get into trouble that you can't find your way out of")

Most games have great saving features these days. And I love them for that. But sometimes you want a game that is a big challenge (like the timed jumps in Bit.Trip Runner). If you don't start the whole level over, then you're missing out on the entire difficulty of the game.
I did that in something a year or two ago. I can't remember what it was, but I remember that I played about .3 seconds of the game for about fifteen minutes until I found just the right combination of moves to get out of the jam.

It's been a while since I've played it, but from what I remember, yes Elizabeth revives you when you die, but you lose some money. Essentially the checkpoints are there if you run out of money (and for when you quite the game and start playing again). This is part of the reason the 1999 Mode is supposed to be so hard: when you die, you use a lot of money to revive, and if you ever run out of money, you fail. You basically have to start over from the beginning of the game.

To agree with tarangwydion: I love Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Tomb, but having to restart an entire mission every time you die stinks, especially because some of the missions can be pretty long (the worst were those levels with the flamethrower troopers).