Why do game designers HATE saving?

I'm playing Bayonetta (fan-fucking-tastic game, by the way; well, except for this part, of course), and I got tired. I got beaten by Jeanne at one point, and I thought, "meh, my hand hurts, I'm going to stop for a while." So, I hit to not continue.

And the game decides that means that I don't want ANY of the last 2 hours of game play saved. It didn't take me to the last checkpoint, no; it took me back to the beginning of the entire level.

That is fucking ridiculous. I'm sorry, but I payed good money for this game, and I will set my OWN schedule of play. I don't WANT to spend 30 minutes trying to beat a boss at the moment, I want to go make dinner.

Game designers need to get off this kick of manipulating the players. NCAA Football does this too. Why the hell CAN'T I save during the game? Why? Give me a good reason! Oh, you think that's "cheating?" Well it's MY game, and I will decide when and for how long I play it.

Grr.

And it's not like the designers are unaware that this pisses people off. There's been articles up the wazoo in gaming mags and online, in game reviews, etc. PC games rarely do this (and when they do 99% of the time it's a console port), yet console game designers seem to insist on this utter idiocy.

When your standard is 12 hours you have to make the gamers THINK they're playing more.

The reason why I do not plunk down cash unless you can win it in 40+ hours.

Many younger console gamers don't know this so nothing will change until they realize it.

Most PC games are already at that standard save those ported from the consoles...

I'm waiting for Red Dead Redemption, and I've heard it's pretty reasonable in terms of playing time.

This is why I almost always buy used. I only payed 35 for Bayonetta. I just needed a game to kill time before RDR, and Bayonetta seemed like an interesting play. And it really IS, but then they add pointless bullshit like this. It's already a long play; they have endless continues, and for some fights, you need them. They let you have checkpoints anyway; I just don't get why they can't save and quit at those checkpoints.

But, like you said, every minute added to the game length increases the perceived value

I can NEVER imagine Bethesda doing this. Even Mass Effect 2, while not having 100% free saving, still dealt with it well.

Maybe action gamers aren't loud enough? Or, more properly, it won't keep them from buying the game, and the designers don't care as long as people keep buying.

at least save your experience points.

In Dynasty Warriors 6, you can't save on the hardest difficulty, which is insanely hard for even maxed out characters, but you can save on all the other difficulty settings.

"well, you couldn't save on mario, or other old-school games"

Yeah, because you COULDN'T. There is no tech reason to not do it now!

...me and the kid can't figure out how to save the game, and have to start over every session?

Or is that more of a Useritis deal?

It's playable in sessions. Quick 5-15 minute sessions for each "movie".

If you come back and play a story in a middle "chapter", you get a reasonable amount of weaponry and health items for where you are in the game.
And the Director will place a few things in the path ahead of you in case you're lacking for goodies.

Case in point: friend is playing on my PC in an online game. Two teammates are down. Safe house is in sight. Friend has something like 20 health, low ammo, no health pack, no adrenaline, no pills, nothing. The Director, seeing this marvelous opportunity, said, "Horde. Horde. Horde. Horde. Spitter. Boomer. Horde."

All in the space of two or three minutes. The game ended when the Tank came and promptly downed him; I don't think he was actually able to move more than five feet toward the door. I couldn't stop laughing.

Started playing it yesterday, but I exited, saving the game, and my 'player level' WAS saved, but I had to start at the beginning??

Fallout was much better about this. Being able to save/restore just prior to entering a room, etc is a great option to have.

i don't recall having that problem with Borderlands. But it's been a while. Did it spawn you at the beginning of the story, or just at the first town you're in? It might be that it only spawns you at those DNA beacon thingies

The save system isn't like Fallout 3's, which I would submit is the gold standard.

After having played Fallout for over 300 hours, I'm just a little bit sour on Borderlands. It's a very good game, but I think I've been spoiled by Fallout.

Looking at your avatar, I think you'd understand it when I say that I'm thinking Fallout Vegas might be the very first game I buy new at full price. It really has set the standard, IMO.

and I will be buying vegas at the release; i may pre-order if they offer some bonuses.

I loved playing the anchorage DLC right away, and getting the chinese stealth suit. That thing was AWESOME

The anchorage dlc was worth it just for the gauss rifle. It's become my 'go to' weapon of choice.

Between the gauss rifle and having Fawkes as a companion, it's almost like having a "God" mode in Fallout.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Gauss_Rifle_%28Fallout_3%29

i didn't like companions though. they were a pain in the fucking ass, IMHO. Hopefully they fixed that in vegas. I know they have a bunch more "squad commands" so it seems that they checked it out

That save system annoyed the hell out of me.

ZOMBIES!

...to avoid losing a big boss victory or something while I find the time to slog to a save point. Associated Pet Peeve: I hate it when the playing-time clock keeps running when the game is paused!

Short version:
1. Schedule/budget - saving mid-level requires additional time for coding and testing, which translates to more additional costs.
2. Platform issues - saving mid-level requires a larger save file, which may be an issue on platforms without hard drives
3. Gameplay issues - avoids things like missing something and not being able to go back

Long version (for those who want a longer, more involved description - warning: may be boring):
1. Schedule/budget.
When saving mid-level requires much more detailed save files such as player and enemy data (location, current action, damage, ammo levels, etc.), object states (picked up, respawn time, etc.), achievement related data (e.g. number of head shots in a row), and possibly other data. This increases the amount of code for the programmer to write. Code must be written to handle the saving and loading the additional data and also to restore the level to the saved state. This results in additional programming time. It also greatly increases the number situations that have to be tested, which increases the amount of time the testers need to spend on the game to ensure the bugs are kept to a minimum. This can add days or weeks to the schedule, with a corresponding increase in the cost of the game.
2. Platform issues.
Size of the save file may become an issue on platforms without hard drives. This is much less of an issue now but the X-Box 360 can still be purchased without a hard drive. Generally speaking, though, this isn't that big a deal with the latest generation of consoles.
3. Gameplay issues.
If there's only one save file, it's possible to miss something in earlier in a level and not be able to go back. The only way to go back in that case would be to restart the entire game.
Depending on how often you can save and how easy it is to load a game, it can make some achievements a lot easier to obtain. The overall difficulty of the game might also be lowered. This also means you'll probably finish the game a lot sooner and require fewer replays to get all the achievements. The quicker a game is finished, the less perceived value there is in the game.
Loading times for the saved games can also increase player frustration. The layout of the disc may be optimized so that the art for a level is close together, reducing the seek times when loading assets. Additional assets for mid-level game loading might be located all over the disc, which will greatly increase the load time (primarily due to seek times for the drive).
With the increased complexity and additional testing required, the likelihood of the game shipping with serious bugs is increased. This can cause player frustration (resulting in reduced purchases of the game) and increased customer support issues (further increasing the cost to the company).

It's not just the designer that's responsible for how the game comes together. The design is constrained by what's possible from a technical perspective and what can be optimized. The technical limitations also put restrictions on the art/sound. The producers also have a say in the features and any changes mid-production. Marketing also has a bit of say as well, especially if the game is demoed. Finally, the platform company (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo) have a lot of restrictions as well (especially when it comes to network/multi-player issues).

So, there are a few reasons. It's a set of compromises and not everyone will be satisfied with the end result. I know this still doesn't really help things be less frustrating while playing the game but at least you'll have a better idea of the reasons involved.

I'm fine with restricting saving in general. In Mass Effect 2, you can't save in the middle of a firefight for example. You can only save once the coast is clear. That's 100% fine with me. The issue is when a game treats checkpoints differently from hard saves. Why? What's the difference? One is temporary, one is not. Why can't you overwrite the saved game with the checkpoint? That seems to me a totally unnecessary aspect. I NEVER have just one save file; I always have at least 3-4 games, and with big rpgs I can have 10-15. If I miss something in the level, as long as it's not end-game required, that's my own problem.

Let's look at sports games. Why can't I save in the middle of a football game? Sure, there are a lot of stats, etc. But almost all of those stats would have been saved at the end of the game anyway. It would maybe slightly increase the size of the save file, but I have a 4gb HD, and a 500mb memory card. 10k extra doesn't mean much, and it would make the game more enjoyable to play. When I sit down to play a football game, I have to carve out at least an hour of time where I can sit and do nothing else. Often, that's not the way my life works.

There are obviously a lot of issues involved. But there are so many little changes that would fix a lot of problems. NEVER put save points BEFORE the cutscene, for example. One small change, and my enjoyment of a game goes up. That's really my complaint, the little things. I understand there have to be compromises, but I will ALWAYS take a game with slightly less crisp graphics, but better playability. Maybe I'm unique in this, I don't know.

There is a good reason for not saving at checkpoints. In a lot of cases, the checkpoints can be dealt with without having all the data needed for a full save. Often, the checkpoints will track only a few things and pretty much leave the rest of the data intact. Checkpoints can assume that the art has already been loaded so there are fewer issues with load times. Also, there is some data that needs to be tracked but doesn't need to be fully saved if you don't save mid-game. For example, for a football game, the calculation for mvp might include things like evading tackles, key sacks, etc. At the end of the game, you just need to know who was selected as the mvp, not what was behind the decision/calculation. Saving mid-game would require this data to be saved/loaded/tested for all the players.

That being said, a lot of it comes down to decisions by producers and designers. The gaming platforms have traditionally been more geared toward the hardcore gamer and that market is more willing to replay the level. The market has definitely changed a lot in terms of the hardcore/casual gamer proportion but it's often hard for the designers/producers to break old habits and beliefs as to what makes a good game. And there's also the problem of "Game X did it this way and was really popular so we'll do it in a similar way because it's easier, cheaper, and proven". This is true when comparing games in the same genre and doubly true for sequels.

I expect with hard drives becoming standard and the number of casual gamers increasing, we'll see more movement toward more flexibility in saving but it'll be a gradual move rather than a rapid change.

Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2. Not an option to save your game in the middle of a mission and come back to pick up at the same point. You have to start from the beginning. VERY annoying, especially when you are playing during your son's nap time ;)