Save/Load Anywhere VS Restart From Checkpoint

#1GoldsicklePosted 3/28/2013 11:57:27 PM
Which Save/Load Format Do You Prefer? - Results (81 votes)
Save/Load almost anywhere in the game (Bioshock and Bioshock 2)
90.12% (73 votes)
73
Can only restart from a previous checkpoint, game autosaves when reaching the next checkpoint (Bioshock Infinite)
9.88% (8 votes)
8
This poll is now closed.
Do you like the new save/load format in Bioshock Infinite?

At least there seems to be a chapter select, so I guess that means you can specifically look for missed items without the need to replay a new game?
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#2JayGood259OzPosted 3/29/2013 12:29:57 AM
This game is prefer manual saves, however tomb raider had the best autosaves I ever saw, never had to back track more than 1 minute. Regardless of save method having only 1 save slot is totally unacceptable ... Again, tomb raider let you have 3 even though they were all autosaves.

twice in infinite I had to back track a half hour because I hadn't reached an autosave and I wanted to quit. One time I literally lost 2 voxophones, a clothing item, a cipher book and a potion.
#3JdarrzPosted 3/29/2013 12:42:56 AM(edited)
Not to be mean but.... this question is pretty obvious and unnecessary. This is like asking do you want to pick any food for dinner or do you want a choice of 5 items you can choose to eat for dinner.

No matter the circumstance or situation or subject.... why would any one EVER not want infinite (no pun intended) choices, and prefer to have only a few options. Do you really think anyone is going to be like oh yeah take away all options from me and only save when the game wants, instead of letting us save any time any place?....

Another random metaphor.... this question is like asking: would you prefer to choose ANY car you want? or which car would you choose from a choice of a Civic, Miata, or Mustang?
I hope you get my point by now....

>_<
#4Goldsickle(Topic Creator)Posted 3/29/2013 1:03:42 AM
Jdarrz posted...
Not to be mean but.... this question is pretty obvious and unnecessary. This is like asking do you want to pick any food for dinner or do you want a choice of 5 items you can choose to eat for dinner.

No matter the circumstance or situation or subject.... why would any one EVER not want infinite (no pun intended) choices, and prefer to have only a few options. Do you really think anyone is going to be like oh yeah take away all options from me and only save when the game wants, instead of letting us save any time any place?....

Another random metaphor.... this question is like asking: would you prefer to choose ANY car you want? or which car would you choose from a choice of a Civic, Miata, or Mustang?
I hope you get my point by now....

>_<

I totally understand your point and always look at objective pros and cons.

But no matter how much you try to explain, there are still those who like things to be less flexible for whatever reason.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#5JayGood259OzPosted 3/29/2013 1:16:27 AM
Goldsickle posted...
Jdarrz posted...
Not to be mean but.... this question is pretty obvious and unnecessary. This is like asking do you want to pick any food for dinner or do you want a choice of 5 items you can choose to eat for dinner.

No matter the circumstance or situation or subject.... why would any one EVER not want infinite (no pun intended) choices, and prefer to have only a few options. Do you really think anyone is going to be like oh yeah take away all options from me and only save when the game wants, instead of letting us save any time any place?....

Another random metaphor.... this question is like asking: would you prefer to choose ANY car you want? or which car would you choose from a choice of a Civic, Miata, or Mustang?
I hope you get my point by now....

>_<

I totally understand your point and always look at objective pros and cons.

But no matter how much you try to explain, there are still those who like things to be less flexible for whatever reason.


Like I said above, I love the idea of a good autosave like in tomb raider. This one isn't good though. I do don't think you need the option to save any time here, just needed more autosaves locations.

a game like fallout, or any open world game u need manual saves.
#6MikeSSJ part 3Posted 3/29/2013 2:42:55 AM
I like checkpoints and autosaves.


In addition to the ability to save anytime, that is. That way, I can quit at any time, or keep a save at a point I really like, and still not run the risk of losing much progress because I haven't saved in a while.
---
You know, Moffat made such a big deal out of the Silence, and yet I don't even remember what they look like...
#7AdrianMagicentPosted 3/29/2013 8:04:27 AM
1999 and survival mode... I definitely wish you could save at will. Some of the checkpoints are definitely designed for the lesser modes, it seemed to me. This game is also very annoying with all those saves!!
---
Dubito, ergo sim.
#8Goldsickle(Topic Creator)Posted 3/29/2013 8:02:21 PM
Whenever I play games like Deus Ex or Bioshock, I always save first before pulling some weird s***.

At some point, I was told that "Stealing May Have Severe Consequences".

If only this game has a "save anywhere" format, I would have saved first and steal from the cash register just to see what happens.
But because this game lacks that format, I was too chicken to try D:
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#9Doubleglock18Posted 3/29/2013 8:07:53 PM
why not both? sure have your checkpoints and autosaves, but also have the ability to save anywhere. easy.
---
Colt 45 and two zig-zags, Baby that's all we need
We can go to the park, after dark, smoke that tumbleweed!
#10Dave_is_my_namePosted 3/29/2013 8:09:32 PM
The save system was the only real let down of the game IMO.