• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Garf02

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,420
If managed right they add an extra element of tension or challenge to the game., see as example RE3, you could only save at type writing machines and on high difficulties, you actually need ink tapes to use the machine making it more complex and forcing you to pick what moments were worth to save
 
Oct 25, 2017
13,022
Save Points exist in games so you feel that if you die it actually matters and you can't just load an auto-save and be like "whatever I just lost 1 minute of gameplay", tension and fear is a powerful tool in games that save points can provide.
 

Aokiji

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,265
Los Angeles
when you do finally get to the station you feel awesome and the threat of the alien is reduced to zero since even if he kills you 10 seconds later around the next corner you don't care since you just saved .

the fix to this problem is simple : use a autosave sytem that saves in the background instead of immersion breaking devices

so when you get killed by the alien and autosave just revives you 10 seconds before the encounter........
 

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
Put me in the camp that says that save stations in Alien Isolation were one of the best things about it.

Yes, when you've just saved you feel a bit more 'invincible'... but that's the case with any other saving system too, whenever you see the autosave symbol flash up or manually save you know you're good. But in Alien Isolation when you've been away from a save station for a while the sense of tension is unbearable, and far closer to what it would actually feel like to be in that situation. You take NO risks.

And getting killed as you use one of them is one of the most brutal, heartbreaking experiences in games.

Also love them in Metroid. Saving anywhere can ruin certain games.
 

texhnolyze

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,176
Indonesia
maxresdefault.jpg


followed by a long ass saving process
This is basically the thing that I hate the most about the game. Saving is such a chore and I groan every time I have to do it.
 

TeddyShardik

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,648
Germany
This is basically the thing that I hate the most about the game. Saving is such a chore and I groan every time I have to do it.

For me it has more to do with that weird "double save" system they have in the game. It doesn't even take that much longer but it still feels like a chore. Saving should be the simplest, quickest thing in a game.
 

daveo42

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,251
Ohio
I think save stations are fine as long as they are implemented well and make at least some sense in the world. The best tho? Nier: Automata's:
s9nalm.jpg
 

Suede

Gotham's Finest
Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,516
Scotland
Some of my favourite games contain save rooms/save stations so I guess I really like them lol.
 
Oct 25, 2017
52
I can't imagine only having autosaves. Especially considering the amount of glitches in many games that could result in loss of ALL progress if an autosave occurred when you for example got stuck in a corner, or fell out of map bounds. This can happen in more situations than you may think and only using autosaves could be disastrous.
 

Yoshi

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,055
Germany
A) it causes you to fear losing your progress and having to do everything you did since your last save more then the actual constant threat of the Alien itself .
But - this is the threat of the Alien, that you lose progress. Other than that, what is the Alien supposed to do?

Save stations are a completely fine way of controlling progress. Automatic saves and manual saves at arbitrary points of time can also be good ways to save the game, it always depends on the gameplay concept. Autosaves may seem like a complete substitute for save stations, but they are not, because it takes away the control over the save from the player. In games with resources (e.g. ammunition) it is not nice to force the player to keep a certain progress over the last saved one. There have been multiple instances in Metroid Prime games, e.g., where I did not want to save, even though I reached a save station. First I wanted to make sure I can replenish my ammunition in some cases.

It helps, of course, that I think immersion is an absolute non-factor, only gameplay is important (to me).
 

Zyrox

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,630
They are a game design choice to add a layer of tension. I like them especially in RPGs and Horror games. That feeling when you finally reach a terminal in one of SMT Nocturne's big dungeons. So good.
 

Talapia

Member
Oct 25, 2017
78
United Kingdom
Now i can understand this might not affect players who don't get immersed in the game and just play it but for me and others who like to immerse ourselves in the game and play as if we are the character it does .

I fall into this category and wholly disagree. Developers should be able to choose the system they think is right for their project and save checkpoints usually offer more regarding story beats than you're letting on. It's a type of Game Logic that informs the player of design choice made by the staff. For example, you usually know if a boss fight is coming up if you get to a room with no enemies, some pick ups and a save point.

If people took your criticism at face value, there would be no noticable improvement to the games you outlined in the OP.
 
Oct 28, 2017
848
I don't mind them as long as the time between them is around 5 to 10 minutes max. As an example, Nier: automatta crashed for me after
the fight against the big whale thing when you need to hack the bunker as 9S.
. That is a segment of about 20 minutes without any way to save, which is to much. Having no auto save is fine but for the love of god make sure

I'm pretty sure that all would be classed as a boss fight and no game is going to let you save in the middle of a boss fight (unless you want the possibility of saving in an unwinable state), also in Nier there's save stations EVERYWHERE in the main world. The only problem here was that your game crashed not the saving system, in my opinion.
 

Spectone

Member
Yeah, can't stand save stations. I don't have a ton of time to play games so if I have like 30 min I might play games for a bit. But I can't play save station games becuase I might not be able to get to a save point before I am done playing. It's a relic of another era and doesn't add anything to games except wasted time imo.

The solution to this is done in many roguelike games. When you quit it saves your game and when you reload the game you can continue but the save file is wiped. This enables you to stop at any point in the game but enables the developer to control saving at other times. So if you quit the game it saves your file, you reload the game and it continues on where you left off but you cannot load that save ever again because it is deleted.
 
Oct 28, 2017
848
The solution to this is done in many roguelike games. When you quit it saves your game and when you reload the game you can continue but the save file is wiped. This enables you to stop at any point in the game but enables the developer to control saving at other times. So if you quit the game it saves your file, you reload the game and it continues on where you left off but you cannot load that save ever again because it is deleted.

Fair enough, but I myself would never want to interrupt a boss fight to save the game, but I can understand, using that method of saving, why people might want to do it.
 

Bulebule

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,805
It is just as "immersion breaking" if you are reloading from checkpoint or save station when you die against enemy. If save stations fit the environment perfectly, it would be a good progress. Save points force you to be more cautious, which I find a good thing, but then there are admittely awully placed save points too. In Star Ocean 4 there is that spaceship section where it's a long distance between save points. Or that end-game bonus dungeon has no save points at all and the possibility of game freezing when using certain move. In games like Uncharted, lack of save points works, because the game is linear and narrative-based + you can always revisit the completed chapters to get those optional artifacts.

Developers need to be more careful with checkpoints as well. In Assassin's Creed 3 or 4, there is one main mission with LONG walk and talk-session first, then comes the actual mission. You fail the optional objective but would like to try again? No, the checkpoint is placed in beginning from that walk and talk-session over again.
 

myco666

Member
Oct 26, 2017
853
Fake Europe
Been thinking about this topic and I definitely disagree with OPs points and the video. Your state in the game world being saved is immersion breaking from the concept already. Having only autosaves on the background wouldn't make it any less immersion breaking. Atleast not for me. The moment you die and the game rewinds you back to a spot where you are fine reminds you that it is a game that you play. Not to mention that with autosaves people would just plan their routes so that their autosave would come at the most convenient time. So it wouldn't even remove the "your character has a savestation addiction" problem.

As for the second point that Alien isn't scary but progress being lost is. This is the case for practically all horror games. It is the thing that simulates your character dying. If you didn't lose any progress it wouldn't be as scary as an enemy because you know it doesn't matter if you die or not. Not denying that it could still be scary even without consequences but it wouldn't be as impactful.

For the third point that save points remove the tension when you save. Well, yes. This is what happens when the consequences are minimized. This wouldn't go away with autosaves since you would still know if the game was being saved and you know the amount of progress you would be losing.
 

Graciaus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
732
A save point usually means that a boss is up ahead so make sure you save or else. Being able to save anywhere is fine but the game better have auto saves to avoid a huge loss of playtime.
 

Deleted member 2321

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,555
Funny. While reading your title I thought of Dead Space and how great the save stations were in that game only to see that you use as an example.

I completely disagree. It´s a great mechanic for some games.

The feeling of relief when reaching a save station in DS was AMAZING
 

Palculator

Member
Oct 24, 2017
242
Germany
No. Few things in gaming are as satisfying as finding a bonfire after an arduous journey through unknown territory barely clinging to life against new enemies.

Going into more detail on each of the complaints raised:
1) It only destroys immersion if the writing is too poor to justify save points in the world. Not a problem of save points, but writing.
2) Having constant saving would undermine horror. Taking away safety is the point of this genre.
A) Fear is the goal of horror; a reset from death does not equal lost progress because you can (and should!) still learn from the mistake that led to your death.
B) That's the point. A safe zone's value is boosted by the hostility of the environment. Having saved recently nullifying threats shortly after is not an argument supporting autosaves/quicksaves. It's an argument against them.
 

EarthPainting

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,877
Town adjacent to Silent Hill
NightCry's save system drove me up the wall. It checkpoints you very inconsistently, and the way to manually save was to use your in-game phone. I looked through the phone's options, but saw nothing of the sort. The one thing I saw that even remotely resembled it was by making a a post on social media. It seemed to have worked once, but you can only post to social media once per character, and only when the story allows it. Not that it mattered, because that wasn't what triggered the saving at all, it just seemed like it. What actually saved your game was finding a phone charger. They were tiny little white cradles in large environments where the camera obstructs their view half the time. There's no "now saving" icon or anything. It's all invisible.

At least a terribad save system does contribute to a game's atmosphere I guess?
 

Snack12367

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,191
It depends on the game, but I think save stations actually add a bit to the immersion and the tension. Knowing you can't save manually and auto saves won't save you, increases the tension dramatically. Dead Space worked so well for me, because you had no idea when the next chance to save could come. You had to survive the obstacle course to reach the save point.

I think manual saving if anything detracts and auto saving for the most part cuts the tension dramatically. If I'm playing a horror game and I see that I just auto-saved, I know shit is about to kick off. I'm not scared. I'm thinking I don't have to care so much, because if I die, I start back here.
 

Strafer

The Flagpole is Wider
Member
Oct 25, 2017
29,378
Sweden
The save stations in Alien Isolation added another layer of tension to an already tense game, I wouldn't change a single thing about them.

You say that you fear losing progress more than Alien itself, when the Alien is what causes you to lose progress in the first place. It makes him even more terrifying. Also if there were autosaves you would fear the Alien a hell of a lot less if there is no penalty for dying. I have played the game 4 times thru and the save stations are everywhere in it, I honestly don't think I have ever lost more than 3 or 4 minutes, and some parts of the game do feature auto-saves when it's being particularly hard.

IMO the game gets the balance just right, not letting you save when the Alien is nearby was a masterstroke IMO.

YOU NAILED IT ON THE STONE.

Autosave in Isolation would ruin the game.
 

Chocobo115

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,311
Sweden
But thats one of the greater parts of survival horror games.

There is a stake, if you die then you lose all progress. It's even in the genre title. The horror of fearing not surviving.
 

Epinephrine

Member
Oct 27, 2017
842
North Carolina
I'm in the same boat as quite a few of you where I enjoy save points as a mechanic. It does require you to repeat long sections at times if you are killed, but that also comes with the joy of mastering (or at least improving) your gameplay during that section. They can certainly add tension, especially if you are short on time or an interest in replaying part of a game.

I get people who have kids and want to save anytime, I've got one myself and it leads to moments where I need to turn it off and walk away. But who cares, I'll repeat those 5, 10 or 15 minutes next time. I'll play when she's asleep or before anyone else is awake. Save stations are a game mechanic and I'm okay with that.

Save spamming just makes you soft anyway.
 

Palas

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,789
I find this interpretation of "immersion" really weird, as the fact is, and will always be, that you are playing a game and the emotions you get from a game derive from the fact that you are playing it. A game knows it's a game, you know a game is a game. There can be no complete immersion. Rather, the game using its save mechanic as a tension factor like Alien: Isolation does is great, great usage of a game component.

The game should use everything it has to evoke a specific emotion, so going for shallowness just to avoid breaking an immersion that doesn't exist in the first place would be a terrible mistake. Save stations are fine, as is any other saveing method as long as it's coherent with what the game wants to do. You don't even need to justify it within the context of the story. You'll justify it yourself if you're feeling it.
 

RookieDood

Member
Oct 27, 2017
45
Brazil
I really don't think I would enjoy Alien Isolation as much as I did if it had auto-saves. The feeling of not having saved the game in 30 minutes, looking for a save point, knowing that the Alien could appear at any moment and make you lose your progress is terrifying. And I could say the same about the earlier Resident Evil games (and Resident Evil 7 on Madhouse), with it's limited saves, and games like The Evil Within 2 on Classic Mode and Dead Space 2 on Hardcore, on the more extreme ends of the spectrum. The act of manually saving your game can be immersion breaking, sure, but if it adds to the tension of the game, regardless of the genre, I think it can be a worthy mechanic.

Dying in the end of a boss fight, respawning in the middle of the fight, with the enemy already damaged and your character having their resources replenished and health recovered is more immersion breaking, if you ask me.
 

zoukka

Game Developer
Verified
Oct 28, 2017
2,361
Save stations are one of my favourite video game tropes and game design elements. I love them in almost any game that has been built around the pacing of having to fight to reach a save station, Metroids, Dark Souls, Resident Evils, they all nail down the feel of dread and the following catharsis of reaching a save room and being greeted by spooky and calm music.

So no, never get rid of save stations.
 

Kazuhira

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,175
More like remove auto-saves from horror games and not the other way around,DS3 suffered by that decision.
Alien Isolation save system did it right,why would i want to lose control of my progress by allowing the game to save whenever it wants?
The only real exception for that rule is Dark Souls.
 

Alek

Games User Researcher
Verified
Oct 28, 2017
8,471
I mostly agree, but I think sometimes it can be incorporated quite well into the games design, like with Alien in the OP.
 
Oct 27, 2017
143
England
Meh having just finished Evil within 2 on nightmare; I can comfortably say that it could have done with the kind of tension save stations bring. All the creepy ass monster designs in the world aren't going to ellicit a response when it autosaves every 5 minutes.

I hate the idea that because people don't have the time they want the game to cater to them. Not every single game has to appeal to everyone and their timeframes. Lots of us don't have the time but it seems kind of entitled to expect a difficult game to alter it's intrinsic design just for you; like it's ok that games exist that don't fit in with your busy life.
 

Darth Smurf X

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,037
Hoth, WI
I'm not sure I could disagree with a topic more vehemently than this one. I read the thread title and came in here to post Alien: Isolation as an example of how to do save stations correctly and you used it as your main grievance against them. I still remember the sound those stations made and the sense of dread I felt when I wasn't near one. I wouldn't change one thing about Alien: Isolation.
 

Iztok

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,138
I like manual save points because it's the perfect moment to hand-off the controller when playing single player games with friends (that, and if you fail and die, obviously).

Probably not a very popular use case, but hey.
 

Molemitts

Member
Oct 25, 2017
583
I much prefer tangible checkpoints in a game to invisible checkpoints for immersion reasons. The best use of this in my opion is what the Souls games do where they're constantly autosaving so you can't just reset after doing something you regret and so you also don't lose progress in the form of items you've discovered and NPCs you've interacted with. While still having checkpoints that you respawn at on death with a clear punishment for failure in the form of retrying a section of the level

My 2 major problems with them are :

1 ) it destroys immersion
every time you activate one of these things you will likely get a message like in the Alien example of " Would you like to save ?"
this pulls you out of the game world by reminding you that yes ,you are playing a game .
By extension even the character you are playing as acknowledges that he /she is is a video game by interacting with it and it becomes a goal of theirs to get to the next one .
Now i can understand this might not affect players who don't get immersed in the game and just play it but for me and others who like to immerse ourselves in the game and play as if we are the character it does .

it makes the game feel like it is just a stage with actors playing out their roles rather then them genuinely trapped in a dead or alive situation with horrible monstrosities .


my second problem :

2) In A:Isolation there are no checkpoints or quick saves . your only method of saving is those save stations and when you die you get kicked back to the last save station regardless of how long ago that was .

this creates 2 problems imo :

A) it causes you to fear losing your progress and having to do everything you did since your last save more then the actual constant threat of the Alien itself .

B) when you do finally get to the station you feel awesome and the thread of the alien is reduced to zero since even if he kills you 10 seconds later around the next corner you don't care since you just saved .

this guy explains it better then i probably did ( it is as he said a bit of a ramble but his point is clear :p )



the fix to this problem is simple : use a autosave sytem that saves in the background instead of immersion breaking devices that throw messages in your face + a Manual Save option in the menu when you need to save right now now ( although they should limit that last part otherwise it will invite save scumming )


I can't really agree with point 1. The least immersive form of saving has to be quicksave/quickload where saving essentially becomes a mechanic and you just think about the best times to save in order to be in the safest situation. (Though you mention save scumming as a negative too.) I don't think autosave (when saves are used as checkpoints) is that immersive either, sure it's not throwing "do you want to save?" in your face, but the immersion breaks down upon death, where will you respawn, why has my character respawned in this specified area? Save points are far more consistent in that regard and for that reason I find them more believable.

I don't think point 2 is great, either.

In response to A, don't you think that's the point? fear of actually losing progress heightens the tensions. Saying that fear is greater than the fear of the Alien is silly, since part of the fear of the Alien is that it will kill you, and part of the fear of death is that you will have to redo a part of the game. Without that there's way less tension.

B is a better point, but I don't see how it's entirely avoidable. I think the release of tension when you find a save point is a great thing for the pacing of a game, but threats being way less scary I can see as a problem. There's probably some solutions to this, but tension will build back up over time. More importantly though, this problem still exists in games with autosave, arguably more so. If I immediately die and respawn in the same gameplay scenario I honestly feel way less tension then if I know I'm going to be put a little further back. This happens all the time in loads of games actually, and I find it pretty annoying. I just end up kind of by trial and error making my way through a situation that isn't really interesting because I'm forced to complete it as the game autosaved right before that moment.
 
Last edited:

H.I.V.E.

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
281
I fall into this category and wholly disagree. Developers should be able to choose the system they think is right for their project and save checkpoints usually offer more regarding story beats than you're letting on. It's a type of Game Logic that informs the player of design choice made by the staff. For example, you usually know if a boss fight is coming up if you get to a room with no enemies, some pick ups and a save point.

If people took your criticism at face value, there would be no noticable improvement to the games you outlined in the OP.
I agree with this guy.