|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
If I was rude, say like one of the earlier posters here who felt the need to insult those who would like a save game feature, I might just tell you to "SACK UP". |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Try to discuss the subject and not each other or this thread will be removed completely.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
No, you weren't rude. I'm kind of surprised that you seem to think you were. See, you don't actually know a lot about me, and I don't know a lot about you. You're just a line of script to me, so I don't take this...effort at sarcasm? whatever it was, personally. I just think it's a shame that we fail to see eye to eye, but then that's another of the disadvantages of being basically faceless.
Anyway, I still consider Dom3 to be better without a save-game feature, and I still think you should sack up. If you don't understand the reasons behind my feelings, then I really don't mind either way, since I guess you were making some effort to insult me and that probably means we won't be best-of-friends or getting into a hot-tub together any time soon. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
See? you've gotten all personal and now we're in trouble.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Wow, lots of posts.
Alot of great posts too. Few tards in the swimmingpool, you know you are and you know that I stink too. And apparantly I'm "Burned" for an opposing opinion and I need to "Sack Up" because my view is irrelevent and again, opposing. Once again, coming to these forums, where you can say anything without consequence, I really didn't except much other then Fanboys. (And in a hypocritical twist, there is irrevency in this very Boo hoo hoo Rant!!! Maybe if your mature, you can ignore it and make any statement you want!!!!) The typical responses against this are: 1. It ruins the game because it doesn't make it challenging. A: FYI Challenge is RELATIVE! What's challenging for you is not challenging for me. I can bench well and it's fun for me. If, assuming that you don't go to the gym much, I gave my same weight to you and you got injured, would that be any fun now would it? 2. It corrupts the gamer Honestly, I can feel for you in an aspect that were all just one giant community. However, define the word "Corrupt" and then find what it's "Corrupting from" and then you'll realize it's just an unintended way of saying "I don't feel comfortable that your playing the game this way", all valid, but comfort was never grounds for action. 3. You can't give Gamers all the features they want Well under this circumstance, you should be sure to give as MANY features as the gamers want to ensure the maximum amount of people to enjoy it. Features SHOULD be judged depending on the feature in an individual case sceanario. Making D3 have saves is nothing compared to making D3 in 3D. If this feature was unable to be implemented, then leave it at that. 4. It betrays the developer vision A: The *Publishing* developer Vision extends so far enough to meet the needs of the Consumer. Why do *Publishing* developers publish games? So they can charge money for it! What seperates a good developer vision from a bad one? Their total profit is equal to their expectation. EAnomics have proven this vision true Note: Emphasis on the word Publish rather then make. A developer could make his own game and he would be the only person on the earth to enjoy it, then it is a sucess. Commercialization is a service toward the people, shine my shoes brown instead of black I'll get my money back, or in this case, sell it on Ebay FTW. And what if the Gamer wants to ruin his own game? What if the Gamer wants to remove certain spells he doesn't like or what if the Gamer makes Spells more early or what if the Gamer decides that every Ulm Man Woman and Child should have str 30. Wouldn't that truly ruin the game. Yes. Would it be funny? No. It betrays the vision of the game What if I want to give myself more starting points for my Pretender on a roleplaying aspect or what if I decide to make my game even more difficult by REMOVING Pretender points? Sure. Would it be smart. Ehh no. and it betrays the vision of the game. What if I decided to create my own side or if I decided to take a Middle Age only side and pull them in the Later age. That surely betrays the vision of the game as well. And it does. Notice that all three of these circumstances are completly acceptable. Fourth Scenario: What if I wanted to be able to Save Games in my own game to make sure that I never lose a battle and cry? What if I wanted to put a Time Constraint in my Multiplayer so people couldn't build up their forces? What if I wanted to be able to set rules that no one can create Oceanic Civilizations? What if I wanted to create new Terrain Pieces, such as Savannahs and Tundras? Do they all betray the game? Yes. The Developer never put any of those features in (to my almost assurd Knowledge), hence it betrayed his vision. This magically brings us down to my Save Game Feature. I want a Save Game feature so I can enjoy my game. All of those "complaints" do not constitute a specific reasonable reason. IE: It ruins the game because it doesn't make it challenging (challenge is relative), It corrupts the gamer (Freedom of use...invalid in Russia) You can't give Gamers all the features they want (You cannot ignore their requests within your capability to accomplish.), and it betrays the Developer vision (When the hands of the game enter the Consumer, it's the consumer's "world". If the Consumer want's the Developer to make it the ability to save games, and if they can accomplish that, then both parties are quite satisified.) PS: I honestly want this feature implemented because I honestly like the game but cannot devote enough time for it to be fun. (After the fifth time you just conquer your neighbors and lose your army, the repetition gets you done) PSS: Sack this 1 up yours. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I actually kind of like having no savegame feature, with one small caveat...I occasionally hit "e" instead of "r" when recruiting units and the only way to go back and finish the turn is to kill the process. Ah well, I think it's worth it for the thematic effect.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Didn't someone write a tool that automatically saved each turn?
In the same way some might say "just don't use the save" others could say "just save your game manually". In either case the discussion here is unlikely to make any difference in how the game evolves. The ability to add a save game feature is pretty trivial (since you can basically do it by simply copying and renaming a file) so it must have always been a conscience decision to not do this (nethack anyone?) vs. an oversite where someone forgot to do something. As I said before I would completely abuse an easy to use save game option if it was available. Civ 1, cool a hut, bah who needs gold, barbians... nah, pottery... nice but, ahh awesome a group of settlers! Perfect. Hmm.. I don't want my militia to lose vs theres... cool I won. Did I mention I could beat Civ 1 every time on the hardest difficulty level! I was awesome in that game and everything always seemed to fall into place for me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Not having a save makes Dominions a different game. Maybe a game other don't like as much... but personally I prefer it. Again its not like you can't save your game now. Just play Dominions in a window with the game folder open next to it. Ctrl C, Ctrl V on game file. Thats it, it will automatically rename each one... you will only have to manually rename something when you want to "load" the game back. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Newthought, so what you're basically saying from my understanding is that you want to play football, but you want your side to be able to use steroids and be able to call "do-over!" every time you fumble the ball. Dom3 just doesn't happen to have a nice convenient save-game option. That's the reality of the game. Nobody stole your money, you put your money down and you bought a product that works as advertized, and perhaps unfortunately for you there's no do-over there as well, although if you're entirely unsatisfied, maybe you can talk the company you directly purchased the game from into taking it back and giving you your money back, but the reality of economics is that you might not even be able to do that. You might not even have legal recourse, that might also be the reality of the situation in your area of the world. And if you do, and it goes to trial, the verdict might come out against you, and again, that would be reality, however unfortunate it was for you. The whole point is that yes, you can redo a turn if you decide to, the method for doing so was explained by Gandalf above somewhere, and the next time you watch a game of football, you can choose to root for whichever team wins, after you've recorded the game on video tape. I'm certain if you think hard, there are all manner of things you can do any way you want to, regardless of how they're supposed to be done, you can follow your own personal vision of how the world works wherever it leads you, and I wish you luck and success in all your endeavors to buck the system, because it isn't an easy path.
And I really don't care if you're comfortable or not in a more than Buddhistic general compassion for all living things that I try to engender within myself, but it does tend to be aesthetically displeasing to me to hear someone whine in public about how a computer game, of all things, is too difficult. I certainly don't mean this as an insult to your person. I'd react the same way to art I found displeasing to my eye. None of that changes the fact that the game doesn't have a savegame feature, but I do know that you can mod in tundras and savannas, and easily create a random map with no ocean provinces. That's pretty easy, actually. All in all, your points are as valid as is required, and certainly you have the freedom of speech and use, noone's denying you that. I think perhaps only that you've been unfortunate in your methods and managed to turn the greatest of authorities-public consensus-against you. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Save Game: in the game. They are .2h files Time Contraint: in the game. There are switches for setting time constriants on MP games no oceanic civ: in the game. there are switches for locking out nations in games new terrain: in the game. it now accepts multi-terains so you can create provinces that are cold/wasteland or hot/plains for tundra and savannah |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I've got to say............
Theres a lot of misinformation here. The arguements against savegames here are extraordinarily flawed. "A lot of strat games start out with no saves" Simply not true. Civ series, Homm series, Warlords, SE3-5, Moo series, etc. Simply NOT TRUE. Cant be added because adding "would require file cleanup options" If a computer illiterate like me can do this by dragging the save game file to my desktop, I'm sure a real programmmer could institute a real save game utility. This isn't rocket science. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT DOM3 IS HARD. YOU'D LIKE TO TRY EXPERIMENTS (IE DIFFERENT OPTIONS) WITHOUT STARTING FROM SCRATCH EVERY TIME IT DOESN'T WORK. WTF IS THIS CONCEPT SO HARD FOR THE DEVS AND FANBOYS TO UNDERSTAND!!!!!!! By the way............for those of you who think save and reloading is cheating in a single player game (me, its how I learn without starting over each time), there is a simple, trivial option. Don't use it!! |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Since their time is so limited there's no need for them to add a feature which can already be done manually when there's current bugs in the game which need fixing. Bugs such as sacred undead unable to be blessed, multiple AI opponents blindly sending their pretenders into the death match, broken modding/mapedit commands, holes in battlefield maps for cave provinces, demons being affected by darkness, and so on and so on. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I'm hardly a fanboy by any stretch of the term. Other than simply being a fan of the game, I'm one of the least satisfied people with it, in terms of wanting it to do more, be more, have more features, etc. The Dev's I'm certain understand the situation perfectly-and have made a personal choice in the matter-just like they made a choice to make Dom3 in the first place. Why THAT concept is so hard to understand...well I don't fail to understand it, I just come to disappointing conclusions.
Anyway, if you're unhappy about the game, you certainly have every right to complain, and I have a right to disagree with you, based purely on my own personal opinion, game experience, and the choices I make. And the Devs have every right not to do anything about either of our wants, needs, desires, etc. Not that I consider in any way an emotional response to be an immature response, but I have to be a little surprised at how people get so emotional over what is, in the end, a game. We are adults, or atleast this is a forum where you can expect to be treated as an adult (and by the word "adult" I mean "with respect") unless you are giving a good reason not to be, and we can be civil to one another, and discuss this calmly, in a less than insulting manner, and without doing the internet version of screaming at, or cursing, or degrading one another-as adults, I'm sure we all get enough of that kind of thing from the world around us at various times, and there's no reason to bring it upon ourselves in a place basically designed for social relaxation and entertainment. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
The question is: Why should Illwinter implement a feature that 1. goes against part of the basic premise of the game and 2. can be very closely reproduced by moving a few files now and then?
Yes, they do make some money off of Dominions, but that is not their main motivation for working on it. It is quite possible they might lose a few customers due to the hardcore approach to saving. I very much doubt it would be enough to make up for presumably compromising their vision of the game, and the hassle of implementing the feature. And who knows, maybe the unique style could actually increase the appeal to some players. The real bottom line? I'd say there is about as much chance of an asteroid squishing the Illwinter team as of them implementing such a feature at this point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Let's not invoke the asteroid-squishing-Illwinter scenario, shall we? If the Gods surf the web, you know they're probably listening to the Dominions forum, and we don't want to give them any Ultimate Misfortune ideas.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I am really curious how often "pro-reload" crowd reloads. In the current version of Dominions reloading probably takes 15-30 seconds (quit without saving, copy files outside of Dominions, continue game). With super-duper reload UI in game it would probably become something like 5 seconds. How often one is reloading to make such an issue out of having to spend extra 10-25 seconds? It certainly doesn't fit into trying different strategy or reloading after losing critical battle pattern.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Are you referring to the sales bullet on the Dom3 Shrapnel sales page that reads: "NO SAVE GAMES!! Thats right folks, we won't let you save games! No other game has this amazing feature!!" Oh wait... it doesn't mention that "feature" on the webpage... Maybe because they know most gamers wouldn't agree that it is a positive thing. 2. Uh? All the easier it should be for someone to code it. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Now I know noone asked what my opinion is, but that has never stopped me in the past. Personally, I never even noticed the lack of a save feature when I first started playing Dom 2. To me, the game doesn't feel like all the other games out there, it feels more permanent. I know I have to make the right moves the first time, because there is no going back. I get more enjoyment from losing an important battle and then coming back with a vengeance than I would from winning all the battles. Let's be honest, if there was a save feature, most people would use it. Sure, it might start out small. You go back and change your orders for a battle or reload, hoping that random knight attack doesn't occur. It would escalate though. Soon, whenever the slightest thing went wrong, you'd shout "redo!", and you would find yourself playing for that one goal, to win. Nothing is wrong with playing and trying to win, but you should have fun along the way. After all, it is a game. Where does the fun go when it is a constant reload fest? Where is the sense of accomplishment when the chance of failure is removed? When most people reach a certain spot in large games in SP where they are simply undefeatable because they have become so much larger or more powerful than everyone else, they usually quite. Why? Because without the sense of the possibility of failure, the danger is gone. Without danger, where is the fun? Where is the accomplishment? Finally, like many others have pointed out, you can already save the game, and it doesn't take much time or effort. Again, all of this is just my insignificant opinion. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
To be honest it wouldn't be that difficult or time consuming to add in. You'd simply need to create a new sub directory in the installer, then duplicate the code used to save the turn file, pointing it at the new directory.
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
But what is being discussed in this thread isn't really my right to ***** or their right to publish what they want, but the fact that people here think that depriving people of choices and options on how to play a game is actually something good, to be desired. It boggles my mind. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
When you make a game easy to mod, you are explicitly choosing to let players do what they want with the game. In line with that philosophy, making it truly easy to save the game would make sense. The player can do what they want with it.
However, the designers have made a decision otherwise and there is little doubt it is a deliberate decision. After ten years of working on the game, they have not spent the hour or two to put in what most of the strategy community considers a standard part of any game. Let us be clear, we are talking about saves from an in game menu, saves which you can name. Illwinter has made thousand of good design decision and a handful of bad ones. We argue about them on the forum every day. This is one that I think is a bad one. And finally, can we get the terminology correct if we are going to insist on using play ground language in our discussions? You don’t say “sack up.” You say “suck it up” or, more insultingly, “suck it up, princess!” If you prefer, you can tell me to “cowboy up” or ask me if I am “afraid to play with the big boys.” Alternatively, you can call me a “big girl’s blouse”, a “Jessica” or a “pansy.” Where I grew up, you would tell me to “go play with the kids from Tranquille,” but then I would have to break your nose, so perhaps we should leave that out. Or we could just try arguing reasonably and leave the “funny” insults where they belong, while respecting each other. This isn’t a Blizzard forum… |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I wouldn't say it's a concious decision, or necessarily a bad one. After all, the functionality is there (as in, moving and renaming files yourself), it's more a matter of polish (as in, it's not automated or presented within the game).
It's not the only rough edge the game has either. Much as I love additional content and similar fun stuff, I do wonder if perhaps the actual presentation is being over ignored. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Implementing a save game option would not be difficult. A subdirectory or three or five in each savegame subdir that store the turn files for e.g. 1 to 5 turns previous and then start overwriting them in order of oldest first would be about as much anybody could ask for. Whether we get it is another matter entriely.
Personally I don't need it in Dominions, never have. In some other types of strat games like the HoMM series and the old Warlords series I like it. In Dominons, I like the ironman approach. For me, it's no problem starting over if things get screwed up. Typically if I do have to start over, it'll be at a point early enough that it doesn't really matter and later I've generally managed a position strong enough that a few setbacks won't be eeough to stop me. Hurt, yes, but not stop. That's a part of the game for me. I don't like the "Take overly big risks and go back to a saved game if it fails" approach that many people like to use. The solution is to take smaller risks. Edi |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Also note that Dom2 worked exactly the same and yet I don't remember much (any) rumbling about the lack of save feature.. Maybe the game is getting more popular so there's more demand for a "standard" feature that is missing. Personally I'd be glad to have it but can live without. Also note that if Dom doesn't have a real save feature like "all" other strat games have, it has *lots* of features that *no other* strat game has http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I know I learn from my mistakes without a save game feature. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like one, but we've been spoiled by the save feature in games for years.
Now, confirming an end-turn click would be nice. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Quote:
Gandalf Parker |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Amen to the "are you sure you want to end your turn?" question/extra click feature! At least in SP games, grrr...
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
HoneyBadger:
I turn public census and the higher powers at be against me all the time. Nowhere near the first. Apparantly my opinions are so hot-topic and my Rhetoric so blood-boiling that everyone feels comfortable in ranting against me. First off, I never once said the game was too difficult. I am requesting a feature! Never once did I say, this game is too hard, I surrender. I said, I'm just fricken tired of spending three hours building up a force making one wrong move and then having to dedicate another three hours into doing the same damn thing is just not the fun. Of course, as you know, there is no Save Game feature in life, I've made plenty of screwed up decisions back at Fork Union Military School to know that consequence. But that's the LEAST of things relevant. You don't have to tell me twice about competetion. It's Humanity's worst situation but yet from the fire brings the ashes of Greatness. --------------------------------- Video games are not similulating challenges and have nothing to do with reality, Video Games are for YOUR enjoyment. What I want that would make this game enjoyable is a save game feature. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? My god it's funny... "No you can't enjoy the game, you have to play the way that I want, no Saves, otherwise it Magically makes me WANT to use Saves(???)" Your (Indirect) preference NEVER overrides MY preference. Any opposing logic is down right ridicolous. There is no emotion in my response (other then the fact that I had lost my original post in writing.) It's just such a simple variation that I've spent more time reading excuses against it then if I were to put it actually IN. I mean, god help me if I asked for a more indepth Tutorial. The Response would be. "No, you can't have that tutorial, you just want the easy shortcut you lazy wimp, you need to spend the remanding four hours like the rest of us on it, otherwise it magically ruins the complexity of the game" (Don't be surprsied if a Fanboy would say that.) The Tutorial isn't bad however, it's an example though. I have to use caps just to bring this final sentance out. THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF!!! CALL IT HARDCORE MODE. Honestly, can anyone make a good debatable reason to prove this statement is unacceptable. Here I'll bring out the easiset argument against that. "It betrays the Developer Vision and it ruins the game for the gamer". A: If the Gamer ruins his own game, who cares!!!!!!! Let me "Ruin" my own game and "deprive" myself of "Ultimate" Happiness. More importantly of all, WTH does the Developer Vision say, "We made sure to appeal to our Hardcore l337s not to include Saves." If anything, there in a different direction. Pg 2 In the Dominions 3 manual states: "We didn't have a deadline, nor any clear direction, apart from adding fun stuff and making the game more User-Friendly.......There are still plenty of things I would like to see in the game, though, so expect new content and ever-increasing modability in future patches." What I see is good intentions and bringing more enjoyment to the game to more people. Are you guys trying to bring Good Intentions, or are you more interested in getting "your" way. (Spicy Challenge + Closer FTW) -THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF!!! CALL IT HARDCORE MODE.- AND LET MY PEOPLE GO! -Edited Numerously |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I would really appreciate a save game feature.
How many time after finishing a whole game, i would have liked to load a saved turn when i made an important strategic decision, to see what the game would have turned into if i selected a different option... |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
What is so hard about ctrl C and ctrl V?
I would prefer that development/GUI design/testing time to spent on some other feature personally. We are talking about 2 people (only 1 of whom can do the coding afaik) who have full time jobs. And no it wouldn't only take "X hours" none of has any idea how long it would take. And the people clamouring for a save feature wouldn't just accept a single overwriting save (they might say they would, but if that feature existed I bet the discussion would be "why can't I have multiple saves?") |
Repeat request.
If you're not exactly the first person to request a feature that's already been heavily discussed, has been lacking in three major iterations of the game, has almost certainly been noticed by the developers as not being there and having been requested, and almost certainly wouldn't require a major redesign considering that the saved games are already essentially compatible with user-done backup/restore -- it seems reasonable to infer that
* the devs have reasons for not doing it other than that it's not being requested, because it has been * points and counter-points have already been rehashed ad infinitum -- it's not like this is a novel area of game development * further discussion may be extremely uninteresting for this reason, especially if requesters choose to ignore the Search forums and repost as if they were the first ones with this concept |
Re: Repeat request.
Okay, I understand.
The pictures been painted well now. What I thought was that the Hardcores were keeping the Devs from putting in this feature. If the Devs honestly feel like not putting features that the people want just because they disagree with it, well then it makes no point standing on the principle. I personally thought that line of thinking was non-existent, but then again, this line of thinking screwed games over a good number of times with games that had a little magic in it (to name a few, Black and White 2, the Superpowers, Heroes IV, and Master of Orion 3) While real Indie Succeses like Gal Civ 2 make sure to include as many desires as possible to the people want in some form of variation or another. Which is why it isn't indie anymore. I mean right now, I could go to the Forums, make a request, and honestly, it would be given thought and love. Even features they deemed "too much" intially for the Exp, was inevitably implemented! To bring this to a close and justify my actions (to a lesser extent). All I was doing was requesting an commoditiy that a fairly good number of people want. If they say no. (which I haven't necessarily heard yet) Cool. I'll just sell my game and in theory they lose one customer. All I am stating is that if the Devs, not the Cores (or in this case, both) decide to FORCE features THEY want rather then trying to appeal to good folks, I can see D going up to five and inevitably making some of the features that people want or seeing D5 crash or seeing D go to six and by then everyone's board of it, new kids get on the block, it's over. W/e, im not fricken Nostradamus, but I am most definetly stating the obvious and the general statements about my complaints are in fact true. Look at it from an opposite direction for a minute. What happens when the Publishers go against what the people want...total disaster commercially. What happens when the Devs refuse to do what the people want, they no longer get paid anymore. Sincere Regards, Me. PS: I appreciate your response Taqwus, really do. |
Re: Repeat request.
A) "feel like not putting features that the people want" is a strange way of putting it. Obviously there are people who dont want it put in at all. Or at least consider it a low need.
B) the fact that they dont get paid if they dont do it has already been addressed. They arent driven by the money to do things they dont want in the game. C) I think that the devs giving in to loud complaints by a few people is a much surer way to fade into nothingness |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Quote:
Like you I can take or leave the save feature itself, however it would be nice to see a little time spent on increasing the utility and general polish of the pre-game menu. While it's probably not important to most people, it's worth remembering that this is the first thing a new player will see, and first impressions are always important. Personally, I can see the need for some kind of game manager replacement for the load interface. Not necessarily fancy, but it would be nice to perhaps see the current turn number alongside the game name at least. Perhaps even identifying whether the game was created as single or multiplayer, the map used and the player's nation. |
Re: Repeat request.
Newthought, Velusion, Nightblade, I want you to know that I have actually considered your arguments (when they didn't become inappropriate) and I do think there are some compelling reasons to have some form of save-game option. I'm not at all in favor of one-I stand fully by my original opinion, but I do see some of your points-and I actually started a thread about this, specifically concerning games which are thrown off-track by extremely bad luck on the part of the user (as opposed to choosing Misfortune scales) early in the game, if you'll notice. I would not want the Devs to add a savegame feature because of this (I still like Gandalf's suggestion about restarting random maps though), but I think that situations do unfortunately occur where it would be perfectly reasonable to want to restart a turn or a game. Not because the game itself needs the function, but because a few areas of the game could in my opinion use some recalibrating because they take away from your ability to make strategic choices and have fun, imposing and perpetuating (and I'm confident this is unintentional) a heavy-handed, pessimistic sense of reality, cheating the player of a fun experience, rather than adding to the experience of the game for a player who doesn't desire to "cheat" him or her self.
And Ramshead, ofcourse kids deserve respect, often a specific "kid" will be far more deserving of respect than a given "adult" of whatever age. I think I was going for an "it's what you do that makes you who you are" kind of feeling. And Newthought, your line of reasoning disregards that the Devs and the so called "hardcore" players happen to be in agreement on this issue, atleast it seems a truth as far as this particular thread is concerned. Usually when the people who make a game and the people who play the game the most and are the most enthusiastic about it are in agreement, it's a good sign, not a bad one. I like GalCiv too, and I've suggested a partnership between Stardock and Illwinter. I still feel that would be a good idea for a lot of reasons. I think that if everyone were clamouring for a save-game feature, the Devs would look at the issue very hard, but the fact remains that not everyone, or even a large population, are. If I went to the GalCiv boards and requested that all planets be square instead of round from now on, I'd probably get the same response as you have here-that yes, I could add square planets if I wanted, but in general, people felt that round planets were a more suitable feature for a "vanilla" version of the game. That response might come with love and affection and a ring and a mortgage, but still, it boils down to the majority opinion, which is important where the "vanilla" game is concerned. |
Re: Repeat request.
I honestly liked your composed piece Honeybadger,
Only two things left to say I guess, 1. When I meant features, I meant logical features within posibility. (as vague as it sounds, this can only come from a Feature to Feature basis) 2. I did ignore that the fateful to this game was in fact a positive. But the fact of the matter is again, -THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF.- I honestly inserted gimmics just so that people can read this very simple and easy to implement feature. Let my people was not hashed in there, for it has a deep statement. It implies as Moses saod to Pharoah, let them do as they wish, for they (we) have their (Our) own truth in their heart. I may not know what applies to the Hardcore world, but based on relative rules, this statement is corrupt. "cheating the player of a fun experience, rather than adding to the experience of the game for a player who doesn't desire to "cheat" him or her self" You assume that how YOU play the game is how I want to play the game. You assume that YOUR good time is MY good time. I mean assume that I play Small maps, and I tell you that your missing the "Fast paced combat" resulted from victory. What if you play Huge maps and you want a "long-drawn out battle", do I have any right to say, "No" This whole "maintain the Image" can get very negative is the "Image" is frozen. I'm purely resulting to a Philisophical measure in order to bring my point into true emphasis, for I indeed know that if this topic was brought to "Your Opinion Vs. Mine" then NOBODY Wins and nothing is changed. This is a matter of "How I want to appreciate the Game Vs. Your appreciation of the game" Notice how this argument could be easily mirrored if I was granted the right to save games. Then, this arguement, purely theoratical, would turn into. "My appreciation of the game vs Your appreciation of the game" (In retrospect, if both parties had negative attitudes, it would turn to "How I want to play the Game vs How I want to play the game") The features is easily implementable, and it is not constraning, therefore if the feature granted, only this many more people would enjoy the experince. The Tyranny of the Majority can only be granted through the Silence of the Minority. So, it is the Minority's sole responsibility to speak for itself, and don't confuse yourself that people don't want this feature, there are plenty who want this feature, I being one of the few pissy about it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif. For in the end, there is no Cheating because Cheating implies the violation of laws in this aspect. But if I define my own laws, how can I cheat myself? Only if other's put their own values in for me. PS: Or we could play "WWSD, or What Would Stardock Do" for fun. |
Re: Repeat request.
You keep saying
-THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF.- like its a big deal. IF YOU WANT SAVES SO BAD THEN DO IT. You arent arguing for saves. You are arguing for easy pushbutton menu driven save and restore. Thats what cuts down your audience. Those of us who want saves already have saves. Another point of this might be that it is a linux developed game. The idea of such a huge need for menu'd saves instead of manual ones is kindof laughable on linux. |
Re: Repeat request.
Actually, Newthought, I was assuming you'd read and understand what I actually wrote.
I wasn't stating that "my way is the right way". I also wasn't invoking any sort of majority "tyranny". I was infact agreeing with you, in part, that there are areas of the game which currently exist, which are not, in my opinion, perfect, and which having a save-game feature could actually improve-or lesson the angst perpetrated thereof. My appreciation of the game-please understand, as far as I'm concerned, is paramount, but when defining the word "appreciation" I include the word "understanding", and so I make an effort to understand your point of view, in order to further appreciate the game. Your effort to stand on a soap-box and politic to me, based on skewing my own words, I admit is definitely superior to the insults and the shouting, but it still is not getting us down to the heart of any real understanding between us, or progress. If you will, try to ignore that I consider the arbitrary implementation and use of a save-game feature to be "cheating", that's just my opinion and judgement on the subject, and it's not the sort of thing that a useful conversation should turn on. If you feel that "being the bigger man" means "turning the other cheek" (since you seem to be familiar with atleast parts of the Bible) then feel free to BE the bigger man, and TURN the other cheek. In return I'll forgive this biblical ranting, and we can hopefully avoid wasted passions. The facts: the save game feature is currently not in the game, it can be implemented by those who actively choose to, but noone's being forced to do so. Nor are they being prevented against doing such a thing in any way. Public opinion does frown upon it, but then that doesn't have to matter or apply to you. I'm quite certain that putting such a feature into Dom3 is a process atleast as easy as it would be to put it into another given title, and I'm guessing with confidence that it would probably be easier to do than with most games. The Devs are and have been in all of my experiences with them, both open-minded, and generous. My opinion-once again-is that there are indeed certain features/issues within the game which do not preclude and at times encourage the desire to reboot a saved game with ease. However, not to the point where they make the game unplayable or unenjoyable. The Devs-for their part-do not wish to add the save-game ability as a feature, which is there choice, and has nothing to do with responsibility. If you want to talk responsibility, then I would suggest that the Devs do have some amount of responsibility to address those above features/issues in some proactive or reactive way, and make an effort-as time allows-to reduce said desire for such a saved-game feature. Thus they are able to remain true to their vision, while at the same time being responsible to the needs of dissatisfied consumers such as yourself, and at the same time remain faithful to fans such as myself. So perhaps you'd like to suggest some ways-in addition to my own ideas-that this could be done? |
Dev style. It\'s their product.
Devs tend to have opinions about their own products. This being a product largely controlled by two devs, and it being a fairly successful one that isn't dominating their lives, their own opinions matter more. Sometimes they agree with the users (quite a few balance issues have been dealt with over the years... and I, for one, appreciate the auto-tax system) and sometimes they don't. *shrug*
If I were going to argue with dev decisions, I'd argue about things unimplemented that don't have simple user-doable workarounds, like the continuing lack of detailed casualty reports in battle storming (which may or may not be difficult depending on data structures used and any consistency issues), or the need to cycle through blood-hunting provinces if you want to 'pool' without pooling sacrifices. |
Re: Dev style. It\'s their product.
Hi Ithought this would be a perfect time to chime in. I usually check out the forums to find out info about this particular issue. I just havae the demo, and personally am waiting for a save game feature before I will buy the game.
I've heard arguments against it and understand, but there are a lot a different playstyles. Personally I'm an old dude and work full time, so I would never have time to be a hardcore player. I just want to mostly play SP on my time with my playstyle. If that means I want so save a game before a big battle to try different options, I just dont know how that would hurt anybody that doesn't like to do that. I also understand that there are ways to save manually, but (and I know the Devs work hard) for $55 buks I wolud expect a professional means of saving the game. I'll keep peeking, hopefully they will add it some day. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
Sigh...
|
Re: Repeat request.
Quote:
*Looks in dictionary* Yep, I spelled that right. |
Re: Repeat request.
Quote:
|
Re: Dev style. It\'s their product.
Quote:
|
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I may have missed this, there are a lot of things in Dom. How do I set it for auto save each turn?
I would like to repeat what Diorj has said. I am an old guy who has a lot of other responsibilities. I don’t want to spend a lot of time figuring out how to do this, I want to have fun for a few extra minutes when I don’t have to work, change diapers, chase tenants or agree with my wife that her boss is evil. I would really, really, really, like a save feature in the menus. Gandalf mentioned that those who want saves already have them, which myself and several other posters disagree with. I would like to note that several of the posters who agree with this point have very low post counts, they are new community members. They are the marginal people, the ones who may or may not stay. They are the growth area of the game, they are the ones we need if we want to keep this game healthy and moving on to another edition. The Devs may not be doing this for money, but they charge us for it like every other game. Between Shrapnel and Illwinter, they have roughly $150 for my copies of the three different games. I will argue that makes them for profit developers, just like everyone else. You can argue that they don’t do it for the money, but I think that one will find that most developers are pretty much the same. Seriously, tell me that Sid M. or Cormack do it for the cash. They do it because they love it. When Cormack got bored, he started to build rockets, because he also loved that. In any case, I just trying to point out that as a consumer, I pay the same to both, so I expect the same from both, regardless of their motivation. As a final argument, I too want the Devs to focus their scarce time on fixing things I see as problems with the game. |
Re: Why no Save game Feature
I've got a lot of posts because I post like ten times a day, not because I've been here forever.
I'm an old gamer myself, I've bought two games from Shrapnel, Space Empires IV and Dom3. I've got a family and plenty of responsibilities. My wife doesn't complain about her boss being evil, because she's got two or three evil co-workers and everybody's in "a huge clique". Whatever that means. I don't chase tenants, I chase fliers. I represent the new community just as much as any other "marginal" person, both because I never owned or heard about Illwinter until they were counting down to releasing Dom3, and because I'm relatively new to these boards. I haven't ever posted to this forum before October. That's 4 months, give or take. I like Dom3 because it's different, both better and not afraid to not appeal to everyone. Honestly, how many game designers or business people in general do you know that reference sacrificing blind pre-teen girls in the name of demon-summoning? I don't think too many. I don't think that you're going to see them caving and giving in to what the "average" gamer who walks in the door, looks around and says "well I would buy it, if they did this and this and this". Dom3 is made by people who are hardcore enthusiasts, for people who are hardcore enthusiasts, and it gives people who aren't, a good reason to become. |
Re: Repeat request.
HB,
Oh, the clique of evil co-workers. We had that last year, but they reshuffled the offices, so now we have an evil boss. I suspect it he was hit by lightening, we would find another source of untold evil. It is important she continue to work, for if she was at home, I would be the next candidate to be the source of all evil… Your points are well taken and you always discuss things in a cogent way, which is great. I do not mean to imply that all new posters are pro-save, as that can not be logically supported. My point is more that there is a pro-save group and that there are non-hardcore players out there. I would argue they are a lot quieter than the hardcore and their opinions are underrepresented. Of course, there exceptions like you and I. I would wager we both post from the office, which is very naughty… I agree that the game has a lot to pull in the casual gamer, but my opinion is that a simple save feature would pull in more. It helps the gaming community and the pocketbook of the Devs. We know they don’t care much about the later, but they do about the first. |
Re: Repeat request.
For me Dominions is a MP game only. I play SP only to test some things or play for 1-x turns to try out a starting strategy. For testing a save/load function would be ok, but i'm still happy to just copy the save game files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif
I've some problems to understand why people discuss about a save/load function in prior of a better single player AI. I mean is it only me but i find it quite boring, the strategical AI doing always the same: Make useless attacks against high province defence every turn. There isn't any visible difference playing against different nations. It seems they are all replicates from only one AI. In fact its really impossible to make a good AI for such a complex game. But anyway they could improve it, make some different play styles, reduce AI bugs like not conquering neutral provinces, etc. This would be a worthy improvement before we discuss a save/reload feature. Thats my oppinion. |
Re: Repeat request.
Quote:
|
Re: Repeat request.
AutoSaves
Much of Dominions doesnt bother writing into the game for each of the operating systems, things that are already possible. Some of it by third party programs that exist or that other players can provide. We have seen the same discussions about screenshots, taking notes, keeping history, redefining keys, alarms so we wont miss real world responsibilities, backups, restores, configs for starting a game, email support since it is a PbEM (Play by EMail), etc etc etc. The "autosave" feature is pretty simple for people on Linux or really old computer users who remember DOS. The game has a switch for telling it a file to execute before a hosting, and one to execute after a hosting. So if a windows person has batch files for it they can change the game icon to add --preexec before.bat --postexec after.bat The pre-execute batch file can copy the game save to a backup directory, or zip them up, or keep multiple copies. The post-execute batch file can make a noise to tell you that the hosting is done (good for really big games) or display the scoreboard or anything else you think of. Its not as simple as a menu option for save/restore but its much more powerful. I think Ive seen examples of files for Windows, and for Mac, and for Linux to make use of that powerful feature. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.