Why no Save game Feature

NTJedi · #1 January 16th, 2007, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Saxon said:
And I say that we do want them spending time on the save game feature!

There is not a consensus on this, but there are some vocal people on either side. That may be all that this thread will establish...

Since a few known workarounds exist for the desired save game feature I seriously doubt the developers will take time away from fixing known bugs and developing new content.
Lets see... should the devs fix the known undead blessing bug which can effect any nation OR add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround. Not a difficult decision for most people.

Personally I would rather they also spend their time making sure each nation has at least 3 heroes instead of adding a save game feature which has a known workaround.

Gandalf Parker · #2 January 16th, 2007, 09:17 PM

Lets not be that harsh. It might not be laziness.
Some people really have no idea how to do things on their computer unless its on a menu. If they cant find the dominions files, dont know how to make a file there or a shortcut, then they are going to have a hard time with the answers that have been given.

NTJedi · #3 January 16th, 2007, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Gandalf Parker said:
Lets not be that harsh. It might not be laziness.
Some people really have no idea how to do things on their computer unless its on a menu. If they cant find the dominions files, dont know how to make a file there or a shortcut, then they are going to have a hard time with the answers that have been given.

That's true... yet it's only a percentage which lack the knowledge for moving/adding files within the windows directories. I feel sorry for these people because this means if someone develops a unique and very fun singleplayer map available for download... they won't be able to play the map.

Saxon · #4 January 18th, 2007, 06:34 AM

Hmm, I remember something in university about small minds getting in the sack with bears when the big mind was turned off�

Gandalf Parker · #5 January 18th, 2007, 11:49 AM

Actually I think the graph history is a good thing to add if it can be done easily. Trying to see all sides of it, I cant come up with anything about a graph history that would be bad for the game. As for 3rd partying the graphs; I brought that up because some people thinks its fun to do such projects and it seems to spur some competitive action in the devs.

Wyehl · #6 January 16th, 2007, 10:46 PM

Quote:

NTJedi said:
Lets see... should the devs fix the known undead blessing bug which can effect any nation OR add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround. Not a difficult decision for most people.

A few people seem to assume that this argument is in the majority. All sarcasm and straw men and smiley winks aside, this view is maybe only in the majority among some of the 'local' crew, if that. The reason I got into this thread in the first place was my personal reaction to this very assumption and I wanted to make it clear that just because a group of the 'locals' think that, it doesn't mean everyone who plays (and buys) the game feels that way (no offense to the locals, I only mean that it seems to me that most of the people who are against a save game feature are regular posters in this forum while the people who are for it are a mix of regular posters and newbies like myself).

I don't disagree that priorities are worth considering but I don't think that there is an overwhelming majority, such that you can simply discredit arguments based on what you perceive as the popularity of your point of view. If it was so overwhelmingly popular, you would only have two or three people on the opposing side and that doesn't appear to be the case.

Note: By 'locals', I only mean people who have been active on the forum for a while and/or participate regularly.

NTJedi · #7 January 16th, 2007, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Wyehl said:
I only mean that it seems to me that most of the people who are against a save game feature are regular posters in this forum while the people who are for it are a mix of regular posters and newbies like myself

I'm not strongly against the save game feature... I'm more strongly supporting other issues which need attention first. If you've scanned the largest sticky bug thread you'd see there's plenty of work which needs to be done and that's not including the long list of OTHER features people want added which is well over 70-something from the patch improvement thread.
Thus when I see a topic requesting a feature which has a known workaround... it's like complaining to your congressman or government official about banks not being open on Sunday, when there's obviously much larger issues which need attention. Another point is 98% of all the other features which have been suggested don't have workarounds unlike the save game feature request.

Wyehl · #8 January 17th, 2007, 02:26 AM

Quote:

NTJedi said:
If you've scanned the largest sticky bug thread you'd see there's plenty of work which needs to be done and that's not including the long list of OTHER features people want added which is well over 70-something from the patch improvement thread.
Thus when I see a topic requesting a feature which has a known workaround... it's like complaining to your congressman or government official about banks not being open on Sunday, when there's obviously much larger issues which need attention. Another point is 98% of all the other features which have been suggested don't have workarounds unlike the save game feature request.

I think those are probably the best 'anti-save' points that have been made (minus the analogy). The only problem with them is that they presume the quality of this requested feature to be poor when, apparently, there are several people that would disagree.

Let's be fair, though. It isn't a question of a save game feature vs. a game killing bug. Since new content and features are released with patches, it's really a question of the save game feature vs. other features that have been requested. I acknowlege that you have said as much, I just want to be clear.

For these two arguments (which are really shades of the same argument), it all comes down to the idea that people disagree on:
A) What priority a save game feature should be.
B) How much effort it is to code it (can't recall if anyone but Gandalf made this argument but it is relevant to (A), in any case, so I am throwing it in).

I don't even know what priority it is in the spectrum of other features and I think it's a fair question, though maybe it wasn't posed all that fairly. Honestly, that's what got me involved, I jumped in because the other anti-save arguments were just begging me and I succumbed.

Just a phrase ? No! They were begging me, I tell you, I could hear them saying "You can't let me go, you know you can't...fine, but my friend here is an even greater exageration, can you resist him ? How about a straw man ? Smugness ? Sarcasm ? Oh come on, Wyehl, you can't resist us all, you know we will get you..."

...and they did. The little bastages got me and here I am.

Thanks for indulging my...umm, imagination.

Saxon · #9 January 17th, 2007, 02:11 AM

add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround.

I am not lazy, I have a baby! I usually look like this smily

and cherish what time I have with the game. Learning some DOS codes to create a batch file is not what I want to do with my few stolen personal moments.

alexti · #10 January 18th, 2007, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Saxon said:
I am not lazy, I have a baby! I usually look like this smily

and cherish what time I have with the game. Learning some DOS codes to create a batch file is not what I want to do with my few stolen personal moments.

Why not to use someone else's script?