Why no Save game Feature

[HoneyBadger]

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.

[Newthought]

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 .

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.

[Gandalf Parker]

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.

[HoneyBadger]

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?

[Taqwus]

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.

[Diorj]

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.

[alexti]

Diorj said:
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.

You can set Dominions to auto-save every turn - no need to waste time saving it manually at all (whether through professional or non-professional means). That's probably the most convenient approach for your playstyle.

[alexti]

Newthought said:
-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.-

Compare this to the current: "Let those who want saves turn them on". So what was your argument about, once again?

[RamsHead]

HoneyBadger said:
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.

I was just being facetious.
*Looks in dictionary*
Yep, I spelled that right.