Auto Save, please...

[Rikashey]

Half way through with building my amazing castle in the sky and go to add a sheet rope on a wood window and accidentally click Climb Through. There goes hours of works and dedication.

 

Auto Save would help quite a bit. Please at least make it optional for us butterfingers.

[FawkesGaming]

Are you sure it was accidental, and your character just saw an opportunity to jump... ending his miserable existence in the apocalypse? 

[GoldenBullet]

Well accidentally slipping out a window is a valid death so lulz xD. Also saving would you know...kinda ruin the point of the entire game. I mean i can't think of any good survival games that actually incorporate saving besides on exit.

[EnigmaGrey]

On the plus, you'll have another character to continue his work.

[Rathlord]

Being able to save scum will never be a part of vanilla Project Zomboid. Sorry mate, it's just not that kind of game.

[Kajin]

This is a game where death is inevitable. Where one tiny mistake like accidentally tripping out of a window can end it all. Being able to just reload a save back to a point before you died would go against the entire point of the game.

[Scorp_poison]

Half way through with building my amazing castle in the sky and go to add a sheet rope on a wood window and accidentally click Climb Through. There goes hours of works and dedication.

 

Auto Save would help quite a bit. Please at least make it optional for us butterfingers.

I completely agree, after playing for hours on end, one mistake shouldn't be the end of all your work!

At least add in the option for people that don't like the PERMA death crude.

[EnigmaGrey]

Then back up your save files when you hit your personal milestone.

It's just copying the save file, found in %username%\zomboid.

[robban279]

Saving and loading will never be part of this game if it was I'd stop playing haha...

[Ohbal]

 

Half way through with building my amazing castle in the sky and go to add a sheet rope on a wood window and accidentally click Climb Through. There goes hours of works and dedication.

 

Auto Save would help quite a bit. Please at least make it optional for us butterfingers.

I completely agree, after playing for hours on end, one mistake shouldn't be the end of all your work!

At least add in the option for people that don't like the PERMA death crude.

 

 

What he said. 

 

I always do a back-up of my save at the end of my sessions, for deployment reasons specially (I like to sneak-play at work, so I basically have my game duplicated on the cloud most of the times). 

 

Even so, my 6 months character has died twice: One by showing the game to a friend (you can't drop your guard this in game) and the other exactly the same that you describe. Jumping through a window from my safe-house 3rd floor

 

I considered both deaths to be completely un-realistic from a roleplaying point of view... so I continued with my saved game (losing hours in the process, of course, but not loosing it all). 

 

I understand the frustration, but without this system the game would lose tons of intensity. At least we have a workaround

[ORMtnMan]

Saving and loading will never be part of this game if it was I'd stop playing haha...

 

You would really just quit? Instead of say... not taking advantage of the save feature?

 

You can always have your own ironman mode you know...

 

If they (for some stupid reason) added that feature, I'd just ignore it.

 

I do agree though, autosave just isn't part of the intention of the game...

[Suomiboi]

Survival basically is ironman mode... Maybe they could incorporate a save system for the beginner mode, but it really has no place in the main game imo.

Telling someone to not use a system, isn't a good argument to implement the system. It's the same as with fast traveling in many games. If it's there I'll probably take advantage of it even if it kills the game on the whole. It's an easy fix for a temporary state of mind that'll bum me out later.

It's the same as giving an alcoholic a beer and saying that you don't have to drink it you know... To exaggerate a bit.

[ORMtnMan]

Survival basically is ironman mode... Maybe they could incorporate a save system for the beginner mode, but it really has no place in the main game imo.

Telling someone to not use a system, isn't a good argument to implement the system. It's the same as with fast traveling in many games. If it's there I'll probably take advantage of it even if it kills the game on the whole. It's an easy fix for a temporary state of mind that'll bum me out later.

It's the same as giving an alcoholic a beer and saying that you don't have to drink it you know... To exaggerate a bit.

 

Good point in all cases. You are absolutely right. I don't think the save/load feature should be implemented in this game. It is mopre powerful to die then load up a new character in the same save... much more interesting. 

 

I tried going back to playing Morrowind after playing the later Elderscrolls games... I got totally spoiled by fast travel and quest locators... so I get your point.

 

Even if it had the save/load feature, I'd have a lot of fun with this game.

[robban279]

It's one of the things I like about kerbal space program. They added the option to not be able to quick save or quick load in the newest version if you play career mode. Now when I play it, my little austronauts die and I love to miss them.

Before they implemented "iron man", I didn't have a single casualty and you know why? Cuz I can't stop myself from clicking quick save...

Now I really try my best to be careful and think through everything I do in the game... I don't "want" an hour planned trip to another planet to fail and all my crew die.

It's so much more pleasing and exciting to see them return from a dangerous journey that lasted a couple hours when I know I only got one chance to make it right, landing back on earth again, rather than "oh damn they crashed, I better press quick load".

Yeah I'd not play PZ with quick load or auto save, though I would if you could disable it when starting a new game.

[EnigmaGrey]

It's one of the things I like about kerbal space program. They added the option to not be able to quick save or quick load in the newest version if you play career mode. Now when I play it, my little austronauts die and I love to miss them.

Really does suck when it's something strange -- like your  two-component rocket causes the launch pad to detonate or your parachutes just vanish mid-landing, but I've learned to live with it.

[Rathlord]

There's a very compelling argument to be made about why adding "optional" features that are too attractive to pass up is actually quite unhealthy for many games.

As was said about KSP, it changes the way you play the game entirely, and can cause major balance and longevity issues (which PZ already struggles from considerably.)

I might even do a video on it sometime.

[robban279]

It's one of the things I like about kerbal space program. They added the option to not be able to quick save or quick load in the newest version if you play career mode. Now when I play it, my little austronauts die and I love to miss them.

Really does suck when it's something strange -- like your two-component rocket causes the launch pad to detonate or your parachutes just vanish mid-landing, but I've learned to live with it.

Haha yeah, I see what you mean maybe add extra parashutes incase that happens

Also launch stabilisers (I think they're called) makes it less likely that the launch pad explodes if it still happens I try to think of it as a kerbal factor mistake.. no room for mistakes in PZ though.

[Scorp_poison]

Minecraft (Of which I have a server  ) Is a perfect example of how this should go.

Normal mode or as we can call it "Being able to save"

Hardcore mode "Not being able to save"

 

In MC if you die in normal mode you respawn, if you die in hardcore mode, you don't.

 

These options were in the game since it's beginning, I don't want Auto saving, but I don't like the idea that people believe that since I play a different way than them I should be forced into playing their way or not play.

 

I enjoy the game and I am glad there is a work around, but it seems counter productive for the creators to tell customers, regardless of how many, that they will never give them an option to play it in a way that "Doesn't fit their vision".

 

I'm sorry if your "Vision" is me playing for 10-20 hours then losing everything because of a house alarm or because (as some users reported) I fall through the roof and break both my legs.

A game is bound to have bugs and losing a little bit of time getting back up from a save is one thing, losing all of it because the game has chosen to be sudden death for no other reason then "That's how the cool kids play it" is ridiculous at best.

[EnigmaGrey]

They were not in MineCraft since the beginning of MineCraft. Your character would die, a new one would be spawned and saves were allowed. Creative mode doesn't count, as it's impossible to die in it.

As said above, relatively simple work-arounds already exist, without the developers having implement a conflicting version of their view of the game. But, I'll admit, I'm all for "forcing" people to play the game a certain way, as the features it has sets the tone for the rest of the game.

[Ewok]

I enjoy the game and I am glad there is a work around, but it seems counter productive for the creators to tell customers, regardless of how many, that they will never give them an option to play it in a way that "Doesn't fit their vision".

 

I disagree with that statement, and I think it's fine for a game creator to stay true to a vision, even if it means disappointing or excluding certain customers.

 

I loved Demon's Souls and Dark Souls I and II for the hardcore nature of them and the fact there was no was around dying and losing everything. Sure, they could have seperated out an 'easy' and 'hard' mode and appealed to different audiences, but that would have cheapened the experience for me and many others.

 

If every creator sacrificed their artistic vision based soley on making the popular choices then we'd be missing out on loads of unique, experimental and different games.

[Rathlord]

As I said before, there are very real reasons why pandering to everyone can negatively effect gameplay balance and overall design. Please don't slander a position jut because you don't agree with it- this has nothing to do with "cool kids" and everything to do with game design and gamers not knowing what's best for themselves.

[EnigmaGrey]

Wait, am I now cool?

Well, this changes everything.

[Rathlord]

I wish I could claim that as a reason

[Scorp_poison]

 

I enjoy the game and I am glad there is a work around, but it seems counter productive for the creators to tell customers, regardless of how many, that they will never give them an option to play it in a way that "Doesn't fit their vision".

 

I disagree with that statement, and I think it's fine for a game creator to stay true to a vision, even if it means disappointing or excluding certain customers.

 

I loved Demon's Souls and Dark Souls I and II for the hardcore nature of them and the fact there was no was around dying and losing everything. Sure, they could have seperated out an 'easy' and 'hard' mode and appealed to different audiences, but that would have cheapened the experience for me and many others.

 

If every creator sacrificed their artistic vision based soley on making the popular choices then we'd be missing out on loads of unique, experimental and different games.

 

In the business world anyone will tell you that the key to success is to appeal to as many customers as possible.

And this is the business world because they aren't giving the game away for free.

 

The only part I don't understand is how it would have "Cheapened" it for you, just don't play it on easy.

They were not in MineCraft since the beginning of MineCraft. Your character would die, a new one would be spawned and saves were allowed. Creative mode doesn't count, as it's impossible to die in it.

As said above, relatively simple work-arounds already exist, without the developers having implement a conflicting version of their view of the game. But, I'll admit, I'm all for "forcing" people to play the game a certain way, as the features it has sets the tone for the rest of the game.

I would even be up for when you die you start someplace else on the same world as a different survivor, that would at least allow you to get your stuff back.

As I said before, there are very real reasons why pandering to everyone can negatively effect gameplay balance and overall design. Please don't slander a position jut because you don't agree with it- this has nothing to do with "cool kids" and everything to do with game design and gamers not knowing what's best for themselves.

There are possible negative effects, a save feature option would have none of them.

I'm not slandering something because I don't agree with it, and it has everything to do with the standard "I like playing hardcore, if you don't you're weak" mentality that has crept into most games that already DO have multiple difficulty settings.

 

And I do know what is best for myself, though I can't speak for others.

A game to enjoy, that's why we're all playing them.

[Ewok]

In the business world anyone will tell you that the key to success is to appeal to as many customers as possible.

And this is the business world because they aren't giving the game away for free.

...

The only part I don't understand is how it would have "Cheapened" it for you, just don't play it on easy.

It doesn't quite work like that, as the whole game was built around the core concept of difficulty and consequence, so you can't just take that away. Giving an easy option breeds temptation to that that option and, as frustrating as they can be, the Souls games are made unique by that difficulty. Remove the challenge and you are left with a pretty dull ARPG.

I don't agree with your comment about (the mythical) 'business world'. Most of us here are working adults, so we exist in the business world in one way or other. The key to success is not necessarily appealing to as many people as possible - some of the most successful products and services are designed to cater to a niche or a specific audience. If everyone tries to appeal to the mainstream you have a lot of people fighting for a small slice of a big pie. It's often more profitable to cut yourself a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

There are a lot of very, very samey Zombie games out there trying to appeal to a mass audience, Zomboid's core message (this is how you died) is one of several things that makes it different, and therefore make it stand out.