Save Me - Need Help with 'Saving'

I was reading a bit in the "what do you hate in games" thread and I noticed a lot of disagreement with how to deal with saving. As this is the last major problem with my demo before I release it, I was wondering if anyone had a good opinion with how to deal with saving.

Logistically speaking, I cannot have the player save anywhere they want because if they load in certain areas, it will crash the game (or cause weird bugs..ahh ABS problems...). However, Having 'save points' seems a bit awkward too (although Dark Souls pulled this off well?). The other option is to be prompted to save at certain areas, but this is unattractive for several reasons (which I'm sure you all can figure out, ill explain if not). Another option is the autosave. The very last option is to have 'save areas' in which players can only save in certain areas (FF7 did this on the world map, for instance, but not anywhere else).

So considering the options below

-Player can save anywhere

-Player can only save at save points

-Player can only save when prompted

-Player game autosaves

-Player can only save in certain areas

Which do you prefer and why? Did I miss any?

If your game will crash due to the player's ability to save anywhere, they you should implement a save point or save area system.

Placing a save point just before a major/boss battle or before making any game changing decisions would be advisable to avoid player frustration. Not everyone would enjoy that 2-4 hour trek into the base of a volcano only to be wiped out by the fire breathing dragon that they didn't see coming. ^^

Don't listen to peoples "OMG i hate save points not enuf time 2 play" comments.  Those threads are most of the time not healthy for developers because many people suck or are stingy/spoiled. (no offense and not calling anyone specific) Do what suits your game best (in this case since you cannot do "save anywhere" then save points are fine)

The reason why Dark Souls uses save points (and they're pretty sparse) is because the game is meant to be punishing and difficult. And reaching a new bonfire save point is very satisfying in that regard, as it acts like a teleporter to wherever in the game you want to go to, as well as Ecstus restoration. (Your main healing items) And how many people love Dark Souls? Millions of people and the fact that the bonfire system is done properly helps a lot.

The only time you should listen to those posts is if they're legit reasons that usually refer to imbalance or technical issues. (which is up to the dev to decide based on how knowledgeable they are)

I agree it's good to have save areas or save points, which are spread out to minimize the amount of player backtracking if they die.

I think it's also good to have save points/areas near good places for players to grind.

In my games (which don't use ABS), I normally let the player save anywhere except within a dungeon.   Inside dungeons, there are specific, defined save points.  For big dungeons I have one in the middle and one before the boss.  Smaller ones either have none (if they're very small) or just one before the boss.   And I have a Skill or Item which allows the party to rapidly escape the dungeon in case they realize they're in over their head.

Right, and a consideration with the "save anywhere anytime" option is that the player can really cheese the game and try anything without punishment. This is something I would like to avoid.

In terms of save points, whats the least cheesiest save point? Are fireplaces and fires too cliche? What about blue fires only? This question stumped the makers of FF7 to the point that they actually used a question mark, lol.

If it fits in well with the game's setting/theme/world, it will not look cheesy. Campfires & books are fine. Resident Evil used typewriters as save points while Parasite Eve used phones. Let your imagination run wild. Nothing is too cliche, especially when a lot of modern games these days have the save anywhere feature. Now who's being cliche? ^^

In my game, I used a large Crystal since it reminded me of FFIV.  I don't think it's a bad thing to have a "too cliche" save point, because players will clearly know "This is a save point," which is all it's for anyways.

I also highly recommend the "Escape" skill or item.  When I playtested my own game, there were areas I got in over my head (i.e. not enough grinding) and find that a literal lifesaver if I've saved in the dungeon.

To implement that, before you enter a dungeon, save the Player X and Y and Map ID.  To Escape, jump to the X, Y and Map ID saved earlier, as long as they're not cleared.  Then clear the X, Y and Map ID.  Also clear the X, Y and Map ID if you walk out of the dungeon. Not perfect but it works well for me.

hahahaha! alright, I think I will do blue fire

Interesting... reminds me of "dig" in pokemon?

Actually, it reminds me of the "Escape Rope" in Pokemon.  If "Dig" did the same thing (I never used it out of battle), then yeah.

I let players save anywhere on the world map and need to use the ever cliched save crystals everywhere else.

I do this to increase the challenge of dungeon areas and because I actually use the save spots for things other than saving.

Hmm there was one method of saving I missed that I am curious about your guys opinion...

What about if the player gets access to these 'save crystals' except they are items in the inventory and are limited and have to be used strategically?

@whitesphere yes they did the same thing

Resident Evil basically did that with ink ribbons, though there you also had to find a typewriter to use them on. I've never played a game that just had items for saving, so I can't really give an opinion. Do such games exist?

Probably not, now that I think about it, it seems way too difficult/strategical to know when to use saves if you dont know whats coming and if you do know whats coming then the point is diminished. it would take the right game to make something like this doable

Actually, the first Final Fantasy let you save with Tents and Cabins that were in your inventory and consumed upon use.

I never really liked the idea tho.

It seems too restrictive if that is the case. Resident Evil did it that way to add tension and strategy to the horror atmosphere. It was too unfriendly to people who don't handle action games too well, so I ended up giving up on these types of games.

Obscure had a save system that you could only save when you have a floppy disk and it is one use only, it is meant to give off that intense survival horror feel but it was poorly scattered that a good player could have 15 of these and not worry.

The main points of having good save points are as followed

- Save points in Inns, cabins, dumpling shops etc

- Save anywhere on the world map

- 2-3 well placed saves in dungeons (Depending how long the dungeon is)

- Save point before the boss or important event.

Shin Megami Tensie: Lucifer's Call had nice save point placements and the dungeons were long but fair, it also had a system where within those dungeons the save points (Terminals) had one Mother Terminal and many small terminals, with the Mother Terminal you can teleport to other Mother terminals that you already visited and with the small terminals they teleport you to it's mother of that particular dungeon. So what they did in every dungeon it will have 1 mother terminal at the beginning of the dungeon and through out that dungeon you will encounter the small terminals giving you the option to teleport back to the entrance where the mother is.

There are plenty of ways to make good save points just need to whack your brain a bit to get the imagination flowing. hope this helps :p

I usually justify the save points, they're usually a journal that is lying around, or sleeping in a bed.

Of those options, my favorite in general would be a "save area" system.  Recettear did this because for some reason or another they didn't want you saving in dungeons - and it worked well; I knew when I was heading into a dungeon that I would need to set a little time aside.

But a lot of what makes a good save system depends on the rest of your game.  What is the risk of losing battles (both how often you'll lose battles, and what happens if you do lose)?  What do you consider the core element of 'challenge' in your game?  Is it important to prevent players from save-scumming, or is it more important to grant conveniences to players?  All of these vary by game and are important questions in answering what the save system should be like.

For example, I'm not usually a fan of the "save only when prompted" system, but I went with it in my IGMC contest game, because the sequences could be so well organized into little "modules" or "levels", and the action was in a way that you starting a module over can allow you to do things different to give you a better chance in the battle that you failed the first time - so it made sense to send the player back to the beginning of the module (the last time they were prompted for a save) rather than to allow them to save right before the battle.