This^^^ exactly. having save available whenever a person wants to save certainly does not hurt anyone especially in a single-player game. Anyone who does not want to save does not have to. Choice is good.
I don´t understand how you came to conclussion that devs are against that… Oo
I said that because there’s more and more PC games with limited saves or no quicksave at all, nothing to do with KC at all.
While I agree that choice is good, as you ought to try to satisfy as many people as possible without impeding on creative goals, I don’t think it’s difficult to understand the desire for a developer to want to limit saves.
Limiting saves INHERENTLY makes YOU–the gamer–make more intelligent and weighted decisions. You can’t just rush through every situation and if it doesn’t work out, revert to a very recent save and try something else. You have to approach things with more caution, which would make things a bit more realistic. When you have a game that is very linear, there’s not a lot of consequences to incur.
When you have a non-linear game, which is what KCD claims to be, there are several branching paths through the storyline. So having limiting saves changes behavior, and allows YOU, the gamer, to more become your character, and accept your decisions and the path you take, instead of how videogames have conditioned so many people to feel like they have to check off each box as they move from level to level, etc. etc., and get into this mindset of save, save, save, and mindlessly move your way through the game, buttoning through conversations, through cutscenes, etc. etc., in an effort to get closer and closer to the next achievement, or the next rank increase, etc. etc., and not actually PLAYING the game.
I think limited saves, coupled with a SAVE AND QUIT function, is the best path forward for a game trying to change things and be different.
2 Likes
I can tell you exactly what makes the difference:
Last month I way playing wasteland 2 - great game, but some of its design choices are really way too oldschool - for example skillchecks. If you want to pick a lock, you have difficulty of the lock vs your lockpicking skill and from this comes your chance of success - so when you have atleast 10% chance to lockpick, you can just savescum this mechanic to no end, without any consequences, and instead of immersive feature, you have only VERY annoying save/load minigame.
This month, I play ARPG Grim Dawn - it has quite classical ARPG crafting system - recipe+materials=item with some predetermined and some random stats. But in this game, you have no save/load, there is only save and exit. The scarcity of crafting materials coupled with no load function really makes you reconsider your rushed decisions, and it increases tension significantly - making crafting intense and fun mechanics, instead of boring and annoying.
See the difference now?
perhaps save when you sleep. if you die you lose the day’s progress. tricky thing is when you need to close the game for some real life stuff.
1 Like
This would be the option i would go for, and maybe if it could somehow be also defined by the speech and charisma skill trees so that you can ask someone in a nearby village or house if you could be put up for the night, that might also be less stressful on loading the a.i and other assets as a save option
I really enjoy this game too. I actually need to go back and finish it. When Fallout 4 came out, I sort of stopped playing it. And now I’m really into The Division.
Yeah, our classic problem with short attention span… how to finish game which takes 50+hours to finish, when there is so many of them huh? 
1 Like
I never rush through games, and stated that fact when someone else mentioned that it doesn’t take long to do a “speed run” to regain lost play time when saves don’t work.
I am not sure what you mean by “limited saves” (Auto save only when the game wants? Limited slots to save when the player wants? It is unclear what you mean.) However, I do not see the advantage with having a “save and quit” option as opposed to free saves, because that only means I will “quit and save” before big fights anyway, so as not to lose what I have done up to that point, so why make the player “quit” in order to save? It creates tedium and frustration for no good reason. I would prefer to save when I feel I need to, rather than have to quit and save when I really am not ready to quit, or pull the plug to crash the game rather than let the game overwrite a save with something that went very wrong. “looking bad, gonna die here, crash the comp so it doesn’t auto save!” Why have to go through all that mess? You don’t want to save, then don’t save–go into that fight how YOU want to–knowing that if you get killed it will cost you all you did for the last three hours if that’s what floats your boat, but there is no reason to force one way on everyone, when choice can easily be available. If you do not have the willpower to keep yourself from saving frequently, that is on you. No matter how frequently saves can be made, it is your choice not to save and “heighten your excitement” all you want.
In no particular order:
B) I can’t vote, but I will say that I’m for restricted, “gamified” saving. This could be done in many ways, not just sleeping; if Henry can write, then that’s another; scribes and bards also recorded events (though I don’t know why any of them would be interested to write or tell tales / sing about Henry).
C) I have always considered autosaves (that override each other) a bad design choice. A prompt to save before certain missions or events, which would also allow you to choose over which slot to save (if these are limited), would be much better.
A) Free form saving… sure, why not. A prompt at the beginning of the game (not related to difficulty) could ask the player what type of saving system he/she would like – and once the decision was made, remain set for the rest of that game.
Disappointed in the poll result. Autosave only is the only way to achieve a true survival + immersion aspect. This kind of crowd funded game should exist because the market is flooded with quick save, fast travel, GPS map, quest marker, reloading you gun magically transfers unused bullets into your new clip so we don’t offend casual gamers kind of games.
Frequency of saves should be up to the player, whether it be frequent or guts-and-glory-I’m-never-saving. Or whether it’s an insurance save for the next time the game crashes. Personally, I’m getting pretty tired of needing to restart KCD and select “new” to go at it from the beginning.
The real problem with game save is that it is doesn’t work.
1 Like
My game saves do work, however if I have too many saves the game will crash. I can usually still play the game with a couple saves on the hard drive, but any more than that will cause the game to crash. Sometimes I’ll have the npcs not talk to me, but I’ll just reload an older save and play off of that one and delete the older saves plus the ones that don’t work. I also have the game autosave just prior to reeky’s cave, that save worked flawlessly as far as I can tell.
Other fun activities in Kingdom Come include getting drunk whenever you quicksave, because the only way to quicksave is to take a swig of a particularly heady local liquor, which means that overly prudent players risk spending half the game with a crippling hangover
So is it confirmed? You really did it?
did we?
we did!
or… did we?
did you?
You’re bad, milkman Dan…
Yeah, it is confirmed by many german game sites.
Implement all 3 and let people chose at the start of the game.
2 Likes
Very funny mister 