Great games with AWFUL save systems

evanft

evanft

CAGiversary!
Feedback
68 (100%)
Ever play a great game with a save system that almost made you want to sell it ASAP? I mean, in this day and age of hard drive-enabled consoles, you'd think a save-anywhere feature would be the standard, but NOPE. There are still games that insist on using an archaic checkpoint or save point feature. Here's some examples:

Metal Gear Solid 4 The save system sucks. Period. The areas this time around are way too big to deal with the whole "saving only at end of areas" dynamic from MGS1. There should have been at least 2x as many checkpoints or a limited save-anywhere feature. Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory proved that stealth games benefit greatly from a save-anywhere. In fact, the save-anywhere feature allowed for a more wide-open, go-for-it type of play style that enhanced replayability.

Grand Theft Auto 4 The game would be considerably more enjoyable if I could save anytime, anywhere I wanted. I wouldn't have to completely redo the beginning parts of missions.

Dead Rising I don't even think I need to say anything about this one.
 
Dead Rising does it for me. It somewhat completely turns me off from even playing the game.

That, and the retarded AI characters...
 
[quote name='evanft']Ever play a great game with a save system that almost made you want to sell it ASAP? I mean, in this day and age of hard drive-enabled consoles, you'd think a save-anywhere feature would be the standard, but NOPE. There are still games that insist on using an archaic checkpoint or save point feature. Here's some examples:

Metal Gear Solid 4 The save system sucks. Period. The areas this time around are way too big to deal with the whole "saving only at end of areas" dynamic from MGS1. There should have been at least 2x as many checkpoints or a limited save-anywhere feature. Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory proved that stealth games benefit greatly from a save-anywhere. In fact, the save-anywhere feature allowed for a more wide-open, go-for-it type of play style that enhanced replayability.

Grand Theft Auto 4 The game would be considerably more enjoyable if I could save anytime, anywhere I wanted. I wouldn't have to completely redo the beginning parts of missions.

Dead Rising I don't even think I need to say anything about this one.[/QUOTE]

GTA4's save system isn't the best, but it is so much better than last gen's GTAs. Those were terrible.
 
[quote name='evanft']The areas this time around are way too big to deal with the whole "saving only at end of areas" dynamic from MGS1.[/QUOTE]

The problem is that this isn't from MGS1, it's from MG1. Like, 1987 Metal Gear.

[quote name='daroga']MGS4 doesn't let you save anywhere? MGS1 did... saving was always just a codec call away.[/QUOTE]
You can save anywhere, but it only "remembers" things you did before you entered the screen you're currently on. So if you enter a screen, pick up a rocket launcher, and save, when you load you will not have a rocket launcher.
 
[quote name='Jesus_S_Preston']What? There's nothing wrong with RE4's save system.[/quote]Yeah, without having to have an item in the inventory to save, the typewriters were just save points, and they were fairly generous with their placement.

Interesting details about the MGS saves. My desire to play 4 decreases by the minutes.
 
Um the MGS save system is just anyway of saving without any save point. I can save after just about every events and they happen pretty often.
 
GTA's save system is fine. It just hasn't heard of this new innovation called the checkpoint that would help make the longer missions less frustrating.

I've been too engrossed by MGS4 to really save anywhere but the end of the acts. The one time I saved mid-act, I just reached the end of the next area, which also happened to be a nice endless fight between PMC and rebels, so I let the rebels be killed and take their guns, earning precious Drebin Points, before heading to the next area and saving.

Twilight Princess and at least Wind Waker before it had a horrible save system that forced you to start dungeons over again if you couldn't finish them in one go.

Super Mario Galaxy had a shitty save system, as it erased all of the lives you've collected. So if you managed to get 50 lives, because the game's so ridiculously easy, and save, you start at four next time and then get 5 from the Princess, as well. I almost screwed myself near the end of the game because I saved and quit before taking on Bowser. Either save the lives I've collected or do away with them completely like Ratchet & Clank.
 
Any game that doesn't let you save anywhere should have a temporary save feature - an anytime/anywhere save option when you quit. When you start up again it loads that save but deletes it. I've seen this on a few games (the handheld Castlevania games come to mind) but I just don't understand why other developers don't do this, especially when they have few save points in their games.

[quote name='FriskyTanuki']
Super Mario Galaxy had a shitty save system, as it erased all of the lives you've collected. So if you managed to get 50 lives, because the game's so ridiculously easy, and save, you start at four next time and then get 5 from the Princess, as well. I almost screwed myself near the end of the game because I saved and quit before taking on Bowser. Either save the lives I've collected or do away with them completely like Ratchet & Clank.[/quote]
I'm fine with that. The game was designed to give you a lot of one ups during gameplay. If the game saved your one ups you would have several hundred by the end of the game.
 
I enjoyed Turok 2 when I first played it, but the gigantic levels coupled with the ludicrously sparse save points quickly became frustrating. I ended up spending as much time looking for save points as I did advancing through the campaign. That's the worst offender I can think of right now.

I also started playing RE:remake on GC, but gave up due to the combination of clunky controls and irritating save system.
 
I'd say anything that limits how often you can save.

In the case of Dead Rising, the game itself wasn't very good, so it doesn't really qualify IMO.
 
Definitely Resident Evil, how you have to find a typewriter. Especially when you had to find ribbons and it took up inventory space:bomb::bomb::bomb:.
 
[quote name='cheezisgoooood']Mass Effect. Can't save with enemies on radar, and checkpoints are horrible. Made the beginning parts without a tutorial a living hell.[/quote]

I actually liked that aspect of the save system. What if said enemy continually kicked your ass after you saved so every time you reloaded you would just get your ass kicked again?

A lot of people wish every game had a save anywhere feature, but what if you save right before you get your head blown off? or inevitably fall off a cliff? That would kind or ruin your game there wouldn't it? I do agree some games have horrible save systems, but just because some games don't let you save anywhere, that doesn't make their systems horrible.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']I'd say anything that limits how often you can save.

In the case of Dead Rising, the game itself wasn't very good, so it doesn't really qualify IMO.[/quote]


You not a hero mang.
 
I don't even have to think about it, Dead Rising by far. Just really what the fuck were the developers thinking? GTA 4's save system does get on my nerves at times, only when I have to restart and drive another 10 minutes to get back to where I as. As for Metal Gear Solid 4's save system, not one problem with it, I felt the checkpoints where at good places.
 
[quote name='Moxio']Resident Evil, ICO, Hitman (limited saves can kiss my wang), I'm sure there's tons.[/quote]

Hitman wasn't bad, you could beat the mission in like 2 out of the 3 saves.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']I'm fine with that. The game was designed to give you a lot of one ups during gameplay. If the game saved your one ups you would have several hundred by the end of the game.[/quote]
That's the thing. Earning 30 1ups within a few hours of playtime is already ridiculous, like the devs had no idea what they were doing when that issue came up, so they decided to erase them when you quit. It's a sign that they couldn't figure out a way to make the game easier without just throwing ridiculous amounts of lives at you, but the simple solution is to just remove the 1ups completely and add to the amount of hits you can take before dieing.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']I'd say anything that limits how often you can save.

In the case of Dead Rising, the game itself wasn't very good, so it doesn't really qualify IMO.[/QUOTE]

No, it was an awesome game hampered by a shitty save system.
 
Dead Rising, it was fun until you hit Level 50 and there wasn't really anything to earn to make a fresh playthrough easier......well there is the megablaster. I have yet to actually finish the story.
 
[quote name='akilshohen']Dead Rising, it was fun until you hit Level 50 and there wasn't really anything to earn to make a fresh playthrough easier......well there is the megablaster. I have yet to actually finish the story.[/QUOTE]

By that point you should really be done with the game.
 
The more I heard the developers opinion on their save system along with other people that enjoyed the game, the more logical it became. It felt like the developers were trying to make the game more challenging by forcing you to have to fight back through hordes of zombies to get to the few save points in the game, so now I actually love that system.
If any save system bothered me, it would be Bioshock, since you COULD save anywhere and it eliminated the difficulty along with the ressurecty thingies. Whatever they were called, lol
 
[quote name='Agrippan']I enjoyed Turok 2 when I first played it, but the gigantic levels coupled with the ludicrously sparse save points quickly became frustrating. I ended up spending as much time looking for save points as I did advancing through the campaign. That's the worst offender I can think of right now.[/quote]
What he said. ^

Only two save points in each level as I recall, and they were hidden away in far off corners.
 
I thought mgs worked well. There were plenty of checkpoints, and often if I had trouble with an area and decided I was done for a bit I didn't want to start where I was, I wanted to try again.

My only complaint was that I didn't realize how to save in the game for a while, I was expecting a codec conversation to come up. Then I hit start at some point and realized there was a save option sitting there.

I'm going to throw final fantasy tactics out there because if you didn't plan ahead to use 2 save slots whenever you got into a series of battles your game may be lost forever (anyone who has played it should know what battle I have in mind that could easily be impossible to beat if you aren't prepared sufficiently)
 
[quote name='Allnatural']What he said. ^

Only two save points in each level as I recall, and they were hidden away in far off corners.[/QUOTE


I had forgotten all about the insanity going on in Turok 2, one of my favorite moments in that game was stumbling upon a savepoint in level two, I actually had a what the hell is that pause before remembering oh yeah thats how you save the game!
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']No, it was an awesome game hampered by a shitty save system.[/quote]It was an awesome next gen tech demo to show how many characters could be rendered. In terms of game play and save system it was pretty awful. Gamebreakingly awful.
 
Dead Rising has the worst in my opinion. They couldn't just stick with a save system that actually works instead they went some backward ass system.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']GTA's save system is fine. It just hasn't heard of this new innovation called the checkpoint that would help make the longer missions less frustrating. [/quote]

And a save-anywhere feature would get rid of the long trips around the map to do find side missions.

[quote name='FriskyTanuki'] I've been too engrossed by MGS4 to really save anywhere but the end of the acts. The one time I saved mid-act, I just reached the end of the next area, which also happened to be a nice endless fight between PMC and rebels, so I let the rebels be killed and take their guns, earning precious Drebin Points, before heading to the next area and saving. [/quote]

I'm doing a no alert/kill/healing item run. Much different beast.
 
[quote name='daroga']It was an awesome next gen tech demo to show how many characters could be rendered. In terms of game play and save system it was pretty awful. Gamebreakingly awful.[/quote]

a tech demo? thats pretty harsh. it's one of the funnest games i've ever played.
 
Save anywhere is grea, however, I learned its not entirely neccessary. For example

I got Final Fantasy Adventure (Game Boy) when it came out. I made it about 80% through the game and was loving every minute of it. So I'm right at the end and I get Moogled (cant do any action but walk for a limited time). I then saved it because I had to do something (save anytime) and came back awhile later. When I started playing, I realized I was Moogled and poisened and stood there helpessly as my character died every time. Game over. Everytime. Not one of my smartest days.
 
Recently games use auto-saves. I've gotten so used to this that I often get screwed over by games I assume have an auto-save feature but don't.

At least we don't have to deal with this shit anymore:

megaman2-password-screen.png
 
[quote name='Rodimus']Recently games use auto-saves. I've gotten so used to this that I often get screwed over by games I assume have an auto-save feature but don't.

At least we don't have to deal with this shit anymore:

megaman2-password-screen.png
[/QUOTE]

Do you know how many scraps of paper I had lying around my room with crap like A1 B3 B4 C5 scrawled on it? Terrible. I feel your pain.
 
[quote name='chakan']New Super Mario Bros.

You shouldn't have to beat 3 stages before you can save on a portable game.[/quote]

While I do agree that that whole restriction made NO sense (you beat the game and THEN you can save anywhere? WTF? Why?) it's crappy-ness was lessened by the fact that you can just close your DS and open it back up a day later to where you were.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']Crap, I misread the title. Breath of Fire V is NOT a good game, but it does indeed have an awful save system.[/quote]

If it weren't for the save system it would be a great game. It has one of my favorite battle systems in any RPG and a good, unique story. I'm still holding out hope that Capcom will eventually bring back the series with a similar battle system to Dragon Quarter's minus the save system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top