Gaming

The thing I fucking hate is when the game doesn't make it obvious when a checkpoint is activated. Then you go to quit the game: "Everything since the last checkpoint will be lost". Well WHEN WAS THE LAST MOTHERFUCKING CHECKPOINT, ASSHOLE?

Implementation probably. Checkpoints are easy because you don't have to save the entire game state, just the progression.

That's a large part of why, with older games, I prefer to use emulators, even if they're available to me in other ways. I love the "save state" option. It's terribly exploitable, of course, but it sure is convenient to be able to save literally anywhere.

Or pause during cut scenes!

Dude, I remember people going OFF on Returnal not offering any saves and people having to keep their consoles in rest mode for days at an end because they wouldn't want their runs to end. I kept arguing with people on rexxit that any respectable rogue-lite/-like has a save function - STS, Hades, Dead Cells - yet they still kept arguing that implenting saves would "ruin the vision of the game" and "make it too easy".

Guess what Housemarque did: they added a save on exit option. You can now suspend your run and finish it whenever. Not having to potentially brick your console just because you can't save mid-game sure is a boon lol. The game sure got a lot easier with this implemented. /s

I feel like the answer is twofold.

Either the developers hit technical limitations of their save system and couldn't reliably restart everything. I feel like RDR2 did this because most of their missions were very specific scripted sequences that needed to be kept on track from the start. A lot of roguelikes are unable to save during a run or within a node of that run. For example Peglin and Void Bastards. It's much easier to say what node or position the player is at than all the AI states, combat, etc. Additionally, automatic saving has always been difficult. Everyone knows the whole "the game auto-saved and now I die instantly over and over again" bug that happens in any game. The way to negate this is to use checkpoints with areas where you know the player isn't going to get attacked. Another way is to try to detect when you are in combat or not but this can lead to the game never saving. Overall it's much easier to just save a state that you know the player will be okay to start back up in.

Or the designers felt like it added something to the game like in Alien Isolation. Save points allow you to exit and designers are trying to focus on keeping players playing. So save points are also an exit point. When you allow the player to save, you allow the player to exit without feeling like they must continue going. Designers use this to try to keep their games more engaging. Super Meat Boy removed a few exit points from typical platformers in order to make the game faster. A lot of games try to be so easy to keep playing that they make it hard to stop. In some ways, this can be seen as a dark pattern in game design. Typically though, designers aren't trying to be nefarious but instead trying to keep the game engaging.

I hate when folks ask for this and assholes say "people will just use this to save scum, don't cheat." As if working adults with children should be able to dedicate a whole hour totally uninterrupted.

Omg remember games that didn't have saving but had a code you had to write down on physical paper to get back to where you were?

Reason is "Game state is hard".

If you want to save, you gotta be able to take the current state of everything and serialize it, then read what you've serialized and put it back. If you only do checkpoints, you can make assumptions about game state and serialize less.

Generally, it is much easier to develop AI and such when you never have to pull it's state out and then restore it, because if that is done improperly you get bugs like the bandits in STALKER forgetting they were chasing you after a quicksave-quickload because their state machine is reset.

With checkpoints, you can usually say "right, enemies before here? Dead or dealt with. Enemies after here? they're in their default state. Player is at this position in space. Just write down the stats and ignore the rest."

And autosaves just make it one less menu to fiddle with.

I think creators should make the games they want and users should buy the games they want

This is a big part of what I like about the steam deck, being able to stop instantly is huge, especially on a handheld.

I just watched a video that covered this in part. You want to keep the player immersed in the game experience. The more interfaces you give them, the more they’re taken out of the experience.

So autosaves are a great way to keep the user interacting with the game and feeling immersed.

Game state can be a tricky thing. By saving at certain points you just need to maintain a few things, like player health and inventory and which checkpoint they were at. And it's only got worse the more things a game has to keep track of.

The solution was used by all last gen and current gen consoles and even the DS and 3DS, which is to suspend the game. This is fine, the Steam Deck can do this too. It's not perfect. Power loss can lose the data, and some won't let you play something else while another game is suspended. But for general use over short sessions, it's alright.

It's less useful on PC because it probably will crash the game anyway, and normally you'd want to use the PC for other things.

That was my only issue with the otherwise excellent Shovel Knight! It had very long levels and only saved once you beat them.

Back in the day of 8/16bit computers we had the solution for this. The action replay cartridge. Could save the exact machine state at any time.

Kill enemy, save, make certain jump, save. Takes a lot of risk out of the game. I like when games let you save anywhere but if you restart the game or load your save you start in the beginning of a room regardless of where you saved from. (Like ocarina of time)

One of my favorite things about the DS family was its pick up and play nature. Sure not every game would let you save and quit, but you could just shut the lid and come back later and everything will still be right where you left it.

The only reason is hardware limitation. I imagine it's more difficult to load at any point in the game in a massive game due to how much is stored in your memory.

Let's say you're playing a game and there's 6 NPCs outside and they're doing their own thing.

If the game has a traditional save system, when you exit the save location it's normal for these entities to rest let their position. Maybe at best their properties (maybe they were wet because of rain) are saved.

But it's much easier to just not save any of this info and reload everything from scratch and only save your progress and location.