Why no Save game Feature

[Newthought]

This game is actually pretty good but the fact that this game has no Save Game feature bugs the F****** Dickens out of me. Enough for me to stop playing.

I put three to four hours into a game and I enjoy the experince, then all of a Sudden, at the climatic battle, when all the chips are down, I lose. Fine.

But my question is why on a Singleplayer game can I not Save the game before the battle??? It's a simple feature that's been implemented since the very first games.

I mean, the game devouts alot of time, alot of work, and alot of playing, and if everything in those hours is thrown out the window because of a three second battle where my main army is defeated and all of a sudden 7 Provinces come conquered, then this is definetly NOT worth my time.

Sure there's an arguement against Saves, "Learn to play the game" or "In reality, you don't get a save game", that crap doesn't apply to video games with flying dragons, especially since RPG Strageties in paticular require this level of time sink.

I honestly like the game, I feel like you two guys are excellent Game Concept creators, especially since you tap real History instead of Trash History (Made up)) as your reference, something in which makes ALL of the sides excellent specimens. But the fact that if I need to sink this excessive level of time into it, only to totally be crushed at once, I should be able to hit the "Undo" button to begin with. Or, I should be able to save game and allow a What-If Scenario to start.

Regards.

PS: I know theres a feature that allows me to continue the game per sa, but it doesn't matter when my God and 70 men get killed to 12 men when I wasn't able to understand my Oppositional force "Unit X" was sacred or that "Unit Y" was really a Giant rather then just a Normal Soldier.

Surprise. funny. Time Wasted. Makes me wish I spent that money on Neverwinter.

[Gandalf Parker]

Actually alot of strategy games start out with no saves, or insanely limited ones. Most developers seem to not like saves and end up adding it only under pressure.

Another answer is that it started as a pbem (play by email) game and saves were automatic without having to be written into the game. They still are in a way. Your turn creates a file and if you save it then you have a game-save. The backups are still supported by the command switches. This version is the first one to do major things in support of solo playing.

You can create an automatic game-save option. The command-line switches support it.

To add it now would require adding file cleanup options also since anyone who cant do saves manually also cant clean up backups manually. But since other options have added needs for file cleanup, I wouldnt be surprised if we get it in the next version.

[Wish]

the save game and revert if you lost strategy is considered cheating among many gamers.

it takes the challenge out of the game.

the fact of the matter is you lost. its a game, you can lose at it. just learn from your mistake and apply what you learned to the next game.

sack up.

[Meglobob]

As you can tell from the above replies, we are hardcore here. Saving is for wimps.

[Newthought]

I'll try Pbeming....

The whole "cheating" things do not apply if I pay them money. If I am a consumer, and I request a sensible feature I should be granted it, otherwise I'll won't buy D4.

Even then, as a Long Gamer, I can understand then practically guarenteed circusmstances of winning (taking unlimited chances to secure a victory is inevitable), and if you think it's cheating, fine. But that does not matter. If I want to cheat and hack my way to victory once it's in "My Dominion" (Pardon the Pun), then whose to stop me.

Sure I could play Oblivion without saves just like Reality and when I die after screwing up the Third Quest I can reroll. But I don't want to. I want saves. I want to be able to put myself far enough back so I can CONTINUE with my enjoinment. Why should the game restrict me!

The Developer vision is essential, but when this vision trips over the consumer, the relationship of the partnership is ruined with the egg on the face lands on the Developer and the Consumer decides to do something else.

I am not encouraging to Developer's to "betray" their vision so they can EA there way to a Short-term Lifespan, what I am asking is that they make sure to implement the simple features that people want as well as the ability to variate their wishes in it.

Why should I ever have to choose whether or not I want to have to save my game!

The Perfect Example: AC for instance, had a save game feature, but it also had a Iron Man feature that made it impossible to save, hence, it wasn't "cheating".

Honestly, if AC said "Nope, only Iron Man mode for you" that would be exactly like saying, "Nope, only 200 turn games for you". 'But I don't want 200 turn games'. "Games past 200 turns are not challenging because you don't have to deal with any time constraints, you cannot variate from my vision, so you have to play how I define the game, even when you paid for it"

Would AC really be a Classic in this circumstance?

More Importantly, do I really have to argue for Save Games?

[PvK]

Saved games tempt players to cheat themselves, because of the degree to which they have been abused by other game developers, and the resulting habits of most players.

You can still cheat if you want by backing up the files.

PvK

[Wish]

There is no save game option in chess, dudebro. once your hand leaves the piece, that is your move, even in the single player version.

the rest of us, when something like what you described happens, start a new game. 70 guy army? weak enough to die to a 12 giants? sounds like you weren't that deep into it anyway.

sack up.

[Gandalf Parker]

We had a downloadable set of scripts for Dom2 that did game saves. Did we ever get a version for Dom3? Is there even a difference?

Personally I have the icons for getting into my major solo games doing game saves (and other things)

BTW: Did you ever think that deja vu might be proof that God is into game saves?

Gandalf Parker

[seej]

If you really want to save the game, you can do so by backing up the directory of the saved game before running the turn. If you don't like the results, replace the backed up files and it will be as if you hadn't run the turn yet.

[Wish]

I was under the impression it was short circuit in short term memory, thus making it feel like current events are being reviewed in your long term memory -- providing for the feeling that what is happening happened sometime prior to when you can clearly observe it happening.

[alexti]

Newthought said:
The whole "cheating" things do not apply if I pay them money. If I am a consumer, and I request a sensible feature I should be granted it, otherwise I'll won't buy D4.



Being a consumer and paying money doesn't entitle you to any sensible feature you want. Nevertheless, even though Johan is notorious for his dislike of UI programming, it's reasonable to assume that if you offer enough money he may decide that coding that damn feature worth not having to work anymore http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Btw, as other mentioned there're save games in Dom3. It's just fancy GUI to reload the game that is missing.

[Gandalf Parker]

Actually Johan is like many people (believe it or not) and isnt doing it for the money. So it would probably take a LOT of money to get him to do it if he feels that it isnt the best thing for the game to have.

[NTJedi]

Newthought said:
More Importantly, do I really have to argue for Save Games?


The original purpose of saved games was to continue playing for another day... not as a way to cheat when losing. Going back in time and changing history is cheating and unfair. Having saved games would bring the cheating temptation to all SP gamers. If you want to cheat then you can manually copy the save game files.

[Saxon]

A save game feature would be very nice. The hardcore can do what they like, as they always will. Further, the hard core are the best placed to make mods or use command lines to make saves, as they tend to have the time to devote to it. Sure, we could still build cars that you have to go outside to crank start, but most people like being able to start the car from the inside. I could go outside the game to save, but I would really prefer to do it from inside.

I would request the hardcore to remember that not everyone agrees with them and to be polite to those who have different opinions. I do not intend to “sack up” just because you play differently than I do. Instead I will voice my opinions in a polite fashion.

[alexti]

Saxon said:
I could go outside the game to save, but I would really prefer to do it from inside.



You don't need to go outside of the game to save. You need to go outside of the game to *reload*.

[alexti]

Gandalf Parker said:
Actually Johan is like many people (believe it or not) and isnt doing it for the money. So it would probably take a LOT of money to get him to do it if he feels that it isnt the best thing for the game to have.


I'm not sure that's the real reason. My guess would be is that it's just too much effort for little gain. There're many other areas in the game where the equal effort would make much better improvement.

And most people who don't work for money still can be hired to do something they don't particularly like doing for a very big money (as long as the job doesn't last too long). It's surprising how much time can be recovered back by offloading various chores http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Wish]

Saxon said:
A Bloo Bloo Blah Bloo



That is the sound someone makes when they are trying to talk while also crying so hard.

maybe the feature can be added to the wish spell, so that when someone wishes for some cheat that isn't implemented in the game, they'll get their way.

(P.S. I am just ribbing, try and read it in a gutteral voice like someone trying to be hard core.)

(P.P.S. Jokes!)

(P.P.P.S. Stop crying and sack up.)

[HoneyBadger]

It bugged me at first, I admit, but when I was a kid I didn't like asparagus. Now I'm older, and if you steam it for just a minute or two, drizzle olive oil over it, add lemon and crushed garlic, freshly grated Parmezan cheese, and just a little white pepper, it's really quite good.

Sack up.

[Wish]

I too was a little like "wha.... huh?" when I first realized there was no save/load.

In the end the when you remove the crutch, you develop better players. Don't be afraid of losing from time to time. this isn't tic tac toe.

[FaceLess]

I don't have that much problems with the no save feature since backing up the game files is pretty easy (with longer turns you even do that during the processing of the turn) but if a save option is a cheat, why not have a restart game option. If things go wrong I like to restart the game with same settings regarding opponents, pretender etc. Are there any command lines I can use to do that?

Sort of related, when I choose save and quit, it sometimes does sometimes does not remember the orders I already gave to some of the commanders. Is there something that determines that behaviour?

[B0rsuk]

Oh, but it does have Save game feature. It just doesn't have the glorious Save/Reload.

[Wish]

restart game is not a bad idea, really.

[Ubik]

It is the developer's prerrogative to design the game as he sees fit. If you do not like the game without a save game feature, you don't buy it. You should have tried the demo before buying it.

Also, I must add I DO play Oblivion with "perma-death". If my character dies once, its game over and start again for me.
Currently, I am a 17th Lvl Imperial roaming around the map and having a blast being cautious and wetting my pants at the least sign of danger... oh! And I play with mods that make the game significantly harder. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Graeme Dice]

Newthought said:
More Importantly, do I really have to argue for Save Games?



You do on a fanboy infested forum.

[Gandalf Parker]

Graeme Dice said:

Newthought said:
More Importantly, do I really have to argue for Save Games?



You do on a fanboy infested forum.


True. Well actually the only place you wouldnt have to argue it would be a players forum that is just as "infested" with fanatical short-vision gamers. There are plenty of forums that make their effort to gather those instead of "fanboys".

Of course you would also have to debate the point on any forum with people who are willing to see both sides, or people representing both sides of anything.

Gandalf Parker

[Gandalf Parker]

Wish_For_Blood_Slaves said:
restart game is not a bad idea, really.



I like that. We have an option to restart the turn. Id like an option to restart the game. Im not sure if the game saves all of the settings in a way that would allow that but it would be nice to use the same map, same number of AIs, same starting race for me, etc etc and create a new game from all of it.

[Evil Dave]

I think a save/reload feature would make Dom3 easier to learn. I know I reloaded hand-saved games a lot when I was just starting with Dom2. Even with the interface improvements, I think it's still hard to understand why you lost a battle, or how to do better, w/o trying it a bunch of times.

But OTOH, Dom4 could have a "hardcore" mode that doesn't allow reloading a turn multiple times.

[Cafard]

Personally, while i was bothered too by the lack of conventional 'saves' when i started with Dominions 2, i grew so fond of that lack of feature that i'm actually thinking of it as a feature now.

I admit it is frustrating when you start, and lose stupid battles and have your pretender killed too often. But that quickly taught me to be more careful in battles, and led me on playing far more interesting games where i had to recover from big setbacks. Had the game allowed me to reload, i'm not sure i'd have played though these games, and i might have grown bored of winning too easily.

But then, i'm 'computer-savvy' enough to manually save games when i feel i hold an interesting situation that i want to be able to replay later with a different strategy. And i'm grateful that the game's filesystem is trivial enough to allow that...

[Graeme Dice]

Gandalf Parker said:
True. Well actually the only place you wouldnt have to argue it would be a players forum that is just as "infested" with fanatical short-vision gamers. There are plenty of forums that make their effort to gather those instead of "fanboys".



Would you care to explain your insulting implication that anybody who wants a save and reload feature for a game is a member of some ill-defined group known as "fanatical short-vision gamers"? I'm not sure why you want to include yourself as a member of the "limited saves are AWESOME!!!!" group. After all, every single argument that people make about why a lack of a proper save feature is a good thing eventually boils down to the person whinging that "I lack the willpower to not endlessly save, so it's a good thing that developers take saving away from everyone else as well."


Of course you would also have to debate the point on any forum with people who are willing to see both sides, or people representing both sides of anything.



You know Gandalf, there's no point in debating anything with you, because you refuse to take any kind of position. You simply waffle that every position is equally valid. That's pure sophistry.

[Gandalf Parker]

I dont think Ive ever been able to turn on "iron man" in games that had a no-saves switch. And I dont have the willpower to NOT ruin the game if the game saves are easy. The fact that its possible but too much effort to do unless Im really eager for it is perfect for me.

[tromper]

I've played many many SP games since release and have never once been bothered by the lack of save game feature.

When I play, I *am* my Pretender. If I make a mistake, and I do often, I view that battle time and again, to understand what went bonkers - and improve, hopefully, the next time around. The lack of save game 'feature' adds a sense of permanence and, dare I type it, reality to the game. This isn't a game for little babies or people with an half an hour per week and expecting a quick fix. It was never meant to be, if I'm understanding its history correctly. It's immersive strategy writ large.

If programming time is going to be spent on implementing anything, save games ought to be waaaay down the list. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

And hey, I like the 'sack up' jokeyness. So, you know.

Sack it up.

[NTJedi]

Graeme Dice said:
After all, every single argument that people make about why a lack of a proper save feature is a good thing eventually boils down to the person whinging that "I lack the willpower to not endlessly save, so it's a good thing that developers take saving away from everyone else as well."




For me, and I'm sure others would agree, it comes down to the fact that I want the Illwinter developers spending their time fixing game bugs and improving the nations.

[Wyehl]

NTJedi said:

Graeme Dice said:
After all, every single argument that people make about why a lack of a proper save feature is a good thing eventually boils down to the person whinging that "I lack the willpower to not endlessly save, so it's a good thing that developers take saving away from everyone else as well."




For me, and I'm sure others would agree, it comes down to the fact that I want the Illwinter developers spending their time fixing game bugs and improving the nations.



Certainly there will be people who agree on both sides. I, for one, would like a save game feature and don't feel that it would be overly difficult.

If you don't want to use an option, turn it off...but don't deny the option to everyone else or try to make everyone else play a game the way you think it should be played.

[NTJedi]

Wyehl said:

Certainly there will be people who agree on both sides. I, for one, would like a save game feature and don't feel that it would be overly difficult.

If you don't want to use an option, turn it off...but don't deny the option to everyone else or try to make everyone else play a game the way you think it should be played.


Since the game only has two developers... I don't want them spending their time adding a feature which can already be done manually. Fixing existing game bugs is definitely a greater priority.

[Gandalf Parker]

Graeme Dice said:
You know Gandalf, there's no point in debating anything with you, because you refuse to take any kind of position. You simply waffle that every position is equally valid. That's pure sophistry.



Sophistry? I suppose thats often true but I wouldnt have honored myself with labeling it such.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophistry

Its a marketable skill http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
As far as "waffle" thats a proproganda chosen word. How about "debator", or "moderator", or "diplomatic". Any of those have to be able to see both sides and move discussions forward without choosing a rock-wall absolute.
Or you could always just say "old married man". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Gandalf Parker]

Wyehl said:
If you don't want to use an option, turn it off...but don't deny the option to everyone else or try to make everyone else play a game the way you think it should be played.



Generally Im all for that. But I think that some things just dont work that way. The same point can be made about cheat codes, or autoclients, or even serial generators. Those in favor of it say it wont ruin anything because those who dont want it just dont need to use it.

And keep in mind, this isnt about adding it. Its about making whats already there easier for anyone to use. Making it a choice on the menu.

[Wyehl]

NTJedi said:
Since the game only has two developers... I don't want them spending their time adding a feature which can already be done manually. Fixing existing game bugs is definitely a greater priority.



I understand your reasoning. And as far as game stopping bugs, I can agree. I just haven't encountered very many of those and, since other features are added with each patch (like new nations), I tend to think this is not a case of prioritizing major bugs over new features.

Without adressing all of the other specific arguments for or against Saves (but having considered them), I wanted to add my voice to the OP and to Graeme's. Some people think Game Saves are a no-brainer in this day and age and I would even suspect, that while some of the 'old crew' here might not like them, the general public might. Obviously, I don't have any evidence but one thing that struck me after reading this thread...having read game reviews...not having game saves is often listed as a negative and I don't think I have ever read a review that said a game was worse because it *did* have game saves.

[HoneyBadger]

On a serious note, I'd just like to point out that I've seen quite a few posts insulting Gandalf for being a "fan-boy" etc. I have yet to notice Gandalf directly insulting anyone, even in retaliation. I think that shows a lot of will-power, in and of itself. More than I have at times, certainly.

Regardless of whether or not Gandalf Parker is a "fanboy", he does and has put in a great deal of work and effort to help others and make Dominions a better experience, and for that, I feel he has the right to be as much of a "fanboy" as he wants to be, and still get some respect.

And to all those who use large words without knowing what they mean, please do yourself a favor and use a dictionary. Yes it's amusing for the rest of us when you screw up, but we're all friends here and we don't really want you to look foolish.

[Potatoman]

Makes me wish I spent that money on Neverwinter.



Burned!

There's another thread with most of the relevant arguments on this issue in it. It eventually turns into a flame war and spirals out of control for seven pages.
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=dom3&Number=456358&page=8& view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all

[PvK]

Graeme Dice said:
After all, every single argument that people make about why a lack of a proper save feature is a good thing eventually boils down to the person whinging that "I lack the willpower to not endlessly save, so it's a good thing that developers take saving away from everyone else as well."

That's not true at all. If you give people a handy ability to undo unlucky results and replay avoiding all their mistakes using knowledge they gained from watching what actually happened the first time, many players will use it, and gameplay and balance will get more and more based on "backsies", people will talk about how easy the game is, etc. Habitual backsies erodes gameplay and sucks the meaningfulness of playing. Look at adventure games that include this, and end up getting balanced so that it's almost impossible to win the game without using backsies, and the converse is that it just becomes a pointless endurance test to beat the game.

PvK

[Velusion]

I do think its amusing how the hardcore people are saying that people who want to have the option to save games "lack the will power".

Um... what are you afraid of? If saving games is made an option you don't have to use it. That is... unless YOU yourself lack the willpower.

[Maltrease]

I myself lack will power to not save and reload or use "unbalanced" options if the game gives them to me. While I can see uses of a save game feature (mostly for research and replaying battles) I am absolutely certain that I would use it to avoid unpleasant events, or reload a few turns earlier to prepare for an unexpected attack.

As it stand now it is possible to "Save" the game by copying the files in the directory structure, but this is inconvenient enough that I wouldn't use it in a SP game.

So I like how it is... because I would abuse a save if it was available to me.

[Velusion]

It seems kind of sad to me that the designers and the fanboys here would limit the ability of many, many players to enjoy the game because some people can't muster enough will power to simply not reload the game.

[HoneyBadger]

I definitely enjoy the game better because I have to think about my choices more and take some risk. I'm sorry if it doesn't accommodate the immediate-gratification and no-consequenses crowd, but a lot of the rest of our society does, so perhaps you can consider this an opportunity to take a walk on the wild side.

[Gandalf Parker]

Velusion said:
I do think its amusing how the hardcore people are saying that people who want to have the option to save games "lack the will power".

Um... what are you afraid of? If saving games is made an option you don't have to use it. That is... unless YOU yourself lack the willpower.



But thats like setting candy out at a diabetics meeting, or having an open bar at alcholics anonymous. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Besides I dont think its as simple as use or not use. If the no-save people can be insulted as weak-willed then the save-mongers can be insulted as greedy destructors (not by me of course). The people who want saves might not be considering the big picture. They think that their game will be improved but in the long run it makes the game less fun. Even for them. The replayability, the challenge, the long-lasting of the game.

It can be argued that adding instant and unlimited save/restores would not improve the game, but would actually damage it in the long run. Even in marketability since I think the game has more to sell it to hard-core strategists than to short-attention-span video gamers. Adding things like saves and cheat codes might sell more Dom3 but would probably hurt the market of Dom4.

[HoneyBadger]

I agree, and it doesn't bother me a bit if people call me a fan-boy for saying so.

The same people can then go out and buy Warcraft3 or Age of Mythology or Heroes V and tell themselves that they're rebelling against our evil conformist ways, and I will wash myself clean in the river of irony.

[Velusion]

HoneyBadger said:
I'm sorry if it doesn't accommodate the immediate-gratification and no-consequenses crowd, but a lot of the rest of our society does, so perhaps you can consider this an opportunity to take a walk on the wild side.



No one is stopping you from not restoring your game... so what is the problem? Funny how you label them "immediate-gratification" crowd when you, yourself don't have any faith in your own will power.

[HoneyBadger]

I don't think I ever said that I didn't have faith in my own will-power. Unless we're talking fresh pasta with a really snappy sauce, I have plenty of confidence in my personal stoicism. The problem is that saving games for a long time have reminded me of that monkey who's head they wired up so that he could keep on stimulating the pleasure center of his brain for as long as he wanted.
Eventually he starved to death, dying with a big blister on his little monkey finger and a big monkey grin on his little monkey face. If the save game feature is there and easy to use, at some point it's going to be used. Saved games, for me, turn "games" into "further sources of stress I don't need in my life". It's not that I need to use them, it's that I need to exert my will-power not to use them.

Saved games can be recovered and replayed, with some amount of difficulty-and I really like Gandalf's suggestion about restarting random worlds. I'd be up for that, as long as that's where it ended.

I just like the fact that I can play this game through to the end without having the Devil sitting on my shoulder saying "go ahead, monkey, press the button...just...once..."

[Velusion]

HoneyBadger said:
I just like the fact that I can play this game through to the end without having the Devil sitting on my shoulder saying "go ahead, monkey, press the button...just...once..."



So... you say you aren't worried about your will power then you say you say you compare it to a devil on your back? I'm sorry... your post doesn't make sense. You either lack some sort of self control or you don't.

If you won't restore then why do you care?

[HoneyBadger]

Velusion, that's like saying "if you aren't doing anything wrong, then why do you mind if the government installs video-cameras in your home?"

Some things just intrinsically cause stress. They don't necessarily turn you into a crack-head, they just make life a little less enjoyable and a little more pathetic.

[Velusion]

HoneyBadger said:
Some things just intrinsically cause stress. They don't necessarily turn you into a crack-head, they just make life a little less enjoyable and a little more pathetic.



I'm sorry you can't handle the stress of being able to save and restore games. I do hope you work to decrease your stress levels in the future. However, many, many gamers do not stress out about saving and restoring games. To most people it's just a feature to use or to ignore. It seems a shame that because you have "intrinsic stress" which you can't deal with you would seek deny would be a very popular feature to alot of gamers.

If I was rude, say like one of the earlier posters here who felt the need to insult those who would like a save game feature, I might just tell you to "SACK UP".

[Gandalf Parker]

Try to discuss the subject and not each other or this thread will be removed completely.

[HoneyBadger]

No, you weren't rude. I'm kind of surprised that you seem to think you were. See, you don't actually know a lot about me, and I don't know a lot about you. You're just a line of script to me, so I don't take this...effort at sarcasm? whatever it was, personally. I just think it's a shame that we fail to see eye to eye, but then that's another of the disadvantages of being basically faceless.

Anyway, I still consider Dom3 to be better without a save-game feature, and I still think you should sack up. If you don't understand the reasons behind my feelings, then I really don't mind either way, since I guess you were making some effort to insult me and that probably means we won't be best-of-friends or getting into a hot-tub together any time soon.

[HoneyBadger]

See? you've gotten all personal and now we're in trouble.

[Newthought]

Wow, lots of posts.
Alot of great posts too. Few tards in the swimmingpool, you know you are and you know that I stink too.

And apparantly I'm "Burned" for an opposing opinion and I need to "Sack Up" because my view is irrelevent and again, opposing. Once again, coming to these forums, where you can say anything without consequence, I really didn't except much other then Fanboys. (And in a hypocritical twist, there is irrevency in this very Boo hoo hoo Rant!!! Maybe if your mature, you can ignore it and make any statement you want!!!!)

The typical responses against this are:

1. It ruins the game because it doesn't make it challenging.
A: FYI Challenge is RELATIVE! What's challenging for you is not challenging for me. I can bench well and it's fun for me. If, assuming that you don't go to the gym much, I gave my same weight to you and you got injured, would that be any fun now would it?

2. It corrupts the gamer
Honestly, I can feel for you in an aspect that were all just one giant community. However, define the word "Corrupt" and then find what it's "Corrupting from" and then you'll realize it's just an unintended way of saying "I don't feel comfortable that your playing the game this way", all valid, but comfort was never grounds for action.

3. You can't give Gamers all the features they want

Well under this circumstance, you should be sure to give as MANY features as the gamers want to ensure the maximum amount of people to enjoy it. Features SHOULD be judged depending on the feature in an individual case sceanario. Making D3 have saves is nothing compared to making D3 in 3D. If this feature was unable to be implemented, then leave it at that.

4. It betrays the developer vision
A: The *Publishing* developer Vision extends so far enough to meet the needs of the Consumer. Why do *Publishing* developers publish games? So they can charge money for it! What seperates a good developer vision from a bad one? Their total profit is equal to their expectation. EAnomics have proven this vision true

Note: Emphasis on the word Publish rather then make. A developer could make his own game and he would be the only person on the earth to enjoy it, then it is a sucess. Commercialization is a service toward the people, shine my shoes brown instead of black I'll get my money back, or in this case, sell it on Ebay FTW.

And what if the Gamer wants to ruin his own game? What if the Gamer wants to remove certain spells he doesn't like or what if the Gamer makes Spells more early or what if the Gamer decides that every Ulm Man Woman and Child should have str 30. Wouldn't that truly ruin the game. Yes. Would it be funny? No. It betrays the vision of the game

What if I want to give myself more starting points for my Pretender on a roleplaying aspect or what if I decide to make my game even more difficult by REMOVING Pretender points? Sure. Would it be smart. Ehh no. and it betrays the vision of the game.

What if I decided to create my own side or if I decided to take a Middle Age only side and pull them in the Later age. That surely betrays the vision of the game as well. And it does.

Notice that all three of these circumstances are completly acceptable.

Fourth Scenario:
What if I wanted to be able to Save Games in my own game to make sure that I never lose a battle and cry? What if I wanted to put a Time Constraint in my Multiplayer so people couldn't build up their forces? What if I wanted to be able to set rules that no one can create Oceanic Civilizations? What if I wanted to create new Terrain Pieces, such as Savannahs and Tundras?

Do they all betray the game? Yes. The Developer never put any of those features in (to my almost assurd Knowledge), hence it betrayed his vision.

This magically brings us down to my Save Game Feature. I want a Save Game feature so I can enjoy my game. All of those "complaints" do not constitute a specific reasonable reason.

IE: It ruins the game because it doesn't make it challenging (challenge is relative), It corrupts the gamer (Freedom of use...invalid in Russia) You can't give Gamers all the features they want (You cannot ignore their requests within your capability to accomplish.), and it betrays the Developer vision (When the hands of the game enter the Consumer, it's the consumer's "world". If the Consumer want's the Developer to make it the ability to save games, and if they can accomplish that, then both parties are quite satisified.)

PS: I honestly want this feature implemented because I honestly like the game but cannot devote enough time for it to be fun. (After the fifth time you just conquer your neighbors and lose your army, the repetition gets you done)

PSS: Sack this 1 up yours.

[Zarkon]

I actually kind of like having no savegame feature, with one small caveat...I occasionally hit "e" instead of "r" when recruiting units and the only way to go back and finish the turn is to kill the process. Ah well, I think it's worth it for the thematic effect.

[Maltrease]

Didn't someone write a tool that automatically saved each turn?

In the same way some might say "just don't use the save" others could say "just save your game manually".

In either case the discussion here is unlikely to make any difference in how the game evolves. The ability to add a save game feature is pretty trivial (since you can basically do it by simply copying and renaming a file) so it must have always been a conscience decision to not do this (nethack anyone?) vs. an oversite where someone forgot to do something.

As I said before I would completely abuse an easy to use save game option if it was available. Civ 1, cool a hut, bah who needs gold, barbians... nah, pottery... nice but, ahh awesome a group of settlers! Perfect. Hmm.. I don't want my militia to lose vs theres... cool I won. Did I mention I could beat Civ 1 every time on the hardest difficulty level! I was awesome in that game and everything always seemed to fall into place for me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Not having a save makes Dominions a different game. Maybe a game other don't like as much... but personally I prefer it.

Again its not like you can't save your game now. Just play Dominions in a window with the game folder open next to it. Ctrl C, Ctrl V on game file. Thats it, it will automatically rename each one... you will only have to manually rename something when you want to "load" the game back.

[HoneyBadger]

Newthought, so what you're basically saying from my understanding is that you want to play football, but you want your side to be able to use steroids and be able to call "do-over!" every time you fumble the ball. Dom3 just doesn't happen to have a nice convenient save-game option. That's the reality of the game. Nobody stole your money, you put your money down and you bought a product that works as advertized, and perhaps unfortunately for you there's no do-over there as well, although if you're entirely unsatisfied, maybe you can talk the company you directly purchased the game from into taking it back and giving you your money back, but the reality of economics is that you might not even be able to do that. You might not even have legal recourse, that might also be the reality of the situation in your area of the world. And if you do, and it goes to trial, the verdict might come out against you, and again, that would be reality, however unfortunate it was for you. The whole point is that yes, you can redo a turn if you decide to, the method for doing so was explained by Gandalf above somewhere, and the next time you watch a game of football, you can choose to root for whichever team wins, after you've recorded the game on video tape. I'm certain if you think hard, there are all manner of things you can do any way you want to, regardless of how they're supposed to be done, you can follow your own personal vision of how the world works wherever it leads you, and I wish you luck and success in all your endeavors to buck the system, because it isn't an easy path.

And I really don't care if you're comfortable or not in a more than Buddhistic general compassion for all living things that I try to engender within myself, but it does tend to be aesthetically displeasing to me to hear someone whine in public about how a computer game, of all things, is too difficult.
I certainly don't mean this as an insult to your person. I'd react the same way to art I found displeasing to my eye.

None of that changes the fact that the game doesn't have a savegame feature, but I do know that you can mod in tundras and savannas, and easily create a random map with no ocean provinces. That's pretty easy, actually.

All in all, your points are as valid as is required, and certainly you have the freedom of speech and use, noone's denying you that. I think perhaps only that you've been unfortunate in your methods and managed to turn the greatest of authorities-public consensus-against you.

[Gandalf Parker]

Fourth Scenario:
What if I wanted to be able to Save Games in my own game to make sure that I never lose a battle and cry? What if I wanted to put a Time Constraint in my Multiplayer so people couldn't build up their forces? What if I wanted to be able to set rules that no one can create Oceanic Civilizations? What if I wanted to create new Terrain Pieces, such as Savannahs and Tundras?

Do they all betray the game? Yes. The Developer never put any of those features in (to my almost assurd Knowledge), hence it betrayed his vision.



Ummmmm actually, all of the things that you listed are in the game.
Save Game: in the game. They are .2h files
Time Contraint: in the game. There are switches for setting time constriants on MP games
no oceanic civ: in the game. there are switches for locking out nations in games
new terrain: in the game. it now accepts multi-terains so you can create provinces that are cold/wasteland or hot/plains for tundra and savannah

[paplan]

I've got to say............

Theres a lot of misinformation here.

The arguements against savegames here are extraordinarily flawed.

"A lot of strat games start out with no saves"

Simply not true. Civ series, Homm series, Warlords, SE3-5, Moo series, etc. Simply NOT TRUE.

Cant be added because adding "would require file cleanup options"
If a computer illiterate like me can do this by dragging the save game file to my desktop, I'm sure a real programmmer could institute a real save game utility. This isn't rocket science.

EVERYONE KNOWS THAT DOM3 IS HARD. YOU'D LIKE TO TRY EXPERIMENTS (IE DIFFERENT OPTIONS) WITHOUT STARTING FROM SCRATCH EVERY TIME IT DOESN'T WORK. WTF IS THIS CONCEPT SO HARD FOR THE DEVS AND FANBOYS TO UNDERSTAND!!!!!!!

By the way............for those of you who think save and reloading is cheating in a single player game (me, its how I learn without starting over each time), there is a simple, trivial option. Don't use it!!

[NTJedi]

paplan said:
If a computer illiterate like me can do this by dragging the save game file to my desktop, I'm sure a real programmmer could institute a real save game utility. This isn't rocket science.




It's about having the developers use their time wisely. As I mentioned earlier only 2 developers work at Illwinter and Dominions is a part-time project because they work regular full-time careers unlike other game companies. Take a look at the progress page for the upcoming patch and you'll see this game is more of a hobby for Illwinter there's no team of 15 developers working full-time as seen from other game companies.
Since their time is so limited there's no need for them to add a feature which can already be done manually when there's current bugs in the game which need fixing. Bugs such as sacred undead unable to be blessed, multiple AI opponents blindly sending their pretenders into the death match, broken modding/mapedit commands, holes in battlefield maps for cave provinces, demons being affected by darkness, and so on and so on.

[HoneyBadger]

I'm hardly a fanboy by any stretch of the term. Other than simply being a fan of the game, I'm one of the least satisfied people with it, in terms of wanting it to do more, be more, have more features, etc. The Dev's I'm certain understand the situation perfectly-and have made a personal choice in the matter-just like they made a choice to make Dom3 in the first place. Why THAT concept is so hard to understand...well I don't fail to understand it, I just come to disappointing conclusions.

Anyway, if you're unhappy about the game, you certainly have every right to complain, and I have a right to disagree with you, based purely on my own personal opinion, game experience, and the choices I make. And the Devs have every right not to do anything about either of our wants, needs, desires, etc.

Not that I consider in any way an emotional response to be an immature response, but I have to be a little surprised at how people get so emotional over what is, in the end, a game. We are adults, or atleast this is a forum where you can expect to be treated as an adult (and by the word "adult" I mean "with respect") unless you are giving a good reason not to be, and we can be civil to one another, and discuss this calmly, in a less than insulting manner, and without doing the internet version of screaming at, or cursing, or degrading one another-as adults, I'm sure we all get enough of that kind of thing from the world around us at various times, and there's no reason to bring it upon ourselves in a place basically designed for social relaxation and entertainment.

[quantum_mechani]

The question is: Why should Illwinter implement a feature that 1. goes against part of the basic premise of the game and 2. can be very closely reproduced by moving a few files now and then?

Yes, they do make some money off of Dominions, but that is not their main motivation for working on it. It is quite possible they might lose a few customers due to the hardcore approach to saving. I very much doubt it would be enough to make up for presumably compromising their vision of the game, and the hassle of implementing the feature. And who knows, maybe the unique style could actually increase the appeal to some players.

The real bottom line? I'd say there is about as much chance of an asteroid squishing the Illwinter team as of them implementing such a feature at this point. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[HoneyBadger]

Let's not invoke the asteroid-squishing-Illwinter scenario, shall we? If the Gods surf the web, you know they're probably listening to the Dominions forum, and we don't want to give them any Ultimate Misfortune ideas.

[alexti]

I am really curious how often "pro-reload" crowd reloads. In the current version of Dominions reloading probably takes 15-30 seconds (quit without saving, copy files outside of Dominions, continue game). With super-duper reload UI in game it would probably become something like 5 seconds. How often one is reloading to make such an issue out of having to spend extra 10-25 seconds? It certainly doesn't fit into trying different strategy or reloading after losing critical battle pattern.

[Velusion]

quantum_mechani said:
The question is: Why should Illwinter implement a feature that 1. goes against part of the basic premise of the game and 2. can be very closely reproduced by moving a few files now and then?



1. I didn't realize that saved games is against the premise or theme of the game. I always thought the premise of the game was to build up cool fantasy based armies to take over the world....

Are you referring to the sales bullet on the Dom3 Shrapnel sales page that reads: "NO SAVE GAMES!! Thats right folks, we won't let you save games! No other game has this amazing feature!!"

Oh wait... it doesn't mention that "feature" on the webpage... Maybe because they know most gamers wouldn't agree that it is a positive thing.

2. Uh? All the easier it should be for someone to code it.

[RamsHead]

HoneyBadger said:
We are adults, or atleast this is a forum where you can expect to be treated as an adult (and by the word "adult" I mean "with respect")


What? Kids don't deserve respect? Yes, I am being an ***, but we need to calm down. (Not necessarily refering to you HB) Boy, do people get passionate about a save feature!

Now I know noone asked what my opinion is, but that has never stopped me in the past. Personally, I never even noticed the lack of a save feature when I first started playing Dom 2. To me, the game doesn't feel like all the other games out there, it feels more permanent. I know I have to make the right moves the first time, because there is no going back. I get more enjoyment from losing an important battle and then coming back with a vengeance than I would from winning all the battles. Let's be honest, if there was a save feature, most people would use it. Sure, it might start out small. You go back and change your orders for a battle or reload, hoping that random knight attack doesn't occur. It would escalate though. Soon, whenever the slightest thing went wrong, you'd shout "redo!", and you would find yourself playing for that one goal, to win. Nothing is wrong with playing and trying to win, but you should have fun along the way. After all, it is a game. Where does the fun go when it is a constant reload fest? Where is the sense of accomplishment when the chance of failure is removed? When most people reach a certain spot in large games in SP where they are simply undefeatable because they have become so much larger or more powerful than everyone else, they usually quite. Why? Because without the sense of the possibility of failure, the danger is gone. Without danger, where is the fun? Where is the accomplishment?

Finally, like many others have pointed out, you can already save the game, and it doesn't take much time or effort. Again, all of this is just my insignificant opinion.

[quantum_mechani]

Velusion said:

quantum_mechani said:
The question is: Why should Illwinter implement a feature that 1. goes against part of the basic premise of the game and 2. can be very closely reproduced by moving a few files now and then?



1. I didn't realize that saved games is against the premise or theme of the game. I always thought the premise of the game was to build up cool fantasy based armies to take over the world....

Are you referring to the sales bullet on the Dom3 Shrapnel sales page that reads: "NO SAVE GAMES!! Thats right folks, we won't let you save games! No other game has this amazing feature!!"

Oh wait... it doesn't mention that "feature" on the webpage... Maybe because they know most gamers wouldn't agree that it is a positive thing.

2. Uh? All the easier it should be for someone to code it.

You obviously miss my point. Illwinter is not making the game they think everyone might like, they are making the game they like. It's a happy coincidence that others can also enjoy the game, and that they get a little money from it, but those aren't the basic reasons they are putting effort into Dominions.

[Archonsod]

To be honest it wouldn't be that difficult or time consuming to add in. You'd simply need to create a new sub directory in the installer, then duplicate the code used to save the turn file, pointing it at the new directory.

[Velusion]

You obviously miss my point. Illwinter is not making the game they think everyone might like, they are making the game they like. It's a happy coincidence that others can also enjoy the game, and that they get a little money from it, but those aren't the basic reasons they are putting effort into Dominions.



*shrugs* I paid $50+ for a game that is lacking the basic feature pretty much every other game on the planet has. I think I have a right to request this feature and not be told off-hand to *sack up*. Their motivation for creating Dom3 is not my concern, the product I bought from them is.

But what is being discussed in this thread isn't really my right to ***** or their right to publish what they want, but the fact that people here think that depriving people of choices and options on how to play a game is actually something good, to be desired. It boggles my mind.

[Saxon]

When you make a game easy to mod, you are explicitly choosing to let players do what they want with the game. In line with that philosophy, making it truly easy to save the game would make sense. The player can do what they want with it.

However, the designers have made a decision otherwise and there is little doubt it is a deliberate decision. After ten years of working on the game, they have not spent the hour or two to put in what most of the strategy community considers a standard part of any game. Let us be clear, we are talking about saves from an in game menu, saves which you can name.

Illwinter has made thousand of good design decision and a handful of bad ones. We argue about them on the forum every day. This is one that I think is a bad one.

And finally, can we get the terminology correct if we are going to insist on using play ground language in our discussions? You don’t say “sack up.” You say “suck it up” or, more insultingly, “suck it up, princess!” If you prefer, you can tell me to “cowboy up” or ask me if I am “afraid to play with the big boys.” Alternatively, you can call me a “big girl’s blouse”, a “Jessica” or a “pansy.” Where I grew up, you would tell me to “go play with the kids from Tranquille,” but then I would have to break your nose, so perhaps we should leave that out. Or we could just try arguing reasonably and leave the “funny” insults where they belong, while respecting each other. This isn’t a Blizzard forum…

[Archonsod]

I wouldn't say it's a concious decision, or necessarily a bad one. After all, the functionality is there (as in, moving and renaming files yourself), it's more a matter of polish (as in, it's not automated or presented within the game).
It's not the only rough edge the game has either. Much as I love additional content and similar fun stuff, I do wonder if perhaps the actual presentation is being over ignored.

[Edi]

Implementing a save game option would not be difficult. A subdirectory or three or five in each savegame subdir that store the turn files for e.g. 1 to 5 turns previous and then start overwriting them in order of oldest first would be about as much anybody could ask for. Whether we get it is another matter entriely.

Personally I don't need it in Dominions, never have. In some other types of strat games like the HoMM series and the old Warlords series I like it. In Dominons, I like the ironman approach. For me, it's no problem starting over if things get screwed up. Typically if I do have to start over, it'll be at a point early enough that it doesn't really matter and later I've generally managed a position strong enough that a few setbacks won't be eeough to stop me. Hurt, yes, but not stop. That's a part of the game for me. I don't like the "Take overly big risks and go back to a saved game if it fails" approach that many people like to use. The solution is to take smaller risks.

Edi

[PDF]

Archonsod said:
I wouldn't say it's a concious decision, or necessarily a bad one. After all, the functionality is there (as in, moving and renaming files yourself), it's more a matter of polish (as in, it's not automated or presented within the game).
It's not the only rough edge the game has either. Much as I love additional content and similar fun stuff, I do wonder if perhaps the actual presentation is being over ignored.



I do think likewise. I don't think IW "didn't want" to do it, rather that either they didn't have the idea or felt there was something more interesting/important to do.
Also note that Dom2 worked exactly the same and yet I don't remember much (any) rumbling about the lack of save feature..
Maybe the game is getting more popular so there's more demand for a "standard" feature that is missing.

Personally I'd be glad to have it but can live without.

Also note that if Dom doesn't have a real save feature like "all" other strat games have, it has *lots* of features that *no other* strat game has http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Caduceus]

I know I learn from my mistakes without a save game feature. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like one, but we've been spoiled by the save feature in games for years.

Now, confirming an end-turn click would be nice.

[Gandalf Parker]

Velusion said:

You obviously miss my point. Illwinter is not making the game they think everyone might like, they are making the game they like. It's a happy coincidence that others can also enjoy the game, and that they get a little money from it, but those aren't the basic reasons they are putting effort into Dominions.



*shrugs* I paid $50+ for a game that is lacking the basic feature pretty much every other game on the planet has. I think I have a right to request this feature and not be told off-hand to *sack up*. Their motivation for creating Dom3 is not my concern, the product I bought from them is.



Everyone has the right to request any feature and the devs will listen to it. I think it only gets hot when a request tries to make it sound like the game is "broke" without it.


But what is being discussed in this thread isn't really my right to ***** or their right to publish what they want, but the fact that people here think that depriving people of choices and options on how to play a game is actually something good, to be desired. It boggles my mind.


Everything has its pros and cons. Its not a bad habit to get into to try and see that about any subject. Also any subject can be said with a choice of words that paints the picture a certain way. Such as "the fact that people here think that depriving people of choices and options on how to play a game is actually something good, to be desired" could be worded as "the truth that so many here believe that giving in to new gamers on workarounds or cheats is considered wrong" boggles my mind. (Im not saying thats my thought, just that its the same statement worded from the other side).

Gandalf Parker

[TwoBits]

Amen to the "are you sure you want to end your turn?" question/extra click feature! At least in SP games, grrr...

[Newthought]

HoneyBadger:
I turn public census and the higher powers at be against me all the time. Nowhere near the first. Apparantly my opinions are so hot-topic and my Rhetoric so blood-boiling that everyone feels comfortable in ranting against me.

First off, I never once said the game was too difficult. I am requesting a feature! Never once did I say, this game is too hard, I surrender. I said, I'm just fricken tired of spending three hours building up a force making one wrong move and then having to dedicate another three hours into doing the same damn thing is just not the fun.

Of course, as you know, there is no Save Game feature in life, I've made plenty of screwed up decisions back at Fork Union Military School to know that consequence. But that's the LEAST of things relevant. You don't have to tell me twice about competetion. It's Humanity's worst situation but yet from the fire brings the ashes of Greatness.
---------------------------------
Video games are not similulating challenges and have nothing to do with reality, Video Games are for YOUR enjoyment.

What I want that would make this game enjoyable is a save game feature.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? My god it's funny...
"No you can't enjoy the game, you have to play the way that I want, no Saves, otherwise it Magically makes me WANT to use Saves(???)"

Your (Indirect) preference NEVER overrides MY preference. Any opposing logic is down right ridicolous.

There is no emotion in my response (other then the fact that I had lost my original post in writing.)

It's just such a simple variation that I've spent more time reading excuses against it then if I were to put it actually IN.

I mean, god help me if I asked for a more indepth Tutorial. The Response would be.
"No, you can't have that tutorial, you just want the easy shortcut you lazy wimp, you need to spend the remanding four hours like the rest of us on it, otherwise it magically ruins the complexity of the game" (Don't be surprsied if a Fanboy would say that.) The Tutorial isn't bad however, it's an example though.

I have to use caps just to bring this final sentance out.

THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF!!! CALL IT HARDCORE MODE.

Honestly, can anyone make a good debatable reason to prove this statement is unacceptable.

Here I'll bring out the easiset argument against that.
"It betrays the Developer Vision and it ruins the game for the gamer".

A: If the Gamer ruins his own game, who cares!!!!!!! Let me "Ruin" my own game and "deprive" myself of "Ultimate" Happiness.

More importantly of all, WTH does the Developer Vision say, "We made sure to appeal to our Hardcore l337s not to include Saves." If anything, there in a different direction.

Pg 2 In the Dominions 3 manual states:
"We didn't have a deadline, nor any clear direction, apart from adding fun stuff and making the game more User-Friendly.......There are still plenty of things I would like to see in the game, though, so expect new content and ever-increasing modability in future patches."

What I see is good intentions and bringing more enjoyment to the game to more people. Are you guys trying to bring Good Intentions, or are you more interested in getting "your" way. (Spicy Challenge + Closer FTW)

-THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF!!! CALL IT HARDCORE MODE.-

AND LET MY PEOPLE GO!

-Edited Numerously

[Nightblade]

I would really appreciate a save game feature.

How many time after finishing a whole game, i would have liked to load a saved turn when i made an important strategic decision, to see what the game would have turned into if i selected a different option...

[Strages Sanctus]

What is so hard about ctrl C and ctrl V?

I would prefer that development/GUI design/testing time to spent on some other feature personally. We are talking about 2 people (only 1 of whom can do the coding afaik) who have full time jobs.

And no it wouldn't only take "X hours" none of has any idea how long it would take. And the people clamouring for a save feature wouldn't just accept a single overwriting save (they might say they would, but if that feature existed I bet the discussion would be "why can't I have multiple saves?")

[Taqwus]

If you're not exactly the first person to request a feature that's already been heavily discussed, has been lacking in three major iterations of the game, has almost certainly been noticed by the developers as not being there and having been requested, and almost certainly wouldn't require a major redesign considering that the saved games are already essentially compatible with user-done backup/restore -- it seems reasonable to infer that

* the devs have reasons for not doing it other than that it's not being requested, because it has been
* points and counter-points have already been rehashed ad infinitum -- it's not like this is a novel area of game development
* further discussion may be extremely uninteresting for this reason, especially if requesters choose to ignore the Search forums and repost as if they were the first ones with this concept

[Newthought]

Okay, I understand.
The pictures been painted well now.

What I thought was that the Hardcores were keeping the Devs from putting in this feature.

If the Devs honestly feel like not putting features that the people want just because they disagree with it, well then it makes no point standing on the principle.

I personally thought that line of thinking was non-existent, but then again, this line of thinking screwed games over a good number of times with games that had a little magic in it (to name a few, Black and White 2, the Superpowers, Heroes IV, and Master of Orion 3)

While real Indie Succeses like Gal Civ 2 make sure to include as many desires as possible to the people want in some form of variation or another. Which is why it isn't indie anymore.

I mean right now, I could go to the Forums, make a request, and honestly, it would be given thought and love. Even features they deemed "too much" intially for the Exp, was inevitably implemented!

To bring this to a close and justify my actions (to a lesser extent). All I was doing was requesting an commoditiy that a fairly good number of people want. If they say no. (which I haven't necessarily heard yet) Cool. I'll just sell my game and in theory they lose one customer.

All I am stating is that if the Devs, not the Cores (or in this case, both) decide to FORCE features THEY want rather then trying to appeal to good folks, I can see D going up to five and inevitably making some of the features that people want or seeing D5 crash or seeing D go to six and by then everyone's board of it, new kids get on the block, it's over.

W/e, im not fricken Nostradamus, but I am most definetly stating the obvious and the general statements about my complaints are in fact true.

Look at it from an opposite direction for a minute. What happens when the Publishers go against what the people want...total disaster commercially.

What happens when the Devs refuse to do what the people want, they no longer get paid anymore.

Sincere Regards,
Me.

PS: I appreciate your response Taqwus, really do.

[Gandalf Parker]

A) "feel like not putting features that the people want" is a strange way of putting it. Obviously there are people who dont want it put in at all. Or at least consider it a low need.

B) the fact that they dont get paid if they dont do it has already been addressed. They arent driven by the money to do things they dont want in the game.

C) I think that the devs giving in to loud complaints by a few people is a much surer way to fade into nothingness

[Archonsod]

PDF said:
Also note that Dom2 worked exactly the same and yet I don't remember much (any) rumbling about the lack of save
feature..



One of the key improvements in Doms 3 is the overhaul of the in-game graphical interface to a clearer, more user friendly design. Perhaps the out of game interface is overdue for the same treatment.
Like you I can take or leave the save feature itself, however it would be nice to see a little time spent on increasing the utility and general polish of the pre-game menu. While it's probably not important to most people, it's worth remembering that this is the first thing a new player will see, and first impressions are always important.
Personally, I can see the need for some kind of game manager replacement for the load interface. Not necessarily fancy, but it would be nice to perhaps see the current turn number alongside the game name at least. Perhaps even identifying whether the game was created as single or multiplayer, the map used and the player's nation.

[HoneyBadger]

Newthought, Velusion, Nightblade, I want you to know that I have actually considered your arguments (when they didn't become inappropriate) and I do think there are some compelling reasons to have some form of save-game option. I'm not at all in favor of one-I stand fully by my original opinion, but I do see some of your points-and I actually started a thread about this, specifically concerning games which are thrown off-track by extremely bad luck on the part of the user (as opposed to choosing Misfortune scales) early in the game, if you'll notice. I would not want the Devs to add a savegame feature because of this (I still like Gandalf's suggestion about restarting random maps though), but I think that situations do unfortunately occur where it would be perfectly reasonable to want to restart a turn or a game. Not because the game itself needs the function, but because a few areas of the game could in my opinion use some recalibrating because they take away from your ability to make strategic choices and have fun, imposing and perpetuating (and I'm confident this is unintentional) a heavy-handed, pessimistic sense of reality, cheating the player of a fun experience, rather than adding to the experience of the game for a player who doesn't desire to "cheat" him or her self.

And Ramshead, ofcourse kids deserve respect, often a specific "kid" will be far more deserving of respect than a given "adult" of whatever age. I think I was going for an "it's what you do that makes you who you are" kind of feeling.

And Newthought, your line of reasoning disregards that the Devs and the so called "hardcore" players happen to be in agreement on this issue, atleast it seems a truth as far as this particular thread is concerned. Usually when the people who make a game and the people who play the game the most and are the most enthusiastic about it are in agreement, it's a good sign, not a bad one.

I like GalCiv too, and I've suggested a partnership between Stardock and Illwinter. I still feel that would be a good idea for a lot of reasons.

I think that if everyone were clamouring for a save-game feature, the Devs would look at the issue very hard, but the fact remains that not everyone, or even a large population, are. If I went to the GalCiv boards and requested that all planets be square instead of round from now on, I'd probably get the same response as you have here-that yes, I could add square planets if I wanted, but in general, people felt that round planets were a more suitable feature for a "vanilla" version of the game. That response might come with love and affection and a ring and a mortgage, but still, it boils down to the majority opinion, which is important where the "vanilla" game is concerned.

[Newthought]

I honestly liked your composed piece Honeybadger,

Only two things left to say I guess,

1. When I meant features, I meant logical features within posibility. (as vague as it sounds, this can only come from a Feature to Feature basis)

2. I did ignore that the fateful to this game was in fact a positive.

But the fact of the matter is again,

-THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF.-

I honestly inserted gimmics just so that people can read this very simple and easy to implement feature.

Let my people was not hashed in there, for it has a deep statement. It implies as Moses saod to Pharoah, let them do as they wish, for they (we) have their (Our) own truth in their heart.

I may not know what applies to the Hardcore world, but based on relative rules, this statement is corrupt.

"cheating the player of a fun experience, rather than adding to the experience of the game for a player who doesn't desire to "cheat" him or her self"

You assume that how YOU play the game is how I want to play the game. You assume that YOUR good time is MY good time.

I mean assume that I play Small maps, and I tell you that your missing the "Fast paced combat" resulted from victory. What if you play Huge maps and you want a "long-drawn out battle", do I have any right to say, "No"

This whole "maintain the Image" can get very negative is the "Image" is frozen. I'm purely resulting to a Philisophical measure in order to bring my point into true emphasis, for I indeed know that if this topic was brought to "Your Opinion Vs. Mine" then NOBODY Wins and nothing is changed.

This is a matter of "How I want to appreciate the Game Vs. Your appreciation of the game"

Notice how this argument could be easily mirrored if I was granted the right to save games. Then, this arguement, purely theoratical, would turn into.

"My appreciation of the game vs Your appreciation of the game"

(In retrospect, if both parties had negative attitudes, it would turn to "How I want to play the Game vs How I want to play the game")

The features is easily implementable, and it is not constraning, therefore if the feature granted, only this many more people would enjoy the experince.

The Tyranny of the Majority can only be granted through the Silence of the Minority. So, it is the Minority's sole responsibility to speak for itself, and don't confuse yourself that people don't want this feature, there are plenty who want this feature, I being one of the few pissy about it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

For in the end, there is no Cheating because Cheating implies the violation of laws in this aspect. But if I define my own laws, how can I cheat myself? Only if other's put their own values in for me.

PS: Or we could play "WWSD, or What Would Stardock Do" for fun.

[Gandalf Parker]

You keep saying
-THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF.-
like its a big deal. IF YOU WANT SAVES SO BAD THEN DO IT. You arent arguing for saves. You are arguing for easy pushbutton menu driven save and restore. Thats what cuts down your audience. Those of us who want saves already have saves.

Another point of this might be that it is a linux developed game. The idea of such a huge need for menu'd saves instead of manual ones is kindof laughable on linux.

[HoneyBadger]

Actually, Newthought, I was assuming you'd read and understand what I actually wrote.

I wasn't stating that "my way is the right way".
I also wasn't invoking any sort of majority "tyranny".

I was infact agreeing with you, in part, that there are areas of the game which currently exist, which are not, in my opinion, perfect, and which having a save-game feature could actually improve-or lesson the angst perpetrated thereof.

My appreciation of the game-please understand, as far as I'm concerned, is paramount, but when defining the word "appreciation" I include the word "understanding", and so I make an effort to understand your point of view, in order to further appreciate the game.

Your effort to stand on a soap-box and politic to me, based on skewing my own words, I admit is definitely superior to the insults and the shouting, but it still is not getting us down to the heart of any real understanding between us, or progress.

If you will, try to ignore that I consider the arbitrary implementation and use of a save-game feature to be "cheating", that's just my opinion and judgement on the subject, and it's not the sort of thing that a useful conversation should turn on.

If you feel that "being the bigger man" means "turning the other cheek" (since you seem to be familiar with atleast parts of the Bible) then feel free to BE the bigger man, and TURN the other cheek. In return I'll forgive this biblical ranting, and we can hopefully avoid wasted passions.

The facts: the save game feature is currently not in the game, it can be implemented by those who actively choose to, but noone's being forced to do so. Nor are they being prevented against doing such a thing in any way. Public opinion does frown upon it, but then that doesn't have to matter or apply to you.

I'm quite certain that putting such a feature into Dom3 is a process atleast as easy as it would be to put it into another given title, and I'm guessing with confidence that it would probably be easier to do than with most games. The Devs are and have been in all of my experiences with them, both open-minded, and generous.

My opinion-once again-is that there are indeed certain features/issues within the game which do not preclude and at times encourage the desire to reboot a saved game with ease. However, not to the point where they make the game unplayable or unenjoyable.

The Devs-for their part-do not wish to add the save-game ability as a feature, which is there choice, and has nothing to do with responsibility.

If you want to talk responsibility, then I would suggest that the Devs do have some amount of responsibility to address those above features/issues in some proactive or reactive way, and make an effort-as time allows-to reduce said desire for such a saved-game feature.

Thus they are able to remain true to their vision, while at the same time being responsible to the needs of dissatisfied consumers such as yourself, and at the same time remain faithful to fans such as myself.

So perhaps you'd like to suggest some ways-in addition to my own ideas-that this could be done?

[Taqwus]

Devs tend to have opinions about their own products. This being a product largely controlled by two devs, and it being a fairly successful one that isn't dominating their lives, their own opinions matter more. Sometimes they agree with the users (quite a few balance issues have been dealt with over the years... and I, for one, appreciate the auto-tax system) and sometimes they don't. *shrug*

If I were going to argue with dev decisions, I'd argue about things unimplemented that don't have simple user-doable workarounds, like the continuing lack of detailed casualty reports in battle storming (which may or may not be difficult depending on data structures used and any consistency issues), or the need to cycle through blood-hunting provinces if you want to 'pool' without pooling sacrifices.

[Diorj]

Hi Ithought this would be a perfect time to chime in. I usually check out the forums to find out info about this particular issue. I just havae the demo, and personally am waiting for a save game feature before I will buy the game.

I've heard arguments against it and understand, but there are a lot a different playstyles. Personally I'm an old dude and work full time, so I would never have time to be a hardcore player. I just want to mostly play SP on my time with my playstyle. If that means I want so save a game before a big battle to try different options, I just dont know how that would hurt anybody that doesn't like to do that.

I also understand that there are ways to save manually, but (and I know the Devs work hard) for $55 buks I wolud expect a professional means of saving the game.

I'll keep peeking, hopefully they will add it some day.

[PvK]

Sigh...

[RamsHead]

HoneyBadger said:
And Ramshead, ofcourse kids deserve respect, often a specific "kid" will be far more deserving of respect than a given "adult" of whatever age. I think I was going for an "it's what you do that makes you who you are" kind of feeling.


I was just being facetious.
*Looks in dictionary*
Yep, I spelled that right.

[alexti]

Newthought said:
-THERE IS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE TWO. LET THOSE WHO WANT SAVES USE THEM, AND LET THOSE WHO DON'T WANT SAVES LET THEM TURN THEM OFF.-



Compare this to the current: "Let those who want saves turn them on". So what was your argument about, once again? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[alexti]

Diorj said:
If that means I want so save a game before a big battle to try different options, I just dont know how that would hurt anybody that doesn't like to do that.

I also understand that there are ways to save manually, but (and I know the Devs work hard) for $55 buks I wolud expect a professional means of saving the game.



You can set Dominions to auto-save every turn - no need to waste time saving it manually at all (whether through professional or non-professional means). That's probably the most convenient approach for your playstyle.

[Saxon]

I may have missed this, there are a lot of things in Dom. How do I set it for auto save each turn?

I would like to repeat what Diorj has said. I am an old guy who has a lot of other responsibilities. I don’t want to spend a lot of time figuring out how to do this, I want to have fun for a few extra minutes when I don’t have to work, change diapers, chase tenants or agree with my wife that her boss is evil. I would really, really, really, like a save feature in the menus. Gandalf mentioned that those who want saves already have them, which myself and several other posters disagree with. I would like to note that several of the posters who agree with this point have very low post counts, they are new community members. They are the marginal people, the ones who may or may not stay. They are the growth area of the game, they are the ones we need if we want to keep this game healthy and moving on to another edition.

The Devs may not be doing this for money, but they charge us for it like every other game. Between Shrapnel and Illwinter, they have roughly $150 for my copies of the three different games. I will argue that makes them for profit developers, just like everyone else. You can argue that they don’t do it for the money, but I think that one will find that most developers are pretty much the same. Seriously, tell me that Sid M. or Cormack do it for the cash. They do it because they love it. When Cormack got bored, he started to build rockets, because he also loved that. In any case, I just trying to point out that as a consumer, I pay the same to both, so I expect the same from both, regardless of their motivation.

As a final argument, I too want the Devs to focus their scarce time on fixing things I see as problems with the game.

[HoneyBadger]

I've got a lot of posts because I post like ten times a day, not because I've been here forever.
I'm an old gamer myself, I've bought two games from Shrapnel, Space Empires IV and Dom3.
I've got a family and plenty of responsibilities. My wife doesn't complain about her boss being evil, because she's got two or three evil co-workers and everybody's in "a huge clique". Whatever that means.
I don't chase tenants, I chase fliers.

I represent the new community just as much as any other "marginal" person, both because I never owned or heard about Illwinter until they were counting down to releasing Dom3, and because I'm relatively new to these boards. I haven't ever posted to this forum before October. That's 4 months, give or take.

I like Dom3 because it's different, both better and not afraid to not appeal to everyone.

Honestly, how many game designers or business people in general do you know that reference sacrificing blind pre-teen girls in the name of demon-summoning? I don't think too many.

I don't think that you're going to see them caving and giving in to what the "average" gamer who walks in the door, looks around and says "well I would buy it, if they did this and this and this".

Dom3 is made by people who are hardcore enthusiasts, for people who are hardcore enthusiasts, and it gives people who aren't, a good reason to become.

[Saxon]

HB,

Oh, the clique of evil co-workers. We had that last year, but they reshuffled the offices, so now we have an evil boss. I suspect it he was hit by lightening, we would find another source of untold evil. It is important she continue to work, for if she was at home, I would be the next candidate to be the source of all evil…

Your points are well taken and you always discuss things in a cogent way, which is great. I do not mean to imply that all new posters are pro-save, as that can not be logically supported. My point is more that there is a pro-save group and that there are non-hardcore players out there. I would argue they are a lot quieter than the hardcore and their opinions are underrepresented. Of course, there exceptions like you and I. I would wager we both post from the office, which is very naughty…

I agree that the game has a lot to pull in the casual gamer, but my opinion is that a simple save feature would pull in more. It helps the gaming community and the pocketbook of the Devs. We know they don’t care much about the later, but they do about the first.

[calmon]

For me Dominions is a MP game only. I play SP only to test some things or play for 1-x turns to try out a starting strategy. For testing a save/load function would be ok, but i'm still happy to just copy the save game files. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

I've some problems to understand why people discuss about a save/load function in prior of a better single player AI. I mean is it only me but i find it quite boring, the strategical AI doing always the same:
Make useless attacks against high province defence every turn. There isn't any visible difference playing against different nations. It seems they are all replicates from only one AI.
In fact its really impossible to make a good AI for such a complex game. But anyway they could improve it, make some different play styles, reduce AI bugs like not conquering neutral provinces, etc.

This would be a worthy improvement before we discuss a save/reload feature.

Thats my oppinion.

[Wyehl]

calmon said:
I've some problems to understand why people discuss about a save/load function in prior of a better single player AI.




Improving the AI is a difficult, intricate and open ended goal with no clear finish line. Adding a save feature is a very attainable goal that can be achieved before moving on to larger changes.

[Gandalf Parker]

AutoSaves
Much of Dominions doesnt bother writing into the game for each of the operating systems, things that are already possible. Some of it by third party programs that exist or that other players can provide. We have seen the same discussions about screenshots, taking notes, keeping history, redefining keys, alarms so we wont miss real world responsibilities, backups, restores, configs for starting a game, email support since it is a PbEM (Play by EMail), etc etc etc.

The "autosave" feature is pretty simple for people on Linux or really old computer users who remember DOS. The game has a switch for telling it a file to execute before a hosting, and one to execute after a hosting. So if a windows person has batch files for it they can change the game icon to add
--preexec before.bat --postexec after.bat
The pre-execute batch file can copy the game save to a backup directory, or zip them up, or keep multiple copies.
The post-execute batch file can make a noise to tell you that the hosting is done (good for really big games) or display the scoreboard or anything else you think of.

Its not as simple as a menu option for save/restore but its much more powerful. I think Ive seen examples of files for Windows, and for Mac, and for Linux to make use of that powerful feature.

[Velusion]

Gandalf - please don't edit people's posts to insert your own commentary. A seperate post would do the trick and be less confusing.

[Gandalf Parker]

Ouch I didnt mean to do that. Im very sorry. The two buttons are too close to each other. I will try to fix it back as much as I can. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

[Gandalf Parker]

Quote:
calmon said:
I've some problems to understand why people discuss about a save/load function in prior of a better single player AI.


Wyehl said:
Improving the AI is a difficult, intricate and open ended goal with no clear finish line. Adding a save feature is a very attainable goal that can be achieved before moving on to larger changes.




Wow thats not true at all. Tweaking the AI code is fairly simple since its already in the game and there is only one code to tweak.

Adding save/restore is a headache. It has to work on all 3 operating systems which do things very diferently. It needs to be safe so it wont accidently hurt the persons machine in some way. It will need to offer some sort of cleanup of old files which is always dangerous. And it probably should recognize the difference between a local game or a server game so that the person doesnt get unreasonable expectations.

[Wyehl]

Gandalf Parker said:



Quote:
calmon said:
I've some problems to understand why people discuss about a save/load function in prior of a better single player AI.


Wyehl said:
Improving the AI is a difficult, intricate and open ended goal with no clear finish line. Adding a save feature is a very attainable goal that can be achieved before moving on to larger changes.




Wow thats not true at all. Tweaking the AI code is fairly simple since its already in the game and there is only one code to tweak.

Adding save/restore is a headache. It has to work on all 3 operating systems which do things very diferently. It needs to be safe so it wont accidently hurt the persons machine in some way. It will need to offer some sort of cleanup of old files which is always dangerous. And it probably should recognize the difference between a local game or a server game so that the person doesnt get unreasonable expectations.



Lol, what isn't true ? You go on to say that it is very difficult (which is humorous to a programmer but then, that wasn't really the point anyway http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif. Yet the point was that 'improving an AI' is an open ended process that can be worked on ad infinitum while making a save game system is a very attainable goal.

[Gandalf Parker]

Wyehl said:
Lol, what isn't true ? You go on to say that it is very difficult (which is humorous to a programmer but then, that wasn't really the point anyway http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif. Yet the point was that 'improving an AI' is an open ended process that can be worked on ad infinitum while making a save game system is a very attainable goal.


I didnt say it was difficult, just that its a headache. And yes Im aware of the programming side. Setting up file managment inside a program to work for windows, mac, and linux is not simple and quick. I see enough headaches with this programs file handling already on its installs and game cleanup just between linux and windows.

You are correct that tweaking the AI can be a forever project but the code is already there and is OS generic.

[HoneyBadger]

I wonder if anyone will mod in a downloadable save-game feature already so that this thread will ever end?

I'm getting a headache, ow.

[Gandalf Parker]

I thought it was already done?
Dom2 had many different versions. Batch, script, javascript, vpscript, and perl if I remember right. I think that even Dom1 had some.

Edited:
found a couple of old threads.
old thread (http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB74&Number=309749&Forum= ,c9&Words=%2Bbackup%20&Searchpage=1&Limit=100&Main =309704&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=&daterange= 1&newerval=5&newertype=y&olderval=5&oldertype=m&bo dyprev=#Post309749)
Older Thread (http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB74&Number=305451&Forum= ,c9&Words=%2Bbackup%20&Searchpage=1&Limit=100&Main =305279&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=&daterange= 1&newerval=5&newertype=y&olderval=5&oldertype=m&bo dyprev=#Post305451)

[Velusion]

So let me get this strait:

1) It's really easy to back up files. You could create a simple batch file to do it and it would be easy to whip up a mod that would do it as well.

2) It's too complex for the designers to patch it into the game.

????? That line of reasoning doesn't make much sense.

[Actuarian]

I'm for a save game feature, although I doubt I would use it. I think it would make the game less intimidating for newcomers, and more friendly to casual single-player gamers.

On the other hand a save game feature might mean that there would no longer be any all-caps posts to enjoy.

I'm definately for the "Are you sure you want to end your turn?" feature. From experience I have learned that there's not much space between some of those hot-keys.

[Gandalf Parker]

So let me get this strait:
1) It's really easy to back up files. You could create a simple batch file to do it and it would be easy to whip up a mod that would do it as well.
2) It's too complex for the designers to patch it into the game.
????? That line of reasoning doesn't make much sense.



Because my answer for my windows machine wont work for linux, windows, mac, or even many different versions of windows.

Here is one for you:
open the dom3 directory
click into the savedgames directory
hit Ctrl-A
then hit Ctrl-C
then hit Ctrl-V
Vuala! Backups of all of your saved games!
(disclaimer: works in WinXp. Dont know about others)

Its not what I use but it might be good for others.

[Gandalf Parker]

Here is the version that I use:
right-click on the Dom3 icon
go to properties
at the end of the target line (after the quotes if there are any) add --preexec pre.bat --postexec post.bat

then go to the Dom3 directory and right-click into the files list and choose "New->text file".

type in
xcopy /yes savedgames oldsaves /i

then save it as pre.bat
It will copy all of the games to a backup everytime that the game hosts any of the games.

Actually I have many more lines in my pre.bat file and many more in my post.bat file. They do file checks, record the date/time so I can get an idea of how long processing takes, checks my alarm file and shuts down the game at important times like when I need to get my kid off the bus, it talks, all kinds of stuff. Im debating having it load a key file to add some new keystrokes to the game but I probably shouldnt since I would forget which are standard keys and Id give wrong answers here.

[Actuarian]

Gandalf,

I've only used saves for trying to understand game mehanics and spell effect, but those are the keystrokes I used. I was too lazy to create a batch program.

Still I bet that most Windows games that have an in-game backup mechanism can also be backed up by those same commands.

[alexti]

Saxon said:
I may have missed this, there are a lot of things in Dom. How do I set it for auto save each turn?


There are many ways. I'm using rather sophisticated one. I'd attach it here if I could figure out how to do it http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Since I can't I'll make separate post:
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=486865&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=&vc=#Post486865

Since you've posted Gandalf has already explained how auto-saves work in Dom3, so I won't repeat it.

[alexti]

Actuarian said:
Still I bet that most Windows games that have an in-game backup mechanism can also be backed up by those same commands.


Right, I'm simply adjusting my scripts for each particular game. So far I've got a total of 2 games on Windows with in-game backup mechanism: Dominions 2 and Dominions 3 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[alexti]

Velusion said:
So let me get this strait:

1) It's really easy to back up files. You could create a simple batch file to do it and it would be easy to whip up a mod that would do it as well.

2) It's too complex for the designers to patch it into the game.

????? That line of reasoning doesn't make much sense.


If you carefully look at why it's easy to back up files it will start to make sense. The simplest approach (at least in the eyes of Windows users) would use windows explorer. Windows explorer (and it's GUI in particular) is not that trivial and coding something similar (especially in a portable way) is a considerable effort. Other methods may use other tools (such as zip, awk, perl etc...). Once again recoding their functionality, or at least integrating with it (if it's available under LGPL) is a significant effort. Easiest approach is probably to provide some script similar to ones posted on this forum, but that would mean taking care of all installation issues to ensure that the correct version of correct package is installed on the target computer. So all together it's one major headache.

And besides, reinventing the wheel probably goes against developer's principles http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Ubik]

Gandalf Parker said:
[...]
Or you could always just say "old married man". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif




LOL!!!! Spot On!

[HoneyBadger]

I think this is probably the best solution-not a good solution, but the best for the circumstances-that, rather than implore the Devs to shoehorn a feature they don't find appealing in, we take it upon ourselves to find a solution that might not be the best polished little ivory button in Computerland, but gives the people some of what they want, and shows favorably on our little community as being helpful and responsive-which isn't a bad thing all around. If that doesn't satisfy everyone, then atleast we've done everything in our power to lend a helping hand.

[Newthought]

Gandalf:
Actually I can't create my own Save System. You can call me pathetic, this specific area is just not my expertise.

Badger:
After reviewing what you said, honestly, albiet may be 2 late, didn't wish to put implications of vigiliance. Honestly, I have a perfectly controlled sense of emotion but coupled with an inability to understand others without facial expressions, any conclusion can come from within my words, for they tend to be very Oblivious from page to page.

Futhermore, I am not a Bibilical Nut, just Catholic, there is a Difference, look it up. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif
And a....the Tyranny part was simply Rhetoric just to keep the people off my back for having a Dissenting opinion

Anyway, pressing for a solution that I percieve the "community" might want (even though I am seperate from this community) I am reluctant to give one. But nevertheless you asked (to no harmful intention)

The problem with making a solution that SP/MP are totally not the same thing, hence I could give an SP solution easily, but an MP solution is hellva lot more tricky.

The Whole Idea is how I want to be able to Test the Waters of my actions and the whole idea of what you want is not to leave from the game as the Developer's intended, at least that is what I percieve.

A solution could be a "in-game feature" known as "Wisdom", only avalible to High Level Astral Mages where you pay a huge sum amount of money+Astral Gems to be able to simuliate one battle of your choice, and it would tell you who the victor is for that simulation only, meaning it would not tell you the extent nor would it tell you the "Real" battle, in luie with mythology, Heroes could only defy the fates for so long.

The Payment scales Horrondesly and no Wizard (Pretender) can do it more then Twice and it has a chance of killing the Wizard (Pretender) outright and it has a chance of giving the Reverse Outcome.

I don't want to shoot my own idea down but I feel like it's one of those Features, high-maintance and incredibly cool and might be impossible, but I'm not sure because these guys are good at programming from what I've seen.

From the Chinese, to the Greeks, to the peoples of the Triple Alliance (Tenochitlian, Tetzcoco, Tlacopan) this thing would be totally awesome, considering that ANY true mythology devulged diviniation as that of the highest priortity. Tenochitilan and Rome were built purely by Oracles and I'm sure almost any event would come in mind 2.

[censored], even Christianity was adopted in Rome when "God" came from the heavens to ensure victory for Constantine by painting the Holy Cross on the Legonary Shield.

That's an idea.

Many things could go wrong with this solution, but in reality, the Oracles pretty much dictated every war including REAL war like the Greeks and Persians. You cannot go anywhere without the "real" Pretender Gods making sure that they are "going to win".

The best part of the Idea is of cours, that you bring yourself ever more closer to "Real Mythology".

Another solution would be to allow a Save Game feature choice to those who want it in SP. (Have to throw it in there)

A Third Solution is where you can pay to Save your Game in SP(Have to throw in there)

So yes, the Oracle idea in summary would look like this,

To do Wisdom.
-High Level Astral Mage
-Requires Astral Gems and Lots of Gold
-The Cost Scales

Results
-Being able to simulate one battle and know who the winner is. No other details revealed

Alternative Outcomes
-Oracle gives unsure answer (meaning no conclusion. "It will be a very big battle)
-Oracle gives the wrong answer (Regardless of what the true outcome is.)
-Oracle dies. (Death from Vision or Drowns in the well water, pick your poision http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif)

Further Constrictions
-Cannot be spammed by the same High level Caster
-The Level requirement also goes up as well.

That's an idea that I think something in which you could like...

This is one of those kinds of requests were only a game like this could pull off succesfully, truthfully.

[Maltrease]

Newthough,

I find the idea of a spell that simulates battles incredibly interesting! This is really almost a completely seperate issue from the save game... but what a neat idea!

I'd say the battle would be completely visible (as if it was real).

Probably mid level astral spell. Maybe astral 5, 20 gems. Pick two provences. Spell plays out battle from army in provence 1 attacking army in provence 2.

I'm not sure of the difficulty in implementing it. It possible that it could be fairly attainable... if they can simply que up a battle as normal but not "save" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif any of the results.

What a cool spell that would be. Simulating a possible reality.

[HoneyBadger]

Newthought, I wasn't trying to accuse you of being a "biblical nut", quite the contrary, I was just accusing you of using the power of religion to your own purposes-done often enough by politicians who are more in tune with peoples' worst fears than they are with their best hopes.

If anyone's a "bible nut" it's me, I study-well, what I term "Christian occultism" as in the Nephilim and Antedeluvian/deluvian myths and I actually read the Bible a long time ago. I read Genesis several times through-it's quite good.

I equate the Bible with the Lord of the Rings-rather stupifyingly dull if you try to read the whole thing through in one sitting, and not concerning itself with "historical facts" but a logical mythos full of the most fascinating and tantalizing subjects and hints of subjects-and it's easy enough to want it to be real.

Both were also obviously written in the world we all share and both are full of rich and detailed history, as well as visions of other places, times, and people powerful enough to capture our deepest yearning.

Again, worst fears and best hopes, but then that's how to grab hold of people.

Anyway, let's forget about it and move on.

It is indeed quite a good idea. I think such a thing should let you see maybe 5 rounds of a given battle per astral path level of the mage in question. A 15th level mage could then view all 75 rounds of a large battle.

I think it would be difficult to program in though, but Space Empires IV is famous for it's battle-simulator tool, so such a thing is not beyond the reach of a small development team.

Along the saved game lines, perhaps certain games with "victory points" could allow a game to be saved whenever a certain amount of points are reached, and then increase the "cost" to save the game, to a higher amount of points.

In a 25 point game, you could save when you capture 5 points, when your opponent captures 8, when somebody else captures 13, when the first player captures 21, and victory at 25.

This would be a specific breed of game, which would appeal to certain groups of players that are perhaps large, but can only meet maybe once a week or so, and want to replay important turning points in the game.

I am not really against giving the Hosts of (especially, large) MP games the ability to save games. This could in the right hands be an important tool for role-playing, kind of like giving the Host DM/GM powers. It could also ease the upset that can be caused by real-world events-if someone dynamically involved in the game is forced to leave, why not restart the game at an earlier point before that person left suddenly in order to smooth things over?

Save games do have a place in computer games, that's why so many people are asking for them. I'm for keeping them in that place though, and rather than making it a choice whether to save or not save a given game, by making it so easy to do-instead making it a choice whether or not a given player wants to make that function available to themselves, and a part of their game.

I think there should be a way for someone to download that option, if they want it, but it's no more valid an option than a mod. Maybe the Devs could charge a few bucks for it, and make a little added money on the side? That way we who don't want it-or atleast don't want it casually-in our games, have a good solid excuse not to obtain it?

[Newthought]

At top, that's exactly what the Catholic mantra is. We don't take the Bible literally, we take it in parables, otherwise people can get really wierd.
At FUMA (A Baptist Military School), we were taught "Intelligent Design" in Geometry.

If I can try to articulate what your saying, I think what your saying is great...albiet let's not go crazy over the charging, (they may be small, but not the souless entity of X-box Live)

I'd love to have a GM that would manage Multiplayer games, but I don't know what kind of responsibility he would have that couldn't be solved through Voting but what would I know.

To further the Oracle Idea, I bring a page from THE AZTECS by Richard F. Townsend. It's long but I'm cutting sentenaces

"Divination, the art of forseeing future even to discovering Hidden knowledge through Supernatural means (interesting), was a standard feature of...ancient civilizations All people seek to know the Uknowable, to control the uncontrollabe, or to make confident choice about a difficult devision. Like the Greeks, Romans, and the Chinese, the Aztecs believed in the portentous meaning of omenss and auguries in the Natural World. The pattern of diverse phenomena which appear to coincide were percieved as high meaningful- auguring good or evil, succes or failure for a propsed endeavour. In Greece, no king or commander would dare take a major course of action without consulting one of the many famous oracles. Roman Genereals similiarly sacraficed Bullocks in order to read...the triumph or defeat of a paticular campaign...." They would read the livers.

"...The I Ching, a book of wisdom already old when Confucious wrote it, is where coins and thrown and as they land it is interepeted by the book" But it's a bit more conserative.

"The Aztec Tonalpohuallis (The 365 day calender), is presented by a traditional form of Calendrical divionation still used in Shirnes practiced in Guatemala...candles are lit and copla incence is burned as an offering. Using Coral Seeds and crystals, the day keeper will make arrangements in lots of four, counting out the days of the 260 day calendar. One day is assigned each lot, starting from the current day, or the day where the client's problem began. This is the beginning complex process of Interpretation, though which the daykepper's client will recieve counsel on the course of action revealed by the time-count the pattern of seeds and crytsals..." I Ching Style....

Not like I'm trying to campaign it or what not, but like when good Badger asked for an idea, I just used what was in my head to meet him in this interesting circumstance.

Personally, I also feel like there needs to be a New Dominion that should be a Mod.

A Good (Representing Holy Priests and Noble Warriors) And the Evil Spectrem (Representing a Realm of Fear with Undead Hordes and Sadistic Blood Magic Practices).

I don't feel comfortable in starting a New Thread and Saying "DO THIS", I just want to share it.
----------------------------------
Keeping Gameplay in mind, it would look like this,

Good 3- Divine Magic +2, Morale +2 In ability to cast Death and Blood Magic Primary Spells, -50% income off of Death and Blood Gems.
Good 2- Divine Magic +2, Morale +1, Greater Penalty to Death and Blood Magic
Good 1- Divine Magic +1, Morale +1 Penalty to Death and Blood Magic
Neutral- None
Evil 1- Divine Magic -1, Morale -1, Bonus to Death and Blood Magic.
Evil 2- Divine Magic -1, Morale -2, Bigger Bonus to Death and Blood Magic.
Evil 3- Divine Magic -2, Morale -2, Slightly Greater bonus then above to Death and Blood Magic, Generate Death Gems and more Blood Maidens.

Again the Numbers are just relative, the +'s in Divine reprsent bonuses to Divine Spells, not their casting levels. (No lowly priest will be able to Smite, but even he will cast sermons of Courage with envogration.)

A Pure Good God gets powerful noble troops off for a cause that would bring them to brink of matyrism, even the Humble Troops fight to the end. Good Gods bring the rightoues word that enligthens powerful Priests that within the flick of a hand causes the hordes of dead to be banished within the realm by the True Word. But Good Gods rarely, if never, result in using Death and Blood Magic which profits off the blood and souls of thier victims. They are matrys, never murderers. (Imagine if you fought for JC, you'd be so Fantaical in nature that you die for others rather then to live for yourself.)

Pure Evil Gods think little to nothing of Divine Magic, hence their is no implication of a greater cause other then their own self-gluttony. The Troops of evil Gods no matter their size and strength, have weak and soft hearts knowing that the only thing that brings them to fight is chains. It is as if there own shadows seek to bring them down. (Imagine if you fought for Loki, the Arcane Trickster whose own spies cause your demise)

However, the Evil God's power within the Darkness and the Blood invoke their ability to summon hordes and hordes of Undead that march through the cornfields and bring wretched pain to villages. Their blood magic is so profond that the blood of the innocents flows through their body as if it was sweat. Their exotic charm invokes the innocent into their own demise.

But even more vile is that Evil Gods, if pursuing an Evil stragety, have the advantage of more expertise and greater power and control to invoke greater forms of War. (hence, they get points for adopting their own "evil" stragety)

---------------------------------------------------
Anyway, I have no disagreement in any shape or form with Badger's idea of activating and deactivating it. None. Make an On switch and I'm good for me.

[Gandalf Parker]

HoneyBadger said:
I am not really against giving the Hosts of (especially, large) MP games the ability to save games. This could in the right hands be an important tool for role-playing, kind of like giving the Host DM/GM powers. It could also ease the upset that can be caused by real-world events-if someone dynamically involved in the game is forced to leave, why not restart the game at an earlier point before that person left suddenly in order to smooth things over?



If there is anyone soing a multiplyer game and not doing gamesaves then please refer them to me. The game might not be setup to make it easy for players to do gamesaves but its definetly in there for hosts. Thats one of the things I pride myself for getting into the game. It was one of the main reasons for getting pre-exec and post-exec added.

[HoneyBadger]

Newthought, now that I've got you using your head instead of your mouth (or finger, since we're typing...and isn't that appropriate?) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif you're really on a roll. I like the idea of good/evil scales. Unfortunately, from what I've read, the Devs are against dividing the game into good and evil. But...perhaps if we shift the terminology a little.

I have one suggestion for the terms to use, Orthodox/Heretical (Please note that I'm using these words for effect more than for purposes of precise meaning.)

In Orthodox dominions, populations are devout, strong in the Pretender's faith as it was originally spoken and interpreted, and fanatical in their commitment to the word of their God. Witches and heretics are burned at the stake, and sinners are often stoned to death for even-from the perspective of outsiders-minor infractions. There is no separation of church and state. Prayer-calls are heard throughout the cities, laws and rulers derive their power from sacred teachings, and the most powerful position in all the land under God is that of High Priest or Priestess.

Orth 1: temples are 25% less expensive to build due to tithings and missionaries (300g for most nations, 150 for Pan and Man), Bless grants an additional +1 to Morale, +0.1 to Growth due to large families of believers being held in high esteem. Income 3% less (-3%) Resources 5% less (-5%) due to more land being held by the Church, more resources going to support the priesthood (none of whom have day-jobs), and more money going to support monasteries.

Orth 2: as Orth 1 but +0.2 to Growth and +3% chance event is good, as prayers to the Pretender for good fortune are granted (that and they burn those old hags that keep cursing my troops). Income -6%. Resources -10%

Orth 3: as Orth 1, 2, except temples are 50% less expensive to build, Bless now grants +2 to Morale (for a total of +4), +0.3 to Growth and 6% chance event is good.
Income -12% Resources -15%.

Heretical: In Heretical Dominions, the people still worship the Pretender, and many are extremely devout, but the population is divided into many different schools of thought, each convinced that their way is the "right" way to worship. All are welcome into these lands, and all are welcome to leave. The laws and power in these lands are upheld by secular authorities. Their is not one Church, but many, and the Churches pay taxes just like everybody else. They are also fully responsible to the law, just as any civilian body or business. The Churches takes advantage of this as well, requiring priests to not only spread the Word but to serve the church in productive, even menial, ways. Although direct violence by the Church against so-called "unbelievers" is much more rare-or even unheard-of, still this is a volatile, violent place where all manner of sects compete against each other, both with their words and in bloody street-brawls.

Heret 1: Temples are 25% more expensive to build due to followers expecting to be paid for their labor (500g for most nations, 250g for Pangaea and Man). -1 Bless effect to Morale due to soldiers being less willing to give up their lives in the name of their Faith. Growth is unaffected but Research is -1 due to conflicting views about the nature and appropriateness of magic, and the lack of organized religious schools. +5% chance for a random event due to increased religious turmoil (chance it's good or bad is unaffected). Income +3% Resources +5% due to harder currency (the church doesn't hoard all the silver and gold in the form of religious icons), banking (usurage), and the ready disposal of goods and lands.

Heret +2: as Heret +1 but 10% chance for a random event, Income +6% Resources +10%.

Heret +3: as Heret +2 but Temples are 50% more expensive to build, -2 Bless effect to Morale (Bless grants no Morale bonus under Heret +3) Research -2, 15% chance of random event, Income +12%, Resources +15%.

I think such a scale would be very appropriate for Dom3, especially with the impending introduction of Gath-which should be dealing with the Nephilim, according to my information.

[Teraswaerto]

It would seem to me that heresy would give a bonus to research, not a penalty. Organized religion clings to whatever idea has been been established, it is anathema to progress and discovery.

[HoneyBadger]

In our modern times, maybe, when schools are government-funded, but not in midieval times when the Church was the major protector and provider of knowledge. Look through a few history books-many of the greatest thinkers of all time came out of or were connected to, the Church.

[HoneyBadger]

The Church was also a great patron of the arts, and even the sciences, and not just Christianity either-science and art flourished under Muslim rule for a very long time, and Iraq-believe it or not-was at one time the book-capital of the world. The Jews also have a long history of scolasticism and certainly were and are proponents of religious schools, as are Catholics-there's a Catholic school in my home town, for instance.

[Teraswaerto]

Islam was relatively tolerant of the sciences in medieval times, much more so than Christianity. Galileo was threatened with torture, Bruno Giordano was burned at the stake, etc.

There is also no count of how many people were condemned as witches and such.

[HoneyBadger]

So you've got both sides of the same coin. On one hand Orthodox dominions are burning people at the stake, while on the other hand, they're promoting education-alongside religious indoctrination, ofcourse.

The Heretics on the other hand have so many different philosophies and are so disorganized and fueled by misinformation (look at the history of alchemy, for instance) that yes, they have a better economy that will eventually-in a few hundred or thousand years-turn out a fine public education system like we had in the 19th century, but right now is just confusing and deluding people.

[Gandalf Parker]

Interestingly Im not sure which side of the coin you are calling heretics. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
(and Id advise not clarifying it for the sake of the thread)
Lets keep the tone light, and the subject gaming please.

[NTJedi]

Gandalf Parker said:
Interestingly Im not sure which side of the coin you are calling heretics. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
(and Id advise not clarifying it for the sake of the thread)



So anyone wanting to stop the beating of this dead horse should clarify.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[HoneyBadger]

Oh Gandalf, I was actually just coming up with a game idea. I wasn't trying to insult anyone, overtly or subtley. It would have been pretty clever if I had though, but no, just taking Newthought's idea and running with it.

I've got an interest in seeing scales become more interesting, and adding an addition to what we have now would be nice.

[PhilD]

PDF said:
Personally I'd be glad to have it but can live without.




Agree here. Something else I'd live without, is the superior attitude of so many Dom players when it comes to this kind of feature. "It's not how the game is supposed to be played and enjoyed, you cheater, so stop asking for it. Or just copy the files by hand"

(If you're not supposed to make saved games, how come simply copying the turn files works?)



Also note that if Dom doesn't have a real save feature like "all" other strat games have, it has *lots* of features that *no other* strat game has http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif



Again, true.

[HoneyBadger]

I'm a fan of the game, so why shouldn't I feel "superior" for having bought and enjoyed a game, and participated in it's forum, without needing to
have something added to it that the Devs don't want to add?

I'm not saying I'm superior because "I'm a white (more or less) male who has enough money to afford the game", I'm not saying that I'm superior because "I've played this game from the beginning, and I know how it's supposed to be played".

I'm saying that I can enjoy something without it being just like everything else in it's genre, and I can work with or around the differences, and understand that where the game is limited, it's limited for reasons.

I also have no problem arguing for change I feel would be valuable, or for a saved-game feature that would add-rather than detract from-my personal gaming experience.

I really don't care for the modern concepts of "pride" as a wrong state to be in and "shame" as the correct and natural state, so-CONSIDERING that I strongly believe that everyone here is a complete and valuable human being worthy of respect to the extent that they allow it by their actions, totally regardless of gender, age, religion, number of limbs/eyes/ears/fingers, skin-tone, what have you, I have no problem with feeling superior when I act in a way I consider to be "superior".

[Archonsod]

Gandalf Parker said:
I didnt say it was difficult, just that its a headache. And yes Im aware of the programming side. Setting up file managment inside a program to work for windows, mac, and linux is not simple and quick. I see enough headaches with this programs file handling already on its installs and game cleanup just between linux and windows.

You are correct that tweaking the AI can be a forever project but the code is already there and is OS generic.



So is the save code. The game already autosaves prior to processing, you're just duplicating that and changing the target directory or filename.
Designing a third party program to manage the saves which works on mac, linux and Windows, now that's hard
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

[PhilD]

HoneyBadger said:
I'm a fan of the game, so why shouldn't I feel "superior" for having bought and enjoyed a game, and participated in it's forum, without needing to
have something added to it that the Devs don't want to add?




Err, I don't know... because a simple reality check should tell you that there is nothing to feel "superior" about in being a fan of a video game?

[HoneyBadger]

Then you shouldn't be complaining about others feeling that way, because obviously, we're not acting in a valid way, according to your own, private, reality.

I wonder how many football fans think their's no reason to feel superior when their team wins a game?

[PhilD]

HoneyBadger said:
Then you shouldn't be complaining about others feeling that way, because obviously, we're not acting in a valid way, according to your own, private, reality.




I don't quite understand what you're trying to say here, sorry. It looks like you're implying that not taking video games too seriously is, in a way, denying reality. If so, yeah, we don't exactly live in the same world.




I wonder how many football fans think their's no reason to feel superior when their team wins a game?



That I couldn't say; but unless you're a member of the team, I'd say it's pretty ridiculous to feel superior when the team you're supporting wins; after all, they did so through absolutely no achievement of yours.

(And yes, I realize there are probably thousands or millions of football/basket/whatever fans who tend to react in the way you describe. That doesn't make them right, though)

[Meglobob]

I always feel superior when my team Man U wins. I also feel pretty good about playing and owning Dom3 as well, especially as 99% of video game players do not even know Dom3 exists. Both help brighten my day...

[HoneyBadger]

I would agree with you about football fans, but that's because I don't enjoy football all that much (I even used to play it, and didn't like it much then, either), but as a fan of Dom3 I agree with Meglobob.

It brightens up my day, what's the problem with that?

Do I have a tattoo of Johan K and Kristoffer O on my chest? no. Did I sign up for the monthly Illwinter newsletter and cheese plate? no. Am I planning a trip to Sweden? not in the forseeable future.

I'm a fan, not a crazy person, and I don't think there's anything wrong with feeling good about that, or even "having an attitude" about that. Especially considering there's a whole world out there that we who are Dom3 fans have to stick up for Dom3 against at times, if we're going to promote it successfully.

If you want to feel wishy-washy (ambivalent) about owning and playing Dom3, feel free, that's your choice. I'd rather feel enthusiastic and excited and proud. That's my choice.

[alexti]

PhilD said:

HoneyBadger said:
I wonder how many football fans think their's no reason to feel superior when their team wins a game?



That I couldn't say; but unless you're a member of the team, I'd say it's pretty ridiculous to feel superior when the team you're supporting wins; after all, they did so through absolutely no achievement of yours.



But you've skillfully selected the team to support http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[HoneyBadger]

Yes, I have, Alexti. And for that matter, in this case I'm "supporting the team" by purchasing the game, promoting it, creating mods, submitting ideas, answering questions, being available on the boards on a more or less daily basis, etc. I think that atleast qualifies me as a volunteer part-time assistant Dom3 coach?

[Newthought]

------------------------------------------------------
About the Good/Evil Dominion thing, on a Gameplay scale I was trying to figure out a way to improve Divine castors and Morales of Troops (Because at the start of the game, this is Impossible.) I was also thinking about how people want to mass Dead units or go crazy with Blood.

What I thought that people might like was to make a Dominion that implemented a Realm of Nobility and Clergy to a realm of Black Magic, Ritualistic Sacrifices, and Troops ruled through the shadow.
The Good and Evil thing doesn't cover it as much as

Love------------------------------------------Cruelty

Bonuses to Penalties to
Morale Morale
Divine Casting Divine Casting
Penalties to Bonuses to
Death and Blood Magic Death and Blood Magic

That would be wicked, a Love-Cruelty spectrem.
An even better proposal. But no more on this.
------------------------------------------------------


I thought we were in Agreement about the Save things??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

"I think there should be a way for someone to download that option, if they want it, but it's no more valid an option than a mod. Maybe the Devs could charge a few bucks for it, and make a little added money on the side? That way we who don't want it-or atleast don't want it casually-in our games, have a good solid excuse not to obtain it? "

Sure! If you think Saving Games are generally against the game and hamper quaility, then please think of it like that. I'm not arguing on whether or not it's a bad thing, I just want the feature.

So in reality, we could put a feature that is not part of the Game into reality and call it whatever so people know that when there using saves there not playing the true game and have no right to complain about the game if they say ANYTHING about it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

But still, unless anyone says so, I think we have made a Geniunine solid compromise. Easy Part is done. Now the real question is, HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO IT?

Few Ideas on the Table.
1. Send a Petition and a letter to encorporate a feature for Saves that can be downloaded in a seperate pack/sequel.
2. Or make a Mod that allows us to do it.

So yes, what's left is to take action.

That's all!

[Gandalf Parker]

I dont think there is an agreement at all. Most people said no then walked away from the discussion.

But you asked for it and people gave it, so whats the problem?

Gandalf Parker
--
To some people, unlimited options seems to them to be zero options.
Without a menu giving them a choice, they are lost.

[alexti]

Gandalf Parker said:
--
To some people, unlimited options seems to them to be zero options.
Without a menu giving them a choice, they are lost.


Curious thought: menu opens and shows:
-> Option A
-> Option B
-> More options ...
When "More Options" is clicked, another menu pops:
-> Option A1
-> Option B1
-> More options ...
etc...
Continuing this pattern we can have unlimited number of options accessible through menu. I wonder how long someone would keep clicking to learn whether the number of options is limited or not?

[Gandalf Parker]

Id never put unlimited options into a menu http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
But the method we have now (--preexec and --postexec) allows for fairly unlimited options in areas such as alarms and saves and event handling. Half a dozen versions of any of those are offered. Yet people will still call it no options at all unless those things are on a menu someplace. I wont knock their desire but a menu button but I cant consider it to be much of a need.

Gandalf Parker

[Newthought]

Well if "most" people say no the feature, then might as well I walk away.

Truthfully, nobody has given any GOOD reason not to implement this feature if it's given to be optional.

Let's look at it mathmatically, something past all irrationalities and things.

X= Game
A, B, C, D= Features

Now, assuming which here is how the logic goes.

If you have X + B + C + D, the game is perfect and should not be tweaked.

If say, another person has X + C + D, the game is perfect, and B is just another gegaw feature.

If I have X + A + B + C, then I am happy, and I couldn't care less about D.

So why can't I have A? Because you disagree with it. That because of A, the game is ruined for YOU even though YOUR not playing the game for me and even if implmeneted YOU wouldn't even think twice of it.

The mantra of, I think it shouldn't be this, therefore it must not is just a crap attitude.

Of all the arguements thrown out against this feature, none of them have been applicable to ME. All of them have been based on YOUR perceptions rather then mine, and why should YOUR perceptions make mine "Wrong" or "Wussy".

Why is Flexibility wrong?

Why should what I want ruin the game????

W/e, I just spoke to think that a small community would appeal to something like this. But nothing gets done one the internet these days.

I'll just stick to Paradox (for Realism) and for Galatic Civilizations (For Flexibility). That way, if I try something new, I won't have to start the whole Four hours over again. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Regards,
Gl with w/e

[Gandalf Parker]

They have given good reasons, just none that you accept.
Which is fine.

But basically one view given would be:
"Should we add a feature that might ruin the replayablity and long term enjoyment, even for those that think they wanted it, thereby hurting the sales of the next version?"

Interesting that you mention GalCiv as an example of a game that has save feature. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[NTJedi]

I say it comes down to that we don't want the developers spending time adding the savegame feature when so many other important bug fixes and other features are in demand.

[Saxon]

And I say that we do want them spending time on the save game feature!

There is not a consensus on this, but there are some vocal people on either side. That may be all that this thread will establish...

[Olive]

[Vocal people mode on]
There's no use for a save feature. If I really want to test different forms of a tactic or save a game at a point, it just takes a few seconds to backup the game directory in the windows explorer. On Linux it should be even faster with a cp.

Remove bugs and add content to the game instead. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
[Vocal people mode off]

[Gandalf Parker]

Saxon said:
There is not a consensus on this, but there are some vocal people on either side. That may be all that this thread will establish...



Im all for that. It has generated discussion which is logged here for the devs to see. And shown support for it either direction.

By the way;
now that things are slowing down abit I will toss some gas on the fire that I was leary of posting. (I hope this doesnt piss off Johan) but people seem to try and motivate the devs the wrong way. From my personal experience, it seems that if you really want to get Johan to add something to the game, get it worked on by someone else. At least 3 major additions that we never expected to see seemed to get added as soon as a fairly decent 3rd party version seemed likely.

[Wyehl]

Gandalf Parker said:
They have given good reasons, just none that you accept.



Well, some people might think they are good but you can't presume that as fact. I think most of the reasons against it are purely for the sake of argument in the absence of actually having a good reason. In fact, to me, it appears that -some- of the arguments are so thin, that I am not even sure the people saying them actually believe them. Don't get me wrong, some of them are debatable but, imo, some of them are really 'stretching it'.


Gandalf Parker said:
But basically one view given would be:
"Should we add a feature that might ruin the replayablity and long term enjoyment, even for those that think they wanted it, thereby hurting the sales of the next version?"

Interesting that you mention GalCiv as an example of a game that has save feature. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif



They also mentioned Civ4, which is an excellent game by most accounts. If I had to list some of my favorite old games, I think they all had it. Masters Of Magic, Masters Of Orion, X-Com, Alpha Centauri, Civ1, Civ4.

Best thing about those games, for me ? Replayability. Somehow they were all great games (with great replayability) despite the scourge of having a save game feature.

[Gandalf Parker]

Wyehl said:
Well, some people might think they are good but you can't presume that as fact. I think most of the reasons against it are purely for the sake of argument in the absence of actually having a good reason. In fact, to me, it appears that -some- of the arguments are so thin, that I am not even sure the people saying them actually believe them. Don't get me wrong, some of them are debatable but, imo, some of them are really 'stretching it'.



Thank you very much for using phrases such as "some people" "cant presume that as fact" "I think" "to me it appears" and "imo". More of that would be a good thing for all threads here and keep them off of the moderators watch-lists.



They also mentioned Civ4, which is an excellent game by most accounts. If I had to list some of my favorite old games, I think they all had it. Masters Of Magic, Masters Of Orion, X-Com, Alpha Centauri, Civ1, Civ4.

Best thing about those games, for me ? Replayability. Somehow they were all great games (with great replayability) despite the scourge of having a save game feature.



Of those, I dont remember if all of them had cheat-saves or not. I remember it with Master of Magic. You could save just before a fight or checking treasures, then restore if you didnt like the result. On the other hand, some games roll the randoms far in advance so that by the time you find something, its result is already decided so that saving didnt do you any good OR restoring from a save specifically made the result worse. Its a common topic in programmer forums on how to make saves available without ruining the game (in the developers view of the game of course).

[HoneyBadger]

I think there's some truth to the statement that what we're expressing here are both opinions and facts. I don't think that makes too much of a difference, even as far as to who's "right" and who's "wrong". It's a question of priorities. Do we ask the Devs to do something that we can do ourselves, and may or may not want, or do we make the decision ourselves.

It's kind of the same question you get with censorship: Do you require a company to make your decisions for you, as to what's appropriate or not for you, or do you choose to turn the channel when you find something offensive and allow others their freedom?

[Gandalf Parker]

Theres nothing against asking the devs for anything. But Id rather we didnt push them into having to defend a decision not to. As we can obviously see from threads like this, that can go down a road which can cut off all communications.

[HoneyBadger]

No I have nothing against asking the Devs for something someone wants in the game. I'm just suggesting that it not be demanded as a point-of-sale, when there are other options to persue.

It's all in how you say a thing, not in what you say.

[NTJedi]

Saxon said:
And I say that we do want them spending time on the save game feature!

There is not a consensus on this, but there are some vocal people on either side. That may be all that this thread will establish...



Since a few known workarounds exist for the desired save game feature I seriously doubt the developers will take time away from fixing known bugs and developing new content.
Lets see... should the devs fix the known undead blessing bug which can effect any nation OR add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround. Not a difficult decision for most people.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Personally I would rather they also spend their time making sure each nation has at least 3 heroes instead of adding a save game feature which has a known workaround.

[Gandalf Parker]

Lets not be that harsh. It might not be laziness.
Some people really have no idea how to do things on their computer unless its on a menu. If they cant find the dominions files, dont know how to make a file there or a shortcut, then they are going to have a hard time with the answers that have been given.

[NTJedi]

Gandalf Parker said:
Lets not be that harsh. It might not be laziness.
Some people really have no idea how to do things on their computer unless its on a menu. If they cant find the dominions files, dont know how to make a file there or a shortcut, then they are going to have a hard time with the answers that have been given.



That's true... yet it's only a percentage which lack the knowledge for moving/adding files within the windows directories. I feel sorry for these people because this means if someone develops a unique and very fun singleplayer map available for download... they won't be able to play the map.

[Wyehl]

NTJedi said:
Lets see... should the devs fix the known undead blessing bug which can effect any nation OR add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround. Not a difficult decision for most people.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif




A few people seem to assume that this argument is in the majority. All sarcasm and straw men and smiley winks aside, this view is maybe only in the majority among some of the 'local' crew, if that. The reason I got into this thread in the first place was my personal reaction to this very assumption and I wanted to make it clear that just because a group of the 'locals' think that, it doesn't mean everyone who plays (and buys) the game feels that way (no offense to the locals, I only mean that it seems to me that most of the people who are against a save game feature are regular posters in this forum while the people who are for it are a mix of regular posters and newbies like myself).

I don't disagree that priorities are worth considering but I don't think that there is an overwhelming majority, such that you can simply discredit arguments based on what you perceive as the popularity of your point of view. If it was so overwhelmingly popular, you would only have two or three people on the opposing side and that doesn't appear to be the case.

Note: By 'locals', I only mean people who have been active on the forum for a while and/or participate regularly.

[NTJedi]

Wyehl said:
I only mean that it seems to me that most of the people who are against a save game feature are regular posters in this forum while the people who are for it are a mix of regular posters and newbies like myself




I'm not strongly against the save game feature... I'm more strongly supporting other issues which need attention first. If you've scanned the largest sticky bug thread you'd see there's plenty of work which needs to be done and that's not including the long list of OTHER features people want added which is well over 70-something from the patch improvement thread.
Thus when I see a topic requesting a feature which has a known workaround... it's like complaining to your congressman or government official about banks not being open on Sunday, when there's obviously much larger issues which need attention. Another point is 98% of all the other features which have been suggested don't have workarounds unlike the save game feature request.

[alexti]

Wyehl said:
They also mentioned Civ4, which is an excellent game by most accounts.


Civ4 took rather interesting approach to save games. Reloading the game was so insanely slow that nobody would want to reload unless one absolutely must had to turn the computer off http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif I don't know whether it was an intentional decision or just a result of overall poor coding that plagued otherwise very good game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

[NTJedi]

I wish I had the time to use all the modding features available within CIV_4.

[Gandalf Parker]

alexti said:

Wyehl said:
They also mentioned Civ4, which is an excellent game by most accounts.


Civ4 took rather interesting approach to save games. Reloading the game was so insanely slow that nobody would want to reload unless one absolutely must had to turn the computer off http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif I don't know whether it was an intentional decision or just a result of overall poor coding that plagued otherwise very good game http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif


Actually that is one of the options that gets mentioned in programmer forums. A way to give it to them but not really give it to them. As if "well this was the best I was able to do".

Things like:
slow save

slow reload

save only when quitting the game

save only at special places in the game that are far apart

randomly generating as much as possible and including it in the save so reload cant cheat

not allowing naming of saves so that you only get one save at a time (keeps you from long-term backtracking)

Of course the people doing it those ways are given a hard time about giving in to players over the quality of the game. But no one gives them too hard a time for avoiding the flak by giving crappy saves. And before anyone says anything, no I dont think that happened here. What we have is standard Linux saves for a pbem game. Nothing else would have made much sense in Dom1 and only seems reasonable now because of the improved menus in Dom3.

[Saxon]

add a feature for those too lazy to use a known workaround.

I am not lazy, I have a baby! I usually look like this smily http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/yawn.gif and cherish what time I have with the game. Learning some DOS codes to create a batch file is not what I want to do with my few stolen personal moments.

[Wyehl]

NTJedi said:
If you've scanned the largest sticky bug thread you'd see there's plenty of work which needs to be done and that's not including the long list of OTHER features people want added which is well over 70-something from the patch improvement thread.
Thus when I see a topic requesting a feature which has a known workaround... it's like complaining to your congressman or government official about banks not being open on Sunday, when there's obviously much larger issues which need attention. Another point is 98% of all the other features which have been suggested don't have workarounds unlike the save game feature request.



I think those are probably the best 'anti-save' points that have been made (minus the analogy). The only problem with them is that they presume the quality of this requested feature to be poor when, apparently, there are several people that would disagree.

Let's be fair, though. It isn't a question of a save game feature vs. a game killing bug. Since new content and features are released with patches, it's really a question of the save game feature vs. other features that have been requested. I acknowlege that you have said as much, I just want to be clear.

For these two arguments (which are really shades of the same argument), it all comes down to the idea that people disagree on:
A) What priority a save game feature should be.
B) How much effort it is to code it (can't recall if anyone but Gandalf made this argument but it is relevant to (A), in any case, so I am throwing it in).

I don't even know what priority it is in the spectrum of other features and I think it's a fair question, though maybe it wasn't posed all that fairly. Honestly, that's what got me involved, I jumped in because the other anti-save arguments were just begging me and I succumbed.

Just a phrase ? No! They were begging me, I tell you, I could hear them saying "You can't let me go, you know you can't...fine, but my friend here is an even greater exageration, can you resist him ? How about a straw man ? Smugness ? Sarcasm ? Oh come on, Wyehl, you can't resist us all, you know we will get you..."

...and they did. The little bastages got me and here I am.

Thanks for indulging my...umm, imagination.

[Saxon]

Sorry, that was a bit shrill. However, the point stands that different people have different priorities, wishes, dreams and fantasies about what might happen to the game and our reasons for those wishes are just as diverse.

As a point of reference, fear the new parent! Buy them coffee and return after 12 months…

[NTJedi]

I truly hope the score graphs are fixed soon.

The loss of functionality from Dominions_2 is quite noticeable.

First anytime an opponent is killed their entire graph history vanishes... thus making it impossible to review the overall history during middle, late and end of the game.

Second if a computer or human opponent wins the game from a victory condition then all human opponents are deleted from the graph history! Making it again impossible to review how you as a human were doing during the game.

It's actually quite sad the graphs provide LESS than what the Dominions_2 graphs provided.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

[RamsHead]

NTJedi said:


I truly hope the score graphs are fixed soon.

The loss of functionality from Dominions_2 is quite noticeable.

First anytime an opponent is killed their entire graph history vanishes... thus making it impossible to review the overall history during middle, late and end of the game.

Second if a computer or human opponent wins the game from a victory condition then all human opponents are deleted from the graph history! Making it again impossible to review how you as a human were doing during the game.

It's actually quite sad the graphs provide LESS than what the Dominions_2 graphs provided.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif


I agree with this wholeheartedly. Looking back at the graphs and seeing the major events at the end of a game is fun. Or was fun.

[Gandalf Parker]

Not to downplay this but there is a crappy alternative.
--scoredump will create an html file of the scoreboard information. Of course if you want historical info then you need to set up the --preexec to rotate the copies. Its something I do for most of the games I host.

But I do wish there was an easy way to get a screenshot of the scoreboards each turn since I like the graph better. However if someone with a background wants to tackle
--scoredump, to import into spreadsheet, to graphing package
then we could have a nice feature there.

Gandalf Parker
--
Its a computer. Nothing is impossible. The word impossible is a
technical term meaning "I could get it to work but it would be more time
and trouble than its worth"

[alexti]

Saxon said:
I am not lazy, I have a baby! I usually look like this smily http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/yawn.gif and cherish what time I have with the game. Learning some DOS codes to create a batch file is not what I want to do with my few stolen personal moments.


Why not to use someone else's script?

[Saxon]

Cycling back to my earlier point, we could build a car where you start it by walking outside and turning a crank. However, most people want to do it from the inside.

NTJedi is right about the graphs and, while I may well be able to go outside to do it with someone else’s script, I do not want to. It is more work and, in my opinion, should be inside the game. The logic is the same in both situations, for both sides of the argument. If you are happy doing saves outside the game, you probably have to be happy doing score graphs outside the game. If you want them inside, logic suggests you need to argue for both inside. But then again, consistency is said to be the bugbear of small minds.

[Wish]

Saxon said:
The logic is the same in both situations, for both sides of the argument. If you are happy doing saves outside the game, you probably have to be happy doing score graphs outside the game. If you want them inside, logic suggests you need to argue for both inside. But then again, consistency is said to be the bugbear of small minds.



that is actually faulty logic since the only existing modes are not A => B (desiring one means one must desire both) since A !=> B is also an option. (desiring one, and not desiring both) as such, within formal logic, neither statement is in itself true, since the contradict each other. and no statement can be both true and false.

I merely suggest that one should educate themselves on formal logic before trying to make logical assertions, lest they find themselves making faulty assertions based on bad logic.

Additionally each issue has different repercussions on how the game plays, and thus, despite apparent similarities, should be regarded differently from a developers viewpoint.

also, something about small minds, bug bears, and sacking up.

[Saxon]

Hmm, I remember something in university about small minds getting in the sack with bears when the big mind was turned off…

[Gandalf Parker]

Actually I think the graph history is a good thing to add if it can be done easily. Trying to see all sides of it, I cant come up with anything about a graph history that would be bad for the game. As for 3rd partying the graphs; I brought that up because some people thinks its fun to do such projects and it seems to spur some competitive action in the devs.