An idea: what do you guys think?

[Deleted]

Since I was planning to just warp the player to their last save when they lost this'd be easy...

I can have three saving options: Quick Save, Real Save, and Cancel. Quick Save would simply set an Escape Point that would get warped to if/when the party dies, and Real Save would set an Escape Point and do the actual save. This way the player can Quick Save in no time at all and only has to do the slow Real Save once before they quit playing. The only negative to this I've thought of is that if the player only does Quick Save and the party dies, they'll have no way of recovering any items they used (any key items' effect would be saved by flags/variables though). Plus, in my game I only two items (not equipment) that cannot be bought, an Elixer and Megalixer (to keep things simple), so this shouldn't be much of a problem. Plus, because of the Chrono Cross leveling system and mystery to to what classes/characters/items/equipment/abilities the player has and whether the player enters the boss with full Extremes (limit breaks for simplicity) my game will probably turn out easy anyways.

Alas, what do you guys think of this idea?

[Dungeon Warden]

That sounds like a cool idea.

I don't really understand the problem, since everything the player's did wouldn't be lost. That is, all money, experience, and items the characters got between the quick save and dying would still be theirs. Any items they used getting that experence and money is all part of the process. I've played several games that worked like this, so it really isn't unusual.

The only game I played where you keep your experience and still recovered all your used items when you died was Final Fantasy VI (FFIII on SNES).

I could only see it being a problem if the character's used an important item in a boss battle and then lost the fight, making the boss impossible to fight the next time. It is possible to make sure the party doesn't lose these items by checking if it is in the party inventory when they die, and if it isn't, give it to them when they recover.

[Deleted]

Well, I was hoping to get more responses, but perhaps that's because people felt the same way you and me did, DW. (thank you)

I'm gonna go ahead and do this as I think it's a cool idea that'll save the player a lot of time down the road.

[Dark Knight Of Lodis]

I like the dying and having to load your game again and start from the last save. Although it really pisses you off sometimes, I like the challenge, and the caution that the player takes when this is the case. With the 'quick save' the players wouldn't be very scared of dying, and therefore would take risks that would be insane if they had a more severe penalty. From my point of view, this only reduces the fear of dying and also reduces the challenge of the game.

But if your game is extremely hard...I like the idea. Since you might be dying fairly regularly, the normal save often might not be often enough. I'd have to play the game to be able to give a suggestion specifically on how your game is.

[Dungeon Warden]

I don't understand why a game must be so challenging that the player should fear death. I though the point of playing a game was to have fun?

Different people have different tastes, and for some a challenging game with death at every corner is fun. For others, running around a dungeon with little chance of death is a fun time.

If the game is too easy, the story would have to be very good or else the player can get bored. I guess this is where game balance comes in. Trying to keep the game a challenge, while not letting it get fustratingly difficult. This still leaves a wide margin for error, and which way you take it depends as much on the tone of the story as it does on personal taste.

[vespuleth]

i tend to lean towards games that are more challenging, where you do fear death quite a bit, and it turns you into something of a paranoid individual (*cough*TombRaider*cough*), but i do agree that there should be a balance (which up until the last few games, tomb raider has missed entirely). im somewhat against the idea, as it lowers difficulty, but so long as it... fits, i say go w/ it. i would really have to see it in action to tell you completely what i thought. also, for those hard to get items, you could record how many they had, or whether or not they had one (if they are that hard to get) by flipping an extra flag when they get it, and if that flag is flipped, when they restore, they get it back, unless they use it in a battle and survive (requiring the use of a second flag, i suppose. one that checks to see if the item is present, one that flips when its used. if at the end of a battle (once they have won) both flags are on, the 'present' flag is turned off, or something. maybe that seems overkill, but it would preserve the more difficult to obtain items if the player lost a battle.)

[Deleted]

That's brilliant, Ves! ;D Thank you very much! I'll do that since I only have two items like that. Thank you!