安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
For me stealth games are at their best when you feel like you're 50% action hero badass and 50% vunerable and the checkpoint/auto save system in this game does that for me.
I also believe that not everyone would save scum for the sake of save scum. I find it rather juvenile to not wanting a quick save system because you can't keep away from the temptation, that is certainly the fault of the people who can't rather than those who can use it to a personal balance.
I think adding an achievement for not save scumming is really the only way to please both camps.
Again, I don't speak for everyone, but as soon as you add in options to make a single player game easier, the "hardcore" gamers come out of the woodwork and scream that the casual gamers ruin everything.... on that note, I agree that sometimes only catering to one crowd makes games way too easy, like Conviction; that game was a fun game, but it was not splinter cell. Then again, Double Agent was a proper Splinter Cell game, but I thought the single player was garbage.
The best example I can think of appealing to both camps was Spies vs Mercs having a classic mode and regular modes with tons of upgrades and a more actiony focus.
Different game modes is great just like different diffulties is great. So why not different save systems? (options) :)
As I said (not that I agree) that giving more options so more people can enjoy a game is seen as a horrifying afront to some people who take gaming too seriously.
I only agree with those sentiments when those game mechanic decisions bleed into every facet of the game.
I honestly don't care about Mark and Execute in this game because I can't even use it on Perfectionist, which wasn't an "option" in Conviction, because certain parts of the game forced you to use it.
I think the real issue is that insecure people who need reassurance from meaningless activities like video games, feel their efforts are somehow diminished if other people can play a game for recreation and not some perverted sports-like competition.
It's as if letting people save where they wanted would somehow negate their so-called accomplishments. That's ridiculous, of course, but self-delusion is not unusual.
As I said earlier, a lot of reactions from "gamers" is usually negative when any feature is implemented to make a game easier, even if its implemented in a way that won't actually effect them.
Part of this is because a lot of games keep getting mainstreamed way too hard in an attempt to steal the Call of Duty audience. I'll be the first to admit that even though I don't have much time for games anymore, and I REALLY like hard punishing games from Demon's / Dark Souls to Spelunky, I also enjoy casual games like CoD.
But a lot of game franchises have been bastardized or even outright killed because they want to "cater to a wider audience" and end up sliding out a mediocre game that is too generic for the mainstream to want to switch to, and ostracizes the fans (like Deadspace 3 or for a Ubisoft example, Ghost Recon; Future Soldier).
So all of this usually causes a pretty quick knee-jerk reaction. I mean, heck, like I said, Conviction was a fun game, but it should have never been called Splinter Cell. It deviated way too hard from the past games and was pretty much a giant middle finger to fans who had stayed with SC up until then. It was fun, but we all were let down that we didnt get a sequel with that super stealth feel, and thankfully, despite good SC: Conviction sales, Ubisoft found a way to give most of what both camps wanted.
1.I hate doing the whole mission over and over again because of a tiny mistake or that the game decided to crashes to desktop.
2.I want to experiment with difference approaches.
If Ubisoft isn't gonna give us Quicksave/Manual save then atleast give us a better checkpoint system.
I found a solution to this, at least better than nothing. If I deem it necessary to come to the place I was because of a minimal mistake, crash or I had to leave the computer then I use a trainer to "cheat" myself through the mission up until the position I was in or slightly earlier in a fashion that doesn't deviate from my earlier playstyle.
As I see it, the only thing challenging is programming manual saves into the game. It's much easier to create static checkpoints. A manual save system would have to take into account every factor of the game (or at least the level and area you're in) at a moment's notice whenever you save. Because this requires more time and effort on the developer's part, they often decide to forgo it and claim their decision was to "make it more challenging" or "increase the tension."
Anyway... a game's challenge should come from level design, enemy AI and other in-game factors. Disabling a feature of the hardware in the name of "difficulty" is a poor design move, which reflects badly on the developers themselves.
Having said all of that, the easiest solution to this problem is give players a choice at the beginning: checkpoint saves or manual saves/quicksaves? Once they choose, they can't switch unless they start over.
Ya i wouldn't think the developers would be bothered creating two types of save states for the player lol, but I do agree with what you're saying.
I have massive OCD when it comes to quick saving so it ruins the immersion for me. Either way with or without quick saving I'm fine, especially if the game is as easy as Blacklist.
What I cannot understand is, why would a quicksave/manual save option ruin the game for others? You are not forced to use it. But this brings me to another question: are you playing such games or are you staying away from all games with a game menu/quicksave option? Regarding some of the above statements it must be a major pain to play such games. Anyway, as I said, I've played through all SCs (except Conviction) in ghost style and it was fun. And yes, I could save anytime. This is the first time I can't save and I hate it for several already posted reasons (the one solo mission, etc.).
I'm working all day hard at work. I don't want to work through games also. But replaying a solo mission (no matter why) many times is work for me, not fun.