"It's not a save slot, it's a character slot!"

[Cyber Akuma]

Oh, well in that case this COMPLETELY changes everything with none of the arguments about if it was a save slot applying and is totally 100% justified now...

.... oh wait, no, it literally does not change a single thing in the argument whatsoever and is just a very transparent attempt to deflect the argument.

[Mielikki Kettu]

Cyber, you still try to "meet halfway" or you preffer to insult instead? Like you did in last post when you couldn't even argument anymore (and did what I've told that you would do if you would want to end the argue)

Not to mention he actually started to use more correct definition

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

It would be if the game allowed offline play, since then the game would have to store your character offline, and then you could just manually backup the save files if you wanted to.

So care to elaborate why you didn't call it character slot? You did claim that its the same thing, now you use two different terms?

[Cyber Akuma]

Originally posted by First5trike:

That would be a bad idea for PC given the coop portion of the game and the likelyhood of hacking.

I can already backup all of my PS4 saves to a USB drive, why would it be any different for PC? And really, "some people might cheat" is not a valid reason to prevent people from backing up their data then, banning cheaters is the job of the people running the servers anyway.

[Mielikki Kettu]

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

I can already backup all of my PS4 saves to a USB drive, why would it be any different for PC? And really, "some people might cheat" is not a valid reason to prevent people from backing up their data then, banning cheaters is the job of the people running the servers anyway.

You actually can do that, its not like you ignored the fact and mistaked both Server side saving (like data in regards of online portion in TPP and Survive).

You have your saves in form of saves which are uploaded to cloud tho (steam), you sure can turn this option off... but why would you?

Either way, care to elaborate on my earlier posts? or do you fear that you just can't argument your stance (and the fact you were lying all the time)? Everyone can check my post history so its not like I do lie here (it does direct who does tho).

[LemonyNebula]

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

..... are we really doing this again? The issue is having to pay at all, save slots, character slots, whatever slots. The issue is it's absurd to charge for them, much less to charge $10.

Many, if not most, people would use an additional "save slot" for another character, not to have multiple instances of the same character at different points of the game, this isn't Final Fantasy or Skyrim :P

I entirley agree. I hate the fact that this is a thing at all. But honestly it is important to be clear. Far too many people expect you to pay to have multiple save slots for your character. Which isn't a thing. All because people are calling it save slots and not what they are, character slots.

I have never heard anyone say "oh you have to pay for save slots on GW2" or any other game that does it. There is a distinction, and so people know what it is we complain about, it needs to be clear.

So yes, I know what you are complaining about and I agree, but I am saying call it what it is and what you mean, don't confuse it by calling it a save slot which indicates paying for the ability to have consequtive saves for your playthrough. It is by all definitions a character slot.

It gets tiring having to explain to people that they can play their character through the whole game without having to pay to save.

[First5trike]

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

Originally posted by First5trike:

That would be a bad idea for PC given the coop portion of the game and the likelyhood of hacking.

I can already backup all of my PS4 saves to a USB drive, why would it be any different for PC? And really, "some people might cheat" is not a valid reason to prevent people from backing up their data then, banning cheaters is the job of the people running the servers anyway.

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

[Mielikki Kettu]

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

Its a valid concern, I am not sure tho if Survive works same way as GZ or TPP does. If it would be the case, saves are actually local but checked by the server if everything is alright (or if the player doesn't get too many things at once perhaps?). I did not dig up the files myself so I can't deny or confirm it tho.

[clay gamer]

Originally posted by Rocket Raccoon:

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

Its a valid concern, I am not sure tho if Survive works same way as GZ or TPP does. If it would be the case, saves are actually local but checked by the server if everything is alright (or if the player doesn't get too many things at once perhaps?). I did not dig up the files myself so I can't deny or confirm it tho.

You can disable cloud saving to get the save file locally, not being uploaded or anything afaik

[First5trike]

Originally posted by Rocket Raccoon:

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

Its a valid concern, I am not sure tho if Survive works same way as GZ or TPP does. If it would be the case, saves are actually local but checked by the server if everything is alright (or if the player doesn't get too many things at once perhaps?). I did not dig up the files myself so I can't deny or confirm it tho.

They are definitely locally cached but the files integrity is verified with the server everytime I login and then updated. I assume this is to reduce the amount of data that needs to be exchanged everytime you login. I am also guessing if your offline files fail to pass the integrity check they probably get nuked and redownloaded.

The game is constantly syncing save data online while I play though.

I should add I'm on the Xbox version.

[Mielikki Kettu]

Originally posted by First5trike:

They are definitely locally cached but the files integrity is verified with the server everytime I login and then updated. I assume this is to reduce the amount of data that needs to be exchanged everytime you login. I am also guessing if your offline files fail to pass the integrity check they probably get nuked and redownloaded.

The game is constantly syncing save data online while I play though.

I should add I'm on the Xbox version.

Sounds reasonable. I think there might be information like how does character look, what loadout it has etc. localy, while amount of items etc might be synced with server.

[Cyber Akuma]

Say guys.... anyone here ever notice how when someone is outsted as a troll, they desperately attempt to get the person to fall for their bait again by repeatedly attempting to reply to them and insist they are going to try to have a rational conversation when they had previously spent the entire topic being anything but rational? Not sure why that suddenly came to mind.... I like to give people second chances, but from personal expirence those tend to blow up in your face and just be a trap...

Anyway....

Originally posted by LemonyNebula:

I entirley agree. I hate the fact that this is a thing at all. But honestly it is important to be clear. Far too many people expect you to pay to have multiple save slots for your character. Which isn't a thing. All because people are calling it save slots and not what they are, character slots.

I have never heard anyone say "oh you have to pay for save slots on GW2" or any other game that does it. There is a distinction, and so people know what it is we complain about, it needs to be clear.

So yes, I know what you are complaining about and I agree, but I am saying call it what it is and what you mean, don't confuse it by calling it a save slot which indicates paying for the ability to have consequtive saves for your playthrough. It is by all definitions a character slot.

It gets tiring having to explain to people that they can play their character through the whole game without having to pay to save.

Fair point, honestly, people assuming you would not be able to save at all isn't something that I assumed people would mistake is the reason for the outrage, namely because I wasn't confused with what the outrage was about. That being said though, the people who thought this were a minority, as most people who write articles made it clear that it was additional slots, not saving at all, and the people who did videos showed that it was additional slots, not your initial slot.

Or attempting to save the same character at different points in the campaign (though that would be pointless in a game like this) rather than using the "slots" to have multiple different characters... as again, most people would want to use this for additional characters, not the same character.

Also, I would like to point out that MMORPGs are a bit different in that regard. Usually the character data is massive compared to other games, and storage wasn't AS cheap bad then... that being said though, even for MMORPGs, that is falling out of practice now. Final Fantasy XIV for example gives you 8 character slots, there aren't even additional slots for purchase, you just get all 8.

Mainly, I don't think the issue here is that most people complaning are under the assumption that you would need to pay to save at all.

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

It can certanely vary by game and how it works, yes. But in terms of cheating by modifying your save file, all you can do is basically modify your stats and inventory. The extent of this varies by game, but just a basic (are these stats/items actually possible to get legitimately?) would prevent purposely broken cahracters/items in most games. Such a check could even be done by the game itself offline. This won't prevent just maxking out legitimate stats, but would prevent flat-out broken unfair chating.

And for games that are online, they coudl have additional checks if a character just suddenly shot from level 1 to level 99 perfect everything within a few minutes of being offline.

Again, not 100% preventative of everything possible that allows you to cheat, but it would curb a vast amount of it.

And again, at the end of it, I don't feel the consumer's rights of being able to backup their data are reasoanble to ignore in favor of arguing anti-cheating for those instances that all of the above can't stop.

Originally posted by First5trike:

They are definitely locally cached but the files integrity is verified with the server everytime I login and then updated. I assume this is to reduce the amount of data that needs to be exchanged everytime you login. I am also guessing if your offline files fail to pass the integrity check they probably get nuked and redownloaded.

The game is constantly syncing save data online while I play though.

I should add I'm on the Xbox version.

Hmm, that is certanely one way it can be done, though also just plain ONLY storing the data online is possible (and hundreds of online-only games do) as well. I also wonder if all versions of the game do that, or just the Xbox verson. I don't have a One and no lonver have Live, but I know that on the Xbox 360 back when I had Live and Cloud Saves, the Xbox actually created a partition on your harddrive that was the same size as your cloud storage and acted as basically a second harddrive/memorycard was connected to the system. The console would save locally in that area, and later sync your saves with your cloud storage when you exited the game or shutdown the console, it didn't directly load/save online (though that's understandable since many games were released before the Cloud Saving feature was added, plus some games had large save files).

I wonder if the Xbox One works the same way, or Survive itself works this way across all platforms. I never had PSN+ so I don't know how Sony did it.

[Skcarkden]

Originally posted by Bacon Overlord®:

Originally posted by Rocket Raccoon:

Skcarkden, I expect you to answer me... ignoring someone with valid argument is rather poor way to debate.

In case you hadn't noticed in some of his posts.. he's not entirely stable. I wouldn't push him, he might start following you around to various forums and whine about things he imagines are slights against him.

LOL. So you finally admit then that you realise it wasn't me, after all this time of refusing to see reason?

But no... you're the unstable one. you made claims agaist me which are simply not true and spread lies about me in a game... the only reason i was able to figure out exactly how you monuMENTALLY came to such an absurd reality was when you told one guy you had screenshots to prove i did something... when i checked for myself.. all evidence you was about someone else that was harassing you. I tried to peacefully discuss this with you at the time, and your response? "haha nice try i'm not that dumb" and now... strangely enough you deleted those screenshots that proved my innocence and i've tried to find them through time machine archives.

Also... following you? please.. you were the first person to talk to me in this topic. I happened to remember you and take every chance i get to hope maybe one day you will be an adult and use logic and reason. The fact you outright blocked me when originally at all times i was very civil with you in trying to help you understand your mistake suggests in some way you do realise.. given how you'll gladly argue non stop with people on your wall when they can't prove you wrong.

but oh yeah... real intelligent... acting like anyone not wanting a false rep is a non-issue... how very 'honourable' of you... DD

[First5trike]

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

Say guys.... anyone here ever notice how when someone is outsted as a troll, they desperately attempt to get the person to fall for their bait again by repeatedly attempting to reply to them and insist they are going to try to have a rational conversation when they had previously spent the entire topic being anything but rational? Not sure why that suddenly came to mind.... I like to give people second chances, but from personal expirence those tend to blow up in your face and just be a trap...

Anyway....

Originally posted by LemonyNebula:

I entirley agree. I hate the fact that this is a thing at all. But honestly it is important to be clear. Far too many people expect you to pay to have multiple save slots for your character. Which isn't a thing. All because people are calling it save slots and not what they are, character slots.

I have never heard anyone say "oh you have to pay for save slots on GW2" or any other game that does it. There is a distinction, and so people know what it is we complain about, it needs to be clear.

So yes, I know what you are complaining about and I agree, but I am saying call it what it is and what you mean, don't confuse it by calling it a save slot which indicates paying for the ability to have consequtive saves for your playthrough. It is by all definitions a character slot.

It gets tiring having to explain to people that they can play their character through the whole game without having to pay to save.

Fair point, honestly, people assuming you would not be able to save at all isn't something that I assumed people would mistake is the reason for the outrage, namely because I wasn't confused with what the outrage was about. That being said though, the people who thought this were a minority, as most people who write articles made it clear that it was additional slots, not saving at all, and the people who did videos showed that it was additional slots, not your initial slot.

Or attempting to save the same character at different points in the campaign (though that would be pointless in a game like this) rather than using the "slots" to have multiple different characters... as again, most people would want to use this for additional characters, not the same character.

Also, I would like to point out that MMORPGs are a bit different in that regard. Usually the character data is massive compared to other games, and storage wasn't AS cheap bad then... that being said though, even for MMORPGs, that is falling out of practice now. Final Fantasy XIV for example gives you 8 character slots, there aren't even additional slots for purchase, you just get all 8.

Mainly, I don't think the issue here is that most people complaning are under the assumption that you would need to pay to save at all.

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

It can certanely vary by game and how it works, yes. But in terms of cheating by modifying your save file, all you can do is basically modify your stats and inventory. The extent of this varies by game, but just a basic (are these stats/items actually possible to get legitimately?) would prevent purposely broken cahracters/items in most games. Such a check could even be done by the game itself offline. This won't prevent just maxking out legitimate stats, but would prevent flat-out broken unfair chating.

And for games that are online, they coudl have additional checks if a character just suddenly shot from level 1 to level 99 perfect everything within a few minutes of being offline.

Again, not 100% preventative of everything possible that allows you to cheat, but it would curb a vast amount of it.

And again, at the end of it, I don't feel the consumer's rights of being able to backup their data are reasoanble to ignore in favor of arguing anti-cheating for those instances that all of the above can't stop.

Originally posted by First5trike:

They are definitely locally cached but the files integrity is verified with the server everytime I login and then updated. I assume this is to reduce the amount of data that needs to be exchanged everytime you login. I am also guessing if your offline files fail to pass the integrity check they probably get nuked and redownloaded.

The game is constantly syncing save data online while I play though.

I should add I'm on the Xbox version.

Hmm, that is certanely one way it can be done, though also just plain ONLY storing the data online is possible (and hundreds of online-only games do) as well. I also wonder if all versions of the game do that, or just the Xbox verson. I don't have a One and no lonver have Live, but I know that on the Xbox 360 back when I had Live and Cloud Saves, the Xbox actually created a partition on your harddrive that was the same size as your cloud storage and acted as basically a second harddrive/memorycard was connected to the system. The console would save locally in that area, and later sync your saves with your cloud storage when you exited the game or shutdown the console, it didn't directly load/save online (though that's understandable since many games were released before the Cloud Saving feature was added, plus some games had large save files).

I wonder if the Xbox One works the same way, or Survive itself works this way across all platforms. I never had PSN+ so I don't know how Sony did it.

The consoles definitely cache offline and tend to trust the offline systems more then the PC games do given the hardware is more secure.

But if you have access to the save files and system memory from a security standpoint its over. You can hex edit everything in your save file and map out the memory addresses from the saved values. From there is literially a matter of days until the script kiddies are online making everyones life hell.

Can't say for PC but I am pretty sure the PS4 version would work the same. PC sometimes tends to do its own thing. Its one of the reasons I prefer multiplayer games on console, less griefing and BS.

[Mielikki Kettu]

Personal attacks, nice. You ignore the fact that you outright lied to actually end whole debate? The fact you can check history of my posts and notice I did not insult you? Or the fact I did predict how you (not me, I still want to debate, since you still probably claim that its save slot being behind paid wall) will end the debate?

Either way, you yourself act like a troll to me. Just look what you've posted at the end? You even claimed that I did insult you and then insulted me yourself even tho history of my posts does directly show that it had no place.

Lies, lies and more lies. You most likely did fearmongering on the purpose as well since you actually did use the save word correctly in discussion with other person.

Do you fear something by actually talking with me? Perhaps the fact I am perceptive and I know actually how to debate?

Skcardkden, you should be thankfull no one actually try to use your work in commercial way claiming to be you. Identity theft is way worse then spreading misinformation (which is also real issue, just look at what OP did at the "end" of discussion with me). So I can relate to you somewhat.

[Franss the Coffee Addict]

Originally posted by Cyber Akuma:

Say guys.... anyone here ever notice how when someone is outsted as a troll, they desperately attempt to get the person to fall for their bait again by repeatedly attempting to reply to them and insist they are going to try to have a rational conversation when they had previously spent the entire topic being anything but rational? Not sure why that suddenly came to mind.... I like to give people second chances, but from personal expirence those tend to blow up in your face and just be a trap...

Anyway....

Originally posted by LemonyNebula:

I entirley agree. I hate the fact that this is a thing at all. But honestly it is important to be clear. Far too many people expect you to pay to have multiple save slots for your character. Which isn't a thing. All because people are calling it save slots and not what they are, character slots.

I have never heard anyone say "oh you have to pay for save slots on GW2" or any other game that does it. There is a distinction, and so people know what it is we complain about, it needs to be clear.

So yes, I know what you are complaining about and I agree, but I am saying call it what it is and what you mean, don't confuse it by calling it a save slot which indicates paying for the ability to have consequtive saves for your playthrough. It is by all definitions a character slot.

It gets tiring having to explain to people that they can play their character through the whole game without having to pay to save.

Fair point, honestly, people assuming you would not be able to save at all isn't something that I assumed people would mistake is the reason for the outrage, namely because I wasn't confused with what the outrage was about. That being said though, the people who thought this were a minority, as most people who write articles made it clear that it was additional slots, not saving at all, and the people who did videos showed that it was additional slots, not your initial slot.

Or attempting to save the same character at different points in the campaign (though that would be pointless in a game like this) rather than using the "slots" to have multiple different characters... as again, most people would want to use this for additional characters, not the same character.

Also, I would like to point out that MMORPGs are a bit different in that regard. Usually the character data is massive compared to other games, and storage wasn't AS cheap bad then... that being said though, even for MMORPGs, that is falling out of practice now. Final Fantasy XIV for example gives you 8 character slots, there aren't even additional slots for purchase, you just get all 8.

Mainly, I don't think the issue here is that most people complaning are under the assumption that you would need to pay to save at all.

Originally posted by First5trike:

Depending which games you have that is not true.

This is closer to The Division then it is to a classic offline game. You cannot backup saved games for The Division, same thing with Destiny.

If you give people access to their save files and make the servers dependant on client data you will 100% end up with hacking, griefing and other crap going on like you see in other games like PUBG. Then people would be on here complaining about that.

It can certanely vary by game and how it works, yes. But in terms of cheating by modifying your save file, all you can do is basically modify your stats and inventory. The extent of this varies by game, but just a basic (are these stats/items actually possible to get legitimately?) would prevent purposely broken cahracters/items in most games. Such a check could even be done by the game itself offline. This won't prevent just maxking out legitimate stats, but would prevent flat-out broken unfair chating.

And for games that are online, they coudl have additional checks if a character just suddenly shot from level 1 to level 99 perfect everything within a few minutes of being offline.

Again, not 100% preventative of everything possible that allows you to cheat, but it would curb a vast amount of it.

And again, at the end of it, I don't feel the consumer's rights of being able to backup their data are reasoanble to ignore in favor of arguing anti-cheating for those instances that all of the above can't stop.

Originally posted by First5trike:

They are definitely locally cached but the files integrity is verified with the server everytime I login and then updated. I assume this is to reduce the amount of data that needs to be exchanged everytime you login. I am also guessing if your offline files fail to pass the integrity check they probably get nuked and redownloaded.

The game is constantly syncing save data online while I play though.

I should add I'm on the Xbox version.

Hmm, that is certanely one way it can be done, though also just plain ONLY storing the data online is possible (and hundreds of online-only games do) as well. I also wonder if all versions of the game do that, or just the Xbox verson. I don't have a One and no lonver have Live, but I know that on the Xbox 360 back when I had Live and Cloud Saves, the Xbox actually created a partition on your harddrive that was the same size as your cloud storage and acted as basically a second harddrive/memorycard was connected to the system. The console would save locally in that area, and later sync your saves with your cloud storage when you exited the game or shutdown the console, it didn't directly load/save online (though that's understandable since many games were released before the Cloud Saving feature was added, plus some games had large save files).

I wonder if the Xbox One works the same way, or Survive itself works this way across all platforms. I never had PSN+ so I don't know how Sony did it.

I'm just gonna continue the legacy that bacon lad and say state that if you dont own the game your argument is invalid and can't give anything constructive.

Ignore my stupid ass for enjoying these arguments and not enjoying the games i own, because right this thread feels way more entertaining.

[Skcarkden]

Originally posted by Rocket Raccoon:

Originally posted by Skcarkden:

i'm not, i've stated how i interpreted the slots to function... save/character slot... means the saame thing to me, I don't care for this "it clearly means X and Y" tripe. there are plenty of games that have features and use entirely different terms/explanations for the same basic thing. it's not all as standard as you think. to me, there's no difference... it was as i expected, regardless of the word used.

Problem is that when you use words in community (especially to review) you should know what they do mean...

As I told its like with rectangle and square... every square is a rectangle but not every rectangly is a square.

Every character slot is a save slot, but not every save slot is a character slot. You see where is the logical mistake in what you wrote? Most people (and I really mean most people who actually do use PCs, consoles have it so mixed up that its probably why you make that mistake) do actually understand that difference. Someone did even try to explain what save slot exactly is.

We can argue about this forever... I really don't care, it doesn't change the fact that no matter what the word gets used differently from studio to studio, game to game. It truly doesn't matter what you call it, the point is it's still fundamentally WRONG.

Learn to see the forest through the trees... It could be a save slot, or a character slot.... the problem with it being sold separately is the issue... I guarantee... if the word actually did matter, i would use it properly, but as it doesn't i just don't care.