Something I’ve never understood about video game culture is the idea that save scumming, or saving repeatedly and restarting a game when you make a wrong choice or die, is a bad thing. Sure, it might sound like an inauthentic experience where you’re not going through the game blindly, and might even be against the creator’s desired way of playing the game. But, I don’t think it’s that bad of a thing. I don’t even think it’s a cheap tactic to get 100% in a game. I believe it promotes exploration in a way that not a lot of people care to talk about.
Now, I’m not talking about saving your game before a boss fight. This should be an expected practice in all games, and frankly makes for great game design so that if you die, you don’t have to climb your way back to this spot, however long it took to get here. I’m talking about being able to save the game wherever you are, and explore whatever options are given to you.
Save Systems That Irk Me (and why I’ve come to this conclusion)
Certain games have phenomenal save systems, while others have poor excuses of saving systems. Maybe I’ve been burned by playing too many Metroid games over the last year or so, but having a dedicated save spot, where you can only save the game at that location, is one of my least favorite game design aspects ever made. I’ll be honest, I don’t have all day to play games. I think most people don’t. So, forcing a player to sit and play until they get to save the game feels like being chained to the TV. I don’t get to be done playing until the game tells me I can be done.
Don’t get me wrong, I love Metroid. I think “Dread” has the best pacing of save stations in the entire series by far, making it much easier to save and be done with the game on your own terms. But, having recently beat “Metroid Prime 2,” there were many cases where I had to stop exploring and backtrack to wherever the last save station was to save. It was often the first thing I did after a boss fight, which meant missing a lot of hidden upgrades, most infamously the second Dark Temple key in Torvus Bog after defeating the Alpha Blogg (respectively, I’m not going to explain these words. If you know, you know). And in these cases, when I booted up the game in the exact same save station over and over again, I ended up forgetting what I had done previously and where I had explored, which, I feel, defeats the entire purpose of an exploration game.
In these games, I felt pressured to save and stop playing at a save station, to not explore too far without a nearby save station, instead of continuing because I didn’t know how much time I had until the next save station. It could be 30 minutes of gameplay, or an hour and a half. And when you’re just gaming for fun, the stress of not knowing when you’ll get to save next seems unnecessary.
A Not-So-Bad Example of a Save System
Comparatively, I actually kind of like the save systems in a lot of Fire Emblem games. Since I’m currently playing “Path of Radiance” (FE9), I’m going to primarily talk about that system, but for the most part, the system is the same across the board.
In FE9, you can really only save before a battle and once you’ve returned to base camp after a battle. Sounds kinda similar to Metroid’s save stations, right? Well, not really. The only thing that happens between these moments are cut-scenes. You watch a 20-minute cut-scene, then you get to save. Then after the battle, you watch another 10-20 minute cut-scene, and you get to save. Simple! Easy! Not stressful at all!
On the other hand, in battle, you can’t really save whenever you want. There’s a separate save mode implemented for mid-battle saving that’s deleted as soon as you return to the battle (most likely to prevent save scumming). Essentially, you get to save once, return to the title screen, and once you return to the game where you left off, that save is deleted. For a tactical RPG like FE9, this is not a bad system to have, and I also understand why save scumming wouldn’t be ideal. It’d kind of be like save scumming a chess match, like you should probably own up to your mistakes.
For older Fire Emblems like FE9, not having a means of save scumming makes sense. There is no casual mode; if the characters die mid-battle, they’re gone for the rest of the game. Having a means to save scum would defeat the entire purpose of that game mechanic. But for newer Fire Emblems, I don’t see a problem in save scumming if you’re playing casually.
The Best Save System in Gaming
One genre of gaming that I’ve noticed has the best save system implemented is visual novels. Obviously, I mean, why wouldn’t it? The entire game-play is reading a book, and like a book, you can stop and “save” whenever you want. It would be strange if that wasn’t the case.
Now, the visual novel genre also encompasses point-and-click adventures as well. These are, for the most part, the same genre, except there’s more game-play in point-and-clicks than a visual novel. However, like visual novels, point-and-clicks also allow you to save whenever you want (for the most part).
Some examples of this include: Ace Attorney, Zero Escape, Professor Layton, and more recently, of the Devil.
Perceived Cons of Save Scumming
In a lot of these listed games, perceived cons of being able to save whenever you want leads to the question of experiencing the game authentically. Can you really say you experienced “Ace Attorney 3” properly if you save scummed your way through most of the cases?
When the puzzle of the game so heavily depends on game dialogue, like Ace Attorney, it’s hard to justify saving the game and reloading into the game to choose the correct answer. If you make a blunder, choose the wrong answer, or make the wrong argument, it should be expected as a part of the game’s game-play. You solve the puzzle by thinking through the logic of a character’s argument and chipping away at it through cross-examinations. If you save scum through the answer, then the concern becomes whether or not you’re following the logic or puzzle of the game. It’s essentially considered “cheating” the puzzle.
This concern of cheating follows through for most games. If you’re allowed to save scum whenever, then that allows you to cheat through the exploration and follow an “intended path” instead of allowing the game to happen. For Metroid, if you could save scum, there would be less intention to explore and find the upgrades naturally, and instead, always choose the correct path.
However, I don’t think this is a concern for most games. Even in Metroid, save scumming seems mostly pointless because regardless, you still have to explore the map to find the upgrades in one way or another. Getting to save whenever you want doesn’t remove the immersion of the game, and it doesn’t negate basic features of the game-play, like in older Fire Emblems. And in older Fire Emblems, the save system works well-enough so you don’t really need to save mid-battle. If you get to save whenever, you just get to stop playing whenever you want, which should be in the control of the player anyway.
In the case of Ace Attorney, you can save scum whenever you want. Sure, you might not be following the puzzle to a T, or maybe you’re struggling to see how a point of logic connects to another and you want to play down all of your options, but I don’t consider it cheating, and neither should you. Honestly, save scumming lets you explore your options. Maybe it’s the wrong choice, but there’s always unique dialogue you wouldn’t get to see if you only ever made the correct choice. In some cases, there’s even hints as to what the correct answer would be in the wrong answer, so you can realign yourself and reconfigure the positioning of the puzzle.
Or, in the case of Zero Escape, there’s already multiple endings to the game, so save scumming would just save time for later routes to explore your options and see the different endings, rather than having the solve the first puzzle over and over again. In fact, this system encourages save scumming, as when you choose a dialogue option, the next time you play through that scene, the previously chosen option is grayed out. That way, when you return to that point in the game, you know what choices led you to the ending you received.
In these cases, it’s not a matter of perfectionism. It’s seeing what other dialogue occurs when you purposefully choose the wrong option.
What If You Could Choose Not to Save Scum?
One example of exploration in save scumming that I’ve really come to appreciate recently is the save system in of the Devil. Of the Devil is a up-and-coming Ace Attorney-like game where you play as a defense lawyer in the year 2086, defending clients from murders they didn’t commit. However, you’re essentially gambling on each dialogue option you have. It only has two episodes out as of this post (Chapter 0 is free on Steam, by the way), but I can tell from just two episodes that this save system works phenomenally.
In the game, you can save whenever and wherever you want. And frankly, the game really wants you to save as much as you can, because you’re given three pages of nine save spots. Much like other games, save scumming allows you to freely explore your other options and gives hints as to what the correct answer is. However, what makes this game unique is in it’s trials and conversations.
During certain conversations, you might have to dance around a topic to get the information you want out of the character, and choosing the incorrect option would lose you credits, or essentially “credibility points.” If you don’t have enough credits by trial, you might not be able to properly defend your client. These moments play like Blackjack, where certain topics provide higher points, and the goal is to reach 21 points by the end of the conversation. These discussions are great for exploration as it helps show why certain topics are Aces versus others that are only 3 points. Save scumming and seeing where the logic lines up to get 21-points also helps for later conversations about the crime, as you know which topics didn’t work previously.
In trial, there are sequences much like the cross-examination of Ace Attorney where you have to disprove a point the prosecutor made with evidence. You can essentially “Ante-up” certain points of evidence to get more credits, depending on how confident you feel about the solution.
And while all of this is wonderful and makes a lot of the slower parts of an Ace Attorney game much more enjoyable, you can choose not to save scum. That’s right, once you get through Chapter 0, you unlock a mode called the High-roller Mode, where you’re only given one save slot, so every decision counts. It’s a completely optional mode, and you can turn the mode on whenever you want. This, I think, is the best answer to save scumming by far. Not only does of the Devil allow and, frankly, promote save scumming, but gives hardcore players an option to not have the option to save scum. Those players get to play in the means that’s most comfortable for them, giving them the challenge that they desire, while also not making it the default option for those who just want to play the game for fun.
I wish more games did their save systems like Nth Circle Studios did for of the Devil. It makes it so that everyone can play the game how they want, and aren’t tethered to their choices. Players can stop playing whenever they please, explore what other options might bring them, and provide hints to put the player back on track in a way that doesn’t feel demeaning.
Hopefully, this convinced some people that save scumming isn’t the end of the world. Regardless, thank you for reading! Stay tuned next week!
No comments:
Post a Comment