[Sledgehammer]

Altered Reality, on 09 July 2019 - 12:14 PM, said:

that soul tether sure reminds me of limited saves on CONSOLES!

That wouldn't be the only reason. It's not surprising to see something like this in Metroidvania games nowadays (where of course this mechanics was implemented due to consoles limitation, Metroidvania games rely basically one one big map or a bunch of maps connected with each other). In fact even System Shock games had a bit similar mechanic (except you were basically getting resurrected instead of just saving), you could also explore the whole game just like in typical Metroidvania games, but at the same time you could save your game too, like in any PC game. This is where comes the problem though, as thricecursed said:

thricecursed, on 11 July 2019 - 01:43 AM, said:

I really don't understand what they're going for anymore.

Sounds like they're trying to focus on many and unnecessary things from other video games at once, not just to make a classic Quake successor. Does it mean that they want to make the game closer to Metroidvania, especially in term of level design where it would make sense to use such mechanic? I don't really get it. If not, it just looks like typical checkpoint system like in Serious Sam, Painkiller, etc.

If they going to turn it into yet another bland retro bait FPS, not going to complain much, never was a big fan of Quake anyway and I've got my fix which is Ion Maiden.

[Zaxx]

Eh, I just find it funny that whenever a game comes out that has limited saves somebody will always come up with saying "CONSOLE LIMITATIONS!" I like the idea very much because it will make save scumming near impossible (if you stocked up on saves to save scum at one part I say you earned it) while at the same time it doesn't limit saving to certain locations like a checkpoint system would.

"Contrary to popular belief" save scumming is bad for you because most of the time it provides an easy way out of tough situations so you miss out on opportunities to learn the nuances of the gameplay. These kinds of save limitations can add to the tension and they force you to play a bit more careful and that can result in great gameplay for a seemingly very exploration based FPS like Wrath. If that gets combined with well balanced resource management in other aspects of the game too then it will be a fun time.

[Jimmy]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Fred isn't a "real" gamer. He's just riding the retro game wave and trying to make money. Sorry but it's true. So when he says things like "Quake's AI is simple" or whatever, we're talking about a guy who plays Doom on "I'm Too Young to Die."

[Zaxx]

What I see as a real problem here that 3DR will have to deal with somehow is that based on the footage they've shown so far Wrath feels nothing like Quake. The pacing is different, the level design seems different, the combat is a lot less movement heavy and slower etc. so it's weird that the biggest selling point is "Quake engine shooter" here. Sure, you can see that it's the Quake engine but really it's Hexen combined with Unreal which is cool but just not what people expected.

I also find it funny how KillPixel called games like DUSK and Amid Evil impostors just because they use modern engines. Meanwhile DUSK is a lot closer to Quake in basically everything that matters.

[Jimmy]

I've said it many times, 3DR is not good at PR. "It's on the Quake engine, so it's like Quake!" Just like you said. They don't know how to market it.

Also, I suspect that 3DR thought they could catch lightning in a bottle again. Ion Fury is good in spite of its engine, not because of it. I felt they thought "If we just use another old engine, we'll have a gold mine!" Poor business sense, I think. 3DR doesn't tend to focus on whether a game is good, just whether it's marketable. Interceptor had the same problem. RotT was very marketable, but it wasn't very good.

[Aristotle Gumball]

Somewhere past the mid point of this you can glean some info of what KillPixel is actually trying to do, which is basically everything but a "Quake-style shooter". I guess most people don't give a shit, though, if you look at Youtube comments. Brown textures have the power to placate even the most hardened naysayers.

[Mack]

[NightFright]

I am sold on the general stylistic approach of the game with its gray-brown look. Sure, many will want more colors like in IF, but I like Quake-style shooters. In fact, this looks very much like a lost expansion with advanced features. Weapons also seem to be fun, they more or less copied Quake classics like the shotgun or the nailgun, but with secondary fire modes.

Not a big fan of the limited saving system, though. Sure, it creates more suspense if you need to find items first before you can save your game, but I think this limitation does not belong into a retro shooter. At least there should be an option to turn it off (like they did in Daikatana with a patch) or this limitation should be reserved for higher difficulties only. However, I guess this is how they want you to play, so I am not counting on it.

Still, it looks pretty interesting and may very well be my next shooter after I am finished with Ion Fury.

[Altered Reality]

[Putrid Pete]

I can concede that in certain cases, you can successfully incorporate the saving system into the gameplay and enhance it with it. This was the case with Alien: Isolation, which had saving stations sparingly throughout the game so it could increase the tension of being caught by the Alien before you could reach one. In this case it felt justified because the game is all about creating a feeling of helplessness, a horror victim simulator, if you will.

Wrath is a different case for me. I don't really see any reason why I shouldn't be able to save whenever I want. Creating tension with a limited save system makes sense in say, survival horror games because the gameplay is all about giving you a feeling of unease and a sense of danger that could be lurking around every corner. In Wrath things look creepy, sure, and you can have a very horror atmosphere to it, but from the look of gameplay videos it doesn't stray away from your traditional retro shooter mechanics. In essence, I don't think 'creating suspense' is a valid justification for not letting me save when I want if at some point I'm going to have a full arsenal and be blasting my way through hordes of bad guys. It will become more annoying than it will be tense. In fact, the only tension will probably come from aggravation and not fright.

Hopefully like NightFright said in his post, maybe it will be made optional. I'm honestly not a big fan of "checkpoint saving only" mechanics in shooters, mostly because I like to feel in control of saving so I can quit whenever I feel like. I guess with this one I'll just wait and see for a bit how the development process goes once it's out. The whole soul tether thing is not necessarily a deal breaker for me but with so many other shooters out there that I haven't played yet and that actually allow me to save freely, then those will get priority.

[NightFright]

The thing is, if it's optional, the STs are removed and you need something to replace them, like health or armor. Otherwise you get to a special spot and there is nothing, which looks like they are pulling your leg. That's why I guess they won't give you a choice. Maybe after release, if enough people complain.

[Putrid Pete]

NightFright, on 29 August 2019 - 09:45 AM, said:

The thing is, if it's optional, the STs are removed and you need something to replace them, like health or armor. Otherwise you get to a special spot and there is nothing, which looks like they are pulling your leg. That's why I guess they won't give you a choice. Maybe after release, if enough people complain.

Having no idea about game design or programming, I must ask: would it be too hard to replace them with something else? Because it sounds like a sensible solution.

[----]

Putrid Pete, on 29 August 2019 - 09:49 AM, said:

Having no idea about game design or programming, I must ask: would it be too hard to replace them with something else? Because it sounds like a sensible solution.

Replacing the STs themselves not ... but incorporating a a fully working "save whenever you want"-system if it hasn't been there from the beginning would be really hard (and it is generally much harder to do than a checkpoint system, which I assume might be the reason why it wasn't there from the start).

[Zaxx]

Putrid Pete, on 29 August 2019 - 09:36 AM, said:

I don't really see any reason why I shouldn't be able to save whenever I want.

But you can save whenever you want... if you have soul tethers. Have you ever run out of ink ribbons in Resident Evil games? If this thing is designed well then all it will do is stop you from exploting saves ("save scumming") and you will be able to save when you really have to.

[NightFright]

Well, there could be more of them on lower difficulties. Like a lot more. Then it would actually make sense.

[Radar]

I'm a save scummer. Only God can judge me.

[Zaxx]

NightFright, on 29 August 2019 - 10:35 AM, said:

Well, there could be more of them on lower difficulties. Like a lot more. Then it would actually make sense.

That's how the RE games did. Well, except for the RE2 remake, there only the hardcore difficulty has ink ribbons and the game is using checkpoint in the other modes.

[Putrid Pete]

Zaxx, on 29 August 2019 - 10:28 AM, said:

if you have soul tethers.

That will be what defines if I like the soul tether system or not. If they are rare to find and say, I'm playing a long level and at some point I feel tired and want to stop, unless they implement a system that creates a temporary save on exit, it would force me to run around until I find a soul tether so I can save my progress and safely quit the game. That would be annoying.

Another issue is, if they are abundant it would make pointless the whole 'trying to create a feeling of tension' approach. There has to be a medium point I guess between challenge and hindrance that would make it work. In the AvP (classic) game you have a limited save system that increases in lower difficulties so I guess you could do the same with STs in Wrath.

As for RE games, sadly I missed out on all of them, so I have no idea how the saving system was implemented there. I tried installing the RE2 port back in the day but it refused to work on my pc. My brother did own a playstation, the only console in our household, but not any RE games.

[Altered Reality]

fuegerstef, on 29 August 2019 - 09:59 AM, said:

incorporating a a fully working "save whenever you want"-system if it hasn't been there from the beginning would be really hard

But it has been there from the beginning. Wrath is based on the Darkplaces engine, which is a fork of the original Quake engine, which lets you save whenever and wherever you want. This means they spent time and money to remove something that works perfectly, and replaced it with a half-assed hack that performs much worse. It's like removing the original engine from a Ferrari and replacing it with the engine of a Pinto!

Zaxx, on 29 August 2019 - 10:47 AM, said:

That's how the RE games did. Well, except for the RE2 remake, there only the hardcore difficulty has ink ribbons and the game is using checkpoint in the other modes.

The Resident Evil saga was born on consoles and was defined by the limitations of the 5th generation of consoles: they did not have a hard drive; they used memory cards with a ridiculously tiny capacity (yes, even at the time it was ridiculous). Using checkpoints was not a stylistic choice, it was a necessity born out of the low hardware specifications and the need to make saves as small as possible.
Compare it with Alone in the Dark, a survival horror series born in 1992 on PC, which let you save your game without limitations because hard drivers in 1992 could contain more data than memory cards in 1996.

[Zaxx]

Altered Reality, on 29 August 2019 - 11:14 AM, said:

The Resident Evil saga was born on consoles and was defined by the limitations of the 5th generation of consoles

There was nothing that would have stopped Capcom from giving you unlimited saves though so that argument instantly fails. Sure, the idea of "checkpoints" through the implementation of the so-called save rooms or specified points where you can save the game is coming from the limitations of consoles but in lots of cases limitations evolve game design. Games like Castlevania Symphony of the Night or RE were designed along using that limitation as a game mechanic and it worked out excellently.

Now I love Alone in the Dark (the first and third game mostly) but that was an adventure game. Yep, that's where survival horror is coming from but it absolutely doesn't feel like a finished game design in that regard and RE does a lot more in order to limit you mechanically and in terms of resources and that's giving you the true tension of survival horror, not some scary sounds or visuals. Whether you like it or not those limitations make the experience into something special.

[NightFright]

Then the master question remains: Do STs carry over from previous levels or are they reset to zero every time you enter a new map? Because if they are, it won't even pay off to hold back with saving to have more options later on.

Unfortunately, there is more than one way to screw this up. Hopefully they are aware of it and won't make the obvious mistakes.

[Altered Reality]

Zaxx, on 29 August 2019 - 11:53 AM, said:

There was nothing that would have stopped Capcom from giving you unlimited saves

Wrong. A PS1 memory card could only contain 1 MB of data, so that, right there, is why Resident Evil does not have unlimited saves. Meanwhile, entry level PCs in 1995 (a year before Resident Evil came out) had a .4 to 1 GB hard drive.
Sure, Capcom could've implemented unlimited saves for the PC version, but a straight port is cheaper to make.

Zaxx, on 29 August 2019 - 11:53 AM, said:

in lots of cases limitations evolve game design.

That is irrelevant, as Wrath is meant to play like Quake, which has no check points.

[Hank]

n/m
changed my mind again

Altered Reality, on 30 August 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

cut ...
That is irrelevant, as Wrath is meant to play like Quake, which has no check points.

Read the revised text again! On Steam …
https://store.steamp...tor_clanid=5161
3D Realms, creators of Duke Nukem 3D, Prey, and Max Payne, presents a hard-core first person shooter, powered by the legendary Quake-1 Tech. 

They, 3DR, are what they are, but they had to retract the mentioning of the actual Quake game.

You want Quake? Get it. Best game in my opinion. You want new good games? Ignore anything 3DR developed. I own three unfinished games from this cult! (Not to be confused with Voidpiont's game.)

[VGA]

Which 3 games?

[Hank]

VGA, on 30 August 2019 - 07:41 PM, said:

Which 3 games?

Who me?
Rott - The editor (appropriately named Ludicrous Development Kit) is useless, and no support is anywhere to be found.
Bombshell - still waiting for this fix 1.3, after three years. Crashes otherwise.
Zig - extreme boring game play.

Still, let’s not get too much off topic. Killpixel might have the same stamina as Voidpoint, thus, despite my extreme distaste for this 3DR toss pot, there is always hope.

[Zaxx]

Altered Reality, on 30 August 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

Wrong.

Dude, this is the point where I have to ask: have you ever fucking played fucking Resident Evil? Ink Ribbons limit the number of saves you can have in the save room locations = it's more limited than a regular PSX game BY DESIGN. Silent Hill? You have unlimited saves in save rooms. Castlevania SoTN? Again, you have unlimited saves in save rooms.

You're clearly clueless about this, man, all you can repeat is "console limitations" even when RE went beyond those limitations to limit your ass even more for game design reasons. And do you know what you did when your memory card ran out of space and you didn't want to overwrite stuff? You bought a new fucking memory card.

Plus there were a few games that let you save your game whenever you wanted to even on the PS1, for example Duke 3D had a quicksave feature.

[Wild Dog]

Another game to add to the wishlist.

[Altered Reality]

Zaxx, on 30 August 2019 - 10:18 PM, said:

Dude, this is the point where I have to ask: have you ever fucking played fucking Resident Evil?

Yes, as well as Silent Hill (although not Castlevania SoTN or any other Castlevania title). I found those limitations irritating, so, rather than playing them on the original console, I emulated them with ePSXe where I could use save states, to save anywhere, any place and as often as I wanted. I've been a PC gamer for most of my life, so a program that makes console games look (HD resolutions and bilinear filtering) and play (unlimited saves) like PC games was a very welcome option.

[Zaxx]

Cool but I wasn't interested in the story of your life but rather why do you think that the sole purpose of RE's ink ribbons is to mask up some console limitation? For example I'd consider save limitations a very important part of the gameplay balance because it enforces the aspect of planning your routes and managing your resources. So saying stuff like that doesn't fit the game is like saying that you should get unlimited ammo in an FPS which is dumb and noobish to say.

And I think that's kind of why I like the idea of limited saves in Wrath: because save scumming sucks. If you save scum in any FPS you're basically ruining your own fun because you've managed to choose a difficulty you couldn't handle normally. So if there are limited saves you may be more mindful in choosing the right difficulty or you simply give yourself the opportunity to get good at the game by not taking the easy way out and instead manage to solve difficult sections without save scumming.

[OpenMaw]

Limited saves have no place in an FPS of this sort.

But otherwise it looks very slick. The art style really appeals to me.

ThougH i think the early game demonstrations really fail to make the game shine in any way. Those cavernous areas filled with mostly Zombies made it seem INCREDIBLY BORING.