For me, there is a better way to play this game. ***SPOILERS****

[Solipso]

[QUOTE=yrthwyndandfyre]This is all very true. To the point, part of the problem of killing bosses is to find a weakness and exploit it, which generally makes things stupid easy.[/QUOTE]

Are you saying that you want to use the save/load to determine an enemy's weakness? If you do, I do not object. It's your software.

I have certainly used the save/load for that purpose. Countless times. But I don't want to use it that way. Sometimes it has just been necessary.

I want to move about the game world, exploring, talking to characters, and learning. When I face an enemy--even a tough boss--I want to be prepared. I want my game-world education to let me know, or with a little quick thinking to figure out, how to beat this guy. I do not want to rely on the save/load to beat him (or her, or it). I do not want to reload.

[yrthwyndandfyre]

[QUOTE=Solipso]Are you saying that you want to use the save/load to determine an enemy's weakness? If you do, I do not object. It's your software.

I have certainly used the save/load for that purpose. Countless times. But I don't want to use it that way. Sometimes it has just been necessary.

I want to move about the game world, exploring, talking to characters, and learning. When I face an enemy--even a tough boss--I want to be prepared. I want my game-world education to let me know, or with a little quick thinking to figure out, how to beat this guy. I do not want to rely on the save/load to beat him (or her, or it). I do not want to reload. [/QUOTE]

I can totally dig that. My point is that I would rather have a defeatable boss that I have to save/load a hundred times to defeat than an un-defeatable boss that no number of save/loads would help. That kind of burns off the fun. Ming was tough. That's OK. I found a way, in time. For the werewolf, there is no number of times that helps. Not funny. Not even pleasant in the worst case.

[Anaximander]

I'm with Yrth on this one. Challenging boss fights are no problem. Enemies that cannot be defeated by any means? That's not cool.

Personally, I rather enjoy challenging encounters in games. One of the first computer games I ever got was Heretic: Shadow of the Serpent Riders. The first time I ever played through the game on the highest difficulty setting, I found myself saying "This is insane! There's no way this is even possible!" quite a bit. But I was wrong. I eventually beat it, and thoroughly enjoyed doing so. Naturally, I did a lot of reloading during the course of that game, but I took it in stride. I had intentionally set the difficulty to the highest possible, so I knew there was no way I was getting through undefeated.

I have no problem relying on the save/reload function in games. I'll reload as many times as necessary, as long I know that eventually I will figure it out and win. I will agree that this is an immersion breaker in CRPGs, but I have yet to play one all the way through without reloading. At least, not on my first time through the game. There's always something you don't expect, or can't prepare for properly the first time you see it. In some cases, I would agree that this is a failure on the part of the game designers. In others, and I'll give an example if you'd like, I would say it's just part of the challenge of the game.

There is a game I feel deserves honorable mention here. Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver (and yes, that's Kain not Caine). The boss fights in that game are very interesting. Every one, except the very last one, is not just a battle. It's also a puzzle. In each case, your conventional attacks are utterly useless against your enemy. You have to pay close attention to your surroundings and use something there to exploit a weakness and destroy your opponent.

At any rate, getting back to the original post, I don't see anything wrong with using cheat codes in a single player game. I use them all the time myself to overcome minor irritants. I do, however, prefer to rely on my own skill to beat the game. As I learned long ago playing Heretic, there's always a way to win.

[Solipso]

[QUOTE=yrthwyndandfyre]I can totally dig that. My point is that I would rather have a defeatable boss that I have to save/load a hundred times to defeat than an un-defeatable boss that no number of save/loads would help. That kind of burns off the fun. Ming was tough. That's OK. I found a way, in time. For the werewolf, there is no number of times that helps. Not funny. Not even pleasant in the worst case.[/QUOTE]

Yes.

Since 1996, except maybe for sleep, I have spent more time playing games than on any other activity. I have always felt that the very worst thing about games is that there are too many moments of excessive difficulty. I have sustained too many pangs of anger and bitterness. Apparently both designers and gamers have trouble believing that easy is not a synonym for bad. The old ego insists on asserting itself.

[Solipso]

[QUOTE=Anaximander]Personally, I rather enjoy challenging encounters in games. One of the first computer games I ever got was Heretic: Shadow of the Serpent Riders.[/QUOTE]

I played that. It was very colorful with lots of bright yellow, blue, green, and red. Besides that, an interesting thing about the game (and also Duke Nukem Atomic Edition) was that if you had a good fight with an enemy, he would drop a good item. If you just blasted the enemy away with an overpowerful weapon, you would get nothing.

I want to be challenged, but I do not want to be frustrated. And it is important to me that I stay immersed in the game. I do not want to reload. I want to identify with the character. I do not want to use the save/load as a kind of God mode. I want the game to teach me how to get by an enemy without my having to reload, and after defeating the enemy I want to feel a sense of accomplishment.

[FriendoftheDork]

[QUOTE=Solipso]I am not saying to get rid of the save/load feature. It has its uses. I am saying that neither designers nor gamers should rely on it for the sake of game balance and to prevent a character's death. It should never be relied on!

A designer who relies on it is a designer who has copped out with respect to creating an alternate-reality game experience. A reliance on the save/load tarnishes the roleplaying experience. A designer's job is to simultaneously create a game world that convinces a player that a character can die, while allowing a reasonably intelligent player to finish the game without having his character die.

The character should not die, not even once! I am about as confident of this as I am of anything.

Now I don't mean to be presenting The Absolute that philosophers are always seeking. There are exceptions. For example in both Diablo II and Dungeon Siege II, your main character can die and be resurrected without your having to reload.




No you don't want to confuse one reality with another, but I am sure that as an appreciater of a good RPG, you do want to believe in the game's alternate reality. You want to project yourself into that world, but only vicariously. You want to believe in that world's characters, you want to believe in your character, and you do want to believe that your character can die. But if you rely on the save/load function, in the back of your mind you are copping out. You are not really believing in your character.



Not necessarily. Diablo II as well VTMB has a good selection of characters that make a replay worth your while even if you never had to reload the first time through.



No. This point is invalid. You have already said that you don't want to play a game in God mode. But here you are essentially saying that you do want to play in God mode, using the save/load feature as God.

But I am confident that somewhere inside you, you really do not want to rely on it. You want to have a rip-roaring experience that is 100% challenging and that makes you feel special. It's the designer's resonsibility to give you that experience, without giving you the disappointment of death.



Maybe the designers of Tetris and of Bad Mojo were simply trying to make an enjoyable game, but the designers of Half-Life 2 and VTMB were trying to do more than "simply make an enjoyable game." They were trying to create an experience of an alternate reality.

A designer probably cannot please everyone perfectly, but he can give a game a selection of difficulty levels (which VTMB does not have). He can also try to achieve the ideal game design I have been suggesting: one that convinces a player that his character can die, while also allowing a player to finish without having his character die and with a strong feeling of accomplishment.[/QUOTE]



Your opinion is duly noted. The problem is, if there is no need for you to reload, that means the game will be too easy for me and other players. What then game SHOULD have is difficulty settings, from very easy to realistic. The first, you could play the whole game without loading once, and the only way to die is to not attempt to play at all during fights. I've played games where it still takes about 20 seconds to die in a combat even AFK.

But the game also needs a difficulty setting where being AFK for half a second can get you killed if at the wrong moment, where you probably have to load several times to win against bosses, and even when you're not fighting bosses you can die from a single hit from the enemy. Deus EX had both of these.

As for the believing stuff... I don't need to believe, just need to suspend disbelief for some seconds in order to have fun. I don't fight with the load/save function on mind, but after I die I remember it again and think "phew I can continue". This makes defeat so much less bitter. And really, there is a major difference for me between save/load and god mode, as one makes you immune to damage (no challenge) and the other gives you unlimited tries. Sometimes fights are so tough that even after trying several times you have to temporarily give up and take a break. Then you can try again another day.

My point is not invalid, you just disagree. Fine. If you somehow think that using save/load is less challenging than cheating then go ahead.

In the end.. yes the werewolf was annoying. The way to kill it was pretty cool though, and at this point I was feeling kind of invincible so it was good to get down a notch.

But really, werewolves are supposed to be dangerous at hell, not immune to anything. A REALLY tough vampire should be able to take on a single werewolf and win - although the odds are in the WWs favor. Sure, the werewolf should have 5 in all physical stats and brawl, potence 5, fortitude 5 and celerity 5 active at all times, a natural weapon that deal aggravated damage (only soaked with fortitude), and bullets damage should be at least halved, even from magnums, and the jaime sue damage would have to be a 10th of what it is now. The fight would be close to impossible, but you would at least be able to damage the ww somewhat before you die.

[Solipso]

[QUOTE=FriendoftheDork]My point is not invalid, you just disagree. Fine. If you somehow think that using save/load is less challenging than cheating then go ahead.[/QUOTE]

Let's not quibble about validity and opinion.

I do not think using the save/load is less challenging than using a code. I do think that if a reload is necessary to get by an enemy, then you have essentially used a code.

Can you imagine if you are fighting someone here in the real world, and he keeps re-materializing after each time you kill him? Your enemy is not using the traditional God Mode as we understand it, since you are capable of damaging him. But the power of infinite re-materializations is certainly the power of a god.

[QUOTE=FriendoftheDork]As for the believing stuff... I don't need to believe, just need to suspend disbelief for some seconds in order to have fun. I don't fight with the load/save function on mind, but after I die I remember it again and think "phew I can continue". This makes defeat so much less bitter.[/QUOTE]

I think you do want to believe. Otherwise why not just play checkers, or Tetris, or some mindless arcade shooter? But you don't play those kinds of games, do you? Why not? Because you want to immerse yourself into your character. You want to fight a concrete enemy that moves and has life. Vicariously you want to believe.

You say that the save/load sometimes lets you say, "Phew I can continue." Well, I am certainly not saying that you should ever have to start a game over. I don't want to do that to anyone.

What I am saying is that a designer or a gamer's reliance on the save/load destroys an element of immersion. It makes a game more of a game and less of an experience.

Apparently you think it is absolutely impossible to design a game that is both challenging and that allows a player to finish without resorting to the save/load.

Of course, as I have said, the save/load has its uses. Two quick examples:

1. A character approaches a trapped chest, the player inadvertently hits the attack key instead of the trap-detect key, and the character dies.

2. A player is involved in a heated battle when his wife pops into the den and exclaims that son Johnny has gashed his arm and needs to be taken to the hospital. The player looks up, forgetting about the battle, and his character dies.

I do not want a player to have to start the game over because of such happenings.

But that is not the kind of reliance on the save/load that I mean. The kind of reliance I am criticizing is when a designer lets the save/load take care of his game's balance. He is too lazy to go through a long process of creation, revision, testing, revision, testing, revision, ad infinitum until he achieves a combat sequence compatible with an easy, normal, or hard level of difficulty. He thinks that if a boss is exceedingly tough, that's okay because after all if the character dies, the player can always reload.

[QUOTE=FriendoftheDork]Sometimes fights are so tough that even after trying several times you have to temporarily give up and take a break. Then you can try again another day.[/QUOTE]

But then the game has become a game and not an experience. To follow that routine amounts to a betrayal of roleplaying and immersion. You have abandoned your character, and you have became someone who is just playing a game. What the player needs--and I think what you and I both want--is to make it through the fight without having to reload, while finishing with a satisfying sense of accomplishment.

If the designer has not allowed you to do that, and if you have played responsibly and intelligently, then the designer has failed.

[mr_sir]

its a game, not the real world. i like to really get into the story, and develop my character but its still fiction. the save/load options in games can be abused but you do not have to abuse them. i agree with FriendoftheDork on this one. its nice to have it there if you do get into difficulty or make a mistake or just need a break. that is not the same as god mode. as for dying in rpgs, i'm currently playing gothic 2 again and i have to say its quite nice when you accidentally stumble across a load of really tough enemies in dense forest - you can run and they will give up the chase after a while so its not getting in the way of the game or story, but if you do decide to fight before you are strong enough to take them on then you run a real risk of dying fast. its the knowledge that you could die that makes it fun and gives you the sense of your character being vulnerbale at that point, and allows you to make the decision to run. but without the reload option, if you accidentally wander too far from the path and meet something really powerful when you are still quite weak it would mean the end of your game. for me, i'd rather have the option to reload as continuously playing the start of games gets very boring very fast. games are about fun, and i use them to escape from reality, not go into a place where everything is realistic. if you don't like the reload option, simply don't use it. i for one though am glad they have it there as a back up if stuff goes really wrong really fast

i agree with your point about developers relying on it too much though and that they should take more time developing different levels of difficulty. or at least make it clear to you that if you do choose to do something when still relatively weak then you do run the risk of dying (something i think they do very well in gothic 2, even though there are no difficulty settings, because the games is pretty non-linear and they do warn you about wandering from the paths early on etc. - sadly bloodlines is not like this as its very linear)

[Solipso]

[QUOTE=mr_sir]its a game, not the real world.[/QUOTE]

I live in Los Angeles, and since I've started playing VTMB, I've been believing there really are vampires. You mean there aren't? Gosh, what a relief!

Seriously, game is a poor word, used only for convenience. The best games are not games. They are interactive experiences. They allow you to vicariously be someone you can never be and do things you can never do in the alternate reality we think of as real life.

[QUOTE=mr_sir]its nice to have it there [the save/load] if you do get into difficulty or make a mistake or just need a break.[/QUOTE]

The save/load is certainly nice to have as a safety backup for glaringly stupid or irresponsible mistakes or for other inadvertent happenings that accompany a character’s death. The save/load then prevents the player from having to start over. I don’t mind this kind of reliance on the save/load. I welcome it wholeheartedly. But it is not the kind of reliance I have been referring to.

I’ve been referring to the reliance of the incompetent designer who doesn’t do his very best to get a player through a sequence without a reload. This designer lacks compassion for the player. He doesn’t really care if the player has to reload. In fact he may even hope that the player has to reload to get by the tough enemy that has been created with great pride.

The designer is proud, but the gamer is frustrated and angry.

And that’s the way it goes for some sequences in many games. That’s what I think is the very worst thing about gaming. There are too many moments of excessive difficulty. One reason for this is the reliance on save/load. For those moments, the games fail to be products of entertainment.

[Solipso]

Scenario:

A development team has just completed work on a sequence of combat. This is for the Easy level of difficulty. The designer who oversees game balance genuinely believes that a novice gamer, acting intelligently and responsibly, will make it through this sequence without having to reload.

I think this designer is not relying on the save/load, and I commend him for that lack of reliance.

But suppose the game is published. A novice buys the game and gets to this sequence. He does well, in so far as his character moves and aims deftly and scores good hits. Suddenly, though, his character dies. Why? Because this novice failed to keep an eye on his character’s health bar. He has to reload.

Who is at fault here? Obviously the gamer is, but the development team is at fault too. At least for the Easy level of difficulty they could have programmed in a feature that warns the player that his health is dangerously low. There could be a red-flashing screen with the sound of a heavy heartbeat. The game's manual and the in-game tutorial would make it clear to the player that if he ever sees that red flashing and hears the heartbeat, he should immediately hit a hotkey that restores health. Or if the game has a teleportation skill, he should hit a hotkey that teleports him out of the battle zone.

Then a reload would have been unnecessary.

[FriendoftheDork]

Solipso, did you fail to notice that I've already said the game could have difficulty levels? That way you don't need to reload.

But really, your last example is a good example of what developers should NOT do, and that is wasting time trying to make their game foolproof so that idiots don't have to reload. Seriously, if you're just running mindlessly around killing stuff and you get killed by a cop in VtM, that's not the developer's fault. And really is it so bad that the player has to reload? If the developers could make the PC give the said player an electric jolt as he dies, that would be better but hey, nobody's perfect

Seriously, the game designers did a good job on the whole, and only the bugs detract from the game experience much. The fact that you must reload sometimes is a nuissance, at most. I think you're just overreacting.

I want to believe! The truth is out there

[mr_sir]

[QUOTE=Solipso]Seriously, game is a poor word, used only for convenience. The best games are not games. They are interactive experiences. They allow you to vicariously be someone you can never be and do things you can never do in the alternate reality we think of as real life.[/QUOTE]

if i want to truly experience something i'd do it in real life. but i don't. game is not a poor word. it is called a game not an interactive experience because it is a game. yes you can act out being someone else, but that does not have to be overly realistic to be fun.

and again i agree with FriendoftheDork - i'd rather the designers spent time making a coherent and entertaining storyline, with lots of little feats and abilities that make the game replayable and fun than spend all the time making it so you never have to reload. i agree there should be difficulty settings so people do not feel the need to rely on cheats in games such as bloodlines, but at the same time the possibility of dying has to be very real in a game or the game loses its interest fast. this is not the same as being too difficult. if i knew i'd never ever have to use the reload option then i'd think what is the point in any of the combat situations if i know there is no real risk of my character dying. i still connect with my character, i still feel a sense that my character is part of the story and this does not change just because i died and had to reload. it just means that i have to think up a new approach and use a bit of strategy. something which makes the game even more fun. again though, i stress that this does not mean that i think the bosses etc. have to be ridiculously hard, just not so easy that its impossible to even think that you might die.

[Lestat]

I think what Solipso is trying to say is that for any game to have some realism, it should be possible to go throught it without a reload. Possible, not probable. And this without using a walkthrough, using only in-game information. And I mean reasonably possible. May not 80%, or not even 50% but 30% possibility should be OK.

As it is, this is not the case with VtM:B, especially the later stages. The most glaring example being the werewolf encounter. I see few chances of getting through this without using information obtained from a walkthrough or from heading into the encounter, dying, reloading etc. (e.g. it is highly improbable that you will understand what to do to kill the werewolf on your first run through).
Depending on gamer dexterity (not PC dexterity), some other encounters might pose similar problems and certainly the Temple level is a major ache in the backside with too much reliance on respawning of opponents (if you get into a fight) which makes it difficult, annoying and boring at the same time.
This is especially annoying since the earlier levels, and certainly Santa Monica seem to have this balance. You can go through SM without reload, even if you haven't played the game before, as long as you don't make clear mistakes.

[mr_sir]

i agree totally with that. the game should be possible to play with no reloads but not necessarily easy or straight forward to play with no reloads. and i agree totally about the werewolf - my first game i just spent the entire time running from it and using bloodbacks as i didn't realise how to kill it. very frustrating.

as for the beginning of bloodlines having more balance, you are right there. my favourite part of the game is probably santa monica for that reason.

[rapid101]

cheats can be fun

all i can reply to so far is i know a ridicously hard game, obvlivion. First time palying thru that, i thouight i'd be like VtM and blast everyone in the street for fun, but nop, 3 seconds later "STOP OR DIE!!!" from the guards and i foudn that game is hard, harder when the monsters lvl up with you and if you don't level up to max lvls everything and make your best spells then your screwed and that game was fun but what im saying is "too many challenges ruin it", i downloaded some mods to make some guys alot easier and somea lot harder but they don't level up now which is good. sometimes cheats can help alot yes (more offtopic then previous stuff: anyone played metal gear solid 2? when during the big sub thing that held the 20 metal gears when the guy kept calling and saying stop playing i thought it was serious in the game... dam japanese makers confuse me!) sometimes they make the game more fun like VtM eg. after the game turn all your skills on high with cheats and see how long you last! (also try to get mods for more disciplines coz ive always wanted: thaumatorgy, celerity and dominate, reeeallll godmode. But to my point, i have passed few games and the few i do pass they were fun (mainly the abes oddysee series) because of the suspense of the story and the whole thriller part, your wandering the whole game who/how hard the last boss is and your wandering "why?", just like in movies, your wandering who the boss is and how it's going to happen, but if you jsut cheat to ge ttheir then you havent really "achieved it" but i sometimes do cheat or look up on the internet some stories for games i wont play but have played the original, or i cant pass.

[Celacena]

I finished VTM with a female brujah yesterday - I took the ex-cop history, didn't bother with potence to any great degree but for the first time, really went for the firearms skill. before, I'd used firearms a fair bit, but not bothered with putting many xp into it. it really does make a difference - I also raised defence, dodge etc and could often just walk into a firefight instead of sneaking around. hallowbrook, ming and ventrue tower all went down the firefight route - OK there were times I got a bit shot up, but with the rifle doing 200 damage at times - wow!

celerity 5 and firearms 9 - that's a lot of bullets heading the other way.

even the steyr and rifle were worth using. Ming was wasted with the uzi and even the Sheriff fell much quicker as I ran backwards from him with cel 5 at the same time as shooting him.

another great place for cel is the Zhao's warehouse - lots of bullets to dodge there.

I never cheat, but I know most tips to complete missions and the best ways to defeat most enemies, so I don't need to. if it was too difficult, then I'd look for a clever exploit, but I wouldn't cheat. the whole thing with computer rpgs is that you know what to expect, so that knowledge is sort of cheating -unless you go iron man through a game first time - you are limiting the rpg factor.