StarDestroyer.Net BBS

In single-player games it's usually possible to use the save/reload technique to erase mistakes, overcome randomized game elements by repeatedly trying until you get what you want, prepare for random "disasters" in sim-style or strategy games, etc. Do you consider this cheating? If so, do you actually avoid ever doing it?

There's a thin line.

Saving regularly in difficult areas is a must. Any RPG gamer knows this well, as with FPS with long stages.

Now, reloading if you get wiped out is obvious. If you get nearly slaughtered and would have to face the boss weakened badly, it's okay.

But just reloading over and over until you get the 'right' choice is cheating(In, for example, dialogue options in computer RPGs).

To quote HK-47 from KOTOR1, " Cheating seems to be relavent term when one is caught in the act, otherwise its viewed as intelligence." Strangly enough in KOTOR2 items are randomized , so whenever I receive an certain rare item as a reward that I don't like or already have, I reload the game and get another random item.

Darth Wong wrote:In single-player games it's usually possible to use the save/reload technique to erase mistakes, overcome randomized game elements by repeatedly trying until you get what you want, prepare for random "disasters" in sim-style or strategy games, etc. Do you consider this cheating? If so, do you actually avoid ever doing it?

I answer this question with the concept of fun in mind.

Would it be fun to start a game of SMAC or GalCiv from scratch, build up a new empire, new fleets etc, because I lost my old game due to unexpected means? No. Mainly because it likely took me hours or perhaps even days of getting my previous game up there to begin with. So if I can save/reload back to a point where I can avert the course of events that lead to my downfall, why not? I'm playing a game, and that means I'm trying to have fun.

By that same token, is it fun to constantly reload to get a favourable item/random event/something else? No. Because I don't want to spend hours exploiting the game system just to get ahead.

I guess it's a balance, and the way you do it.

Can I ask a question which I hope to be on-topic? Is cheating in a single player game bad?

Having recently reinstalled Commandos 2: Men of Courage, I can say without a doubt that the game would be impossible were it not for saving and loading. As those who've played it know, even on "normal" difficulty the game is fiendishly hard. When a single mission takes several nights of playing to complete, saving is a must.

In other games, like FPSs, I'd die without the quicksave and quickload keys. Nothing sucks more than getting all the way through a level to die at the end because your fingers slipped on the keys and you fell down a bottomless pit. Now exploiting this system is another matter, but in a single player game, if it really floats your boat, then go nuts; no skin off my back.

Can I ask a question which I hope to be on-topic? Is cheating in a single player game bad?

If cheating makes the game more fun for whatever reason, then more power to you. Just don't brag you beat it on Extreme Insane Hell Suicide Mode.

Saving is in games for a reason.

I mean there are some games where you dont have a choice like FARCRY for instance, id like to see ANYONE beat that on no saves.... hell i give you a car to beat that without a save....heck beat MYST without a save!

But there are those who ABUSE saving. For instance people who play FPS'S and save the game before going around EVERY corner. Thats just lame if you gotta save before entering every room and going around every corner!

Like saving before a boss to me isnt lame because obviously theres a pretty good chance youll die. Personally i like games where you have limited saves!

Overall though i never actually save. I usually start a game and ill be like "Ok... ill save after this part....:hour later: ok...maybe after this part". Few hours later i beat the game so i never really use saves. The only time i really use them alot is when i have a stupid game that tends to crash alot for whatever reason or if its i have no choice like i have to go somewhere or other obvious reasons.

But there are some games i will admit i save alot on...Hitman series and Splinter Cell....not alot of saves but in those one wrong move and your screwed.

I think in many cases SP loading utterly ruins games, particularly in RPGs. No decision is ever final, there's never any tension, etc.

OTOH, noone wants to start from the beginning all the time: but there are better ways than 'ESC/save' to implement it (like single save, no going back style).

I tend to oversave stuff in games. I have the the paranoia that the game will randomly crash, because some of my games like to do that for no apparent reason. I hate having to do everything all over.

It depends on the game. For the action/strategy type games, I usually don't. For the rare occasions in playing FPS games, I will for the reason that JediNeophyte mentioned- it sucks to have to start over because of a bad twitch on the control.

For RPGs I'll do it regularly simply because I don't play RPG games for the challenge so much as for seeing the story unfold.

Is it cheating? It's about on par with cheating at solitaire, I'd say. Not a big deal, since the only competition is the system.

I don't consider it cheating, but I do think it's fun to play a game you really like without saving/restore at all, see if you can do it. Like how Diablo 2 implemented the "Hell mode" where it was harder than the highest difficulty, but, with the added "bonus" that your characters were stored on their servers and if you died ever while progressing through the game, that character was dead and gone forever, including all items. That's pretty intense.

My policy in turn based strategy / 4X space games like Space Empires, MoO is to save often to ensure game can be restored if something goes wrong. But if my empire is losing I dont go back a few turns and use knowledge of future events. It is similar in most other games. Use save feature as a backup instead of an edge.

Marksist wrote:I don't consider it cheating, but I do think it's fun to play a game you really like without saving/restore at all, see if you can do it. Like how Diablo 2 implemented the "Hell mode" where it was harder than the highest difficulty, but, with the added "bonus" that your characters were stored on their servers and if you died ever while progressing through the game, that character was dead and gone forever, including all items. That's pretty intense.

It's hardcore mode.

I have a friend who plays D2. He told me once he let his character die rather than 'save/exit' because he felt that was cheating. His character was level 50 or something. Talk about principles!

Everyone should play a longterm game like Rome or MoO without saving at least once. How many times do people reload just because they don't win a battle flawlessly? THAT is why Rome is so easy - the fact you can replay battles until you win.

If you play without saving, you consider attacks much more, and you have to live with the consequences. It's called 'drama'.

It's still a bit of a tough question, whether Saving/Loading can be considered as cheating... But I don't think it is. Kills the fun (especially in the games that take forever to reload), but I don't think it can be considered as cheating. It tells any viewer, though, of just how [sarcasm] well [/sarcasm] our friend plays. Seriously, when I can't pass a certain zone, after re-trying it three or more times, I quit and try again the next day, since I can tell, by my consequent failure, that I'm not in the right mood to play.

overcome randomized game elements by repeatedly trying until you get what you want, prepare for random "disasters" in sim-style or strategy games,

This, I don't interpret it as cheating, but as a sign that my friend (because, honestly, I never do this) isn't up to the challenge of the game. So what, the boss doesn't have the uber-blade in his remains?? As if that could prevent a player of not advancing further in the game! "Oh, that volcano went active and destroyed my city, along with all my units! That can't happen, quick, re-load and move them away!" For crying out loud, to concentrate units in a risky location (risky due to natural/random causes) is a bit dumb in the first place. As far as gaming goes, I've always kept a dogma with me: Adapt and Improvise, which doesn't motivates reloading.
Besides, I only save constantly in RPG's, in order to explore all possibilities that a dialog or a certain/specified action cause... Every other game, I consider to be the final challenge to play it through with as less savings and reloadings as possible. Heck, through Doom3 I only reloaded five times, with two being from auto-saves and the other three from boss fights...
In the end, I only consider trainers and console codes as the real cheats. I only use console codes to see the jokes sometimes the developers put in the games.

If I'm not using a cheat code, it's not cheating as far as I'm concerned. To me,it falls under the category of "gameyness".

SpacedTeddyBear wrote:To quote HK-47 from KOTOR1, " Cheating seems to be relavent term when one is caught in the act, otherwise its viewed as intelligence."

Which is exactly what I'm playing now. I only bought it a week ago and I've been playing it non-stop.

I haven't used cheats in a game since Sonic the Hedgehog 1, I hate using them, I feel using cheats robs you of the accomplishment beating bad guyx, solving puzzles y, etc.

While I don't exploit the save/reload system to get the outcome I want because, yes, it is cheating, I will use it if I die at some point, or need to take a break or whatever, but even when I use reloads from dying it takes something away from what you've done. It always feels better to be able to say "yea, I beat the whole game, no cheats, and I didn't die once, on hard mode!"

For me it depends on the game. In TBS (turn based strategy) for instance Rome Total War, I tend to let what happens happen. If I screw up the game so much that there is no chance for victory, I restart with the knowledge not to do it again.

With RTS I never restart. I win or lose. If I loose I do it over again.

With FPS I have a tendency to frequently save and reload if I gank myself (like press left instead of right sending me over a cliff). However, unless its death causing, I rarely load up again (however if there is a spot I just can't seem to get past, I do save right before it and keep redoing it until I actually survive it).

Direct answer to your question, saving/replaying until you get a random event in your favor is cheating in my opinion. It destroys the purpose of a random game if you only play the random event that favors you. More games have been made interesting by that loose cannon which may or may not hit you next. A game inwhich everything goes your way gets boring real fast.

In Rome: Total War and other strategy games, I almost never save/reload (well, I do, but only to start off another session). In R:TW, at least, I rarely lose battles (Pontic light infantry vs Principes? Please), and if I am thrown on the back foot I like the challenge of trying to reconstitute my empire.

Now, in FPS, I constantly use quicksave-reload. Like in Call of Duty, on Hardened, I frequently find myself going for that quicksave key, mainly since I die so freakin' much. On Veteran, since there's no health, if I take too hard a hit I usually need to hit quickload or I can't beat the level.

I have had too "Voi (insert a colection of finnish curse words here)" moment to not save often, but load only if I either get myself into "no-win"situation or lose/get killed.

I have a go at my brother for saving before every mission on GTA games and then reloading if he fails the mission (or dies) so that he maintains a 100% record.

Part of the problem is the unstableness of most new computer games.

If you dont save often, you risk losing rediciously numbers of hours from a random crash.

I'm something of a crashphobic so I tend to save quite often, but I don't reload at the slightest drawback.

For me saving primarily occurs in RTS and FPS games. I save semi frequently in RTS games just to keep up to date with things and avoid having to replay and loose hours just replaying the game. After I've already beat the game once, I tend to have a little more fun trying to get better things and I will use save to do that. In FPS games I generaly play through the game the very first time using save merely as a way to avoid having to replay areas frequently when I die. First time through Half Life 2 and I rarely had shields above 30%. First time through Doom 3 and I rarely had very much ammo for certain weapons. Second time through both games I had more fun using save to try and play with full states. Saved game features even let me take the Dune buggy into places it didn't belong.

There was one game called "Buzz Aldrin Race into Space". The probability of getting a moon landing even with the best trained astronauts and the best equipment money and research could buy was about 5%.

I found that out after reading the FAQ and realizing it was a bug. After playing the game for so long, I decided it was absolutely necessary to see the end game cinematic, so I spent half a day reloading until the moon landing worked. And I did it a year earlier than in real life too.

Brian