Save-scumming

[Flabyo]

It's a game design thing really. Modern titles like Dishonored and Deus Ex are designed with the quick-save mentality in mind. But something like a Zelda 2 was not designed with 'saving the game anywhere you like' as an option, so doing so using emulator save states is introducing something into the game that wasn't part of it's design.

If you're analysing a game, then playing it in a way that wasn't possible at the time of launch is perhaps not a correct way to analyse it. It's a fine line though, in order to complete games for the podcast its sometimes necessary to take shortcuts. (It's notable that some people dropped out of the Zelda 2 cast because they couldn't finish the game in time *even with save states*).

[gallo_pinto]

This year I've been playing a lot of older games that I was too young to play when they first came out. I've been using a case by case basis for whether or not to save scum. With Zelda, Mario and other all-time classics, I want to play them as closely as I can to how they were designed to be played. So with those, I don't save scum. With games that don't quite reach that "classic" level but that I'd like to see all the way through, I'll save scum (I recently did this with Castle of Ilusion, Aladdin and Sonic 1+2).

I think there are often times when there is more enjoyment to be had by playing a game as it was designed, replaying levels over and over and building up the skill to get good at it. But sometimes there's a bad piece of design that is just frustrating and a save state helps you skip that frustration. Everyone should be able to play games the way they want, so I think shaming people for using save states is a bit silly.

[Craig]

I think they mention it on the podcast because they're playing in a way not originally intended and want you to be fully informed of how they've come to their opinions. If someone played through a game on god mode without telling you and talked about how easy the game was it wouldn't really be on.

But there's no shame in using it yourself if that's how you want to enjoy the game. While it's important to recognise how the game was in it's initial state, you're playing it to have fun and no-one should dictate whether you're doing it rightly or wrongly.

There are many instances where older games are definetly improved via save states either to overcome spots of poor design, poor check pointing or even difficulty spikes designed to lengthen a game (or take your money in the case of arcades.) There are even certain games I wouldn't advise playing without save states (such as the original Metroid.)

If you're giving an opinion on a game, you've got to be up front about these things but for yourself it's all upto you. All I know is I don't trust people who didn't use the money cheat on the sims to create nightmarish death traps.

[ratsoalbion]

I think they mention it on the podcast because they're playing in a way not originally intended and want you to be fully informed of how they've come to their opinions.

That's exactly it.

I don't think save-scumming is something that anyone should feel guilty about as such, but while we will sometimes use that technique to 'beat' (or at least 'clear') games for the podcast, we must always acknowledge the methods that we have used.

There are good arguments that the experience of playing certain games can be negatively affected (for some players at least) by electing to play this way, and some listeners feel that rather than save-scum to get to the end of certain games, we would be able to give a fairer, more 'realistic' assessment by playing as the developer intended - even if it means us not seeing the credits roll (due to the lack of time and/or ability required to finish the game 'properly').

This is a debate I have with myself constantly, and something the team discusses from time-to-time. We will continue to consider each game on a case by case basis but overall it's important to me that we persist with one of our key USPs, which is that - unlike many other podcasts - we actually experience the back ends and final showdowns of virtually all the titles we cover (even if we have, on rare occasions, got there via nefarious means).

It's an interesting conversation for sure and I don't believe that there's any right or wrong answer really. It's very much a case of horses for courses, and remaining aware that as well as improving your experience with save-scumming, you might just easily be doing something that is detrimental to the experience that you could have had.

[Sellardohr]

It's a fun game to take a game that you normally quicksave through, or that has a generous checkpoint system, and for an experiment play it as a permadeath roguelike. See which way you enjoy more.

For me I love the out-of-control moments that happen when something goes wrong in a stealth game.

On the other hand, when things go wrong due to poor programming or design, and your character fell through the level or someone spotted you through a wall, savescumming can be the only feasible way to play. Those times suck.

[Stanshall]

When stealth goes wrong, and you can adapt like in MGSV, it's a fantastic release of tension, because when I say adapt you know I mean start spraying the shottie and punting grenades out of the underbarrel launcher. When you can't adapt, and you have to just replay the section...snappy snappy disc disc.

[PapaJupe13]

I am save scumming in Mankind Divided and I hate myself for it.
Not because I think it is wrong to save scum, but because it takes me an hour or more to get through 15 minutes of game because I want to do that 15 minutes perfect. And I have no will power.
This almost always leads to me getting burned out on a game before it is over.

I am about 4-5 hours into Mankind Divided and I barely made it to Koller, who I assume should be able to be reached in under an hour.
I am thinking I am gonna start fresh tonight after work and try to play through the weekend without save scumming. But I doubt that will happen.

[Sellardohr]

I also have that issue of save scumming from perfectionism. There was this idea with Heavy Rain that you should accept every action and every consequence of your first playthrough, 'cuz that's YOUR playthrough. I definitely think it can be liberating to quit trying to control your play experience so hard, at least in a choice-heavy game like a Deus Ex.

But you know, for something like a JRPG, I've always enjoyed it more when I reload each boss battle 'til I've stolen every item and found everu secret. Heaven help me if I skip a missable side quest or something.

[PapaJupe13]

Yeah....I have started a new game with no save scumming. Feels good to just play and actually make progress. That crazy shot gun also makes the failed stealth chaos alot of fun to clean up.