Make a save force a quit, and delete save upon loading

[Ivlivs]

I'm thinking of doing a new project.

However, due to its nature, I need a way to keep the player from saving a game, then reloading when things go wrong without disabling saves entirely.

Then I found the solution: Make it so that saving the game forces a return to the menu screen, then when you reload the game, the save is erased. How is that done?

[Jake]

Then I found the solution: Make it so that saving the game forces a return to the menu screen, then when you reload the game, the save is erased. How is that done?

I wondered about this kind of approach myself a little while ago, but fundamentally, nothing you can do in code will defeat the determined player. If you delete the save, then the player will just copy the file/directory the save is in somewhere else before loading the save, and copy it back if they want to go back to that previous save again.

Not to mention that there are related problems - what if the player gets 95% of the way through your game, then there's a power cut, or his system crashes? His last save will have been deleted when he reloaded it, so his progress will be gone and he'll be angry. And probably not ready to play through the game again unless it was very short or very compelling.

You can get away with this kind of thing on consoles or online games, where the filesystem isn't accessible to the end user, but there's really no secure and safe method for PC games.


That said, if you're working on this principle, why not just disable in-game saves/loads entirely and auto-save after every decision? It would be less intrusive to the player if the game didn't drop out and restart when he tries to save his progress.

[Ivlivs]

Good point. I forgot that the files were accessible to end-users. Silly me.

That being said, how do you disable saves and auto-save after every decision? I might just go ahead and leave the save system as it is, but I just want to know.

[monele]

Something better : leave only one save slot.

But really, it's very different to have a game that prevents you from reloading and forces a save when you quit. I'm thinking of NetHack and other roguelikes. Sure, you can copy files... but you usually won't. On the other hand, if you have all the saving possibilities in the world, you certainly won't make it harder on yourself by deleting your save when you die :p... that's the kind of thing that has to be a rule inherent to the game.

[JQuartz]

I wondered about this kind of approach myself a little while ago, but fundamentally, nothing you can do in code will defeat the determined player. If you delete the save, then the player will just copy the file/directory the save is in somewhere else before loading the save, and copy it back if they want to go back to that previous save again.

I got into the same argument 7 days ago at another game-making forum. Anyway I think if it doesn't take too much time making something that makes cheating ( well some people consider it so) harder then just do it. A door only requires 3 whacks from a hammer to take it down (at least that's how many whacks it took for my door) but everyone still putting up doors.

Something better : leave only one save slot.

I agree but how do you do it? Also I think rollback should be disabled. Again I must ask how do you do it.

Thanks in advance.

[Raikiri]

Also I think rollback should be disabled. Again I must ask how do you do it.

I don't know if it is a good idea to disable rollback altogether; the player might always want to go back a few pages to re-read something he missed, or didn't quite grasp the first time. I know I do it all the time, myself.

If you just want to stop players from rolling back and picking another option whenever they feel like it (most likely to prevent them from "cheating death" or avoiding a bad ending), you can use the renpy.block_rollback function.

[PyTom]

I personally don't think that games should really try to block the meta-level stuff like saving, loading, skipping, etc. The VN format isn't really good for tests of skill, and so the gameplay needs to be about story. If the story is so frustrating that the user wants to rollback/save/whatever, the meta-level isn't the best place to address that problem.

I think right now, Ren'Py's menus have basically the feature set VN players have come to expect from a game. Reducing that to increase player frustration... well, that's not a good thing.

Remember, the player is on your side. You want to tell him a good story, and he ways to read a good story. You shouldn't have to restrict his freedom of gameplay.

[Ivlivs]

PyTom, I understand your concerns, but a large part of my next project (a sequel to Jitteh Dawn) involves an elaborate puzzle, and I want to make it difficult to solve perfectly.

Ah well, I guess there is no point in blocking saves since the player will just want to go back into the game without sitting through the opening sequence over and over if he/she does not get the desired ending. That is probably the logic that the programmer of the game Cave Story used when he gave the player infinite lives by default, making it more of a "Are you persistent enough?" challenge than a "HA HA HA! Back to the beginning with you! Do not pass go, do not collect $200 because you're DEAD!" challenge.

I will not block the saves and such, then.

[JQuartz]

If you just want to stop players from rolling back and picking another option whenever they feel like it (most likely to prevent them from "cheating death" or avoiding a bad ending), you can use the renpy.block_rollback function.

Thanks that's exactly what I wanted.

I personally don't think that games should really try to block the meta-level stuff like saving, loading, skipping, etc. The VN format isn't really good for tests of skill, and so the gameplay needs to be about story. If the story is so frustrating that the user wants to rollback/save/whatever, the meta-level isn't the best place to address that problem.

Well I played a SNES game called doukyusei and the game only allowed one save slot even though it's not a game for tests of skill (just need to go to specific locations at a specific time).And it's not like the game wasn't capable of having multiple save slots (you get more save slots after finishing the game the first time). So I believe that restricting use of rollback so that it'll just be used to reread the previous dialog and allowing only one save (at least for the first playthrough) is not extreme or unreasonable.

[monele]

(you get more save slots after finishing the game the first time)

Mmm... Does it make sense when it comes to the game? I mean... you can *always* restrict things the player can do in some way (like prevent skipping cutscenes :p) but it isn't always a good thing.
I'm not against self-erasing save files as long as it's absolutely linked to the game... meaning that if you *could* save as much as you want, the game would be flawed and uninteresting. But otherwise, it's just adding an annoying "feature" for no gain . Think about it well and don't copy old games just because

[Criptych]

The "delete your save file on load" sounds a lot like the Suspend function in Riviera, among other games. For something like that, it makes sense (even if it is a little frustrating when you forget to "Save" save). But for that to be the only save function in the game? Not something I'd be likely to play.

[monele]

I suddenly remember that Phoenix Wright has the same Suspend concept. It *is* a bit annoying that you're only allowed ONE save per cartdrige (hey, what about families?) but as it's a rather linear game, it's no big deal.

[Ivlivs]

The "delete your save file on load" sounds a lot like the Suspend function in Riviera, among other games. For something like that, it makes sense (even if it is a little frustrating when you forget to "Save" save). But for that to be the only save function in the game? Not something I'd be likely to play.

Of course there would be an actual save. I'm not that cruel.

A "suspend" function was exactly what I had in mind.

[Criptych]

Of course there would be an actual save. I'm not that cruel.

*breathes a sigh of relief* Not like Nero, eh. Hail, Caesar! :p