Saving: What's better? Checkpoints, or no going back?

Recommended Videos

BeerTent

Resident Furry Pimp
May 8, 2011
1,167
0
0
Okay, so, minecraft crashed on me after killing a monster, only when I started it up, the last update it did was from before the zombie was killed. The result was a hit, but no biggie. I'm not complaining. I know why the game crashed.

But it sparked an interesting question in my mind. Would games like Tereria and Minecraft, as well as the countless other games out there be any better if you required to save your game manually? If there were save points you could craft to reload from? It made me think a little bit about System Shock 2, which tackled the ability to live one continuous life, despite it being a shooter. (It was also an RPG, but, whatever.)

What if other major games were also like System Shock 2? Not of the multi-player genre. Halo: Reach (What is this, Halo 6?) could actually have an explanation if they tweaked the story a bit to keep multiple Spartans, but when you die, you could simply go to the next squad-mate and assume control? Or even have re-spawners in there? Do you feel this would kill the difficulty? (Not like there was much difficulty in there anyway) How could the game make up for it if so?

Just a series of thoughts. Discuss, if you will. Personally, I fin that quick, automatic load when you die to just be annoying. If we're having the manual saving, or checkpoints, bring up a damn menu.