5 ms·

I want to start, pause and stop my game at any point and this isn't compatible with a real-time multiplayer game.

by jkubicek 2y ago

drdaeman 2y ago
That's not even compatible with a lot of single-player games that only allow to stop at checkpoints (because developers are lazy).
- scruple 2y ago
  FWIW, the Switch has this and so does the SteamDeck. I'm a father of 3, 5 year old twins and a 3 year old, so it's the killer feature for me on my SteamDeck.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  depends on the game, to be honest. Resident's Evil tension would be demolished if you could save in the middle of battle, or right before you turn a corner. But also yes, modern consoles do have a suspend feature. PC's can't do it as easily because of various Windows API issues, I assume.
  - indrora 2y ago
    Apathy by developers, really. The Xbox One and above are a really funny shaped Windows machine with HyperV underneath.
  - drdaeman 2y ago
    Well, anything can be ruined by a pause at a bad moment, but it’s great when each individual player can decide for themselves whenever their circumstances require interruption at the cost of potential experience disruption, or not. I think it’s less about player experience, though, but more about save system complexity (how much data needs to be persisted), aka lower dev costs.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Difficulty is a factor, sure. But Console TRCs (technical requirements Checklist) are very strict on a save/load system in each game. And if you don't pass a TRC you can't ship on console (usually... I'm sure greased hands happened with certain releases). It's complicated but also not a spot to skimp out on. So the incremental cost to design it as anytime isn't that much more than a checkpoint. Most modern games have pretty lax save systems anyway (basically anywhere that isn't a battle), so I feel it's becoming more of a moot problem.

5 ms·

I want to start, pause and stop my game at any point and this isn't compatible with a real-time multiplayer game.

by jkubicek 2y ago

I want to start, pause and stop my game at any point and this isn't compatible with a real-time multiplayer game.

drdaeman 2y ago
That's not even compatible with a lot of single-player games that only allow to stop at checkpoints (because developers are lazy).
- scruple 2y ago
  FWIW, the Switch has this and so does the SteamDeck. I'm a father of 3, 5 year old twins and a 3 year old, so it's the killer feature for me on my SteamDeck.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  depends on the game, to be honest. Resident's Evil tension would be demolished if you could save in the middle of battle, or right before you turn a corner. But also yes, modern consoles do have a suspend feature. PC's can't do it as easily because of various Windows API issues, I assume.
  - indrora 2y ago
    Apathy by developers, really. The Xbox One and above are a really funny shaped Windows machine with HyperV underneath.
  - drdaeman 2y ago
    Well, anything can be ruined by a pause at a bad moment, but it’s great when each individual player can decide for themselves whenever their circumstances require interruption at the cost of potential experience disruption, or not. I think it’s less about player experience, though, but more about save system complexity (how much data needs to be persisted), aka lower dev costs.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Difficulty is a factor, sure. But Console TRCs (technical requirements Checklist) are very strict on a save/load system in each game. And if you don't pass a TRC you can't ship on console (usually... I'm sure greased hands happened with certain releases). It's complicated but also not a spot to skimp out on. So the incremental cost to design it as anytime isn't that much more than a checkpoint. Most modern games have pretty lax save systems anyway (basically anywhere that isn't a battle), so I feel it's becoming more of a moot problem.