I like how this post was very useful. Whats the point in posting and disagreeing without giving an argument. Other for the sake of being seen I guess.

In Skyrim it wouldn't, in survival games it does, which is the genré I was referring to.

What's the point of responding to dozens of reasonable arguments by starting your reply with: "I see most people have a really hard time understanding my point."

Understanding your point does not necessarily mean agreeing with you. In fact, most of the posts that disagree with you address your arguments quite clearly. So obviously, it's not just an issue of not seeing your point
Are you lost? This is the Skyrim forum, isn't it???
.

We're at another difference. I honestly don't see it as cheating. If you abuse it for instant profit and no-lose with no effort, then it's cheating. Before that occurrence, it's a feature for storing game data, and it is what it is, and it's probably NOT going to change. It's really a case of taking it as it is, or...well, I'm sure there are other games that can offer you what you desire.

*high five*

It's like this. You can do a heavy roleplay version of the game, only skills and equipment that make sense for that character, no fast travel except carriages, no crafting exploits, no or limited HUD, not use active markers on the map, no factions or quests that aren't appropriate for your character and no reloading, whatever the circumstances apart from bugs and crashes.

OR IF YOU WANT, you can go casual action, exploit whatever the hell you like, and enjoy the sights and the world and defeating enemies, join all the factions, reload to get all the treasure and not miss a single ounce of content.

The choice is given to you, it's yours. I never reload, not even to save my sorely missed dogs, but if someone else wants to play an action game 'to win' and miss out on all that lovely role-playing immersiveness because they just have to pass that intimidation check or crack that lock, that is up to them, no skin off my nose.

Some people have come up with good arguments. He[censored]mains for example. You on the other hand didn't and the post was aimed towards you.
None ever had to agree with me, but alot of people started talking about how bad having a checkpoint system in Skyrim would be - which wasn't my point, thus I felt like they didn't get my point.

As for the "are you lost" response - that was a reply to somone who didnt understand that I didn't say checkpoints would be good in Skyrim and here's why I even brought another game up:

I said this many times already, I used another genre to show an example on how not being able to ignore dangers in a game just because you can simply save 5 seconds before something happens can be a bad thing for some genres. I said horror games wouldnt be half as exciting if it wasnt for the survival aspect of it, then I used that to relate back to Skyrim to explain how I feel about the fact that it is very easy to abuse the system, leaving you with no sense of risk vs reward what so ever.

Later in the thread I realised that the bad feeling I had about being able to save right before lets say pick pocketing somone wasn't actually a problem with being able to save all the time, but rather with save + rng event (that takes 1 second) is what makes it feel cheep. As that isn't giving you anoter try at something that you have to beat - it simply makes you spam load til the game succeeds to pick somones pocket for you.

I started this thread to discuss concerns I had about the game - what triggered me to do it was a Let's play series I watched with somone saying, that it's easy to level up pick pocketing - but he felt a bit dirty doing so.

You still havn't had anything constructive to say, you are not everyone else. If you don't feel like discussing yourself then I still don't see why you are responding.

I agree that older games had more chance of failure, and that was good.

However, that didn't necessarily correspond to saves and quicksaves. For example, Jedi Knight Dark Forces II was a fantastic game, where death was easy to find... had quicksave. Didn't really effect my enjoyment, or how immersed in the game I was.

In contrast, the first Splinter Cell was just utterly irritating with it's checkpoints. I had to repeat the same bit of each level before dying AGAIN that it svcked all meaning out of the game.

For me, the ability to save any time is really important. It means I can leave the game when I want, for one thing. But then, as I like playing a lot of different characters, I don't do the save and reload thing so much.

Yes, thats fine. I see that this is where we are heading with games. Sure, as long as you base lockpicking etc on RNG it might be hard to do something about it. I just don't think that we should strive to have exploit friendly games, i don't see how breaking a game is a good thing. I'm not saying that Skyrim isn't great because you can do w/e you feel like it it - be it role play, or powergaming. But if you are not the roleplay type then I would assume that you like a challange - which you don't really get from exploiting. Smart exploiting maybe, I used to enjoy that in older games - simply because they games were so hard and non userfriendly anyways - that if you managed to find a way to give you an advantage it actually added to the fun.

Spaming quickload isn't doesn't take alot theorycrafting however o.o

You also gotta know that alot of people playing this game are used to how TES games used to be, sure you could exploit the hell out of them as well - but at least they had a steep learning curve. If you wanna streamline things in newer games to make them more userfriendly so that they don't require you to bring up your calculator,pen and paper every time you are making a character. Then at least make use of modern technology to make other parts of the game more interesting and interactive - combat, pick pocket, lock picking etc.

Using ancient ways to design games like RNG doesn't work to well if you remove what made the series deep in the first plays, namely theorycrafting and min/maxing. Basicly they removed things from the series but didn't replace it with anything else, except for better graphics.

Thats just the way I see it.

I totally agree, as this thread went on for a while I realised I didn't have a problem with the save / load part.. but rather that saving and loading before a 1 second RNG event kind of breaks it - if the even was based around player interaction and skill, just like you save right before fighting a boss - then there wouldn't be a problem.

Unless it's a survival/horror game, then I think it adds to the challange in a good way. It helps making you terrified of dying, something monsters on a screen don't succeed well at on their own.

Not good in a game where bugs and freezes stops your play.

No.