EDIT: I realised that being able to save and load w/e you want isn't what I'm having a problem with, but rather saving right before a one second quick time even kinda breaks the risk vs reward feel in the game. Saving right before a boss fight for example is only standard, because if you fail and load, you at least have to try your best at not failing again.

As far as pick pocketing goes, or any other RNG even, you are simply letting the game roll once more if you failed the first time - this would not be a problem if lockpicking and such would instead be based on the players ability.


Many games use a checkpoint system for saving, which in a way adds to the thrill.

I never really thought of it, and it was never something i was concerned about in TES games. However, especially in games with a somewhat open world - where you are free to do as you please as long as you are prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions.

There is a reason why you can't pickpocket with a 100% success rate by default, kill a non hostile torget without risking getting cought etc.

There is a reason for having a system based around you getting caught such as.

Getting a bounty on your head.
Bribing guards.
Serving your time in jail.

And more.

Being able to save at all times before you attemt to do something simply breaks parts of the game.


Horror games for example, now unless you are 5 - these games aren't exactly thrilling/scary in any way due to visuals or monsters jumping out of nowhere to attack you. It's a combination of horror and survival that makes you edgy and what not. People don't want to die.

But trust me, if you were able to turn on godmode in a horror game - there would be nothing horrifying about the - it's just clever design that makes them good horror games.

TES games will never be horrifying, thats not my point. Sure you could choose to never save before you attempt something - but shouldn't games be challenging, and not just challenging if you want them to be? Thats at least how it used to be - otherwise we might just remove the possibility of ever dying or failing in any way in every game to come.

Nice thing about this game, is you get to choose when and where you save. If you don't want to save before an activity, don't.

Besides, those who spam the quicksave/quickload buttons tend to corrupt their saves, so it bites them in the butt eventually.

I actually save a lot with Quicksaves and do a lot of Quickloads... not once did I get a corrupt save and I had a lot of characters in these 7 months.

Checkpoints in a go anywhere, whenever world? Rife with bugs, glitches and CTDs? One case where 'don't like it, don't use it' applies.

I always save normally, because I have no idea where the quicksave hotkey is. I wouldn't use it if I did though, I'm too used to naturally saving.

Me too, I save like every five minutes... I've started doing that years ago in Word and Morrowind when those kept crashing on me, haven't noticed problems with save games yet and I have a lot of them.

Regardless, I don't see how this is a bad thing. Autosaving at certain points would mean I could probably walk from Whiterun to Solitude with just two or three saves, if I die after having killed two dragons three bears four giants and half a sheep I don't want to start the entire walk again. If you think this should be different then please by all means don't quicksave...

The saves in this game give you ultimate freedom, you can exploit it or not. I like that.

I wasn't saying quicksaves would be a good option in a TES game. I was just explaining why some games use it while trying to make a point.

The only times I have had CTD is when fast-traveling from a certain trap pit outside of Whitetrun. Other that that, it never happens.

Never have I had any problems with bugs, not that I can think off - then again I do use a bug patch.
But tbh you shouldn't design a game around bugs - bugs should get fixed.

On a side note, it seems people have so much problems with their games - I just recently went back to Morrowind, a game where apparently people have been making multiple saves and then backing them up due to getting them corrupted all the time. Just like somone mentioned in here.

Now, I played Morrowind when it was brand new - for about 2 years straight. Never had a corrupted save, nor have I had it in Skyrim either.

Yeah, not too sure what the OP is thinking- most games with static save points have a clear, linear path you're following, so the save point is on the way to where you're going. How would that be implemented here, exactly?

If you're looking to make the game more challenging, move the difficulty slider. Turn off your compass. Travel at night. If you're on PC, there are dozens of mods to make the game darker, harder, and have more difficult enemies.

A save point doesn't make the gameplay more difficult, just more frustrating.

I agree, unless you're playing a game like Dark Souls with restricted areas, it would be more fuss than it's worth. Only way i could see it working would be with an inn system similar to resting on Dragons Dogma, but again i think players would just find this to be an inconvenience.

I like the save system as it is. I hate it when games have certain save points, as it takes away the freedom to choose when you save and when you want to leave the game.

Back when the games where a bit more advanced I liked that you could play around with the game a lil to get advantages. Yes.

However I prefer to play smart and not use dumb exploits like save and spam-try to pickpocket something - thats not exploiting to me thats just dirty cheating and game breaking

TES has always allowed you to save when you want. In every single game since 1994. I don't want to see this changed.

As buggy as these games are, being able to save at will is necessary...at any moment the game could freeze, glitch or crash and you could lose hours of your game if you didn't save recently.

Its one thing to die normally and have to start a quest over but when the quest is killed by a bug and you dont have a save to fall back on it becomes a nightmare

I can understand how saving before, say a pickpocket attempt, etc., would be immersion breaking.

However, in the case of combat, I save rather frequently, as I enjoy combat most when I'm dying dozens of times with almost every encounter. If I were to play on a checkpoint system (which I don't even think could be implemented well for an open world game), or Dead is Dead type of playthrough, either the combat would be too easy (not dying), or I would never make it out of Helgen alive.

However, for anyone interested in something like a checkpoint, you know Skyrim has three auto-save slots, and I think you can adjust the time in-between each, so perhaps that would provide that experience you're looking for.

As for the pickpocket, the devs implemented a function in the lockpicking where if you save and reload it resets the lock in a different place, right? Perhaps there is a mod that does something similar with pickpocketing. In my personal opinion, it seems rather boring to reload a save in order to pickpocket someone. When I'm playing a thief, getting caught and thrown in jail is a huge part of the fun of playing a criminal character.

Save when you see fit to, or don't. Your choice. You're not being made to do anything. It's all on you to supply that challenge you're jonesing for.

No thanks, I like to save when I want. Then I can also quit whenever I want and besides I hate having to go through an entire dungeon again, because the boss killed me. Also checkpoints can work well in linnear games, but where the hell are you gonna place the checkpoints? Especially if you just go around exploring and looking for butterfiles.

Ever since I was playing Pokemon I was saving way too much. Too used to it.

if you dont like using saves then..dont.
noones holding a gun to your head,but leave them as they are for the rest of us! cheers

I don't really want the TES games to become thrilling in that way. I think it would be better to accept that limitation and (wherever possible) move away from situations where success or failure comes down to a single random number with heavy consequences for a bad roll. Like in combat, there's more to it than just going up to an enemy, selecting "attack" and then being told if you die or they die, so you can't beat any enemy just by doing nothing but reloading until you get lucky.

I don't like checkpoint saves. To me, that belongs on linear console games, not open world ones. If you don't like autosave you can turn it off. If you don't like quicksave, don't use it.

Like mentioned above - I never said that save points are the way to do it. I was making a point how horror/survival games use survival together with the horror theme to make them somewhat intimidating. If not for the fact that you have unlimted ammo and never know when you are going to die.. they wouldn't classify as horror games IMO.

Then I tried to explain why the fact that you can for example: save before breaking the law in skyrim and just ignoring the crime system all together takes away from the genre just like. Being able to save EVERYWHERE in a horror game would be bad for that genre.

As for moving difficulty slider etc. I have never played on anything less then master in Skyrim and the only mods I use are ones for darker nights etc.. and deadly dragons. But it has got nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.

The point was that even tho skyrim isnt all that much of a challenge to begin with, sure it's fine - I'm not gonna complain much about the challenge when playing the game without exploiting.

But being able to avoid failure by simply saving and loading takes away from the thrill in a game - Am I the only one who play games for other reasons then to look at the pretty graphics while picking flowers nowdays?

Imagine playing an MMORPG and being able to save before you do something. Why do we need to save all the time in singleplayer games?

I see most people have a really hard time understanding my point.

Why is it that nowdays failure is only an option if the player wants it to be? Of course I'm going to save if I can, but it feels dirty. Why do we even have a criminal system in the game? have anyone actually been in jail? or had to bribe a guard?

Does anyone actually know what its like in this game?

ah crap. Not that i save to get away from getting a bounty or anything thing, i'm just a "compulsive saver". Bit i hate to redo things so i prob quick save every other minute.

On topic: I see what op mean, but the fact of the matter is if you don't want to save be4 picking a pocket you don't need to. And since this is a 100% singel player game there is tbh non of your business if other player save before picking pockets (or other things) or not.
On a off note you may want to give Mount & Blade a go, if you play realistic save mode (i think it's called) you can't quit the game with out saving .

Of course I know what it's like. I don't save before every action. I save when I feel it might be necessary. Like before walking into a room in a dungeon where some obvious shenanigans might be going down, or before I enter a house I'm looking to burgle-- because a bad save inside the spot would be a pain in the rear just as much.
I also save for utility reasons, for example when I'm experimenting with enchanting with limited soul gems at my disposal, and the obligatory "I've been running around for a while, may as well make a hard save."

Just because our way of doing things differs from yours and you have these personal hangups about it, doesn't mean yours are any more pure or righteous. We're just playing a game that allows us the freedom to do this sort of thing.

"Do what you want", written in black in white in the Morrowind manual. I take those words to heart.