Save games needed

[freespirit]

Hi all. DCS never had this feature which is a biggest downside of the game for me. It is very frustrating when you nearly completed the mission and than crash right on the end. Or when you flying the long distance and after 20 minutes your computer suddenly crash and then you have to repeat everything from the beginning. To do a save game during the mission will be a great. Than you don't have to repeat the whole mission just because you did stupid mistake. Sometimes when you fly the long mission you could finish it next day. I think that is really no necessary to explain more of the the benefits of save games. Some players probably can say that with save game the game wont be a simulator any more. It's not true because in game we have already options to speed up the time or active pause. Some players don't have to do 'save games' if they feel that it is not necessary for them. But we should have this option to be able customize the game to how we want to play. The game than become more enjoyable for less experienced players or for someone who don't have that much time to repeat 6 or more times one mission.

[Gierasimov]

Please... NO

 

(...) It is very frustrating when you nearly completed the mission and than crash right on the end. (...)

 

(...) But we should have this option to be able customize the game to how we want to play. The game than become more enjoyable for less experienced players or for someone who don't have that much time to repeat 6 or more times one mission.

 

To be honest I disagree with the save game idea. Once in a while people do make mistakes and I understand this can be frustrating, but on the other hand, if it is then stop, take a solid hours long pause from DCS and try again. Master you skills, short-cutting with save game is not going to make you better anyway. Simulations are one of the genre that gives you one life and one life only, if you die in DCS you are replaced by another pilot. If you worry about your Logbook then take a backup of it.

 

I agree with the opinion of customizing the game to your style and liking but I would rather see dev resources used in better way than making this happen.

 

You can always play instant mission in external view / game mode if you lack skills or time ;)

[SharpeXB]

Some games used to allow save at will and yeah it was possible to just qsave comtinually to cheat your way through them.

 

But all games today have some sort of progress save system. Flight sims really suffer in appeal because who wants to replay an hour long mission or have to quit your progress if something else intervenes (wait honey I'm almost done with this mission... )

 

So the ability should be in the ME and let the designer decide how to implement.

Yes there are challenge type campaigns like Maple Flag where I agree completing the whole mission at once without saves is part of the deal.

But other solutions might include auto saves at mission waypoints or after objectives. Similar to all other games.

The Museum Relic campaign offers an "Auto Sucess" setting where you can choose to advance in the campaign regardless. I don't really want to "skip ahead" though. I'd feel cheated. But see there's an example.

The DCS engine is capable of saves. It used to let you take over tracks so you can tell it's possible. So add this as a setting and see what people do with it.

You could make realistically hours long sorties that actually require air to air refueling like in reality. Wouldn't that be cool.

[shagrat]

Some games used to allow save at will and yeah it was possible to just qsave comtinually to cheat your way through them.

 

But all games today have some sort of progress save system. Flight sims really suffer in appeal because who wants to replay an hour long mission or have to quit your progress if something else intervenes (wait honey I'm almost done with this mission... )

 

So the ability should be in the ME and let the designer decide how to implement.

Yes there are challenge type campaigns like Maple Flag where I agree completing the whole mission at once without saves is part of the deal.

But other solutions might include auto saves at mission waypoints or after objectives. Similar to all other games.

The Museum Relic campaign offers an "Auto Sucess" setting where you can choose to advance in the campaign regardless. I don't really want to "skip ahead" though. I'd feel cheated. But see there's an example.

The DCS engine is capable of saves. It used to let you take over tracks so you can tell it's possible. So add this as a setting and see what people do with it.

You could make realistically hours long sorties that actually require air to air refueling like in reality. Wouldn't that be cool.

Hmm, I think you should just practice more... It's like AAR just needs time and practice. ;)

 

Sorry buddy, I couldn't resist...

 

But honestly, it isn't such a bad idea, as discussed in another thread time and real live does interfere, at which point a "finish this later" option could be pretty comforting.

 

The tracks especially after longer flights, or when using dynamic weather don't play 100% accurate, but something like a "snapshot" may do the trick.

[FSKRipper]

The DCS engine is capable of saves. It used to let you take over tracks so you can tell it's possible.

 

I would disagree in this point. As long as tracks are not played back 100% correct especially in turbulent or long missions we can't speak of a working save system. And as long as this system is not bug free we can waive the idea of mission saving.

 

Apart from this I'm against such a feature for the reason you told already for the qualification campaigns. Before somebody gets the RL mace out, I have a wife, two little children and a job so yes, I know RL. Currently I'm studying the briefings in the of the A-10C Red Flag campaign and the according maps in the evening to prepare for the Saturday evening when I do my next Mission. If it went wrong I would hate it to quickload instead of going through the Tacview recording to find my mistakes (Anybody knows how Tacview will behave with saves ? :music_whistling:)

 

The point to make it an option in the ME is as useful as the Autoland, Autostart, Autorefuel demandings. If ED would implerment even 50% of all this stuff the ME will get so overloaded that most Newbies won't even touch this tool and we could only rely on some experienced cracks to get new missions...

 

The issue for me would be that with saves you continue the game flow but you won't learn anything and get better by avoiding your mistakes. You will quickload until you have a lucky run and don't get an idea what went on...

[Yurgon]

It is very frustrating when you nearly completed the mission and than crash right on the end. Or when you flying the long distance and after 20 minutes your computer suddenly crash and then you have to repeat everything from the beginning. [...]

 

Agreed, that would be a very cool feature IMO!

 

In most cases, I probably wouldn't use it. But like you said, in long missions, when something stupid happens (including my own stupid mistakes ;)), or when DCS crashes, it would be nice to be able to resume a flight instead of having to repeat it.

 

There have definitely been instances where I was frustrated by a mission and never flew it again, just because of one or two design decisions I strongly disagreed with and that destroyed an otherwise good impression I had of the mission. That would be one example where the ability to continue from a save game would actually make DCS more enjoyable for me.

 

Me, I'm all for it. :thumbup:

[SharpeXB]

I would disagree in this point. As long as tracks are not played back 100% correct especially in turbulent or long missions we can't speak of a working save system. And as long as this system is not bug free we can waive the idea of mission saving.

I think there's a mod that can already do this but it's not tied to campaign progress the way DCS tracks it.

 

Apart from this I'm against such a feature for the reason you told already for the qualification campaigns.

Certainly the ability to save at will would totally spoil a campaign like that, there's no challenge if you can just create your own save points and restart at any point.

But if the option was designed into a campaign in the right manner, it could open up a lot of options and playability.

And the ability to Live Die and Repeat? Well it would just make flight sims just like every other game out there (which are more popular...) Can you imagine any other game with no saves?

As 3rd parties keep making campaigns maybe someone will realize that this feature is a strong selling point.

[FSKRipper]

Can you imagine any other game with no saves?

 

Sure, without advertising some specific game they call it Hardcore Mode or Ironman Mode :music_whistling:

 

You are much more careful when knowing that death has consequences.

 

I'm aware that specific games (like Civ f.e.) need savegames but if I have not enough time to prepare and play a campaign mission I choose another shorter option. Just my two cents and I'm aware that most people have another point of view which is fine for me :thumbup:

[freespirit]

To be honest I disagree with the save game idea. Once in a while people do make mistakes and I understand this can be frustrating, but on the other hand, if it is then stop, take a solid hours long pause from DCS and try again. Master you skills, short-cutting with save game is not going to make you better anyway.

 

I agree that 'save game' is not going to make me a better pilot, but this is not the point, because every player can have a different expectations from the game. I'm not playing this game to improve my flying skills but rather to just simply enjoy flying a military plane/helicopter and to complete missions in reasonable time, without spending too many hours to learn in detail how to fly or to repeat the same mission on and on. So to be a better pilot is not my goal. But of course I agree that other players expect much more advance approach to the game and they want to improve their flying skills. I will treat the save game feature as another option, and player can decide to use in or not. It is like the options of speed up the time or active pause. They are just an options. If some advanced players decide that these options are unrealistic, just don't use them, that's it. The same with save game. If someone feels that it is not necessary to have them in game, just simply never do the save game and just fly as you always did. So in my opinion introduce the save game doesn't change anything for hardcore players who want to play a real simulator. Save game just make the game more accessible for more casual players, but don't take anything from advanced one. It is a win-win situation.

[FSKRipper]

I agree that 'save game' is not going to make me a better pilot, but this is not the point, because every player can have a different expectations from the game. I'm not playing this game to improve my flying skills but rather to just simply enjoy flying a military plane/helicopter and to complete missions in reasonable time, without spending too many hours to learn in detail how to fly or to repeat the same mission on and on. So to be a better pilot is not my goal. But of course I agree that other players expect much more advance approach to the game and they want to improve their flying skills. I will treat the save game feature as another option, and player can decide to use in or not. It is like the options of speed up the time or active pause. They are just an options. If some advanced players decide that these options are unrealistic, just don't use them, that's it. The same with save game. If someone feels that it is not necessary to have them in game, just simply never do the save game and just fly as you always did. So in my opinion introduce the save game doesn't change anything for hardcore players who want to play a real simulator. Save game just make the game more accessible for more casual players, but don't take anything from advanced one. It is a win-win situation.

 

You choose very wise words to express your point of view and as already said I have no problems with people following this way.

But as with all the other additional items on the wishlist I see one problem. If ED will follow these with their precious time, we can plan some additional months/years before we see 2.5, the new Caucasus map, revised NTTR, the F-18 and all the other nice suprises. Can only speak for myself but I'm 36 years now and would be happy to fly a F-14 and F-18 from a carrier in the Gulf before some stupid handicap like Alzheimers disease, a traffic accident or cancer get's me :joystick:

Edited September 14, 2016 by FSKRipper

[shagrat]

You choose very wise words to express your point of view and as already said I have no problems with people following this way.

But as with all the other additional items on the wishlist I see one problem. If ED will follow these with their precious time, we can plan some additional months/years before we see 2.5, the new Caucasus map, revised NTTR, the F-18 and all the other nice suprises. Can only speak for myself but I'm 36 years now and would be happy to fly a F-14 and F-18 from a carrier in the Gulf before some stupid handicap like Alzheimers disease, a traffic accident or cancer get's me :joystick:

The idea of a "wishlist" is not, to have a list of work items that are directly transferred into the project management.

The idea is to collect things that can be an advancement, optimization or cool new feature of DCS.

First there must be a decision if it should be done. Then there is a priorization of tasks and sometimes while you already work on, let's say "fixing the track-file-playback desynchronization" you find a couple of hours to add a snapshot option to the track recording function and sneak a save and load button into the ESC-Menu...

Who knows?

 

I doubt any new requests, will get any love before the 2.5 merge, and I am very happy with that.

From my point of view a single maintainable source, with one update stream, all maps and modules integrated, consistent and on the same feature level is paramount to the progress of DCS World.

Maybe an overhaul of the AI, damage modelling and route finding.

 

Everything else, after that is achieved. :)

[winz]

While I would love to see a savegame feature, I don't think we will see one anytime soon. The reason is that saving state of a simulation is not a simple task, and would most likely require the overhaul of all modules.

[sc_neo]

Hrm....i am kinda split about this feature. I just lost 1.5h of play because i stupidly clicked on quit after i reched something on the briefing screen. You know, the save game thing would mainly come in handy when i you gotta do something else, or on long training sorties where its less about immersion and more about getting things done without having to set things up each time i play.

 

On the other hand: i gotta say, this thing; that you have to really do it each and everytime properly...and the feeling you get when i touch down, call in and taxi to the parking area...shut down and then it is finished....i don't know how often i would have that if i could break each and every mission up into multiple play sessions. I reckon its a tough call. Yeah, nobody has to save all the time...but i am not sure how i would use it!

[Frederf]

Save game state would be an AMAZING feature. People talk about how to make a dynamic campaign by stringing missions together, sharing data between missions, etc. but what about a single mission that you could play over days, weeks, years that you simply saved/loaded between sessions. It would be a one-mission multi-session campaign. No need to stringing multiple missions together; they're only be one!

[Pikey]

In terms of single player, I believe you are asking for the Track system to be more accurate, so it would be useful enough, else, the feasibility of this is there, simply fast forward to the point you stopped flying and take over control.

 

In terms of MP, it's not easy to design. You need to capture the air starts for the clients, then assuming you could get them all to sync whilst paused, unpause the server and hope to hell the world doesn't stop rotating.

 

You can save the mission state with DAWS apart from aircraft/clients. I'd like to see this integrated better with core game and supported. There are some design limitations - bombing scenery being the biggest one, runways reset, scenery will return to being as mission start and so on. but it works and I used it way back more than a year ago for a 12 player campaign and it played out for weekend sessions for three months with very little work. Much fun, golden days.

 

TBH, this shoud be wrapped into the dedicated server technology ad come with persistent mission tools for campaigns, because its really just a different example of doing the same thing. We all asked for that way back in a poll and it was the top scoring item, over a 4th gen jet. So go figure, it's not done yet. I'm sure ED have had conversations about it.

 

Save game state would be an AMAZING feature. People talk about how to make a dynamic campaign by stringing missions together, sharing data between missions, etc. but what about a single mission that you could play over days, weeks, years that you simply saved/loaded between sessions. It would be a one-mission multi-session campaign. No need to stringing multiple missions together; they're only be one!

[HiJack]

The problem is of course only there in singleplayer. DAWS savegame is a god start but it needs more development to really save the status in a campaign. I completely see that people could use that during a campaign. DAWS savegame works fine for longer multiplayer campaigns in current build.

 

But there is so many bugs end stuff to fix in current builds of DCS that I'm pretty sure we won't see anything on this front for many years. At least not from ED. I guess it's not just to throw new developers at the SIM either. If "saving status" could be sold as a separate feature it may be more interesting for ED but how many would pay for it? If I had a say at ED's I would also developed a online flight log and sold access for ekstended access to information and features for flight log reports. Could also include flight planner. I would by access in an instant!

[some1]

If "saving status" could be sold as a separate feature it may be more interesting for ED but how many would pay for it?

 

In my case, I simply stopped playing and buying campaigns because of lack of ability to save the progress mid-flight. It's just too damn frustrating with my limited time and occasional mission breaking bugs in DCS.

[Pikey]

Absolutely agree. The fundamental design of the Engine has limits. Short version: it's a large file giving all the starting conditions for the mission, but there are a bunch of things in there that aren't in there, such as scenery states, warehouse states which change throughout the mission but are not capable of being 'recorded'. DAWS is almost a proof of concept that you could extend the simulation as an addon, with some limitations. The RM is simply in memory, as with some of the special damage to scenery like buildings and runway.

 

And as you say, you don' think it will change (me neither) because we've seen exactly the same engine run under the hood without change since the very begining of the game. There's simply no sign that it will change at all in history or mentioned publically. So no reason to think it ever will.

 

This is why we've seen mods like DAWS, extensive scripting from Mbot and external tools like Ian's Mission planner, as well as the laborious efforts of server admins to enhance servers and provide content that DCS otherwise would not have for MP groups, eg Blue Flag and those types of server. Not forgetting people that extend the scripting, even into entire modules of scripts and their own language eg MIST, MOOSE, ATME and so on. The community has propped up the missing parts of DCS well. If it had not been for these people, my interest would have disappeared long ago along with many others from the MP community, and to those people I give my thanks.

 

But I fear the golden times are over and if ED cannot rescue the basic structure of the simulation to allow it to be more easily extensible, the community will give up making decent multiplayer extensions and we will be limited to Single Player experiences that are hollow and hold no long term interest.

 

I lost count of the numbers of module sales that were made in the groups I have been a member of. Single players come and go. The real engine behind customer loyalty is the groups and communities that propel sales and keep people supported and playing with friends trying out things together. If they collapse, the long term player base will erode, and entry players will end up buying one module and quitting rather than more modules and continue. Of course, i've got no statistics to back that up, other than to list a long reel of names of people who stopped playing DCS over the last 4-5 years, and everyone of them was wanting to fly an F-18C. And yes, I can list a four figure sum of lost F-18C sales through unsatisfactory multiplayer - of which this thread is strongly related as a missing component of what many have asked for, for years.

 

I did meander into multiplayer a lot with that thought, but a "Save State technology" isn't just for Single player, it's a component of dynamic multiplayer campaigns for which both types of players would benefit, and the MP crowd arguably more so.

 

The problem is of course only there in singleplayer. DAWS savegame is a god start but it needs more development to really save the status in a campaign. I completely see that people could use that during a campaign. DAWS savegame works fine for longer multiplayer campaigns in current build.

 

But there is so many bugs end stuff to fix in current builds of DCS that I'm pretty sure we won't see anything on this front for many years. At least not from ED. I guess it's not just to throw new developers at the SIM either. If "saving status" could be sold as a separate feature it may be more interesting for ED but how many would pay for it? If I had a say at ED's I would also developed a online flight log and sold access for ekstended access to information and features for flight log reports. Could also include flight planner. I would by access in an instant!

[Frederf]

In terms of single player, I believe you are asking for the Track system to be more accurate, so it would be useful enough, else, the feasibility of this is there, simply fast forward to the point you stopped flying and take over control.

 

In terms of MP, it's not easy to design. You need to capture the air starts for the clients, then assuming you could get them all to sync whilst paused, unpause the server and hope to hell the world doesn't stop rotating.

 

You can save the mission state with DAWS apart from aircraft/clients. I'd like to see this integrated better with core game and supported. There are some design limitations - bombing scenery being the biggest one, runways reset, scenery will return to being as mission start and so on. but it works and I used it way back more than a year ago for a 12 player campaign and it played out for weekend sessions for three months with very little work. Much fun, golden days.

 

TBH, this shoud be wrapped into the dedicated server technology ad come with persistent mission tools for campaigns, because its really just a different example of doing the same thing. We all asked for that way back in a poll and it was the top scoring item, over a 4th gen jet. So go figure, it's not done yet. I'm sure ED have had conversations about it.

 

Not really what you say.

 

I don't mean playing back a track and taking over. I mean the mission previously took 1000 hours and was saved exactly as it was at a single moment. The next session takes that saved state and continues exactly where it left off without having to retrace and resimulate any of the previous 1000 hours. In extremis the saved game is simply a RAM dump of what was held in memory for DCS.exe yesterday and is simply reloaded into RAM and resumed as if it never stopped.

 

The program itself cannot distinguish if 1ms or 1,000 years have passed since the last frame.

[Moafuleum]

Maybe a possible option would be some kind of a "save and quit" option. If some RL thing interferes you from playing then you can stop and return another time but you cannot save and repeat the same point in the mission over and over again.

 

Then the hardcore simmers would still be satisfied and the frustrated ones also?

[MikeMikeJuliet]

This was an altogether interesting thread on the subject, and I would like to congribute with a few notes:

 

Firstly - savescumming through a singleplayer game is any one players own choice. If someone feels threatened by someone possibly having a shiny virtual medal for a virtual qualification by not actually playing it straight, I would say an evaluation of priorities is in order. No-one goes to war or do anything else with DCS World qualifications, and if someone wants to experience a campaign or a qualification their own way for their own enjoyment, it does not affect any other players gaming experience in the slightest.

 

Or at least it shouldn't.

 

Secondly - I feel a save feature is for single player. What has been described for multiplayer would actually require a proper multiplayer campaign framework, not a save feature. We would need scripts and triggers to be able to work accross a campaign instead of within a single mission only. All in all it would require a lot of other features as well, but that is, in my opinion, for another thread entirely.

 

In conclusion, I don't see a save feature being for multiplayer. I do aknowledge the argument that it could be used to split a multiplayer campaign into different gameplay sessions, but I feel that should just be made with a real MP-campaign system.

 

Thirdly - on the subject of a track fastforward working as a save: Allow me to ask, why should it be made so clunky for users? Firstly there is the issue of "will it play properly", as discussed. And it woukd be very inconvenient. Instead, press the "load" button and you are there - unless, of course you want to be able to continue the mission when ever.

 

Fouthly - A pause could be utilized as a training and scenario building aid. You can fly into a situation you want to practice in, save, and repeat the situation to your hearts content. An advantage compared to simply creating a mission in the editor is that you can have aircraft already engaged (i.e. maneuvering) when starting and all your switches already set correctly.

 

 

That is all for now.

 

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

[Exorcet]

I'd consider this a nearly required feature for a flight sim (or anything really). There are no downsides.

 

Track problems should be an concern, as a track deals with a lot more data. Basically, if your tracks are fine for the first ~2 seconds of playback (regardless what happens in long tracks), the save feature should be reliable.

 

This would make a very nice tool for convenience and for training, as you can repeatedly reenact a situation that went wrong without having to go through unrelated events.

[HiJack]

I agree with Mike, savegame for singleplayer and a dynamic campaign model for multiplayer that keeps on playing a war scenario with replenishment of resources.

 

The savegame system must be for single player campaigns only. This would allow longer campaign missions that could involve even one or more landing and refueling over a couple of days. So saving could be automatic every 5 minutes and it could overwrite the last save to conserve space. This will ensure that there is no "cheating" in making multiple saves along the campaign and will also solve the "crash" scenario, unless it crashes during the save moment.

[Frederf]

In conclusion, I don't see a save feature being for multiplayer. I do aknowledge the argument that it could be used to split a multiplayer campaign into different gameplay sessions, but I feel that should just be made with a real MP-campaign system.

 

There is no "multiplayer" or "single player." A correctly designed multiplayer-capable game is programmed to be multiplayer where solo play is simply the multiplayer code where only one person happened to show up. Splitting solo and multi into arbitrary incompatible architectures is a bad habit that needs to stop. Why is there a distinction? In the decision tree from main menu to flying "do I want to play with other people or not?" should happen at the end, not the beginning.

 

Save for multiplayer. Saving and reloading is the real system for multiplayer. The capability for the system to do this is a starting point. After the capability exists then you are free to design that may or may not include it.

 

1. Indefinite session
   
2. Halt-resume session from disk
   
3. Time skip/acceleration
   
4. Real time session content manipulation
   

With those four items the world's your oyster. Right now we have 1, 3, and 4 to some degree. Three could be better (time skip and/or a practical higher time accel) as could #4 (script can spawn stuff but it's not user friendly).

 

• Monday: Start mission session, play by self for X hours. Save and quit
  
• Tuesday: Resume mission session from save, play with 3 others for X hours. Save and quit.
  
• Wednesday: Resume session from save, play solo for X hours. Half way through session enable multiplayer join on the fly and others join and play. Save and quit.
  
• Thursday: Open saved state in mission editor and add in enemy tank column to attack. Save mission state.
  
• Friday: Open edited-saved mission state and fly with others to attack enemy tank column. Mission completed after 30 hours of playing.
  

Is it clear that from this paradigm that the concept of what is single player and what is multiplayer and that they are somehow different goes out the window? Single player is simply playing a multiplayer architecture where someone else won't (or can't) join. Think of everything that is different between the current single/multi situation and realize that none of those differences makes any sense. I challenge any difference between the two play environments that has a logical reason to be.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Frederf

[Ironhand]

Just like to mention that this sim in its childhood allowed you to save the game and, then, pick up where you left off and continue the flight. This, of course, was back when there was only SP and reasonable MP was a mere dream. But, at any rate, it didn't spell the end to flight simming as we knew it. Some people used it to cheat. Some people used it as a learning tool. Some people used it to break longer missions into shorter segments that fit the time they had to fly.