I find that I often end up not finishing games that don't allow you to save whenever you want. Gaming tires me out so much (and often so unexpectedly) that having to push on to a checkpoint -- and who knows where the next one might be -- despite physically needing to stop does not endear me to the game. Nor does having to replay content because I died between checkpoints. I really enjoy Titan Quest but getting sent back to the same point over and over (and then dealing with respawns) is starting to not work for me.

I understand this is part of gaming to some extent, the design where you save at checkpoints, or only if you pick up a certain item, or whatever. I have long been a "creep saver" anyway, since the days of text adventures (meaning you creep along, save, creep along, save). But since becoming disabled, I'm starting to see the ability to do so as not only a convenience but an actual accessibility feature.

Anyone else?

Yes! As someone with fatigue and GI problems I find the ability to save when I need to almost essential.
I suspect that the save spheres present in FFX and FFXI were part of while I didn't finish either game. It was just too draining. With older consoles things like GameShark would sometimes allow you to save anywhere but on the PS2 a network card is almost required for GameShark to work correctly. On the xbox360 there just doesn't seem to be something like GameShark and as I understand it there never will be.

Dead Space uses save points as well but I don't find it quite as frustrating. Part of it is that the points are more frequent than in FF, as far as I can tell. Also, when I die I seem to rez at the last doorway I went through prior to dying
rather than at the last save. So, while I don't like save points they can be done in less difficult ways than others.

Lisa

I remember getting the high score on Jumpman II on the Commodore 64 and realizing that I didn't prep the disc for saving the few bits of data "RKM" and my score would take up because I forgot to take the little gum-wrapper type thing off the notch in the floppy disc, and then flipping out because I couldn't write my initials over "VIC".

What a trip it was to take Sonic the Hedgehog 3 out of it's case and start the game for the first time. Not only was there 1 save slots, but there were 10! What an idea, both taking info from a cartridge, but also being able to write info back to the cartridge.

From the Commodore 64 through most of Genesis to the original Playstation, saving wasn't really an option. The closest I could get to saving was the start button, and there's no way I could ever get away with that.

Once Sony brought there Playstation out with it's memory cards, saving became the thing to do. If the option was there, it got taken. That happens to this day - even with auto-save being there.

I don't know if auto-saving is so much a question of accessibility as it is a matter of responsibility.

<strong>Ronin KX wrote:</strong>
I don't know if auto-saving is so much a question of accessibility as it is a matter of responsibility.

I agree with this. And moving mostly from console to PC gaming has helped in this area, or maybe it's just the ones I like to play tend to have free save/auto-save (like Bethesda's and Bioware's games).

And yes, save spheres is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. "Draining" is the word all right, which is too bad because I recall enjoying the game otherwise.

I think most gamers who have ANY experience with PC gaming still believe in saving and saving often and using different save slots in case one was corrupted.

I have to admit, I really dislike the checkpoint system precisely because of how far apart some developers place checkpoints. I can say without any spoilers that "Alan Wake" is likely the single-best implementation of a checkpoint system that I've ever seen - there's usually a checkpoint before any major event, after any event, and usually a bunch along the way. I'm not exaggerating when I say that some checkpoints are about 30 seconds apart, and not because of any boss fights or hard puzzles - they're just that close.

I don't know that developers think of saving vs. checkpoints as an accessibility issue, but it sure feels like it makes "Alan Wake" a LOT more accessible (and it's already pretty accessible), so maybe they should.

@Ronin: Remember having disc punches to knock those tabs out? I pulled that stuff with Ultima III and Bard's Tale and a bunch of other games back in the 5 1/4" era.

@Puckett: All of my discs were hand-me-downs, so all I really had to worry about was taking the protective gum wrapper off before I was ready to go. I think it was there for protection against magnets or something like that.

Actually a common method in ff and other such games was that you could save freely on the world map, and needed points/crystals to save in areas.

As a pc gamer first and foremost I do multi save. Auto save and checkpoints have the same problem. Alan wake imho is a good example. Walk in the wrong direction and you are locked in/out. On my first run twice my exploring was punished by an event triggering early. Especially on nightmare there are one or two sequences I really did not want to do over just so i could grab an item. _The checkpoints were not always well scripted either. Once or twice I passed trough the right spot without the checkpoint taking.

@Wacky Lisa: network adapter for the ps2 how so? I do not know about gameshark since thats the US version, but the xploder etc worked just fine without any of that. Only thing that came close was using an usb link cable to save files from the memory cards to pc or update the code database etc.

@puckett101: I did one worse. punching holes in several single sided dd floppies to make them double sided. On the 3.5's they would remove the write protect switch on some. I think lucas got into the habbit of doing that with their game discs. I know for a fact pc mag did, still have a few of those somewhere.

@RenderB: Oh, I remember the double-punch method Any gamers who used anything in the Apple II era do. I'm pretty sure that era continued to ... hmmm ... when did I get my first CD-ROM drive ... 1993 maybe? 1994? My first hard drive had 40 megs of storage, so I KNOW it wasn't 1990 ...

@Ronin: If you're talking about the tape on the side, that was preventing a drive from writing to the disc. In the case of floppy discs, nothing protected them from magnets. Maybe a thick lead casing, but a sticker would do sweet F.A. to protect a floppy from a magnet.

<strong>RenderB wrote:</strong>
Actually a common method in ff and other such games was that you could save freely on the world map, and needed points/crystals to save in areas.

I'm sure it is but apparently I never figured it out for FFX or FFXI so the method was far too complex for someone with mild-moderate cognitive impairment.
Although, my husband has played the same games. He can figure out almost anything and can read the manuals. He never found a free save in world map method.

Wacky Lisa: network adapter for the ps2 how so? I do not know about gameshark since thats the US version, but the xploder etc worked just fine without any of that. Only thing that came close was using an usb link cable to save files from the memory cards to pc or update the code database etc.

With my version (I can't get the number right now) you have a limited list of codes on a disk and you can get additional codes online and transfer them to a memory card via a USB drive. If you don't have a network connection the GameShark won't let you use the downloaded codes in my experience.

I hate those types of games! Save anywhere should be STANDARD!!!

<strong>puckett101 wrote:</strong>
I don't know that developers think of saving vs. checkpoints as an accessibility issue, but it sure feels like it makes "Alan Wake" a LOT more accessible (and it's already pretty accessible), so maybe they should.

I didn't either, honestly, until pretty recently. As people have mentioned, I've been in the habit of creep saving to avoid corrupted game data and power outages; plus I learned early from Zork I to save before you try anything wacky in a game. It was only some months ago that it really occurred to me how much I rely on it due to my disability.

I'd say Dragon Age on the PC just about achieves perfection here, with unlimited save slots, a quicksave key, and a well-timed autosave that fires in new areas, before big moments, etc. (Maybe not as robust as Alan Wake but not nearly as bad as some of the checkpoint systems people have mentioned.) I love it, but I certainly don't require that in every game. One save slot and the ability to use it more or less whenever I want is enough for me.

The review I'm almost done with (I swear!) does include savability as an accessibility feature, and based on this thread I think I'll include it in future reviews as well. I agree with puckett101 that developers should be encouraged to see it this way.

Well, there's an obvious thought that has been overlooked.

In my line of "work", when doing the disabled access auditing thing, most of the disabilities you need to account for (with shop entrances, workplaces, etc) are physical ones. That doesn't mean, of course, that other forms aren't supported by the Disability Discrimination Act, just that the physical ones are usually more applicable to the case.

So, extending that to games - as Mark, Steve, and many others have pointed out on here - visual disability, cognitive disability, aural disability, and various physical disabilities such as lack of full motion are represented too, so it's only fair to include the factor of tiredness in this. Let's face it, many of us who have any disability, whatever it may be, often get more tired than an able-bodied person would in a similar situation, so it's not exactly a "niche" disability (I apologise for the poor choice of wording there).

I don't doubt Mark et al will pick up on this, and maybe include it in future reviews? *Begs oh-so-nicely*

Apart from this, as many of us (cough) seasoned (cough) gamers know, games are generally easier rides nowadays (that's no criticism), so factoring in extra or "free" saving is not rocket science to be honest. In fact, I'd bet most debug modes on games have them already there! I feel it's shoddy (or lazy) programming to be deliberately sparse with those save points these days.

Oops, I feel another crusade coming on ... developers beware!

Anyway, final point to Wacky Lisa - I know what you mean about those GameSharks. I think the version 4 (or 5?) for the PS2 did those tricks where you had to go on the internet. I'd advise trying to find a version 3. As with RenderB, I use the Xploder disc, which amounts to the same thing. It uses the same codes. I'm fairly sure you'd be able to pick up one from somewhere fairly cheap now. The only requirement you need with it is the little bit of space on the memory card for the save file.

Of course, if you do have trouble (and your console's chipped), give me a shout, I could always send you a copy - assuming I'm not breaching any forum rules for offering such a thing

On another note, I've been playing Borderlands DLCs lately, and they have the annoying habit of returning you to the entry point for the DLC when you start a new gaming session, regardless of where you were when you saved. So, as an example, I was four or five zones into one of the DLCs when I saved (and Borderlands does allow you to save anywhere, typically returning you to the nearest autosave point on restart) and it pushed me right back to the beginning. Annoying. >

That is also - to me - an accessibility issue in that it all but requires a gamer to complete all the missions in a given area in a single sitting.

Furthermore, in Mad Moxxi's Underdome Riot, it's effectively arena combat with multiple waves of enemies, several waves per round, and several rounds per challenge (I believe I counted 20 separate rounds in one challenge last night, each of which was VERY time consuming) with no way to save progress between rounds. If you leave, you start over from the beginning.

@puckett101: on what dlc would that be? As far as I can remember the game will warp you back to the last settlement you visited in the main game as well. Could it be because enemies constantly respawn, and so it is to prevent you from loading a game in the middle of a mob? I did notice there are fewer teleporters, and that is annoying.

@crunchyfrog555: I'll take real manual saves over checkpoints any day of the week. Btw, I am one of those that complains games these days are too simple from a complexity and mental challenge point of view.
Even though I am a great advocate for lots of options, and customization in games. I do realize that there is a limit. You cannot make a game playable by everyone, just like a dev should not try to make each game appeal to everyone,
(Of course that goes against current thinking. The major studios focus on single big budget mainstream titles. )
Having said that: Large fonts, a pause feature, subtitles, alternate control schemes, button mapping and so on should be options in most games. They should also be worked out well, so setting 'slow battle speed' for example should not make a fight near impossible. (Glares at Sqenix)

On the gameshark/xploder: Unless there is a seriously limited version out there somewhere. You can always enter new codes manually if you do not want to use a link cable no?

I'm with RendeB... At what point is too much, too much?

Subtitles large enough for people to read comfortably, legible menus, remap-able buttons, and being able to pause the game anywhere. Sure there are other things that could make people's lives easier, but who really wants to be able to skate through every part of a game? Not I.

<i>Spyro thinks to itself "I don't like the looks of that sheep over there - better save".</i>

There are additions to games that I'd like to see, but the ability to rearrange the HUD to suit my game playing arrangement isn't really all that important.

I realized something while playing Metal Gear Solid. We should be glad we've got pause buttons. Not necessarily for anything related to gameplay, but because the cut-scenes are about the length of movies.

@RenderB: Dr. Ned's Zombie Island and General Knoxx - I looked into it, and saving in an area returns you to the nearest Fast Travel / New-U station on restart. Those DLCs only have one Fast Travel / New-U station in the entire DLC, so you basically start over several times if you don't play the entire DLC in one sitting.

@RoninKX: The problem, IMO, is people who don't do the easy stuff. Then you get folks on the opposite end who want to exaggerate everything, like a troll who posted a now-deleted comment saying he was surprised I didn't want games to be in Braille.

As far as I'm concerned, any good game should have the following:

1. Letterboxed subtitles in a clear, legible, readable font that allows people to change the size between, for lack of a better term, a regular size (12-16 points or so) and a large print version.

2. Offer a subtitle option that only includes mission-specific / game tip / hint dialogue, as well as a fully subtitled / captioned version that includes ambient chatter and relevant sounds in the subtitles (see Left 4 Dead as a perfect example).

3. Allow gamers to change the color / size of target reticles / crosshairs / scopes (i.e. that dot in Red Dead Redemption that's too small for anyone to see well) to improve targeting and reduce issues with gamers who have a form of color blindness.

4. Save anywhere.

5. A controller configuration that puts the most commonly used controls on the right stick / trigger, and another configuration that puts them on the left stick / trigger. For some games, like "Skate," this is not likely to be possible due to the use of the sticks to control tricks. For first-person shooters, there's no reason not to do this.

6. Relying on different color schemes than red and green when using color in puzzles. Just because it's on stop lights doesn't mean it should be used as a default.

7. Fewer / no time-based puzzles. These just turn into twitch gaming for no real purpose - it's little more than whether you can flick the sticks / buttons / triggers quickly enough, not whether you can solve the puzzle.

8. The above point dovetails nicely with turn-based combat (old-school RPG style which allows you to have as much time as you want) whenever possible, or, at the very least, a feature to slow combat down in single-player modes.

I don't think these are unreasonable goals. Note that I'm specifically stating that these things should be in single-player modes. Multiplayer is a different beast. Frankly, I like the way COD4: Modern Warfare handled combat speeds - harder difficulties allowed less time. However, I think there should have been at least one additional difficulty level which offered even more time than the modes included.

Yeah i did notice the lack of teleporters. I did do dr nedd in more than one sitting. I never really found it a problem. But quick zapping to areas would have been nice.

I find the gamer in me having some notes on one or two of your points. Save everywhere, except in certain sequences or boss fights.
I can see your point about timed puzzles, but only as an option. Those that do like a challenge should have the option to do them, and maybe link an achievement to doing them all the "hard' way. As much as I cursed the timer in some games like Darksiders, it does offer a challenge. It also gives an extra kick once you've done it.

imho minigames such as in KOTOR, GoW 2 or FF should always be optional. Again I'm quite happy if that means missing out on an item or achievement.

<strong>RenderB wrote:</strong>
I can see your point about timed puzzles, but only as an option. Those that do like a challenge should have the option to do them, and maybe link an achievement to doing them all the "hard' way.

This is a great idea. I agree there's a fine balance between being accessible and making things too easy, and I think more options like this are probably the best way to keep that balance.