PDA

View Full Version : WTF?! No multiple save files?!



F3nix013
11-01-2015, 03:19 PM
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with Ubisoft? This is the second damn game in a row that they failed to put in multiple save files so that we didnt have to delete our original if someone else wanted to play. Didnt they learn from last year when people complained about this?

Or is it that Ubi wants more money by forcing people to go out and buy a copy of their own? Even though some people (like myself) have a brother that doesnt have a console and just wants to play mine.

This is bullsh*t.

RA503
11-01-2015, 04:31 PM
I agree 100% with you,I think that they do that because of microtransation,but they will never assume that,Petitions are useless,I discovers that with personal experience,but at least we can keep remember them in this forum...

OM3GA089
11-01-2015, 04:36 PM
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with Ubisoft? This is the second damn game in a row that they failed to put in multiple save files so that we didnt have to delete our original if someone else wanted to play. Didnt they learn from last year when people complained about this?

Or is it that Ubi wants more money by forcing people to go out and buy a copy of their own? Even though some people (like myself) have a brother that doesnt have a console and just wants to play mine.

This is bullsh*t.

Use separate accounts, that should work for you, but yeah I'd love to have multiple saves too. It wasn't something that need to be removed.

phoenix-force411
11-01-2015, 05:19 PM
They did this, I believe, to stop the games from screwing up your ACInitiates Progression. If you loaded a new save with 0% completion, your game on Initiates will take on that save file's progression instead. This causes Initiates to remove points and any earned unlockables associated with the game and your current level(your XP level drops). Uplay/Initiates does not keep a record of your highest completion percentage towards a particular game.

F3nix013
11-01-2015, 06:21 PM
Use separate accounts, that should work for you, but yeah I'd love to have multiple saves too. It wasn't something that need to be removed.

Cant. when i tried switching profiles, the system tryied syncing the information from what i had already done to go to his profile. I tried this the first night i had the game because we remembered how unity fd his up.

F3nix013
11-01-2015, 06:22 PM
They did this, I believe, to stop the games from screwing up your ACInitiates Progression. If you loaded a new save with 0% completion, your game on Initiates will take on that save file's progression instead. This causes Initiates to remove points and any earned unlockables associated with the game and your current level(your XP level drops). Uplay/Initiates does not keep a record of your highest completion percentage towards a particular game.

I think that is ******ed too. This is a next gen system they are working with and they cant get that sh*t straight after what happened last year? That just tells me they are either lazy or just dont care.

Captain Tomatoz
11-01-2015, 06:45 PM
I think that is ******ed too. This is a next gen system they are working with and they cant get that sh*t straight after what happened last year? That just tells me they are either lazy or just dont care.

Probably both

F3nix013
11-02-2015, 03:15 PM
Probably both

More than likely. And come next year, if the next AC only has 1 save file, i more than likely wont buy it. I dont think it is fair that all the other AC games have multiple save files on the current gen but when it comes to Unity and Syndicate on the next gen, somehow it is too much strain on the engine or too much effort from the devs or worst yet, they have a mindset of wanting more money and this is them trying to force people to buy a copy of their for that money.

My brother likes playing AC as well and we only have 1 next gen console being the XB1. I am the only one that really plays games on the console because im a gamer and its what i do. My brother hardly plays any games on the consoles to begin with and the ones he DOES play are the ones that i myself play. So he literally has NO incentive to spend around $400 just to play 1 or 2 games a year and he shouldnt have too considering i play the same games as him.

Jackdaw951
11-02-2015, 08:01 PM
Cant. when i tried switching profiles, the system tryied syncing the information from what i had already done to go to his profile. I tried this the first night i had the game because we remembered how unity fd his up.

That makes no sense at all. A separate profile not only could be a different person, but even someone who is visiting, and usually games on a different console. Sorry, but it doesn't wash. This is the way to do it, at least on the Xbox. On the PS4, you can also export the save file to a memory stick, pull the stick, then start the game over.

cawatrooper9
11-02-2015, 08:05 PM
Honestly, I don't see how they benefit from this. All I had to do to get my fiance going was create a new account for her. Ubisoft didn't get a single cent from that, nor did Microsoft- all it did was mildly inconvenience us.

F3nix013
11-03-2015, 12:02 AM
That makes no sense at all. A separate profile not only could be a different person, but even someone who is visiting, and usually games on a different console. Sorry, but it doesn't wash. This is the way to do it, at least on the Xbox. On the PS4, you can also export the save file to a memory stick, pull the stick, then start the game over.

I dont know what to tell you. When i got the game, the first thing i did was add my brothers account to my xbox. Then after that, i tried switching profiles from me to him and when i did that, a notice came up saying something like "syncing data, please wait". At that point i cancelled it because i didnt want to do that.

It pisses me off how we are being forced to do all this work around sh*t just because Ubi was either too ******* lazy or greedy to want to add in an extra save slot.

RzaRecta357
11-03-2015, 12:37 AM
Nah Fenix you just don't know what you're doing. If you xbox or playstation is set to home or activated.. Then any account on that system can play it's games.

So go make sure it's your accounts home console. Then sign completely out. Now bro signs in and can play happy as a clam.

SolidNSnake1985
11-03-2015, 03:05 PM
since they got rid of Coop from Unity i thought we could make a new game file... wth !

if they are really worried about "microtransactions" than how about atleast a new game+? .. you start a new game with all the upgrades you had in your first playthrough ..


PS. i still didn't play the game

cawatrooper9
11-03-2015, 03:39 PM
if they are really worried about "microtransactions" than how about atleast a new game+? .. you start a new game with all the upgrades you had in your first playthrough ..




Is that why? Microtransactions?

If microtransactions (which weren't supposed to even be in the game) are why I have to jump through hoops to start a new playthrough, then Ubisoft really needs to reconsider its priorities. They honestly aren't probably making that much off them, collecting gear and money/leveling is way easier than in Unity- especially when you consider that they may be losing customers next year (including, possibly, myself) if this becomes their trend.

RzaRecta357
11-04-2015, 05:43 PM
I hope it isn't that.

I'm gonna be upset if I don't have my Helix glitch finder I spent 5 bucks on once I totally 100% and backup my save to play again.

cawatrooper9
11-04-2015, 05:47 PM
I hope it isn't that.

I'm gonna be upset if I don't have my Helix glitch finder I spent 5 bucks on once I totally 100% and backup my save to play again.

I'd imagine it would still be in your marketplace even if it does get deleted, so you may just have to redownload it for free (which is still, admittedly, a hassle). Don't quote me on that though, I could totally be wrong.

SixKeys
11-04-2015, 09:40 PM
Microtransactions being the reason would make zero sense, considering that every other game on the market has them these days and still manage to give you multiple save slots.

Jackdaw951
11-05-2015, 06:02 PM
I dont know what to tell you. When i got the game, the first thing i did was add my brothers account to my xbox. Then after that, i tried switching profiles from me to him and when i did that, a notice came up saying something like "syncing data, please wait". At that point i cancelled it because i didnt want to do that.

It pisses me off how we are being forced to do all this work around sh*t just because Ubi was either too ******* lazy or greedy to want to add in an extra save slot.

Oh! No, no. The synching of data is going to happen regardless. Instead of giving us XONE users the (much-preferred) manual-backup/exporting option for saves, MS decided to have all save data synched to the "cloud" automatically. Whenever you play any game while online, your save data ends up on both your local storage and a server somewhere. Then when you load your profile into another console, all your save data for whatever game you boot up gets synched in from that server. This is normal, and has nothing to do with AC Syndicate per se.

Edit: My recommendation to you is to create a silver profile for yourself (with its own gamertag), using a separate email acct. Don't use your brother's, because then whatever you do with it ends up on whatever he does, wherever he may be. I don't blame you for being angry about it. They should have given us multiple save slots. It's all the more infuriating if that deficiency is motivated by self-serving reasons.

cawatrooper9
11-05-2015, 09:09 PM
Microtransactions being the reason would make zero sense, considering that every other game on the market has them these days and still manage to give you multiple save slots.

Fair enough.

I just don't get why this game only has one slot, then. It seems like they really went gung-ho to try to fix all of Unity's flaws, but they left one of the biggest ones right in the game (in my opinion).

Farlander1991
11-05-2015, 10:19 PM
This thread is making it sound like the conversation the developers had was something like:
Dev #1: "Should we add extra save slots?"
Dev #2: "Naaaaaah, **** it."

Which is obviously not the case. I can't really theorize what the reason is, because the truth is - there can be hundreds, ranging from 'there are a lot of tasks with higher priorities and there wasn't time to get to this one' (for example, replaying everything would be a higher priority, and as far as I know in Syndicate, unlike Unity, you can replay every mission including those that take place in the open world, please correct me if I'm wrong) to some accidental issue that may be so stupid yet so complex in fixing it (in my experience there were things that you think would take a day because they're that simple, but then take a month because so many things got affected by that small change and it breaks a lot).

cawatrooper9
11-05-2015, 10:36 PM
This thread is making it sound like the conversation the developers had was something like:
Dev #1: "Should we add extra save slots?"
Dev #2: "Naaaaaah, **** it."

Which is obviously not the case. I can't really theorize what the reason is, because the truth is - there can be hundreds, ranging from 'there are a lot of tasks with higher priorities and there wasn't time to get to this one' (for example, replaying everything would be a higher priority, and as far as I know in Syndicate, unlike Unity, you can replay every mission including those that take place in the open world, please correct me if I'm wrong) to some accidental issue that may be so stupid yet so complex in fixing it (in my experience there were things that you think would take a day because they're that simple, but then take a month because so many things got affected by that small change and it breaks a lot).

That's the thing... to me, this is a huge issue. Not only is it a pain to be forced to set up a new account if you have multiple people playing on the same machine (I'm lucky enough to be engaged to a beautiful woman who is a huge fan of the series) but it also makes it frustrating to have to start a new game.

I know the developers aren't stupid, but it baffles me why they thought (for 2 years in a row now!) that this was the best way to handle this situation.

SixKeys
11-05-2015, 10:39 PM
This thread is making it sound like the conversation the developers had was something like:
Dev #1: "Should we add extra save slots?"
Dev #2: "Naaaaaah, **** it."

Which is obviously not the case. I can't really theorize what the reason is, because the truth is - there can be hundreds, ranging from 'there are a lot of tasks with higher priorities and there wasn't time to get to this one' (for example, replaying everything would be a higher priority, and as far as I know in Syndicate, unlike Unity, you can replay every mission including those that take place in the open world, please correct me if I'm wrong) to some accidental issue that may be so stupid yet so complex in fixing it (in my experience there were things that you think would take a day because they're that simple, but then take a month because so many things got affected by that small change and it breaks a lot).


It's still a valid concern. People already thought it was weird with Unity and there were so many complaints I was positive it would be fixed in Syndicate. But it hasn't. Multiple save slots IMO should have higher priority over other things. Turn down the visuals if you must, have less side missions, whatever, but bring back multiple save slots, please.

cawatrooper9
11-05-2015, 10:47 PM
Also, as a console gamer, one of the perks is that we're not supposed to have to deal with a lot of the back end stuff that PC gamers do (not trying to start a gang war, there are some really things about PC too, I've had both). So, I feel kind of like I'm doing work the developers should have done when I have to go to my system storage and delete my saved game just to play a game I bought for my XBox One or PS4. It just feels so broken to me.

Farlander1991
11-05-2015, 11:14 PM
but it baffles me why they thought (for 2 years in a row now!) that this was the best way to handle this situation.

First you say you know developers aren't stupid, but then you say that :p Again, who says they thought this was the best way to handle this situation? Just because something isn't there doesn't mean the developers are lazy, greedy, didn't want to fix that, or thought it was a good solution.

And when it comes to the amount of complaints, we actually don't have a view of how many complaints something actually get, for example, we may see in our environment what we think is 'so many complaints', because for us it's an issue and we confirm for us that it's an issue, but in conglomerated feedback this thing can be like, 0.2% of all the complaints, which leaves all other 98.8% complaints to be fixed.

And again, maybe this was something they wanted to fix, but there can be so many reasons why it wasn't the case. I'm speaking in theoreticals here, but the point is... well, game development is a deceivingly tricky thing.

cawatrooper9
11-05-2015, 11:28 PM
First you say you know developers aren't stupid, but then you say that :p

Right, because I respect the developers and their intelligence enough for it to baffle me. If the game was made by an idiot, a six year old, and an EA public relations spokesperson, my expectations would be much lower.



And when it comes to the amount of complaints, we actually don't have a view of how many complaints something actually get, for example, we may see in our environment what we think is 'so many complaints', because for us it's an issue and we confirm for us that it's an issue, but in conglomerated feedback this thing can be like, 0.2% of all the complaints, which leaves all other 98.8% complaints to be fixed.

And again, maybe this was something they wanted to fix, but there can be so many reasons why it wasn't the case. I'm speaking in theoreticals here, but the point is... well, game development is a deceivingly tricky thing.
Again, you seem to be missing my point here. While I certainly am frustrated about this, I'm also very puzzled. It's strange that the game runs off such a terrible file saving system. I'm not merely trying to complain here, I'm trying to see if anyone has a reasonable explanation for why the game is this way.

If you have any theories, feel free to contribute.

SixKeys
11-05-2015, 11:32 PM
And regardless of the reasons, it's good for people to keep voicing their concerns about it so that hopefully next year we won't have to deal with this a third time.

cawatrooper9
11-05-2015, 11:37 PM
And regardless of the reasons, it's good for people to keep voicing their concerns about it so that hopefully next year we won't have to deal with this a third time.

Exactly. I tried to tell the "hood toggle" crowd that they're probably not gonna get their issue patched, but honestly, it's cool that they're talking. I don't expect this issue to get fixed either, but this is certainly a place that the devs are able to see our suggestions for future releases.

Farlander1991
11-05-2015, 11:52 PM
Right, because I respect the developers and their intelligence enough for it to baffle me. ... Again, you seem to be missing my point here.

I'm sorry, but it's you who seems to be missing the point. You said that you're baffled that they thought, and I quote, "this was the best way to handle this situation." And what I'm saying is that it's not necessarily true. You're framing this issue as a conscious choice that they thought is best, in your last post as well, ignoring what I said that sometimes **** happens. Just because something is done in a certain way doesn't mean the devs are happy it's done that way. I'm not going to go into polemics and theorize what or why this particular issue has happened, because there's no point to that, as I said already there can be ****tons of reasons.

Obviously, there are situations where 'what they were thinking?!' is applicable. But, you know.

cawatrooper9
11-06-2015, 03:45 PM
I'm sorry, but it's you who seems to be missing the point. You said that you're baffled that they thought, and I quote, "this was the best way to handle this situation." And what I'm saying is that it's not necessarily true. You're framing this issue as a conscious choice that they thought is best, in your last post as well, ignoring what I said that sometimes **** happens. Just because something is done in a certain way doesn't mean the devs are happy it's done that way. I'm not going to go into polemics and theorize what or why this particular issue has happened, because there's no point to that, as I said already there can be ****tons of reasons.

Obviously, there are situations where 'what they were thinking?!' is applicable. But, you know.

So, over the course of at least two years, they have realized what a broken system this is, but have done nothing to fix it. I think we can both assume that.

I'm not sure why you're getting so bent out of shape over my questioning of "why" this is happening. It's a big deal,and Ubisoft is a company that should be able to handle issues like this. The fact that I hold them to that standard implies that I actually respect them quite a bit.

DynaRider
11-06-2015, 05:02 PM
It would be helpful if someone from Ubisoft would come on board and let us know why they elected to not have multiple game save slots. All any of us can do is speculate and none of us will know the real reason without input from the programmers.

F3nix013
11-06-2015, 07:27 PM
Ok, i found out about signing completely out which i thought i did and my brother was able to play on his account. But the main problem here is that we should not have to go through all this crap just to be able to have 2 people play it.

This is a next gen game on a next gen console. There is NO reasonable excuse to have only 1 save file on the system. With all the hype around the system and the developers and MS stating that next gen is way better than current gen and the systems and software are more advanced, i find it very hard to believe that these developers cant do something as simple as multiple saves.

Farlander1991
11-06-2015, 08:13 PM
So, over the course of at least two years, they have realized what a broken system this is, but have done nothing to fix it. I think we can both assume that.

No, we can't. Again, why do you assume that if something was not fixed that nothing was being done about it?

Read these three articles.
1. Dirty Coding Tricks (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132500/dirty_coding_tricks.php)
2. More dirty coding tricks from game developers (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/249475/More_dirty_coding_tricks_from_game_developers.php)
3. Dirty Game Development Tricks (http://gamasutra.com/view/feature/194772/dirty_game_development_tricks.php)

A note: these articles list extreme cases with successful, though ideally really really unwanted, solutions. Even just the very first example where a crash is fixed by rotating the default camera a bit shows just how finnicky something can be in game dev is.

What I am trying to say is, you are right to complain about this. I am not arguing that in any way. And I agree with you, actually. Multiple save slots is something we need and something the games should have. And it's good that people are bringing it up, the more people say it, the brighter it will be on the radar. That's not the issue I have. The issue I have is when something is not fixed, and people say things like 'devs are just lazy or greedy' (you in particular haven't said that, I know, but it can be found in this thread), or while not insulting developers per se, say things like that they are baffled the somebody thought this was a good solution or that they have done nothing (those particular parts are from you :p ).

And you know, maybe you're right, maybe they did do nothing regarding it, but that's only because they had to make choices what to prioritize much higher than other things, and if save slots wasn't one of those things, well it sucks, but it doesn't mean devs don't care, it means they had to make choices. Ubisoft is big, but so are their games. And then there's a situation when they did try to do something, which... you know, there can be a lot of reasons why this wasn't eventually fixed, or maybe just partially fixed with a further fix coming for some other game which will bring back the slots, there are tons of possibilities what could possibly happen and I really can't say anything regarding it unless somebody from the AC devs will say something. These things are really complex, and there's a difference between saying 'I think this is important, and developers should prioritize this over other things, and it's bad that this feature is not here' and 'what were they thinking? (even though there are times when this can be a very valid questions, in my experience most of the times it isn't) Why have they done nothing?' One is fair feedback and criticism, the other is, I'm not even sure what proper word to choose, blaming I guess.

And you know, devs aren't always happy with how things are done. Actually, there's never a case when they're fully happy with absolutely everything. They can be proud, but there's always something that they'd also like to do. There's a saying among the devs, 'a game is never finished, at one point you just put it out'. I have a lot of examples like this from personal experience. There are things and elements that I wouldn't like to have in the games I worked on the way they are, but, well, choices have to be made and you just try to make the best of it. And a lot of times good things come out of restrictions or problems, btw as well, so it's not all so sour either.

Anyway, I think I've lost where I was headed with this whole post.

cawatrooper9
11-06-2015, 08:43 PM
No, we can't. Again, why do you assume that if something was not fixed that nothing was being done about it?

Read these three articles.
1. Dirty Coding Tricks (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/132500/dirty_coding_tricks.php)
2. More dirty coding tricks from game developers (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/249475/More_dirty_coding_tricks_from_game_developers.php)
3. Dirty Game Development Tricks (http://gamasutra.com/view/feature/194772/dirty_game_development_tricks.php)

A note: these articles list extreme cases with successful, though ideally really really unwanted, solutions. Even just the very first example where a crash is fixed by rotating the default camera a bit shows just how finnicky something can be in game dev is.


I get that games can have issues. I'm not expecting perfection, and honestly I hate the entitled attitude so many gamers have now when a game glitches every now and then. I'm old enough to remember when glitches were even celebrated. They were funny! You'd play this relatively serious game, then something absolutely insane would happen, and you wouldn't care because it's just a game.

But unless I missed something, these articles are about single games, not series. A big part of my issue with this is that this seems to be recurring now. When it happened in Unity, I was pretty forgiving of it- stuff happens, and that was far from the weirdest choice made in Unity's development (see: the wildly unethical and misleading Helix menu screen at the beginning of the game).

But it happened again this year. And that's my point: sure, I'm sure there is some issue that the devs are trying to address by doing this- and I'm demanding that this fix is not adequate. Again (and I don't know why I have to keep repeating myself) I have high expectations of Ubisoft because I respect them as a company and I love the AC franchise. If this was another Call of Duty, I wouldn't care enough to even be on the forums, much less continually humor you with responses here.


And you know, maybe you're right, maybe they did do nothing regarding it, but that's only because they had to make choices what to prioritize much higher than other things, and if save slots wasn't one of those things, well it sucks, but it doesn't mean devs don't care, it means they had to make choices.

My friend, neither of us know what really went down behind the scenes. You were right to say that it is wrong for people to think that the devs simply shrugged this issue off- but you have no basis to claim your version of the story as fact either. All we know is that the current version is what it is- and that I for one, find it highly unsatisfying.

F3nix013
11-06-2015, 09:21 PM
it's good that people are bringing it up, the more people say it, the brighter it will be on the radar.

In theory yes. But the problem i have with this statement is this. How many times last year did we see people complain about this issue, yet, fast forward a year later and we STILL have this issue? That is why i am more or less very mad at Ubi.


No, we can't. Again, why do you assume that if something was not fixed that nothing was being done about it?

That's not the issue I have. The issue I have is when something is not fixed, and people say things like 'devs are just lazy or greedy' (you in particular haven't said that, I know, but it can be found in this thread), or while not insulting developers per se, say things like that they are baffled the somebody thought this was a good solution or that they have done nothing (those particular parts are from you :p ).

I am the one who called them lazy or greedy because there is absolutely NO good reason for them to not include the multiple save files. They can give us all the BS excuses that they want. But it comes down to being lazy or greedy. Like what i said above, they didnt include it last year and after all the complaining, they STILL havent done anything over this past year to remedy this. I know we dont know the real reason why but at the same time, no one from Ubi has said anything either.

This is next gen. They KNEW this was coming. I looked at the development from Unity, it was in development from the time AC3 was being development and coming out back in 2013. And the next gen came out 2 years ago. So with next gen being 2 years old, there is no excuse for them to not include multiple saves due to software of the next gen engines or anything like that. I quite honestly cant see any good reason why Unity wouldnt have it and i damn sure dont see a reason why Syndicate wouldnt have it. I am not saying that the software of the next gen is the reason, but i also dont want people on this forum or even Ubi to come out and try to pin the problem on that either.

But it would be nice to have an explanation (even though it would most likely be a BS pr reason) but so far we have received no word about this from them.

Assassin_M
11-06-2015, 09:58 PM
In theory yes. But the problem i have with this statement is this. How many times last year did we see people complain about this issue, yet, fast forward a year later and we STILL have this issue? That is why i am more or less very mad at Ubi.



I am the one who called them lazy or greedy because there is absolutely NO good reason for them to not include the multiple save files. They can give us all the BS excuses that they want. But it comes down to being lazy or greedy. Like what i said above, they didnt include it last year and after all the complaining, they STILL havent done anything over this past year to remedy this. I know we dont know the real reason why but at the same time, no one from Ubi has said anything either.

This is next gen. They KNEW this was coming. I looked at the development from Unity, it was in development from the time AC3 was being development and coming out back in 2013. And the next gen came out 2 years ago. So with next gen being 2 years old, there is no excuse for them to not include multiple saves due to software of the next gen engines or anything like that. I quite honestly cant see any good reason why Unity wouldnt have it and i damn sure dont see a reason why Syndicate wouldnt have it. I am not saying that the software of the next gen is the reason, but i also dont want people on this forum or even Ubi to come out and try to pin the problem on that either.

But it would be nice to have an explanation (even though it would most likely be a BS pr reason) but so far we have received no word about this from them.
So, you're just gonna deliberately ignore everything he posted and continue to believe whatever you want? Not only that, but any explanation or reason from them is BS and PR? Okay. Wow, well....There's no point being arsed to formulate a proper discussion with someone like you then. You got your mind all made up, you seem to know everything about everything, so. Wow.

See, Farlander, this is why I stopped the whole big-post-reply when someone talks about laziness or incompetence or "ohmagodzzz, how ded zis pass Q and A?!!" or "This can't be so hard". It's because you'll get replies like this and you'll have wasted time and energy for no reason.

F3nix013
11-06-2015, 10:04 PM
So, you're just gonna deliberately ignore everything he posted and continue to believe whatever you want? Not only that, but any explanation or reason from them is BS and PR? Okay. Wow, well....There's no point being arsed to formulate a proper discussion with someone like you then. You got your mind all made up, you seem to know everything about everything, so. Wow.

See, Farlander, this is why I stopped the whole big-post-reply when someone talks about laziness or incompetence or "ohmagodzzz, how ded zis pass Q and A?!!" or "This can't be so hard". It's because you'll get replies like this and you'll have wasted time and energy for no reason.

I did read. But the main gist of it all is excuses. And i know i said that it would most likely be BS excuses regardless, but at least Ubi would ACKNOWLEDGE the issue rather than to completely ignore it like they have. That was my point. Its not about getting mad at the excuses, its about them not acknowledging the issue.

At least with a BS excuse, the community will expect that issue to be resolved later on. But how can we expect an issue to be resolved if the reasoning for the excuses is not known? I dont like being kept in the dark about certain things that actually matter to the games. I would rather have a BS excuse then have no excuse at all, because then you would be able to hold them to the fix of the issue.

Assassin_M
11-06-2015, 10:15 PM
I did read. But the main gist of it all is excuses. And i know i said that it would most likely be BS excuses regardless, but at least Ubi would ACKNOWLEDGE the issue rather than to completely ignore it like they have. That was my point. Its not about getting mad at the excuses, its about them not acknowledging the issue.
Then there's really no point. I don't know what it is you want, you're saying BS is better than nothing? But if it's BS, then why bother? If you "know" that anything they say is BS, then why bother listening in the first place? You know it's BS, how do you expect BS to fix anything? To that point, why should THEY listen to you? you pretty much shut down your brain to any explanation, labeling anything as excuses and BS. How do you expect this situation to work now? "Uhhh, hey guys, we know you know that this is BS, but here it is...our BS excuse. Okay? Okay, bye".


At least with a BS excuse, the community will expect that issue to be resolved later on. But how can we expect an issue to be resolved if the reasoning for the excuses is not known? I dont like being kept in the dark about certain things that actually matter to the games. I would rather have a BS excuse then have no excuse at all, because then you would be able to hold them to the fix of the issue.
Okay, now you're just contradicting yourself. BS is BS because it does not fix anything, else why oh why would it be BS? if it fixes things, then it's not BS. Plain and simple. If you had actually read Farlander's post, you'd know. Farlander is not making "excuses". It's a little thing called an educated opinion. People seem to think that whenever some sort of **** happens in a game, there's an ooooohhh mystery going on and the developers are conspiring to hide something to just piss people off.

Farlander is attempting to avert away that impression with something more logical, given his experience. He's saying that coding is complex and tricky. That perhaps the developers fell into a coding pit early on in development and rather than prioritize the issue of multiple save files, they decided to prioritize other more important things. That's all he said. Just maybes and perhaps based on solid facts and his experience. But yeah, pffffff who cares? BS, right?

Farlander1991
11-06-2015, 10:19 PM
See, Farlander, this is why I stopped the whole big-post-reply when someone talks about laziness or incompetence or "ohmagodzzz, how ded zis pass Q and A?!!" or "This can't be so hard". It's because you'll get replies like this and you'll have wasted time and energy for no reason.

To be fair, I didn't try to have a conversation with F3nix in particular, but with other people :p :)

Assassin_M
11-06-2015, 10:27 PM
To be fair, I didn't try to have a conversation with F3nix in particular, but with other people :p :)
You kind of inserted him by bringing up the laziness or greediness :rolleyes:

cawatrooper9
11-06-2015, 10:29 PM
Might I ask: Why the impassioned defense of this? As a game feature, this sucks. It really, really sucks- and as far as we know, it's entirely avoidable.

Why defend this? Ubisoft gets so much flak for so many issues that they really couldn't help- why ignore this one, which as far as we know, could've been easily avoided?


You kind of inserted him by bringing up the laziness or greediness :rolleyes:

Okay, I feel out of the loop. How did that draw him in?

Assassin_M
11-06-2015, 10:36 PM
Might I ask: Why the impassioned defense of this? As a game feature, this sucks. It really, really sucks- and as far as we know, it's entirely avoidable.
We're not defending the feature. Farlander complained about it here before, it really does suck.


Why ignore this one, which as far as we know, could've been easily avoided?
Because, again, we're not really ignoring the problem, Farlander is just portraying a reality. The bolded part up there. That's precisely why Farlander is talking about this. No one but the developers knows exactly how easy or hard it is to avoid. Next Gen doesn't make life easier, software actually works the other way around. advancement sometimes makes things a lot more complex and gives rise to more unforeseen problems. Really, what everyone is doing is the classic complaint "We can walk on the moon and yet I'm still stuck in this traffic". Just because it's in other games, doesn't mean it's easy to implement here, it's not how games work.


Okay, I feel out of the loop. How did that draw him in?
Wasn't he the one who called the whole thing lazy and greedy? :p

cawatrooper9
11-06-2015, 10:41 PM
Because, again, we're not really ignoring the problem, Farlander is just portraying a reality. The bolded part up there. That's precisely why Farlander is talking about this. No one but the developers knows exactly how easy or hard it is to avoid. Next Gen doesn't make life easier, software actually works the other way around. advancement sometimes makes things a lot more complex and gives rise to more unforeseen problems. Really, what everyone is doing is the classic complaint "We can walk on the moon and yet I'm still stuck in this traffic". Just because it's in other games, doesn't mean it's easy to implement here, it's not how games work.


I just think that's a bit of a stretch. I'd agree that we don't know what's going on in the development side of things- in fact, that's exactly why we have no reason to think that this is some impossible (or even difficult) feature to implement. Ubisoft is a big company, as I've said many a time now, and they should be able to handle something like this- this isn't some unexpected glitch that no one could've seen coming. It's a major flaw in the game's organization that's persisted for two installments in a row now.


Wasn't he the one who called the whole thing lazy and greedy?
Honestly, man, I don't even know what's going on anymore, so I'm just gonna nod my head and pretend I know what you're talking about :p

Farlander1991
11-06-2015, 10:53 PM
You kind of inserted him by bringing up the laziness or greediness :rolleyes:

Point taken :p


Might I ask: Why the impassioned defense of this? As a game feature, this sucks. It really, really sucks-

It does suck, as I already said nobody is arguing that. I'm not arguing with that criticism, I'm arguing with what follows which is judgmental attitude towards the developers caused by assumptions that paint the outcome as a result of somebody not caring, not thinking about it, or thinking that's actually a good idea.

While we're at it, here are some other new (or new-ish) Ubisoft games that don't have multiple save files: Watch_Dogs, Far Cry 4, Child of Light.

Here are some other games that don't have multiple save slots: Metal Gear Solid V (from incredibly respected Kojima), Transformers: Devastation (from incredibly respected Platinum Games), and a bunch of others :p

cawatrooper9
11-06-2015, 11:12 PM
It does suck, as I already said nobody is arguing that. I'm not arguing with that criticism, I'm arguing with what follows which is judgmental attitude towards the developers caused by assumptions that paint the outcome as a result of somebody not caring, not thinking about it, or thinking that's actually a good idea.

I guess we just differ on how we see the developers' responsibilities. As I've said multiple times, this is an issue has persisted over two games now- they get paid to make their games, and I guess I just have high expectations of what they can accomplish, then.


While we're at it, here are some other new (or new-ish) Ubisoft games that don't have multiple save files: Watch_Dogs, Far Cry 4, Child of Light.

Here are some other games that don't have multiple save slots: Metal Gear Solid V (from incredibly respected Kojima), Transformers: Devastation (from incredibly respected Platinum Games), and a bunch of others :p
I actually haven't played any of those games yet- but mediocrity on behalf of other franchises is no excuse. If I was also a fan of those other games, I'd be just as upset.

Jackdaw951
11-07-2015, 04:55 PM
I've been watching this argument unfold with increasing frustration, so I have to vent a bit.

If I'm a teacher, and a student comes in one morning and tells me that the dog ate his homework, I may think about it for a second or two. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Not in the least. Now, if he lived in a farm, and he said a goat ate it, I might raise the value of that probability; but in the end, I would still reject the excuse.

Once progress saving is in place, supporting multiple files is cake. The hard part is figuring out how to save and restore all progress. Once you buy a car, you can drive to the bank, and the store, and your girlfriend's place. The hard part was the vehicle.

The probability of some major technical impediment against multiple saves is so low that it's not worth considering. So what is more probable? (1) Negligence. They just didn't feel like putting together an extra dialog screen, so they didn't do it. (2) Some self-serving reason. Perhaps a marketing study showed that a significant number people will buy more DLC or move on to paying for another game if they have to put any effort at all into playing through a game a second time. This is where I agree the we don't know what their rationale is. But technical impossibility or even challenge? No, sorry. I don't believe that for a second.

NondairyGold
11-07-2015, 09:41 PM
I've been watching this argument unfold with increasing frustration, so I have to vent a bit.

If I'm a teacher, and a student comes in one morning and tells me that the dog ate his homework, I may think about it for a second or two. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Not in the least. Now, if he lived in a farm, and he said a goat ate it, I might raise the value of that probability; but in the end, I would still reject the excuse.

Once progress saving is in place, supporting multiple files is cake. The hard part is figuring out how to save and restore all progress. Once you buy a car, you can drive to the bank, and the store, and your girlfriend's place. The hard part was the vehicle.

The probability of some major technical impediment against multiple saves is so low that it's not worth considering. So what is more probable? (1) Negligence. They just didn't feel like putting together an extra dialog screen, so they didn't do it. (2) Some self-serving reason. Perhaps a marketing study showed that a significant number people will buy more DLC or move on to paying for another game if they have to put any effort at all into playing through a game a second time. This is where I agree the we don't know what their rationale is. But technical impossibility or even challenge? No, sorry. I don't believe that for a second.

Here here! The only technical reason for not having multiple save files, as far as I can tell, is all down to Ubisoft Club integration, and previously, Initiates integration. Multiple save files caused havoc with this system and countless man hours were spent by Ubi support trying to resolve these issues. They've saved a fortune on the help desk by implementing this one save system.

adster01
11-08-2015, 07:14 AM
It's completely ridicules that they do not patch unity/syndicate and add multi save slots pure laziness they clearly don't care what the people who buy the games want