So I grew up on Super Mario World on the GBA and I acquired a

>>4221042
You fail to realize that SMB3 had no saving. It had warp whistles. Saving at special points is already an improvement and discourages from savescumming.

>>4221042
>It certainly is not because of some technical restraint

Are you sure

>>4221047
Why would there be considering you get the option to save every time you beat a castle or ghost mansion?

>>4221045
SMB3 is a bad comparison considering it was much more limited technically, had warp flutes, and much shorter levels.

>>4221047
It's fucking not, plenty of romhacks autosave or let you save anytime.

>>4221053
No. Saving on NES is possible. They just didn't want the extra cost of having a save battery in every single of the millions of cartridges.

>>4221083
I'm aware of it being possible on the NES. I do own Zelda 1 on NES. But that's not the point and it doesn't explain SMW's lack of save-when-you-want function.

>>4221042
right, they shouldve made saving after each ghost house and fortress a one time thing, so that you would have to make significant progress in order to save

>>4221095
I think that was the original intention and they accidentally let you resave on revisits.
Btw you can replay a castle level if you enter the level while holding R and L

>>4221098
>you can replay castles with L + R
isnt that just for the forts?

>>4221090
Probably because at the time they didn't see it as that much of a value and assumed people were sitting down to play for lengths at a time.

Putting something on a portable system where it's expected people might be playing on the bus or at other times when they would have to stop quickly lead many games to have quick save features or save states where there weren't before.

>>4221090
> it doesn't explain SMW's lack of save-when-you-want function.

How is it a problem? What's technically different between "saving at a ghost mansion" and "saving anywhere on the map" ? Nothing.

>>4221106
Also works on Castles
https://youtu.be/R9wM2PUF09M

>>4221110
Are you a game designer? It might surprise you what kind of problems game designers ran into in the 8 and 16 bit era, due to the severe restrictions. It might very well be a technical issue

>>4221110
>What's technically different between "saving at a ghost mansion" and "saving anywhere on the map" ? Nothing.

That's exactly my point.

You people don't realize how bad savescumming really is. Mario World ain't no shooter, but god damn you could just savescum your way through Doom. Imagine if you could save anywhere in SMW. Beating a castle/ghost house/fort in World is proof you've got the balls to get to that point and win. It's not like you're gonna fucking run out of lives in SMW.

>>4221116
weird. how did i never try this on castles?

File: WoDI1MqdRS05tZjN5qBN.gif (1015KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

1015KB, 320x240px

>>4221116
The guy who made this video is a king among men.

>>4221143
Fuck off, saving in the world map is not save scumming. It's only scumming if you can do it in-gameplay.

>>4221151
It is, though. What kind of pussy needs to save after every course?

>>4221153
people who grew up playing GBA

>>4221153
The kind of pussy with successful responsible adult lives.
That ain't no saves cumming unless you can save every 2 seconds

>>4221159
what if ot takes me 2 seconds to finish a smw level? didn't think of that, did you

>>4221175
It's still not savescumming unless you can save anywhere.

>>4221182
keep on moving the goal posts, save scummer

File: 1502505237740.jpg (68KB, 637x639px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 637x639px

>>4221159
>The kind of pussy with successful responsible adult lives.

>>4221159
I totally understand it. Most of the time I play something it has to be in short bursts here and there, so being able to save or with the 3/DS just close the system to suspend is pretty important.

I don't play SMW, but I do get the sentiment.

Save Scumming can be done in anythign with a save feature. All it is, is going back to a save after you did something in game you decide you want to undo. It has nothing to do with how often you save, though people who make a practice of it tend to do it a lot.

But saving every 2 seconds isn't save scumming. Doing something that has a random result, like a power up roulette wheel and then loading a save when you didn't get the result you were wanting. That's what save scumming is.

>>4221192
Silly Adam Sessler. Go back to recording porno movies with trannies.

>>4221205
[spoilers]Did he really do that? Link please.[/spoilers]

The real question is, why even have a lives system in a game that has a save feature. They limited your saving to only castles so the extra lives system could have a purpose.

It wasn't a technical restraint, they did it deliberately to induce challenge.

Ok I'll break it down for you a bit.

When we was kids we had all day to play games and do nothing on a tv.

The gba version is first and foremost designed to be played on the go. So one of the constraints they had to remove was when and where you could save as you m8ght only have 2 mins to play a level while on the go or at school or wherever.

That's pretty much the only reason it was changed.

You are comparing a portable version to a console version.
It only makes sense.
And any idiot should be able to figure that out, but then again you don't seem like any ordinary idiot.

>>4221308
Yoshi Island is on SNES but still autosaves after every level, though.

>>4221308
>Not speedrunning all the time.
What are you, gay?

>>4221139
No, but I read Assembly.
It's all about setting the values you want (like, levels cleared, number of exits found, etc) to the RAM addresses corresponding to the save.

The only difference between "saving anywhere on the map", is that there'd be more possibilities as to where on the map the game starts when loading your save, and if you can't be bothered with that, just make it so that you can save anywhere, but loading brings you to the nearest/last visited ghost mansion.

SMW should be fully documented too.

Because back then game's had consequences to failure. Mario world is piss easy yes, but it was still during an era when you got pushed back if you didn't do well. That's all there is to it.

>>4221320
only because it's an autistic collectathon and nobody in their right mind would attempt 100% it otherwise.

File: smwgbaad.jpg (107KB, 450x673px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 450x673px

>I had already spent so much time on the GBA port that I saw no point to it.

Well, playing it on SNES has bigger screen ratio, better sound/no annoying voice clips (unless you enjoy these) and better color saturation. So there is a point to it, or at least 3.

>Now why is this necessary? Why can't you save whenever you want? It doesn't make the game harder in the slightest to have to go back to a Ghost Mansion in order to save, it's just very tedious. At least they got the courtesy to let you save every other level in the Special World, but I don't see any reason they omitted this feature. It certainly is not because of some technical restraint.
I have no answer to your questions, and I don't know if it wasn't because of a technical restraint, but was it really that tedious? Ghost houses are really short once you know your way, anyway, you also forgot you can also save after castles (by the way, you can access castles you've already beaten if you press L+R and start, I think) and Switch Palaces too.

>>4221579
Damn dude, I hate collectathons so much! I hate Pac-Man, Space Invaders and every other game that makes you collect shit for no reason.
Fucking old games are too damn game-y.

>>4221042
>it's a "babby throws a fit when he can't handle the slightest inconvenience" episode

I fucking hate all those "retro gamers" who think they know their shit and keep spouting "technical reasons blah blah blah the console wouldn't have handled it blah blah blah" when they don't even know what the console was made of or which programming language the devs used on it.

>this NES game doesn't have 2 player because "technical reasons"
>you can't save anywhere on the map in this SNES game because "technical reason"
>this game lag because the console couldn't handle it

Stop it. Spouting "technical reasons" does anything but make you sound smarter.

>>4221456
9/10 would lel agian

>>4221616
>but was it really that tedious?

Yes. It takes time and you jsut spend almost more time going from the nearest Ghost Mansion to whatever level you are trying to beat. It ruins the flow of the game.

>>4221639
I can handle it. I've played through the whole game, cleared every stage with this inconvenience. I just don't understand why they chose to include (or rather, exclude) this mechanic.

>>4221698
>exclude this mechanic

You're aware that the SNES version came before the GBA version, right? ... RIGHT?

They didn't exclude anything. They included a save feature and boughts millions of batteries for their cartridges while all the previous Mario games didn't.

>>4221671
nobody in this thread is claiming that saving in smw is restricted due to technical reasons. some simply refuted that it was obvious that it wasn't. i know nothing about how smw works under the hood (except for some basic collision detection stuff), but it is not impossible that smw was constructed in such a way that adding saving after each level would be a major hassle. it is however far more likely that they wanted to give progression more meaning, but dropped the ball by not making saving after ghost houses/forts/castles/switch palaces a one time thing

>>4221707
Now I can see what you're suggesting, but this was the devs being generous to people who were going to complain about it anyway. See this entire thread.

>>4221042
I don't think you know what "omitted" means.

>>4221098
>I think that was the original intention and they accidentally let you resave on revisits
Honestly, it's probably this.

>>4221698
>It ruins the flow of the game.
There's a Ghost House in almost every world (I think the only one that doesn't have one is cookie mountain, which is just 2 levels anyway).
I think it's not really that big of a deal, you're exaggerating.

File: smw_allstars.jpg (38KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 736x552px

What a whiny baby.
Anyway, here's your solution, OP.

>>4221042
Because to have lives mattered in that gen.

You had to beat a few stages before save, proving you're good at the game.

>>4221671
This pretty much.

Isn't it the select button that brings up the option to save, not start?

>>4221834
This, same reason why Donkey Kong Country limited saves too.

>>4221716
Not OP but I think he does.

It was 1991. You're just used to games auto-saving now. Saving only at certain points was and is perfectly fine. You don't get to save after every level. You were expected to get used to playing through the same levels until you progressed to the next point. It also encouraged trying different things as there are many secret exits throughout the whole game. Kids back in the day actually used skill to play games and enjoyed it and didn't see things in terms of linear progression the way that the modern gaming industry has made it.

>>4222448
OP didn't deserve such a nice explanation, honestly.
He probably won't get it either.

Back then Saving the Game was something you had to earn by showing ur gud. I don't want to sound like a dick but think about it, you can extrapolate your question to extremes with the same reasoning.
>Why can't I save anywhere? This 1991 method is just tedious and holds me back artificially.
>Why doesn't the game have infinite lives? This 1991 method is just tedious and holds me back artificially.
>Why doesn't the game have regenerating health? This 1991 method is just tedious and holds me back artificially.

File: donut.png (192KB, 395x409px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 395x409px

>>4222448
Nintendo Power (in the release year) published the easy save route through the Donut Ghost House..

>>4223018
Kek, When I was a kid I do this all the time

>>4221205
Sounds like you wanna watch more of his content

File: Youre_not_a_gamer_if_1[1].jpg (62KB, 630x420px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 630x420px

>>4222448
You know, this is honestly fucking stupid because there were already many games at that time that had world maps that let you save anywhere. Granted, they tended to be JRPGs, but the same rule applies either way. There's no challenge in not being able to save anywhere on the map, it's primarily used for navigation, there's no skill involved in it. It's only when you start a level (or a dungeon in a JRPG) that it becomes necessary to withold the ability to save anywhere from the player, because that's where the actual challenge begins.

Honestly OP, this is probably a bad place to ask the question that you asked. Lots of the posters here are autistically biased towards old games and outdated methods of game design. They basically have the minds of children and haven't matured at all since they were 12 years old.

The real reason that you can't save in SMW is because, despite the fact that it's awesome, game design in the early 90s still had a certain crudeness to it that it was yet to overcome. SMW plays great, sounds great, looks great, but the game devs at the time didn't give two shits about stuff like player convenience. It just wasn't on their agenda. The saving system in SMW clearly didn't even get a fraction of the attention that the rest of the game got. Maybe they thought it'd provide that cheap extra layer of "challenge" that lots of retro games had, where shit like this was implemented just to make you spend as much of your time on the game as possible.

Either way, it all comes down to the shortcomings of retro game design. Nobody here will admit it, but as far as player convenience goes, modern games are generally far, far superior to their retro ancestors. And no, it's not a matter of "casualisation", it's a matter of games being made primarily for actual human beings to play. And actual human beings have lives to live where they will sometimes need to turn off the console suddenly, or earlier than expected to go do real life shit.

>>4223215
This is literally what people that insist "not being able to savestate every second is a flaw" defend it with.

>>4223215
At what point does "challenge" become a waste of time, though? I mean, why not allow saving at any point in a level or JRPG dungeon or whatever?

I remember when Nintendo released those DLC level packs for NSMB2, there were some people mad about the way they were structured. There was no saving or continues, so each pack (three levels) had to be completed in one sitting. Why is it okay to play through one level without saving, but three is considered too much?

The programmers overlooked the fact that you could save at Ghost Houses. It wasn't supposed to work that way.

jesus christ, such an autistic thread

>>4223239
the save scummers conveniently ignore this point which has been brought up several times in this thread already

>>4221045
Self-control discourages sacescumming, too.

I get that this is /vr/ and you have to fool yourself into believing everything older is better but less options will never be superior to more options in any field, ever.

>>4223278
>less options will always be superior
while i agree that not everything that is old is better, this statement is simply false.
many things become better with suitable imposed restraints. it may be counterintuitive, but it is true

>>4221729
Can you save whenever you want in All-Stars + SMW?

>>4223236
Because it removes the luck aspect. The longer it takes between saves the more consistently better you have to be at the game to get through it. If it saved every level you can just keep retrying until you luck out either through RNG somehow making it easy on you or just accidentally missing an enemy that you have hit 20 times in a row. Same reason save states are looked down on. Naturally you need a balance between saving every 20 frames and having to finish the whole game in 1 sitting. Save points every 3 levels seems a good compromise.

>>4223278
that's nice, but these are games made for children, i.e. people with no self control

>>4223239
People keep mentioning this, but does anyone have any sources, or do you just wish this to be true?

>>4223454
>Save points every 3 levels seems a good compromise.

That's completely arbitrary.

>>4221042
Just save at the fucking ghost house that gives you can beat in less than a minute and get 3 1-ups.

Every ghost house, every castle or fortress, any switch palace and any star world.

If you need more than this you are spoiled.

>>4221151
It is though, it's pretty clear the intention is you're supposed to beat a short series of levels with limited lives before saving just like the dkc games. Going back to castles for saving is an oversight by the developers and abusing this is basically savescumming as you are exploiting the save system to lower the difficulty.

>>4223474
Absolutely. The important thing is to not make them too frequent, neither should they be so far apart that you need to set aside several hours just to make progress. I would put it that there's more arguments against per-level saving than for.

>>4221042
lol try playing Donkey Kong Country where you get thrown into new worlds with new gimmicks and have to clear 3 or more stages just to reach the save point

>>4225806
Op couldn't handle the kong

>posts claiming autosaving after each level is the same as save scumming
>posts pretending it's a measurement of challenge when you can just re-enter and beat a previously beaten ghost house/castle to save again.
>posts claiming lives matter in any main Mario game after SMB1, 2, and 3
Can't make this shit up, I'm sure you kids think World is hard too

>>4226668
/thread