this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
170 points (97.2% liked)
Asklemmy
43907 readers
1154 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Saves, especially save states/quicksave. Some kind of way to tell you what is actually the correct answer, not just what someone thinks is, or wants to be, the correct answer. Enough predictability to give you a reasonable shot at things.
But would we remember between quicksaves? Would other people? If my boss quicksaves before our meetings and then I quicksave and honestly tell him what I think about this job, whose quicksave would take precedence?
I just thought "hur hur, Nazeem" and save scumming skill checks, dice rolls and tricky input in mostly singleplayer games, without any nasty precedence or concurrency issues. Extending it to multiplayer and also being inside the game seems, uh, complicated. I'll give it an undercaffeinated try:
Each player gets an individual "marker" they can place at their current time, and a function to restore the entire universe state to that point.
"Whose marker is when" seems like it needs to be part of that state. Otherwise, reverting and then having someone else reload a formerly earlier, now future/orphaned state... just sounds like a clusterfuck. Or it's unproblematic and just weird, I'm not sure.
Keeping memories across reloads would at least not happen "naturally", since everyone has their exact brain state reverted. You could just say it does for the purposes of the experiment, but it seems like it makes things more complicated.
At least, remembering stuff through someone else's reload is right out: everyone on the planet quickly ends up with a bunch of memories that have no longer happened, and no way to tell what's what. Psych horror time!
Whoever saves first does get to revert everything since then, but assuming no memory retention, you could still safely shit talk your boss all day long, at least. If their checkpoint reverts yours, they will forget the rant, you can still revert. It would be further back than you intended then, but you would be blissfully unaware of that fact. Of course, you also wouldn't remember the rant, so it doesn't sound very cathartic either.
But, if memories are retained, Boss could reload on you - they now remember the rant and you don't, which sounds like a bad Christmas Party. While reloading would still be a win for you, you wouldn't know to actually do it, and could risk saving at a position where you've screwed yourself. Common risk of save scumming.