
|
|
|
Let's face it -- Internal memory is here to stay. All three current-gen gaming consoles have some form of internal memory, with the exception of the Xbox 360 -- It's hard drive can be removed just as easily as removing a USB device, but it functions the same way as an internal HDD. Every system comes with this storage space, and it's gotten to the point that we as gamers are constantly taking it for granted. We don't even consciously realize it's there anymore -- We download demos, full games, videos, and save our data without giving it much of a second thought. But recently I've been noticing it a lot more, particularly with the PS3, and I can't decide exactly how good of an idea it is for managing game saves. Take a walk with me and let's see what the positives and negatives of this technology are. I'm pretty sure I don't really have to expand too much on the plus side of internal memory. Game demos, huge videos, and full games would never be able to fit on a standard-sized memory card, so a hard drive or internal flash storage is pretty much essential this generation. All of the internal memory in each console can be expanded, too, except for the Wii -- That really doesn't matter, though, because all of your games can now be run directly off of an SD card up to 32 gigs, most of which are dirt cheap, anyway. Without hard drives and such in our consoles, there's no way we'd be able to have the video rental services such as Netflix that are available now, because there would be no way to store them on anything else (well, maybe one at a time, which is ridiculous). Also, try downloading something like Warhawk or Fable to a memory card and tell me how that goes. For the big stuff, internal memory isn't just a luxury anymore -- It's a requirement. When it comes to anything less than the big stuff, however, we start having problems -- Particularly with game saves, and specifically on the PS3 and Wii. How many PS3 owners out there have wanted to backup, transfer, or copy a game save for one reason or another, only to be greeted with the infamous "Copying this save data is now allowed" message? This is when I start to think that hard drives and internal flash storage are terrible ideas as far as saves are concerned. Last generation, we had these awesome things called "memory cards," and they stored all of your save data on a convenient, pocket-sized card that could be put into any console it was compatible with. Now, a lot of saves are locked to the console or hard drive, making it literally impossible to transfer the data to any other console for any reason (you can bypass this easily on the Wii by using homebrew). These consoles are pieces of electronic equipment, and they will have faults. I don't want my data getting corrupted or deleted completely for no reason at all.
Another more important concern over locked saves is the fact that it's just so damn inconvenient. One of the biggest offenders is Street Fighter IV. If you got the game for the PS3 like a lot of people did (because of the controller, I'd assume), don't think you'll be able to take your completely unlocked roster to a friend's house -- Unless you haul your entire console over there, even if he or she already has one, you'll have to re-unlock everything on the new console, because the original save file is completely non-transferable. What's the point of working on the game, unlocking everything as you go, if you can't use that data wherever you travel? Why should I have to work on my game for a second time when I should just be able to throw a USB drive into the system and copy the data? Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection is another one, and it's just ridiculous. Sega basically encrypted a save file that's linked to a bunch of Genesis roms. Why? What's the point in doing that? So I can't play my unlocked games with everyone else? Really? And what about the people who wanted to upgrade from an original PS3 model to the Slim, or those who don't want homebrew on their Wiis? Sometimes I can understand locking saves, like in the case of Demon's Souls. If you can back your save up, then you can dupe all the rare items and souls that you've found, essentially giving yourself unlimited of whatever you want and making the online portion of the game extremely unfair. But after spending so much time on the game, hundreds of hours, no doubt, to reach the maximum level of 712, do you really want to risk losing your character? Why can't the saves be locked to our accounts like Dead Space and Mirror's Edge if they had to associate it with something? Completely blocking the player from getting to his or her game save is ludicrous. A friend of mine is coming out to visit from Jersey next month, and he wants to show me his character. Well, he can't, unless he plans on either A) taking a picture of his TV screen, or B) going through the airport security (which is God-awful now, as we all know) with his entire PS3 console. All of that instead of just being able to throw an SD card into the reader and carrying his character in his pocket. The negative aspects of game saves on hard drives vastly outweighs the positives, and I long for the day when memory cards become the standards over internal memory once again, but I know that's just a fool's dream. I suppose it's not all bad -- Capcom did in fact patch Resident Evil 5 to remove the copy protection from the PS3 save files (See? I'm not the only one complaining about this.). The Xbox 360 has a few games that have locked saves, but there aren't too many. I think playing Demon's Souls as much as I recently have been has made me think about this more, and it just burns me every time. I know I'm probably overreacting a bit, but it really is a major concern of mine, and the only reason I haven't yet purchased games like Street Fighter IV. For demos and other huge files, the internal memory solutions the current consoles offer is a much better option -- The only option, really. But for game saves themselves, I just don't see how any of it is better than memory cards. What do you think? Is making sure you can transfer your data important to you, especially when it comes to local multiplayer stuff? Well, I'm going back to celebrating my birthday by playing more Uncharted 2, which lets me back my saves up. :P
|
|
|
|
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
|
Comment with FacebookClick connect and comment instantly! |
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds |
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!

Follow
RSS
Contact
Yeah, it is kind of bad programming. I just figure the fact that the internal storage exists is enough to provoke the programmers into doing that same lazy thing over and over.
As for a cloud, that's the LAST thing I want -- I like being in total control of my saves. I hate playing even free MMOs online, because if the servers go down or it gets hacked, then that's that. Also, what happens years down the line when these consoles would become retro? The servers will be down, and so will the ability to save ever again.
Yes, I'm paranoid, and I'm fine with it. :P
Why don't devs simply allow online back up of gamesaves to their servers?? The memory usage is absolutely minimal, but if I ever get a corrupt file or use a friend's PS3... all the date would be available for me.
Online backup is being used for computers... why doesn't Sony incorporate this for gamers? The file sizes are so small... but for situations of a stolen PS3, a new HDD, going to a friend's place or just general corruption issues - this would be wonderful to have!
Locked save files aren't new. The PS2 had them too. Timesplitter 2 if I remember correctly. You couldn't even copy it from one memory card to another. I never understood the point of that.
There is a way to back-up your files but you'd have to back-up every thing on your PS3. It even works with the locked files but yeah, a bit of a hassle really. But better than back in the days. It happened a couple times that my mem card just completely erased itself. No way of backing up on the PS1 or PS2 (other than copying to another mem card.)
It's true, I don't know why companies do this. Even games that you wouldn't care to back up that much, like Fat Princess (which only saves the look of your character) have locked saves. I just don't understand why it happens this way.
@Takeshi
I don't know if it's Trophies, seeing as how games like LittleBigPlanet and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare shipped with them and you could transfer the saves. It just says that you can't earn Trophies on a different account. I know locked saves aren't new, but at least on the PS2 and GameCube and stuff like that you could take them with you. Couldn't back them up, but there were memory cards with USB ports you could get. I still have my GameCube one.
I actually started looking into the Backup Utility you're talking about, and yeah, while it's a hassle, there's apparently a glitch to transfer even locked saves to other consoles, so I suppose that's a good thing.
@mkshiranui
Are you trying to delete individual Okami saves on the Wii or the PS2? The PS2 version actually has each savegame separate when you look through the data. Also, that picture Magnalon posted was from the Good Idea, Bad Idea segment of Animaniacs.
And with that, you're my hero, Magnalon. :D
Yeah, you're right. My mind wandered off a bit with the trophies.
It's interesting to know why certain games have locked files and why others don't. Burnout: Paradise for instance doesn't lock them at first sight but they put a three way protection on their files so you can't transfer them to somebody else. I can't remember which ones but I looked it up once when I didn't want to get all the cars again for the 3rd time (1. Pal copy, 2. Pal copy with trophies, 3. US copy). I didn't really mind playing it 3 times but I can see why some people would.
I agree completely. I seriously don't want to see centralized servers for game saves. Online profiles are fine, but not actual saves. I want to be able to play my damn games in the future when the consoles aren't supported anymore.
As for the Facebook question, I actually see almost every single one of them on a daily basis, but you're right -- It seems like games are trying to make us have less of a social live.
Dude, just use a PSP to transfer PS1 save data. It converts it back anyway when you copy it back to the PS3. That's if you don't already have the memory card slots.
Also, you can copy Game Save Data. The stuff you can't copy is data that is installed off the disc, so either take the disc to a friends or they will have the game.
Silly blog is silly.
...
Do you even know what I'm talking about? I'm not talking about PS1 and PS2 saves. Try throwing Demon's Souls or Street Fighter IV or even Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection into your PS3, and tell me what happens when you try to copy the save data to a USB stick or something. It's totally locked. This is a problem people have been complaining about for a long time already.
Silly comment is silly.
It's totally a software problem. Every current-gen system, largely due to network connectivity, can potentially possess person- (e.g. account-) and system-specific information that will often make its way into a game save. Trying to copy this info leads to bad things happening. I've seen a couple games that go to the trouble of making two (or more) save files, specifically to get around this sort of thing: sensitive files can't be copied, the others can.
Unfortunately it's a fact of life that programmers are lazy. So until first parties start building this kind of behavior in as a standard save/filesystem API, the situation is unlikely to change.
Re: portable save data - I was super stoked when I first found out the Wii remote had its own internal memory, thinking I'd finally be able to realize the ideal [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64_accessories#Controller_Pak]controller pak[/i]. But it's only for Miis. Motherfuckers.