[HorribleOversightInGameDesign] ALL MY STUFF IS GONE.

[Duxwing]

@OP *hugs*

KSC scene transitions should not affect quickloading and quick-saving: these features are for flight. Quickloading states wherein the player has fewer technologies should pause the game and require confirmation; e.g., "Galloping Galaxies! The quicksave you want to load has less tech than your current save: are you sure about quickloading it?"

-Duxwing

[Sirrobert]

@OP *hugs*

KSC scene transitions should not affect quickloading and quick-saving: these features are for flight. Quickloading states wherein the player has fewer technologies should pause the game and require confirmation; e.g., "Galloping Galaxies! The quicksave you want to load has less tech than your current save: are you sure about quickloading it?"

-Duxwing

WTF do scene transitions have to do with quickloads?

[Duxwing]

WTF do scene transitions have to do with quickloads?

Kerbal Space Center scene transitions synchronize the quickload and its backup, preventing mistakes' undoing.

-Duxwing

[AlamoVampire]

there are 4 problems with this:

1: I don't know how much science was needed to...

1: You can edit your save and add in however much science you wish to have by picking a random number. Depending on number of mods present that may change, but, you shouldnt need more than about 30k science at most.

2: unlock node that I'm not sure which I had/

2: Not a big problem if you add in science in copious amounts.

3: I don't know the orbital parameters of any ships I had in orbit

3: Then, just relaunch the missions, isnt that part of the fun of this game, to fly the missions? Id say you have a GOLDEN opportunity to ya know, see if you cant eek out MORE science as you go!

4: It's overlooking the broader problem.

Yup, this IS a broader problem and its NOT where you think it is. The problem is with you, not the game. Now, before you think me being rude, I am being absolutely unsugar coated brutal with my honesty. You say you QUICK LOADED. A quick save is NOT the same as an AUTO SAVE, they are TWO DISTINCT SAVE FILES. You lost your science NOT the game. Again, I am being 100% BRUTAL with my honesty. While I do sympathize with you for losing science, I also do not feel sorry for you. You DID quick load after all, it is NOT a bug in the game that cost you your science and missions and tech nodes. It was a poorly executed Quick-Load w/out having a more recent Quick-Save in your games folder.

This has happened to me in the past many times, but now it's happened in Career mode, and I realize how serious this bug is.

again, not a bug, but an end user error. I have made this EXACT mistake a number of times. You learn to quick save before performing ANY action that may result in a catastrophic failure of your vessel.

[Dunbaratu]

Again, F9 requires a press and hold.

I've had it activate with a single keypress, not a hold.

[Sky_walker]

I've had it activate with a single keypress, not a hold.

You must be slow on releasing, cause F9 definitely does require you to hold the key.

[Padishar]

Yup, this IS a broader problem and its NOT where you think it is. The problem is with you, not the game. Now, before you think me being rude, I am being absolutely unsugar coated brutal with my honesty. You say you QUICK LOADED. A quick save is NOT the same as an AUTO SAVE, they are TWO DISTINCT SAVE FILES. You lost your science NOT the game. Again, I am being 100% BRUTAL with my honesty. While I do sympathize with you for losing science, I also do not feel sorry for you. You DID quick load after all, it is NOT a bug in the game that cost you your science and missions and tech nodes. It was a poorly executed Quick-Load w/out having a more recent Quick-Save in your games folder.

again, not a bug, but an end user error. I have made this EXACT mistake a number of times.

Yes, these are "user errors" but there is absolutely no reason why the game has to make it so easy to do it. If you were designing a rocket capsule, would you leave the abort button exposed to any accidental press, maybe putting it somewhere on a different panel so it was "out of the way"? No, you would put it in the most logical place and would put one of those failsafe covers over it to prevent accidental triggering.

You learn to quick save before performing ANY action that may result in a catastrophic failure of your vessel.

I'm sorry, but doing a quicksave before every physics simulation time step is going to slow my game down too much... Yeah, a bit of an exaggeration, but the game quite often decides your vessel would look better in lots of pieces without you doing anything that should require quicksaving. I have one save where I'm messing with an asteroid and non-physics timewarp can explode the ship at almost any time needing KSP to be restarted to stop it happening. You should make a quicksave after successfully doing anything that you really want to keep if you have to reload for any reason. However, this doesn't change the fact that the game, in loading an old quicksave file without giving any sort of warning that you are about to lose a significant chunk of progress, is unhelpful. A confirmation prompt (or even a dialog to let you choose which save to load that defaults to the most recent one) really wouldn't hurt anyone...

[Sky_walker]

I usually do saves in 2 situations:

1) Approach to the target

2) Successfully completing objective

So for example if I'm sending a rocket from Kerbal to orbital station I make 2 saves: one when orbits are in synch and next "meeting point" is with my rocket and a station being less than 2km away, and another one after docking.

[Random Tank]

This really pointless argument is still going? Wow...

The only thing I could agree in changing is to make F5 need holding down too; because as far as most are concerned, the the fact you have to hold down the key IS your confirmation window. It is a quicksave/load after all, so if you start adding confirmation windows and load select screens it doesn't become quick anymore; the current quicksave is THE definition of a quick save currently: one button saved, another button loaded. Just use your frikking memory and you'll be fine....

[Padishar]

This really pointless argument is still going? Wow...

If you think it is pointless then why are you contributing?

The only thing I could agree in changing is to make F5 need holding down too; because as far as most are concerned, the the fact you have to hold down the key IS your confirmation window. It is a quicksave/load after all, so if you start adding confirmation windows and load select screens it doesn't become quick anymore; the current quicksave is THE definition of a quick save currently: one button saved, another button loaded. Just use your frikking memory and you'll be fine....

You suggest that quicksave should be made to take 5 seconds longer to trigger and then use the fact it is supposed to be "quick" as the reason? Having to hold a key down is not confirmation as it gives no info about what you are doing so you don't know what you are confirming. As I have said before, making f5 open a "save game" dialog that defaults to a name that wont overwrite any existing file by default and can be confirmed by just hitting enter would be a lot quicker than having to hold f5 down. It could even have a checkbox for "always show this dialog" and clearing it would mean you had to hold alt to see the dialog. Exactly the same argument holds for the loading dialog as well.

[Sky_walker]

As I have said before, making f5 open a "save game" dialog that defaults to a name that wont overwrite any existing file by default and can be confirmed by just hitting enter would be a lot quicker than having to hold f5 down.

You are confused. That's not a quicksave any more.

(and: lol @ 'dialog is a lot quicker than holding f5')

[Random Tank]

If you think it is pointless then why are you contributing?

It's pointless because this feature shouldn't be changed, and also doesn't need to be changed. I'm just trying to explain why. (I do think F5 could be changed to hold down though, but it's not important, so I don't even care if it didn't happen, it just could be smart)

You suggest that quicksave should be made to take 5 seconds longer to trigger and then use the fact it is supposed to be "quick" as the reason? Having to hold a key down is not confirmation as it gives no info about what you are doing so you don't know what you are confirming.

Well... Yeah, that's why it's called a quicksave? It doesn't need to tell you what you are confirmining, you already know that, it's a save button? The only reason I say to make it hold down is so accidental presses won't override your quicksave. Changing it to the way the Op and others want it stops it being quick; and to be honest, having some bit of common sense would stop mistakes like this happening anyway....

As I have said before, making f5 open a "save game" dialog that defaults to a name that wont overwrite any existing file by default and can be confirmed by just hitting enter would be a lot quicker than having to hold f5 down. It could even have a checkbox for "always show this dialog" and clearing it would mean you had to hold alt to see the dialog. Exactly the same argument holds for the loading dialog as well.

This leads me onto my next point: This feature isn't needed. At all. Wanna know why? It's already in the game.

Alt + F5, Name save menu. Alt + F9, Load Menu. Don't like quicksave? Don't use it there is an alternative.

You think a dialog box with confirmation button is quicker? Good one! That's funny

[Padishar]

You are confused. That's not a quicksave any more.

(and: lol @ 'dialog is a lot quicker than holding f5')

No, I am definitely not confused. I know for a fact that it would take less time to save if hitting f5 opened a dialog that was then confirmed with enter than having to hold down f5 for 5 seconds. I can press f5 followed by enter in less than a second and I would also get the benefit that my previous quicksave would not get overwritten by default.

It's pointless because this feature shouldn't be changed, and also doesn't need to be changed. I'm just trying to explain why. (I do think F5 could be changed to hold down though, but it's not important, so I don't even care if it didn't happen, it just could be smart)

Well, you're really not doing a very good job of getting your argument across. Simply requiring f5 to be held down makes it take 5 seconds longer to do a quicksave without any significant benefit (such as stopping it from overwriting the previous save).

Well... Yeah, that's why it's called a quicksave? It doesn't need to tell you what you are confirmining, you already know that, it's a save button? The only reason I say to make it hold down is so accidental presses won't override your quicksave. Changing it to the way the Op and others want it stops it being quick; and to be honest, having some bit of common sense would stop mistakes like this happening anyway....

It is called a quicksave because it is supposed to be quick, not because it is supposed to use a "single slot" and thus always overwrite your previous use. You are saying that it makes sense to make quicksave take 5 seconds longer because it is supposed to be quick. This does not make any sense at all. None of the suggestions that I have made in this thread would make quicksave significantly slower (and certainly not 5 seconds slower) and would make quickload significantly faster (as, if you were sure what you were doing you could hit f9 then enter much faster than holding f9). The issue isn't about common sense, it is about the program being unhelpful when mistakes are made by the user when a little redesign of the save/load UI could greatly improve this aspect without significant penalties.

This leads me onto my next point: This feature isn't needed. At all. Wanna know why? It's already in the game.

Alt + F5, Name save menu. Alt + F9, Load Menu. Don't like quicksave? Don't use it there is an alternative.

Alt-f5 is a ridiculous key combination to have the most useful save operation on. What happens when you accidentally hit alt-f4 instead? Besides, this doesn't affect the main point of my argument that a redesign of the save/load UI along the lines I've described does not make anything significantly worse than at present.

You think a dialog box with confirmation button is quicker? Good one! That's funny

No, I don't think it, I am absolutely certain that a dialog with enter to confirm would be much faster than having to hold a key down for 5 seconds.

Perhaps you should actually think about what you are going to type before typing it. Try to come up with one significant drawback of the system I proposed that isn't far outweighed by the advantages it would give (to others, not just to you).

[Red Iron Crown]

Alt-f5 is a ridiculous key combination to have the most useful save operation on. What happens when you accidentally hit alt-f4 instead?

Oh god, this. Made enough progress that you'd like to make a named save for it? Here, let me close the game abruptly for you. [insert rage induced table flipping image here]

[AlamoVampire]

Padishar any dialogue in a QUICKSAVE makes it SLOWER not faster.

[Padishar]

Padishar any dialogue in a QUICKSAVE makes it SLOWER not faster.

Go and read what I wrote. Then think about it. Actually, to save you the trouble, I'll explain it here...

First, to address the "point" you made, someone suggested that quicksave could also require the key to be held down and I pointed out that this would make it significantly slower, both than it is at present, and also than how it would be if a save dialog were opened and then you hit enter. Yes, adding a dialog to the current quicksave would make it a little slower to use but I never said any different.

My complete proposal is to fix the alt-f5 and alt-f9 dialogs to display information about each save (real time and in-game time at least) and to select sensible defaults. The save dialog would default to a name of the form "quicksave N" where N is simply incremented so it will never overwrite a previous save by default. Clicking the Save button or hitting enter would do the save. The load dialog would be similar but would default to having the most recent save selected. Both dialogs would also have a checkbox marked "Always show this dialog" and, if that is checked (it would be by default) then the relevant dialog would also be shown when the key is pressed without the alt key. Otherwise, the keys without alt would simply do the operation with the default that the dialog would have chosen.

The user would be able to set this up to behave almost the same as the current system. The only difference would be that the previous quicksave is not overwritten each time and, if you really want to argue about that being a bad thing then another checkbox could easily be added to the save dialog that allows you to specify "always default to quicksave.sfs" (though I wouldn't waste space in the UI for that option and would stick it in the config file instead).

[AlamoVampire]

Padishar it takes me half a second to strike quick save. It takes me 3-4 seconds to hit alt-f5 and monkey with the dialogue box. This is slower, not faster. The system you propose is infinitely slower. Why? You gotta name it, then when you try to load it you gotta find it. This turns quick save/load into save/load. I stand 100% correct in my statement of your 100% absolute wrongness. Dialogue boxes and options slow it down, not speed it up.

[zeel]

Seems like the simplest thing to do is for quick saves to not overwrite each other, and for the quickload button to ask for confirmation when and only when the save it is trying to load is older than some set amount (or older than the current session). Furthermore backloading should not delete/overwrite the more recent saves, allowing you to load them if needed.

That means that you don't accidentally overwrite a quicksave, you won't accidentally load one that's days old, and if you do you can load an autosave that's more up to date. The load list should tell you the real time timestamp, game time, science amount, and number of flights for every save in the list.

Also you don't have to make a "hold to save" feature very long. 500ms is more than enough to prevent accidents, but still more than short enough to avoid being annoying.

[AlamoVampire]

Alt-f5 kinda asks confirmation as u choose which qs u want.

But in simple terms a quick save file is a photo of the game at that moment if you go a while w/out a QS your autosave is more advanced than your QS and as such are and always have been 2 distinct saves, which can cost you if you quick load carelessly.

[cpast]

First, to address the "point" you made, someone suggested that quicksave could also require the key to be held down and I pointed out that this would make it significantly slower, both than it is at present, and also than how it would be if a save dialog were opened and then you hit enter. Yes, adding a dialog to the current quicksave would make it a little slower to use but I never said any different.

In that case, your suggestion is utterly useless. If people get in the habit of pressing F9-Enter, they'll have exactly the same complaint as now. The complaint is not much more justified now than it would be then, because the problem is squarely in the "what you say" vs. "what you want" distinction: you run into problems not because you accidentally trigger quickload, but because you intentionally trigger quickload, then complain when it turns out that's not what you wanted to do. What makes you think that adding a second keystroke would change anything at all about it? If you say "only do the extra dialog under these circumstances", you no longer have a quickload - a quickload system is *quick*, and having to look at the screen to see if a dialog pops up is not quick.

The sole advantage of having F9-Enter instead of holding F9 for the quickload is that it can tell you when you made the quicksave. But you can do this more easily: Where it says, in the top right, "Hold F9 to load quicksave", add the date (and maybe hour too, so like "Hold F9 to load save from 2 PM June 9") on which you made the quicksave. Adding a system that doesn't slow the user down provides no check on the quickload "problem" (as the issue is that you weren't thinking, not that you accidentally triggered it), and adding one which does ruins the point of quickload.

[Padishar]

Padishar it takes me half a second to strike quick save. It takes me 3-4 seconds to hit alt-f5 and monkey with the dialogue box. This is slower, not faster. The system you propose is infinitely slower. Why? You gotta name it, then when you try to load it you gotta find it. This turns quick save/load into save/load. I stand 100% correct in my statement of your 100% absolute wrongness. Dialogue boxes and options slow it down, not speed it up.

What does that have to do with anything that I wrote? I clearly said that the save dialog would default to a name that wouldn't overwrite any existing file and the load dialog would default to the most recently saved file.

In that case, your suggestion is utterly useless. If people get in the habit of pressing F9-Enter, they'll have exactly the same complaint as now. The complaint is not much more justified now than it would be then, because the problem is squarely in the "what you say" vs. "what you want" distinction: you run into problems not because you accidentally trigger quickload, but because you intentionally trigger quickload, then complain when it turns out that's not what you wanted to do. What makes you think that adding a second keystroke would change anything at all about it? If you say "only do the extra dialog under these circumstances", you no longer have a quickload - a quickload system is *quick*, and having to look at the screen to see if a dialog pops up is not quick.

The sole advantage of having F9-Enter instead of holding F9 for the quickload is that it can tell you when you made the quicksave. But you can do this more easily: Where it says, in the top right, "Hold F9 to load quicksave", add the date (and maybe hour too, so like "Hold F9 to load save from 2 PM June 9") on which you made the quicksave. Adding a system that doesn't slow the user down provides no check on the quickload "problem" (as the issue is that you weren't thinking, not that you accidentally triggered it), and adding one which does ruins the point of quickload.

You quoted a bit specifically about saving but are only talking about loading. Yes, what I wrote in that post made no mention of the confirmation it would ask for if the file chosen to load (either the default or one you explicitly chose) is significantly older than your current state (as I wrote in an earlier post).

It also allows you to pick a different save to load if you want and it is quicker in the cases where you wont lose a substantial amount of progress.

[Red Iron Crown]

Personally, I'd prefer F9-Enter over press and hold F9, with the default behavior of F9 being to load the last quicksave, you would have to choose a different save in the dialog to load a different one. Prevents accidental loads like long press does, doesn't take any more time (F9-Enter is as quick or quicker than press and hold F9), and gives better options for loading.

[AlamoVampire]

.......As I have said before, making f5 open a "save game" dialog that defaults to a name that wont overwrite any existing file by default and can be confirmed by just hitting enter would be a lot quicker than having to hold f5 down.....

You said this. But beyond that you now try to back pedal to try to save face in the glare of your error.

Edited June 26, 2014 by AlamoVampire

[technicalfool]

This thread has served its purpose, I think.