The art of saving and reloading.

Save Scumming is a rather simple concept. You save the game, perform an activity that has a random outcome, and reload the save if the outcome is not favorable to try again. Not all games support this, and quite a few struggle with the concept of ‘favorable’. Others do a great job here.

XCOM2 is probably the best example. The RNG itself is set before you perform the action, so save scumming doesn’t actually change the results of an action, you need to take a different action altogether. Second, the failed results rarely lead to ultra negative outcomes, often simply an added difficulty modifier. I mean, that’s why Iron Man mode exists (1 save, can’t reload). Favorable outcomes in this case become ‘optimal’ outcomes.

Many RPGs can find difficulty here, either in that failures cause massive failure (e.g. failing a roll = the whole map turns aggressive) or that the favorable outcome is so powerful that it changes the rest of the game.

The answer lies in complexity and flexibility. In that the positive and negative outcomes have a marginal impact on the overall progress. BG3 and PoE2 tend to hit this one well. Impactful outcomes are less about a random role than a clear decision. Flavorful outcomes (more lore, cosmetics, alternative paths) are unlocked through the RNG machine. Example: I need to pass a speech chest to get access to some gloves. If I fail that check, I then need to steal them through a different set of skill checks. The final destination is still the same, but the paths to get there are different. Heck, Fallout 1 nailed this nearly 30 years ago – you could talk the final boss into taking themselves out!

I’m still noticing behaviours in my PoE2 playthrough though. I naturally press F5 when I enter a new zone, as you get little context as to what awaits the next step. Nekataka (the capital city) has a location that is miles above your level, and they will kill you on sight. Turning an entire zone hostile = I will die and need to reload, so less scumming than simply accepting defeat and moving on. The game also generally hides skill checks, only truly presenting them if you can pass. This is different than BG3, where you roll a die and can clearly see that you failed. I can still clearly recall needing a very low number to pass, and rolling a critical failure – right at the start! The good news is that the outcomes of those rolls are very rarely full failures.

The absolute best example I can think of is Disco Elysium. The entire game is rolls to determine outcomes, and nearly all of them are glorious in one way or another.

When a game uses RNG to determine fixed outcomes that are objectively bad/horrible, and paint you into corners you absolutely do not want to visit, save scumming is needed. If your roll relates to a marriage proposal that goes poorly, and you end up in a bar drinking your misery away and meet an entire crew of ragtag space misfits, isn’t that a positive thing?

It’s an interesting mindset that is only possible in today’s gaming age of non absolutes. And in the broader sense, I think it’s a good thing for people to accept that failure of one small act does not mean that the world is going to end. Experimentation gets you so much more enjoyable experience, so that the next time you give something a try, your skill + experience has raised enough to pass that check. Oh yeah, I went there.