FYI: There is a max save file limit, after reaching it not even autosave works. No warnings in-game.
FYI: There is a max save file limit, after reaching it not even autosave works. No warnings in-game.
As the title says, there is a max save file limit of 260, after that the game will PRETEND to save, but not actually do it. This includes autosaves. The game never warns you that it failed to save, and all animations in the menu looks like it does with a successful save, so you won't know until the game crashes and you realize you lost 2 hours of progress.
I learned the hard way, so you don't have to.
If you want to mass-delete old saves, I suggest you do it in Windows and not in game, btw.
![User avatar](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="256" height="256"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
I am a bit shocked that anyone has this many saves already. The game came out on April 24, for a maximum 23 days played. That means 11 saves per day, and none overwriting a previous save. As a software engineer and gamer, I don't think I would have considered anyone having that many saves, ever, but I would have put an error message for it too. That sucks that the error was silent, the worst kind of failure.
Between the pile of saves, and seeing the 2 hours of progress lost, I quickly realized that we must play the game very differently. I tend to start a scenario and just play, the only reason I save is if I need to go do something that will take more than 15 minutes or so. At this point, having beat all three scenarios a few times, I can beat the Arks scenario in about 90 minutes. The first scenario I did in about 3 hours on hard two weeks. Refugees is the only one that I tend to go slower on, and it took a bit over 4 hours last weekend.
Well, I do tend to save very very often, specifically to avoid this exact situation of loosing progress.
If a game lacks a quicksave function, I tend to just spam the manual save fairly often, every 5-10min or so. And overwriting added 2 extra clicks to this every time, so I just had 258 saves all called "NEW SAVE", since it defaulted to this name every time, but I just tracked it via the time stamps.
As a habitual quicksaver I'd say that 11 saves is a pretty typical day. This game is pretty good with autosaving, so I try not to overdo it. But I like to save occasionally just to have landmarks to return to if I want to roll back. There's nothing I hate more than losing progress that I don't plan to do differently the next time.
It's not surprising that this sort of thing gets missed in QA - on the face of it that seems like an absurd number of unique saves. But it should be easy enough to fix.
I make 100+ saves per City. More during my No-Death run. The amount of Save/Reloading I did to get that was crazy. Wanna prevent that murder from the food thieves? Chase 'em twice, don't esclate the third time, ignore them the fourth and fifth time. Chasing 3 times = a Death. That one choice-branch alone took me about 30 saves to fully map out, and that was in just 5 of the 45 days in that city. Gotta make a save for Polar Bears and Tesla City too. Them scouts die too often from RNG. More saves. It's very easy to get 255 saves; I do it pretty much every day I play. :P
260 savegames should be more than enough for Frostpunk. You can also just rename the savefolder, Steam will create a new one. Another advice, i would turn off cloud storage, so you have full control over your savefiles.
I am quite the save hoarder in other games. In Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 i had like 300+ savegames in the end.
I have never, ever, in 30 years of PC gaming, had to manually delete a save, for any reason (other than cheating in permadeath roguelikes). Yes, of course 260 saves is "more than enough" for a few playthroughs. But cumulatively it's not that many at all.
Is strange number for computers nearby FF = 255
wiki The use of eight bits for storage in older video games has had the consequence of it appearing as a hard limit in many video games. For example, in the original The Legend of Zelda game, Link can carry a maximum of 255 rupees.[3] It was often used for numbers where casual gameplay would not cause anyone to exceed the number. However, in most situations it is reachable given enough time. This can cause many other peculiarities to appear when the number wraps back to 0, such as the infamous "kill screen" seen after clearing level 255 of Pac-Man.[4]
255 is so because of limitations of older hardware. They used single byte to store that info. Nowadays there is literally no reason to use short unsigned ints in a computer game. For consoles... maybe? But computer game developers can reasonably expect that the computer has extra storage.
Dumb question, how did you find the save folder? I had to make a savefile with a goofy name then search the entire hard drive.
Silly me for not knowing the saves were in C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\userdata\34XXXXX\3XXXXX\remote\saves?
('X'd out those digits because I don't know if linked to an account number)
Its not a dumb question :)
And the save folder would obviously have been a different place if you didnt get the game off steam.
I went to pcgamingwiki.com and looked up Frostpunk. It lists everything from save folder to mulitmonitor support, fixes to common issues and usually link to programs that fix your FOV and all that good stuff for all PC games.
The first digit is your steamID btw, the second is the gameID.
Having a save limit isn't weird but not letting the user know? Showing success even when the save fails? These are bugs.
Someone who has an account needs to post this bug on the official forums. There's going to be a lot of people encountering this and getting pissed off about lost progress.
Our glorious leader hasn’t slept a single minute since that generator came on! Show your respects to the unsleeping captain!
![Silver](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="32" height="32"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
I was wondering where are the members of the royal family and the queen of England would be in the frostland,since the people of London goes to the generator sites to survive the winter,where the royal family and the queen of England would go to survive the winter?Maybe a private generator site for only the members of the royal family and for the queen or in somewhere else?
"The City Must Survive". This game is a masterpiece. Thanks to Piotr Musial for AMAZING Frostpunk's soundtrack. I drew listening it.
https://www.artstation.com/leondecamargo
https://i.redd.it/g87nw503bo871.jpg
I was goofing around and thought it would be fun to hit all requirements before triggering the arrival of the New Manchester messenger. (He's triggered the day after you finish the last set of pre-storm objectives OR on day 15, whichever comes first.)
After I got prepped for the storm and finished the objectives, I got a little prompt of, "So, hey, do we still want to look for New Manchester?" (paraphrasing). I said no and it skipped to an ending, fully customized to the scenario.
I guess I won't spoil details, just so you can do this yourself if you're feeling like it. I was impressed with them adding an ending just for the "never even bothered to find out about New Manchester" options. It was neat.
Say does this Save 44% on Frostpunk: Season Pass on Steam (steampowered.com) comes with the base game? or do I need to get the base game as well
Is there an up to date 'go to' guide for beginners for this game?
Yesterday I was going to finally complete refugees on hard after 2 weeks of trying. It wasn't the end but the mid part, where Lords arrive. I had resources, all areas were heated above chilly, and maybe 10 sick people at the time.
No reason for more to fall sick, when just randomly sick number started rising fast and suddenly everybody was becoming critically grave.
It was way too random.
If there is a sequel I really hope we can see where and how are people becoming sick.
Them getting sick feels very random sometimes.
