|
|
Post by Vokkan on Jul 25, 2011 14:24:50 GMT -5
Using savestates is cheating, but for pracitice it is acceptable.
Rule is: if you can't put it all together in a one credit run, you have not beaten the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by hidetoshidecide on Jul 25, 2011 14:35:23 GMT -5
I don't really care about the angels dancing on the head of a pin aspects of beating a game, so all is well.
|
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jul 25, 2011 14:41:05 GMT -5
I just think beating a game is, by the game's rules, getting to the end of it! A 1cc is a self-imposed challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by llj on Jul 25, 2011 15:43:14 GMT -5
All retro shmups are hard. I'm not big on shmups myself, I've only enjoyed the Treasure ones from the 90s and 00s and as hard as they are, I still consider them FAR EASIER than retro shmups.
|
|
|
|
Post by hidetoshidecide on Jul 25, 2011 17:29:20 GMT -5
All retro shmups are hard. I'm not big on shmups myself, I've only enjoyed the Treasure ones from the 90s and 00s and as hard as they are, I still consider them FAR EASIER than retro shmups. I took a shine to Sin and Punishment for some reason. I loved it. And I did it on the Wii, so no save states. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 17:45:22 GMT -5
I wouldn't judge someone for beating a game, shmup or otherwise, with save states. Of course, that's only as long they aren't bragging about some kind of accomplishment they made while playing it that way. As I see it, save states are a convenient way to see difficult games through to the end. It helps you get more fun out of a game that's giving you a hard time. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by llj on Jul 25, 2011 18:03:47 GMT -5
Save states are great for action games where you just have to see the ending. But Shmups really don't offer much reward at the end of the journey other than a high score. Some of them may have some interesting endings, but to me the shmup is the biggest example of a genre where cheating is essentially pointless. I have played some shmups to the end with unlimited credits and I get no high out of that.
I've been playing Gradius V on and off lately and I like the system there. 3 credits to start, 1 additional credit for every hour you've spent on the game, and you'll get unlimited credits after 17 hours of play. Obviously, the goal is to try to beat the game before logging 17 hours on it, but it's kind of a nice "test-reward" kind of thing for the gamer that you know if you committed to it, you'd get an option to see the end, if that was your goal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 18:09:24 GMT -5
I can recognize the appeal of playing for score or just trying to test the upper limits of your ability in a game. The thing is, most people just want to reach the ending so they can move on to the next game they want to play. I wouldn't say there's anything intrinsically wrong with that approach, though.
If someone misses out on the "meat" of a game due to their own playing preferences, so be it. There isn't exactly a shortage of good games to play out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by necromaniac on Jul 25, 2011 18:44:31 GMT -5
Who cares if you "cheat" or not, as long as you're having fun its your business.
And turning back to the topic at hand, I recommend the Reap: An obscure isometric PC classic from the makers of Super Stardust HD and Outland.
Don't expect it to work on Vista or windows 7 though...
|
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jul 25, 2011 18:54:35 GMT -5
Of course, that's only as long they aren't bragging about some kind of accomplishment they made while playing it that way. Like saying they even beat the game. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 18:55:58 GMT -5
Of course, that's only as long they aren't bragging about some kind of accomplishment they made while playing it that way. Like saying they even beat the game. Oh my god, someone beat Gradius III with save states! It completely invalidates my own accomplishments with the game! |
|
|
|
Post by kitten on Jul 25, 2011 19:05:39 GMT -5
I'm just saying, you can't say you beat a game if you cheated to get to the end. It forfeits you from winning like it would any other game. Cheating doesn't necessarily invalidate any fun anyone has had with a game, and I've never said it has (who hasn't enjoyed doing stupid shit with a Game Genie/Shark?), but you don't beat a game unless you play by the rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 19:29:03 GMT -5
It feels like semantics to me. The way a person reached the end of a game should only matter if they use it in reference to some other kind of achievement. A high score, or a 1cc run or something.
Of course, I do sort of see what you mean. If someone were to tell me they beat Ninja Gaiden 1 for the NES, I'd initially be impressed. Not that the game is impossible, but a lot of people simply gave up after 6-2. If they were to then say they did it with save states, I'd have less respect for their skill, but it wouldn't offend me or anything. It's not like we're all in some kind of dick measuring contest (this is where you specifically do not mention Achievements).
|
|
|
|
Post by kyouki on Jul 25, 2011 20:35:16 GMT -5
More importantly than all of that, STGs just aren't fun unless you beat them legitimately. What that means depends upon the game... for example, console STGs may not necessarily be balanced to be an enjoyable 1CC (though all good arcade STGs are).
One of the most enjoyable things of playing STGs is that as you get better you clear earlier stages with more lives/a higher score. Stages that frustrated you initially become ridiculously easy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 20:36:44 GMT -5
That assumes that every person derives their enjoyment from the same sources, though. Some people are entertained just by seeing the end of a game, regardless of how they got there.
|
|
