|
|
Post by Super Orbus on Jul 26, 2011 7:34:44 GMT -5
Just as long as you're not submitting your scores for some kind of ranking or leaderboards or whatever. Unless those people are also using savestates. Then I guess it's a level playing field again.
|
|
|
|
Post by llj on Jul 26, 2011 11:46:47 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. But again, endings for SHMUPs basically suck. If getting to see the end of the game is the goal, there are much better genres to play that give you more rewarding endings. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2011 12:02:35 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. But again, endings for SHMUPs basically suck. If getting to see the end of the game is the goal, there are much better genres to play that give you more rewarding endings. The first time I beat U.N. Squadron was on an emulator with save states. I'd never been able to do it as a kid, so I wanted to see it through to the end when I got older. I've since beaten it legitimately, but I'm not going to fault someone or consider them a second-class citizen for clearing a game with save states. It's laughable. |
|
|
|
Post by hidetoshidecide on Jul 26, 2011 13:43:46 GMT -5
But again, endings for SHMUPs basically suck. If getting to see the end of the game is the goal, there are much better genres to play that give you more rewarding endings. I would say that I'm a game tourist, by and large. I like to see what I can see. It's about the journey rather than the destination. |
|
|
|
Post by Vokkan on Jul 26, 2011 13:55:36 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. And those people are casual gamers. |
|
|
|
Post by derboo on Jul 26, 2011 14:28:05 GMT -5
Those evil, despicable casual gamers!
|
|
|
|
Post by hidetoshidecide on Jul 26, 2011 14:40:51 GMT -5
Those evil, despicable casual gamers! They control world finance. |
|
|
|
Post by susanismyalias on Jul 26, 2011 14:44:46 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. And those people are casual gamers. What. |
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Jul 26, 2011 14:45:24 GMT -5
If it were about the journey instead of the destination, why would you use save states? They only shorten the trip and you'll miss out on unexpected experiences.
I mentioned it before, but I'll say it again in different words: When using save states it doesn't matter whether you're "cheating" your way through a game like some claim, or if your "accomplishments" are better or worse compared to non-save staters. None of that abstract (i.e. objective) "playing it right or wrong" bullshit matters. Simply put, the possibility of having rich experiences-- the kind that are not immediate, that you cannot predict, that take effort, that take patience-- when playing a game is diminished when using save states. And that is all I want to express.
In other words, do not save state because you think you've seen it all. How do you know when you've reached that point? Save state because you're no longer interested in what you're seeing. Perhaps you are already doing this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2011 15:03:40 GMT -5
If it were about the journey instead of the destination, why would you use save states? They only shorten the trip and you'll miss out on unexpected experiences. I mentioned it before, but I'll say it again in different words: When using save states it doesn't matter whether you're "cheating" your way through a game like some claim, or if your "accomplishments" are better or worse compared to non-save staters. None of that abstract (i.e. objective) "playing it right or wrong" bullshit matters. Simply put, the possibility of having rich experiences-- the kind that are not immediate, that you cannot predict, that take effort, that take patience-- when playing a game is diminished when using save states. And that is all I want to express. In other words, do not save state because you think you've seen it all. How do you know when you've reached that point? Save state because you're no longer interested in what you're seeing. Perhaps you are already doing this. I guess the more important question is: Why do you care how another person derives their entertainment from games? Play them however you want and leave others to their own devices. Do you want someone to tell you that you're "doing it wrong"? I remember when I was around 12 years old, one of my sisters would play FFII on the SNES while I watched (stupid, lousy sharing). I would constantly tell her she was playing the game wrong, when in truth, she just wasn't playing it exactly the same way I would. In the end, though, as the great Linkin Park would say, it doesn't really matter. Who cares if someone uses save states? Why would their reasoning for using them matter? The crazy amount of judgment being tossed around here is just bizarre. |
|
|
|
Post by susanismyalias on Jul 26, 2011 15:21:56 GMT -5
Hardcore Hating 101
|
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Jul 26, 2011 15:27:35 GMT -5
I was just offering advice. All I was saying was: using save states lessens the possibility of having a greater range of experiences; that he could be missing out on things he didn't consider. That is not a criticism against using save states. I never said it was "bad." I even specifically said those kinds of ideas don't matter.
edit: and believe it or not I DO care about hidetoshidecide's game playing experiences, which is why I'm offering advice in the first place. He clearly stated he's new at the genre and I'm offering tips for enjoyment based on my experiences-- not some lofty, imaginary standards regarding cheating or being better than other players.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feynman on Jul 26, 2011 15:56:54 GMT -5
I think my favorite thing about this thread is how suggesting shmups that may be enjoyable for someone who isn't much of a shmup fan only lasted a couple pages, followed by four pages of arguing about the use of save states. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2011 16:44:50 GMT -5
I was just offering advice. All I was saying was: using save states lessens the possibility of having a greater range of experiences; that he could be missing out on things he didn't consider. That is not a criticism against using save states. I never said it was "bad." I even specifically said those kinds of ideas don't matter. edit: and believe it or not I DO care about hidetoshidecide's game playing experiences, which is why I'm offering advice in the first place. He clearly stated he's new at the genre and I'm offering tips for enjoyment based on my experiences-- not some lofty, imaginary standards regarding cheating or being better than other players. Fair enough, but when you say "I'm not judging you" and then proceed to tell someone what you feel is the correct way to do something, it still sounds like you're judging them. |
|
|
|
Post by derboo on Jul 26, 2011 16:50:41 GMT -5
I think my favorite thing about this thread is how suggesting shmups that may be enjoyable for someone who isn't much of a shmup fan only lasted a couple pages, followed by four pages of arguing about the use of save states. That's because discussing stuff is more exciting than listing stuff. I'd personally recommend the Gradius 1 or 2 ports for the NES/Famicom, as those have a lot of technical limitations and as such aren't nearly as ruthless as their arcade counterparts. Gradius is the only shmup I've beaten not only without cheating, but also cleared without dying. Gradius 1 is actually one of the games that soured me on the genre. I could beat it at one point, but I always found the die-and-you're-fucked aspect incredibly frustrating. This. Gradius has the potential to be a great game, there's just this terrible design flaw. Making the game exponentially harder the more the player fails is bad design. Gradius, to me, is the best example of a game that has become much better with save states. Dieing after the checkpoint in the later levels of Gradius is a 99% game over. Why do I have to start from the beginning to have a chance again? Because the game is badly designed. Save states have saved me so much tedium, I can't even count the hours I would have wasted on bad game design without them, especially in older games. There is no good reason whatsoever to force me through five stages that put me to sleep only because I've played the sixth one for the first time, or it's got an unfair difficulty spike. So, well, my recommendation: Play all the Gradius games, with save states. |
|
