Board 8 > If you use rewind/save state to finish a game, did you beat it?

(+) Yeah! (+)

If he is satisfied enough to say he did, why does it matter?
---

My question isn't really for you Jakyl it's for people that think skipping and rewinding/savestate scumming are different

---

Is it not beating the game if you're a speedrunner and doing stuff like going out of bounds to skip levels or using glitches to become invulnerable?

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Is it not beating the game if you're a speedrunner and doing stuff like going out of bounds to skip levels or using glitches to become invulnerable?

People should start clarifying in general conversation whether they beat a game Any% or 100%
---

Let me explain why they're the same to start

In both cases you're circumventing a lot of the intended experience by using a game mechanic

One you're outright skipping a difficult part, one you're trivializing a difficult part, or many difficult parts, to the point where you're basically no longer experiencing what that portion of the game has to offer to the player.

Like when a segment of the game exists to challenge you and you are using features not in the original release to trivialize that challenge, what you're doing is removing that aspect of the game. Not unlike passwording through some difficult levels, I think.

---

I'd say you didn't really beat the game, but you got to experience the content and that's really all that matters. There isn't some test to get into heaven where you are given a controller and have to beat SMB warpless or Ninja Gaiden without a Game Genie etc.

---

Lopen posted...

So at what point does skipping become less egregious than rewinding?

Say a dude has a problem getting through Heat Man's stage and passwords through that, does all the rest by himself.

Did he beat Mega Man 2?

I already asked a literal situation from my own life along these lines and nobody bothered to answer it...!

---

lordjers posted...

Also particularly worth noting, attack against who? People who don't supposedly care if they legit beat the game or not as long as they have fun?

I mean, yes? The person doesn't necessarily have to care about the attack for it to be an attack.

I don't go out of my way to clarify that I looked up a solution, used a save state/password, a Game Genie, or what have you, because I don't really think it's important how someone beats something, but I'm not ashamed that I've done it or anything. I also almost never care to 100% a game. If you want to discount the way I play games, fine. I'm still going to keep playing them that way. I think it's dumb to obsess over 100% completion and grind for hours in RPGs, but more power to the people who have the time and patience for it.

---

Leonhart4 posted...

I mean, yes? The person doesn't necessarily have to care about the attack for it to be an attack.

When I say I don't think someone really beat a game it's not an attack per se. It's just an observation/statement of belief. It doesn't really matter to me except in the case of particularly difficult games. If someone beats Battletoads on the Switch I'm not gonna give them any props for it unless they explicitly say they didn't use savestates/rewinds. For a game like Battletoads that'd probably be my first question too.

On the flip side, a game like Mega Man 4 or Super Mario Bros 3 I'm probably not opening with that question or asking it at all. You don't really get any gamer cred to me for beating that as it's not particularly difficult so how you did it is not really important. We can just both say yeah we beat it, good game. I might ask if you played all the worlds in SMB3 because warp whistles are easy to get and some of the worlds are memorable experiences that would suck to miss (the giant world for example), but we're not gonna throw down about that.

Like I feel whether someone has beaten a game should not be considered an unwarranted attack in general. If you're not the type who has some sort of pride about gaming cred or whatever it shouldn't matter at all to you. If you are then you should take some pride in what you're doing and beat the games 'legitimately' and deserve to be attacked if you're cheaping through games for 'cred'

---

I dunno. It just feels like he's taking a bit too much pride in the way he plays games if he needs to make a distinction in what it means to actually "beat" a game.

I feel like if you're like me and you don't care about how you beat it, then you're probably not bragging about beating a game you took a shortcut to beat anyway.

---

He probably is but it shouldn't matter. He's the angry video game nerd. Whether you consider it an attack is what's important. To me it feels like a victimless crime. The only people that would be offended, well, should be, quite frankly.

---

Well, he's the nerd's friend, but yeah.

Still, no one will answer my question!

---

Lopen posted...

If someone beats Battletoads on the Switch I'm not gonna give them any props for it unless they explicitly say they didn't use savestates/rewinds. For a game like Battletoads that'd probably be my first question too.

If someone beat Battletoads on the Switch I feel like there are larger questions in play that need answers
---

Leonhart4 posted...

Well, he's the nerd's friend, but yeah.

Anyone who has seen Mike Matei stream knows who the real nerd is

---

Of course you beat the game. This is like saying that you don't know how to park a car now because new cars have a camera so it makes it easy.
And it does make it easier BUT you still parked the damn car. You have to know to do it.
Man these elitists.

---

To me it's just another category. Like you would say I beat the game on Easy, or hard, or blindfolded, or in less than an hour, or without getting hit. I beat the game using save states/rewind. I'd say it's more legitimate than using skip glitches or password/warp skips, which are actually part of the game!

Also does beating Persona on safe mode count?

---

Leonhart4 posted...

I mean, yes? The person doesn't necessarily have to care about the attack for it to be an attack.

I don't go out of my way to clarify that I looked up a solution, used a save state/password, a Game Genie, or what have you, because I don't really think it's important how someone beats something, but I'm not ashamed that I've done it or anything. I also almost never care to 100% a game. If you want to discount the way I play games, fine. I'm still going to keep playing them that way. I think it's dumb to obsess over 100% completion and grind for hours in RPGs, but more power to the people who have the time and patience for it.

It would only affect people who actually care if the way they finish the game by rewinding is validated or not. If they don't need such validation, it's not even directed to them cause the merit of beating a game is meaningless to them.

---

Drakeryn posted...

I feel like a lot of posts in this topic were "Yes they did beat the game, and you should stop gatekeeping aka having the wrong opinion"

My first post probably exuded this vibe, so I'd like to apologize for the unintended attack on all different stances from mine. People like you have had valid arguments against the question at hand that I respect, even though I disagree. The difference, of course, is that you're willing to respect others' opinions, whereas the lordjers of the world aren't.

---

MetalmindStats posted...

My first post probably exuded this vibe, so I'd like to apologize for the unintended attack on all different stances from mine. People like you have had valid arguments against the question at hand that I respect, even though I disagree. The difference, of course, is that you're willing to respect others' opinions, whereas the lordjers of the world aren't.

So you felt like been apologetic yet singled me out for some reason. Talk about attacks lol

---

lordjers posted...

It would only affect people who actually care if the way they finish the game by rewinding is validated or not. If they don't need such validation, it's not even directed to them cause the merit of beating a game is meaningless to them.

I mean, you can do an attack in a game that misses or hits for 0 HP but it still registers as an attack...!

Except when Dagger can't concentrate

---

Lopen posted...

Let me explain why they're the same to start

In both cases you're circumventing a lot of the intended experience by using a game mechanic

One you're outright skipping a difficult part, one you're trivializing a difficult part, or many difficult parts, to the point where you're basically no longer experiencing what that portion of the game has to offer to the player.

Like when a segment of the game exists to challenge you and you are using features not in the original release to trivialize that challenge, what you're doing is removing that aspect of the game. Not unlike passwording through some difficult levels, I think.

When you put it like that, I see why you would regard them as being pretty similar.

To me, though, the difference between jumping straight to the end of the game and using something like savestates is that, in the latter case, you're still doing everything that would normally be involved in a full playthrough of the game. Making it easier on yourself is not the same thing as completely bypassing it.

Heat Man's stage is actually a great example, because you can circumvent the entire disappearing blocks section with Item 2 if you like. That's a tool given to you by the game, the same as a rewind function is. I realize that's not a perfect one-to-one comparison, because as you said, it wasn't in the original release, but trivializing the challenge is a pretty broad term, which is why this whole debate gets so fuzzy. What about something like grinding excessively in RPGs?

Or take something like the recent Fire Emblems that have a literal rewind function built in. Wouldn't it be silly if someone accused another player of not "truly" finishing Three Houses because they used it? I just don't know if it makes that much difference whether it was in the original release or not - it isn't like all games are perfectly balanced around every mechanic in their default form. There's pretty often going to be exploits of some kind or another.

---

The Konami Code is in the original Contra, but you rarely hear people simply say "I beat Contra". They'll often say "I beat Contra, but I had to use the Konami code" or "I beat Contra, without the Konami code". The rewind function is kind of like that.

---

How about people who skip (mandatory) cutscenes? Obviously they're meant to be part of a game's experience.

---

What about people that skip trainers and use Repels in Pokemon? They're skipping the entire point of the game!

---

Leonhart4 posted...

Oh, are we moving the goalposts to include guides now?

If you use a guide to beat a Puzzle game like Phoenix Wright I would absolutely think that's cheating.

---

Skipping things using in game mechanics is totally fine.

---

Leonhart4 posted...

I mean, you can do an attack in a game that misses or hits for 0 HP but it still registers as an attack...!

Except when Dagger can't concentrate

But that attack still targetted you. In this case it's like a monster told a party "raaarghh! I'm the most powerful there is!!" and at that same moment some others in a faraway town suddenly lost some HP.

---

So would you consider somebody who uses a warp whistle to skip to the very last world of Mario 3 to have beaten the game moreso than somebody that uses the built in save states on Switch but doesn't skip anything?

---

StealThisSheen posted...

So would you consider somebody who uses a warp whistle to skip to the very last world of Mario 3 to have beaten the game moreso than somebody that uses the built in save states on Switch but doesn't skip anything?

Personally, yes.

---

From reading some of the last few days' posts, if you use save states to reach the end, you beat the game, but you didn't really beat the game.

---

Lopen posted...

When I say I don't think someone really beat a game it's not an attack per se. It's just an observation/statement of belief.

you didn't attack anyone, no. but also, you weren't saying "YOU DIDN'T BEAT THE GODDAMN FUCKING GAME BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION" at any point.

seems like you're only looking at the content of what matei said while ignoring the way he said it. "you didn't beat the game" isn't an attack but matei absolutely phrased it in a belligerent way.


---

Matei is a belligerent person so eh. I just take that tone as his default if he's passionate about something.

---

NBIceman posted...

To me, though, the difference between jumping straight to the end of the game and using something like savestates is that, in the latter case, you're still doing everything that would normally be involved in a full playthrough of the game. Making it easier on yourself is not the same thing as completely bypassing it.

I'm not sure I'd consider a liberal use of save states and rewind really doing the segments I guess. Like you're not duplicating a scenario that resembles the actual gameplay. It's sort of what's the difference between doing a marathon and a 100m dash. Gameplay difficulty is often based on the marathon approach not breaking things into segments ala I Want To Be The Guy and such. If each individual segment is not actually that difficult you're warping the original intent of the gameplay to the point where in my eyes the only difference between that and outright skipping is checking a box, more or less. You didn't do the gameplay, except on a technicality.

Item 2 on the other hand is completely different because you're making things easier on yourself through strategy (beating Air Man first) as well as a gameplay mechanic, rather than something that's just tacked on to the game.

Also on that note I'm not sure I'd consider built in Switch features present on every retro game a gameplay mechanic-- that's like considering an emulator feature (which hey, that's what they are) a gameplay mechanic, basically-- the only difference is now it's on an official Nintendo release.

---

Lopen posted...

Matei is a belligerent person so eh.

just because he's always in attack mode doesn't mean this wasn't an attack!

like, I'M a belligerent person so i self-identify with matei. but if i tell someone to "fuck off" in an argument, i would be pretty weirded out if afterwards someone went "oh lasa wasn't attacking anyone, he was just posting his opinion in a non-confrontational way!" i know exactly how i argue and i know that plenty of people find my arguing style unpleasant. no reason for me or anyone else to deny it.

---

Lopen posted...

Let me explain why they're the same to start

In both cases you're circumventing a lot of the intended experience by using a game mechanic

One you're outright skipping a difficult part, one you're trivializing a difficult part, or many difficult parts, to the point where you're basically no longer experiencing what that portion of the game has to offer to the player.

Like when a segment of the game exists to challenge you and you are using features not in the original release to trivialize that challenge, what you're doing is removing that aspect of the game. Not unlike passwording through some difficult levels, I think.

I used the save state feature on the 3DS to get through one screen that was broken and buggy that was designed to force players to start the game over once they ran out of lives. I dont care what people say, Ill cheat and not bat an eye.

Uglyface2 posted...

I used the save state feature on the 3DS to get through one screen that was broken and buggy that was designed to force players to start the game over once they ran out of lives. I dont care what people say, Ill cheat and not bat an eye.

Which game was that? Cause a screen that's designed to make you start over if you run out of lives sounds like a normal Video Game.

---

wg64Z posted...

Which game was that? Cause a screen that's designed to make you start over if you run out of lives sounds like a poorly designed Video Game.

---

Gotta check your gamer card to make sure you're still allowed to carry it...!

---

Games with levels/difficulty that are just specifically designed to eat your lives are holdovers from the arcade where it was a practice employed to eat your money, and isn't really game design that should be celebrated. We should be wanting to get away from that as the "norm."

---

Doesn't mean it's unbeatable, just means it's difficult. I've seen this argument made a lot and it's pretty flimsy.

---

wg64Z posted...

Which game was that? Cause a screen that's designed to make you start over if you run out of lives sounds like a normal Video Game.

Castlevania: The Adventure. There is a screen on the second stage with three falling platforms. Its sole purpose is to artificially extend the life of the game. Im sure there are YouTube videos, but Im not looking them up at work.

Uglyface2 posted...

Castlevania: The Adventure. There is a screen on the second stage with three falling platforms. Its sole purpose is to artificially extend the life of the game. Im sure there are YouTube videos, but Im not looking them up at work.

Again, it's beatable though. If it was solely designed to kill you it would be a room of spikes.

---

wg64Z posted...

If it was solely designed to kill you

Since you're attempting to be pedantic, I feel you should know this isn't what was said.

---

tazzyboyishere posted...

Since you're attempting to be pedantic, I feel you should know this isn't what was said.

I know. That's why I said "if". It was designed to be beatable is the point I'm making.

---

People can play the games however they want, but if they beat Contra only because they used an insane number of save states or rewinds, then I'm not at all impressed.

---

wg64Z posted...

Doesn't mean it's unbeatable, just means it's difficult. I've seen this argument made a lot and it's pretty flimsy.

There's a difference between difficulty and just being stupid

Like the wall laser boss in Mega Man 2 that requires all your crash bombs to beat because nothing else hurts it, and you have to strategically use them cause you just barely have enough bombs to beat it anyway... and you don't even get your meter back if you die so you basically have to just game over intentionally if you go in with less than full meter. There's no way anyone playing blind would know to conserve their crash bombs for the entire stage (especially when there are energy tanks and stuff hidden behind walls you need crash bombs to break). That's not difficulty, it's just poor game design.

Basically, if something is actually hard I would say using save states/rewind to beat it doesn't count. If it's skipping crappy game design it's fine imo

wg64Z posted...

StealThisSheen posted...

So would you consider somebody who uses a warp whistle to skip to the very last world of Mario 3 to have beaten the game moreso than somebody that uses the built in save states on Switch but doesn't skip anything?

Personally, yes.

This is baffling to me, honestly.

---

Why is that so baffling? At least with the whistles they still need to actually beat the entire final world, which are the hardest levels in the game so far. Not only that, they would have skipped most of the other instances of getting supplemental items and powerups to deal with these levels. The entire challenge of World 8 still has to be beaten with pure skill.

...Unless of course they abuse state/save rewind in which they remove all difficulty and consequences.

That being said, I don't think they COMPLETED the game doing that. To complete the game I'd view it as every single intractable tile on each world map showing that cleared M.

---

wg64Z posted...

Why is that so baffling? At least with the whistles they still need to actually beat the entire final world, which are the hardest levels in the game so far. Not only that, they would have skipped most of the other instances of getting supplemental items and powerups to deal with these levels. The entire challenge of World 8 still has to be beaten with pure skill.

...Unless of course they abuse state/save rewind in which they remove all difficulty and consequences.

That being said, I don't think they COMPLETED the game doing that. To complete the game I'd view it as every single intractable tile on each world map showing that cleared M.

Ok so does it count if they beat World 8 without save states or rewinds but used them a few times in like World 3

---

As beat? No. This isn't hard to understand, why are you having trouble getting this?

---