Current Events > It's not "sequence breaking" if the devs intended it

(+) Yeah! (+)

Ya nerds.
---

Meh, a game can have an intended sequence and still have intentional diversions from that, which I would still consider to be "sequence breaking".

---

Early Grapple/Bombs is not a sequence break then.

But I'm pretty sure other breaks in the game, which require glitches both minor and major, are unintended.

---

Search action

---

Devs intended path for first time players is different than devs providing a reward for breaking the rules/thinking outside of the box imo. Id still call it sequence breaking.

---

What about if it's an unintended possibility or oversight that they choose to leave in when discovered?

---

Only if you want to be absolutely literal to a specific definition of it.

Musourenka posted...

Early Grapple/Bombs is not a sequence break then.

But I'm pretty sure other breaks in the game, which require glitches both minor and major, are unintended.

Correct. Glitches are sequence breaking. Going a different direction than most other players is just exploration.
---

Once we start going esoteric, things start looking closer and closer to glitches and they become harder and harder to tell apart.
---

Reminds me of the key starting gift in Dark Souls. You can just unlock the Valley of Drakes and wander through to other zones while never exploring the Undead Burg.

---

Having an intended first player sequence and an ability to play through a different sequence intentionally programmed in by the devs is not a sequence break. Its only sequence breaking if you are playing in a sequence the developer never intended or envisioned. Playing through all the upstairs paintings in super Mario 64 first because you used a backwards long jump to get up there is a sequence break. Getting all the stars in whomps fortress before bombomb battlefield is not a sequence break