Board 8 > "Beating a game"

(+) Yeah! (+)

Kenri posted...

Just throwing it out there but these days when a game takes away 20 minutes of progress I seriously consider just dropping it and playing something better.

You're talking about games with 40+ hour runtimes...

Games like Contra can be beaten in 30 minutes but that's obviously not the intended first runtime

I don't think qualifying the Konami Code as "only acceptable because you can still lose" makes any sense if you consider games that don't meaningfully prevent progress beatable in the first place.

kevwaffles posted...

I don't think qualifying the Konami Code as "only acceptable because you can still lose" makes any sense if you consider games that don't meaningfully prevent progress beatable in the first place.

I reread this like 5 times and I have no idea what you're saying

Try a 6th time

I would rephrase but you won't beat this topic like the rest of us if I do.

I got it in 2

I kinda feel like beating a game varies per person.

foolm0r0n posted...

I got it in 2

On my third attempt I think he's saying "what about games where you can't lose?"

I probably could have made it more readable with additional quotation marks and an "as" thrown in there, but it wasn't in my original design.

When making things readable you should always put the difficulty on Very Easy

Lopen posted...

When making things readable you should always put the difficulty on Very Easy

THIS is why reading comprehension is through the FLOOR

I have auto Konami Code tier reading and I lost 5 lives on that segment it's too hard for me

Anyway to address the point I'm not 100% is being made but I'll trust pjbasis

Obviously in a game where you can't be defeated you can't use being able to lose as a condition for beating it. However if you're completely undermining an intended defeat condition through a cheat, side effect of porting, or an emulator feature I still think it's fair to say you didn't beat the game.

Although on a side note I would find it odd to refer to such a game as "beaten." I've never said I "beat" a visual novel like Fate/Stay Night or even Phoenix Wright (though in theory you could fail to get through Phoenix Wright it still feels weird to me) I have always said "I played through these routes/games" or "I read it" or whatever. I am 95% sure I've never claimed to have "beaten" any VNs or any similar unlosable game.

Arcade credit feeding? Yeah.

Yes, if the infinite continues are offered naturally in the game (Castlevania).

Other games offer this after some hours of gameplay (Thunder Force V). It's not as satisfying but sure why not.

If you add them yourself with cheat or save states? Nah man, don't justify your laziness.

I think it's silly to gatekeep the concept. If I play a NSO game and use save states, I can say I beat the game, you can't just deny that from me lol. I used what the game had available to me. But even if it didn't and I used some other method of cheating, it wouldn't matter imo. I beat it in my own way.

I absolutely can and will gatekeep you for savestate abuse. I determine whether you beat it in my own way.

Gatekeep
Gaslight
Lopenboss

foolm0r0n posted...

What if it's exactly the same game but you leave a floating bag of currency at the place that you died. You can buy cute hats with the currency you collect over multiple runs.

if you're under the impression I like corpse runs I dunno what to tell you but you're very extremely wrong

pjbasis posted...

You're talking about games with 40+ hour runtimes...

Games like Contra can be beaten in 30 minutes but that's obviously not the intended first runtime

that factors into my consideration but the fact is that the consideration of dropping the game still happens