What constitutes a "legit" playthrough for classic games?

[T-Pac | 7,548]

What is your personal criteria for beating a classic game legitimately?

Does your playthrough count if you used save states (or even practiced with them)?
What about turbo controllers? Or aftermarket controllers?
Online walkthroughs?
Strategy guides (first-party or otherwise)?
In-game glitches/exploits?
Cheat devices (era-appropriate or modern?)
Playing via emulator or clone-hardware?

Share your thoughts!

-CasualCart

[Khromak | 768]

What a question! I think there are lots of valid answers and different amounts of pride to be derived from different levels of completion, to be honest, but here are mine:

Save states: completion doesn't count if they were involved in your "final run" but if you practice with them, whatever. I also think save states are fine for games without any save system if you just use them in between play sessions, because it doesn't provide any advantage.

Turbo controllers: no-no. Aftermarket controllers: OK as long as they don't provide any new functionality (like turbo). I guess the exception to this is Turbografx, which has built-in turbo. Maybe that's OK? Real grey area there.

Online walkthroughs: I think this is fine, personally. I think beating a game means overcoming the difficulty of the game mechanics, not necessarily in figuring out the steps to complete it. One possible exception/caveat to this in my opinion is puzzle games. I think if you use a walkthrough telling you how to beat every stage, you kinda bypassed the mechanics of the game.

Glitches/exploits are kosher, IMO. Obviously it can feel better to beat it "legit", and maybe you want to do that as well for another challenge, but it's really hard to draw a line here and it gets fuzzy fast.

Cheat devices: Nope. Unless it's like...changing the sprite of Samus in Metroid or something, you didn't beat the game if you added infinite lives or double damage or something.

Emulator or clone hardware: So long as it emulates properly and you don't use other features (speed up, speed down, turbo, etc.) then it's absolutely a clear in my opinion and no different than any other clear.

Bonus: Emulator + aftermarket controller example I'm pretty torn about: I saw the SMB WR holder beat it using Keyboard on emulator. I'm really not sure about this one. It feels like hitting a button in a KB is a lot easier to time than a controller, especially for short tricks. I haven't tried all these frame perfect tricks and other nonsense on either so I can't say for sure...but that just feels wrong to me and I can't explain why.

[DefaultGen | 5,405]

I mean I used Nintendo Power and playground advice to beat games, is that any better than online walkthroughs? If you beat it on original hardware or the equivalent, ya beat it. If it’s a puzzle game and you looked up all the answers, you only really ruined it for yourself.

Being against save state practice is kind of crazy. You think every top speed run of every game isn’t legit then, because every top Mario speedrunner uses them to practice and build muscle memory for tough tricks. And if you ever practiced with save states, all your runs and completions are then invalid? On Twitch right now there’s a guy streaming 5 second loops of Contra 3 runs!

Edited March 15, 2021 by DefaultGen

[Reed Rothchild | 9,533]

In regards to save states and guides , they're both grey areas.

If you use save states to "master" Contra or Double Dragon II, you're only cheating yourself.

If you use a guide to speed through a LucasArts point-and-click you're definitely cheating yourself.

 

On the other hand, I am 100% in favor of save states for insurance in RPGs for example (especially with glitchier titles), or using guides for stupid pointless puzzles (Castlevania II).

 

[mbd39 | 2,022]

I like to beat a game without using any cheats. And then if I get hooked on a game, I'll go for other challenges such as 1CC, no death or high score runs.

 

 

 

[Estil | 1,265]

Maps/guides/walkthroughs are totally fair game.  I mean you wouldn't go on a road trip without maps would you?  And some of those trophies like the 100% one for Final Fantasy 10-2 are next to impossible without a checklist and even then you gotta be very patient and very careful.

But yeah, if you use an actual cheating device or save states, then no, it's not real.

[Andy_Bogomil | 815]

Beating the game without any cheats, save states or any other advantage that you wouldn't have had outside the original hardware. Having said that, some games are extremely cryptic and I think downright unfair without a guide or proper instruction. Most well made games worth putting the time into avoid this situation though. I think the lack of passwords/saving was a massive reason for 'NES difficulty'.

[sp1nz | 612]

For me beating something "legit" means popping in the game and clearing it with default settings or "as the devs intended".

I remember how people got hung up with this tweet:

I think you can beat any game any way you want but there are degrees to beating something: Save states every five seconds < save state between checkpoints < save state between levels < save state between worlds < "legit" clear < 1cc etc. At the end of the day, the easier path you take, the less you get out of it. People have different skill levels though, so someone's watered down clear can be bigger deal to them than core gamer's "legit" clear is to the core gamer.

Personally I enjoy the archaic life and continue systems but I can enjoy modern games without them just as much. Assist modes, rewinds and save states I don't touch with a ten feet pole unless I've already beaten a game "legit". Sometimes it's nigh impossible to beat a game blind when it has cryptic elements, so while I don't feel good about looking something up, sometimes it's necessary evil compared to getting stuck and dropping the game. I don't like turbo controllers but I just happen to like smashing buttons even when it's not good for the hands. I probably won't find glitches on my own when playing blind but I probably won't use them before my first clear, if they make the game easier. Cheat devices and codes are a no-no for me before first clear. I do play with emulators with non-platform controllers but I don't use save states, especially before first clear.

[Splain | 2,570]

I don't know how I feel about glitches and "speedrun" style mechanics to get through a game. As opposed to "what the dev intended." For example: Super Mario 64, Whomp's Fortress, the "caged" star in the sky. As a teenager, I thought this was a really hard one to get, because you had to aim the cannon reallllly precisely, and try to somehow remember where you aimed on each attempt, so that you could get a little closer on each attempt. I finally got it. Only after I got all 120 stars did I learn about the owl in the tree right at the start, that can carry you up toward the cage. That's obviously the "intended" way to get that star. In a way, I was skipping a small amount of game content by using the cannon. Nowadays, speedrunners don't use the cannon or the owl, they get that star in a definitely non-dev-intended way.

Using "rewind" and save states to micro-manage a playthrough and make 0 mistakes sure is FUN, but if someone did that and said "yeah, I beat that game" I would fight them on it.

[Andy_Bogomil | 815]

1 hour ago, Splain said:

I don't know how I feel about glitches and "speedrun" style mechanics to get through a game. As opposed to "what the dev intended." For example: Super Mario 64, Whomp's Fortress, the "caged" star in the sky. As a teenager, I thought this was a really hard one to get, because you had to aim the cannon reallllly precisely, and try to somehow remember where you aimed on each attempt, so that you could get a little closer on each attempt. I finally got it. Only after I got all 120 stars did I learn about the owl in the tree right at the start, that can carry you up toward the cage. That's obviously the "intended" way to get that star. In a way, I was skipping a small amount of game content by using the cannon. Nowadays, speedrunners don't use the cannon or the owl, they get that star in a definitely non-dev-intended way.

Using "rewind" and save states to micro-manage a playthrough and make 0 mistakes sure is FUN, but if someone did that and said "yeah, I beat that game" I would fight them on it.

Funny you say that because I think I beat that star the exact same way the first time too!

It's an interesting point with speedrunning though, as a lot of these tricks would have been impossible to find without current technology like save states (TAS) and breaking down the code in the game. I think speed running starts to lose its luster once glitches and gimmicks take over, even if they can be duplicated by a player. For example, once 'wrong-warping' in Ocarina of Time was discovered the game just kinda fell apart in terms of speed running in my opinion - it became a matter of understanding and manipulating the code in the game more than skill or technique. It's interesting how far a game can break but this would have never been the case when these games were released.

Save states are good for practice and can improve the quality of life for a game, but ultimately I don't think they should be used when completing a game for the first time. I don't see it as any different from using a game genie code of the same nature.

[JamesRobot | 5,800]

As a kid, nothing was off the table when gaining the upper hand against the computer.  And if you were playing Contra with a friend, you better know the Konami code.

[TDIRunner | 2,740]

In my mind, if you play through a game and get to the end, you can say you've completed or beaten the game, regardless of how you got there.  If you use any type of cheat or anything was wasn't meant to be part of the game, you just need to include that as a disclaimer.  I play through Turtles in Time at least once per year.  While I used to be able to beat it legit back in the day, I can't really do that anymore, so I use Game Genie cheats for unlimited lives.  I still consider the game completed when I do it, but I acknowledge that I cheated to do it.  

With that said, there is a huge difference between completing a game and mastering the game.  If you are using any type of cheat or aid to finish the game, there is no way you can say you have "mastered" it.  In reference to an old thread from NA, it's definitely unreasonable to say an NES game that's universally considered difficult was actually easy after using save states to beat it.

As to what  constitutes an aide or cheat, it depends on what the game was designed for.  For MOST games using turbo fire would be an aide.  However, I would argue that turbo fire is fine with TG16 games.  On the flip side, in many cases I wouldn't say that a game guide is a cheat considering that many NES era games were deliberately made cryptic in order to force you to buy a guide or use Nintendo Power.  There are of course a lot of grey areas and most of the time it probably will come down to a case by case basis.  

[phart010 | 1,707]

Yes.

It doesn’t matter how you play as long as your having fun.

Some old timers want you to experience it the same way they experienced it. They forget that they were little kids with no responsibilities, they could spend hours playing and mastering these games. We don’t have the luxury of time today. If we're forced to play the way they want us to play, we may not have the time or patience and may end up just not playing at all.

Whats better? Experiencing the playthrough with assists... or being forced to experience it the way they did, losing patience, giving up and not getting to experience the playthrough at all.

Edited March 16, 2021 by phart010

[Splain | 2,570]

48 minutes ago, phart010 said:

Yes.

It doesn’t matter how you play as long as your having fun.

Some old timers want you to experience it the same way they experienced it. They forget that they were little kids with no responsibilities, they could spend hours playing and mastering these games. We don’t have the luxury of time today. If we're forced to play the way they want us to play, we may not have the time or patience and may end up just not playing at all.

Whats better? Experiencing the playthrough with assists... or being forced to experience it the way they did, losing patience, giving up and not getting to experience the playthrough at all.

Sure, that's all true. If I just want to relax or re-live a childhood game, then yes, I'll rewind and save myself some of the "wasted" time of repeating levels over and over. But I wouldn't chalk it up as having "beaten" the game without a qualifier, as @TDIRunner says.

It's not about ignoring those things, or what makes for a "better" experience. It's about whether or not the game is legitimately "beaten" when you use them.

[Strikezone1 | 154]

To me, the legitimate way to “beat” a game is a full playthrough no cheats, save states, warps, or turbo controllers.

I do think save states and/or certain codes are okay (and sometimes necessary) for PRACTICE purposes in order to get the reps in for brutally hard games such as Battletoads or Top Gun Second Mission for example. 
 

Guides & walkthroughs are also okay, particularly for excessively cryptic shit which isn’t all that uncommon in retro games. But if a game is pretty straightforward then using them you’re only cheating yourself.

Thats my 2 cents... But I think ultimately we can all agree - play games however you want to have fun.

[GPX | 1,369]

1 Player

Legit play through retro style - without using any updated enhancements or modifications.

Legit play through free style - with save states, cheats etc. - whatever you like!

When discussing it with others

Need to clarify if any additional features were used. Because different features will come with different degrees of difficulty and the experience will differ significantly.

————————

Personally, I prefer to game without any extra modded enhancements. However, as I get older, free time reduces, and save states are a godsend whenever applicable.

[Tanooki | 4,934]

Let's be blunt about this.  What counts, is what counts to you and has since you were a kid, if you were old enough to be around when these weren't classic but modern.  Back in the day, what did we deal with?  Getting out asses handed to us, friends giving each other tips or handing off the controller to, and of course Nintendo Power magazine maps and code sections.

No one gave a crap, do it alone or not, no one got all judgy about what it took to complete a game.  One thing was pretty specific though, complete THEN is not what complete NOW is.  Now you have some twit wanting to blow 3x the effort getting some meter up to 100%, getting every unlockable, having their fragile ego stroked off by trophies and achievements.  Being complete, you know what that was?  Seeing the credits...if they existed.  Maybe it just congratulations or congraturation if engrish won out.

That really was it. You kill the last evil bastard boss in the game, you completed it, that was it, nothing more or less.  Didn't matter if you did it alone, with printed help, friend help, even using in built in hidden codes.

Some would argue using a game genie since it was straight up hacking the hell out of the game didn't count, and that's a fair argument.

As far as I'm concerned the rules of the 1980s and 90s still apply, even today.  Once you get that last boss down, it's over, anything else you do because you have free time and want to see and do more without erasing your progress.

[DarkTone | 985]

To me, official hardware. 

[Sumez | 2,952]

Depends on the game and what your intentions for it are.

But in a well designed action game, going for the 1CC and beating it without using continues is no doubt the most satisfying way to get through. You can "credit feed" your way through Ninja Gaiden without having to learn how to consistently deal with most of the challenges it throws at you, which means you haven't experienced a major part of the game.

"Rewind" can get right outta here. Use it if all you want is to experience the briliant cinematic video game story time. 

Or practice. When you're practicing a game, anything goes. It's all about building the skills.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Sumez

[fox | 1,667]

Watching a Let’s Play

[LeatherRebel5150 | 1,056]

where's Pegboy, he used to love this topic. "1cc or nothing"

[WhyNotZoidberg | 585]

The answer to that question is found within each individual and not in any external party.

By definition, if you start a game and get to the end, you legitimately played through the game. It was not a "fake" playthrough.

Every form of assistance or tool are merely variations of a playthrough.

For example, I can play through Super Mario Bros. 3 in numerous ways, including but not limited to:

• beating every level without warps
• using warps
• using a game genie to have a specific costume and multijump and infinite lives
• on an emulator with save states or rewind if I mess up a jump
• with a NES Advantage full turbo on both buttons (why tho)
• using just my feet
• with hacked audio to have Linkin Park's Numb play instead of the OST

Once I beat bowser, I played through the game is what I did.

The only need for legitimacy is in the specifics. A 1cc run cannot be a 2cc run. A no death run cannot be a "ok just this one death" run. And so on.

[T-Pac | 7,548]

3 hours ago, WhyNotZoidberg said:

The answer to that question is found within each individual and not in any external party.

By definition, if you start a game and get to the end, you legitimately played through the game. It was not a "fake" playthrough.

Every form of assistance or tool are merely variations of a playthrough.

I thought this was implied in the original post - I guess I should have been more specific haha. I'm curious about everyone's personal take on a "legit" clear - as in "what standards do you set for yourself to consider a classic game beaten"?

-CasualCart

[TDIRunner | 2,740]

3 hours ago, WhyNotZoidberg said:

• using just my feet

NO game is truly beaten unless you can do it with just your feet.  

[Khromak | 768]

Yeah I think the point here isn't what qualifies in general, but what's your opinion?

I already gave mine earlier in the thread, but...yeah if you used save states to re-try sections over and over again, especially in a game with limited lives/continues, you didn't beat the game. Sure, you got to the end screen, but that's not beating a game.

There's a password in Captain Planet which brings you to the credits screen. If you enter in that password, did you beat the game?

I think the point is, you have to overcome the challenge that was programmed into the game. I think there's some grey area in terms of glitches, etc. but I would never consider a game beaten if I used save states to do anything other than record my progress between play sessions. Another example is game genie for the same reason. If you alter the code to remove part of the challenge, you haven't really beaten the game, you beat some other, totally unrelated and hand-crafted version of it.