What constitutes a "legit" playthrough for classic games?

[cj_robot | 542]

The only way to "legit" beat a classic game is to play on original hardware with a controller that your dog has chewed on while your little brother sits by the TV giggling and pretending like he's going to press the reset button, and halfway through the playthrough your mom has to start yelling at you that dinner's ready.

[Tulpa | 3,501]

1 hour ago, cj_robot said:

while your little brother sits by the TV giggling and pretending like he's going to press the reset button

My cousin would do that to annoy his siblings and me. One time one of his older brothers sat on him and played two levels of SMB 2 while he screamed.

Edited March 19, 2021 by Tulpa

[Tulpa | 3,501]

15 hours ago, TDIRunner said:

In the thread he was referring to, the person who beat the game using save states was claiming that the game was much easier then everyone had told him and implied that he was a better gamer than most due to his ability to beat the game quickly after playing the game for the first time ever.

Very few people in the thread (if any) cared that he beat the game using save states.  They were arguing against him because he claimed that the game was super easy despite cheating.  

Was that that PatrickM guy? The one who bitched about Battletoads "sucking" because he couldn't get past Rat Race?

[docile tapeworm | 4,198]

you have to no death

[T-Pac | 7,548]

11 hours ago, cj_robot said:

The only way to "legit" beat a classic game is to play on original hardware with a controller that your dog has chewed on while your little brother sits by the TV giggling and pretending like he's going to press the reset button, and halfway through the playthrough your mom has to start yelling at you that dinner's ready.

[TDIRunner | 2,740]

8 hours ago, Tulpa said:

Was that that PatrickM guy? The one who bitched about Battletoads "sucking" because he couldn't get past Rat Race?

I don't remember the name.  I just remember the discussion.  

[SpoonMan Abrams X | 697]

On 3/15/2021 at 7:25 PM, sp1nz said:

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.

Was about to be like "Don't let manchild Mike Matei hear the 'filthy casuals' talking about save states and such!" but here we are lol

Archived thread for anyone fancying a bit of Twitter Drama lol https://archive.md/y7Kzz

Save States vs Speed Runs vs 100% "Developer Intended" Non Exploit Playthroughs; it's all legit. It's all relative to each other for how much the individual cares & wants out of it.

I'm mostly of the "Who cares" mindset but too take a bit of umbrage for anyone attempting to dictate what is and isn't "proper", as "developer intended" is essentially to waste as much of your time as possible, even now a days not just the "Nintendo Hard" retro games.

I implore everyone to heed the wise words of the sage-like Brian Zane;

[Tanooki | 4,934]

He has a good point there, you're robbing yourself the easier and more halfassed hand out style of play you attempt.  At some point, sure you saw the end, but you beat nothing, it was handed to you.  Which leads to the other good point, spamming endless saves and on those Nintendo CEs, using the rewind each screw up, it means you did nothing, but cheated your way to the end.  There was no challenge, no victory, just an extreme use of the old rental store credo... be kind, rewind.

[sp1nz | 612]

On 4/19/2021 at 6:43 AM, Tanooki said:

He has a good point there, you're robbing yourself the easier and more halfassed hand out style of play you attempt.  At some point, sure you saw the end, but you beat nothing, it was handed to you.  Which leads to the other good point, spamming endless saves and on those Nintendo CEs, using the rewind each screw up, it means you did nothing, but cheated your way to the end.  There was no challenge, no victory, just an extreme use of the old rental store credo... be kind, rewind.

Indeed. Still I think a lot of the opinions on this rise from the wording and how people perceive the exact wording. For me the savestates / rewind etc. is "going through the game" but not "beating it", playing on default settings with no assists or cheats on original version is as devs intended (and the default settings are what they set up, no matter how easy or hard) and "beating it", and 1cc or no death just because you consider each life as a arcade quarter you put in or whatever is "mastering it". The arguments were made that "game over" is final, even with continues existing - people are free to think that, even more so in games with infinite continues but I don't think "to beat" carries the same weight for everyone, it's just the basic form of cheatless victory to some. But when you go to the options and change settings or make your own set of rules for what constitutes a completion or use modern digital / emulating / cheat engine perks then that's custom difficulty, even in the more challenging clears. Thinking that all games have to share the 1cc or no death to be just be beaten is just an opinion, just as much as the people who savestate and rewind their way into "victory" thinking they're on equal footing with their clear. I do have different levels of respect for different levels of clears and I expect the same towards my clears - merely going through a game any means necessary is like getting a participation award, sure it's called an award but everyone who tried got it. It's not skin off my back and I'm happy when someone has fun with their games (even if they don't like to be challenged) but some people think about their participation awards as gold medals.

Edited April 30, 2021 by sp1nz

[SpoonMan Abrams X | 697]

21 hours ago, Tanooki said:

He has a good point there, you're robbing yourself the easier and more halfassed hand out style of play you attempt.  At some point, sure you saw the end, but you beat nothing, it was handed to you.  Which leads to the other good point, spamming endless saves and on those Nintendo CEs, using the rewind each screw up, it means you did nothing, but cheated your way to the end.  There was no challenge, no victory, just an extreme use of the old rental store credo... be kind, rewind.

"Robbing yourself"

I look at it like reading a book. More people enjoy taking their time and reading the book over several days, a chapter or a few pages at a time. Some people like to marathon books and go as far to finish reading in one sitting. Which way is the "proper" way to read a book.

People that take the time to "master" a game and know it inside and out, kudos to them. But just because someone else played through the same game with cheats and/or save states doesn't somehow invalidate the experience, which your argument really seems to imply.

Imo if someone feels the need for gatekeeping and trying otherwise trying to argue that another's fun is wrong, then just maybe they themselves should find some other way to spend their time. They would probably be a lot happier

[Tanooki | 4,934]

My argument simply implies this.  If you had to hit rewind 5 or 50x plus (NES/SNES CE), used an infinite supply of free restarts using save/load states (again NES/SNES CE, most emulators), used a GameGenie/Action Replay code/hack, or a rapid save/die/quit/reload to finish a stage you basically didn't do as the designers of the original games intended, therefore you didn't beat it.  You robbed yourself of a real win, actually beating it, you got carried in some form because the skill wasn't there, even on easy difficulty, to finish it.  Yes even beating a game on easy or nightmare, whatever it is, if you can do this, you finished it.  I'd even go as far as saying if the designers put in codes, published them (Konami Code etc) even that despite even working more to cut the challenge, still is a win, even if it was help, it was intended by the makers.

Beating it and mastering are nothing of a similar thing.  Most people have lives, aren't OCD enough, poor enough to focus on just 1 game a quarter or less so they're stuck doing it, whatever the motive.  That fine, obsessive, but fine.  If you get the ending, you ran your butt there and earned it, the game is done.  I couldn't care less if 2x the clock is run up on optional garbage for the fans, it's still extra... a win is a win there if you earned it.

[VegHead | 127]

For me, as long as I beat it the way I would have when the game was new, it counts.  Strategy guides are cool (although I try my best first), but I do avoid cheat codes except to practice or just dick around.  Like, I'll do the Contra code for fun or to practice, but I wouldn't consider beating a title with it as "legit".  Similarly, rampaging around in GTA3 with cheat codes helping out is pretty fun.

That said, I think it all depends on your time.  My partner is playing Wizards and Warriors, and we are dying for save states because it just take more time than we have available to sit down together and play.  I'm probably going to grab an Everdrive in the next couple of weeks just to facilitate that.  

Play the way that makes you happy.  Don't listen to naysayers if they criticize your preferences. 

[Sumez | 2,952]

On 4/19/2021 at 5:43 AM, Tanooki said:

He has a good point there, you're robbing yourself the easier and more halfassed hand out style of play you attempt.  At some point, sure you saw the end, but you beat nothing, it was handed to you.  Which leads to the other good point, spamming endless saves and on those Nintendo CEs, using the rewind each screw up, it means you did nothing, but cheated your way to the end.  There was no challenge, no victory, just an extreme use of the old rental store credo... be kind, rewind.

 

[LeatherRebel5150 | 1,056]

You guys take this stuff way too seriously. Call it whatever you want but I just want to experience a game. See the levels, play through them, get to the end. If I want to use an infinite lives code or something, whatever. I would have never played through any of the GTA games if it wasn’t for the cheats. Your outta your dam mind if Im going to play a game where I have to worry about food/working out to keep my character in shape (San Andreas). That cheat goes right on so I never have to think about it.

[Strikezone1 | 154]

It has a lot to do with people who beat games by using cheats implying that doing so is on the same level of achievement as beating games without cheats (i.e. as how the developers designed the game). Most people understand that the 2 are different, but there's always a few knuckleheads that don't. Most of the time, the people I see being labeled as "gatekeepers" are merely elating to this point, as opposed to being a snob or jerk. 

It really has nothing to do with the "play/beat games how you want for fun" - that is preconceived, blatantly obvious, and objectively true. Multiple replies in this thread have made a mention along the lines of "play games however you want for your personal enjoyment".

[Dr. Morbis | 2,088]

14 hours ago, LeatherRebel5150 said:

You guys take this stuff way too seriously. Call it whatever you want but I just want to experience a game.

I think this is the fundamental difference between gaming now and gaming when I grew up: now it's all about "experiencing" the game.  You know what it says on the front of the NES Control Deck box?  It says, "The most challenging video game system ever developed."  Now that's what I'm talking about!!!  You can go and have all the namby pamby "my game is a movie" experiences you want, while I'll be over here taking on the most powerful library in the universe!  Yeah, baby!!!

It's so sad that "Now you're playing with power!" has turned into "Now you're playing a movie!" ....

[LeatherRebel5150 | 1,056]

8 hours ago, Dr. Morbis said:

I think this is the fundamental difference between gaming now and gaming when I grew up: now it's all about "experiencing" the game.  You know what it says on the front of the NES Control Deck box?  It says, "The most challenging video game system ever developed."  Now that's what I'm talking about!!!  You can go and have all the namby pamby "my game is a movie" experiences you want, while I'll be over here taking on the most powerful library in the universe!  Yeah, baby!!!

It's so sad that "Now you're playing with power!" has turned into "Now you're playing a movie!" ....

Your assuming Im talking about something that even has movie elements to a game, I know I mentioned GTA as an example but I mean all games. Even something like  Megaman or Super Mario Bros, I like to play through the levels see all of what’s going on, and be done. I’m not 10 anymore and don’t have all the time in the world to focus on one game until Im good enough to “beat it for realzies.” I got real things to worry about.  Playing 60hrs worth of Megaman to say I beat it “the right way” doesn’t give me anymore satisfaction then slapping on infinite energy for weapons or something and playing through it.

Edit: Another thought cane to mind. Did everyone care about this back in the day? I remember using codes and stuff all day long to play through games and so did my friends, nobody ever said you didn’t really beat it.

Edited April 21, 2021 by LeatherRebel5150

[Sumez | 2,952]

I've definitely missed out on more than a few great video game experiences as a kid, by coming across codes, defaulting to just using them, and never experienced the actual qualities of the game as a result.

I get that you don't have the time to truly master certain games, especially when you have a lot of games you want to play. But from there and then to defaulting to a mode where it doesn't even matter how you perform in the game at all (ie. any cheat involving unlimited life, save states, or rewind, etc.), why even spend time on the game at all then?

If someone claims they get just as much out of the game that way, fine, no reason to tell people they are wrong, but I don't personally get it. At its core, every element in Mega Man's gameplay and stage design is constructed around stuff trying to kill you, and you trying to kill it or avoid getting killed.
Negating that element, causing taking a hit to be irrelevant, is pretty much the equivalent to not even playing the game in my book, except it'll still take up your time.

Also, 60 hours of practice to properly beat any Mega Man game sounds like a gross overestimate  But even if it was anywhere near that high, at least you'd get 60 hours of quality entertainment compared to whatever the hell Kingdom Hearts 3 was...

Edited April 21, 2021 by Sumez

[mbd39 | 2,022]

Everyone has hundreds of hours for the latest Zelda, RPG or FPS but when it comes to retro games taking more than 15 minutes to beat then suddenly there's no time and have to use save states and cheats.

 

Edited April 21, 2021 by mbd39

[LeatherRebel5150 | 1,056]

29 minutes ago, mbd39 said:

Everyone has hundreds of hours for the latest Zelda, RPG or FPS but when it comes to retro games taking more than 15 minutes to beat then suddenly there's no time and have to use save states and cheats.

 

In the example in the latest Zelda, I cant speak to most modern RPG’s of FPS, I’d argue it’s completely different from a time spent standpoint. I can spend many hours in BOTW because Im not constantly repeating the same stage over and over again. I die in botw is almost always due to a fall, so I just don’t try to climb up that cliff and move on, maybe go a different path to the same place or just go do something else in game. Alot of people gatekeeping in here

[mbd39 | 2,022]

23 minutes ago, LeatherRebel5150 said:

In the example in the latest Zelda, I cant speak to most modern RPG’s of FPS, I’d argue it’s completely different from a time spent standpoint. I can spend many hours in BOTW because Im not constantly repeating the same stage over and over again. I die in botw is almost always due to a fall, so I just don’t try to climb up that cliff and move on, maybe go a different path to the same place or just go do something else in game. Alot of people gatekeeping in here

See it's really about gaming preference rather than time.

 

[Sumez | 2,952]

19 minutes ago, mbd39 said:

See it's really about gaming preference rather than time.

Pretty much this. I feel like the "I'm not ten anymore, and I have real things to worry about" should be at least as much of an issue for a game like Breath of the Wild that'll easily demand 100 hours of your time, compared to an old school action game I can play for half an hour here and there. To me at least, that's a lot easier to set time aside for.

Calling video game preferences "gatekeeping" makes no sense, and a fallacious argument. You're allowed to disagree, no one is keeping you from anything.  

[peg | 371]

We are still talking about what constitutes a legit playthrough correct?  How does the amount of time someone has available have any relevance to that conversation at all?

 

The run is either legit or not.

[T-Pac | 7,548]

I enjoy different games with different degrees of leeway for "legitimacy" in my playthrough. 

I like the rewarding feeling of conquering a game by the "developer defaults", but I also like to abuse cheat-codes and turbo (and occasionally save-states) when I want to enjoy the entirety of a game that I otherwise don't have the skill or willingness to tackle on my own.

-CasualCart

 

[Dr. Morbis | 2,088]

16 hours ago, LeatherRebel5150 said:

I’m not 10 anymore and don’t have all the time in the world to focus on one game until Im good enough to “beat it for realzies.” I got real things to worry about.

...And yet you've got all the time in the world to play BOTW ?!?! .....

9 hours ago, LeatherRebel5150 said:

I can spend many hours in BOTW because Im not constantly repeating the same stage over and over again.

See, as mbd39 wrote, it has nothing to do with your time, so don't bother bringing that strawman in just so you can knock it down.  Just admit that you like the modern "experience" far more than the old-school "challenge" and then we can all get on with our lives...

Edited April 22, 2021 by Dr. Morbis