If you credit feed in an Arcade game or abuse save states when

I do those things to acclimate myself to the game before I try a real challenge.

>>3910454
In an arcade I don't think anyone would really care, they just want to see that damned ending screen.

When emulating the most agreed-upon victory would be to 1cc a game.

>>3910465
I suppose that's a decent reason.
I honestly prefer to challenge myself to beat most games on only three credits (Maybe four depending on the game) and restart from the beginning each time I run out.
It feels more satisfying to me that way. I get the thrill of seeing the next bit of content and the challenge of trying to improve my skills at the same time.

It takes me a hell of a lot longer to beat a game but I don't mind. It makes it sweeter.

>>3910454
I don't like savescumming, but a lot of arcade games go out of their way to be as bullshit as possible so I don't really care about credit feeding.

>>3910486
If the game has no checkpoints then credit-feeding is as bad as savescumming

>>3910454
>If you credit feed in an Arcade game or abuse save states when emulating a game, do you consider yourself to have "beaten" the game?
No. Anything other than a 1cc or xALL is a loss.

File: I just don't give a fuck.jpg (36KB, 500x332px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x332px

Arcade games are for casual fun since they originally started out in bars.

Interested, thoughts on save states as a way to save in games with no save option? I admit to doing this in quite a lot of nes games.

>>3910561
In arcade games or arcade-style games you don't need them because they are pretty short, it's better to play them on one sitting.

File: Carnevil_arcade_flyer.jpg (52KB, 256x332px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 256x332px

Only when the game is bullshit.

I seriously think that credit feed and savestates are done by people who never played on arcade.

Most people who get hooked to a game observed what others players on the cabinet could do.
learning safe spots. tricks route from each others.
It was silent communication but it worked.

File: FraK6qD.jpg (9KB, 213x236px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 213x236px

>>3910623

>>3910454

I consider myself to have beaten the game in a cheap way. This is a greater achievement than not finishing it at all, and a far lesser achievement than finishing it without abusing credits or save states. It's not just a binary thing.

Also there are degrees of abuse. I recently played through a Secret of Mana hard mode hack, and there I used save states, because the hack is stupidly hard--but I only used them to reduce tedium between fights, not to make fights easier. That is, I wouldn't use them during fights; I'd only use them in completely safe spots. This is still cheating, but only in a fairly mild way, since it takes no real skill to get back to one of those safe spots.

An even milder way to use them would be to pretend you're playing a roguelike or some such--you save only when you're about to leave the computer to do something else, and load only when you return to the game again; and as soon as you load a state, you consider that state to be dead and never use it again. That's cheating, but only in a VERY mild way, except maybe in some weirdo game like Desert Bus where the whole point is to play the whole thing in one session.

Usually I minimize cheating because it doesn't interest me to play that way anyhow. But if I do cheat, then the more I do it, the weaker my sense of achievement ends up being. But anyway this weakening happens on a continuum, like I said; it's not just binary.

Some arcade games were CREATED with the purpose of being coin munchers.

>>3910454
Sure. If it's a shitty game, I'll be a shitty player right back.

But when the game is tough, but fair with no bullshit mechanics, it makes me want to rise to the occasion, put the time in, and earn an honest win. Like in a classic shmup for example, I don't consider the game beaten until I can do a no-miss no-bomb run.

>>3910454

considering the arcades where designed to fuck with the player I have no issue fucking them right back

File: seriosulybro.jpg (13KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 512x384px

>>3910624
>I seriously think that credit feed and savestates are done by people who never played on arcade.

I seriously think people who say garbage like this never played an arcade, because it was fucking bullshit then and it's bullshit now and claiming there's some kind of "honor" to beating a game that was designed to steal your lunch money is fucking stupid. Who are you trying to impress?

>>3910454
I don't consider myself to have beaten anything until I 1cc it

File: pc.jpg (18KB, 480x333px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x333px

>>3910893
Dude calm the fuck down I don't know what part of this shitty world you live on.
But here it was like this. I 1cc Dead Connection tiger road or dynamite Dux like this. took time but it was fulfilling. I am sorry for you if your arcade experience was shitty to the point you still have ressentiment to this day.

>>3910548


These >>3910891
>>3910873

File: Hana-bi-Fioridifuoco24.jpg (19KB, 620x340px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 620x340px

>>3912875
they are minority cause coin munchers were badly seen on arcade. Gradius 3 or asteroid deluxe for exemple.

There was also the case of some shitty owners who always set their machines on very hard and they were always and massively called on their bullshit.

Arcade game on the early and mid 80 were kind of hard to balance for developers. Too easy and people play them once and never come back. Too hard and people avoid them like plague.

Minus some crazy exclusive experience like LD based games, dual monitors cabinet or racing games. Only balanced game between the two had the appeal to the regular customers arcade population.

But faggots around here complain about every fucking arcade game. thinking anything with a 1 shot one kill is bullshit.

>>3912875
Better not to play the game at all then retard, what is the point if you can't lose no matter how shit you play?

>>3913528
Obviously it depends on the game, as stated. So if you went to an arcade and brought $20 with you to play one of these offenders that's ok with you? Calling half the posters here retards is pretty shortsighted of you, retard

>>3913538
Try not being a retard and maybe I'll not call you a retard, credit-feeding arcades with no checkpoints is fucking dreadful.

>>3913545
How old are you?

>>3913552
Old enough to not deviate the discussion with retarded questions.

>>3913591
Yet you never answered the question before. Really makes you think

File: 1491105154024.jpg (290KB, 689x920px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 689x920px

>>3910454
Thing with the arcade games is that they're intentionally bullshit so that you spend as much money as possible. It's micro transactions, so like with modern games like that, there's no real properly made difficulty curve. Honestly, as long as it's a single player game, cheat as much as you want. Because it's your valuable time you're wasting away in video games, so you should be having fun in whatever way you want as long as it isn't fucking over other people.

File: ss2 in modern day.jpg (127KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1024x768px

You can save scum like crazy in System Shock 2

Why can't you in older games?

>>3910454
credit feeding still counts as beating a game imo.
you haven't lived until you've beaten simpsons arcade and x-men on real cabinets.

save states are gay but i can understand certain games where that would be acceptable

File: worf_0.jpg (40KB, 694x530px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 694x530px

>>3913930
MUH HONOR

/vr/ thinks that their kind of fun is the only valid kind of fun. Because they're very dedicated to specific games and want to feel good about that and that this somehow makes them awesome people and better than other people.

Thus, since they have this low self esteem, they feel they have no choice but to become the fun police. They will proclaim that you're having BAD WRONG FUN and are a DISHONORABLE COWARD if you play videos games in a way that consider wrong like save states or not 1ccing a game.

Of course, the only situations any of this matters are for showcase play like with non-TAS speedruns, comparing high scores, or competitive play at tournaments/ over netplay. But these are more professional situations, not when you're just on your lonesome playing casually like the vast majority of people play these games do.

>>3910913
>took time but
so you credit fed

It depends on the game.

For emulating old RPGs I don't mind using fast forward and savestates because I don't really want to waste time on trash mobs and other tedious fights, and I like being able to save state, go to work and be able to resume exactly where I stopped off.

For arcade games, it makes a lot less sense. The games are all meant to be pretty short, and the goal is supposed to be a 1cc. However, that kind of thing is a goal to work towards, and there's nothing wrong with credit feeding to get a feel for the whole game.

Depending on how serious you are, you might wanna use savestate practice to tackle really hard parts. It's extremely effective and saves SO much time, but at the end of the day it's just to prepare for a good 1cc run.

>>3913986
or play only 1 credit by game session.

>>3913943
No wonder you credit-feed since you like shit games like Simpsons.

1cc'ing a tough game is like learning how to play a tricky guitar solo, like Cliffs of Dover or Master of Puppets, from start to finish without wiping out.

When you're practicing guitar, you can "credit feed" by just playing past your mistakes, and you can "load state" by skipping to any part of the song in order to practice a specific lick. It would be absurd to call that cheating. That's just good, focused practice.

The whole point is to have fun and try to accomplish something.

But if you think fumbling your way a song through like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFFDtycOAaw
means that you have done the equivalent of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiRn3Zlw3Rw

then you are a retard beyond the pale.

and if you think
>yeah but this song with its bullshit chords goes out of its way to make you fail
then git gud or PICK ANOTHER SONG.

If you aren't beating a game within 2 years of it being released with the sound up high to drown out youre parents yelling and hitting each other, you didn't beat it.

>>3914012
If games were really supposed to be 1cc then they wouldn't keep counting more credits or wouldn't have a continue option.

Anon, your elitism isn't impressing no one. The games were designed to be fed with credits constantly, it's okay to lose in a game.

>>3914282
tell that to your high score.

File: voyagedhermes_moebius_03-copy.jpg (419KB, 1600x897px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1600x897px

>>3914282

It's not really that hard to 1cc a lot of arcade games though. It definitely takes practice, but it's really not an impossible task like you think.

There are definitely quarter munchers out there. NARC, Gauntlet and Smash TV come to mind, but typically Japanese games are balanced around 1cc being pretty feasible. There are all sorts of features like hidden 1ups and regular extends, or things like bombs and special moves that can save your ass in a situation where you would otherwise be fucked.

I'm not gonna judge someone for credit feeding arcade games. That's how most people will have played those games, and I have some really wonderful memories of being a kid, pooling a bunch of quarters between my friends and finishing Alien vs Predator in the arcade. It can be a great time.

Having said all that, if you want to go back and play all these arcade games, then it's a great way to test your mettle. For a lot of the really adored arcade games, much of the depth in the design doesn't become apparent until you've tried to go for a high score. And like many people have said, the feeling when you do finally nail that 1cc is sublime. I will always recommend that any anon who is interested should try 1ccing an arcade game they like.

>>3914282
>losing your score
>adding a counter of shame for every time you continue
>secret 1cc endings or bonuses
>option to disable continues on the settings
And retards like you still think they 1ccs weren't intended.

>>3914323
SCORE, the most important part of a videogame.
What would I do without those sweet, delicious points?

>>3914343
Never said games were impossible or something like, but people gotta practice harder levels via credit feed, unless one deliberately ignores the continue screen just to put an arbitrary obstacle.

After practicing a lot, then you can try 1cc'ing a game.

>>3910891
>considering the arcades where designed to fuck with the player
>>3913915
>Thing with the arcade games is that they're intentionally bullshit so that you spend as much money as possible. It's micro transactions, so like with modern games like that, there's no real properly made difficulty curve.

I almost always hear this from American gamers on English-language boards. Were American developers/arcade owners just assholes or something?

If you look at classic "hard" arcade games like Gradius and Gradius II, the challenge level and difficulty curve are pretty much perfect. Yeah you're gonna fail at first, and there's memorization involved, but it's a steady and reasonable ramp up in challenge. Besides, you can always save your money and get a head start on the memorization by watching other people play. Arcade games were nothing if not a public, social experience.

Gradius III is pretty fucking unfair, but the devs have admitted that they basically screwed up and made it too hard, because that's what the fans were asking for. That was always the catch-22 of arcade game development: the diehards were always eager for something more challenging, but the newcomers wanted something easy to get into.

>>3914361
>SCORE, the most important part of a videogame.
>What would I do without those sweet, delicious points?
not sure if serious, or you just don't understand the mindset.

High score was THE defining feature of golden age arcade games. It was the beacon that shined over everything else.

Look at all the games from that period which can't even be beaten in the conventional sense, like Space Invaders and Pac-Man. It just keeps going. There's not even the concept of a 1cc for these games. In Pac-Man, you play until you hit map 256 and the game just glitches out due to a bug. In Space Invaders and many other games, you play until you reach count-stop, at which the score stops increasing or rolls back to 0.

The only thing that matters, the only thing that serves as the record of your accomplishments, is your score.

>>3914245
Anon don't make me feel.

>>3914424
I mean, yeah, sure.
If we're talking about endless games then OF COURSE getting the highest score was the defining feature, but the anon I replied to with that used it when we still talked about 1ccing games a.k.a. games with an ending.

>>3914375

>I almost always hear this from American gamers on English-language boards. Were American developers/arcade owners just assholes or something?

American developers were really bad for making games with bullshit deaths and obvious player exploitation. Williams and Midway were the absolute worst for it, but it tended to be the default mindset for most American coin-op developers.

>>3914434
Robotron is fucking phenomenal.

>>3914429
yeah but when credit feeding and continues destroys your score, that demonstrates that the developers intended for you to 1cc. The score is a reflection of that, and thus a player who credit-fed to the ending is not given as much respect and admiration as the player who 1cc'ed (and rightly so). That's why the score is there.

And that's not to mention the 1cc-able games which loop, like Gradius and a buttload of other shmups.

>>3914429
Getting a 1cc is only the beginning, veteran players will always go for a higher score if the scoring is fun enough for them.

>>3910454
I've "beaten" the game, but with a very strong incentive to come back and play it again. Practice makes perfect.

>>3910561
Sometimes shit happens, and we must stop playing for a while. Often it's not even our fault, so I think saving to retain progress can be forgiven. Many people probably wished they could have saved games back in the day, regardless.

I don't consider an arcade game as completed until I get a 1cc but I do credit feed and save state for practice.

I just watched the battletoads video on rare replay. said they made the battletoads arcade game final boss invincible for first 40 seconds just to make more money. using save states isn't cheating. arcade games are rigged.

>>3910454
Arcade games I typically do 1 credit per stage, although it varies on game. It's babby mode compared to 1cc but almost always feel challenged enough that I have fun.

Similarly, I'll use a save state so if I beat a stage in contra 3 let's say I don't have to repeat it over and over again. Again it's easier than intended I guess but I'm having fun and getting to experience a lot of stuff, I mean most people I know never even really tried to beat their old Genesis games.