Are credits cheating?

>>4154208
Credits are inapp purchases

It depends on the game. Some games pretty much just treat continues like extra lives, allowing you to earn more in-game through scoring or secrets or whatever. Meanwhile, you have games that lock away endings or bosses behind a 1cc.

>>4154219
So, I know you're trying to be funny but its killing me inside to know because I want to beat games the "proper" way

>>4154226
The proper way it's the way fun for you, nothing else matter.
Said that, credits are the grandparents of "buy gems to keep playing" of today, so I think:
It's a real arcade? If yes then: it's yours? If yes again, choose the funnest way for you
If it's not yours, but you are in a center or similar, keep in mind that they want your money, these are in app purchases.
If emulation, do whatever please you.

>>4154229
>The proper way it's the way fun for you, nothing else matter.
And knowing that I actually beat the game, the way it was intended or harder is the most satisfying and fun way for me. Of course I'm just a casual and am playing the arcade version of ninja gaiden getting completely stomped without credits.

>>4154232
The "proper" way to play arcade games is to play for score. If a continue resets your score, then don't do it.

>>4154236
That game is quite linear to make a difference in the score

No?

>>4154243
It seems like savescumming to me

I wouldn't call it cheating, more a definition of true mastery to finish a game without additional credits.

A truly masterful player will finish a game in 1 credit, given it is possible to do so. But theres't nothing wrong with not doing 1cc, after all, mastery takes a lot of dedication, and isn't always worth it for a given game.

Decide after playing if you think a game is worth trying to 1cc.

>>4154246
It's intended by the developers. The only thing credits show is how skilled you are.

Easy - 20 credits
Normal - 10 credits
Hard - 5 credits
Extreme - 1 credit

It's sometimes frustrating to have to give up your game, but it's better to show some restraint than being a quarter feeding bitch.

>>4154232

>Implying arcade games weren't designed as credit munchers so the developers and the arcade owner could make as much money as possible.

Lay off the hardcore gaming sites.

I made my MAME cabinet coin operated so that I am limited to the number of quarters in my pocket, just like when I was a kid.

When I first started emulating, I would just keep hitting the credit button, and it felt like cheating, because I could just throw lives away to advance through harder parts.

>>4154306
This.

>>4154306
Normal - 1 credit
Faggot - Anything else

>>4154306
you've probably wasted way more than 20 credits to get to the point you only spend 1 on a playthrough.

You're supposed to credit feed until you git gud, you dinguses, just like you would have if you were in an arcade in 1990.

>>4154232
the proper way is one credit, but feel free to use more(or save states) for practice.

>>4156093
>just like you would have if you were in an arcade in 1990.
it's cheaper to play on one credit, you get more playtime if you start from the beginning, if you continue you'll get game over again in a minute or two.

Fucking wow.

We're really here now.

We're really that bored.

>>4154208
Donate a quarter to charity every time you use a new credit.

>>4156104
>not sending bunch of change to every person who worked on the game

>>4154306
lolno, it depends on the game as always, you should always aim for one credit tho

>>4156114
>not sending your $1.75 to the CEO of Konami with a letter in Japanese to explain your act

>>4154208
There is no such thing as the "true experience" or "proper way" to beat a game. Every game offers multiple ways to play, and each one is a different experience.
You can play to just get to the ending, 1cc, deathless, speedrun, or any other gameplay variant you can come up with (e.g. mega buster only). Each will provide a different experience.
Personally I find harder challenges more rewarding.

>>4154208
if you don't 1cc a game, then you didn't actually beat it.

>>4154208
At the end of the day, no one cares. Some games have a special ending for 1CC, but you should play however you enjoy it. Some arcade games are much too frustrating if you don't continue sometimes, and others just get really boring if you keep playing and dying in the same spot over and over.

That being said, in most cases I agree with >>4156154 since credit feeding often eliminates the skill requirement, primarily in games where you continue from the exact spot you died at (like in beat em ups).

>>4155076
A game can be a quarter muncher and still demand a 1cc. see: >>4156083

A chimp can be trained to "beat" nearly any arcade game if they are allowed to credit feed. If you're over the age of say 20 and still get enjoyment out of "beating" an arcade game you credit fed your way through then you're a typical delusional modern gaming faggot who needs a constant ego boost to feel that they're "good" or "special" without ever actually earning it.

I was always a credit feeder because i was a kid and games were fun.

That being said i almost always only played at this bowling alley my grandma worked at, and the guy at the front counter would always give me tons of tokens so i could hang out in the arcade.

>>4154208
The proper way is to use one credit, which is what a lot of these games were designed around anyway (because the game still has to accommodate the player, rather than just the operator, who'd be perfectly happy with games brutally kicking the player off after exactly three minutes if they could get away with it, since most arcade games are also designed to provide an unskilled player about that much playtime before trying to get them off the machine).
Some games suck really hard and were never intended to be 1CC-able in the slightest, but those are rarer than you'd expect (I'm talking shit like Rail Chase, where you outright cannot avoid needing to continue before the end of the game, although some games are also just brutally hard and like a dozen people in the world have ever 1CC'd them because there was no actual expectation that someone would be able to reach the end on a single credit).

And yeah, credit feeding is basically p2w -- if you've got no limit, not even the slightest level of skill is required to proceed and there's no real point in playing rather than just looking it up on YouTube (although, for checkpoint games like R-Type, continue as much as you want, it's not going to give you a free pass to proceed, and it'll likely be easier to just one-life the game so you have a fully decked out ship instead of struggling to recover at a checkpoint).

ultimately though, no one actually cares whether you used one credit or one hundred, the point of playing is to have fun with it (with the aside that there isn't much fun to be had by just feeding a gazillion credits into the machine and not needing to even vaguely try to play)

>>4154306
I like this idea a lot.
it's fairly general and those numbers would work for most immediate respawn arcade games

I used to go to the arcade with $5 and play until I ran out of quarters. It's no more than the cost of a rental. Getting better meant I could play longer on the same amount of money. The higher your skill, the more bang for your buck. With MAME there are no stakes, but scores generally reset when you continue.

>>4155076
plenty of well designed arcade games were made so you can beat them with 1 credit. Even games like metal slug are beatable with 1 credit. ive no missed metal slug 3. ask me anything.

>>4156431
Plenty of them weren't, like most American made stuff.

>>4156436
yea ill give you that. ive seen a TAS of that fucking aerosmith arcade game that cant even 1cc it lol.

If it's in the game, it's not cheating.

The "proper" way to play an arcade-to-console port is to play it over and over and over again all the way through wasting as many credits as possible until you naturally got good enough through practice and repetition to go to the arcade and 1cc it.

Think of the console version as the practice room for the real trial of the arcade.

If it matters so much for you, then just go for 1cc every time just to err on the safe side, dude.

>>4156436
Then they must not have been well-designed games!

>>4156845
>If it's in the game, it's not cheating.

So you'd say that iddqd is not a cheat?

I've never liked credit-feeding, at least in emulated versions of arcade games.

I prefer the "lose all lives and start from the start of the stage" method rather than the, say, Metal Slug method of just respawning where you died and going from there.

>>4158312
Yeah, credit feeding's not as bad in checkpoint games, but it's still cooler to 1cc.

>>4158293
More like how Quick Saves are in Doom and nobody considers it cheating.

Whichever you enjoy more

>>4156845
> Proper way to 1cc arcade game.
> Practice on console port.

Congrats on exposing yourself as someone under the age of 20.

For the vast majority of arcade gaming history console ports were basically different games. They might have roughly looked similar on the surface but in regards to one's ability to transfer console skills to the arcade the arcade game almost always had completely different frame data, hit boxes, enemy pattern AI, spawn point scripting, number of enemies on screen, lives, speed, etc making training at home for a 1cc run pretty much pointless outside of a very small number of games.

>>4158335
Doesn't matter, iddqd is in the game so it must not be cheating.

Also regardless of whether anyone considers it cheating, quick saves destroy a game's tension and difficulty just as badly as any "real" cheat.

>>4158293
>So you'd say that iddqd is not a cheat?
Actually, no, I would not consider that "a cheat" despite the term cheat code that was so prevalent at the time. If it was truly cheating, then the developers would not have put it in. It's as simple as that. It's more like they left in developer options because they were fun.

>>4158868
Quick save is still there, though. If it really is worth that much of a complaint, then play a different game.

>>4158507
>This much autism
>"Basically different games"
>What in reality amounted to slight graphical differences and 99% similar gameplay
You are very desperate on your witch hunt for the underaged boogieman, aren't you? There's a reason why /v/ makes fun of us, you realize.

You kinda need one or two to even play.

better question is, how the hell are you supposed to play pc games with saves? for example, baldur's gate, i feel bad for quick saving but the game tells me i should do it often.

>>4160662
Doing one before each dungeon/big battle?

>>4160671
how do i know if there will be a big battle? sometimes you can find compltely op group of enemies who wrecks your shit and you can't run away, it's really annoying.

>>4156219
And here's a faggot who needs a constant ego boost to feel that he's "good" or "special" by writing this statement.

>>4160662
Just quick save. It's lame, but games with quick save are usually lame by default. If you don't like it, then intentionally don't play games with quick save features.

>>4154208
>credits cheating
sounds like paying for subscription in wow is also cheating

>>4161463
>don't play games with quick save features

This is generally be the best plan. If a game has both checkpoints and quick saves then you can just ignore the quick saves and sometimes it turns out alright.

>>4161463
>If you don't like it, then intentionally don't play games with quick save features.
i tried, but jrpg a shit

I'm not sure I buy the 1 credit or it doesn't count mindset. Sure, all games are technically doable, but I don't want to master Metal Slug, I just want to play Metal Slug at a reasonable challenge level.

The idea that a playthrough of Metal Slug would only earn a quarter if everyone wasn't "cheating" seems odd to me. But so would spending 30 bucks on Metal Slug.

These games clearly had to keep in mind how many credits would people use before they quit in a huff. Maybe determining that amount is our best bet.

>>4163191
Well, you could look into the achievements for console ports. For Metal Slug, the PS4 version has an achievement for beating it within 5 credits.

But even that can be a bit dumb sometimes. Like the continue-based achievement for the 360 version of Final Fight is for beating it within 18 credits, which you would have to try to fail at.

>>4163216
That's as good a barometer as any, I guess. Thanks for the tip.

Also, 18 credits? That crazy.

>>4163191
1cc is far from mastering though.

>>4163153
Try harder you fag.

>>4163397
True. It is easy for me to forget the distinction between "never dying" and "never dying enough that you need to continue".

I don't know. I somehow consider using any credits for something like
Street Fighter to be 100% cheating, but for Metal Slug, I'd think it would be fine within reason.

Maybe it is a matter of Credits vs. Playtime? I dunno.

>>4163191
Fine, do this. Every time you continue, put a quarter in a jar. 50 cents if the game is 2007 or above. Once you beat the game, donate the jar to charity.

>>4163429
This sounds pretty fun, to be honest.

>>4163216
There are challenges in the vault mode that reward beating each level without using continues
http://rq87.flyingomelette.com/FF/F/1/360v.html

>>4163232
>>4163439

>>4163427
Well, Street Fighter games tend to have secret bosses that require 1cc/no losses, don't they? So a 1cc would feel more like an intended challenge in a game like that.

>>4158936
>There's a reason why /v/ makes fun of us, you realize.
You pretend as if that means anything. /v/ is already a mockery of themselves.

>>4163153
There are plenty of games that aren't JRPGs and don't have quick saves.

>>4158936
/v/ is full of canadian r*dditors, though. I'm not even joking.

>>4163452
>>4163465
I generally take offense when the mentally ill call me retarded, because I'm afraid people still take to the old adage of "It takes one to know one". Plus shouldn't we be holding ourselves to higher standards then /v/ of all places?