when have you beaten a shmup

[noiseredux]

I'm a big fan of shmups, but I don't believe in the 1CC is the ONLY way to beat the game thing. That's garbage. If the end screen says y'know "congrats, you win!" then I'm pretty sure I won. Maybe I'm not purist, or maybe I just don't care THAT much. But if I get through the entire game, without resorting to cheat-codes or something, then I feel I've beat the game within the confines of the rules that the game designers gave me.

[dsheinem]

I'm a big fan of shmups, but I don't believe in the 1CC is the ONLY way to beat the game thing. That's garbage. If the end screen says y'know "congrats, you win!" then I'm pretty sure I won. Maybe I'm not purist, or maybe I just don't care THAT much. But if I get through the entire game, without resorting to cheat-codes or something, then I feel I've beat the game within the confines of the rules that the game designers gave me.

I think that this is especially true for home ports that provide you a set number of credits (many 16-bit titles did this, for example). If they give you 5 credits, that means the developers think you should be able to finish the game in that amount of credits with some practice. It doesn't mean they expect you to 1cc it. If you beat Contra or Streets of Rage with the stock number of continues, then you have beat Contra or Streets of Rage. Credit feeding and using codes is not the same as working within the confines of what the developers/programmer port into a game.

[dsheinem]

As I said before, it's why I rarely play them. I'm not that dedicated, but I view shmup "purists" as you put it, as the most hardcore gamers out there

I do realize that shmup purists look for the 1cc. This is in part because they are primarily playing Arcade perfect versions where that is indeed an ultimate goal to literally "beat" the machine and not have to pay it money. But, if I let the "purists" of any genre dictate what I think constitutes as beating a game, I would never be very satisfied when I reach the credits. For example: some adventure or RPG purists may say you beat a game when you get all the endings, some platformer purists when you collect everything and/or unlock all levels, some racing game purists when you get every car, etc. As far as I am concerned, if I hit the credits screen I have beaten the game. For some genres (such as fighting games) I only count it as beaten if I finish it with no continues. But for others (like shmups or light gun games), I am happy to work within set credit limits (imposed by myself or the developers) and try to beat the game that way.

[noiseredux]

I think that this is especially true for home ports that provide you a set number of credits (many 16-bit titles did this, for example). If they give you 5 credits, that means the developers think you should be able to finish the game in that amount of credits with some practice. It doesn't mean they expect you to 1cc it. If you beat Contra or Streets of Rage with the stock number of continues, then you have beat Contra or Streets of Rage. Credit feeding and using codes is not the same as working within the confines of what the developers/programmer port into a game.

yes this is exactly my way of thinking. I tend to always play a game on the default settings. No extra continues. No limiting continues. No tinkering with EASY or HARD modes. I tend to just think that the way the game is given to me on default is generally the way the designers felt it should be experienced. So if a game gives me 3 lives and 5 continues before a final Game Over, then so be it. That's what I allow myself.

[noiseredux]

As far as I am concerned, if I hit the credits screen I have beaten the game.

this.

And like others have pointed out, 1CC'ing or 100%-ing, or beating a Fighter using every fighter, or getting every ending, etc... all this junk is mere extra-accomplishment to me. It's extra goals if someone beats the games but is looking for further challenge.

[Gamerforlife]

I'm a big fan of shmups, but I don't believe in the 1CC is the ONLY way to beat the game thing. That's garbage. If the end screen says y'know "congrats, you win!" then I'm pretty sure I won. Maybe I'm not purist, or maybe I just don't care THAT much. But if I get through the entire game, without resorting to cheat-codes or something, then I feel I've beat the game within the confines of the rules that the game designers gave me.

Fair enough, but to me infinite credits is no different than using a cheat device. You CAN'T lose. If you die, you pop back on the screen and keep at it until the boss is dead

Now it's better if you stay within the confines of a limited number of lives or credits like dsheinem says, but some games are way too generous. To use a beat'em up example since it's a genre rooted in arcades like shmups, Streets of Rage 2 gives you default lives, then gives more when kill a certain number of enemies, AND has hidden ones in each stage. Factor in health items and it's a game that ANYONE can get through even on higher difficulties. I'm tired of youtube videos of people supposedly beating a game when they're blowing through extra lives and showing no skill. Reviewers often complain about old school shmups and beat'em ups being too easy and that's because many of them reveal no depth whatsoever if you're not trying to 1 cc them

And the net is full of videos of people one lifing Contra and Metal Slug games, so no you haven't beaten them if you can't do that. I think that's how they are meant to be played. Sorry if that bruises some egos. I've managed to do it on Shattered Soldier and Contra Hard Corps. Any Contra game can be done in one life with practice

[noiseredux]

Fair enough, but to me infinite credits is no different than using a cheat device. You CAN'T lose. If you die, you pop back on the screen and keep at it until the boss is dead

Now it's better if you stay within the confines of a limited number of lives or credits like dsheinem says,

um... did you actually read what I wrote?

But if I get through the entire game, without resorting to cheat-codes or something, then I feel I've beat the game within the confines of the rules that the game designers gave me.

When did I ever say anything about using infinite credits?

[Gamerforlife]

I think that this is especially true for home ports that provide you a set number of credits (many 16-bit titles did this, for example). If they give you 5 credits, that means the developers think you should be able to finish the game in that amount of credits with some practice. It doesn't mean they expect you to 1cc it. If you beat Contra or Streets of Rage with the stock number of continues, then you have beat Contra or Streets of Rage. Credit feeding and using codes is not the same as working within the confines of what the developers/programmer port into a game.

yes this is exactly my way of thinking. I tend to always play a game on the default settings. No extra continues. No limiting continues. No tinkering with EASY or HARD modes. I tend to just think that the way the game is given to me on default is generally the way the designers felt it should be experienced. So if a game gives me 3 lives and 5 continues before a final Game Over, then so be it. That's what I allow myself.

This is where we disagree. I don't believe this. I think the shmup genre is built around the high score or the 1cc. They give you extra lives, continues, etc. on home consoles becasue they HAVE to. Honestly, how much is a shooter with one life going to sell? Even though it's how the game should be played. I think now we're arguing about what genres are really about. Like I said before, high scores and 1ccs are why shmups exist. It's not "extra credit". You guys are comparing shmups to other genres that have different goals than most shmups do, but I can't change your opinions. I'll just agree to disagree, but I've seen responses from some other people who agree with me

[noiseredux]

This is where we disagree. I don't believe this. I think the shmup genre is built around the high score or the 1cc. They give you extra lives, continues, etc. on home consoles becasue they HAVE to. Honestly, how much is a shooter with one life going to sell? Even though it's how the game should be played. I think now we're arguing about what genres are really about. Like I said before, high scores and 1ccs are why shmups exist. It's not "extra credit". You guys are comparing shmups to other genres that have different goals than most shmups do, but I can't change your opinions. I'll just agree to disagree, but I've seen responses from some other people who agree with me

So you have more authority on how a game SHOULD be played than the actual designers of the game?

[Gamerforlife]

This is where we disagree. I don't believe this. I think the shmup genre is built around the high score or the 1cc. They give you extra lives, continues, etc. on home consoles becasue they HAVE to. Honestly, how much is a shooter with one life going to sell? Even though it's how the game should be played. I think now we're arguing about what genres are really about. Like I said before, high scores and 1ccs are why shmups exist. It's not "extra credit". You guys are comparing shmups to other genres that have different goals than most shmups do, but I can't change your opinions. I'll just agree to disagree, but I've seen responses from some other people who agree with me

So you have more authority on how a game SHOULD be played than the actual designers of the game?

It's not about authority, everyone knows that arcade games get dumbed down for consoles. And everybody knows that designers have to make games accessible for them to sell

I'm not claiming to be an authority on anything, everything I've said is just my opinion