What does "beating a game" mean to you?

[J T]

Sounds like someone read Ender's Game.

I never finished that one, but I have been listening to copious amounts of Alan Watts recently, which has certainly had influence.

[Exhuminator]

I still haven't seen an answer to my question concerning 1cc'ing arcade games correlated with the fact those games have copious dip switch settings which can drastically alter the difficulty of the experience. How does one decide which dip switch settings are the ones the developers truly intended to be the legit play for 1cc'ing in the first place?

[mjmjr25]

I still haven't seen an answer to my question concerning 1cc'ing arcade games correlated with the fact those games have copious dip switch settings which can drastically alter the difficulty of the experience. How does one decide which dip switch settings are the ones the developers truly intended to be the legit play for 1cc'ing in the first place?

Each board has "default settings" either via dip (older boards) or RAM on board accessed in a service menu.

Whenever I get a board I go into the service menu and hit "restore default settings".

Those are the intended settings.

There are typically about half a dozen options:
Screen - Inverted
Player Stock - 1-5, 3 is almost always default
Difficulty - Easy to Very Hard
Coins per play - Free play to 4 coins per play
Sound - Stereo or Mono

The last option is "restore default settings"

Adding player stock is really the only one that has an impact. Difficulty levels on most games the past 15 years is marginal. Again, though, if someone had a board set at easy and 5 player stock, that would not be a legit clear for most in the STG community. Also, there are generally indicators if someone is playing off of default settings, ranging from scores not saving, scoreboard initials not prompting, adding numbers to your score, a visual verbal marker on the screen or scoreboard, or a different colored scoreboard, etc.

For example - if you play Tatsujin, the scoreboard will say "Easy", nothing, or "Hard". If it says nothing - you are at default, etc.

[J T]

Is it fair to say 1CC on an arcade game is required for a win, when the developer intended for you to spend more money than one credit's worth?

[dogman91]

It would be interesting to know if there are any arcade games (that aren't terrible games in of themselves) where it's IMPOSSIBLE to beat with a 1CC.

I would like to think (good) developers just had the idea of making the games difficult to master and the quarters spent is put into practicing the game. I think they know a feeling of progression is necessary for people to keep coming back.

[Sano]

I am going to have to select option 1. If I enjoy the game enough I will spend the time to get a true 100% completion. Which is a rare game for me.

[dunpeal2064]

Is it fair to say 1CC on an arcade game is required for a win, when the developer intended for you to spend more money than one credit's worth?

Honestly, there is no one answer that will cover all arcade games. I'm sure tons were designed just to eat coin, or to never be 1cc'd. Since I tend to focus on Cave's arcade output, its the only case where I can give more in-depth thought on the matter.

So, lets take Ketsui. If you are operating an arcade, and you want Ketsui in your shop, you are looking at $2500+ dollars, and cab space, to run this game.

My question would be, how much money do you think the game would make from Average Joe plopping some credits in? If you had no experience with the game, you would spend a LOT of money just credit feeding. Most people Game Over within seconds in these harder games, and miiight put in a few more credits before walking away. You'll make maybe $50 a month off these players.

Compare this to a player aiming for a 1cc. Just to start, the player is going to spend a lot becoming familiar with the game. Just learning the game will cost quite a bit. Then the player has to take that knowledge, and perform it, spending credits on runs that are essentially dead within the first few stages, if any mistakes are made (Keep in mind, you can't bomb or die once in ketsui to access its hidden loop, where the final boss lies).

The player will likely spend $100+ just to get INTO this hidden loop. Now, the player is going to credit feed within that loop, seeing and learning as much as possible, because, once the player hits the end of it (and doesn't fight the last boss, because they used credits), they have to actually No Miss/No Bomb the first loop EVERY TIME they want to even practice the hidden loop. THEN the player, once ready, is going to spend a SHIT TON of credits doing full runs, aiming for Doom, the final boss, scraping tons of runs in the first loop, scraping even more in the 2nd, until finally, they see him. They see Doom. OH BUT GUESS WHAT? You've never even seen this mofo before, and he's the hardest thing you'll ever fight. You get one try, you can't even continue on him. NOW, NOW you have to actually get through all 2 insanely difficult loops EVERY TIME you want to fight Doom, just to see him, just to practice him. You will be bled dry by the time you actually kill Doom.

... and you haven't even tried to score yet. So now, you get more risky, you push the game for points, but now each stage has more points where you will die, and guess what? You STILL have to beat the entire game, now while taking these huge risks, knowing your limit, changing every run based on how well you have done, how much risk you feel like taking for the reward, and most of these runs will end far before Doom, and the ones that make it to him are still very likely to end there.


Do I think a game like that is designed to have a few coins plopped into it for a credit-fed clear? No. Not whatsoever. Its an art, a beautiful, everlasting game that can sit in an arcade and make money for a decade off of a player base of less than 5. Its brilliant, the high point of arcade design, most games don't even come close.




If you own Ketsui, and know that you will never get to this level, that you will never see the last boss, and you want to find some comfort in calling the game "beaten", then go for it. But you didn't beat it. Its okay to not beat it, its fucking hard, like waaaay harder than almost any game. But that doesn't change the fact that there is a last boss, and killing him is what ends the game.

I can't stress enough that its not some way to come off as hardcore, or bragging rights. Playing these games in this fashion is god-like, not in skill required, but in experience. You will learn new things about yourself, you will rage, you will cry, you will laugh an uncontrollable laughter. Its a hell of a ride. If anyone reading this thread is curious, not just in proving whether one side of this debate is right or wrong, but genuinely curious about what it is like to play these games like this, please, please try. PM me, ask for recommendations, PM me or post in any shmups thread, ask questions about any part of any game, just please try. Why do I care? Because I love these games, and seeing even one person join the dark cult makes me jump with joy.

And with that, I am done with the 1cc talk. I think I've taken enough part of this for folks to know where I stand, and I hope something positive came out of this whole debacle, or at least that there is an understanding that goes deeper than the crappy elitist title often flung at us. Now, time to play some shmups.

[dsheinem]

nice post, dun.

[Key-Glyph]

So, lets take Ketsui...

Okay, so that wonderfully-written description totally piqued my interest, and now I'm watching runthroughs of Ura loops on YouTube.

Holy @#($*&! This is fascinating.

Now here's a question: do you think shmups like these are designed to be 1CC-able? Meaning, do you think the creators and programmers take mindful steps to create a game that pushes the difficulty to the edge of what they assume players are capable of, without stepping over the line into being literally impossible, for the 1CC? Or do you think these games are designed to be as impossible as can be managed, as a kind of challenge to the universe to reveal someone who can complete the run?

Dunpeal, you seem to be suggesting the former. I just don't have a handle on how many people are capable of such a thing, or what conventions the designers might be employing that an experienced bullet-hell player would know how to approach and overcome. How is something like Ketsui even play-tested for 1CC-ability?

I just have this image of high-powered executive types sitting around a boardroom table saying, "Let's see them handle THAT," then someone bursting through the door with a VHS in hand, shouting, "IT CAN BE DONE!!" and some huge incredulous commotion/celebration ensuing.

[Exhuminator]

Whenever I get a board I go into the service menu and hit "restore default settings".

Those are the intended settings.

That is logic I can get behind.

Now I want to take a minute to look at the whole situation from a holistic perspective:

I believe that we have the 1cc mentality and ethos covered now. The discussion on the matter has been enlightening to myself concerning arcade shmups. Although I have played through many arcade shmups (and do enjoy and respect the genre), I have never 1cc'd a single one. This is something that I could see myself attempting to do some day if ever I came across an arcade shmup that I found to be particularly amazing. Reaching that state of skill could easily take over 30 hours of practice, I can fully admit to realizing that. So now I do understand what you meant when you said beating a backlog full of shooters is just as, if not more intimidating, from a chronological investment perspective, as a backlog of RPGs. That is in enlightenment of knowing that when you said "beat" you meant 1cc'ing, and when you said "shooter" you meant arcade shmup.

On the other side of the debate. You now know when I said "shooter" I actually meant console or PC FPS and TPS games, not arcade shmups. You also know that when I said "beat a game" I meant reaching the credits using normal means, and that includes continues, checkpoints, and such. The idea of 1cc'ing doesn't correlate to console FPS or TPS games by and large. By this measurement, beating a backlog of console or PC RPGs is more intimidating from a time investment perspective than beating a backlog of console or PC FPS and TPS games. I say this as someone who has beat many of all three genres and experienced the time required to beat games in each genre.

I also think that yourself and a few others have come to realize (based on this thread's poll) that "beating a game" is commonly thought of as merely reaching the credits without cheating. Whereas beating a game to the level of skill you prefer is more commonly thought of as "mastering a game". While I can fully respect the investment to master a game, I hope you can respect that simply "beating a game" from a standard standpoint is not nearly as time devouring an endeavor.

Ultimately this has been a very fun discussion that spawned from a very small misunderstanding. I hope it won't be long before someone else has an equally trivial misunderstanding that ignites another discussion of such magnitude.