What does "beating a game" mean to you?

[dunpeal2064]

Some fantastic questoins Key-Glyph!

To start, I think its important to note that these games look a lot harder than they actually are. Now, thats not to say that Ketsui Ura loop isn't hard, it really is, but it is very much a fair game. Especially interesting when looking at loops, is that the game has somewhat trained you to handle the ridiculousness with its first loop. The enemies are going to shoot similar projectiles (ie popcorn enemies that shoot aimed bullets in loop one will shoot nastier, but still aimed bullets in the 2nd loop). This holds true with "suicide" bullets that you see in a lot of loops, and in Ketsui, because you'll be more familiar with where enemies are coming from, when there is going to be a big rush, etc.

It really comes down to familiarity. These games are very consistent, with little actual RNG happening. If a boss throws a thousand bullets at you, but you are in the right place to dodge it, that should work every time you do the fight. Its like a series of small, difficult challenges that, once worked out, you are able to very consistently perform. Then the challenge becomes actually linking them all together, and adjusting for any mistakes that might take you out of your learned "route".


As for their design intent, I do indeed think that these games are designed to be 1cc'd. When a game pushes difficulty this far, I think it would take a LOT of coincidence for the game to actually be beatable if it wasn't designed that way, and with the goal of being as hard as possible. (almost) their entire catalog is 1cc-able, so if they never took concern to making the games beatable, they have had a serious series of coincidental, yet masterful game development.

As for HOW they actually test this? I'm really not sure to be honest. I know from reading interviews that they have had World Record holders actually play their games before they release them, so I think this would often be the case. I know the devs have said that they are not capable of clearing the games themselves, but I think they could feasibly develop 15 second chunks, and quickly know whether something is actually impossible.

They did, in one case, actually make a game specifically thinking no one would be able to beat it, and that was the Death Label Arrange mode on Dodonpachi Dai Ou Jou on the ps2. They had a very high level player play the game, and kept making it harder until he could not beat it. This is the one time they've mentioned purposefully doing this, and it wasn't an arcade release, but a variant of their arcade game released as a bonus for that home port. (And 7 years later, someone actually beat it!)


But yeah, in short, I think the design is intentional. They have well over a dozen games that push difficulty limits to the extreme, but are not only all 1cc-able, but with an understanding of the expectations of the game, are surprisingly playable. Even Futari Ultra, home of the "Hardest Video Game Boss Ever" video, can be consistently played with just a bit of efficient practice. Its just all about familiarity, planning, and smart play.

[dsheinem]

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?

Yes, this is how they are designed.

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?

Most shmups are designed so that, through many play sessions, experienced shmuppers will be able to eventually 1cc them. It can take hundreds of hours of practice, though, in some cases. I believe that Cave and other devs rely on the experience of both specialized playtesters and their own staff's design acumen to know what's fair and what's not.

You've also hit on one element of shmup design that I think has, over time, made the genre less accessible/attractive/profitable. The genre's best games have gameplay that is built on and plays to those who are most familiar with genre histories and conventions...thus throwing a new-to-the-genre person into something like Battle Garegga or Ketsui is just going to frustrate them.

In my opinion, there have been less n00b-friendly shmups this century, since the expected audience is now people who are already well versed in the genre. I believe that more "gateway games" existed in both the arcade and home space in the 1990s and before (including home-only games with finite continues). That said, there are some current games with variable difficulties and modes that make them worth diving into the genre with: Jamestown comes to mind, for example. Additionally, most Cave home ports have novice modes which are more easily 1cc'd.

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.

This is funny.

[dunpeal2064]

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.

The poll includes all genres, most of which don't have credits, some of which don't have lives, etc. It really doesn't show anything, because there is only one feasible answer. Hell, I picked option 1, its the only one that makes sense when considering all video games.

If you want to see what most people that play shmups would think of the question, hop over to shmups forum and open the poll In seriousness though, I would be interested in what our arcade-playing community thinks of the topic. Most of the arcade players I read posts of and watch stream are all set on the 1cc mentality, and perhaps there are some alternate ways to play that still keep the game interesting, and could even make for a good entry point before working on a 1cc.

I still can't see how a 1cc requires mastery though. I 1cc'd Espgaluda after playing it for 2 days, and I am far from a master at it, in fact I'm not good at it at all, it was the cheesiest 1cc ever. Same with my Dodonpachi clear. 50m points when the high score is 700m is so far from mastery that its borderline scrub-play.

It makes me think of Contra. I had always heard that this game was rock hard, and that the only feasible way to play it was to use the 30 lives code. It turns out the game is actually rather easy, but most people just wanted to "sight-see" the game, to have played it, but they didn't want to actually play it. People actually started to think you had to master the game just to play it without the cheat!

It has been a fun conversation, and even if it started for poor reasons like a misunderstanding, I think it resulted in some quality dialogue, and I've given the opposing side's ideas some serious thought over the last few days. So, hopefully, when a Cave game gets listed on someone's Beaten thread in the future, and I post "1cc?", it will be in the most loving way possible!

I wish I had the brevity that some others do, my posts are disgustingly long :/

[Exhuminator]

The poll includes all genres, most of which don't have credits, some of which don't have lives, etc. It really doesn't show anything

Well I disagree that the poll does not show anything. The poll shows that people who play games which are beatable by reaching credits, consider the game beat once they have reached those credits using whatever means the developer makes available. If that doesn't translate to the arcade experience, then there is also an option for beating a game "on 1cc" in the poll as well. This would correlate to the arcade experience you and mjmjr25 have been purporting.

If anything the poll has been indicative that maybe not that many gamers here play arcade games all that often, or at least certainly not exclusively. After all, credit fed arcade games only represent so much of the medium's output. Consoles, handhelds, PC, and mobile games make up a whole lot more of the vidja pie chart, and they do not run off credits traditionally. Therefore the poll I created here captures all aspects of how one might beat a game built on one of those other platforms. It also allows you to choose "on 1 cc" for the arcade experience if that's what you wish to vote for instead.

Last but not least there's a vote for "Other" as well, meaning you can vote for something entirely different and explain it in a post.

[dunpeal2064]

The poll shows that people who play games which are beatable by reaching credits, consider the game beat once they have reached those credits using whatever means the developer makes available.

Sure, but thats because this answer actually makes sense. For any game that has credits, its beaten when you make it to credits without cheating. Of course, plain and simple, and it fits across the spectrum, any game beatable by credits could have this option apply to it.

The other options do not make sense. GTA has end credits, how can I rightfully choose "1CC" when GTA has no coins to plop in? I would be voting purely to skew the poll towards what I think about a particular genre of gaming, in a poll that is trying to encompass the entirety of gaming (at least those with end credits).

I don't see how any other option is even remotely fair. The poll screams "choose this answer", and to me it just doesn't really show much. Just my opinion.

[Exhuminator]

GTA has end credits, how can I rightfully choose "1CC" when GTA has no coins to plop in?

I don't understand why you would even consider extrapolating beating 1cc for a non-arcade game like GTA in the first place. That's illogical in my opinion. However any of the other 7 poll options available can fit that game in regards of beating it. I don't see any poll bias in there. And even if a voter thought none of the options fit their personal taste, the "Other" option is available as a vote. But we can agree to disagree on this, I'm okay with that.

[dunpeal2064]

Heh, I think we are misunderstanding each other. Unless I am mistaken, the poll encompasses ALL video games with credits at their end, correct?

So, when the answer I choose in this poll is supposed to be a show of when I would consider any game with end credits beaten, I would want the answer to fit all games, and not just particular ones.

Was the poll supposed to be specifically about games that have the option to feed credits or use continues? Because that wasn't the impression I got. And yes, some of the other options fit GTA, but my point was that only one option fits everything, and that is option 1.

Even if we limit it to games with credits, there is a huge difference between, say, Streets of Rage, a game never designed to actually make money per credit, which limits the credits you put in, and could very well be designed around using said credits, and an actual arcade beat em up or shmup.

But when we include all games? There are a couple answers that fit RPGs (Which I play), other answers that fit shmups (also play), others seem fit for 3rd person hack n slash (which I also play), but only one option actually covers all of them.

Hopefully I've explained myself better this time.

[Exhuminator]

You are saying that the concept of "beating a game" does not equal one size fits all across the entire spectrum of gaming. I can agree with that. I agree that in beating arcade games one can have a special situation involving credits, that no other form of gaming has. But if you agree that is true, you must also agree that comparing console/handheld/PC-RPGs-backlog-times to credit-fed-arcade-shmups-backlog-times is an argument that never made much sense to begin with.

[BoneSnapDeez]

The poll includes all genres, most of which don't have credits, some of which don't have lives, etc. It really doesn't show anything

Well I disagree that the poll does not show anything.

Yeah my answer is the same regardless of genre or platform.

Somewhat related - though some may disagree I consider every game to be "beatable" in some sense. Whether it be a 2nd gen looper, sports game, MMO, etc. Once I hit a definable goal I consider it beaten, regardless of whether a formal credits roll exists or not.

[Ack]

Isn't it impossible in some Metal Slug games to beat it with a 1CC? I'm pretty sure I remember Metal Slug 4 or 5 being considered impossible.