What does "beating a game" mean to you?

Post by **Exhuminator** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:01 am

Okay so we've had some silly drama over in the "Game collecting is not what it once was" thread. I think one issue boils down to what it means to "beat a game" in accordance to the time allotted to do so. Which in itself further distills down to what "beating a game" means to each individual person. It is my hope that this thread can show in a general fashion exactly what "beating a game" means to the largest representative group overall in that regard.

Although I have set up the poll, I hope we can have actual detailed discussion about this here.

Disclaimer: In the poll "reaching the credits" simply means finishing the game in whatever fashion the game considers "the end". I realize this does not work for games that loop forever, but let's just leave those out of this equation for now.

Post by **Luke** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:28 am

Why is "Using your fists and feet" not an option?

I'd say:

You know if you have actually beaten a game.

You "beat" Ninja Gaiden with save states or codes or a game genie...You know you didn't actually beat the game. You cheat and you know it.

Using the Konami code can make Contra a breeze...but for me it takes all the fun out of the game, as you really only need what the game gives you to beat it.

Post by **Exhuminator** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:35 am

Luke wrote:save states

But are save states actually cheating? Or are they merely using a form of time travel to make the experience more convenient?

For example, let's say you're playing a platform game with ten stages. You can finish the first five stages without any problem, but you keep dying on the sixth stage. You are tired of replaying the first five stages just to try the sixth stage again and again. So you make a save state at the beginning of the sixth stage, so that you can just pick up from that point and continue practicing it, without having to replay the five stages before which you have already proven you can finish without issue.

So is that cheating? Or is it simply making the experience more convenient?

Post by **prfsnl_gmr** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:41 am

We have had this debate in many different threads over the years, and I hope that we can direct future debat here.

I have always used three categories to describe my gaming accomplishments:

Beat: (1) reaching the credits on any difficulty level using only the means made officially available by the game developers; (2) looping a game

Complete: doing and collecting every single thing you can possibly do in the game on the hardest difficulty possible and then reaching the credits

Master: Accomplishing some task in the game using a player-imposed limitation (i.e., reaching the credits without dying; looping a game on a single credit, etc.)

I beat Kirby Triple Deluxe the other day by reaching the credits in the story mode. I completed Okami several years ago by collecting every bead, obtaining an S-rank in every category, and unlocking everything the game has to offer. I mastered Super Mario Bros. by rescuing the princess with a single life in less than 10 minutes.

Exhuminator wrote:
Luke wrote:save states
But are save states actually cheating? Or are they merely using a form of time travel to make the experience more convenient?

It depends upon how you use them. If you use them to repeatedly continue right before the last boss, then it is cheating. (It is a great way to practice a dificult game, however!) If you use them to avoid having to write down a 40-character password or to continue from points where the game would otherwise let you continue, it is not, IMO, cheating.

Post by **dsheinem** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 9:44 am

relevant: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2099 ... _world.php

the poll answer is too genre dependent for me. it's a case by case thing.

Post by **Exhuminator** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:03 am

dsheinem wrote:relevant: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2099 ... _world.php

the poll answer is too genre dependent for me. it's a case by case thing.

Alright, that was how it was discussed and explained on Gamasutra. Let's not use that instance to offhandedly discredit Racketboy's community in being able to reach a different outcome however. I doubt we all agree on this matter ultimately, but it is still interesting to see the greatest sum total of opinion on the issue.

Personally, I am of the "reached the credits using only the means available by the developers" aspect.

Post by **Opa Opa** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:09 am

I voted the first selection. Reaching the credits within normal bounds is how I roll. If I get lives/continues I'll use them (that's what they're there for).

To discuss the various points of contention:

>using cheats/codes/glitches/etc- I'm not going to advocate any cheating or exploits unless there's some real necessity to do so. For example, some old PC games (maybe it's Daggerfall I'm thinking of?) are prone to bugs and crashing. If you have to enable a code to skip a bugged portion of the game to continue, go right ahead. Also, I wouldn't mind if someone used the Mew glitch to complete their pokedex in Pokemon Red/Blue as there is no way you're going to get Mew legit anymore. However, putting in a code for infinite lives, money, items, whatever, is not how most games are intended to be played. I prefer to work within the bounds set by the creators.

>difficulty selection- Play on whatever you're comfortable with; that's what they're there for. If you suck at first-person shooters, kick it down a notch- no shame in that. Are you a master of RPG's and are bored to tears on normal? Play on Hard. However, not every game is going to have the same content if you change the difficulty. For example, if you play Castlevania 64 on Easy, the game will end at the half-way point and a text box will tell you "Play on Normal to experience the rest of the game".
There's nothing wrong with adjusting difficulty where needed and I'll change the difficulty if the game is too easy/difficult. I usually just play on Normal as it is almost always the default setting.

>the self-imposed challenge- Not using continues, not dying, not leveling up, playing one-hand tied behind your back while wrestling five crocodiles... these are impressive feats in some instances; however, these challenges are not the default method of play. Yes, you can play a shmup without continuing, you can min/max in Final Fantasy VIII and beat the game while still on level 1, you can even play most of The Legend of Zelda without using the sword. However, the people that do this are just looking for another challenge to breathe new life in a favorite title or, in the case of shmups and other arcade games, looking to maximize scoring potential. While approaching titles in new avenues may lead to new tricks and discoveries, these self-imposed challenges are not necessary to 'beat' a game (sorry, Mike).

>collecting everything- No foolin': I cannot fathom why people do this. I am not a completion-ist at all. The few times I've ever 100% collected every main object the reward has sucked (that's if you get anything). I'm pretty content doing the main quest and calling it a day. Although, I would like to hear from people that actively try to complete most of their games and their logic and reasoning behind it.

Post by **isiolia** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:34 am

I think the term is used so broadly, at least as far as semantics go, I just take it to mean getting to the credits using built-in methods. Same as beating a level or beating a boss doesn't mean someone did so without room for improvement.

Additionally, there are generally-understood terms for completing more (or all) of a game, if possible - Platinum trophies for instance.

Personally, I prefer using "played through" instead, since it doesn't carry the same implication of dominance that "beat" does.

Post by **Ziggy** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:40 am

prfsnl_gmr wrote:I have always used three categories to describe my gaming accomplishments:

Beat: (1) reaching the credits on any difficulty level using only the means made officially available by the game developers; (2) looping a game

Complete: doing and collecting every single thing you can possibly do in the game on the hardest difficulty possible and then reaching the credits

Master: Accomplishing some task in the game using a player-imposed limitation (i.e., reaching the credits without dying; looping a game on a single credit, etc.)

That's pretty much how I look at it. If I roll the credits on any difficulty without cheating, I consider the game beat. If I 100% a save file or something, I consider it completed. Mastering requires a feat like you said, beating the game on one life, single credit, etc.

prfsnl_gmr wrote:
Exhuminator wrote:
Luke wrote:save states
But are save states actually cheating? Or are they merely using a form of time travel to make the experience more convenient?
It depends upon how you use them. If you use them to repeatedly continue right before the last boss, then it is cheating. (It is a great way to practice a dificult game, however!) If you use them to avoid having to write down a 40-character password or to continue from points where the game would otherwise let you continue, it is not, IMO, cheating.

It's like you're in my head!!!

Yeah, I agree, it really depends how you use save states. Older games that don't have saves, passwords, or even a level select cheat, I wouldn't consider using save states as cheating if you're only using them to save progress through the game.

I know I can't trust myself though. If I'm using save states this way and the game gets too difficult/frustrating for me, I might resort to using save states as a way to cheat. But, whenever this happens, I'd rather cheat to roll the credits than never beat the game at all. And a lot of times when I cheat to beat a game, I end up replaying it and trying to beat it without cheating.

Post by **dsheinem** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:50 am

Exhuminator wrote:
dsheinem wrote:relevant: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2099 ... _world.php

the poll answer is too genre dependent for me. it's a case by case thing.
Alright, that was how it was discussed and explained on Gamasutra. Let's not use that instance to offhandedly discredit Racketboy's community in being able to reach a different outcome however. I doubt we all agree on this matter ultimately, but it is still interesting to see the greatest sum total of opinion on the issue.

Personally, I am of the "reached the credits using only the means available by the developers" aspect.

I'm just adding something to consider to the mix...no more or less.