Do you consider it less bad to use cheats that work on real hardware as opposed to save states and other cheats that only work on emulators?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Do you consider it less bad to use cheats that work on real hardware as opposed to save states and other cheats that only work on emulators?
Save states are perfectly acceptable if you're using them to save your game because you want to take a break. Using them to cheese hard parts, not so much. Also there are flash carts with save states that work on original hardware.
You should really just enjoy the game however you want. The world is quickly going to shit. Don't worry about filters, cheats, save states, etc. Have fun.
Hey fellas, is this the insecure homosexual thread?
Is this the thread where I come if I need permission and approval from anonymous nobodies about how to play video games?
I'm genuinely terrified of thinking for myself and coming to terms with my own opinions, I am utterly helpless without guidance from a consensus of faceless seething troglodytes, is this the thread for me?
Kudos anon, that loud unprompted passive aggression sure implies rock-solid confidence and not at all a crippling reliance on insulating yourself from any and all external perspective.
Depends on the game and type of ingame cheat.
I suggest you post beforehand which ingame cheat & game you plan to do next, so we can approve them on an individual basis.
Anon, if you need to rationalize it with at-least-isms, that's a tell of how you yourself are aware that you are connecting those "intended" cheats more to the notion of emulation-type functionality than to the actual game by design. They don't represent an alternative way to play the game, or an "aid"; that's what difficulty modes and options are for. These are cheats, period.
Even if you're not even talking about included button codes and actually about exploitable glitches, the issue isn't whether cheating one way is inherently "bad" and another one isn't. Cheating is only bad if you personally think it diminishes how you engage with what's ultimately a game you're supposed to be enjoying. If you need to fumble with excuses and mental gymnastics to actually validate an aspect of that enjoyment, then don't lie to yourself: cheating is bad for you.
A cautionary tale involving this game in particular: I played it for the first time using an emulator maybe 15 years ago, and got about 80% through using save states, all the while having a miserable experience on average. I eventually dropped it out of sheer burnout because I simply wasn't having fun even if I was progressing. Recently (and I mean as recently as last month) I played it again, also emulating but never using save states. It's challenging, but even when I felt frustration, the mindset and learning attitude I naturally settled on simply by removing the safety net didn't let the overall experience become grating, actually made the game easier overall since I was building up a skillset from the natural flow of the game, AND of course made it much more satisfactory to master and ultimately beat compared to if I had used codes or save states in any capacity. That genuine satisfaction to counter the genuine frustration just wouldn't have existed. The final stage is lots of fun and the final boss a cakewalk by the way.
Cheats alter how you experience a game, and a game is ultimately an experience. You're not "fixing" the experience if you cheat, you're changing it; and you're absolutely entitled to do so. But that also means you shouldn't delude yourself into believing the experience is necessarily equivalent, or that you're any less directly responsible for your choice if the developers themselves gave you the means to make that choice.
Ok, but how did you handle lives? Rayman was absolutely a game that should have gave you infinite lives, but you have to beat each stage in one go or up to check points. I just dont see how anyone can have fun having to go grind lives just to be able to go back and play the stage you are stuck on. It sounds like this was not intentional at all considering the devs didn't externally playtest it, i wouldn't doubt the continues not resetting was an oversight they missed. Rayman 1 is one of the few games where the lives cheat fixes the game, as long as you are not abusing it for the health refill.
>I just dont see how anyone can have fun having to go grind lives just to be able to go back and play the stage you are stuck on.
I'd say it would have been fair if the Rayman statues in the first level respawned each time you started it. I learned that doesn't happen and promptly entered the 99 lives cheat.
Oh right, I was gonna cover that because I'm aware of the extra lives cheat and suspected that's what was being alluded in the op, but the post was already stupidly long.
The key for me was basically doing a trial run of each level where you figure shit out without going overboard with caution and stress, and obviously not saving your progress after you beat a level but instead reloading and going for a "keeper" run where you set to invest less lives than the number you can get in that level. It takes maybe a couple attempts on average (or a handful in particularly tough levels) but once you manage it you save and move on: little by little you progress while racking up lives, which give you more leeway for your trial runs, which build better groundwork for your keepers, which sees you through the game at a nice pace.
With this approach the worst emotional blow I got throughout was discovering that this butthole gets a happy ending.
Life mechanics are just a shitty way to prolong the game. Always have been. Same with requiring all Electoon cages for the final level so you have to replay each level multiple times AGAIN just to find them. I understand why those shitty practices were somewhat necessary during 3rd and 4th gen because cartridge space was so limited and the absence of content had to be covered up, but a 5th gen platformer released on CDs has absolutely no reason to do those things. It's a badly designed game, period.
why don't people just accept that if you need cheats to beat a game it's poorly designed? it's OK to play shitty games. everyone plays shitty games.
if you think the game is well designed and you just need too much time to practice than your life allots time for, then you're cheating so you can beat a good game more quickly. it really is as simple as that binary: either the game sucks, in which case it isn't bad at all to use cheats, or you suck, in which case it's still not wrong but definitely cheating.
Cheats should be reserved for when you beat the game. It doesn't matter otherwise.
>Rayman
Rayman had its problems but the main one for me was that I couldn't replay the individual levels within a level. Meaning that if you missed one of those cages, you had to replay the whole 2-5 levels of a stage to get back there. Either that or an indicator to where the cages are. Its a pretty easy game bar maybe 3-4 stages (ink stages in particular)
>if you missed one of those cages, you had to replay the whole 2-5 levels of a stage to get back there
Yeah, along the way picking up tings and earning extra lives, while also getting more proficient at the game naturally.
>Getting better naturally
In otherwords, inefficiently.
Asking this question on Ganker instead of figuring it out on your own is cheating, sorry
I don't even bother with game genie cheats or whatever in most games because pretty much every emulator has save states (used mainly to take a break) and a rewind button (I mean, you still have to git gud at some point even when rewinding or you'll never beat the game).
I hated rayman. It was too hard for a casual and offered a bunch of routes that never went anywhere whereas in many areas only one pathway would let you live
no one is keeping score, weirdo