/vr/ - Retro Games

>>4561048
>there's nothing in the game or manual that tells you it exists
Then no, it's not ok to use

>>4561048
Yes. The Continue Code is a cheat code.

If it's in the game, then it's in the game.

The game doesn't tell you there's warp pipes, either.

>>4561062
>if it's in the game, then it's in the game
by this logic the konami code or typing iddqd in doom isn't cheating either

>>4561062
>>4561067
also, the game does tell you about warp pipes. if you go to where the warp pipes are, there are warp pipes there. if you find them, you can use them. so that's not at all comparable to the continue code.

>>4561048
Who cares.
It only matters if you're doing some self imposed challenge, or you actually care about your score ( since i'm pretty sure continuing resets it )

>>4561070

No, anon, that's not "telling you about warp pipes" any more than the game tells you about the continue code. If you punch in the continue code, you get a continue, bam, same logic as yours.

>>4561067

Those codes are also in the game. You guys don't seem to get it, if developer intention matters, and the developer intentionally puts in a code that trivializes the game, then you can't say it's not the developer's intention to use the code. That shouldn't be the argument you use to claim that it is cheating.

Just say it makes the game shitty to use most cheat codes. It makes essentially the same point.

Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo features a second roster plus a "secret" character that can only be accessed by inputting a code at the character select screen. The developers actually intended for players to be able to use these characters, that's why they told everybody about them. The secret character was Akuma, who was stupidly powerful because Capcom thought that would make the game more interesting, they even intended for him to be used in tournament play. Instead he got banned from tournaments but the rest of the characters were legal to use. Nobody calls this cheating even though they still call it a cheat code.

>>4561048
There is a continue code???
My childhood is a fucking lie holy shit

>>4561089
What happens if you throw a Super opponent using a World Warrior character, does the opponent get a chance to tech/recover?

Continue code was taken out of all forms after the NES wasn't it? I know for sure it can't be in Vs Super Mario Bros.

>>4561163
It wasn't necessary anymore for later ports of SMB because the All-Stars version gave you the option to save at the beginning of each world so you could get the same effect of the "cheat" without having to start the whole game over when you shut off the game while the Gameboy Color port gave you the option to save in the last level you got like in Lost Levels (the only disadvantage is that you lost your score but I'm not sure how many mario players still care about it).
But yes, they took it out from the Vs version but that has more to do with the arcade set-up of the Vs versions in general. Vs Super Mario Bros. is neat but I prefer the Duck Hunt and Excitebike Vs games.

>>4561048
They also didn't tell you to continue breathing while playing the game. Personally I don't think getting to the end counts ad beating the game if you used more than one breath. lol. Sure is a good thing stupid opinions mean nothing.

>>4561198
>being this mad because you got called out on "beating" SMB with a cheat code

>>4561048
This is a personal opinion imo, getting through the game to the desired level isn't that hard in mario even if you have sub-par plattforming skills, so using the continue code is just a time-saver.

And since there is no tv-broadcasted world tournaments of beating SMB and people using this as a status symbol, who really gives a fuck? If you are the person imposing this bar of achievement (beating a game) and feel like you are cheating doing it, then you are cheating. If not, then no.

To be safe in the eyes of the digital gods just beat it one time without continunes and one time with, then you'll get into retro-heaven.

>>4561079
>guys don't seem to get it, if developer intention matters, and the developer intentionally puts in a code that trivializes the game, then you can't say it's not the developer's intention to use the code.

Yes you can. What kind of logic is that? If intent matters then all intent. Meaning that it depends completely on WHY they intentionally put the code into the game. A lot of these codes and features were used as debugging tools and weren't meant to be used while playing normally. Developers will even directly state this.

I think that they hid the 'continue' so kids back in the day didn't play through the game in the first run. Parents wouldn't buy you a new game until you next birthday/ christmas, so it had to last as long as possible without children losing interest in the expensive toy.

The question is how did the information get into the public? Did they mention this in Nintendo power at some point? This would make sense to boost their sales, specifically putting in hidden features just to force players to buy the magazine.

This would suggest that Nintendo Power was for the most part a multi-manual for many games as well as a way to put in commercials for new games to make the kids have to buy more magazines to get the new pages for the multi-manual, restarting the cycle.

If this is the case, then it's the developers that are cheating; they are trying to cheat you from your money.

I'd also be pretty interested how much money the gaming hotlines made back then with giving out these tips, or if there are lists of the most asked questions? This would depict a $/game ratio to see how much a hidden feature would get you netgain to the storeprice.

eg (just pulling numbers out of my ass as am example)
>SMB costs 60$, 100000 were sold
>Nintendo Power with detailed information about 5 games 10$ (2$ per game), 50000 sold
>Hotline questions about SMB were 15000 callers with a median duration of 2:30 minutes, costing 5$

Without tips:
6 000 000$
With tips:
6 175 000$

That would be 2,92% more money just for taking away a normal feature.
It's like dlc before dlc was invented. Instead of new maps or gameplay you buy settings or menu function:

>LoZ - typing in 'zelda' as name is the same as having a menu button "play map 2"
>SMB - using code is the same as having "continue" button at start screen
>Contra - code is the same as the "starting lives" button under settings
etc...

Don't know how this would help you with deciding if it's cheating, but i think it should be factored in

>>4561319
You're assuming developers are more clever than they actually are. These kinds of things are largely happy accidents, rather than deliberate plans. Later on it became a tradition or in-joke. For example, the Konami code was literally just made as a tool for the programmer that he accidentally left in.
Also funnily enough this exists
http://saintsrow.wikia.com/wiki/Invincible_Pack

>>4561048
I agree with you, OP. In fact I don't even consider it beaten if you spend more than one life. You're an hero you're not supposed to die

>>4561347
>You're an hero you're not supposed to die

by that logic you have to throw away the game if you ever die; if the hero is dead then there can't ever be a second chance.

On the other hand, if you propose that every time you turn the console on it's a new 'universe' for the character and you get one try, then this would also apply to the lives as an alternate universe scenario where they only difference is that you don't need to get up from the couch to push a button. The character itself is not anchored in our sense of reality needing the restriction of having one life, in a world full of possibilites where touching a star makes you glow and fuck up everything it is reasonable that the hero has means of rejoining his adventure after perishing.
I know this all sounds a bit drastic, but comparing a phantasy with reality for a sense of achievement lacks the compatibility.


Saying for yourself that you like the challenge of making it through the game without dying is one thing, but saying that using a life is cheating is a bit steep don't you think?

Who even cares about "cheating" in single player games?

>>4561206
I didn't get called out on anything champ. I just made fun of a faggot asking what it would take for others to validate his existence by playing a childs game.

wait is this another one of those "I can't beat SMB1 it's a really hard game"-meme threads?

>>4561457
people dont really play video games so yeah

>>4561048
Playing any game with any knowledge external to the game itself is cheating.

>>4561551
>Life is cheating

>>4561551
Do you count game manuals in that category?
In some games they are required or you will be chasing your tail.

>>4561551
What if the point of the game is to have people collectively work out solutions to problems by sharing their knowledge online?

>>4561089
You're comparing an unlocked character to unlimited lives?

>>4561048
I never even knew about the code

>>4561563
No, he'd rather waste hours of his life going back and forth figuring out nothing, drop the game and feel accomplished for it rather then take 5 minutes to see an quick and easy solution.
Otherwise he wouldn't have something to enlarge his epeen with, now would he?

>>4561671
>Otherwise he wouldn't have something to enlarge his epeen with, now would he?
But this entire thread is literally nothing but children who are, for whatever pathetic and sad reason, obsessed with their "epeen" and simply use old video games as the pump. Better than cars or guns, I suppose. Still pathetic, though.

>>4561728
>But this entire board is literally nothing but children who are, for whatever pathetic and sad reason, obsessed with their "epeen" and simply use old video games as the pump. Better than cars or guns, I suppose. Still pathetic, though.

fixed

>>4561738
Yeah, you're right. My bad. Thanks for the correction.

>>4561671
Found the person who watches let's plays and then pretends he's actually played the game.

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkSYX0N07CQ

Is it cheating to use the konami code? If it is implemented in so many games, isn't it just a funciton like saving? There are games that don't use save, so is saving cheating?

>>4564027
>Is it cheating to use the konami code?
yes
>If it is implemented in so many games, isn't it just a funciton like saving?
no. saving is an option accessed from the game menu. cheat codes are hidden codes
>There are games that don't use save, so is saving cheating?
In games that don't use save, saving is indeed cheating. good job

>>4564028
so, if they made a game with a button in the game menu named 'konami code' which did the exact thing as putting in the konami code, that would not be cheating? By your argument the answer should be yes

>>4564032
it wouldn't, it would just be like playing on a really easy difficulty level

>>4564032
If something is explictly labelled as a cheat code, then it's a cheat code even if it's easily accessible in a menu. What you're bringing up isn't even one of those scenarios where the lines are unclear, it's all clearly spelled out for you by the developers themselves.

>>4564027
cool wikipedia vid bro

>>4564051
when is it explicitly labelled as a cheat code? When 'code' is written behind it? So if the button would only say 'konami' then it wouldn't be a cheat?


>>4564042
On another note, is using special attacks that require a button combination (which isn't mentioned in the game), like a super uppercut double as strong as the normal attack, a cheat code?

There are probably games out there that when you do some shit like press a, start and bumper controller makes some nuclear attack that wipes the screen, but on the same note you have moves in fighting games that would be defined just the same way, but they aren't considered cheating.
Nobody would say that special attacks in fighting games would be cheating, but there is a grey area where the line is unclear if it were one.

>>4564071
didn't want the thread to die, so I had to post something topical

>>4564080
the fuck is that you're playing?

>>4564072
>when is it explicitly labelled as a cheat code? When 'code' is written behind it? So if the button would only say 'konami' then it wouldn't be a cheat?

Judging by what it does, yes, probably. That's a very confusing message to send to the player. Would seem very much like a weird debug feature. What's the point of this thought experiment? The thing that seperates a cheat code from a legitimate part of the game is developer intent, or rather your interpretation of their intent based on in-game communication or context. Since it hinges on interpretation you can discuss many aspects of it, but when something is explicitly labelled as a cheat code, and is described as a debug feature by the developers themselves, there's not much room for discussion is there.

>>4564080
LMAO this webm

>>4564101
Mario would be good if only there was a cheat code that let you play Sonic instead.

>>4564080
>holding the black data side
reported

>>4561048
It s not cheating, it s playing
Beating is 1CC and a no death run being the penultimate goal.
Ultimate goal no death run time/score record

>>4564151
No death run is called 1LC (one life clear), just FYI.

>>4564032
>attempting logic with aspbabies
good luck with that

>>4561048
use the 1-up trick
damn noobs need to use your brains

>>4564182
Really, your 1CC doesn't count if you lose a life at any point.

Is this considered cheating?

>>4561048
Who gives a fuck? Just play the game.

Treat it like difficulty levels.
>No warp pipes and no continue code is hard; >no continue codes is normal;
>warp pipes and continue code is easy

Nintendo has always treated difficulty as something that should adjust to the player and not the other way around, just look at Switch Palaces in Super Mario World - is it cheating to use them? Is it cheating to use the assist thing in New Super Mario Bros when you die several times in a row?
Noone cares, Mario games are interested in being fun, not challenging. SMB2 Japan is the only exception in the series, and judging by the fact that game was changed later to have infinite continues, Nintendo clearly decided that focus on difficulty was a mistake.

>>4564702
No, it doesn't you mouthbreather. 1CC is a 1CC. 1LC is a different thing.

>>4567864
I should add - I'd consider 1-up trick in the same vein as continue code. So:
>no warp pipes, no 1up trick, no continue code - hard
>no 1up trick and no continue code - normal
>1up trick, warp pipes, continue code allowed - easy

Like, jesus, this game was meant for kids.

>>4564182
it's called a nomiss just FYI my friendo

>>4561073
this.

>>4561048
Who cares?

>>4561048
>"Counts"

counts for what? Its just a game.

>all these people asking who cares

maybe the people who like to discuss videogames online and come on this board to do it? just a guess

>>4568687
yeah was thinking the same, this whole board is a big 'who cares' for the majority of the public, if you start nitpicking then all of this makes no sense.

>>4568687
The real answer is nobody cares. Heck you should even cheat in multiplayer games as well, fuck the opposition, you would use cheat codes even in real life if you could.

>>4569603
But I get bored winning so easily.
It's no fun.

There is no such thing as cheating in singleplayer, only difficulty customization.

>>4569617
I know I don't, I feel awesome when I cheat. Fuck the system.

>>4569663
Fuck the system, you say, yet you are in fact trapped by the system, pleased as you cheat your way to joy, undemanding anything from yourself, even in the pursuit of a silly pastime...

>>4569696
Pretty much this. 100% agreed. Really makes me think.

>>4569625
There is no such thing as cheating period, if you cheat in mp games it's not unfair to other players because they could have cheated too

>>4569726
Why should I care? I cheat because it feels awesome, if developers or players have a problem with that it's their duty to find a way to stop it.

>>4569732
>cheating feels awesome
A big fan of press x to awesome QTEs too I take it?

>>4569737
It's more like, fuck your X my Circle button is overpowered and blows your QTE out of the water. I'm entitled to win I'm not a little bitch who feels bad about being powerful.

>>4569740
That kind of power is completely unengaging, especially in video games. Can't imagine anyone past the age of 12 being entertained by it.

>>4569764
well, i can't imagine anyone past the age of 12 being entertained by video games.

>>4561073
/thread