/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1865183]

Are there people who just play shoot-em-ups(or whatever you want to call them), run n' gunners, etc. and don't really care about being perfect at them?

Or are these games only fun and worth playing if you're going to 1CC to try and get the highest score? For some people, 1CCing a game is really fun, but for me, it takes the fun out of it. I'm fine trying to retain some credits, but thinking about 1CCing is a bit discouraging.

[Anonymous No.1865212]

Well I still manage to enjoy them even though I'm not good enough to ever make it to the end. Can anyone recommend some relatively easy shooters for the NES?

[Anonymous No.1865216]

OP here, I just want to add that I'm aware there's a general for the shoot-em-ups, but I made this thread for any arcade game where it's possible to 1CC it, no matter the genre. It's not really about the genre, but about what people find fun in the different ways to go about playing these games.

[Anonymous No.1865217]

Yes, those people are called casuals.

1ccing a game is really hard. It takes dedication, and discipline and commitment. You throw yourself at a game, and slowly take it apart and learn it piece by piece until you have mastered it. The price of mistakes is raised much higher, so you need to spend lots of effort coming up with survival strategies in different parts of the game.

There's something really thrilling about learning a game on that kind of level; I remember being amazed at trying to play through Metal Slug with a 1cc mentality and finding that what seemed like mere waves of enemies actually ended up being carefully designed encounters. There were setups, tactics to be used in each situation, and things started to click and make sense as a whole. What seemed like just a silly run and gun game was actually a deeply designed experience. Also, nothing can compare with the adrenaline rush of getting farther than you ever had before, and being on your last life. It's amazing, and the feeling you get from actually 1ccing a game has no equivalent.

Playing just to have a brief fling with a game will never give you that kind of experience. That's why people 1cc.

[Anonymous No.1865226]

>>1865217

>Yes, those people are called casuals.

stopped there.

[Anonymous No.1865232]

>>1865217
So is it bad to be a "casual"? Is it a bad thing if one person does not find the same enjoyment in having that type of focus that you do?

Just asking. I've always found the term "casuals" to be negative and dismissive in the way people use the term.

[Anonymous No.1865251]

>>1865212
Try Life Force bro. I played it lots when I was a kid with the 30 life code. Picked it up a few years ago and started playing every morning before work.

After month or so I 1cc'd the fuck out of it repeatedly.

I'd say it's fairly easy, and a fun game too.

[Anonymous No.1865306]

>>1865251
Thanks man I'm gonna give it a shot. It seems right up my alley from what I'm reading.

[Anonymous No.1865317]

>>1865183
>pic related is one of the games I've been able to 1cc
G-Darius was a tough game to try to 1cc. Especially doing it in maniac mode. As of right now I've only been able to 1cc the Nu route. I am not going to try Omicron's route.

[Anonymous No.1865398]

>>1865317
I haven't played it much, and I'm pretty terrible at it. I'm not very good at dodging some of the bullets that come at you full speed, especially on the boss I posted when it shoots from underneath it.

The thing I keep making amateurish mistakes over is that I sometimes can't tell if I've captured an enemy or not, and sometimes I think I did, and I didn't. But if I press the capture button again if I'm not sure, it uses the bomb and I waste my capture.

[Anonymous No.1865408]

They are ridiculously short, so trying to 1cc them and playing on harder difficulty settings are just ways to extend playtime for me. Lately I've been losing my motivation to replay them over and over because it doesn't feel like I'm improving much, though.

[Anonymous No.1865527]

>>1865183
Of course there are. 10% of the population play retro games. Of that nearly 30% of the population regularly enjoy shmups. So that's roughly 3% of the population. Only 1% of the population are autistic so even if all the autists play shmups there's still twice as many people who enjoy them without trying to 1cc.

[Anonymous No.1865558]

Single-credit clears simply come naturally when you play a game enough OP. I think it's more of a matter of finding a game you enjoy so much that you do end up playing that much. If you're trying to build up your confidence you could try some easier arcade games, like the original Gradius, Elevator Action Returns, R-Type Leo, Moon Patrol, Cabal, etc., but try not to take the idea so seriously that it hampers the fun you're having.

I myself have probably something like a couple hundred no-continue clears of various arcade and arcade-like games, and I can tell you that rarely have I achieved them by simply playing the same game over and over to the detriment of playing any other games. When you get good enough, it'll just happen.

[Anonymous No.1865565]

>>1865317
The easiest route in my opinion was αβδηλ, ending with Lightning Coronatus.

I do play G-Darius with the built-in console port autofire though, which basically trivializes the beam battles and probably makes a lot of other things easier too.

[Anonymous No.1865571]

>>1865232
There's nothing wrong with being a casual. Everyone is casual at a million things that aren't their main hobbies. The reason the term is used so negatively is because of perceived catering to casuals or casuals that want to criticize games they don't really know anything about.

[Anonymous No.1865572]

You're supposed to fire your laser there for instant win, OP. The thing I've never really liked about G-Darius is almost all the bosses amount to dodging things for a bit and then waiting for -that one- beam attack where you can nuke them with a counter beam. It just seems so rigid.

[Anonymous No.1865675]

>Are there people who just play shoot-em-ups(or whatever you want to call them), run n' gunners, etc. and don't really care about being perfect at them?

Yes. That would be most players.

The hardcore players that insist on practicing a single game for years in order to perfect it are the very tiny majority.

They're just opinionated and very loud.

[Anonymous No.1865678]

>>1865675

And by majority I obviously mean minority.

[Anonymous No.1865683]

>>1865183
Ikaruga was like that for me. At first, I really liked the game, but seeing the leaderboards for it every time I played always made me feel completely inadequate since I'm just a visitor to the schmup genre. Since it's impossible to have even a decent score with a mistake since score increases exponentially, I always found myself restarting as soon as I broke my chain.

[Anonymous No.1865754]

>>1865683
This is why I dislike all games with all-or-nothing scoring systems like Ikaruga and Dodonpachi.

[Saniblues No.1865779]

>>1865183
I don't mind losing, but I lose my shit if I ever die in the first three levels. It's a threshold I need to cross.

[Anonymous No.1865792]

>>1865183
I play normally instead of going for 1cc, and usually select the hardest difficulty to make survival based on reactions. 1cc just means memorization, and the shmup community in general only plays on normal because autism.

[Anonymous No.1865807]

>>1865558
OP here.

>Gradius
>Elevator Action Returns
>R-Type Leo

I get what you mean. All three of these are some of my favorite games, and I do play them better every time I play them. R-Type Leo, the first time I played it I wasn't very good, but got to a point I could get to the 6th stage without losing sometimes.

I think if I'm trying to 1CC and expecting fast progress, I tend to get disappointed and want to restart when I'm losing too much. Then after enough restarts, I get tired of playing the game. It does feel better when it's just natural from playing the game a lot and not trying too hard to achieve it.

>>1865792
They can't play unless they memorize every single thing? I've liked games that let you have room for reaction instead of relying too much on memorization. I have trouble getting into certain R-Type games because of this.

[Anonymous No.1865816]

>>1865754
I just dislike exponential scoring. A mistake mid combo is worth infinitely more than a mistake at the end or beginning of a level, despite still being only one mistake.

[Anonymous No.1865829]

Once you first 1CC a game you'll know the rush you get and why people try to do that

[Anonymous No.1865835]

>>1865816
That's what I'm saiyan. Although I do find some exponential scoring fine, such as medal chaining in Raizing games and Raiden Fighters, or Chaos Field's bullet absorption chaining. I guess it just depends on how easy it is to ruin the chain. Those give you a lot of tools to prevent the collapse of a chain.

[Anonymous No.1865837]

>>1865792
>that image

>>>/v/

[Anonymous No.1865943]

>>1865183
Don't understand how you could enjoy any arcade genre game without 1CC-ing. Just feels pointless or aimless. You guys must be the one's who love shit like yoshi's island and adventure games... keep up dat exploration bros

[Anonymous No.1865954]

>Are there people who just play shoot-em-ups(or whatever you want to call them), run n' gunners, etc. and don't really care about being perfect at them?
The majority of them including myself. If you play it enough you just naturally gain the ability to 1cc like I've done with most of my favorite fighters and beat em ups. Shmups are specifically different because of their memorization based gameplay

[Anonymous No.1865971]

If I max the number of lives out and turn the difficulty to easiest in the dip switch settings then complete in one credit - is that still a 1CC?

[Anonymous No.1866025]

On consoles, I play until I run out of continues; on arcade (MAME) just keep inserting coins until I get bored or run out of time (like have to go somewhere). The only games I play with just one life are roguelikes.

[Anonymous No.1867749]

>>1865971

It's a pretty cheesy one.

Generally 1cc means on default dip switch settings.

[Anonymous No.1868034]

Serious question: do those of you who genuinely enjoy playing a linear game until you can pull off a 1CC also enjoy getting achievements and such in modern games? A guy I work with says their his reason for not switching from console to PC, and I seriously cannot wrap my head around it. The same is true for replaying linear, non-sandbox games. I have never gotten much enjoyment out of playing a game again once I've beaten it unless I can take a completely different approach.

[Anonymous No.1868087]

>>1868034
Achievements mean nothing

>you played half the game
>damn, now you've beaten it holy shit!

I actually had someone try to tell me that he knew more about games than everyone else, why, because he had an xbox gamescore that was 50000 or something

>mfw

[Anonymous No.1868101]

>>1868087
>Achievements mean nothing
Agreed

[Anonymous No.1868105]

1cc is like speed running. It's reserved for those games you love do much that you've played them entirely too much. You've reached that point of dissection and memorization that you're cracking off shits to hit things that aren't even on screen yet without wasting a bullet.
For me that was the first Metal Slug, or that rail shooter Star Wars arcade machine.
It's all about love of the game.

[Anonymous No.1868112]

So much talk about 1CCing these kind of games but has anyone here beaten a classic Megaman without dying? I feel like that would be just as impressive.

[Anonymous No.1868113]

>>1868034
Some games are meant to be played over and over, and are more rewarding that way.

I'm a musician. When I play out with my band, and we play that Black Sabbath song and hit every note perfectly and everything's in time, it's an exhilarating feeling.

I get the same feeling when I beat Contra on a single continue. With the wrong movements--a few wrong button presses, a lapse in judgement, an unpredictable element like my cat jumping on me--and my run can crash and burn, the same way I could trip on stage, or break a string, or go out of tune. There's so much that can go wrong in a Contra run that being able to play through it and do it near flawlessly is pretty awesome.

[Anonymous No.1868119]

>>1868113
>Black Sabbath

Fuck yeah. I used to run through their entire early catalog on guitar.

[Anonymous No.1868138]

>>1868113
Maybe my sociopathy keeps me from having that reaction. It's only in the past few years that I even learned I'd ever experienced embarrassment or nostalgia.

[Anonymous No.1868149]

>>1868138
You've went through life without feeling embarrassment? Or like, you felt something else instead?

[Anonymous No.1868150]

>>1868034
I enjoy playing most arcade games for score but achievement bullshit can fuck itself.

[Anonymous No.1868157]

>>1868034

Generally no, for a couple reasons.

First is that modern games have alot of dead weight compared to the brevity of arcade or earlier console action games. Loading time, cutscenes, unskippable "cinematic moments", and the demand to have an "x hour long" campaign mode means it can take a couple of evenings even for a relatively short game. A typical shmup can be more like 20-30 minutes.

Second is the way modern games handle checkpointing and saving; they are much more lenient, giving you the opportunity to grind achievements or specific sections until you pass them; once you are done with the game, it's unlikely you'll ever go back to face them again.

Third is that most achievements are really lame. Lots of "find every collectable" or "shoot 500 guys". Occasionally they are "do this very specific thing". To me, it's just a fake sense of achievement (ugh) to give to people. There's no cheating a game you're meant to 1cc; your score is your score. If you want to improve it, you get better at the game.

[Anonymous No.1868159]

Personally, just being under a hail of fire covering 3/4 of the screen proves a satisfactory rush.
I'd have to really enjoy the game to chase the score though. Say, Raystorm, G-Darius, Tyrian 2000, Gunnail.

[Anonymous No.1868176]

>>1868149
Up until about 4 years ago, I just knew that there was a concept known as embarrassment, and there was also a phenomena in which my scalp itched and face felt warm if I waved at someone who I mistook for someone else.

[Anonymous No.1868185]

>>1868159
Shame G-Darius sucks so hard for score. Memorization Central.

[Anonymous No.1868412]

>>1868159
Just try scoring the first three stages. Shouldn't be too hard and retries aren't nearly as painful, that way you can "pretend" you're playing for score and learn the mechanics.
Just a my 2cc, of course, I think scoring sounds really cool on paper but when you get to it, it boils down to watching a super play on the internet and repeating everything you saw the pros doing. It's better if you figure out for yourself even if your score suck.

[Anonymous No.1868414]

>>1868176
>embarrassment
literally no one gives a fuck as long as you keep it to yourself

[Anonymous No.1868428]

>>1868412
>it boils down to watching a super play on the internet and repeating everything you saw the pros doing.
What the hell? Seriously where do people get this ridiculous approach to scoring? Scoring doesn't mean you have to be the best in the world on your very first attempt.

[Anonymous No.1868814]

>>1865183
>Are there people who just play RPGs(or whatever you want to call them), and don't really care about finishing the story in any of them?

That's basically what you are asking

[Anonymous No.1869015]

>>1868814
no he isn't

[Anonymous No.1869052]

>>1865183

I don't play for score, just survival.

[Anonymous No.1869060]

>>1869052
I thought that at first too, then I add scoring and I've got further than plying only for survival.
That was weird but also satisfying as hell

[Anonymous No.1869067]

I like them even though I'm awful at them.

Been playing Ikaruga on steam and Gunbird 2 on the dreamcast.


What was the one with sea monster robots and an operatic techno soundtrack? It was one of my favorite MAME games to play.

Damn, cannot remember.

[Anonymous No.1869093]

>>1869060
A whole lot of STGs link the extra life mechanism to the score, so that's not too surprising.

[Anonymous No.1869107]

>>1865183

I love shoot 'em ups, but I'm pretty mediocre at them. I play games to have fun, not to have an aneurysm.

>>1865226

This

[Anonymous No.1869181]

>>1869067
Darius? It has aquatic ships as enemies.

[Anonymous No.1869183]

>>1869181
Aquatic ships as in, ships shaped like fish.

[Anonymous No.1869218]

>>1865226
stay butthurt

[Anonymous No.1869223]

>>1869067
>What was the one with sea monster robots and an operatic techno soundtrack? It was one of my favorite MAME games to play.

Darius Gaiden.

[Anonymous No.1869234]

[Anonymous No.1869306]

>>1868112
I can with 2, 4, and X1 with no problem. He'll, I can buster-only run X1 without dying.
Now, those crazy fucks that can beat a Megaman game without getting hit, those people scare me.

[Anonymous No.1869307]

Yes. I enjoy them and know I'm not a hyperaut with a need to prove myself to nobody.

[Anonymous No.1869313]

>>1868157

Normally I'd mock you for this shit again, but I'm not even mad. I'm just disappointed that people still use this as though it were anything other than curmudgeonly fault-finding.

[Anonymous No.1869352]

>>1869218
>implying

using buzzwords is a sure sign to avoid your post, friend

[Anonymous No.1869424]

>>1865217
This dude is the shit. Hard games are really fun and the harder the better. If you don't like hardcore gaming you are a casual, as simple as this.

[Anonymous No.1869434]

>>1869424
define a casual

[Anonymous No.1869461]

>>1869434
Knowing these tripe-a babies it's probably "Anyone who plays games that I don't like. Fucking 2D indie shit like La Mulana."

[Anonymous No.1869464]

>>1869424
Hardcore doesn't mean "hard", you dumbass. By that logic, Super Meat Boy is hardcore. Spoilers: It's not.

[Anonymous No.1869472]

>>1869424
>hardcore gaming
>casual

I, too, would like to hear definitions from you enlightened few.

[Anonymous No.1869476]

>>1869424
List TWENTY games that are considered hardcore. You will refuse to do it because you only play shitty games you see on the telly.

[Anonymous No.1869486]

>>1869434
>>1869472
>>1869476
See, this is why 4chan doesn't have circlejerk problems on most of the boards. People can (and will) call you out on your bullshit.

[Anonymous No.1869507]

>>1869486
It's always funny when try-hards show off their lack of understanding, like trying to redefine 30 year old games with terms like casual and artificial difficulty.

Everything is black and white when you don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.1869521]

>>1869507
>Everything is black and white when you don't know what you're talking about.

d-damn anon. you just summed up /v/ and /vr/ better than i've ever seen.

[Anonymous No.1871498]

>>1869472
Hardcore gaming is, as far as I'm concerned, a meaningless buzzword.

Casual I can define though. A casual is "A player of a game who does not invest the needed effort to become good at the game". They fall into three main categories:
1: One who plays a game they aren't good at and has fun anyways.
2: One who plays a game they aren't good at, and quits.
3: One who plays a game they aren't good at, and bitches about difficulty when their lack of skill is the issue.
Types 1 and 2 are fine, and is perfectly normal behavior for all gamers. Type 3s are pure cancer.

[Anonymous No.1871703]

>>1871498

Ah, an answer.

Since you can define it clearly, where is the line between a casual and a 'good player'?

[Anonymous No.1871710]

>>1871703
A good player is someone who can reliably overcome the challenges they are presented with in the game. That is to say, they are good at playing the game.

[Anonymous No.1871719]

>>1871710

So a good player can overcome 10/10 obstacles, but if he does 9/10 he's a casual?

[Anonymous No.1871723]

>>1871719
If he can't reliably clear all ten, and isn't working towards being able to do so, then he's a casual. If he's unable to clear all ten, but is putting in effort towards getting better, then he's not a casual.

[Anonymous No.1871762]

>>1871723

In other words you can't actually define it and you're talking shit.

[Anonymous No.1871763]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMB-OAodJ4w

[Anonymous No.1871946]

>>1865183
I've only beaten a few shooters. I just aim to beat it within the continues allowed, which is usually 3-4. I think I beat Metal Slug with 3 continues, so that's good enough for me. Too many games to play, too little time, I got none to devote to mastering just one game for the next 6 months.

[Anonymous No.1871954]

>>1871762
With which portion of the definition I proffered do you find fault?

[Anonymous No.1872008]

>>1871946
3 continues in Metal Slug 3 is pretty close anon. With just a bit more practice you could easily get that no-continue clear.

[Anonymous No.1872092]

>>1871954

The part where it's impossible to accurately distinguish between the two situations you described.

[Anonymous No.1872096]

>>1872008
It was MS 1, but I still could've 1cc'd it with time. I lost most in the last level iirc. This was several years ago so I'd have to start over now. I did the same for MS 2 and 4. I got the Anthology set and set it to 5 credits, so as long as I was within that I was pretty proud of myself.

[Anonymous No.1872115]

>>1872096
Oh yeah I need to read better. If it's the first Metal Slug then that's even better. It has the fairest difficulty curve of the series in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.1872132]

>>1872092
I fail to see how "Putting in effort towards being able to beat a game" and "Not putting in effort towards being able to beat a game" cannot be accurately distinguished between.

[Anonymous No.1872142]

>>1872132

By your logic if a highly skilled player can't be bothered to finish a game for some reason he is a casual, and if a terrible player 'puts in effort' and completes it that makes him a good player.

Not to mention the fact that the amount of effort can't be quantified.

[Anonymous No.1872152]

>>1872142
If a skilled player can't be bothered to finish a run, then he was playing casually. If a poor player puts in effort to improve and beats the game, then they're not a very poor player anymore.

The definition doesn't require quantification of effort.

[Anonymous No.1872161]

>>1872152

It's not about playing casually, we were talking about defining a casual player, casual being a constant descriptor of the player.

Which is something that can't be done.

Because players are human beings and it's not black and white like that.

Kid.

[Anonymous No.1872168]

>>1872161
I'm not using casual as a descriptor of a player in general, but as a descriptor of a player of a game. Also, wherein did I state it was a constant descriptor? You're attempting to prove my definition wrong by modifying it to be flawed.

[Anonymous No.1872173]

Casual in the truest sense of the word is simply something that is done intermittently or without effort. Someone who plays the same game casually for years can still become insanely good at it.

[Anonymous No.1872185]

>>1872168

Since the discussion that you jumped into was about defining a casual, the term describing a player often thrown around on 4chan, I assumed that you were providing such a definition.

Now I see you're choosing to be disingenuous by claiming you meant a game by game basis even though I'm pretty sure you knew what I meant the whole time.

My point, along with the point of others in this thread stands: A player can't be deemed casual, hardcore or any other buzzword because they are all meaningless.

[||D.II.II\/II.||D No.1872195]

>>1865558
I can't get past the volcano on Gradius stage 1 ;_;

[Anonymous No.1872196]

>>1872185
The original post I replied to asked for a definition of "casual", NOT a definition of "a casual gamer". You're the one claiming I meant something I didn't.

[Anonymous No.1872202]

>>1872196

The original post was mine and I was responding to this:

>This dude is the shit. Hard games are really fun and the harder the better. If you don't like hardcore gaming you are a casual, as simple as this.

You're playing dumb to save your ass, buddy, and it's fine by me.

[Anonymous No.1873189]

>>1865217
>1ccing a game is really hard. It takes memorization.

Fixed.