What are your thoughts on using save states to beat a game? Is that cheap cheating or an effective time saver?

[Box]

i think it does change games quite a bit. something like Crash Bandicoot on the PS1 is this really challenging, rewarding game, but when you use save states it's totally trivialised, and wouldn't have been cemented one of my favourite ps1 games. same with schmups, other platformers, etc; you're supposed to fail over and over again.

for me i play games to play them - i'd rather take months to play 1 game properly than save-scum my way through a load of games quickly just to tick them off my to-do list or whatever.

I turn off auto save states and just play off saves. The key is turning it off before your brain gets used to the convenience.

 

[MiyazakiLovesKojima]

Save scumming & pause menus in SoulsBorne games are pathetic ways for low-level filthy casuals to COPE with life

 

[JAHGamer]

Its not cheating if you're not competing against anyone. Some people find it more fun, people like you don't. I think its fine for certain games like Pokemon or Dragon Quest, but save states in fast paced challenging games like Crash Bandicoot and Donkey Kong Country is a terrible idea.

 

[Box]

Save scumming & pause menus in SoulsBorne games are pathetic ways for low-level filthy casuals to COPE with life

Unironically yes.

Games build obstacles to test your skills, if you fail to pass an obstacle you are punished for your lack of skill and if you fail enough, the game essentially tells you "You're not good enough". It's a punishment for your lack of skill.

By using save states you are circumventing that punishment and in essence, entirely removing any chance of failure from the game. You're removing a core part of what makes any game interesting, the possibility that you may fail.

Some of the best moments I've had with video games are of me pushing through an incredibly tough situation. Beating a boss with just a sliver of health left, barely making a jump or getting to the end of a level with just one heart left. Sure there have been plenty of times when I've been frustrated because of some bullshit attack that landed and killed me, forcing to do the level all over again, but then again, I'd rather be frustrated and mad than just monotonously repeating the same part again and again and again.

IF something hits you, you load your last state, dodge what would have hit you, save, enemy fires, you die, you load, you know where the enemy is coming from so you shoot first and win, save. Etc etc.

The actual impact of failure is minimal at best, so you're not that motivated to do better or protect the character, because there's nothing really for you to lose. This is a really a big problem with gaming in general. Campaigns and single player missions become things you cannot fail, the designers actively put guards in place so that you can't shoot an ally, go the wrong way, blow something important up or anything else.

Basically what's then point of trying to improve yourself and better in a game, when there is nothing to lose by being bad?

Sure games are difficult, some games have bullshit sections that will make you kill kittens. But that's also what makes them interesting and fun. Because every time you fail and every time that frustration builds up, the act of winning becomes more and more enjoyable for you.

 

[Gods&Monsters]

I have no problem with people using cheats, save states, scumming, walkthroughs and trainers to play games.

I would love if we could cheat on consoles like in the PS2 generation. I would cheat in every game that I play with a big smile on my face and no remorse

 

[Darth Vader]

When in single player, people should use whatever they want to make the game fun for them.

 

[Falcs]

Depends on the game for me. Ideally I would avoid save states and always play everything on hard.

But I have 2 kids under 4. Work full time. Live in a house that I'm renovating. And a hot wife that needs attention.
My game sessions are often quite short, so some games I have to play on Easy otherwise it feels like I made zero progress in the little time I got to play.

 

[arvfab]

I hate wasting time, so if through quicksaves/save states I'm able to reduce the wasted time/reduce progression loss, I don't see any problem with it.

Recent example: messing up a boss battle in FFV Pixel Remaster, which would either require a new playthrough or lose multiple levels of grinding when reloading the last manual save point.

I also don't have anything against save scumming/cheating in single player games. I usually avoid it, because I like being challenged, but if it helps overcome boring parts/solve issues I have with a particular game mechanic, I would make use of it.

 

[anonpuffs]

Depends on what you do with them. If you use them to get a gameplay advantage it's cheating. If you use them to practice then it's w/e.

That said I don't really have anything against cheating in single player games.

 

[Deleted member 223]

Cloud save state swap for games with "multiple endings" that only vary with a couple actions and the payoff being just one cheap cutscene difference (you can already guess which games I'm talking about) is definitely fair play for Plats.

As for beating a game using save states, depends on how cheap the difficulty is. I guess that varies per person. Bottomline, if something feels extremly, super, uber dooper cheap to you, do remember that these games are made by humans not gods or your daddy.... so naturally fuck em, and "cheat" your way through. After all you paid your money for the game only to get your enjoyment cock-blocked cause some dummy made a stupid balancing decision and didn't QA enough.... or worse yet, the type that do it on purpose for the youtube/viral engagement.

Back in the NES/SNES days hard games were a major problem. You paid good money for a title only to hit cheap and insane difficulty walls. As a kid, that fucks you up inside a little after being so excited to just play your new toy per say. I still remember a few, you simply can't forget the fucking disappointment.