Are Savestates Cheating?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ต.ค. 2020
- Support the show on Patreon!
/ silokhawk
Watch me on Twitch!
/ silokhawk
Follow me on Twitter!
/ silokhawk
Like me on FaceBook!
/ silokhawk
Referenced Donkey Kong Country 2 VOD:
• Donkey Kong Country 2 ...
Original Referenced Tweets:
/ 1311158508377780225
/ 1311164609483558917
Season: 3
Episode: 19
#savestates #emulation #SNES - เกม
![[TH]FFWS SEA Spring 2024 Knockout Stage - Day 13](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/K9o3IXb75T0/mqdefault.jpg)
Still should have used a save-state.
I have no joke for that, sadly.
It ain't cheating if you're the one making the rules.
Hell yeah
This to me is the best answer. Is a savestate mid-level cheating that game? Yes.
Is it cheating the speedrun of that game, if the rule of the speedrun states you can savestate mid-level? No, you aren't cheating but following the speedruns rules
@@StepanderTheKing if savestating wasn't a thing speedruns wouldn't have been where they are today, because savestating is used in practicing speedruns
@@elexterminadordedemonios4320 not just practice, some also accept it in the "main competition". But this doesn't mean it is not "cheating the game"
i dont get it
I'm neutral on savestates, I like having them and they're a live saver when a game starts throwing difficulty spikes at you.
At that point you're just throwing away what the developers intended
@@classicpinball9873 Some times for the sake of unfairness, but other times I just forget to do it.
@@classicpinball9873 That's our choice as the ones playing the game though. I wouldn't expect anyone to respect the fact that arcade devs wanted your quarters in the 80's if you played an arcade game today via emulation. Play (single-player) games however you enjoy the experience.
@@chrismdb5686 It depends on what you're doing with it imo. For example, geometry dash has a mode where you practice and save states are built into it so you can focus on certain parts of the level. The level is meant to be done in one take but you can just use these states to finish really easily since there's no pattern memorized. It completely removes any point to playing the game if you use it that way.
@@classicpinball9873 That's your perspective, someone else could think it's the most enjoyable part of the game and that's totally ok. If it's a single-player game there's no reason people can't play however they want to, whether it's intended or not because they're the only one that matters in the situation. If some random dev gets salty because kids play with glitches in Super Mario Sunshine that's his problem, not the kids'. The only time your argument holds any water whatsoever is either when you are playing a game or when we're talking about multiplayer games with an accepted set of rules.
Dude, I'll cheat all the way just to avoid a checkpoint before an unskipable cutscene.
I don't consider placing a savestate after a load screen or unskippable cutscenes cheating.
100%
I agree, yes. Cheating in a game would be playing the game in a way that it wasn't originally intended to be played in, though that doesn't mean said cheating is bad.
Exactly
I think save states are cheating in a level its not cheating at the start of a world
ye, that wasnt the question being adressed
In Crash 1,save states arent cheating
Specifically if it gives you an advantage. You can definately play in an unintended way that makes things harder for you like Pokémom nuzlocke challenges or trying to play Dark Souls on a dancepad.
I heard save scumming and I immediately thought "ah, yes, Ace Attorney"
Which when you think about it, it often just becomes "save scumming: the game"
🤔🤨That Game? Really?
@@setsers1 have you never played ace attorney?
@@setsers1 you save before like...every big decision
@@RoyGuyManDude Not Yet.
@@strawbtangerine6087 😠Yeah, I feel like I've played something like that before.😆
There are two things I 100% believe in, but contradict each other
"Developers can make the game however they want if it enhances the experience they are going for."
"Players can play the game however they want. Even if they edit the game themselves"
The topic of save states are the perfect design thing that follow these two quotes.
They don't contradict each other. Developers who still think it's their game after they sold it to you are just insane, and developers who make a game that you cannot play however you want are not very good at their jobs.
There are some games that fulfill both like Celeste’s assist mode, where the game makes it clear that this mode isn't the intended way to play the game but the developer acknowledges that not every player is the same.
@@CaptViewtiful98 that is the best example. It also doesn't insult for choosing an easier option like wolfenstein or doom
just like emulation?
@@BlueFlagAlpha Excatly. Emulators have many options that the game doesn't have, but enhances the game tenfold. Like full button customisation, shaders, higher resolutions, and of course, save states
It doesn't matter if it is cheating unless it is multiplayer or a speedrun, or any other sort of competitive gameplay
I agree
Exactly
I think Save state is okay for a speedrun(TAS)
Silok agrees
Yeah play as you want in singleplayer, but stay out it from multiplayer.
I think it doesn’t matter if it’s technically cheating or not. I recently played through Mario 64 a few months ago and the fact that I could get some of the harder stars without spending hours was very helpful.
I think save states is okay as long as you use it like a checkpoint before boss fight
yes exactly
If you are talking about those hidden stars. Yeah it can take a while for you to get them.
Look at this comment section. It's like these people didn't even watch the video.
That's TH-cam, baby!
Definitely a few people did not, in particular the part explaining how savestating does in fact change the gameplay.
not that it matters
Welcome to TH-cam. And Twitter. And any other social media platform.
Yeah. This video is not asking for the morality im save states, it was just fact checking the implications of save states to see if they align with the meaning of cheating.
But people still start their comments with, "I feel"
I feel like part of the problem is that the word "cheating" has negative connotations, but also the word "dishonest". I'm being honest to the original developer? but I'm not even interacting with them, I'm interacting with their game. This is a bit of an extreme example but... If a trapper sets a trap and I avoid getting caught am I cheating by not going into the trap as intended? Is it dishonest to avoid/disarm it? I should note that above example is even likely to occur as part of a game so...
I should note that I am still on the "yes it is cheating but it's also fine" side... but in the end it's too subjective for me to give a good reason for why. especially when stuff like the fairness of it comes up. After all, the full definition given was "To act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." so putting aside the "dishonestly" if asked if it is unfair then even more than before the answer becomes sobjective, at least in a single player experience. Especially with the given example of older games that are basically designed to stack the odds against the player. though even easier games played by players with lower skill level or determination can bring up the question of "fairness".
The difference between playing a game and avoiding the trap is consent. By choosing to play the game there is an implicit consent to play it as designed. On the other hand you did not consent to the trap and neither did any other potential victims, so there is no dishonesty in destroying the trap. However if the trapper asked you to help test their new trap and you evaded the trap purely by the advance knowledge that the trap was there, then this would be dishonest because there was an agreement to engage with the trap in a certain way and this was not followed.
this is a certified hood classic
@ArcheEpicGamerYT nownownownownow nownownownownow yeeeah
@ArcheEpicGamerYT white people be like
THEN IT GO *fart fart fart fart*
@ArcheEpicGamerYT *tetris rap*
@ArcheEpicGamerYT I honestly cant be bothered im sorry.
Now to continue
Black people be like
"Play the game as it was intended"
87% of the games back then were designed like arcade cabinets which had bs difficulty to get you to put money inside it.
I'm not going frustrate myself so I can use the fact I beat a game rife with outdated design as my only character trait.
it's still cheating though technically
Get gud, or just play another game
Yeah, I only use save states when I’m playing an old game that’s constantly throwing bs at me. I feel like it’s cheating any other time though, but I don’t really care if any one does it.
@@energeticyellow1637 Oh boy, you wouldn't mind teaching us how to do it now, would you? After all, it's just a matter of "getting good."
In all seriousness, the "the game's not bad, it's just you that sucks at it" argument is inherently flawed because you'd be initially assuming that the person in question is bad at the game, in which 80% of the time they're not. Arcade games were deliberately designed terribly so they could get the biggest amount of money possible - in fact, it's the same reason as to why most fighting games, specially Mortal Kombat II, had the 100% accurate input reading of the machine that results in them knowing right to do despite you pressing the button for less than a single second.
And, being quite honest here, people back in the day simply did not care if a game was badly designed or not since they quite frankly had no decent level design basis what-so-ever. Arcade games like Haunted Castle, or even NES games like Metroid or Mega Man 2, were likely considered really good at the time because, simply put, there were no games that matched their level of quality, but are retroactively extremely flawed and dated not only due to jerkish or just badly planned design choices, but also because they all have been, for the most part, outmatched by recent level design in every possible manner.
@@TheDaibu Sounds like an excuse to me.
@@energeticyellow1637 How come? Would you mind elaborating?
The Short Answer: Yes.
The Long Answer: Savestates are objectively used to cheat the system built into the game. That's not to say they're good or bad, that's purely to the discretion of the person who's capable of using them. And, really, if it's a single-player game or even a game that you're just playing by yourself, nobody should really care if they're good or bad.
This.
^
*_O O F_*
This is incorrect, save states, in of themselves, are not used to cheat the system of the game.
Lets say I'm at a save point... is using a save state cheating?
What about if I'm across the room from the save point?
To claim they are 100% is already wrong.
Now lets say I'm going to grind the legendary sword of 1% drop chance... I still have to roll the chance every time... but rather then get from level 70 to 100 doing that I'm still level 70. You're still not cheating the system of the game, if anything you're making it so the item still has value opposed to being 30 levels higher... keeping the system relevant.
You have to define a window as to when they are cheating... but to do that you also must define how things will pan out without using them and if the player will complete the same exact action but will become possibly over powered without save states... is it cheating or is it healthier for the game.
@@Buglin_Burger7878 Yo, late to this, but...
"Lets say I'm at a save point... is using a save state cheating?" Yes. It is cheating. Cause that save point was intended to be used as either a point to refresh a save in the system or as a checkpoint for you to turn off the game and come back to it later. Maybe both. You are objectively cheating by using a save state.
Everything after that is still cheating. You're using an outside source, the save states, to gain an advantage not originally intended by the developers. That, by definition, is cheating.
Your argument basically boils down to 'if it makes it easier and gets the same results, then it's not cheating', which is wrong: that's being subjective. You may not wanna grind or maybe you wanna save time, but that is going outside the original systems of the game.
Now, that's not to say that the original dev-intended method is BETTER. It's more pure, but what's a better experience for the player is up to, well, the player. My argument isn't whether or not save states make a healthier game state, it's whether or not using them is cheating. It is. But whether or not a game is fun is not co-dependent on whether or not the player is cheating and I'm not here to condemn anyone for using them. In fact, I objectively think using them doesn't really matter in the end, it's up to the player's discretion...but it IS cheating. Whether they care about that or not is on them.
For me, save states at the beginning of a level is not. Saving in the middle of a level, it is. Not that it matters anyway.
It’s only cheating of you use them excessively
Both are cheating but since the only point is for you to have fun, who cares.
It still invalidates lives. Why try to get extra lives in Sonic when you can just reload a savestate when you get too low
Using savestates in Crash 1 especially those hard levels isnt cheating
@@GentlemanOrcus1 I just don't care about lives. Having to beat entire levels again is a challenge I suppose, but it usually annoys me more than anything else.
I'm not cheating, you're cheating!
No you
no u
no u
As if you are any good to begin with
@@BlueFlagAlpha no u
"Are Savestates cheating?" As I get older I care less if they are. I don't have volumes of free time I used to have.
Same here, it sucks to have to admit it but you can't truly enjoy games as an adult the same way you could as a kid for this reason. As a kid you had time to enjoy challenges, truly get immersed and explore, do all-nighters, etc. As an adult, it's just squeeze it in until you have to go to your 9-5.
So, using my experience as an example, I wanted to beat Castlevania 3, and I wanted to do it without save states, and because of that I had to replay the stages a lot. after a couple of day I managed to beat the game. Some months later when I replayed it it was way easier, I didn't have near as much trouble to beat it again, that's because I had to replay the stages so many times before that it became muscle memory and I love that feeling, I don't just want to beat the game, I want to get good at them, it's kind of that arcade feeling and that pressure of getting a high score or beating a game with a limited amount of quarters, that's the feeling I want when I play most games.
But at the same time, if you want to use save states to beat a game go for it. It's your experience and you should chase the feeling that makes you happy.
People just take the word too literally, cheating in a video game is not the same as cheating on your wife lol, same word, different scenarios. You're not a scumbag for doing it in a video game, it's cheating, but who cares.
I have to agree. Part of the appeal of Castlevania 3 is the difficulty, and taking it away just feels wrong for me. If you want to use savestates to have a frustration-free gaming session, that’s fine. But there’s a place for that retro controller-destroying challenge too.
Yeah, I use save states mainly to prevent myself from having to restart the level. If it weren't for them, I would have probably hated Earthbound.
Earthbound lets you keep levels if you die so a death can make you stronger. You do however not get any items you used back but the fact you keep levels means you can go back and steamroll anything that killed you now that you are far more powerful. So some death can be god if you died after power leveling. Resetting is annoying but staying at the same level is nice.
The one time I used restore points in EarthBound is when I was trying to get those crazy equips (i.e. Sword of Kings). For whatever reason, I felt obligated to get that specifically.
6:51
In that gen, you can just use the accuracy increase item to completely bypass the accuracy check, meaning the move is broken either way.
Listen, I’m not about to retrace a dungeon in ALTTP whenever a boss kills me
I just started this game and I can tell I'm gonna need savestates
Even today I get Vietnam Flashbacks from the Moldova boss.
@@maddiegeier You will for later dungeons.
Being an adult and working, I rarely have time to enjoy games, especially those without a save feature. Although, I will admit I used to abuse save states, like if I miss a jump or get hit by a boss, this video changed my perspective. I guess the most I can do is use a save state before a level or before a big boss. Then if I lose all my lives, I'll just restart the level via my save state. I don't have the time to start all the way from the beginning. Unless it has a password system, then I wouldn't mind much.
It's not even about that lol. I'll use save states to save time. I want to play other games.
Imagine being called a cheater because you want to finish a game you are trying to get good at.
It's still cheating because you're not playing the game the way it was intended. Not saying I disagree with it because I've cheated in the past to beat Megaman and Ninja gaiden lol
Many people don’t have the time to play a game for hours just to get past one hard level
@@wozthescott2804 I beated Mega Man without middle stage ST, I used because I was too lazy to do that code thing
(If I am remembering all right, I could had do it, I played if years ago)
@@ireplytoeverything3122 So they cheat to beat the game faster, and theres nothing wrong with that, but you have to admit that youre cheating
Of course it is, because that's an help that the game wasn't designed with. I don't even know how it can be a debate.
I (sometimes) uses them when I don't play seriously at a game. I never ever use savestates before I finished a game for the first time tho.
They're perfectly fine (and even required) if you're training for speedrun and others things like that.
yes
its not cheating at all
@@BlueFlagAlpha It actually is
@@BlueFlagAlpha No
I'm standing on a save point... is it cheating?
What about if I'm grinding for a legendary sword rare drop... and rather then hit level 100 without save states I'm now only level 70 with it.
To claim it flat is makes you immediately lose the debate via the first point I made while the second shows how it can circumvent a flaw and keep the game fair/fun as opposed to making you over leveled ruining the game via the game.
When I started playing Megaman 1 for the first time, I used Savestates to win because I wasn’t good enough at the game. Now that I’ve beaten several difficult games with and without savestates, I’ve improved enough to beat Megaman 1 in a little under an hour without savestates.
Nice!
i beat all megaman games with savestates and hasnt improve enough
@@BlueFlagAlpha Because by using savestates you don't improve at all
@@mep6302 False, completing the game with savestates or any easy mode gives you necessary knowledge you need in order to improve at said game. Half of the battle with video games is understanding what's going on and how to progress, the other is having the technical skill to perform said actions. Savestating doesn't develop any of your technical skill, however; it does develop your understanding of the game and the next time you move through the area/level/world/whatever you'll be prepared for what you'll be up against. Whether you have the technical skill to capitalize on the knowledge you've gained or not is another issue entirely.
TL:DR - technical skill and game knowledge are the two things that make you good at vidya games, you need both to 'git gud' and savestating does improve your game knowledge.
😠Considering this is Mega Man 1, I'd shun anyone who argues with that.😆
Diddy's Kong Quest is brutal if you don't have enough lives. The first few levels of the swamp are really tough for me, and I almost always have to redo the World 2 boss over and over and over again before I can make it to the Swamp's save school.
The fact I have to do levels FROM A PREVIOUS WORLD, and that the lives NEVER reset, is outrageous! In Mario, if you game over, you go back to 5 lives. If you play DKC2, when you die, you have exactly the same amount of lives as you did when you last saved. That means if you only have 1 live, you have to be extremely careful, try your best to find lives, and get enough banana coins to actually save when you get to save school. Challenge is great, but it's honestly super annoying and no matter how careful I am on those first few Swamp Levels, if I die once or twice, I'm dead.
So if it were me, I would save state at the beginning of the world, instead of after every level. That way you still have to worry about lives, but you won't be booted back and have to redo the last world's boss. It's still cheating, but it's basically like giving yourself the ability to save immediately after finishing a world, instead of having to unlock a save college.
I find it funny how you end ALL of your lines with a full period intonation hahaha
Love your videos. Thank you.
The only time I’d say that save-states aren’t cheating is when they’re used to do a thing that’s already possible with the original game.
For example in games with save points it’s technically still possible at any time to not lose your progress when you stop playing the game by just leaving the console on after pausing. Save states can let you do that without leaving the system running overnight.
Another example is when the game already lets you save scum. Speeding it up doesn’t really change the action. If someone wants a shiny legendary Pokémon, I don’t see a difference between using hard resetting or save states.
My Uncle: Hey did you just save state?
Me: I'm making Mac and cheese AND NO BODY CAN SHOP ME
@Silveeo the joke is that by using save states he's effectively 'cheesing' the level (which means doing it in an unintended way), and he said mac & cheese because it's cheese.
I agree with you partially. I agree that no one can shop you, as human trafficking is very much illegal. However, I disagree that you are making mac and cheese because if you were making mac and cheese, then you would not have the opportunity to save state, as there is currently no known mac and cheese emulator.
In my opinion, as long as it’s not affecting anyone else, “save scumming” only serves to facilitate the enjoyment of the game by cutting down on frustration.
ye, that wasnt the question being adressed
Frustration is good until a certain point, tho.
Because that frustration usually is what pushes the player to play better in order to finally beat the level.
@@ego2133 Exactly.
@@ego2133 what if the frustration is more of "ugh, this shit again" or "fuck this boss". Is it wrong for using "cheats" or save states to get through annoying areas like the valley of defilement from demon souls or annoying enemies/bosses like the 4 kings from darksouls? This is regardless of whether or not you have beaten the game or how good your gaming experience/skills are.
@@ego2133 Yeah, but this isn't good frustration being cut down in their example. It is frustration which gets in the way of enjoying the game.
Great video! You point about randomness in Pokémon reminded me a lot of how traditional roguelikes like Nethack, Tales of Maj'Eyal or Caves of Qud use permadeath to increase the utility of one-use items or abilities with niches uses, like teleportation to a random tile or super-powerful attacks you can only use once.
In a game with saves, you tend to not use those items and skills because they seem too good to waste (Which is kind of why the "haha I always finish a final fantasy with ten thousand elixirs in my pocket" meme comes from). In a roguelike, though, you ARE going to use them, because if you die, they're gone. Permadeath, and by extent the lack of saving, gives a new depth to the game that simply wouldn't exist if you could save at any point.
I did something similar to this in sm64. Next to the final boss fight, is a 1up that respawns on death, and is next to where you respawns if you die to bowser. I used this to retry bowser multiple times before ge over
I personally despise Tee K.O. Its pretty much cards against humanity and wait this is the wrong video
Lel
Lives would still have value however if you were only save stating before starting a level as the checkpoints would only apply until you game over and reload your save state therefore keeping the value of items still as it was before
For anyone looking the song at 5:18 is Butterfly Kiss from Persona 5
The year was 2016. NES Classic Mini was released.
NES was the first video game console that I had when I was a kid, so this was very nostalgic for me to play this games again. I had played them before but it was not so fun anymore, but when I was a kid I loved NES games.
But when I get NES Classic Mini it was fun to play this games again.
The only reason was suspend points.
Now I can save in all games and I don’t need to start from the beginning next time I play this games.
But when I play SNES Classic Mini I never save with Suspend Points, and the reason there is that I can already save in almost every SNES game.
It depends on how you use save states, really, if ever. Here's one of the big examples on why I use save states: *Metroid (NES)*
Say you defeated both Kraid and Ridley, the path to Tourian unlocks and you go down the elevator to that area. You have a stock of 6 energy tanks all filled up, as well as a crap ton of missiles and an ice beam. You are well prepared to destroy the Metroids that get in your way, defeat the big bad Mother Brain, escape from Planet Zebes and beat the game... Only to then die to Mother Brain and get a game over, with the password on the screen. That's fine, it's not like you're starting all the way back to the beginning of the game, you can just try again and continue from where you left off...
Only to find out you have 30 energy left and NONE of the energy tanks are filled, you are most definitely not prepared now. So you go all the way back up to Brinstar, walk up to the enemy spawner and destroy those enemies so they can drop energy for you to refill. (and maybe some missile replenishments) That itself is not a huge issue; tedious, yes, but not too terribly bad. However, what IS a big problem, and what makes this _even more_ tedious, is that there is a small chance for enemies to even drop any refills in the first place, and when they do drop something it's sometimes missile refills, even when you're already full on those. It could take as long as around 15 minutes or even HALF AN HOUR to fill everything back up so you have enough to try and defeat the boss again.
IT SUCKS. Grinding for missiles or energy is a huge waste of time in the original Metroid (I'm glad the developers fixed that issue in later installments where enemies drop energy, missile and power bomb refills every time unless you're completely full) and it's no wonder people use hidden passwords and cheat codes, let alone save states. (myself included) Grinding for replenishments for overly long periods of time is BAD GAME DESIGN and if you're a game designer yourself, you should NOT waste a player's time to the point of boredom or exhaustion.
As I said before, that's just _one_ of the reasons why I use save states. I could talk about other big reasons why I use them, but this comment would be even longer than it already is, so I'm just gonna leave it off at that.
Save states could technically be cheating in a way because that's not how developers intended you to play their games. So long as it's a single-player game and not a multiplayer or competitive one, though, no one is really going to care if you use that power you have. It's HOW you use said power that counts. Whether it's before a level, right after a tough section, right before you face a boss or you encounter an unfair difficulty spike, it's okay to use save states so long as there aren't any checkpoints, or lack thereof, or losing your last life could send you all the way back to the beginning of the world or, have mercy on your soul, the beginning of the GAME. (especially after coming so close to beating it) You do, however, not want to _overdo_ it to the point where it loses any sense of challenge the game has to offer you, (unless that's what you want) or you can just not use them at all and play the game for what it is.
TL;DR: Whether or not you use save states is entirely up to you. Either way, enjoy playing the game how you want to. If you are playing a multiplayer or competitive game with other players or doing a speedrun, however, think before you dare to try and "cheat."
I definitely save-cheated on the original Metroid in my day (the version that's unlocked when beating Metroid Zero Mission).
I think the most honest way to use save states would be to put them after crossing a big milestone, such as at the start of each new world in a Mario game. That way if you die on a level like 7-3, you go back to 7-1. You still feel the loss of progress, but don’t get overwhelmed with the regret of your lost time. It also helps you practice difficult parts so you can eventually get good enough to do a “no continue run.”
Save states are cheating, but they are by far the most acceptable form of it.
But all the mario games already do that without savestates...
@@Tom-jw7ii The first one, 2 and the lost levels don’t and I was saying this for games in general. Such as each new zone in a sonic game or many rpg’s that don’t allow the player to save often or every few levels in a streets of rage game. The player would be able to self impose checkpoints for themselves so they won’t feel like they don’t want to return to the game again.
@@The_Silverblast Yes they do. Mario 1 has a continue code, mario 2 gives you 2 continues, and the lost levels gives you infinite continues. Most games actually let you continue from milestone points like that anyway, but there are some, mostly from the 8 bit era, that don’t.
@@Tom-jw7ii gonna be honest didn’t know anything about the lost levels. But continue codes are not save states. Save states persist after you turn off the console. Mario 1 and 2 don’t have that in their base versions. Again this whole discussion is not just about Mario, this is about most retro games as a whole.
Also if u want to experiment with the game and go for "impossible" platforms
I bought the Castlevania collection last year and it was the first time I really used them. The games were fun but if I died and had to redo the sections as originally intended I don't think I would've finished the games.
Same as final fantasy type 0 in psp a boss can 1 shot you and then you gotta redo the 40 minute level so i use save states as a checkpoint but I didn't not use it while fighting the boss
I'd recommend watching the Game Maker's Toolkit video about how developers protect players from themselves. Save states are popular because they help you to beat the game, but not always to have more fun playing it.
Technically save states improve games like games that don't save like most NES games.
yeah "technically"
Are save states cheating? Yes
Is it ok to use save states? Yes
yes
not really cheating
@@BlueFlagAlpha Yes, it is
@@BlueFlagAlpha No
Save States was how I was able to beat the Sonic 2 Special Stages which are notoriously difficult, and require lots of memorization. Without that I would've gave up out of frustration. Now anytime I play Sonic 2 I don't need to use save states since it's ingrained in my memory where the rings, and spikes are.
For some old games you must remember they were designed to be tough so you'd pump quarter after quarter into the arcade, before they were ported to home consoles. Also, a recent example, I was playing Silent hill for the first time, enjoying the atmosphere, getting used to the clunky controls. I was able to save, then played about 10 minutes exploring around before getting hit one to many times. This death sent me all the way back and it meant I would have to redo the last 10 minutes of slow wondering through the town, which kind of sucked the fun out of the experience. No one wants to replay the same parts of a level over and over, you want to move forward and have fun.
The part of this I'm paying most attention to (not sure if he ever found this out) is that he didn't realize NSO's emulator allows you to go back 10 or so seconds even if you haven't created a save state, and he could have undone the death anyway.
You cannot rewind online
No matter how much we can bicker about this, we can all agree rewind is 100% cheating
Exactly
But also 100% fun.
@@pentelegomenon1175 I don't think so. It makes games too easy. It makes it fun when the game is not fair.
Nope... because what happens if I stand on a save point... walk away and rewind back to the save point?
What about if I rewind to when I would've made a save state in the first place?
@@Buglin_Burger7878 it's still cheating but you're just being really fucking weird about it.
Savestates is like training wheels for bikes, it gives you an advantage if you keep falling.
Helped me get through homework... Very informative!
I totally get your point since I was playing Phoenix Wright and since I had save states, instead of thinking, I just pressed every option until I got the right one, completely removing the point of the option system in the first place. I'd say save states are cheating however they aren't as bad as using cheat devices. I'd say using a save state, while being cheating is below cheat devices and I don't think it is a bad think to use save states
It depends on the use, I mean you can use save states, here and there just a few times or you can use them severely to cope with any inability getting through challenging passages, the potential is there.
All in all I think games shouldn't leave such an option open, when there abuse can ruin the gameplay-experience and undermine the rules of the game. Phoenix Wright is a special case, replaying large sections of an visual novel has no gameplay value and challenge tied to it, so it make sense not having the player to lose progress but at the same time, putting lives to it just to give you the illusion of tension. Usually when I wasted all my lifes I just have a bad feeling for the rest of the current case.
Yes, it is cheating, but just because it’s cheating doesn’t make it wrong.
Games that have infrequent checkpoints (like DKC2) punish the player by making them re-complete obstacles that they’ve already already proven they can can beat; this is bad game design. In cases like these, where challenge or inconvenience comes from bad design, I think savestates only serve to balance out difficulty and save time.
That’s why more people consider use of savestates in Mario Odyssey as cheating. Because Odyssey is well designed game that respects the players time and punishes the player with the loss of coins instead of progress.
TL;DR: Using savestates is cheating, but some games have more a reason to use them than others
Edit just to clear things up for those in the replies: I don’t think that lives are bad design. Lives are a great way to force a player to master a game by making them learn learn the mechanics and the levels. However, I only believe this when the player gets sent back to the beginning of said level or challenge. When a player is getting sent back to the previous WORLD, forcing them to replay challenges that they have already proved they can beat THAT is bad design. So what I’m trying to say is that my problem isn’t with lives, but with game overs that provide an extra penalty that merely wastes time for no reason. Game overs deter the player from experimenting and getting comfortable with how the game plays.
Celeste is a great game to demonstrate my point; each screen is its own self-contained difficult challenge, so you are given a checkpoint when you enter a new screen and when you die you return to the beginning of that screen. Now imagine being sent back a couple screens when you die, or having a finite amount of tries that send you back to the beginning of the level when you run out. Not fun.
But as always, this is just my opinion and you are entitled to your own
"DKC2" and "bad game design" in the same sentence...
Ngl mario odyssey approach to death punishment is not that much better than donkey kong, since it's litterally non existent
So I wouldn't say donkey kong has bad game design and mario odyssey is well designed, it's just really different approaches with very different drawbacks. Donkey kong gives you the will to explore and survive, adds tension but the drawback is the potential tedium you get when dying. Mario odyssey doesn't want to stress you with death but as a result death feels pretty pointless.
Having lives imo is not bad game design. Getting sent back to the start lets you learn to play the stage faster, by taking less damage and by collecting more 1ups and coins
@@Outta-hz1ej Yes, but in the example Silok gave, he was being sent to the previous world, not the beginning of the level
@@SerpongeDash I can agree with that. They are very different games with different structures so the comparison isn’t that great, I only used it since Odyssey was referenced in the video. I also think that the coin death penalty should have been considerably higher.
I think save states are both a welcomed mechanic and a necessary one. The reason why is a lot of retro games don't have the luxury of put down and pick up; most of 'em are very strict that once the power switch is turned off then you're saying goodbye to all that progress and none of us have the time to sit down and finish a game in one sitting like we did when we were kids.
As a mechanic is like any other: abuse it, and people start thinking its cheating.
I love savestates, I mostly use them when there's a hard jump or an unfair boss fight.
Wait, if devs like Nintendo and Capcom are including save states for their remakes/ports, wouldn't that mean save states are no longer cheating in those ports because the devs effectively made save states an in-game resource that they intend for players to use? If so, wouldn't that retroactively make save states legal in the older versions because the devs now endorse them, trivializing this entire discussion?
The debate is over. You're ended it.
I always used it while playing A Link to the Past on my emulator. I didnt know it had a built in save system, so when I stopped playing Id make a savestate and then come back and load it.
Yes, they technically are
If they weren’t in there originally
But I myself use save states to get better at certain games or certain bosses, because these bosses are so hard to reach normally, I don’t want to have to get through the whole thing again to face the boss
I think that's fair. I use them when I get to the boss of Mega Man games.
I use save states:
when I'm playing a game for the first time and I'm stuck after dying 3 times
when I'm playing an older game which has no save feature and I don't have time or don't want to finish it the same day I started playing it.
Especially the second option. Otherwise I use the save feature modern games use without savestates.
For example I decided to start playing Mega Man games and I like to start from the beginning (I don't care if the first games are more difficult than the new ones in any franchise. I like to start from the beginning). I used save states in every single spot I died because I was learning to play the game. However, I didn't care about lives anymore because of that. Today I've finished Mega Man 5 and I barely used savestates because I think the game is easier but I've also become better at the game. And even if I still died some times, I felt my lives and getting them were very valuable.
it is cheating, no debate. But anyone should feel free to do what they want.
Freedom 🇺🇸
He's not saying that people aren't allowed to use save states, he was just wondering if it's cheating period. Heck, he even admits to using save states himself and even encourages people to do so if they believe that using save states would heighten the experience/enjoyment.
It depends idiot
Exactly! The fact people argue save states aren't cheating annoys me to no end. It's 100% cheating, but if it's a single player game and you're not hurting anyone, go nuts
@@AegonCritique I wasn't disagreeing with him, he asked for our opinions :|
I like how this video is casually about DKC2.
Two thirds of my Twitch username got into an Silokhawk video
I've never felt so accomplished in life
I'd say that even given your definition of cheating it's not possible to cheat at a single player experience.
What???
I somewhat agree, I think that video games are basically toys that people should be able to play with however they want, and that multiplayer is the exception since that's more like a sport with rules.
@Aaron Yes you dont gain an "unfair" advantage since you make the rules for your own fun, but it is an advantage nonetheless and so i think its still cheating because youre not following the "rules" that the developers made for the game
My personal opinion is that it is cheating as it isn’t in the game
Well most games have save features. Also you aren't competing vs anybody. So I don't think it's cheating.
New Crash bandicoot recommends and endorses the no lives method of play rather than the classic way with lives at the cost of still counting deaths and final score at the end of levels for grades. Not super disimilar to uses save states for infinite lives before levels but thought it to be a good point. I think Game Makers Toolkit has a video that has a lot of similarities with this
Most games have a learning phase that involves stimulating exploration and experimentation. Death, or starting over, allows you to start afresh from a clean slate and take a step back. In the case of a non-linear game, where the player has a form of expression in the way they play, this makes sense.
But in the case of a linear game that demands uncompromising and punishing mechanical execution, and where there is no alternative proposal, even if only to take one's mind off the challenge and re-approach it in better condition.... the prospect of unstimulating and potentially unproductive repetition is tempting for the savestate.
Darksouls, despite its die-and-retry boss-rushes, offers mechanics and physics that allow players to express themselves and learn constantly.
Dead Rising is uncompromising on its timing, with particularly violent bosses. But it's a dense rogue-lite sandbox where repetition not only builds strength, but also allows players to explore and experiment, optimizing their routes and ultimately facing a short but challenging campaign.
I'm on board with the whole "play how you want to play" mentality. But by using savestates/cheats to your advantage, you forfeit your right to be proud of any accomplishments you make. You can't say "I beat Megaman # on the HARDEST difficulty" if you made a save state every five seconds or "Look at my amazing island in ACNH!" if you time traveled a ridiculous amount.
I get your point, but I think the second ACNH example is a mistake. Time-traveling doesn't make it less effortful, you still have to make the items, put them, organize them, in a way that is not less effortful than those who don't time travel. (I completely get your point though, no offense intended.)
nah
I can be proud of being a game with savestates; I should also be transparent about that fact.
That’s if you use a save state very consistently. If you use some moderation, like using it before a boss or save in the middle of a long and difficult level and you don’t want to start at the beginning all over again, then it’s fine.
Who cares if someone doesn't give me credit for games I beat with or without save states.
I feel like save-stating isn't cheating, but it takes away from the original intention of a game, especially difficult ones. When I played Super Metroid on Switch Online, I save-stated frequently and I think it kind of took away from the cautious atmosphere which makes Metroid so great, where you don't know when the next save point is and have to have your wits about you. So no, I wouldn't say it's bad to do so, but I feel like it doesn't give you the best *experience* (most of the time).
It’s definitely cheating. You are using mechanics not found within the game in order to gain a clear advantage (saving time is an advantage). However cheating isn’t inherently bad, there’s no issue with using save states, but it is cheating.
They are cheating but I do agree with your statement about them undermining the original experience of the game. I couldn't imagine how much less tense a game like Resident Evil would be if you just save stated all the time. Would completely ruin the experience. Making the player actually fear death is a philosophy I really miss about these old games. Nowadays, failure is just a slap on the wrist.
I absolutely loved the video, also, is the Jackbox 3 video next?
I only use save states in games with live systems and even then I typically only make them at the beginning of a level or checkpoints.
Argument could be made that the developers of switch online intended people to use save states, therefore making it not cheating when you played DKC. Otherwise- fair enough, it’s technically cheating! Morally fine, but still cheating for sure
You could make the same argument about the developers of emulators that include the function. If the feature wasn't included by the developers of the game, then it's cheating.
I'm going to have to agree with the comment above.
Donkey Kong Country 2 was made by Rare in 1995; Nintendo Switch Online service was done by Nintendo over 20 years later. 1995 Rare has no say in what 2020 Nintendo decides to do with their online service; Unless they built a time machine without telling us.
SilokHawk even so, say I’m taking a math test in the year 2020. The test was written in 1995 by a totally different teacher, but 25 years later MY teacher says “from now on this test will be open book” (because 2020 amirite). In 1995 I would absolutely have been cheating if I looked at my book for the answers, since the old teacher didn’t allow that. But today my own teacher does. That’s not cheating. Does that analogy apply here? PROBABLY not, I think you’re right- but I think it does apply for some games, at least for the Nintendo-made ones on Switch Online, or for like a Namco collection with a rewind feature.
@@GreatGatzB Yes your analogy applies here. This is a very great point you made. Sonic 1 on genesis there is no save feature, however when they remade it on the compilations the Sonic Mega Collection they added a save feature to that game & all the others. Save state is saving. So why does it matter if it's implemented by a developer or not? To me it is not cheating if the devs allow you to do that later on.
What if you are using save states on a mobile emulator ? I am playing the god of war psp games on mobile which can be hard because of the controls and laggy because my phone is trash, so i use save states to make it a balanced experience, what do you think ?
This is a fair point. You are experiencing the game in two ways unintended by the devs, where one way acts to counterbalance the other and as such I would go with this: the creator of the emulator had to give you a laggy game by necessity and designed the game with the intent that you would use savestates.
Actually, now that I think about it, there's a similar argument to be made for emulators where the people who designed the emulator expect players to use savestates, hence why they are included.
I used savestates to play New Super Mario Bros DS. The game is not hard but the tactil controls of android emulators are bad. I can't get used to them. When I replayed it on PC, I didn't even need savestates xD
Playing console platformers with touch controls? You all are nuts. I’ve found mobile emulators way too frustrating for anything more fast-paced than Pokemon, and even that I prefer to use buttons.
It's like the argument of Exploits to Glitches. Exploits are using in intended game tools to get unintended effects, and glitches are using unintended game tools to get intended effects. They have a difference, but some find it so minor they categorize both as one thing.
Yes, and it's a lovely cheat. Like being able to input codes that let you pick stages at will with a lot of games from yesteryear, or activating godmode, or Konami codes galore. I used one for a playthrough of TMNT for the NES because that final stage was just brutal time after time after time again. Sure, I never did finish the game start to finish in one go, but I was able to finally beat the last stage from its starting point eventually, and that's all I wanted by that point, because one can only start from scratch so many times before it becomes a bit of a chore. That was the experience I wanted for myself... Still a challenge though, the RNG in it could still get ridiculous in making you go through certain areas where avoiding damage came at the toss of a coin. Wanted to make it just a bit less random for once by ONLY having to deal with the final stage.
I believe that using save states removes any stress and worry from a game. If you die in a game, tough luck, game over, go back to the start of the world. When you use save states even if It saves time, still removes the stress of trying your hardest to not screw up which is the entire point of life system and game over screens.
Save states are fine, but they're no doubt cheating. I completely agree with you.
Now see what rage you'd get by saying skipping large portions of a game through glitches like in speedrunning could be considered cheating as well.
😆
The Pokémon example is fully researched. It makes sense, but the item x-accuracy is weird in gen 1 (the generation he showed in example) and makes all attacks bypass the accuracy check, so all save states does is save a few pokedollars. Good video though!
The thing is, many retro games (including super Mario bros 3!) were SUPPOSED to have a save feature, but were unable to add one due to hardware or storage limitations. So using save states in those games is “kinda” the way the developers intended for you to play them, isn’t it?
Or what about remakes made by the original developers? When a game doesnt have a feature but they wanted to include them, is using that scrapped feature cheating? I dont think so.
Ok...but most retro games that have save states are made by the companies who made the original game so thus it could be said that it's not cheating since the company intends players to use save states.
If you're playing a NES game on an emulator on your PC or Android, then it wasn't intended by the developers to use them. However, if you're using them on a Virtual Console, collection, etc then it was intended by the developers of those servers/collections to use them.
@@mep6302 Ok, thats just being very purist. Whats the difference if im playing the same game on the virtual console or an emulator? Its the same game.
When talking about "playing the game how the original creator intended", what about all the butchered games with increased difficulty to accommodate the rental market in tbe west? If the game already is "cheating" then you should give it a taste of its own medicine (or better yet play the original Japanese release with a translation patch, so many games that I didn't jam with are now held in high regard thanks to dedicated folks who makes translations/delocalizations). Maybe a slightly different topic but I think you could "cheat" yourself to make the game play more like it was intended to play, ie when there's things like removed checkpoints or lowered health/lifes/continues for the western release
I like to have fun with games and play loose and experiment with gameplay so I always hated when the penalty of messing around was replaying large sections or watching unskippable cutscenes again. I absolutely love using save states. I can create my own fun in a game without the harsh penalty that retro games tend to have.
In a game that doesn't allow saving on for example the NES, i save state everytime i get a game over, so i can continue playing in the most fair way possible the next time i play.
yes it's cheating, but I don't care and so do you
Here's a question in response: can a game have cheating mechanics built in?
Example: the Super Leaf in Super Mario 3D World
Another example: Funky Mode in the Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze switch port
I would say that if the game is specifically designed around a certain mode or experience, and these modes give the player an advantage, it's a sort of "mandated cheating". It isn't the same type of cheating as in a game shark, but it does still impact the game experience. The designers clearly intended you to play the game without it. But instead of having players rely on external devices or code to make the experience easier, they figured it would be better to have these cheating mechanisms baked in- perhaps hidden, so that the player doesn't automatically gravitate to the less fun way to play first thing.
Really good points! But one has to beg the question with classic games if they really were intended to not have saves or if saves were a limitation. Seeing that future DK games have saves to prevent game over sending u to the beginning, it may be possible to think they would’ve included this in the original game if they knew. But of course this is all speculation lol
I wonder how many NES games came without saves just because the publisher didn't want to pay for a battery in every cart.
This was a cool video to see, this is the kind of question I often think about to myself since I'm often concerned with "Honor" and "Manliness" and all that. Don't think people should be neccesarily shamed for using save states to enjoy a game more but I know I feel kinda bad if I do unjustifiably.
I couldnt imagien playing some of the older fe games without save states, especially for some of the bs bosses that are just rng fiestas
I find this discussion (and this video by extension) utterly pointless. As you yourself said: A game should be enjoyed in a way that makes the individual player the happiest. I would take it even further and say that the game you are playing can be given rules by yourself. Pokemon nuzlockes for example or infinite Money in a city builder. Cheating can, in my opinion, not exist in single-player games because all players are in full agreement over the rules of the game being played.
as a nuzlocker myself, here's what i think about save states, in pokemon at least
it's definitely 'cheating' to use save states if you're trying to get an encounter, when literally one of the rules is as soon as u step in a new area full of wild pokemon, the first thing you see, you either catch it or run/kill it, which forfeits the encounter. if you don't like the encounter and u decide to save state prior to getting the encounter, that's technically cheating because your second attempt for the encounter isn't what you encountered first.
If you're playing casually and wanna get specific Pokemon through save states, I don't see an issue.
You're not cheating to any other person, but to yourself and the game. Cheating in single player games exists but it's up to you if you want to cheat or not. Even if I tell you this, I use savestates sometimes, especially in older videogames
@@mep6302 True if you break your own self imposed rules you are technically cheating, but i mean in cheating them you are kind of readjusting your own rules.
If there's so much debate and contention over this topic, I would argue this discussion absolutely has merit.
It would seem the real thing that upsets you about this video is defining savestates as cheating; Opposed to the topic itself.
just gonna add a couple more of my own thoughts with regards to nuzlockes and save states. Another rule in pokemon nuzlockes is that once you lose a pokemon battle and "black out", you lose the nuzlocke. unless you, and maybe your fanbase if you're nuzlocking on YT, implement a common rule such as the "revive clause", then you're able to revive one pokemon of your choosing. this is typically done in a versus style of pokemon nuzlockes. In single player however, it's more likely you won't implement the revive clause unless you make your ROM insanely difficult. For the sake of this, we'll just use a regular randomizer nuzlocke of pokemon as an example. If you know you have a hard battle coming up, like for example Cynthia in Diamond, Pearl and Platinum, and you choose to save state prior to the battle, it seems a little counter productive to do a nuzlocke to begin with. I mean sure if you beat Cynthia on the first try even with making a save state then that's pretty fucking impressive ngl. but if you lose over and over to her and keep loading the save state in order to mix things up and have, what the definition implied "an unfair advantage", then there really isn't any point of doing a nuzlocke is there? This is all from my pov. nuzlockes are pretty competitive and cheating in competitive settings, especially in pokemon of all things, just makes me think u might as well just play casually since u weren't ready to play competitively and lose a pokemon or two.
that's all from me. sorry if this was too long to read. I don't blame u if u skimmed past this up to here. have a good day folks
Personally I don't like using save states to actually finish a game, but I use them in 3 cases:
1- Learn patterns of difficult bosses or sections in games with few checkpoints or limited continues, sometimes with the help of TH-cam walktroughs too, however as soon as I learn the pattern I go back to the checkpoint or beginning of the game and try again without the save states
2- Make some unnecesary long sections shorter, like if the beginning was easy and it gets hard at some point, I put the save stat in that point
3- In DKC to avoid farming lives every time I start the game, which is no different to keep the SNES turned on even after stop playing the game for a while, but still, that's a pretty rare case
In a nutshell: Savestates take away challenge from the game, make it essentially "Hand-Holding Mode"
I don't think I mind that for games with a Password Load system (Punch-Out for NES)
I consider it cheating to use savestates during a boss battle or during the final boss. Use Save states ONLY if a game does NOT come with its own save feature. A Savestate is save that you can load from an outside extention of the game. (I think I just deacribed savescumming with the whole savestates and boss battles. Just be careful about using Savestates with Earthbound.)
The REAL question you should've asked before any other here was: "In which context Honesty is considered?" and the answer is "During Social Interactions, usually Competitive Enviroments".
So, Are Savestates Cheating?
No. Savestates are hardly ever used outside of Single Player games and NEVER in a competitive enviroment. Adhering to rules just because they where set beforehand doesn't mean these same rules are benefitial to the experience. If what you want is to circunvent imposed limitations because they impact your experience negatively, why the question in the first place?
The cases where savestates were used to circunvent mechanical challenges that balance a game are cases of "cheating" not because of savestates themselves but HOW they are being used.
Any tool have the capacity to facilitate anything. The morality should not be put on the tool but rather the behaviors it allows and, more importantly, the PEOPLE that indulges on this behavior IF, AND ONLY IF, this behavior prejudicates people OTHER THEN the user itself.
Nope, honesty being considered by others is not the same as honesty existing. If you knowingly alter the way a game can be played in a way not intended by the developers then you're playing dishonestly and therefore cheating. Since placement of save-points is a fundamental part of the game-play experience, any method of deliberately subverting this not possible in the base game alone is cheating.
Uhh... Is it bad that I don't personally care? I just save whenever I find necessary really. I suck at video games.
Same. I do NOT have the patience for bad level design in old video games.
Yep
No. I don’t care. Frustrating to have to start over again especially after a long level. I hate having to redo the same things over and over! It’s about having fun. It’s my money and experience. It’s really painful when you fight a boss with multiple stages and you die on the last stage.
Me personally, I only use save states after a huge section of a game like say after each dungeon in Zelda, or at the start of each world in Mario or Donkey Kong. The only other times I use them are if I beat a super hard section so I don’t have to play it again if I lose all my lives.
Just a thought on the DK collectibles - they may now be downplayed by using savestates since their in game value comes from the fact most of them grant opportunities for lives. Common stuff like bananas mean nothing, as do most of the bigger collectibles as mentioned in the video. However, there is still the incentive to collect the non-banana items since they are unique collectibles. Obviously having collectibles unlock things (lives in most games, extra levels in others, or miscellaneous things like new outfits in yoshis woolly world) makes them intrinsically more tempting to collect, but the fact they are so distinguished makes them stand out and be more tempting to collect, regardless if there is an in game external payoff for doing so. I feel most are willing to go for things like star coins in mario because they stand out, even if we completely ignore the fact they grant endgame levels.
Compare this to new super mario bros 2 - its thing is coins. Everywhere. Collecting 100 gives you an extra life, as is the case for most platformers. Yet they essentially have so little value since you can get SO many that you will never have the threat of having a game over, which for all intents and purposes may as well be the same as having infinite lives or using savestates before each level - thus removing its primary purpose in the game. The only other thing they are used for is the arbritrary goal of getting a million coins, which gets you a new title screen - essentially just a "well done, heres a super bare minimum reward" thing. But at that point... are coins really worth anything? Since it takes so long to gather a million, and you are usually not incentivised to grab many coins in levels since they are everywhere and have no challenge to them, they lose all value outside of getting a high coin count on each level, which I feel most players are not too interested in going back to get better scores.
Of course this all differs between games, but I feel that even if the larger collectibles have little to no purpose if they have no attached function, they can still be worth it since they are usually a reward for high skilled gameplay, or finding hidden areas. That alone I feel can give just as much value as an in-game reward a lot of the time, especially if they are incoporated into the level design of a game well. Then again, mario odyssey's main complaint is that all the moons feel meaningless as they are the same exact reward regardless of the challenge presented (outside of bosses granting 3 moons). Having the harder challenges give the player 2 or 3 moons perhaps would make those moments feel better, or even if there were a completely unique collectible outside of the moons.
TL;DR - game design hard, big collectibles can still feel rewarding enough even if they have little to no value in the game itself
Save states aren't cheating. "Cheating devices" like Action Replays aren't cheating either.
Save states don't give you an unfair advantage because, crucially, anyone could use them. I mean, yes, it'd be cheating if you were, say, racing against someone and they were playing on actual hardware and couldn't use save states while you were emulating and using save states. But if everyone involved can use them, it's not cheating. And, further, if you're not competing with other people, "cheating" is meaningless and inapplicable.
It is completely impossible to "cheat" in a single-player game. Developer's intentions simply don't come into it.
By definition, it is. He said it already, but it gives you an unfair advantage. It's morally worse to do it in competitive settings, but it's cheating nonetheless.
@@kellennicholson4488 Where's the unfair advantage? I don't see one.
@@Zeturic You're giving yourself an advantage over the game? This isn't that hard to understand
@@kellennicholson4488 You're conflating an advantage with an unfair advantage. You have yet to explain how you can be unfair towards a non-sentient computer program or why anyone should care about it even if it was possible.
@@kellennicholson4488 But glitches are an advantage over the game, exploits, using strategy to utilize items effectively.
On an official speedrun, no. But for every other occasion, 100% yes
How is it not cheating for speedruns?
@@mouthshovel sarcasm
The part about savestates invalidating core parts of the game really resonated with me. While some parts of a game could be seen as unfair or outdated design, they were put there for a reason and ignoring them often leads to a less interesting play session in my experience.
There is nothing wrong with using them if you can't stand the game as it was presented originally, and they're also a really useful tool to let speedrunners practice sections of a game. However, they're functionally the same as a cheating device, as you concluded in your video.
I view save states the same way as I view the assist mode in Celeste. It’s there if you really need it to see more content from the game and that’s fine.
Imagine playing a game but being called a cheater because you don't feel like doing a half an hour stage of don't want to start from the beginning because you missed an item that you couldn't see.
Man the internet is really sad these days.
I mean relative to the person who went through an extra half hour to get around said problem, you're cheating. Not that it really matters because if the game sucks that much it's probably not worthy of playing through legitimately.
You are by definition a cheater by altering the game in a way that wasnt intended, the point is that theres nothing wrong with that and that you should play the game how you want even by cheating
Just becuase its cheating by the technical definition dosen't always make it a bad thing
When this was commented they were only 3 minutes into the video. Man the internet is really sad these days.
Yes it's cheating but it's totally understandable if you want a pleasant experience from games that you find way too hard but just want to complete
All hey! Here scott
Could’ve never 100% DK64 without save state (damn those races challenges, especially the jet pack ones)
Also I did save scum for amiibo drop in BOTW (don’t want to have to potentially wait days just for one piece of armour or weapon)
I usually only defend the use of save states on a few very specific ocasions:
1)The game has no proper save system built-in like some of the old 8bit and 16bit games.
So I usually use the save state to save my progress.
2)The game save system is flawed: When the save system of the game is flawed i prefer to rely on save states for a better experience: for example in Zombies ate my neighbors you lose all of your items if you use the password system which renders the player basically defenseless if you load at the end of the game.
On Crash Bandicoot you have to play a bonus level to have a chance to save and if you fail youre screwed.
Also some games take away all of the player's lives/items when saving.
3)I need to quit the game fast: when Iam in a hurry to quit the game and go doing something else but there's no save point in sight, I just save state there,quit and then save properly when I return to the game.
4) Long sections in a game with no save points or checkpoints: No one likes to repeat 30+ minutes of gameplay again just because of a fail, it feels like a waste of time.
It also sucks when you need to save&quit the game but you cant.
Now about this its ok for me if it is only 3- 5 minutes in a adventure game or a platformer or 10-15 minutes in an rpg, more than that nah.