Support NeoGAF

[KDR_11k]

Many arcade games get ported to home systems with infinite free credits, obviously that's not representative of how you're supposed to experience them.

But what do you do about them? Never using a continue isn't how these games are meant to be played either. But most arcade genre games these days just respawn you immediately when you lose a life, no going back to a checkpoint so credit feeding guarantees that you will beat the game no matter how bad you play.

Has anyone come up with a scheme that works to make these games remain fun?

 

[data]

Get a piggybank and everytime you continue, put a coin inside of that, and never open it

Spoiler

unless you really need the money

 

[SigSig]

For every credit, put a quarter into a money box.
Once it's full, treat yourself to something nice!

edit: lmao noooo

 

[PSqueak]

The digital simpsons arcade port had a fun scheme that should be expanded.

Basically you had 2 modes of co-op:

-Each players have 10 credits and they're out when they use them all
-There is a total of 40 credits for all 4 players to use as a comunal pool.

Now for a game like the Simpsons arcade that's too much credits, the game might as well be in freeplay, but these schemes with tweaking options could be pretty good for arcade ports.

 

[SatoAilDarko]

Neo Geo home games gave only 4 credits automatically.

Which sucks with the really hard games.

I wish they changed it for the Virtual Console releases.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Back when I used to spend a lot of time in arcades I usually made it a point to never spend more than a dollar on a single game (assuming that it was 25 cents per play, adjust for higher prices). So roughly between 2-4 continues, depending on what kind of game it was and how well I felt I was doing. If I was dying multiple times in the same area or level, sometimes I'd cut myself off early. I think it's a pretty good rule of thumb.

It also depends on if you are just playing for fun, or want to actually beat the game or just improve at it. I don't see any problem spamming continues if its your first time through a game and you just want to see the end. You should be trying to cut down on them during replays to work your way up to a 1cc.

 

[chronic_archaic]

If Metal Slug Anthology didn't have free play I would have been a very sad 10 year old.

 

[FyreWulff]

I think the option of having a both limited credits mode and freeplay is good. I loved Metal Slug but the original Xbox MS3 release had no freeplay mode so it was like I paid money for someone to punch me in the face.

 

[TheSpoiler]

I thought about this, and man, I think people can just limit themselves if they want. A fun arcade game is fun on its own. Taking away infinite credits isn't going to magically fix the design elements centered around the game. FF games are still going to have cheap bosses with dumb hitboxes and too many i-frames while you get stuck getting smacked out of combos.

On the flipside, The Simpsons was fun to me because of the characters and setting, not the gameplay. No amount of holding back coins was ever going to make that fun.

 

[KDR_11k]

I thought about this, and man, I think people can just limit themselves if they want. A fun arcade game is fun on its own. Taking away infinite credits isn't going to magically fix the design elements centered around the game.

No but e.g. credit feeding in a Metal Slug game makes death completely meaningless which obviously removes the whole challenge.

 

[Jucksalbe]

Usually I think unlocking extra credits over time is fine, but this can really suck if you're playing multiplayer.
I guess in the end free play is the best option, since the player can decide how to play the game.

 

[IsntChrisL]

"Credits" were implemented solely to squeeze more quarters out of you. They carried over to NES/SNES/GENESIS games to add challenge.

Not all games today respawn you in the same position. The newer Donkey Kong games operate very similarly to the SNES games. A lot of people here seem find them too difficult though.

I think checkpoints and lives are the best way to go for certain kinds of games (mostly platformers and shooters). Losing has more impact so you're more likely to improve faster while you play than you'd be if you didn't need to worry about starting over. It also gives winning a much more rewarding feeling.

 

[KDR_11k]

Not all games today respawn you in the same position.

I'm thinking mostly about arcade ports or arcade-like games, e.g. shmups or run-and-guns. Among modern shmups there are very very few that don't use instant respawns (the only ones I can think of right now are by Astro Port).

 

[Maintenance]

Let's not give companies more ideas.

"Credits" were implemented solely to squeeze more quarters out of you.

Yep.

 

[danthefan]

You don't get infinite credits in an arcade so you'll feed it more money surely?

They aren't a gameplay thing. They're a making money thing.

 

[TheSpoiler]

No but e.g. credit feeding in a Metal Slug game makes death completely meaningless which obviously removes the whole challenge.

But the whole point of arcade machines wasn't so that you got so good that you could 1cc it (well, part of it was, but I'll get to that in a second) - they were designed to take in as much money from you as they could. In that essence, they were made to play that way. If you ran out, tough shit, start from the beginning another day.

And from that, players would work to get better, play it more often, and dump even more quarters in. They might spend less than three or so on their best runs, but to get to that point, it took money and effort.

By and large, that's how the majority of the design elements operated.

But once again, a fun game a fun game. Death not being an issue doesn't remove the fun from a person who doesn't want to die in the game, and people who want to limit themselves can do so on their own.

I'm thinking mostly about arcade ports or arcade-like games, e.g. shmups or run-and-guns. Among modern shmups there are very very few that don't use instant respawns (the only ones I can think of right now are by Astro Port).

Ports were scaled to make you play longer by giving you a limited amount of continues. Sometimes they came with the option to give you more or less, depending on the game. As for shmups, I'm not sure since I don't play those games, but I feel like there's nothing wrong with freeplay if the user seeks to better themselves. They don't need a guide to do so.

Most games give you something for being it on the hardest setting or using a certain amount of continues anyway.

 

[iconoclast]

The most important thing is to educate the average player. Make it common knowledge that as soon as you choose to continue, you've already lost. Any further credits are just for practice - you can no longer "beat" the game, even if you reach the ending.

 

[Krejlooc]

I think the option of having a both limited credits mode and freeplay is good. I loved Metal Slug but the original Xbox MS3 release had no freeplay mode so it was like I paid money for someone to punch me in the face.

Metal Slug 3 on the Xbox didn't have credits at all. When you died and got game over, you had to go back to the beginning of the level. I really liked that, it made the game very challenging, but not impossible. Every time you completed a level, you could start from that level going forward.

Metal Slug Advance had the same scheme.

 

[Deadpool_X]

I like to act like I'm a kid still and pretend I only came in wit a dollar worth of quarters. That gives me 3 continues. If I can't beat it in that, too bad.

 

[KDR_11k]

people who want to limit themselves can do so on their own.

I'm mostly wondering: What kinds of limitations do you impose on the credits for yourself?

Metal Slug 3 on the Xbox didn't have credits at all. When you died and got game over, you had to go back to the beginning of the level.

I hope they broke Mission 5 down into multiple levels because that thing is about as long as the other four missions combined.

 

[Stumpokapow]

This won't work financially, but... Implement credits as Microtransactions, give the game away for free.

 

[GrayFoxPL]

Use NeoGeo system - 4 credits and roll.

 

[Krejlooc]

I hope they broke Mission 5 down into multiple levels because that thing is about as long as the other four missions combined.

They didn't, and it made that level tense as hell.

MSA also had some long, branching levels, too.

 

[Krejlooc]

This won't work financially, but... Implement credits as Microtransactions, give the game away for free.

I have seriously always wondered why DD games haven't done this. Give people 1 credit or so a day for free, then make them pay for additional credits.

It's a system that worked for decades.

 

[KDR_11k]

This won't work financially, but... Implement credits as Microtransactions, give the game away for free.

I'd rather say "every continue costs 3DS play coins".

 

[TheSpoiler]

I'm mostly wondering: What kinds of limitations do you impose on the credits for yourself?

I hope they broke Mission 5 down into multiple levels because that thing is about as long as the other four missions combined.

Depends on the game. For beat'em ups, I'll run through it once and feel it out. Usually 4 to 5, but it depends on the amount of bullshit. FF1 I can usually do on 5. For fighting games, I'm there for the content itself, so quarter dumping isn't a big deal.

It's all on what you want - if you want a challenge, I'd suggest the player feel it out first or look at a medium that people have reached, and aim for that and get better from there. If you don't, dump away and have a blast.

 

[SoundPulse]

I just never use more than one credit unless I'm learning the game. Doesn't take much discipline or anything, and those that want to use them can do so.

 

[Metalmarc]

You know, £40 $40 whatever your currency is for a game is not too bad, if you convince yourself that if you ever payed £1 /$1 a go at the arcades for one turn (i did in the mid 90's) , it's like your buying 40 goes all at once and actually infinite goes as you keep it, so the full price is like a Infinite credits cheat.

 

[Mbrill82]

The arcade games that I play the most are shmups and I always use only 1 credit per run with the ultimate goal of finishing the games without continuing. I find it a very rewarding way to play, because even if I've been playing a shmup for 10 hours and I still can't beat Stage 3 I will still be improving and hopefully increasing my hi-score.

 

[Mac the KNife]

Either tie credits in with highscore or create a secondary "score" layer on top of the game where players are scored/judged by how many credits they use to finish the game.

 

[Polioliolio]

I thought about this, and man, I think people can just limit themselves if they want. A fun arcade game is fun on its own. Taking away infinite credits isn't going to magically fix the design elements centered around the game. FF games are still going to have cheap bosses with dumb hitboxes and too many i-frames while you get stuck getting smacked out of combos.

On the flipside, The Simpsons was fun to me because of the characters and setting, not the gameplay. No amount of holding back coins was ever going to make that fun.

I disagree about infinite credits being a better default, if that's what you're saying.

Challenge is what makes a game, for me. Assuming the game is decently designed, the fun is in facing a challenge and learning in order to overcome obstacles. If you can just breeze through it, you may have an acceptable experience, but it won't be very meaningful.

I remember, before having this kind of discussion, loving that Metal Slug 3 was on PC.. After jumping into the game with a friend, it was a blast for a level or two, but once it set in that we had infinite continues, the mood changed and we were just going through the motions.

Looking back, some if my favorite, most memorable game experiences were very challenging. Many of my favorite games I've never really beaten.

Concerning arcade games, sure, your credits are only as limited as your wallet, but when I was a kid playing arcade games, with maybe 5 dollars or so, I was only willing to drop maybe 4 quarters on a single machine.. If I was really close to winning, maybe I'd muster up another one or two quarters, but there's definitely a sense of limited lives, and every life feels precious and worth fighting for.

Not that arcade games are particularly well designed, but that's often why having the inherent challenge of limited credits adds something to these games.

Edit: I'd also like to add that it's easier to go along with the rules the game presents. You could ask players to make their own rules and limit themselves if they want, but it's hard to say what our limits should be. It's always best if a game is designed with challenge already prepared. That's why difficulty modes exist. So players can quickly jump into an experience most suitable for them.

I'm tired and rambling, but I hope I've gotten some of my thought across. Challenge is very important to me..

 

[Jangowuzhere]

You get 1 credit

If you lose, start over.

 

[ArjanN]

Depends on the game I guess, most shmups are designed around going for 1 Credit Clear, while something like beat 'em ups usually aren't really.

That said, I usually just credit feed through them the first time, then if I like the game enough/the game is designed around it, whittle down the number of credits required. It helps that modern ports often have achievements around that as well.

 

[Eridani]

I disagree about infinite credits being a better default, if that's what you're saying.

Challenge is what makes a game, for me. Assuming the game is decently designed, the fun is in facing a challenge and learning in order to overcome obstacles. If you can just breeze through it, you may have an acceptable experience, but it won't be very meaningful.

I remember, before having this kind of discussion, loving that Metal Slug 3 was on PC.. After jumping into the game with a friend, it was a blast for a level or two, but once it set in that we had infinite continues, the mood changed and we were just going through the motions.

Looking back, some if my favorite, most memorable game experiences were very challenging. Many of my favorite games I've never really beaten.

Concerning arcade games, sure, your credits are only as limited as your wallet, but when I was a kid playing arcade games, with maybe 5 dollars or so, I was only willing to drop maybe 4 quarters on a single machine.. If I was really close to winning, maybe I'd muster up another one or two quarters, but there's definitely a sense of limited lives, and every life feels precious and worth fighting for.

Not that arcade games are particularly well designed, but that's often why having the inherent challenge of limited credits adds something to these games.

Edit: I'd also like to add that it's easier to go along with the rules the game presents. You could ask players to make their own rules and limit themselves if they want, but it's hard to say what our limits should be. It's always best if a game is designed with challenge already prepared. That's why difficulty modes exist. So players can quickly jump into an experience most suitable for them.

I'm tired and rambling, but I hope I've gotten some of my thought across. Challenge is very important to me..

The problem is though, what number of credits should the game start you off with? For shmups 1 credit runs are the most common choice for those wanting a challenge, but in harder shmups that's just way too hardcore for most people. For other types of games I don't even have a clue what a good general number would be - I certainly can't imagine playing the Metal Slug or beat 'em up games with only one credit, although maybe that's just me being bad.

For me the best solution would be to offer infinite continues but add challenges/achievements for clearing the game with limited continues or with a certain score. That way people who just want credit feed can do it, and the challenge is still there - at various difficulties. Of course, setting up those kind of challenges for yourself is easy enough even if they are not explicitly in the game, so I don't really mind games that just give you infinite credits and call it a day.

 

[Water]

Many arcade games get ported to home systems with infinite free credits, obviously that's not representative of how you're supposed to experience them.

But what do you do about them? Never using a continue isn't how these games are meant to be played either.

Disagree. The CAVE bullet hell shoot'em ups I play are absolutely designed to be cleared with one credit. I'm not gonna say someone is playing them absolutely wrong if they credit feed through the game and only then start trying to do better, or credit feed tactically while they try to learn specific sections of the game, but if you're not at least somewhat trying to improve towards clearing the game for real, then you are not experiencing the core of the game.

I personally never continue to get further in the game, or savestate if playing on emulator. I find it would spoil the excitement. There are obvious downsides to this. First, I definitely learn the game slower than someone who'd also put in 100% concentration, but continue a reasonable amount and thus get more practice in the hardest areas. Second, if the game doesn't have a good scoring system or other optional challenges in the early levels, it would become super boring because you're redoing those early levels so much. Consequently I only play games that have good scoring systems and enough challenge early on. An example of the opposite would be something like R-Type, where it's mostly memorization, no interesting score system and you just have to survive. IMO a game like that should be designed with some other thing in mind than permanent death.

But most arcade genre games these days just respawn you immediately when you lose a life, no going back to a checkpoint so credit feeding guarantees that you will beat the game no matter how bad you play.

I'd say the fact you get no functional penalty makes it all the clearer that you aren't supposed to credit feed the game - it's clearly not designed to be a part of a cohesive experience with the game. Instead, continues are a cheat code for people who wander in the arcade and just want to see the game through in one go. In the shoot'em ups I play, you even get maximum weapon strength when you continue, so you could be all powered up on stage 1 even though you usually get maximum strength only at last or second last stage.
Your score is also zeroed when you continue - so the game is very directly telling you that at the moment you continue, your performance is worth zero.

 

[pizzacat]

Just the other day I was thinking how can I lose more money in money grubbing schemes

 

[Water]

The problem is though, what number of credits should the game start you off with? For shmups 1 credit runs are the most common choice for those wanting a challenge, but in harder shmups that's just way too hardcore for most people. For other types of games I don't even have a clue what a good general number would be - I certainly can't imagine playing the Metal Slug or beat 'em up games with only one credit, although maybe that's just me being bad.

Most of them are nowhere near as hard as they look. I'd venture a guess that you can beat one in the same time it would take you to get decent at a hardcore single-player strategy game, assuming no experience with either genre. I'm a noob, and it took me <20h of playtime to 1cc the easiest arcade mode in Mushihimesama Futari. After you have the genre mechanics down, next ones will be much easier.

You just have to play each credit at a time, concentrate and enjoy the play itself, don't get frustrated about failing any single run and just be happy when you get farther. Play couple of credits a day, and as long as you're not just mashing buttons and watching Netfix on the side,you'll get the hang of it in a few weeks. It doesn't matter if for several hours you can survive only a few minutes at a time, as long as you're learning and extending that run slowly.

What adds to the illusion of difficulty is that the difficulty curve in many good arcade games is frontloaded, so stage 1 can kick your ass at first but quickly becomes manageable (30% of maximum challenge?), stage 2 is a lot harder (60%?), and stage 3 may take you even to 85% of maximum in a 5-stage game. This is good design on a 1cc-centered game because otherwise it would become seriously boring. It also means once you can survive to Stage 3 and beyond in a game like this, you are much closer to beating the game than you might expect.

 

[magnetic]

I make savestates at the beginning of each stage and at the boss and then practice them separately. Most of the time I never really attempt full runs. It's just the way it's the most fun for me that way.

I hate having to play the usually easy first stages only to be able to practice later more challenging parts. Breaking the game up into "missions" means I can fine tune the experience to my current skill level.

That's also why I never even considered owning actual arcade PCBs.

At the moment, I absolutely love playing stage 3 in Mushihimesama on Maniac over and over again.

The only game I actively played for score was Armed Police Batrider - easily my favorite shooter.

 

[ToastyFrog]

Oh whoops, I thought this thread was going to be about sitting through the ending of an Ubisoft game.

 

[Eridani]

Most of them are nowhere near as hard as they look. I'd venture a guess that you can beat one in the same time it would take you to get decent at a hardcore single-player strategy game, assuming no experience with either genre. I'm a noob, and it took me <20h of playtime to 1cc the easiest arcade mode in Mushihimesama Futari. After you have the genre mechanics down, next ones will be much easier.

You just have to play each credit at a time, concentrate and enjoy the play itself, don't get frustrated about failing any single run and just be happy when you get farther. Play couple of credits a day, and as long as you're not just mashing buttons and watching Netfix on the side,you'll get the hang of it in a few weeks. It doesn't matter if for several hours you can survive only a few minutes at a time, as long as you're learning and extending that run slowly.

What adds to the illusion of difficulty is that the difficulty curve in many good arcade games is frontloaded, so stage 1 can kick your ass at first but quickly becomes manageable (30% of maximum challenge?), stage 2 is a lot harder (60%?), and stage 3 may take you even to 85% of maximum in a 5-stage game. This is good design on a 1cc-centered game because otherwise it would become seriously boring. It also means once you can survive to Stage 3 and beyond in a game like this, you are much closer to beating the game than you might expect.

It really depends on the game. Some of them (DoDonPachi, EspGaluda, the Touhou games discounting higher difficulties and extra stages) pretty doable. I have 1cc-ed those, and yeah, it's perfectly doable if you put in the time. On the other hand, games like Ketsui, DOJ and SDOJ are on a whole other level. Metal Slug too - for me at least, although I really don't have much experience in the genre. With those, even runs with multiple credits are pretty challenging.

That's why I don't think 1cc should be the only mode. Clearing a hard game with 2 or 3 credits can be just as hard as clearing an easier with 1. Most people also don't want to dedicate hours upon hours needed to get that 1 credit run, so having something easier to work towards is nice too. 1cc should be the ultimate goal for any well designed arcade game though (or chasing high scores, if you want even more).

 

[Tain]

You get 1 credit

If you lose, start over.

The most important thing is to educate the average player. Make it common knowledge that as soon as you choose to continue, you've already lost. Any further credits are just for practice - you can no longer "beat" the game, even if you reach the ending.

yuup

which is why I'm a big fan of disabling continues by default. Let people activate them as an option and let 'em know, kinda like the Ikaruga XBLA port.

 

[Glowsquid]

This won't work financially, but... Implement credits as Microtransactions, give the game away for free.

I have seriously always wondered why DD games haven't done this. Give people 1 credit or so a day for free, then make them pay for additional credits.

It's a system that worked for decades.

One mobile complilation of Capcom arcade games and Tekken Revolution did exactly that.

 

[KDR_11k]

I'd say the fact you get no functional penalty makes it all the clearer that you aren't supposed to credit feed the game - it's clearly not designed to be a part of a cohesive experience with the game. Instead, continues are a cheat code for people who wander in the arcade and just want to see the game through in one go. In the shoot'em ups I play, you even get maximum weapon strength when you continue, so you could be all powered up on stage 1 even though you usually get maximum strength only at last or second last stage.
Your score is also zeroed when you continue - so the game is very directly telling you that at the moment you continue, your performance is worth zero.

Why not simply remove the ability to continue if 1cc is really the main way to play? Cheat codes require some effort to input but with continues it's often faster to hit start than to mash buttons to accelerate the countdown and then sit through all the post-game and intro screens. So the game design actively encourages abusing the continues.

Preventing players from credit feeding prevents them from seeing everything in the game (minus the true final boss perhaps) before being any good at it. Spoils it, no?

 

[Neoleo2143]

The 1 Credit run is what Arcade games need to get their players to Strive for, I really like the Fact that Star Fox Zero's Arcade mode is basically a 1 Credit run mode. It's really great and more games need specific 1 Credit modes.

 

[dragonzdogma]

What developers Should do i give you a trophy for beating with less than a certain amount of credits.

 

[Tain]

Why not simply remove the ability to continue if 1cc is really the main way to play? Cheat codes require some effort to input but with continues it's often faster to hit start than to mash buttons to accelerate the countdown and then sit through all the post-game and intro screens. So the game design actively encourages abusing the continues.

Preventing players from credit feeding prevents them from seeing everything in the game (minus the true final boss perhaps) before being any good at it. Spoils it, no?

The developers need to strike a balance between providing a good experience and a comprehensive port with all the functionality of the arcade original included (score-chasing players sometimes use continues to practice, stuff like that).

 

[adj_noun]

Pick a parent or guardian and make them stand by your console/PC. If none is available, you can hire a stand-in.

You get four credits. After the first four, you have to whine for more. The parent/guardian gets to decide if you get more and, if so, how many. Their word is final.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Why not simply remove the ability to continue if 1cc is really the main way to play? Cheat codes require some effort to input but with continues it's often faster to hit start than to mash buttons to accelerate the countdown and then sit through all the post-game and intro screens. So the game design actively encourages abusing the continues.

Preventing players from credit feeding prevents them from seeing everything in the game (minus the true final boss perhaps) before being any good at it. Spoils it, no?

Well, assuming you can pay for it, arcade games do allow the player to continue (and even if you are going for a 1CC, continuing can be helpful in that setting as a practice tool - some of the world's most dedicated shooter players will credit feed while learning a new game). I 100% think that arcade ports should do a little more to make it clear to players that any good arcade game is balanced around being 1CCable, but I don't think they should absolutely remove the ability to continue.

 

[Daouzin]

I think this is one scenario where the benefit of achievements really makes a difference.

I bought the Metal Slug Anthology for Wii, but could never get into it because of the unlimited Free Play. Which sucks, because until then I was a huge fan of the Metal Slug series.

However, I just bought Mushihimesama on Steam and loved it because it has random achievements thrown about. To be fair, it's also a Cave Shooter, but I think the Achievements got me to play through the different modes and got me to invest enough time that I like it enough to go for the 1 CC on the easier modes.

I don't think the achievements matter in the sense of, "I want to increase my total # of Achievements," but in the sense of "I did something, or could do something cool," and the game will acknowledge it, in a meaningful way.

In the Metal Slug Anthology, the game won't recognize anything you do, although you could still set your own achievements/milestones.

 

[Jucksalbe]

In the Metal Slug Anthology, the game won't recognize anything you do, although you could still set your own achievements/milestones.

Didn't the Metal Slug Anthology have some art or music you could only unlock if you beat the games within a certain number of continues?