This thread is about getting the most out of video games. It's about playing them in a way to get the most satisfaction. Here are a few examples. What are yours?

Added Disclaimer:
There are plenty of people who tell others the "right way" to do something or when someone is "going about something the wrong way". Google it sometime. I'm giving out sound advice. If you don't want to follow it, then simply don't.

Resident Evil 0-Code Veronica, Silent Hill series, and other horror games.

To be played in the dark. Playing it at length will also increase immersion. An excerpt from EGM article:

Ninja Gaiden 2 (XBOX360)

This game is meant to be played without using healing or ki restoring items. Beating a boss by restoring all your health sucks all the tension out of the fight. It also will make you worse at the game because you don't figure out winning strategies. So, playing the game without those items will give the player a greater sense of accomplishment. It makes every blue and red orb dropped by enemies that much sweeter to get.

Resident Evil 4 (Gamecube)

This game is meant to be played without using continues. The game has a hidden difficulty scale that goes 1-6. When you continue the game dumbs down the difficulty and ai for you. It will also drop more items for you. Like reasons stated for NG2, you'll become that much better at the game and have a more satisfying experience if you play this way.

STG/Arcade Games

The games were designed to be played on one credit and not by coin feeding. If you keep hitting start or putting more coins in the cabinet you might as well not be playing the game (there is no difficulty with infinite lives).

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p … %20feeding

I think you're a troll.

If we're truly talking about playing games the "right way" then it's so much simpler than you make it:

1) Get a game you want to play
2) Have fun playing it

And that's it!

Now, if we're talking about the way "you" choose to play games because you're a challenge-junkie, then your suggestions would definitely help like-minded people find more satisfaction. As for everyone else... those suggestions are pretty much useless. Satisfaction is entirely subjective and therefore how one attains it will obviously vary depending on the individual. Take me for example: none of those suggestions would make my gaming experience more satisfactory.

On a related note, I don't care so much about satisfaction as a concept when applied to games. Since games are merely entertainment, I'd argue that terms such as "enjoyment", "pleasure" and "fun" are far more valuable. Those concepts are even more subjective than satisfaction though. I'd say this is definitely a case of "Why fix something if it isn't broken?"

Why is it apparently so important to you to convince everyone else that they need to do things exactly your way? A little low on confidence perhaps? Or maybe you've got way too much?

Seems more like an insomniac to me.

Uh, are you sure about that? It's the exact opposite. Most arcade games are DESIGNED to make kids pump money into them. Any arcade game developer that expects the player to beat the game on one quarter is a poor businessman. Sure, it's not very satisfying to endless blow through credits, but if you're talking about the developer's viewpoint of how it was designed and intended to be played, they expect you to put in at least one or two extra quarters. Technically, you could say they're designed with the intent that the player would eventually get good enough to 1cc the game, but they'd like you to feed the machine a ton of cash along the way to that endpoint.

If you want a "real" experience when playing MAME or whatever, just pretend you're using real money. Stop adding credits when you hit the point in which you'd tell yourself that you've put enough into that one machine for one day. I think you can feel proud and accomplished in beating a game even if you go through a few credits. If you go through 50, then, yeah, that's overboard.

Read this Tri-Ace: On Arcades. Article talks about how quarter munchers don't exist in Japan and more.

This thread is about establishing superior ways of play to enhance the gaming experience. No one is being forced to play this way. I am using my own judgment to describe what is preferential. If something doesn't seem better, then explain why that is. I find it hard to believe that you would not feel a greater sense of accomplishment (satisfaction) beating an arcade game in one credit over using infinite lives.

When I'm right, baby, I am right.

I was wondering why you would post a topic called "Dictionary For Baudrillard" on a forum primarily about video game soundtracks.
I was thinking to myself, "don't be so suspicious! There might be a perfectly innocent reason he posted this topic!"
But no, you're not here to promote literacy. You're here to promote conversational sociopathy.

That article is a mile long. I'm not going to read it just because you're too lazy to make your argument yourself.

You must have extremely limited experience with Japanese-developed arcade games if you think quarter munchers don't exist in Japan (well, obviously they don't use quarters). I've probably played more ridiculously cheap Japanese arcade games than ones made anywhere else. Shooters, fighters, puzzle games, etc. Every hear of SNK Boss Syndrome, for example?

People don't credit-feed in Japan. I only posted that because it says everything that I could say but better. It's long, but it's worth a read.

Does icycalm pay you for this? And if so, is it with money or drugs?

Dais, have I told you how much I love you lately?

This guy has been doing this for a while here, then he suddenly disappeared after community backlash, and now he's back again, pretending nothing ever happened.

In regard to what? Actual arcades? Historically, it's been no different in the US. Kids have limited money, and those with more to spend generally don't want to dump a ton into one machine. Credit-feeding is a phenomenon associated with emulation and console ports, where it doesn't cost anything to endlessly continue. And unless there are surveys conducted that ask Japanese people how they go about playing MAME or their home consoles games, I don't see how a statement like "Japanese people don't credit-feed." can be made. I'm sure some do, some don't. I've encountered plenty of Westerners obsessed with 1cc'ing games too.

This thread isn't about getting the most out of video games, it's elitist ePeen stroking.  There is a small, small, fraction of a percent minority that enjoy playing games to that difficulty.  The majority don't give a f--- and play games to have fun.

I've never heard that before. If true, it gives me a new reason to play it (like I needed one).

Yea, I found out the 1-6 scale through a post by a hacker in arcentral.net/forums.

Yes.

As opposed to what, sadness or boredom? LOL. People have fun playing for challenge.

I was hoping in this thread that someone would talk about FPS games needing to be played with a keyboard or fighting games needing to be played with an arcade stick. Hopefully someone in the community is capable of offering a response that deals with the topic.

Some people have fun dying all the time. But not everyone. Some people have fun tearing through enemies and laying the smack down, never being in trouble. You can't say that there's is only one true way. Especially why you say a game is "meant to be played" with restrictions the developers didn't even give.

If you beat FFXII International, you can restart the game at level 90. Clearly not a challenge in the least. Why would they put it in, though, if there weren't some people who would have fun with it?

I thought it was clear that I was asking for player input of how to play a game, not developer intentions. When I said "This game is meant to be played" I am saying this in my opinion. Personally, I don't care if players want to "go the wrong way" in a racing game or refuses to run right in a side-scroller when the screen only scrolls when you go right--I just want to read explanations for why someone should play a certain game a certain way that is logical.

And no, I wouldn't recommend anyone start off an rpg at level 90. That's just bad game design.

Actually, that would be a really interesting idea: Start at 90 and level DOWN.
Grow weaker as you progress!

That'd make for an interesting RPG...

On-topic: I've always enjoyed playing Mega Man games "naked": no use of boss weapons, upgrades or Energy Tanks etc. I never dared doing so for MM9 and 10 though...

Likewise!

...oh, we are not talking about the same thing D:

If I'm playing 'em wrong, I don't want to be right.
Aside from playing horror games in the dark, I can't think of any good examples myself. Playing a dating sim when you're lonely and desperate? As far as challenge goes, I play games more for the adventure. I think I prefer "feeling" like it's challenging without actually dying a lot. Games like Uncharted do a good job of putting you in the middle of dangerous action, without being punishing (usually). And if I'm playing on any difficulty above "normal" just for the sake of my pride or ego, I'm playing it wrong. But that's just me.

Killzone Liberation should be played with a punching bag nearby.

Ninja: Shadow of Darkness should be played with cheat codes.

Monster Hunter should be played while you're incarcerated, so you can make sufficient progress.

DMC 3's Dante Must Die mode should be played on YouTube.

How is it 'bad game design'? It's not as if they are forcing you (there's also a weak mode where you don't level at ALL).

What about New Game Plus? Such a thing is VERY often sought after. It seems to be one of the huge reason people love Chrono Trigger so much. Yet the majority of time it allows you to easily plow through most of the game.

I get satisfaction by playing games the way I want to, and NOT by people telling me how I should play. When people tell me how I should play I get annoyed, when they keep insisting they are correct, I get more annoyed. If they don't leave me alone and keep pestering I am tempted to beat them (not too much, just until they cry like a baby)... beating people is wrong of course, but then I can play the games quietly, and I get a greater sense of accomplishment in making the gaming world a little bit better for everyone.

edit:
Couldn't resist! Seriously though, people enjoy different things, let's not tell others how to enjoy themselves.

in FF4,, it was either Tellah, or Fusoya,, their stats (sans HP/MP) would actually go down as they leveled up because they were old...

What about FPS games designed for home consoles? What about the fact that the standard controller for the Neo Geo CD is a pad?

While I do think the title of the topic could be paraphrased differently, I don't see the need to get so aggressive on this. I share the sentiment of playing horror games in the dark. Can't really see how they can be played in any other way for maximum immersion. Also, playing Resident Evil 4 on Professional mode greatly improves the experience (even though the 1-6 difficulty spike the author of the topic is suggesting is lost on me). However, as I said, "right" wouldn't be the word I'd opt for.

Agreed. RE4 was one of the few games I loved playing for all it was worth. Like a drug I kept needing stronger doses of.

Here's something, but it may be more of a pet peeve: When I'm playing an RPG and I get to an area with new music, I like to enjoy at least a full loop without distractions. If I'm playing Chrono Cross and I just stepped onto the world map for the first time, please don't talk to me. You will ruin a sacred moment.

And that's the problem: you can't believe. It's an insomnia thing. It won't matter what I say or how I say it. Regardless, games aren't just about challenge, accomplishment, or satisfaction. I appreciate that you choose your words carefully, but in the end it just turns into a word game and I'm not really interested in playing. I don't always play games for the challenge. As I said clearly before, I play them for enjoyment. And sometimes enjoyment comes from a lack of challenge.

These days, I'm frankly lucky if I get to play a game at all.

I can see why you find his prescriptive tone objectionable.  I wouldn't presume to dictate how others should play games, but I often wonder whether I'm playing games in such a way as to maximize my enjoyment, and difficulty is a factor.

For example, I've been playing Medal of Honor on Xbox 360 on normal difficulty with aim assist, and after breezing through a few levels I'm beginning to suspect that it would be more fun if I turned cruise control off.  It's pretty silly, I think, to have the aiming done for me in a FPS.

I see a link to an Insomnia article in this thread. That pretty much kills off any chance at respectability

If you have faults with the article please point them out, Goldfish. Thanks.

Sincerely,

Vert1

i also think people who wipe their butt from front to back instead of back to front should be rounded up and put in internment camps... cause it totally goes against the biological design...

if you're playing a lot of games,, you probably have a lot of free time...
if you're playing so many games that you watch others and decide that they are playing them incorrectly,, you have too much free time...
if you're playing so many games that you watch others and decide that they are playing them incorrectly and feel you must preach about how your way is the correct way,, you need to come out of the basement once in a while...

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h311/ … douche.jpg

There is no such thing as free time.

There are plenty of people who tell others the "right way" to do something or when someone is "going about something the wrong way". Google it sometime. I'm giving out sound advice. If you don't want to follow it, then simply don't.

Sure there is. It depends on a person's perspective and definition. Are you not familiar with the basic concepts of relativity as they apply in both physics and philosophy?

edit: Along Mike's lines, I've always enjoyed this pictorial definition...
http://www.killmydaynow.com/2010/04/you … when.html/

On Free Time:

From The Consumer Society: Myths & Structures