The laziest professional video game review I've ever read

[Randorama]

Sorry guys....

...I actually remember a video from a someone usually posting on neo-geo.com who recorded how he cleared all four courses with mostly Birdies and quite a few Eagles. I do not recall if it is on youtube or not, but I do remember him playing him all four courses and getting the first place all the time, with scores in the -18 to -21 or -22 range...and then concluding the video with a "thumbs up" selfie, I believe. He was likely playing the home version.

I probably forgot that he starts a new credit after each course, but I do believe that he played all four courses in a row to prove the point that, stamina-wise, the task may be feasible. But still, we are talking of a 2-hours something "run", I guess? I wonder if that would count as "predatory behaviour" from programmers, making a game so enjoyable that you literally get glued to it for hours on end

[Sumez]

Haha
Yeah, 1CC'ing every course is still a cool feat
I'm glad it's not the built in goal though

[Randorama]

Well, the Neo Geo should have some early titles that were obscenely long, as I mentioned in the..."We are the champions!" thread (where else, indeed?).

To be on topic, I am not really surprised about the guy calling Contra a predatory game even if the person might want to pass as an "arcade games expert" of some sort(s), but I am also curious about the choice of the "predatory" label. I still keep thinking that the "classic arcade business model" revolves around games that should invite players to insert coins as frequently as possible, with the possibility to play for the 1-CC or for an indefinite time as a "prize" for those players who made an effort to play the game. As "creations" of the 1980s, the decade that witnessed the meteoric rise of rampant predatory capitalism, it makes quite a bit of sense to me.

However, in my line of work "predatory" is a label slapped onto publishers who promise researchers to publish papers without too many hurdles if they pay a (usually) hefty publication fee. It is considered predatory because people might pay up to bypass quality control steps and therefore publish articles that are worthless when evaluation committees check publications ("this article is shit; you just published it because you paid for it!").

As a kid who would always play on a tight budget (2000 of the old Italian lire, roughly one euro, and ten credits of 200 lire each), I would usually refrain from continuing. I do not remember anyone forcing me to continue when playing games as a kid, perhaps promising me that I would get some benefit out of it ("1-CC Contra and your grades will go up!", for instance), but usually I didn't check attract screens either. Maybe Contra offers promises of bigger penises to players who will clear the game but only if they credit-feed it due to their lack of gaming skills?

(or really: youtubers say that dumbest things, indeed).