FUN and “EASY” 1CCs

[bcass]

I'm afraid that all those lists are compiled (no pun intended) by people experienced in shmups, so their views are a bit skewered.

In which case DDP would likely rank even higher in difficulty.

[wiNteR]

Dodonpachi was my second 1CC after ThunderForce-3. I don't re-call having a hard time with it. Essentially I had credit fed it a few times before. And one night I thought I would sit down and try to clear it by practicing using save states. By the morning time, I had the clear.

Basically I learned the first four stages and learned how to get through them without losing a life (using a few bombs). I thought I would have to practice on stage-5 and stage-6 too and get familiar with them too, but it didn't come to that (since via bomb spamming I cleared it on last life and last bomb).

======

Now I watched your video too, out of curiousity, to see why you thought it is hard. Honestly, it is a bit hard to say, since you didn't do anything particularly wrong (like dying with lots of bombs which leaves less and less resources for a basic 1CC). Nevertheless, here are few observations:
(1) You did quite well overall I think. Decent dodging on a number of parts and actually very good dodging on stage-6 beehive. Few things that I noticed:
(i) You can attack the stage-2 boss head-on (by staying in the middle) and it would probably have died earlier (unless you want to destroy the side parts for bonus). It definitely lasted longer the way you destroyed it, which meant you had to dodge more of its harder attack.

(ii) At the stage-4 middle part (where the first big ship appears) you can go to the upper left and destroy the first big ship quicker with aura. Routing for the part can help save a bomb. Hard to write the whole description but watching a video gives a good idea about routing for this part.

(iii) Similarly, stage-5 (till the popcorn enemies start coming out relentlessly from all over the screens) and stage-6 (till the beehive) can be made significantly easier with memorization (muscle memory) and routing alone.

(2) The game has an extra button for shot auto-fire (can be set-up from emulation too, but the game has an extra button for this anyway). That makes switching between shot and laser much easier.

(3) Somehow, I felt that tanks on stage-2 were firing more aggressively than they would on default (4 difficulty). But I could be wrong about this (hard to say without experimenting a bit and re-checking).

[bcass]

Maybe you're just amazing a shmups then, as it took me a month of practise to complete it. I can guarantee that the vast majority of players new to shmups will not be having an easy time with it.

That said, it only took me a weekend to get the 1-ALL on R-Type, which is ranked above DDP in the Difficulty Wiki, so maybe there is a bigger problem with that list than we first thought...

[bcass]

Now I watched your video too, out of curiousity, to see why you thought it is hard.

In that run I was using a Sanwa stick, which I find very difficult to do tap-dodges / micro-movements on. That may be one big reason why it took me so long to clear. I recently changed to a Korean lever, which I am using for a Progear 1-ALL.

Somehow, I felt that tanks on stage-2 were firing more aggressively than they would on default (4 difficulty). But I could be wrong about this (hard to say without experimenting a bit and re-checking).

I played the JPN version. The international version is maybe easier? Eitherway, thanks for the unexpected feedback!

[wiNteR]

Forgot to mention in last post. While Gradius-V is fairly manageable, it does require endurance (due to length) and disciplined practice on the stages. For example, there are some places where a death can be quite costly (as I re-call, perhaps(??) dying on speed section of stage-7 means losing all the options). And, on top of that, the option hunters are a real nuisance.

I played the JPN version. The international version is maybe easier? Eitherway, thanks for the unexpected feedback!

Yes, certainly conceivable that there might be some small differences, but difficult to confirm or deny this without testing.

Maybe you're just amazing a shmups then, as it took me a month of practise to complete it. I can guarantee that the vast majority of players new to shmups will not be having an easy time with it.

That said, it only took me a weekend to get the 1-ALL on R-Type, which is ranked above DDP in the Difficulty Wiki, so maybe there is a bigger problem with that list than we first thought...

To be honest, I had my struggles with fair number of games over the years (and also doing merely OK-ish on many). Yes, for a first 1CC a better recommended game might be something like Futari-v1.5 Original or something similar (given what I have seen of it).

Also, coincidentally, I am playing R-type1 on R-type dimension on switch. I have to say it doesn't feel particularly easy to me at all (right now just unlocking it level by level with the limited lives mode and re-starting from beginning of stage). Now I do think part of it is that (1) I am highly used to keyboard (and on top of that the direction-pad of switch isn't good for diagonal movements) (2) small screen (3) Lack of save-states which makes a particularly big difference in a game with checkpoints, where a death suddenly leads to spike in difficulty (and also, importantly, a different routing plan). For example, if I was using save-states, I wouldn't bother about learning recovery from checkpoints (except maybe 1 or 2 at-most, where it might be worth practicing a bit) ***.

In that sense the game seems similar to gradius to me where the simplest plan of getting a no-miss is the best plan for a 1CC (since that worked quite well for me in that game, as it is my fastest arcade clear to date).

Nevertheless, regardless of that, honestly I have to say that if I absolutely had to place R-type somewhere [which can be a bit hard to judge when using different practice methods], I would also place it a point or so above dodonpachi 1-All. It is also worth mentioning that a difference 1-point or so is very small in a list with so many gradations (particularly towards the lower end). But indeed that list gets number of things right and also many things wrong too (and some of them are noticeable). If there is some interest I can write in detail (in the relevant topic), though there is no doubt that there are good number of players who can describe these details much better than me. Writing in them detail here would de-rail this topic so I would leave it here in this post.



*** Regardless of all that I can see why R-type is considered a quality game. Sure stuff like checkpoints could be considered a bit out-dated by some. However, playing it in a somewhat inefficient way (working out all the checkpoint recoveries by yourself and without watching any 1CC videos first etc.) also shows how the game-designers were thinking about various aspect of stage design.

In that aspect, there is some degree of resemblance with Ikaruga, where I see that a lot of people don't enjoy it. I also felt the same. However, when I started playing it I didn't watch any videos and tried to get some level of proficiency with chaining myself [ofc after a certain score, it seems reasonable to consult videos]. That helps one appreciate the stage design more. My feeling is that RSG is somewhat similar in this regard.

[Sima Tuna]

What every person finds easy or hard is going to be subjective. That said, I think the most objective formula for deriving an "easy" 1cc is the amount of resources you are given.

If you are given few resources or no resources, then most will find the 1cc challenging.

If you are given a ton of resources, even if the game itself is hard, many will find it more attainable.

Nobody enjoys being told they have 2 lives, no extends and a run attempt takes over an hour (metal slug 3.)

[jehu]

Agreed on the previous comment about resources. If you're trying to derive a broader rule about what separates the easy from the hard, that's a very good place to start.

That being said, if there's anyone out there - lurking or otherwise - who's really interested in Easy 1CCs and acclimating themselves to the genre, I'd make sure you're getting advice from other people who are around your skill level. On one of the Discords - ShumpJunkie's, I think? - I saw a list of beginner 1CCs that's actively updated and vetted by a ton of new players. That's probably going to be the best thing out there as far as I know. Once you've been on the scene for awhile, you can forget the kinds of problems new players are even having. (How to read a screen of bullets, specialized hand-eye coordination, where to "look" while you're playing etc.)

I often visualize the skill-curve of STG players using the charts used for language learners: with Beginner, Intermediate, Intermediate-Advanced, Advanced, Superior etc. The 'beginner' question is asked more than any other. But sometimes I wonder where you'd draw the line for the other skill levels.

Say you decided to put together an 'Intermediate Curriculum' - what games would you include?

I've seen a lot of people argue that once you get past Beginners' stage, you just ought to find a game you like a lot and play it to death. I could see that working, but if you pick the wrong game it might be awfully discouraging. I don't know - what do you all think?

[Lethe]

I often visualize the skill-curve of STG players using the charts used for language learners: with Beginner, Intermediate, Intermediate-Advanced, Advanced, Superior etc. The 'beginner' question is asked more than any other. But sometimes I wonder where you'd draw the line for the other skill levels.

Say you decided to put together an 'Intermediate Curriculum' - what games would you include?

Some of these difficulty lists already categorize their rankings in such a way.

But the real answer is: it's meaningless. The reason why this question is asked by beginners is because, by definition, beginners don't have a foundation to build on. If you already know enough to know how to approach problems, you're above the level where generic answers are useful. By that point there's no reason to concern yourself with "obligatory" games or "training" basic shit; as long as you're applying yourself, your fundamentals are going to get better on their own anyway. Better to have it happen naturally while spending time with something you like.

To me, the appeal of shmups is in their combination of simplicity and esoterica. Conventional fundamentals are one underpinning constant, but there's also a constant of how that solution works in this specific moment thanks to the way this game's mechanics are set up. Moreover a hard game could demand few esoterics, while an easy game can have the capacity for tons! And unless you experience it, you'll never understand. So go find new problems. Play something unlike what you've played before, and experiment as much as you can. Experience in both depth and breadth helps isolate what it is you actually like from what you associate with what you like, which feeds back into the continuous process of deciding what you're going to spend time with and to what end.

E: Just IMO, worrying over putting time into the "wrong" game is nonsense. A game becomes the "wrong" game when you stop liking it. You're in the position to make that judgement whenever that moment comes, not before.

[To Far Away Times]

Maybe you're just amazing a shmups then, as it took me a month of practise to complete it. I can guarantee that the vast majority of players new to shmups will not be having an easy time with it.

That said, it only took me a weekend to get the 1-ALL on R-Type, which is ranked above DDP in the Difficulty Wiki, so maybe there is a bigger problem with that list than we first thought...

I've completed the first loops of R-Type and DDP. They're on opposite sides of the shmup spectrum. I had to have a real solid plan for R-Type to clear it. Yet it only took me three days of focused save state practice. Nice going to get it done in two days. Within three days I had the game memorized inside and out. I knew where every enemy would come from and had strategies for every section of the game. So while I had to work hard for it, it was only for a short amount of time. Part of it is that R-Type is designed to be easy to remember. R-Type is certainly no freebie clear, it has a reputation for being brutally difficult for a reason, but with the right mindset you can tear through it in a surprisingly short amount of time.

With DDP I play mostly on reaction and try to bomb when I'm near danger, and hope my skills and reflexes carry me through.

Once I had R-Type memorized, I felt like I could pretty much do it every time. Just having a solid plan is 90% of it. Stages 5 and 8 are trivial, you can just sit in the corner. Stage 1 - 3 is the opening with a gradual ramp up in difficulty. If you know the mechanics, I could see the first three stages being cleared on a blind run. Stage 4 is where the game starts really trying to kick you off the machine. So that leaves only stage 4, 6, and 7 as potential choke points.

DDP I felt like I could screw up at any moment. I know what's coming, but I could still screw up due to having to make tight dodges.

So they are very different games with very different skill sets. I can see how two people could look at those games and have different views on which one is harder.

I find DDP harder because I will definitely screw up some of the tight dodges in a typical bullet hell game each run, but DDP gives you lots of resources to cover mistakes, whereas R-Type doesn't ask as much from the player but demands a perfect run.

[atro_city]

Maybe you're just amazing a shmups then, as it took me a month of practise to complete it. I can guarantee that the vast majority of players new to shmups will not be having an easy time with it.

That said, it only took me a weekend to get the 1-ALL on R-Type, which is ranked above DDP in the Difficulty Wiki, so maybe there is a bigger problem with that list than we first thought...

I've completed the first loops of R-Type and DDP. They're on opposite sides of the shmup spectrum. I had to have a real solid plan for R-Type to clear it. Yet it only took me three days of focused save state practice. Nice going to get it done in two days. Within three days I had the game memorized inside and out. I knew where every enemy would come from and had strategies for every section of the game. So while I had to work hard for it, it was only for a short amount of time. Part of it is that R-Type is designed to be easy to remember. R-Type is certainly no freebie clear, it has a reputation for being brutally difficult for a reason, but with the right mindset you can tear through it in a surprisingly short amount of time.

With DDP I play mostly on reaction and try to bomb when I'm near danger, and hope my skills and reflexes carry me through.

Once I had R-Type memorized, I felt like I could pretty much do it every time. Just having a solid plan is 90% of it. Stages 5 and 8 are trivial, you can just sit in the corner. Stage 1 - 3 is the opening with a gradual ramp up in difficulty. If you know the mechanics, I could see the first three stages being cleared on a blind run. Stage 4 is where the game starts really trying to kick you off the machine. So that leaves only stage 4, 6, and 7 as potential choke points.

DDP I felt like I could screw up at any moment. I know what's coming, but I could still screw up due to having to make tight dodges.

So they are very different games with very different skill sets. I can see how two people could look at those games and have different views on which one is harder.

I find DDP harder because I will definitely screw up some of the tight dodges in a typical bullet hell game each run, but DDP gives you lots of resources to cover mistakes, whereas R-Type doesn't ask as much from the player but demands a perfect run.

Agreed. I think shmups designed in the "classic" style like Twin Cobra, Raiden, etc. feel more doable than something like Dodonpachi which is more of a hard skill check. This will vary from person to person of course. Personally my overall skill/reaction level is very low so I have to rely heavily on going in with a very specific and safe plan. Something like a DDP 1CC is simply not in the cards for me even with the amount of resources available, but with something like Raiden I know that I can eventually clear it with the right strategy, enough practice and not screwing up in a bad place.

[pulsemod]

so, do most people tend to use save states when starting with a game then? I can't be bothered to do that and it seems totally not fun to me, but it seems like whether they're used or not for practice can massively change the difficulty of a game

[bcass]

It's going to take you a lot longer to clear a game if you're not using save states. If you have no job, or are a student with plenty of free time, then that might not be a problem. For the rest of us, life is way too short to not use that advantage.

[To Far Away Times]

so, do most people tend to use save states when starting with a game then? I can't be bothered to do that and it seems totally not fun to me, but it seems like whether they're used or not for practice can massively change the difficulty of a game

I like to think of practicing a game for a 1CC like practicing a musical piece. If you were learning a classical song, maybe something quite difficult, and there was a measure that was giving you trouble and that section was three or four minutes into the song, would you play the song in full until you got to the trouble spot, make one attempt, mess it up because you don't know it real well, and start over from the beginning? Or would you isolate the measure that was giving you trouble and work it repeatedly until you had it?

[pja]

so, do most people tend to use save states when starting with a game then? I can't be bothered to do that and it seems totally not fun to me, but it seems like whether they're used or not for practice can massively change the difficulty of a game

I try not to. I may resort to savestates eventually if I like the game enough to go for 1CC anyway (or a practice mode/stage select since this is often included in ports nowadays).

But people are right that this doesn't translate to a lot of 1CCs. If you're hunting those, savestate practice probably is the best strategy.

[donluca]

I like to think of practicing a game for a 1CC like practicing a musical piece. If you were learning a classical song, maybe something quite difficult, and there was a measure that was giving you trouble and that section was three or four minutes into the song, would you play the song in full until you got to the trouble spot, make one attempt, mess it up because you don't know it real well, and start over from the beginning? Or would you isolate the measure that was giving you trouble and work it repeatedly until you had it?

Piano and guitar player here.

When I have to learn a piece from scratch, I generally do it bits by bits at the beginning to get the feel of it, but then I start playing it as a single piece and if I mess up really badly at some point, I'll just start over since that will be practice which will improve parts which, despite already knowing, still have room for improvement.

This is not obviously the most efficient way of learning, but it's what I personally enjoy the most.

I do the same for Shmups and Fighting Games (long combos/setups).

For a shmup, I generally try to 1CC each stage separately and then play the whole thing from start to finish.

With all its flaws, Jamestown did this really well: it first let you play in story mode each stage separately and then unlocks Gauntlet mode to play all the stages, one after the other.

[Sima Tuna]

so, do most people tend to use save states when starting with a game then? I can't be bothered to do that and it seems totally not fun to me, but it seems like whether they're used or not for practice can massively change the difficulty of a game

When playing casually, I don't use save states unless I'm really fucking around. Most of my casual play, like when I'm playing a game for the first couple of times, I'll credit feed. You can beat most arcade games by just credit feeding. Even checkpoint games.

But when it comes to 1cc and trying to learn how to play the game correctly, I use save states. Save states are great for learning. I think it's a mistake to use them in casual play as a crutch, but for practice, they are a godsend. Others have already said why. Sometimes you need to practice specific sections or patterns over and over until you figure them out. You can't do that efficiently without save states and/or chapter/boss select.

Now, I will say that you don't need to save state practice for every 1cc. I'm not very good at arcade games, and most of my 1ccs are of games where I didn't use save states. You don't need save states or chapter select for a lot of Cave Novice modes, because the games give you a lot of resources. You can make a lot of mistakes and still 1cc those modes. My Huntdown 1ccs were all obtained without save states, mostly by just running the Arcade routes over and over until I mastered each piece. That said, you can use Story mode in Huntdown as a stage select, to practice boss patterns and trouble spots.

I think game length is also a big factor. I don't think it's reasonable or even feasable to 1cc Metal Slug 3 without save state practice. The game is over a fucking hour long and the hardest part of the game is the 20 minute+ last level. So if you run the game from start to finish to "practice," you're going to spend the majority of the run no-missing, up until the last stage where you game over repeatedly. So why not just save state on the last level? Makes sense. No-miss to the last level and then save state to practice the hardest/most bullshitty part of the game.

But with short games, like a 20-minute game? You might not need save states. If a game is 20 minutes then you can just run the game until you hit a trouble spot, game over, run the game again to the same trouble spot. I'm thinking of games like Double Dragon arcade. Even Vendetta is not very long, although you might want to save state for the boss rush extra stage, I dunno.

[BIL]

My 2c: as enthusiasts of arcade games, we don't live in conventional times. This isn't the 80s, or even the 90s, where we'd be in person, at cabs, playing full runs and very likely talking, taking notes, etc. That's the atmosphere these games were designed for (see the much-beloved communal Druaga efforts of Japanese game centers, with logbooks on-site for players to record their findings). Best most of us can do ATM is searching replays and hopefully their attached notes, online.

There's also the matter of selection - you couldn't casually carry about hundreds of these games in a small briefcase, the way we can now (ignoring unofficial emulation/piracy - then it'd be in the thousands, easily). So naturally there's more pressure to "get clears" and whittle down "the list," compared to playing a handful of games that might be rotated out next month for all you know.

In this context, without that intended communal support, savestates are totally understandable. You're simply looking at the same games in two starkly differing cultural eras. Instead of watching the four dudes in front successively bite it at that bitch of a sixth boss, noting it's got a blind spot to its left during That One Nasty Pattern and finally executing when your turn comes up, you can use a state for the same rapid prototyping process. (you could also play five credits at 20mins apiece, of course - for PCB players this is basically the only choice - but then there's that issue of labyrinthine selection, even when sticking to official releases)

What matters is the end result, obviously. A run is a run, however it was constructed. At a certain threshold, even the most trivial of hobbies goes from mere amusement to disciplined performance - and good performance tends to demand effective training methods. Those bands hammering out your favourite tunes onstage probably stated their way through particularly troublesome time-changes and breakdowns, too.

And as bcass says, there's the harsh reality of time. Most of us were kids back then. Voluntarily or otherwise, you end up giving a lot more of your time and energy away in young/middle adulthood. I'm looking at doing a lot of Grandpa Shumping before falling off of my chair, Godfather Part III-style for the ultimate Game Over, Yeahhh!

All this said, there's nothing stopping anyone from replicating the conditions of past decades; playing strictly on PCBs, in communal settings (in-person or streamed online), etc. I like to use one savestate, finding it a healthy solution for my relatively low performance goals (kinda fun, gradually going further and further away from the "checkpoint" unscathed - "I think I can do this!"). If I were aiming for truly impressive scores, I'd undoubtedly be using several.

[donluca]

I agree with most of what BIL said, but I wanted to add just one more thing.

Everyone's goals are different. You *don't have* to play for 1CC, to get a high score or what have you.
You can also play just for fun and try to get to the end of the game by making your own set of rules.

Back in the days, my parents would give me 1000 Italian Lire to go and play at the arcade near home, that was 3 credits and since I managed to get a cab and recreate that experience (minus the crowds and the atmosphere, obviously), I still stand by my 3 credit rules.

I choose a game, I fire up the cab knowing that for that day I only have 3 credits to use.
Play and see how far I can get and decide whether I want to continue and put another credit in or switch to another game.

That's how I personally roll and, yes, sometimes I get stuck on a game because I want the 1CC (Progear, I'm looking at you, I still get wrecked at the last stage up to this day) but that's about it.

I think that there should really be a shift in attitude, at least for what concerns retrogaming, to be more on the "having fun" rather than spending time and money to achieve the "perfect setup" or "get the highest score" or "get the 1CC".

After all, even if those damned machines ate our quarters like nothing else, games were meant to both challenge the players and, most importantly, for us to have fun.

[BurlyHeart]

^ I really like this post.

I agree having fun is the priority. If it's trying to get 1cc's or high scores, that's cool. But it shouldn't define you.

I think it's undoubtedly a knock-on from the internet, and having so many videos / scores & information readily available at our fingertips. Leading to people to compare themselves against the best of the best. I am not Jaimers. I am not iconclasts or Jun0. And that's okay. I'm having fun doing my thing. And the community, by and large, is very accepting of that. It's all just a bit o' craic.

[Creamy Goodness]

I sometimes wonder if chasing 1cc's helps or hurts the gaming experience. On one hand having a goal to attain can make things more exciting and help extend interest in a game. OTOH the whole process can take a game meant to be played for fun and turn it into a regimine and exercise more than a game. These days for various reasons I kind of need an end goal to help me keep focus on things. Without that I would probably just dick around with games and never get to deeply involved in them which would eventually lead me to losing interest. For shorter arcade style games 1cc'ing them creates that goal. For other types of games like RPG's simply finishing them is enough for me. Like I couldn't imagine doing stuff like speed running or 1cc'ing long games. That level of practice would drive me insane.

[Rastan78]

I think that there should really be a shift in attitude, at least for what concerns retrogaming, to be more on the "having fun" rather than spending time and money to achieve the "perfect setup" or "get the highest score" or "get the 1CC".

Agree with the whole games should be fun, so don't lose sight of that notion.

On the other hand I wouldn't just assume that the gear heads tinkering with their CRTs and RGB cables or the score chasers aren't having fun.

If you look at one player saying "noobs who don't play for score miss the whole point," and another saying "sweaty tryhards need to chill out and just enjoy the games" that's really two sides of the same coin. You have one person telling others the best way to enjoy their hobby.

A few points to maybe keep in mind.
- The potential for score based competition is baked into the design of just about every shmup ever made.
- Competion is of course fun for some people and not for others.
- Especially in the western community the truly dedicated tryhards are no doubt far outnumbered by casual players, collectors, connoisseurs etc.
- 1CC isn't really a hardcore goal unless the game is super difficult. Like on the road from dedicated expert who can get 80 or 90 percent of world record scores and up, 1CCing a game once might just be a stepping stone between beginner and intermediate.

Not trying to say 1CCs aren't challenging, rewarding and meaningful. Just putting it in perspective. Like if someone going for 1CC in shmups is considered hardcore to the point of removing the fun out of a game, that's a pretty low bar.

[Sima Tuna]

To me, 1cc is the natural progression of loving an arcade-style game. You see the game is fun. You love playing the game. So you want to play it as well as you can. That leads to 1cc, no credit feed play. It's also a testament to the design of the game. If a game isn't possible to 1cc (and there are some) then the game is kind of shit, isn't it? By doing a 1cc, or a nomiss, you're showing the world that the game is good. The game is at least well-designed enough that you can beat it without pay2win. It's a way to show off the game that you love.

[BIL]

Still breaks my goddamn heart that Midway's beeyootiful T2: The Arcade Game is apparently 1CC-proof. 3;

Either that or everyone I've seen play it is just shite >_> I know a lot of their classic 2D frighteners like Smash TV and Total Carnage are, indeed, 100% smashable on a coin, albeit balls-tough. Our own LordBBH smashes 'em with regularity. I just wanna feel like a kid reading that ol' EGM again though, with AHNULD and Ed Furlong and Linda Hamilton, who actually wasn't in the AC game, they got some other bird (bloke?) to cover for her. Bit lame I thought but oh well.

A 1CC is just a demonstration of competence, imo - both the player's and the game's alike. Competence is fun imo Anything further is done strictly at leisure (not that gaming is anything but, haha - pros excepted obv). There are plenty of STGs I adore from 1ALL standpoint, but don't feel like optimising (Garegga springs to mind), and others I've always meant to return to for a proper blast of hell's furnace on my fuckin bawls (Rayforce, Dangun, Dragon Blaze...), and still others where as far as I'm concerned the 1/2ALL is the end of the line (most Toaplan and Konami endless-loopers). It's all good.

[donluca]

On the other hand I wouldn't just assume that the gear heads tinkering with their CRTs and RGB cables or the score chasers aren't having fun.

i'm a huge gear head here. Or at least have been.
Went through the whole phase, took me almost 10 years and now I look back and I realize that I've spent most time just looking at test patterns, internet threads and youtube videos about how to do what and why and, I'll be brutally honest: I wish I could get all that time back to instead just playing the fucking games.
I already had a couple CRTs, they were not BVMs or Trinitrons/Diamondtron, they were the ones I grew up with and were perfectly fine.
I ended up keeping the 14" I grew up with, recapped it and it's like new.
It's not perfect but I don't need that kind of perfection.
Living in Italy means I've always had RGB (thanks to SCART), just had to switch to Jap/US consoles to get 60Hz and that was it.
I didn't need to go through all the whole thing and I strongly regret it.
I've become knowledgeable, absolutely, but I now realize I didn't want that knowledge, in the end I just wanted to play the games I like and those games that I always wished I had when I was a kid and hadn't, and thanks to flashcarts I could now play.

I just want to warn other people about this rabbit hole, because the whole point shouldn't be a perfect test pattern on your ultra-high TVL Sony BVM. The whole point should be having access to games you like and play them and have fun.

If there are people who actively have fun tinkering, then by all means, so be it.
But for me, looking back, I wish that back then, when I had way more free time than I have now, I would have just focused on playing games.

If you look at one player saying "noobs who don't play for score miss the whole point," and another saying "sweaty tryhards need to chill out and just enjoy the games" that's really two sides of the same coin. You have one person telling others the best way to enjoy their hobby.

Exactly: both of those kind of people are wrong in their own way.

You should do what gives you the most satisfaction and not get influenced by people on forums/social media.
Just because, let me exaggerate this number, 99% of people in shmups tell you that you should go for the 1CC, you should not feel compelled to do so if you don't find it fun. Make up your own rules and have fun with whatever you enjoy doing with the games you love.

The only thing... just don't go online and brag about how good you are because you've cleared Dodonpachi with 10 credits.
Like, it's ok to play by your own rules, but also be aware of what the rest of the world is doing and don't act like everyone else is wrong and you're right and other people chasing high scores, using save states and dedicating a large portion of their free time just to learn how to max the milking of a certain boss are not having fun.
Each of us has a goal and our own ways of reaching it.

Anyway, sorry for the big vent, hopefully it will bring some constructive discussion and ways we can improve to communicate with other people that the whole point which should never be missed is to have fun while playing.
Having goals and achieving them: that's great.
If you do it, that's alright.
If you can't and you feel you're not enjoying that game anymore because of it, then fuck it, drop it and go for something else.

[atro_city]

I can definitely relate to overemphasis on trying to clear games on one credit taking the fun out of them, especially for arcade games. I can't think of a single arcade game I've ever played that I wouldn't consider difficult to 1CC. They're designed to suck the quarters out of your pocket first and foremost. The only clear I've ever gotten is Raiden DX training mode, which doesn't really count.

When I was younger I would just credit-feed everything and have fun doing it, not caring about trying to get a 1CC. I need to make an effort to get back into that mindset because getting to Stage 2/3 over and over in every game is a lot less fun and has led to me playing a lot less of arcade games in general.

[BareKnuckleRoo]

I've become knowledgeable, absolutely, but I now realize I didn't want that knowledge, in the end I just wanted to play the games I like and those games that I always wished I had when I was a kid and hadn't, and thanks to flashcarts I could now play.

I just want to warn other people about this rabbit hole, because the whole point shouldn't be a perfect test pattern on your ultra-high TVL Sony BVM. The whole point should be having access to games you like and play them and have fun.

If there are people who actively have fun tinkering, then by all means, so be it.
But for me, looking back, I wish that back then, when I had way more free time than I have now, I would have just focused on playing games.

I can relate and applaud you for your insight. I stopped livestreaming recently, just can't be bothered any more. I started doing it to a) potentially stave off any cheating accusation drama when posting Youtube stuff, and more importantly b) to try and showcase games I love that haven't gotten enough love, or high level play of stuff I'm very obsessed about (namely Bayonetta). It's fun chatting with other folks into the games, it really is, and I've met some great people.

But lately I've been playing some shmups and realizing I've been really playing badly due to feeling distracted the entire time. Either it's technical issues (one time my ISP had issues that caused constant stuttering for like an entire month, another time the chat window broke and started displaying garbage any time someone typed a comma) or I'm trying to pay attention to chat because I enjoy the chat and don't want to feel like I'm actively ignoring it when I play. I didn't want to be like one of those streams of speedrunners who literally never respond to or interact with their viewers. But I realized I was playing badly much more frequently, and decided ultimate I prefer playing and then uploading to Youtube without the pressure and distraction involved playing live. I just wanna enjoy the games.

[copy-paster]

so, do most people tend to use save states when starting with a game then? I can't be bothered to do that and it seems totally not fun to me, but it seems like whether they're used or not for practice can massively change the difficulty of a game

Real men never use savestate, practice tools of any kind, no autofire either. Play the game like what it was back in the day: full run only, mash that button because it's part of the SKILL, and restart stage 1 over and over if you gameover at final stage. No emulators/ports allowed because that's an unfair advantage, real men plays on PCB only like the good ol' days. Liquid Snake have the right point too.

Spoiler

Of course that's obviously a joke. Use savestates or practice tools if there's any, even those japanese superplayers did copy strats and use ports as learning tool. Clear is what matters.

[Samildanach]

I've given up trying to go for the 1cc on most shmups I play. Too shite skills and too easily bored of the repetition now I am in my 40s, when perhaps if I was more into the genre in my 20s & early 30s, I might have been happier to.

Now, however, I am having a whale of a time gradually playing all the shmups I own (via Arcade Archives, mini consoles and emulation), all by original release order. Doesn't matter if it is a shmup I think I'll like or not, it will all get at least a playthrough. The most dull e.g. Ghost Pilots get dropped after one savestate riddled completion; whereas the best get a lot of time put in, maybe even a 1cc if it is as good to play as Thunder Force III or AC.

So up to February 1991 currently, with Aldynes (PC Engine mini) and Detana!! Twinbee on Arcade Archives. I may have to go back in time a little with the upcoming release of Dragon Saber (Dec 1990).

Going through the genre, month by month, gives me great sense of how this genre was gradually evolving, as well as showing up the breakout releases that pushed things forward dramatically. As an aside, I will be glad when I move out of the 'slow-moving big hit box player ship vs fast moving sniper shots from the side' era that is so bloomin' popular in the v early 90s.

[To Far Away Times]

I go through spells. Right now I'm just not very inspired by the shmups I play. Maybe I'm not focusing on the right games.

I love R-Type, so I tried give the very similar Pulstar another go, and it's alright, but it just never clicks with me. It's competent, but every way that it deviates from R-Type just makes it not as good.

I tried to play Touhou 15 for a bit since it's the only Window's era Touhou I haven't cleared but I find that game incredibly unfun with all it's uniquely bullshit patterns designed around point device mode.

Then I tried Exceed Third and it's a thoroughly solid doujin effort, but it just doesn't muster any motivation in me to return to it or go for a 1CC.

I guess I played all of those out an "obligation" to go for a 1CC, and that's why they didn't stick the landing.

A good game, taken on it's own, should really inspire you to go for a 1CC. I had to 1CC atleast one version of Mushi Futari, even if it was just Original Black Label at the time. I was addicted to that game and it's audio/visual overload. I had to see what came next. That's the sign of a good game.

[wiNteR]

Getting back to the main topic of easy 1CCs, here are few that come to my mind:
(1) Sengoku Aces (first loop)
I haven't done this myself but I think it is probably considered as one of the easier clears.
(2) Storm Blade (first loop)
(3) Gunbird (first loop)
This is probably somewhat harder that (1) I think, so it might be a reasonable game to go for after getting some clears.


Also, I think that at least some of the Sonic Wings/Aero Fighters also are considered friendly 1CCs, but I don't know about them well enough.

I've seen a lot of people argue that once you get past Beginners' stage, you just ought to find a game you like a lot and play it to death. I could see that working, but if you pick the wrong game it might be awfully discouraging. I don't know - what do you all think?

The next logical step might usually be going for (1) better score and/or (2) completing the game with less resources. Of course (1) entails (2) necessarily sometimes.


The specific answer to this kind of question can always vary (i) depending on the person and also because (ii) there could be lot of good choices. Nevertheless here are few suggestion (from survival viewpoint):
--- progear (get conditions for second loop)
--- dodonpachi (get conditions for second loop with survival)
--- dangun feveron (no-miss)
--- ketsui (get condition for second loop)
I haven't done last two myself but I think these are fairly logical steps (after 1CC) in the above games if you are not going for score (and actually, even if you are).


However, actually I think the most important point you mentioned yourself about discouragement. If you choose a milestone that might be too difficult then there is possibility of getting discouraged or burned out. Some people will persevere through [likely they might have made their mind before-hand to keep up at the milestone despite the difficulty], but others won't.

In the possibility of getting discouraged or burn-out, it might be a good idea to choose your milestones in an incremental manner. This might not be the most efficient way but it might be a good way to approach a bigger milestone using smaller milestones step-by-step. The benefit of this is that one can switch games after getting the "smaller milestone". The down-side is that if you return to a game multiple times, there is likely to be an initial curve (getting acquainted with a number of things again).