'1CC lists are bad' discussion split from 'Who has the most CAVE clears?' thread

[EOJ]

but I'm sure that with some dedication everyone could get every Cave Clear (no 2-all's, no Ultra's, no Raizing's) within 2-3 months maximum.

I know a LOT of guys who have played games seriously for much longer than 2-3 months and still don't have any 1CCs (or maybe just one, in one of the easier games). A 1CC in most Cave games takes more skill than you're giving credit. You're better than most people at these types of games, so I can see how your judgment could be clouded here. It may not seem like much of a challenge to you, but to most people, it definitely is.

[Plasmo]

The most guys who complain about Cave games being too hard usually play 1-2 credits a day for a week and then stop playing the game at all, because it's "TOO difficult". That's why I put that "dedication" part there in my last post.

But then again I have to admit, I'm playing Shmups for years and maybe I'm completely wrong with my assumptions after all. I sure must sound like a dick then, sry. 

[zlk]

At this point in my life, I just don't have time to play like I used to.  I get to play a few hours, once a week, max.  If I clear a game, I usually put the pcb back on the shelf and move on to something else. 

[GaijinPunch]

I have yet to play a Cave game that takes skill to just get the Clear on

I should've mentioned I never don't play for score.  Sorry for the double-negative.

And I'll also go on record saying that my first Cave 1CC was ESPGaluda, and it took a lot of work.  Times have changed since then, but hey.  There are plenty of people that, even given months, cannot 1CC the middle tier up....especially the ones that demand a high score to get the extends.

[croikle]

I tend to focus on score far too much, leading to terrible survival rates. This means I play the early levels so often that I get bored with them and drift off to another game. With more focus on a single game, I'm sure I'd do better, but still don't have any 1ccs yet. Got a pretty kickin' Bakraid score I'm working on, and one of these runs will get the clear soon. (Normal mode maybe isn't the full 1cc, given that there's Advanced)

[lgb]

As PROM tends to put it often; half of the scoring improvements you could make tend to be boring. Getting that 1CC is definitely more possible - and to some, more rewarding/wanted - than beating the world record.

However, I also never don't play for score. I see no reason to do otherwise; beat the game and get a decent score? Sounds great.

I've heard some say that, outside of Subterranean Animism, that clearing a Lunatic mode of a Windows Touhou game was easier than clearing the first loop of the original DoDonPachi. I'm... not seeing it, but I don't play more of either game.

[markedkiller78]

I should've mentioned I never don't play for score.  Sorry for the double-negative.

However, I also never don't play for score.

You've set a new precident here GP. Never not playing for socre is what you do best

[PROMETHEUS]

WE NEVER DON'T PLAY FOR SCORE !

[GaijinPunch]

You've set a new precident

I'm a trend setter.

[EOJ]

The whole "play for score" thing is a bit weird. What are the criteria for NOT 'playing for score'? If you play the game, blow through it, and get a 1CC early on, is that not playing for score, or is that playing for score but not yet knowing how to score well yet?

I guess if you consciously avoid scoring, don't pick up scoring items, and use every last one of your bombs, then that could be considered "not playing for score". Or playing through a Donpachi game to get a 1CC, without bothering to learn to chain each stage first (I think just about everyone has tried this). Otherwise, if you're not doing any of those things, then you're playing for score.

[PROMETHEUS]

Just not making particular efforts to take advantage of the scoring system,
or playing with just the clear or longest survival time in mind
is "not playing for score" I guess.

Well, at first when you get to know a game you won't try to score well at it but just get a hang of the concepts and try to survive and clear it. I recall some "pros" said they did that when they began playing a new game, in interviews. So before starting to play for score you always don't play for score :p

[lgb]

The whole "play for score" thing is a bit weird. What are the criteria for NOT 'playing for score'? If you play the game, blow through it, and get a 1CC early on, is that not playing for score, or is that playing for score but not yet knowing how to score well yet?

I guess if you consciously avoid scoring, don't pick up scoring items, and use every last one of your bombs, then that could be considered "not playing for score". Or playing through a Donpachi game to get a 1CC, without bothering to learn to chain each stage first (I think just about everyone has tried this). Otherwise, if you're not doing any of those things, then you're playing for score.

I will agree.

I hear there are those who actually do this, or at least talk about it; sometimes it shows, sometimes it doesn't. Score threads for games in the Touhou Project are pretty good indicators of this, though. In fact, I personally will not move up difficulty levels unless I'm satisfied with my score on a lower one; I "master" that level, and also prepare myself for a higher difficulty later. But maybe I'm being dense about that...

[necpmf]

Personally, I get a lot more enjoyment out of a game if I go for a 1cc via any means, then go back and re-work it for score. My first cave 1-all was Dodonpachi and damn, I remember how good that felt (depite being one of the easiest cave 1-alls), and it was even better knowing that I could go back and improve it. On the contrary I've been learning Daioujou stage by stage learning how to chain it, so my first 1cc will most likely be a nice big score (still learning 4 and 5, I don't think I'll ever chain the laser cannon in 4). But really, I'm thinking about saying screw it, going for a 1-all then going back to learn the 4/5 chains, I think I'd enjoy it more that way. And in the end, it's just a video game, whatever gives you the most enjoyment is definitely what you should do.

[markedkiller78]

And in the end, it's just a video game, whatever gives you the most enjoyment is definitely what you should do.

I could not agree more

[jpj]

The whole "play for score" thing is a bit weird. What are the criteria for NOT 'playing for score'? If you play the game, blow through it, and get a 1CC early on, is that not playing for score, or is that playing for score but not yet knowing how to score well yet?

I guess if you consciously avoid scoring, don't pick up scoring items, and use every last one of your bombs, then that could be considered "not playing for score". Or playing through a Donpachi game to get a 1CC, without bothering to learn to chain each stage first (I think just about everyone has tried this). Otherwise, if you're not doing any of those things, then you're playing for score.

there was a discussion about going for a quick and dirty 1-ALL on doj a while back.  play A-S and bomb any time you're in trouble, wont be hard

[ave]

play A-S and bomb any time you're in trouble, wont be hard

My DOJ 1cc took me incredibly long and in the end I finished it with 203 million. There are few CAVE games that can be finished easier without playing for score than with some tactics involved, that's at least what I experienced. In fact I think chaining through stage 2 of DOJ is easier than just surviving when it comes to skill. Chaining gives you some kind of rhythm, in any game, and that again provides confidence (->skill).

[necpmf]

there was a discussion about going for a quick and dirty 1-ALL on doj a while back.  play A-S and bomb any time you're in trouble, wont be hard

I actually gave that a try once not too long ago, and will probably never pick shot ever again. Wasn't fun at all due to being practically immobilized during laser. Certain parts where I just laser through are completely changed and it throws me off a bunch and just frustrates me. IMO shot type is pretty terrible in DOJ, especially compared to DDP where you can pick C-S and just kinda blow your way through everything with minimal movement/strategy.

Also, reading back on my previous post, I meant the 1-up cannon, not the laser cannon, haha. It doesn't feel possible, at all, so I've pretty much given up on that (along with the st 3 midboss which also seems to be impossible, but I gave up on that like the first time I ever tried it.).

[lgb]

The whole "play for score" thing is a bit weird. What are the criteria for NOT 'playing for score'? If you play the game, blow through it, and get a 1CC early on, is that not playing for score, or is that playing for score but not yet knowing how to score well yet?

Taking another look at this, I'd have to say the latter.

afaik, most older games from the 70s to the early 1980s don't have "stages" in the sense that you technically "win" after you beat them, even if the game plays over or not. Here, there's nothing else but play for score... and that would be how it started, right?

Then again, that would mean "playing for score" is pretty close to "playing for survival"... which we know does not apply to many modern games with so-called "scoring systems".

Again, it becomes apparent that the genre changed completely at some point, and it seems somewhere around the very later 80s and early 90s, probably farther (mid 90s, maybe?).