the evil that is "continue"

[elviticus]

I was just playing Namco Museum on the PS2. I was playing Galaga Arrangement and really liking it - EXCEPT - for the f-ing continue feature... What a great way to spoil most games. In the arcade, w/a limited amount of quarters, I think this is fine. But, when you can continue as much as you want (with no penalty) it just robs a game of all suspense and challenge. I think a pretty good solution was how (in the 16 bit era) games woulld often give you a limited # of continues - probably what they thought you could win with, if you didn't completely suck.

 

Anyway, that ends my rant ---- just had to get it off my chest. Your thoughts?

[ButtonMasher]

Agree'd, some of the newer shoot'em up's from Treasure add a credit after an hour of play till you hit 6-10 hours of gameplay, then open up for full credits, they should have atleast done that in the Namco collection.

[JB]

I don't use continues at all usually. I've moved towards seeing how far I can get on one credit.

...

Unless I get pissed at the game, then I infinte-credit it just to spite it.

[figgler]

I was just playing Namco Museum on the PS2.    I was playing Galaga Arrangement and really liking it - EXCEPT - for the f-ing continue feature...   What a great way to spoil most games.    In the arcade, w/a limited amount of quarters, I think this is fine.   But, when you can continue as much as you want (with no penalty)  it just robs a game of all suspense and challenge.   I think a pretty good solution was how (in the 16 bit era) games woulld often give you a limited # of continues - probably what they thought you could win with, if you didn't completely suck.  

 

Anyway, that ends my rant ----  just had to get it off my chest.   Your thoughts?

 

You can send me 25 cents via Paypal everytime you continue, if it'll make you feel better

[Stingray]

Just because you can continue, doesn't mean you have to.

 

-S

[The Eidolon]

I get much more frustrated by games with too few continues allowed

on the home version than ones that allow too many. I figure if I

bought the game, I should have the chance to play through it and

see the whole game without years of practicing. There are some games

I would rather play on MAME than on my console port just because the

console version is too stingy with continues.

 

--The Eidolon

[elviticus]

Just because you can continue, doesn't mean you have to.    

 

-S

 

Good point, and that's usually the approach I take.. but... It seems artificial to me, when I know that technically I have infinite lives.

 

As to the point about liking to be able to play through if you want - I like to get through games too, but if you're getting through by constantly continuing, you may as well use a code and make yourself invincible. Not fun to me. At least an option to play with a fixed number of continues would be nice.

[rxd]

Boy, I am just the opposite. There is nothing I hate more than buying a really deep game and never getting a chance to see more than a fraction of it because I suck. Like it's been said here before, you don't have to continue, but it gives us lousy players a chance to make some progress in a game...

[JB]

Boy, I am just the opposite. There is nothing I hate more than buying a really deep game and never getting a chance to see more than a fraction of it because I suck. Like it's been said here before, you don't have to continue, but it gives us lousy players a chance to make some progress in a game...

I suck too. But I don't feel like I really got anywhere when it took a dozen continues.

[Tempest]

Gauntlet Legends and Dark Legacy were completly ruined by the infinite continue feature on the home systems. Some games are just made pointless when you can continue without penalty.

 

Tempest

[Great Hierophant]

One thing I always hated about continues is that people with more money inevitably will be able to beat the game while people who can't afford to drop $10 on a machine will not be able to beat the game. Wealth becomes more important than skill. Not that continues would have mattered much in the old days when the play screen rarely changed, only the enemies multiplied and did everything faster. Arcade games really did not have a narrative (beginning, middle and end) like they did in later years. Skill was the sole quality that determined status.

 

The classic games had no concept of a continue. You pop in a quarter,go as far as your skill could take you and at the end of the last life you went back to the beginning. I think it was Dragon's Lair that first popularized the concept of continuing, among its other "innovations." In that game you would attempt a screen, die because you did not use the correct combinations of joystick movements and button presses, and pay $.50 to try again until you got it right. Repeat on the following screens until you rescue the princess, wherein the game ends. Very fulfilling.

 

We all know this depressing story of the decline of the Arcades, flashy graphics over gameplay, novelty over innovation, endless and pointless sequels, Golden Tee and garbage.

[JB]

One thing I always hated about continues is that people with more money inevitably will be able to beat the game while people who can't afford to drop $10 on a machine will not be able to beat the game.  Wealth becomes more important than skill.  Not that continues would have mattered much in the old days when the play screen rarely changed, only the enemies multiplied and did everything faster.   Arcade games really did not have a narrative (beginning, middle and end) like they did in later years.  Skill was the sole quality that determined status.  

 

The classic games had no concept of a continue.  You pop in a quarter,go as far as your skill could take you and at the end of the last life you went back to the beginning.  I think it was Dragon's Lair that first popularized the concept of continuing, among its other "innovations."  In that game you would attempt a screen, die because you did not use the correct combinations of joystick movements and button presses, and pay $.50 to try again until you got it right.  Repeat on the following screens until you rescue the princess, wherein the game ends.  Very fulfilling.  

 

We all know this depressing story of the decline of the Arcades, flashy graphics over gameplay, novelty over innovation, endless and pointless sequels, Golden Tee and garbage.

Of course, in games with a score, it's score is usually reset on continue. That can provide a compelling argument against continuing(do I smear my chosen 3 letters over the whole dang high score list, or continue with nothing?).

 

And fighting games are more about the multi-player anyways.

[sega saturn x]

Dont forget games that have unlimited continues but are still hard as hell any way (gouls N ghosts).

[Jess Ragan]

Bleh. Don't limit my continues, I say. I paid for the game fair and square... I should be able to play it for as long as I want. I get really peeved when I play a really long game like the Double Dragons on the NES that force you to start from the beginning if you lose all your lives.

 

Unlocking credits like in Treasure's two shooters is a fair compromise. It extends the playlife without cheating the player out of the opportunity to see the other stages. However, I'm noticing more and more than limited continues and even a limited set of lives is going out of fashion in the video game industry. Many games let you continue as often as you want, so losing a life isn't really an issue... you just start over from the last save point.

 

JR

[sega saturn x]

And alot of games are very hard and giving you 3 lives just wouldent cut it.

[nester]

Well for continues it kinda depends on the game. What I don't like is re-releases of games having a different continue system than the original.

 

If you want to play games without continues, play some Sega Master System. I have never seen a system with such consistently hard games! Most of them don't even have 1 continue. No wonder Nintendo won the battle, people could actually get past level 1!