beat: end credits (no save stating, rewind or external tampering) 100%: 100%

If a game has an ending, finishing that's enough to qualify. For an "endless" or practically endless (kill screen) game, playing through the unique levels is enough.

>>1566257 The developers usually have an idea of when a game ends and it's usually pretty clear to understand when that point in the game comes as a player, even if it's not punctuated by a credits screen. Anything after that is post game or completionism. It's harder to define when it comes to endless/simulation/sandbox games, but I guess that point comes when you have experienced a lot of what you can do with the game to the point where you feel satisfied with everything you have seen.

I'd normally agree that seeing the credits count as "beating the game," and 100% is different. However, there are exceptions where seeing the credits shouldn't really count as beating the game. For example, if a game has multiple campaigns and it shows the credits after each one, you should still have to beat them all. A bunch of Sonic games would count for this. However, the campaigns need to be significantly different. So for Sonic 3 & Knuckles, I think you haven't really beaten the game until you've beaten as Knuckles, but you don't need to beat it as Tails Alone, as that's too similar to Sonic's campaign. Sonic Adventure 2's Story Mode has three endings, but I think even that is only a small portion of the game. There is simply so much extra content in that game that it makes the Story Mode feel like a training mode. I contend that a lot of people who say they don't like the game haven't even tried the Extra Mode, which is where most of the content really is. I almost feel like saying you haven't beaten the game until you beat Extra Mode. But I know everyone else would disagree with me and say that is only 100% completion. OP has a pic of Castlevania, and that one is interesting. The original game loops, but I can't bring myself to say that you need to beat the second loop. That's more like hard mode, and would be completionism, akin to 100%ing it. Castlevania Chronicles loops like eight times and gets harder each time. I can't even imagine anyone ever doing that because it's so hard even on the first loop. Castlevania III has four characters, four endings, and two significantly different paths. Characters are separated by paths, so Alucard basically has the hardest path. I'd say to really say you "beat" it you have to do both paths, so you need to beat the game with both Sypha and Alucard. Beating the game with Grant basically follows the same path as Sypha, but it's harder, so if you do that, it counts as beating it with Sypha but not Alucard. You can also beat both paths with Trevor alone, and I suppose if you want to 100% the game, you'll need to do that, but that's insanely hard. Basically, Sypha is Easy Mode, Alucard is Normal, Grant is Hard, Trevor alone (Sypha's path) is Super Hard, and Trevor alone (Alucard's path) is Super Duper Hard. I think you only need to beat Easy and Normal to count as having "beaten the game." Symphony of the Night famously has a bad end that's only halfway through the game. That shouldn't count. You need to get the good ending for it to count. But it also has a percentage counter. Maxing out the percentage counter is 100%ing the game. And also there are unlockable characters, Richter and two different versions of Maria (depending on if you're playing the Saturn or PSP version). Obviously that's not required to say you "beat" the game. Many later Castlevania games then follow this formula, but I would say that a couple of the extra modes count, especially Julius Mode in Dawn of Sorrow. That one feels different enough that I think you're really missing out if you don't beat it. It has its own story and everything. Not canon, but still. Portrait of Ruin has Sisters Mode, which is canon, but it's fucking boring so I have a hard time saying you're missing much by not playing it. It's not much more interesting than Richter Mode. Also, there are things like fighting games where clearly you haven't beaten it until you've done the Arcade Mode with every character. There are variants of this in things like car combat games, too. I don't care if you see the credits in Twisted Metal, you have to do it as every character or it doesn't count. It would count in a racing game, though. You don't need to beat every cup in Mario Kart with every character, you just need to do it once. >>1566390 >The game has a 90% completion status What exactly does this mean? Not all games have an actual number, and how you count completion could be different. That's kind of what the thread is about.

>>1566257 When there is nothing left to learn. Since a video game combines multiple forms of media together, this would mean having an understanding of all of its design choices.

>>1566494 By that definition, almost no games have ever been beaten. Even Pannenkoek has never beaten Mario 64.

>>1566494 >>1566535 The use of the chess pic in regards to "completion" reminds me of a video I watched that determined there's a handful of absurdly specific chess moves (in terms of notation) that nobody had ever made on Chess Dot Com. Stockfish has still "solved" chess (it will, at worst, draw a match without a deliberate handicap) even if its data lacks any actual experience with a particular double differentiated move that requires an opponent willingly play along to setup.

>>1566494 Intrinsically impossible thanks to the nature of art

>>1566570 There are video games that are simple enough to have been "solved." Like people proved Todd Rogers was lying about his Dragster world record from like 1980 by just looking at the code, which is only like 100 lines or something, and determining that his supposed time was literally impossible.

Autism, you beat the game when you finish the main portion of whatever the game is.

>>1566677 Yes, but what does "main portion" mean?

>>1566677 What if the game has several endings with different paths?

The problem with answering this question is that video games, as a medium, have such an abundance of edge cases, that there's no definitive answer that effectively encapsulates all of gaming, and the notion of "beating" a game really has to be applied on a case-by-case basis. While there are fairly obvious "beat" conditions like with Super Mario Bros. or Dragon Quest, others are significantly more murky. Donkey Kong Country 3, for example, has a final boss, a secret bonus world final boss, and a secret bonus world final boss, on hard mode via an in-game password, and each one has a distinctive completion percentage tracked on the load file. I think that in the end, the communities surrounding the game ultimately end up determining where the line between "beaten" and "unbeaten" is. >>1566460 I'm gonna disagree on your SA2 point. The story is a very small fraction of game, sure, but as far as content goes, most of the stuff past it is some flavor of remix of the story mode levels, save stuff like the Chao Garden and the Green Hill Zone level you unlock after getting every emblem. If postgame was more its own distinctive thing, akin to Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal, then that would be a different case.

>when never. You have literally never beated a single game in your life. Or you think you have ever "beaten" basketball, i don't think so. Games are a discipline, a challenge to the soul, to the individual. You don't beat a game, cause games are life. >>1566494 this guy has the right idea, even if the conclusion is wrong. You never run out of stuff to learn because games are forever.

>>1566992 >Super Mario Bros. It has a second quest. Super Mario Bros. Deluxe incentivizes the second quest a bit more by actually saving your progress and keeping track of if you did it. Playing that version of the game made me appreciate it. So that game's completion isn't quite as clear as Dragon Quest. It's closer to Zelda. Zelda's Second Quest is pretty substantial. I'm almost inclined to count it. You're missing out on a lot if you don't play it. >>1566992 Yeah I know my opinion about Sonic Adventure 2 is pretty out there. But on the topic of Pokemon, yeah, I'd say you haven't beaten Gen II until you beat Red. I'd also say you haven't really beaten Gen I until you catch Mewtwo. 100% is filling the Pokedex. And then I guess with Crystal onwards they have Battle Towers and stuff, but those are basically just for people who enjoy grinding, so I don't count that at all because I don't enjoy it. >>1567056 The Pannenkoek philosophy. I respect it. It isn't enough to get 120 stars, it isn't even enough to do that in 0x A Presses. There is always more to learn about the game. The Stars, the bosses, the A Presses, they're all just ways to keep track of how much you've learned about the game.

>>1566565 >reminds me of a video I watched that determined there's a handful of absurdly specific chess moves (in terms of notation) that nobody had ever made on Chess Dot Com this one? https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=iDnW0WiCqNc neat vid i must say, thanks

I play it from the start to the end. If I see the credits, It means I beat the game. It really is not hard. The end of a movie is when the credits come up, and it is the same with games.

>>1567237 >The end of a movie is when the credits come up Not anymore. Marvel ruined that. >and it is the same with games. >beat 1/6 of Sonic Adventure and think you beat the whole game. >beat Twisted Metal with one character and think you beat the whole game >get halfway through Symphony of the Night and think you beat the game >don't even go to Kanto in Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal and think you beat the game There are too many examples of games that even have stories that go on way, way past the first viewing of the credits.

I don't think there's one set measure of when a game is "beaten", but the broadest definition is when the credits roll after finishing the final bit of whatever story a game has, or completing all the basic objectives a game has in the case of sandbox games with defined objectives (factorio, satisfactory, etc). You can play a game enough to understand it without beating it, and depending on the game you can also beat the game without really understanding how it works too well. For example: Voices of the Void is considered beaten on day 50 of story mode due to there being no more story events and the game telling you such, but you can get a feel for the gameplay and the tone of the game far before that. Rougelikes often serve as an opposite example, but Risk of Rain is a good one, you can beat Risk of Rain without understanding fully the game's systems or how to play all the characters well. Hell, there's a character and some upgrades locked behind beating the game. And then you get to the topic of multiple endings. Again it depends on the game. Some are clearly meant to be played through one after another due to drastic differences between them and shorter play time, while some games having different endings with different content is to aid in giving the player a sense of choice and consequence, and making the story more interesting, like the SMT games or Fallout 1/2/NV, and is not meant to be played through to every ending. On the other hand, some games even expect you to play all the routes in order since it makes up one big story, like the Sonic Adventure games, the Touhou fighting games' story modes, and NIER games. Speaking of fighting games, those too are an oddity. Most have a story or arcade mode you can beat, sure, but it won't indicate mastery or even a basic understanding of the game depending on the game and how complex the AI is. Yet you'd still have technically "beaten" the game upon completing said story modes or beating arcade/whatever the main mode is. Doesn't make you good at said game or even give you an understanding of it beyond a very basic level in most cases, especially when playing against "normal" AI and not setting it to maximum.

>>1566591 True, I didn't think of edge cases like that But since they are only edge cases, I don't think it's correct to use them as a standard

I don't think I can define what it means to 'beat' a game in a way that encompasses all the various types of games with their own intricacies. But I know it when I beat it.