Every gamer knows the dilemma: you're stuck at that one level or boss or puzzle that you just can't seem to figure out. You frustratingly try every single option there is. Or maybe you die a bunch of times and then die even more when you're so angry you start doing things out of spite in the game. You fall into random pits, take hits on purpose and then toss the controller across the room.
Maybe you revisit the level and repeat the process all over again, and maybe you finally eke out a victory. But what if you don't? Do you just give up on the game or hand the controller over to someone who's better at playing that specific part than you are?
Or perhaps you decide to take a more "sinister" route and refer to the dark arts to finally secure victory: you use a cheat code.
That's what PC Gamer's James Davenport did.
Davenport wrote a review on his play-through of Sekiro, a single player action-adventure game that had some particularly hard bosses.
The game takes an old-school approach to battles.
Remember the "glory days" of gaming that required you to master certain sections of games that could only be accomplished through attempt after attempt after attempt of trial-and-error? It isn't until you memorize the patterns of particular boss phases and what they're going to do next that you'll ever have any hope of beating the game.
This game was a lot like that.
When you're on a time constraint and have memorized the bosses patterns' time and again, you've probably already proven to yourself that you're capable of such. But the long, drawn-out boss battle in Sekiro made Davenport feel like it was totally "kosher" to go and implement a slo-mo cheat code that let him see when and how the boss was going to strike.
His decision spiraled into a conversation about cheating in video games.
Namely. people debated the "ethics" behind cheats and what people thought about his decision to use them to beat the final boss instead of taking the time to merk them the old-fashioned way.
Some people provided succinct responses.
Is there any worse insult in the gaming community? Well, if you're at the receiving end of a 12-year-old Halo player's rage, then yes.
Others called Davenport's abilities as a journalist into question entirely.
While others just offered helpful commentary.
Geez, tell us how you really feel, @Sorutoku!
But this kind of behavior's to be expected. Part of what makes a game fun, especially one that's supposed to be challenging, is the ability to surmount the rules set in the game. Much like life, if you're able to "conquer" and thrive under a specific rule set, the reward is much greater.
Which is why people weren't down with Davenport trying to make himself "feel better" about using cheats.
But there was another, far more response to James' article: people began sharing their favorite cheat codes.
Using codes after you beat a game is perfectly fine.
I don't know many gamers who could ever fault anybody for going through a title after beating it senselessly and having some fun with an overpowered character or some little "hacks" to breeze past certain sections for a leisurely time.
Some games were made for cheat codes.
Who didn't want to just build a massive city right from the get go?
Only people who beat the game first did this though, right?
Nothing better than seeing Doom-guy's eyes glowing yellow at the bottom of the screen and you had an unlimited ammo on BFG-9000.
Oh come on.
I understand cheating to get the Chaos Emeralds, but just jumping straight to the last stage?!
Someone brought up this interesting dilemma...
Is using a strategy guide or hint book created by the game manufacturer really cheating?
Timed levels do stink.
I don't think anyone would really fault you for cheating at Carmaggedon if we're being completely honest.
Oh man those puzzles.
In Tim's defense, Legend of Zelda puzzles are extremely obscure and annoying to figure out.
What do you think? Is there ever a time where cheat codes are warranted for the first play through?
More from Distractify
More From Distractify
Geek Geek Geek Entertainment