Do you find a vanilla victory more satisfying than one with mods?

What do you think?

EDIT: Poor wording. In effect, the new thread title is the question. Ignore the "legitimacy" clause.

 

Of course it's 'valid', but that's only because you used the wrong language. The game (And steam) considers it valid, therefore it is. If you mean is it equally satisfying to win with or without mods, then I have to say that it depends, but since I find that most mods (not counting, of course, those specifically designed as cheats) don't make the game significantly easier. And in my experience, most actually make it harder even if that doesn't appear obvious at first. I have theories on the reasons for that but no way of proving them.

Since it's a single player game, you don't want to ask if something is valid. The only thing that isn't valid is if you are helped by a bug or exploit. That's invalid because it's unintentional. But anything intentional is certainly valid.

A much better question would be whether victory is equally satisfying with and without mods. And my answer is that it depends on the nature of the game and the mods themselves, but most of all, the player himself. That's totally subjective. The bigger the challenge, the more satisfying victory is. For example, my first and so far, only win with a random build (DM/PD) was incredibly satisfying. Sometimes not winning can be extremely satisfying if you've made a really good showing in spite of difficult setbacks (bad luck, etc.)

But I just don't know how you can claim that anything that anyone does that is accepted under the rules can be considered invalid.

 

As said, it's a single player game, so I'm not that worried about how anyone else plays it. If you had fun, the playthrough was legitimate. Even if it happened to be a win by filthy cheating and giving yourself infinite stats with a cheat mod... it didn't affect my game in any way.

 

Knew I could have worded that better. Changed the title.

 

I prefer un-modded game-play for games that have a "set goal" or "victory requirement". I would usually feel like modding my game would make it easier, and I'd just feel like I was cheating (which can be fun and all, but it makes the victory feel hollow, for me).

With games such as Minecraft I have no problem using mods, since you basically set your own goals. I still wouldn't install a mod that made diamonds easier to find, though. Get what I mean?
EDIT: I guess slaying the Enderdragon could be considered winning Minecraft, but it's not really the point, is it

 

I agree with that. I'm not going to criticize anyone for playing the game anyway they see fit. But as Gorbax says, it would make victory feel hollow. It certainly would not be as satisfying to me.

Then again, I don't have to win the game to gain satisfaction from playing it. If I don't make any really stupid mistakes, and I feel I did well, given all that the RNG served up and my skill choices allowed, then it was a good game regardless.