I usually only do it if I encounter a game-breaking bug, to see if I can help. In other instances, like private betas, I have scrubbed through the code top to bottom, to make sure there are no inconsistencies, etc.
I try not to do it in order to “cheat the system”, so to speak, though I may do it on a longer game, just to try to help with issues, without having to replay from the beginning.
Maybe it’s just how my brain works, but I honestly enjoy the games more with the code. Not for any cheat-y purposes…I just like reading them that way. This may just be due to how much time I spend staring at code for fun, though, so 100% ymmv.
I wouldn’t say thicker skin, necessarily, but part of showing art to the world is accepting that not everybody is going to like it and that it may not be perfect. Especially for new authors, this is really difficult, and things can all feel like a personal attack. I’ve been publicly writing for +/-14 years, and I still sometimes feel personally attacked by constructive criticism, even when it is worded as nicely as possible.
So, while I don’t think “growing a thick skin” would be quite apropos, there is a certain amount of experience and maturity that comes from critique and learning how to step back and not view it as a personal attack.
I don’t believe anyone has said it is. Personally, I have only ever meant this in the context of genuine constructive criticism, not toxic criticism. Even sincere, polite, constructive criticism can be painful to read.
Agreed, especially with…
Textual mediums are very difficult to convey tone with. I have made it a habit to comment that “xyz is not a personal attack” if I am concerned that debating something may be perceived as such.
And, just to be on the safe side: none of this is aimed st anyone in particular. I’m just expanding upon ideas put forth. Please let me know if anything came across offensively, as that’s not my intent 

