Finite Continues? Ain't that some shit.
-
Zebra Airforce
- Posts: 1695
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:10 pm
-
- Posts: 7681
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
- Location: Bedford, UK
- Contact:
The problem I found with HOTD2 is that everyone preferred the pad because you could just press 2 buttons for machine gun rapid fire, which made it infinitely easier than using the gun. (DC version).
That kinda bugged me. I wasn't good enough to beat the game with or without the pad unfortunately. It was as they say "hard as nails" and I got tired fingers playing it.
Moot point now, as I don't have a TV to play it properly as the gun doesn't work with my TV.
That kinda bugged me. I wasn't good enough to beat the game with or without the pad unfortunately. It was as they say "hard as nails" and I got tired fingers playing it.
Moot point now, as I don't have a TV to play it properly as the gun doesn't work with my TV.
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.
To be honest, I think it's stupid that the vast majority of you all think that having infinite continues available is a bad thing. It seems to me to be the perfect solution.
For the masses who just want to play a game through to the end, they have the option of doing that.
For the people who believe that using even a single continue constitutes eight lifetimes in purgatory, you have the option not to use them.
If reviewers are going to complain regardless of whether there's infinite or a set amount of continues, why not give the gamers what they want?
For the masses who just want to play a game through to the end, they have the option of doing that.
For the people who believe that using even a single continue constitutes eight lifetimes in purgatory, you have the option not to use them.
If reviewers are going to complain regardless of whether there's infinite or a set amount of continues, why not give the gamers what they want?
You're arguing for a universe with fewer waffles in it. I'm prepared to call that cowardice.
Where did you get that idea? So far people mostly complain that the reviewers are insatiable regardless of the amount of allowed continues.benstylus wrote:To be honest, I think it's stupid that the vast majority of you all think that having infinite continues available is a bad thing.
What they want is...?benstylus wrote:If reviewers are going to complain regardless of whether there's infinite or a set amount of continues, why not give the gamers what they want?
Matskat wrote:This neighborhood USED to be nice...until that family of emulators moved in across the street....
moozooh wrote:Where did you get that idea? So far people mostly complain that the reviewers are insatiable regardless of the amount of allowed continues.benstylus wrote:To be honest, I think it's stupid that the vast majority of you all think that having infinite continues available is a bad thing.
光あふれる 未来もとめて, whoa~oh ♫
[THE MIRAGE OF MIND] Metal Black ST [THE JUSTICE MASSACRE] Gun.Smoke ST [STAB & STOMP]
What they want is...?[/quote]benstylus wrote:If reviewers are going to complain regardless of whether there's infinite or a set amount of continues, why not give the gamers what they want?
some gamers want infinite continues, some don't want to use infinite continues.
If you don't put in infinite continues, you alienate one type of gamer.
If you do put them in, both types can play their own way.
Granted, a lot of elitists might say that the people who would use infinite continues don't deserve to play the game, but they are the vast majority and their sales are what keep the releases of games like this from disappearing.
You're arguing for a universe with fewer waffles in it. I'm prepared to call that cowardice.
The general content of this thread is more about reviewers, than gamers. It's that arcade-style games seem scorned whatever their means of distributing credits.
Personally I think free play is fine too, since it allows user moderation. The problem is when reviewers state that this feature means "you can see everything in an afternoon" (You can wring every last drop out of DDP DOJ in a weekend! Fuck buying these games!). On the other hand, games that don't give you free play, and thus take effort to "see," tend to get scorned as "frustrating." Not all reviewers do this catch-22, of course, but it's certainly noticeable.
I would think Gradius V / Ikaruga's time-release credits are the happy medium, but apparently, HOTD2&3 got slammed for doing just this. It would be nice if this type of game was recognised as something to refine and polish one's performance at, rather than a 30 minute diversion that's over and done by Monday. That's what so many reviewers seem oblivious to.
Personally I think free play is fine too, since it allows user moderation. The problem is when reviewers state that this feature means "you can see everything in an afternoon" (You can wring every last drop out of DDP DOJ in a weekend! Fuck buying these games!). On the other hand, games that don't give you free play, and thus take effort to "see," tend to get scorned as "frustrating." Not all reviewers do this catch-22, of course, but it's certainly noticeable.
I would think Gradius V / Ikaruga's time-release credits are the happy medium, but apparently, HOTD2&3 got slammed for doing just this. It would be nice if this type of game was recognised as something to refine and polish one's performance at, rather than a 30 minute diversion that's over and done by Monday. That's what so many reviewers seem oblivious to.
光あふれる 未来もとめて, whoa~oh ♫
[THE MIRAGE OF MIND] Metal Black ST [THE JUSTICE MASSACRE] Gun.Smoke ST [STAB & STOMP]
"But I play games to relax, not to work!"Bill wrote:It would be nice if this type of game was recognised as something to refine and polish one's performance at, rather than a 30 minute diversion that's over and done by Monday.
Matskat wrote:This neighborhood USED to be nice...until that family of emulators moved in across the street....
Yeah, the performance aspect of arcade gaming doesn't seem to click with some people.
Which is fair enough, of course. Just don't act as if it's not there, and those four shooters have been reduced to expensive coasters by a 0,000,029 final score.
Which is fair enough, of course. Just don't act as if it's not there, and those four shooters have been reduced to expensive coasters by a 0,000,029 final score.
光あふれる 未来もとめて, whoa~oh ♫
[THE MIRAGE OF MIND] Metal Black ST [THE JUSTICE MASSACRE] Gun.Smoke ST [STAB & STOMP]
I don't know that it "doesn't click" with people; I think that a lot of the people I know who still buy and play PC FPS shooters regularly (not DOOM II, which occupies a special place) get sick of what feels tired and want to find a challenge. I think many of them look for deeper gameplay mechanics and challenges besides just twitch gameplay - let's not forget that this site's userbase is generally slanted towards reflex games.
When you think about it, both 3D platformers and shmups (to take two wildly different genres) attempt to reward the player for really involving themselves in the gameplay mechanics. On the platforming/FPS/etc. side, you often have short "do it exactly right and go to the next" section; booting people back to the title screen from hour 15 just isn't a popular design decision for those types of games. You can pick up gameplay ideas and drop them in a 3D game without harming the player's enjoyment of the game; look at how Psychonauts (say) throws out different types of challenges to mix up the pace.
If there is a problem with the "classic style" games, it's that the intensity usually precludes changing the gameplay style too much (Rendering Ranger tried to switch gameplay modes, which is going to confuse the heck outta some folks) and it's usually optimal to have the exact same mechanics from start to finish.
Even simpler than that - going back to Bill's post - people aren't always aware that they should look for more depth. If I hadn't happened upon this site I would only have the vaguest understanding of things like rank as being "enemies throw more stuff at me;" I find these games most enjoyable when I have a manual to look towards (or if they're relatively simple to figure out, like Thunder Dragon II).
When you think about it, both 3D platformers and shmups (to take two wildly different genres) attempt to reward the player for really involving themselves in the gameplay mechanics. On the platforming/FPS/etc. side, you often have short "do it exactly right and go to the next" section; booting people back to the title screen from hour 15 just isn't a popular design decision for those types of games. You can pick up gameplay ideas and drop them in a 3D game without harming the player's enjoyment of the game; look at how Psychonauts (say) throws out different types of challenges to mix up the pace.
If there is a problem with the "classic style" games, it's that the intensity usually precludes changing the gameplay style too much (Rendering Ranger tried to switch gameplay modes, which is going to confuse the heck outta some folks) and it's usually optimal to have the exact same mechanics from start to finish.
Even simpler than that - going back to Bill's post - people aren't always aware that they should look for more depth. If I hadn't happened upon this site I would only have the vaguest understanding of things like rank as being "enemies throw more stuff at me;" I find these games most enjoyable when I have a manual to look towards (or if they're relatively simple to figure out, like Thunder Dragon II).
Many people don't know about the depth of certain shmups, which usually comes to attention only after analyzing scoring systems, which in its turn can be difficult without proper documentation (I mean, look at something like RFJ strategy thread). This in most cases go far beyond reflex, and you can polish it endlessly even if you can survive the entirety of DDP with your eyes closed.
Many reviewers don't bother doing that, either. And I believe most of them are writing for the people that wouldn't as well. To each their own.
Many reviewers don't bother doing that, either. And I believe most of them are writing for the people that wouldn't as well. To each their own.
Matskat wrote:This neighborhood USED to be nice...until that family of emulators moved in across the street....
You might want to drop the PC part there, else you get people who defend shit like Crysis and UT3 to the death by no other merit that they have great graphics alone.Ed Oscuro wrote:I don't know that it "doesn't click" with people; I think that a lot of the people I know who still buy and play PC FPS shooters regularly (not DOOM II, which occupies a special place) get sick of what feels tired and want to find a challenge. I think many of them look for deeper gameplay mechanics and challenges besides just twitch gameplay - let's not forget that this site's userbase is generally slanted towards reflex games.
so long and tanks for all the spacefish
unban shw
<Megalixir> now that i know garegga is faggot central i can disregard it entirely
<Megalixir> i'm stuck in a hobby with gays
unban shw
<Megalixir> now that i know garegga is faggot central i can disregard it entirely
<Megalixir> i'm stuck in a hobby with gays
No one said it's a bad thing. Its more about the mindset of reviewers and certain gamers toward arcade style games. Infinite continues, it's too easy and not worth replaying. Finite continues, it's too hard and frustrating and not worth playing. Or sometimes it's both, like those infamous reviews of Giga Wing and 2. I also find it strange that people often make a lot out of how long they are, like "This game is only a half hour long" as if the depth of the gameplay does't make it worth replaying because it's so short. I could level the same criticism at fighting games , but the difference is that fighting games are recognized as competitive games, and shooters are not.benstylus wrote:To be honest, I think it's stupid that the vast majority of you all think that having infinite continues available is a bad thing. It seems to me to be the perfect solution.
Feedback will set you free.
captpain wrote:Basically, the reason people don't like Bakraid is because they are fat and dumb
That's their problem, not mineTwiddle wrote:You might want to drop the PC part there, else you get people who defend shit like Crysis and UT3 to the death by no other merit that they have great graphics alone.
Besides, I wasn't talking about them - most people seem to be saying that Crysis feels like more of Far Cry, anyhow.
Although I think some gamers simply (and understandably) lack interest in "performing" at arcade games, and won't be lured by any degree of technical depth, I do agree with your comparison of modern and oldschool games' hooks. Ironically, a good arcade games' real focus (player development) tends to be less instantly apparent, despite their relatively no-frills, joystick and two buttons design.Ed Oscuro wrote:I don't know that it "doesn't click" with people; I think that a lot of the people I know who still buy and play PC FPS shooters regularly (not DOOM II, which occupies a special place) get sick of what feels tired and want to find a challenge. I think many of them look for deeper gameplay mechanics and challenges besides just twitch gameplay - let's not forget that this site's userbase is generally slanted towards reflex games.
When you think about it, both 3D platformers and shmups (to take two wildly different genres) attempt to reward the player for really involving themselves in the gameplay mechanics. On the platforming/FPS/etc. side, you often have short "do it exactly right and go to the next" section; booting people back to the title screen from hour 15 just isn't a popular design decision for those types of games. You can pick up gameplay ideas and drop them in a 3D game without harming the player's enjoyment of the game; look at how Psychonauts (say) throws out different types of challenges to mix up the pace.
If there is a problem with the "classic style" games, it's that the intensity usually precludes changing the gameplay style too much (Rendering Ranger tried to switch gameplay modes, which is going to confuse the heck outta some folks) and it's usually optimal to have the exact same mechanics from start to finish.
Even simpler than that - going back to Bill's post - people aren't always aware that they should look for more depth. If I hadn't happened upon this site I would only have the vaguest understanding of things like rank as being "enemies throw more stuff at me;" I find these games most enjoyable when I have a manual to look towards (or if they're relatively simple to figure out, like Thunder Dragon II).
I can imagine arcade games' mechanical simplicity obscuring their depth, for less informed gamers who might well be interested in such performance-focused games, were they given a little encouragement and enlightenment.
Of course, that goes back to why shooters, etc, really shouldn't be written off the way they often are. Not to sound too sentimental, but a little understanding of how these games earned their fans should be apparent in reviews. They may be mechanically simple, and technically brief, but knocking them for this while ignoring (or demonising into "frustration") the depth of player development they allow? That's like criticising an RPG for being incompletable in a couple of hours. It misses the point of how these games are designed to entertain.
Yeah, exactly. Takes a bit of research and digging, this genre, but it certainly rewards the work.moozooh wrote:Many people don't know about the depth of certain shmups, which usually comes to attention only after analyzing scoring systems, which in its turn can be difficult without proper documentation (I mean, look at something like RFJ strategy thread). This in most cases go far beyond reflex, and you can polish it endlessly even if you can survive the entirety of DDP with your eyes closed.
Yeah, I can imagine the more infamous shooter reviews were of just that mindset. I just wish a little more open-mindedness was present.moozooh wrote:Many reviewers don't bother doing that, either. And I believe most of them are writing for the people that wouldn't as well. To each their own.
光あふれる 未来もとめて, whoa~oh ♫
[THE MIRAGE OF MIND] Metal Black ST [THE JUSTICE MASSACRE] Gun.Smoke ST [STAB & STOMP]
I don't see what you guys are bitching about. EOJ has explained again and again that many, if not all, of the top Japanese players credit feed shooters all the time.
Clearly, what's good for them is good for every other player out there. If anything, we should be congratulating our reviewers for adopting the practices of top Japanese players.
Clearly, what's good for them is good for every other player out there. If anything, we should be congratulating our reviewers for adopting the practices of top Japanese players.
-
- Posts: 7681
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:28 am
- Location: Bedford, UK
- Contact:
Their tune-up style is the main event with those reviewers, and their scores would reflect that. I'm guessing you're being ironic.Clearly, what's good for them is good for every other player out there. If anything, we should be congratulating our reviewers for adopting the practices of top Japanese players.
-
Zebra Airforce
- Posts: 1695
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:10 pm