arcade vs. non-arcade shmups?

[professor ganson]

There seems to be a useful distinction among racers between arcade racers and sims.

Is there perhaps a useful distinction between arcade shmups and shmups that seem more at home on a console (call them "console-based shmups")?

It seems to me that some shmups have less of an arcade feel than others, that they are more akin to epic adventures than quarter-swallowing hiers to Defender, Galaga, and the like. Einhander and R-type Delta come to mind (though I'm not sure they are the best e.g.s).

At the same time it seems that all shmups make scoring pretty central to the experience, so it is hard for me to say that some shmups are more score-based, others more adventure/exploration-based.

OK, these thoughts are pretty half-baked, but do you think there is any useful distinction to be drawn here at all?

[Ghegs]

OK, these thoughts are pretty half-baked, but do you think there is any useful distinction to be drawn here at all?

I don't really see what benefit could be derived from such distinction. In racing games it's more simple and has a clear use.

But in shmups...not so much. While there's stuff like Einhander that just wouldn't feel right in arcades, there's plenty of console-only shmups that wouldn't look out of place, eg. Sonic Wings Special, Harmful Park, Gradius Gaiden, Sanvein, Shienryu 2 (though I understand it was originally supposed to get an arcade release) several PCE shmups, Gradius V (bit on the long side, maybe) and I think R-Type Delta would fit in there quite nicely. Final not so much.

The gameplay is still very much the same, whereas in racers there's a clear difference.

[DC906270]

i dont know if there is a distinction between games designed for arcade and those designed for straight to console release. probably most of the straigh t to console release would have suited arcade release back in the day. there is probably a distinction between "old school" shmups which were more about progression and seeing later levels than scoring, maybe chasing the 1cc or 1 life completion. of course there have always been the hardcore shmup score attackers who seek to know all the little scoring quirks of a game.
among these older games which were more progression based i would say majority of shmups released 1986 - 1993 like r-type, gradius, toaplan games etc. i can remember when 1m points was a good score. nowadays 1m points from the first level alone would be considered mediocre.
then there are the modern console games. it seems like every modern shmup will have some sort of intricate scoring mechanism built into the game with "free play" mode as standard ie unlimited continues. in these games you may "complete" the game every time you play through, but your ultimate aim is to maximise your score in 1 credit. most of these will have been ported across from the arcade though. has there been a simple "shoot em up" shmup released within the last few years, without scoring playing a major factor in the gameplay? the last one i can think of is batsugun normal version.

[Ghegs]

has there been a simple "shoot em up" shmup released within the last few years, without scoring playing a major factor in the gameplay?

Neither Gradius V nor R-Type Final have in-depth scoring systems, Trizeal has some but it's hardly a major factor in the gameplay. Same with Raiden III. And if I've understood correctly, Under Defeat is pretty basic in this department as well.

[DC906270]

maybe it is just since i joined this forum, but seeing other peoples high scores has made me concentrate on my scoring rather than just trying to stay alive nowadays. i have always been a bit of an old school fan until i got into battle garegga a year or two ago

in playing battle garegga, i was kind of forced to pay attention to the scoring! this is the game in which scoring/staying alive both go hand in hand

[Ganelon]

Well, the crux of the difference between arcade and sim racers and flight sims is one of realism. While arcade emphasizes more liberal crashes and crazy drifts, sim focuses on the precision of turning. While arcade gives you lots of stuff to blow up, sim gives you more controls to accurately target enemies. Realism at its extreme is akin to army sims, which are the most boring things in the world due to their realism. There's dramatic differences in terms of gameplay between arcade and sim games in these genres.

And that's something you won't see in an arcade game: deliberately boring gameplay with no action going on. And hence you have no arcade games focusing on exploration without a stringent time limit or lots of enemies. Since all shooters force you to take action with scrolling and push you towards new obstacles, with the same essential gameplay and reused secondary control schemes that don't distinguish between where it originated, there isn't really any noticeable difference between arcade and home shooters.

[BulletMagnet]

Neither Gradius V nor R-Type Final have in-depth scoring systems...

That's not 100 percent true, though I guess it depends on how you define "in-depth"...in R-Type Final enemies are worth more when you destroy them with your force pod (well, technically it has to have a full "dose" first, but you need to fill it up by beating enemies with the pod anyways), not to mention the "classic" suiciding and playing through a point-rich checkpoint practice, if you count that. Gradius V, I know I've noticed at least one point where killing certain enemies faster makes more appear; for instance, the faster you destroy the first Big Core you see in the first stage, the more of those gunship things come after you before you reach the next section.

Again, it's certainly no Galuda or anything like that, but there's at least something in there which you can play "for score."

[iatneH]

How about stuff like the old Star Soldier stuff on the PC-Engine? I know some of those had Caravan modes, but otherwise I can't really think of any meticulous way to play competitively.