Most ridiculous anti-shmup hogwash?

[elvis]

Yawn, another post where the mainstream games are roots of all the world's evil. Maybe that kid can do something for you too... It wouldn't be a bad idea to trade "nth anonymous space shooter" for his GTA.

You're kidding right? Mainstream games are beyond rediculously easy. Most of them are practically pedestrian. Sometimes I feel like the majority of modern console games are more like an interactive movie than an actual challenge.

Console games are designed to turn profits. Flash graphics and "must have" factor above and beyond long-term replayability. After all, if those kids like the games so much that they don't bother buying more games after becoming bored, where does the next dollar come from?

Mainstream is the same shit over and over, and publishers like EA are making money off of that.

Thankfully, that's turning around:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ea/more-on-eas ... 152469.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ea/worldwi ... 152184.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ea/ea-earn ... 152454.php

EA have hit a 31% drop in profits. The EA of old made some of the best titles around. Since the XBox era they've turned into a money-making factory pumping out sequel after sequel. I do hope this downturn ni profits sees a reshuffle of their upper teir, and puts people back in the decision making chairs who remember how to make fun games, and not money tree franchises.

[MovingTarget]

After reading many Uk games mags, I end up wanting to punch the writers a lot. Edge is good sometimes, Gamestm is good most the time. Psw is half readable, opsm makes me want to destroy all humans, and at psm they like dnb which helps me forgive them.

[Davey]

My personal favorite:

"Radiant Silvergun is so over hyped!"


Anyone who has actually 1CC'd it would quickly say different.

Everybody who has ever bowled a 300 enjoys bowling.

[Turrican]

You're kidding right? Mainstream games are beyond rediculously easy. Most of them are practically pedestrian. Sometimes I feel like the majority of modern console games are more like an interactive movie than an actual challenge.

I'm afraid I'm no kidding. But about mainstream games (or better, games currently perceived as mainstream) and challenge, you can read my opinion here.

[AAA]

Worst. Quote. Ever. (from a Gamestop Store Clerk)

"I don't play videogames actually. I just sell them."


Fucker.

i have heard the exact same words from the people who sell to the retailers.
un. fucking. believable.

[Acid King]

But GTA is still just free roaming, 3rd person trash in every sense of the word.

"Hey, I hate dance dance games. Hate them, loathe them, completely biased. But I don't make dumb comments about dance games around my friend who enjoys them or refuse to conceed that they take some skill ie "Oh goodness, danzors gamez iz stoopid, no skillz, just a bunch of 'pad mashing." I am sure there are plenty of "mainstreamers" out there who are 2D shooter fans waiting to happen. We just don't like the ignorant smart aleck gamers who make moronic comments."

Yeah, I agree with you, but each shooter is always different: different bullet patterns, bosses and etc. It might be the same, but developers always make the same thing work perfectly, like those mainstream games.

Yes, every shooter works perfectly...

"waka waka waka mainstream sucks... all the same... hardcore... shooters rule... etc etc."

[system11]

Console games are designed to turn profits. Flash graphics and "must have" factor above and beyond long-term replayability. After all, if those kids like the games so much that they don't bother buying more games after becoming bored, where does the next dollar come from?

Console games are designed to make sales. Commercial arcade games are 100% purely about profit - it's their whole reason for being.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ea/more-on-eas ... 152469.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ea/worldwi ... 152184.php
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/ea/ea-earn ... 152454.php

EA have hit a 31% drop in profits. The EA of old made some of the best titles around. Since the XBox era they've turned into a money-making factory pumping out sequel after sequel. I do hope this downturn ni profits sees a reshuffle of their upper teir, and puts people back in the decision making chairs who remember how to make fun games, and not money tree franchises.

The thing that hits me about those stories - is that they're firing the wrong people. Instead of getting rid of 1 manager, they fire 10 people who actually make the games. It's the same in most industries, many managers I've known couldn't manage their way from A to B. In a taxi.

[Axon]

You're kidding right? Mainstream games are beyond rediculously easy. Most of them are practically pedestrian. Sometimes I feel like the majority of modern console games are more like an interactive movie than an actual challenge.

There are some mainstream games that are difficult. Have you played Devil May Cry?

[elvis]

I'm afraid I'm no kidding. But about mainstream games (or better, games currently perceived as mainstream) and challenge, you can read my opinion here.

I see little discussion about mainstream gaming there, and instead some rather offtopic mumblings about GTA. For the record, I don't *ONLY* play shmups, and don't hate "mainstream" games on stupid principle like I find a lot of people do. My comments are purely observational based on what has passed under my nose in the last 25 years of my own personal gaming. And those comments are: on the whole, modern mainstream gaming provides no long-term challenge, and gives no desire to replay games once complate. As wiith all statements there are of course exceptions to the rule, but these are much lower in volume in the last 10 years than ever. I doubt there are very many people who can disagree with what I've said there, even those who enjoy easy games will admit there's little there to get them coming back to their games once they complete them in mere days/hours after purchase. If you enjoy that sort of gaming, then by all means continue to reward the system by paying for them. I on the other hand don't enjoy "pedestrian" games, so I don't play/buy them. I vote with my wallet, as money is the only language game companies understand.

The thing that hits me about those stories - is that they're firing the wrong people. Instead of getting rid of 1 manager, they fire 10 people who actually make the games. It's the same in most industries, many managers I've known couldn't manage their way from A to B. In a taxi.

I agree 100%. But unfortunately those who are deemed wise by corporate decree (typically 70's and 80's Harvard Business School grads) are the now middle-management of today's corporates, and these people are taught that when times are tough you need to downsize. And there's no way in hell these people will ever lay themselves off, and they can't sack people UP the foodchain, so instead they stupidly go for the actual "nuts and bolts" folk who do the work. You see the same thing in companies everywhere every day. Eventually you end up with a company that has 4 managers to every staff member, and the whole thing implodes under its own weight.

[Acid King]

I see little discussion about mainstream gaming there, and instead some rather offtopic mumblings about GTA. For the record, I don't *ONLY* play shmups, and don't hate "mainstream" games on stupid principle like I find a lot of people do. My comments are purely observational based on what has passed under my nose in the last 25 years of my own personal gaming. And those comments are: on the whole, modern mainstream gaming provides no long-term challenge, and gives no desire to replay games once complate. As wiith all statements there are of course exceptions to the rule, but these are much lower in volume in the last 10 years than ever. I doubt there are very many people who can disagree with what I've said there, even those who enjoy easy games will admit there's little there to get them coming back to their games once they complete them in mere days/hours after purchase. If you enjoy that sort of gaming, then by all means continue to reward the system by paying for them. I on the other hand don't enjoy "pedestrian" games, so I don't play/buy them. I vote with my wallet, as money is the only language game companies understand.

What incentives were there to replay a game after complete? A higher score? Infinitely looping stages? Gameplay was totally different back then, which contributes a lot to the fact that nowadays games can be beaten in a few days. Better save systems, different gameplay mechanics, and actual extensions of play time contribute to this. 20 years ago all platformers were 2d and designed to be beaten in one sitting... without save features. Now they're 3d, take 10 hours of split play time (via saves) to beat as opposed to 45 minutes to an hour on straight, continuous play years ago). The challenge and "long term challenge" you speak of are artificial, not a product of the gameplay, and a limitation of the system, not allowing you to save or use passwords. I'd say there were exceptions back then too, but your generalization is way off base.

[Turrican]

I see little discussion about mainstream gaming there, and instead some rather offtopic mumblings about GTA.

Sorry, I should have quote the part of interest before:

So, [GTA] it's a series not based on challenge or skill, right? I don't see the least problem in this. I don't think Jrpgs were really challenging either, and at least GTA remove the hassle to "level up". SotN was a cakewalk compared to previous Castlevanias, and the most intriguing part was to explore the castle in every inch. I recently played MGS3 and that too, sadly was set to a normal difficulty too easy.

So, either this is a problem the entire industry is dealing with, or a GTA crime. Oh, of course I was forgetting shmups, the true herald of "challenge" in this corrupt world. I guess that's why with manicness they just aim to a niche audience.

[...]

It's 2005 guys. I think it's fair to accept games that are not focused on challenge. I don't think ICO posed me a challenge at all, but I love it.

And hey, luckily we'll ever have shmups for challenge

And this cover the topic "about challenge in modern meainstream gaming".

For the record, I don't *ONLY* play shmups, and don't hate "mainstream" games on stupid principle like I find a lot of people do.

Never thought you do.

My comments are purely observational based on what has passed under my nose in the last 25 years of my own personal gaming. And those comments are: on the whole, modern mainstream gaming provides no long-term challenge, and gives no desire to replay games once complate. As wiith all statements there are of course exceptions to the rule, but these are much lower in volume in the last 10 years than ever. I doubt there are very many people who can disagree with what I've said there, even those who enjoy easy games will admit there's little there to get them coming back to their games once they complete them in mere days/hours after purchase.

In the last ten years, with the arrival of playstation, the gamers population grew esponentially... I'm sure you'll find plenty of people willing to disagree among those millions. And about completion in mere days/hours... Maybe I repeat myself, but the rest of the world had a perceptive shift and doesn't judge games that way anymore, and luckily so. Super Mario World lasts an afternoon, and I don't think many regret to spend time on it. On the other hand, looping two times Makaimura could require years of training. Now, I don't know which is more pedestrian of the two approaches, but I'm pretty sure both have nothing to do with "supporting the system"...

If you enjoy that sort of gaming, then by all means continue to reward the system by paying for them. I on the other hand don't enjoy "pedestrian" games, so I don't play/buy them. I vote with my wallet, as money is the only language game companies understand.

I don't even know where to start... I'm probably helpless because unlike you I didn't get access to the "Holy List of What is Mainstream And What Isn't" for the last 25 years. During the famicom age Gradius, Twinbee and Xevious, to name a few, sold each a million carts; and the most "pedestrian" game, by sales, should have been Super Mario Bros. 3.

Genesis' best selling cart is Sonic 2 and Snes one is Super Mario Kart: luckily I was mainstream enough to play them. Yeah, I know, I was evil to reward the system back then, shame on me.

[elvis]

I should clarify:

By "pedestrian" I mean games that can be completed on their first attempt with little effort. Games that are merely pretty graphics with a few button presses and lo and behold you are looking at the "Congradulations, you've won" screen. These to me are more in the genre of "interative movie", and less "game".

Since the era of the Playstation, I've lost count of the volume of games that I've clocked on my first attempt.

Now, I don't know why this trend has become popular. Sure, I can speculate. I could say that companies are focussing more on online multi-play and less on single player games. I could say that budgets are being put towards graphics engines first, and AI and gameplay second. I could say that corporations are all evil bastards and make games too easy so I'm forced to buy more sooner and spend my hard earned dollars. But none of these statements I can back up with any sort of proof, because I don't work for / run said corporations.

And I'm no superhero. I have 15 year old nephews who can chew through games twice as fast as I can. These same nephews have personal games libraries in the hundreds, complete with parents who fork out for a new game every few days/weeks to alleviate their boredom. (And yes, I've suggested rentals as a more economically viable option).

Now don't get me wrong, shmups are not void from the same criticism. There are plenty that are too easy. But on the whole I find the majority of them refuse to let me 1CC them as quickly as other genres. It actually takes effort and concentration on my behalf, unlike a great deal many other games of which I can finish on my first attempt with 3-4 beers in me. This is probably why I've been a fan of the genre for so long.

And as mentioned, there are exceptions to the rule. I've been pleasantly surprised by quite a few "mainstream" (whatever the hell that does really mean) titles. But again, the number seems to decrease every year, and likewise with every new console that goes up in processing power, but down in fun games.

All of this is personal opinion, and observation. I don't have a crystal ball and I can't say why these things occur. And likewise I'm sure there are plenty of gamers out there who enjoy winning far more than they do actually having to put effort into games (I know people who have pretty high-stress jobs, and play games to relax - shmups are often difficult and frustrating for these folks, and they don't like them).

But whatever. Each to their own. Play what you like, and avoid what you don't. The rule of economics states that if something is crap, it will eventually go broke. Just like EA's 31% drop in profits this last year, as a poignant example to a long winded post about my very unimportant opinion on my personal hobby.

[gs68]

http://www.elecplay.com/reviews_article ... ticle=2933

# Unlimited continues
# So easy it can be played while unconscious

Snagged this from a board that I'd rather not mention, let alone link to:

For the next Tyrian, it needs to be a full 3d spacecombat/flight sim. None of this "2 dimensions with 3d models" crap that a few other shooters are doing.

Also, I love how casual gamers compare any shmup, no matter how manic/insane it is, to Space Invaders. I mean they're both shmups, but still...

[Shatterhand]

My personal favorite:

"Radiant Silvergun is so over hyped!"


Anyone who has actually 1CC'd it would quickly say different.

Everybody who has ever bowled a 300 enjoys bowling.

HA!

[elvis]

http://www.elecplay.com/reviews_article ... ticle=2933

# Unlimited continues
# So easy it can be played while unconscious

So when exactly did the world lose the self control to avoid using continues? Or is this me being one of those crazy old-timer cynical fringe-gamers again?

[Zweihander]

http://www.elecplay.com/reviews_article ... ticle=2933

# Unlimited continues
# So easy it can be played while unconscious

Snagged this from a board that I'd rather not mention, let alone link to:

For the next Tyrian, it needs to be a full 3d spacecombat/flight sim. None of this "2 dimensions with 3d models" crap that a few other shooters are doing.

Also, I love how casual gamers compare any shmup, no matter how manic/insane it is, to Space Invaders. I mean they're both shmups, but still...

"Has there been public outcry for retro gaming at full price on Sega’s 128-bit machine?"

Dreamcast was 96-bit, not 128-bit. This reviewer fails at internet, and at life.

[serge]

96-bit?!
Was it calculated by the same people who said the NeoGeo hardware was 24-bit?

[Zweihander]

96-bit?!
Was it calculated by the same people who said the NeoGeo hardware was 24-bit?

...just did some searching...

HOLY SHIT, the Dreamcast was 128-bit?! wtf.... impossible.

[Specineff]

The main processor was 128 bit all right. At some point, bits become irrelevant. (Xbox uses a Pentium 3. Which is 32 bit as we all know). You wouldn't believe me if I told you the SNES uses a variant of the same chip used on the PCE and SNES, would you?

[Turrican]

I should clarify:

By "pedestrian" I mean games that can be completed on their first attempt with little effort. Games that are merely pretty graphics with a few button presses and lo and behold you are looking at the "Congradulations, you've won" screen. These to me are more in the genre of "interative movie", and less "game".

Since the era of the Playstation, I've lost count of the volume of games that I've clocked on my first attempt.

Now, I don't know why this trend has become popular. Sure, I can speculate. I could say that companies are focussing more on online multi-play and less on single player games. I could say that budgets are being put towards graphics engines first, and AI and gameplay second. I could say that corporations are all evil bastards and make games too easy so I'm forced to buy more sooner and spend my hard earned dollars. But none of these statements I can back up with any sort of proof, because I don't work for / run said corporations.

And I'm no superhero. I have 15 year old nephews who can chew through games twice as fast as I can. These same nephews have personal games libraries in the hundreds, complete with parents who fork out for a new game every few days/weeks to alleviate their boredom. (And yes, I've suggested rentals as a more economically viable option).

Now don't get me wrong, shmups are not void from the same criticism. There are plenty that are too easy. But on the whole I find the majority of them refuse to let me 1CC them as quickly as other genres. It actually takes effort and concentration on my behalf, unlike a great deal many other games of which I can finish on my first attempt with 3-4 beers in me. This is probably why I've been a fan of the genre for so long.

And as mentioned, there are exceptions to the rule. I've been pleasantly surprised by quite a few "mainstream" (whatever the hell that does really mean) titles. But again, the number seems to decrease every year, and likewise with every new console that goes up in processing power, but down in fun games.

All of this is personal opinion, and observation. I don't have a crystal ball and I can't say why these things occur. And likewise I'm sure there are plenty of gamers out there who enjoy winning far more than they do actually having to put effort into games (I know people who have pretty high-stress jobs, and play games to relax - shmups are often difficult and frustrating for these folks, and they don't like them).

But whatever. Each to their own. Play what you like, and avoid what you don't. The rule of economics states that if something is crap, it will eventually go broke. Just like EA's 31% drop in profits this last year, as a poignant example to a long winded post about my very unimportant opinion on my personal hobby.

You have clarified one time more that you equal easy games to crap. And let me add that I had not touched the argument of a game's difficulty once before you did.

[Acid King]

I should clarify:

By "pedestrian" I mean games that can be completed on their first attempt with little effort. Games that are merely pretty graphics with a few button presses and lo and behold you are looking at the "Congradulations, you've won" screen. These to me are more in the genre of "interative movie", and less "game".

Since the era of the Playstation, I've lost count of the volume of games that I've clocked on my first attempt.

Don't you think that's a poor criteria? Games restrictions have been eased. How many of those games did you not die? How many of those games did you not have to continue? Comparing a one credit clear in a shooter to modern mainstream gaming is like comparing apples to heroin, I just don't see the connection. I mean, what mainstream game (i.e. platformer, 3d action game, etc) do you not clear on your first attempt? You never actually start the game over because of saving and liberal lives. Even if a game can be beaten in say 5-10 hours (a few days of playtime)if you applied arcade criteria of single credit limited lives the games would be ridiculously frustrating. If you got 8 hours in to a game, and you ran out of continues and had to start the game all over again, how many people would? The games would be impossible due to their length. How many people would be willing to sit and play a game for 10 hours straight just to complete it?

[serge]

The main processor was 128 bit all right.

From SH4 Programming Manual, page 1 (14, Section 1 Overview):
(the manual is available here: http://www.itc-electronics.com/CD/Dop/H ... o/sh4p.pdf or it can be found at renesas.com)

The SH-4 is a 32-bit RISC (reduced instruction set computer) microprocessor, featuring object code upward-compatibility with SH-1, SH-2, SH-3, and SH-3E microcomputers. Its 16-bit fixedlength instruction set enables program code size to be reduced by almost 50% compared with 32-bit instructions.

The whole bitness thing is totally meaningless without context.
SH4 does include a "128-bit" block that operates on four 32-bit numbers at a time (to calc matrix*vector and vector dot product), the CPU itself is still 32-bit.

[Gopher's Ambition]

Funny you should mention elecplay... the same guys who listed one of the misses of a game as "I didn't like the main characters hat". Tommy is a complete and utter tool. He rated a Bugs Bunny platformer a 7. He also berated the Ninja Turtles game, not for it's repetitve use of voice clips, but the fact that they didn't put the Turtles names on the screen... because he didn't know the difference between them. Let's forget about how sinful it is to not know the Turtles apart... how does it affect gamplay as to whether it says 2P or Raphael?


To be fair... G. Darius and R-Type Delta got very positive reviews. And not just due to aesthetics, but because they thought the games were innovative and fun. I guess someone up there in elecplay land has some sanity... if only because they didn't lower the score because of how dumb they thought the idea of a fish based enemy was.

[Rob]

G. Darius and R-Type Delta got very positive reviews. And not just due to aesthetics, but because they thought the games were innovative and fun. I guess someone up there in elecplay land has some sanity...

Here's the thing about gaming sites/mags: everything is rated too generously except for token punching bags. So what they really meant is that they goofed around for 1-2 hours semi-nostalgically. 8/10!

[Turrican]

G. Darius and R-Type Delta got very positive reviews. And not just due to aesthetics, but because they thought the games were innovative and fun. I guess someone up there in elecplay land has some sanity...

Here's the thing about gaming sites/mags: everything is rated too generously except for token punching bags. So what they really meant is that they goofed around for 1-2 hours semi-nostalgically. 8/10!

Aww, come on now. What's the problem with R-Type Delta Rob?

[Rob]

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm saying mags overrate everything. They can do no right by me! Delta is pretty cool. Of course, the most heavily memory based moments get really boring (giant mech stage 2, dodging its lumbering feet for the 20th time).

[Turrican]

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I'm saying mags overrate everything. They can do no right by me! Delta is pretty cool. Of course, the most heavily memory based moments get really boring (giant mech stage 2, dodging its lumbering feet for the 20th time).

Well, fine. But always remember, it's a matter of perception. We are talking in a shmup forum and Delta looks a solid, more of the same game. Reviewers back then were talking from pages of Playstation magazines. They lived a troubled period where they had to review tons of Need for Speeds and Tekkens. I bet even you under that regime would welcome Delta like a breath of fresh air... Actually, it's always like this for "generic" game press... think to the whole Geometry Wars thing...

[Rob]

I bet even you under that regime would welcome Delta like a breath of fresh air...

Tomb Raider > Delta. Einhander was the shooter of the day and TF5 was my nostalgia novelty. It was cute how they gave most shooters 7-8 ratings though.

[Turrican]

I bet even you under that regime would welcome Delta like a breath of fresh air...

Tomb Raider > Delta. Einhander was the shooter of the day and TF5 was my nostalgia novelty. It was cute how they gave most shooters 7-8 ratings though.

Tomb Raider was excellent in 1996... By the time Delta was released, no one could stand TR sequels anymore (at least among the press, they sold like bucketloads anyway). And Einhander was the shooter of the day mostly because the entire press was completely in love with anything Squaresoft was doing.

[Shatterhand]

Hey, *I* can stand Tomb Raider sequels.

I own every Tomb Raider game in one format or another. Also my mother is a BIG Lara Croft fan.