4th Annual Top 25 Shmups of All Time! - Discussion thread

[BulletMagnet]

but that's because the SS rev feat. the special version, and in that one your ship has a pretty damn tiny hitbox -- if you know what I mean.

"It's not the size, it's how you use it!"

[xaer0knight]

Then again, I never had an NEC gaming console or handheld of my own. So that means that not having a PC-Engine is okay? I keep hearing that it has an extensive shmup library.

The NEC Consoles, SuperGrafx, TG16, PCE, and Duo, have a great selection of SHMUPs. Its an expensive system to collect for, man i paid 40+ bucks for a Complete R-Type. Games like Sapphire, Magical Chase, Final Solider are very looked for making it expensive. Sapphire alone hit 600 last i looked (ebay), Magical Chase (altus games hit $$$ easy about 700, ebay)... NEC Consoles takes some money and some detication. I thought about collecting and finishing a complete US Tg-16/CD library but i dont have about 3k to finish it. Its okay, NEC systems are expensive.

[xaer0knight]

Dude, that's what I just said a few posts back.. but honestly, a lot of criticism of old games I've seen is just "oh I don't play games made before X" or that they're ugly or too low tech or something. This to me seems to be largely a preference of style rather than anything too objective, and that's why I was suggesting earlier that perhaps we've lost some old-timers somewhere along the way =)

IMO!
I find that alot among these "casual" games unlike your "hardcore" gamers. Hardcore gaming is for genres like Puzzles, SHMUPs, and RPGs, because they require such dedication or skill to play these days. Such skills may not be needed in some games like GTA, Mortal Kombat, or GUN....
To me the finest Era was the 8/16 bit of gaming after the crash of 1982/83. Even those games were simple but yet fun. Lost old-timers by making some games more complicated, visually and in controls. how many times can you rehash a concept before it gets old?...
-Games like Ikaruga and Psyvaiar are concepts that i have never seen before or that are new to me, Bullet Eating and Buzzing.
-Controls get more complicated or more to learn than just A=Shoot & B=Bomb/Special then A=Shoot, B=Sword, X=Field Change, R=Wing Layer & L=Lock On ..
-and because the "majority" can be overblown with buttons controls and the amount of things happening at once can turn off people.
-I guess you have to be "hardcore" or like a challenge/difficulty to play certain games...
-also games are subject to snap judgement, word of mounth, internet, and the review that fallow them.

Videogaming can be a harsh world

But there are still some of us that are here to endure the change and provide ensite.. and some of it history

-Jason

[Turrican]

No, I meant:

... the majority of shmups that survive the test of time are ones that were originally released on the arcade.

It's all very subjective, really... I mean, these games get their audience constantly narrowed, and just like it happened with beat'em ups, they get über-complex so that only a small niche of nerds appreciate them... We can call this process "standing the test of time", or we can call it degeneration.

imho, it's frankly quite absurd that the age when shooters were produced for the home market is nowadays seen as a period of decadence. But heh, I'll quit it here 'cause I get the feeling we could discuss this for a month without reaching an agreement of sort.

[Zach Keene]

So how long before we get the results of this year's voting?

It'll be no later than May 1, but hopefully sooner.

[dai jou bu]

imho, it's frankly quite absurd that the age when shooters were produced for the home market is nowadays seen as a period of decadence.

As of right now, First-Person Shooters are very popular. It's literally saturated with tons of titles that I don't even care about. There's still gems to be found though; it's just that you have to dig through a lot more dirt to get to them. This is no different when shmups were popular.

It's all very subjective, really... I mean, these games get their audience constantly narrowed, and just like it happened with beat'em ups, they get über-complex so that only a small niche of nerds appreciate them... We can call this process "standing the test of time", or we can call it degeneration.

This is what happens when the majority of the market decides to develop games for the current popular genre: you get a smaller volume of games in the same genre after the developer migration, but those companies that are still sticking around are usually the most influential ones in the genre anyway, so that means the games released are either very original or very refined.

Also, it seems like you're referring to the genre as "standing the test of time" by surviving the shift of developers making games for more popular genres. I'm referring to specific shmups that "stand the test of time" due to particular aspects that make it very unique to the genre, be it gameplay mechanics (I don't really care about score modifiers though) and/or its aesthetics.

[Turrican]

As of right now, First-Person Shooters are very popular. It's literally saturated with tons of titles that I don't even care about. There's still gems to be found though; it's just that you have to dig through a lot more dirt to get to them. This is no different when shmups were popular.

Well, if the good/crap ratio is kept equal regardless of genre and ages, you'd agree with me that it should be the same even regardless of the arcade/domestic factor.

This is what happens when the majority of the market decides to develop games for the current popular genre: you get a smaller volume of games in the same genre after the developer migration, but those companies that are still sticking around are usually the most influential ones in the genre anyway, so that means the games released are either very original or very refined.

Also, it seems like you're referring to the genre as "standing the test of time" by surviving the shift of developers making games for more popular genres. I'm referring to specific shmups that "stand the test of time" due to particular aspects that make it very unique to the genre, be it gameplay mechanics (I don't really care about score modifiers though) and/or its aesthetics.

It's interesting. Please don't take my unwillingness to reply as rudeness. It's just that I detest to play the part of the vocal minority.

[Randorama]

It's all very subjective, really...

This is the perfect cocktail party comment!

I mean, these games get their audience constantly narrowed, and just like it happened with beat'em ups, they get über-complex so that only a small niche of nerds appreciate them... We can call this process "standing the test of time", or we can call it degeneration.

"Degeneration" doesn't belong here, nor some rather questionable discourses like golden ages, ice ages and random Kali Yugas. The complexity of current shmups is no more and no less than the early '90s. Incredibly complex score systems were a trend of the late 90s and ended with DOJ, basically...Still, they were nothing to titles like Rainbow Islands
, just to make a simple example (1987!).

imho, it's frankly quite absurd that the age when shooters were produced for the home market is nowadays seen as a period of decadence.

It sounds like a plea for victivism, honestly, but please see above...

Well, if the good/crap ratio is kept equal regardless of genre and ages, you'd agree with me that it should be the same even regardless of the arcade/domestic factor.

Old games won't appear in the chart too often regardless of the origin. An annual chart is something based on new titles, honestly, and if 5 new titles which are excellent appear in an year, old titles may be dropped. Not everyone is apparently obsessed in worshipping the past. On the other hand, it is easy for a title that can be programmed with 20 years of experience behind to appear "better" than a seminal title. It is a problem of the 'annual chart' itself, honestly.
Beside that, if people like more old arcade titles and vote them more than old console titles, that's democracy, for the sake of a better term.

But heh, I'll quit it here 'cause I get the feeling we could discuss this for a month without reaching an agreement of sort.

Using terms like "decadence" and "degeneration" sounds more like Julius Evola than serious discourses, especially when talking about videogames. Branding change as decadence is such an extreme position that it's there not even space for a debate, frankly.

Also, you've hoarded votes for an arcade title (Salamander) so you're partially guilty

[Turrican]

Edit: i didn't really want to reply in full length, but on a second thought it could be helpful.

"Degeneration" doesn't belong here, nor some rather questionable discourses like golden ages, ice ages and random Kali Yugas.

Funny, reading some of your articles I did get the impression that periodization was one of your interests.

The complexity of current shmups is no more and no less than the early '90s. Incredibly complex score systems were a trend of the late 90s and ended with DOJ, basically...Still, they were nothing to titles like Rainbow Islands, just to make a simple example (1987!).

So it's a trend that begins in the early '90s. I perfectly accept what you're stating here. I don't see where I claimed otherwise.

Old games won't appear in the chart too often regardless of the origin. An annual chart is something based on new titles, honestly, and if 5 new titles which are excellent appear in an year, old titles may be dropped. Not everyone is apparently obsessed in worshipping the past. On the other hand, it is easy for a title that can be programmed with 20 years of experience behind to appear "better" than a seminal title. It is a problem of the 'annual chart' itself, honestly.

Too bad it's called "top 25 shmups of all time". If that's indeed the poll's spirit, I'd suggest at least a name change. ^_^

Oh, and too many "honestly". I did catch that you're honest. Put at least another "frankly" next time.

Also, you've hoarded votes for an arcade title (Salamander) so you're partially guilty

Oh, I voted many arcades, not just Salamander. QED

Question: did i vote? I can't recall and i happen not to find my votes, can anyone double-check? (I can't find my votes, in case i've cast them: can anyone confirm this or i've just overlooked them?)

You didn't, iirc.

[Randorama]

Funny, reading some of your articles I did get the impression that periodization was one of your interests.

Seriously, such a label is out of place, periods are just periods.

So it's a trend that begins in the early '90s. I perfectly accept what you're stating here. I don't see where I claimed otherwise.

It's a trend that can be labelled as 32-bit. Not entirely true, but as long as the 8-bit and 16-bit eras are seen as "omg the golden age etc etc", zany comparisons easily arise, with things like "omg megadrive games were perfection, now we live in an era of children-eating shmups!" and viceversa. Honestly, all these manichean dichotomies floating around (score vs fun, old vs new, good vs evil, Milan vs Inter) are, to say the least, questionable.

Too bad it's called "top 25 shmups of all time". If that's indeed the poll's spirit, I'd suggest at least a name change. ^_^

I skipped the name entirely...but that's the problem with it being annual. Slap Fight still kicks tons of ass, but years can wash away such class. That's a problem with charts and votes: if a game is indeed a perfect 10 and people forget it, does it stop being a perfect 10?

Oh, and too many "honestly". I did catch that you're honest. Put at least another "frankly" next time.

Well... the contract says that i need to be redoundant at least 10% of the time, working for the redoudancy minister has its problems

Oh, I voted many arcades, not just Salamander. QED.

Glad to see you've got the joke

You didn't, iirc.

;___________;

Ok, i would have dropped away all of those shitty old titles, DAMMIT!!1!

[Shatterhand]

If this sounds too stupid, please let me know

Even what's a "new" shmup may be subjective. I mean, Sengoku Ace was out im 1993, but if I am playing it for the first time now, wouldn't be a new game for me?

There are a few shmups on my votes that I only played for the first time MANY years after its initial release (Gigawing, Cotton Boomerang, Soldier Blade and a few others).

The thing is that I still think many people here don't care too much about a game, if he is resorting to emulation to play it and/or the game is too old. It's like they play the game for five minutes, then just drop it together with the other tons of roms he downloaded, or something like that.

Not that I am saying this is a sin or something, it's just something that I think it happens. I also know many people hate using the PC for gaming, so resorting to emulation is a pain in the ass sometimes.

I still think Apidya and Space Manbow would get a lot more of votes (Apidya got a lot more this year) if people actually played them. I personally think both games are a MUCH, but MUCH better than, say, Salamander, and taking a look at the votes, it makes me think that nearly everyone who actually PLAYED both games also think this way.

And people's memory, in general, is very short anyway. I believe people may tend to vote for games he have played in the last few months or something. This makes me quote what Rando just said:

if a game is indeed a perfect 10 and people forget it, does it stop being a perfect 10?

When *I* cast those votes, or when I make a top 10 list or top 100 list of any kind of game or anything like that, I always try to remember what games I had the most fun with it. Even if I haven't played the game for ages. I mean, I haven't played Aleste 2 for a some time now, but still I can't remember any shmup I had more fun with than Aleste 2... probably only Zanac Neo . Maybe this is "to worship the past", I dunno , but for me, that's how a "top 25 list" should be made. It's not even how much a game LASTS (Though this may be taken in consideration), it's just how much I enjoyed those games when I played them.

So, erm... blend people's short memory with their lack of interest in playing older games (Which may be through emulation), and this may explain why older games always keep dissapearing from the charts, even though it should be a "top 25 of ALL time".

[Randorama]

If this sounds too stupid, please let me know

Even what's a "new" shmup may be subjective. I mean, Sengoku Ace was out im 1993, but if I am playing it for the first time now, wouldn't be a new game for me?

Well, no, it's still 13 years old, but i get your point. However, you would agree that, if we want to make a thing such as a chart of 'best games ever!', old classics would disappear without being 'guilty' of anything. That's why i agree on an 'annual shmups chart' instead, if someone discovers Space Invaders in 2010 and decides that it's the best game of his gaming year, it would make more sense, i think.

The thing is that I still think many people here don't care too much about a game, if he is resorting to emulation to play it and/or the game is too old. It's like they play the game for five minutes, then just drop it together with the other tons of roms he downloaded, or something like that.

You were the one going around with the 'eat shit Cave' signature, though.
The whole discourse about exposition may be sound if everyone would accept that, perhaps, votes are cast without trying to be too objective or without really trying to give some kind of "holy bible of shmupping". In short, it would be much nicer if people would accept that charts (and reviews) wouldn't be some kind of dogmas about the genre.

I still think Apidya and Space Manbow would get a lot more of votes (Apidya got a lot more this year) if people actually played them. I personally think both games are a MUCH, but MUCH better than, say, Salamander, and taking a look at the votes, it makes me think that nearly everyone who actually PLAYED both games also think this way.

Ok, but as hard as you can think about this, and also be right, you can't go to people's houses and force them to play those titles. Exposition counts and obscure gems can suffer about this. Especially when they're easy, as there are higher chances to be dismissed, right now.

When *I* cast those votes, or when I make a top 10 list or top 100 list of any kind of game or anything like that, I always try to remember what games I had the most fun with it.

Sorry but from the way you present it, it is straightforward that you're making a nostalgia chart. Personally i would change the chart to "top 25 shmups of this year! List the shmups that you've enjoyed more in the last 365 days!". Defender wouldn't get too many votes, but everyone knows that it's a classic, no?
Of course, a list of classics would also help, so if someone wants to have an idea on what's worthy to play even if 20 years old, it would much more clearer and subject to whims and trends. Funny that you mention Apidya though, since it's probably one of the most arcadey console games ever

[Turrican]

Seriously, such a label is out of place, periods are just periods.

You mean the "degeneration" label. I perfectly agree of course. It's out of place in both senses, for the "easy console stuff" and for the actual shmup scenario.
(although it must be said, that among periods there's the Renaissance and the Early Middle Age... They are periods, yet there's a difference).

It's a trend that can be labelled as 32-bit. Not entirely true, but as long as the 8-bit and 16-bit eras are seen as "omg the golden age etc etc", zany comparisons easily arise, with things like "omg megadrive games were perfection, now we live in an era of children-eating shmups!" and viceversa. Honestly, all these manichean dichotomies floating around (score vs fun, old vs new, good vs evil, Milan vs Inter) are, to say the least, questionable.

Well, I couldn't agree more on this... Like all generalizations, they are quite pitiful.

I skipped the name entirely...but that's the problem with it being annual. Slap Fight still kicks tons of ass, but years can wash away such class.

No problem at all. Personally I think the poll should stay as it is. Like nullstar wrote, he had thought to rename it "Most Influencial", "Best new releases" and such but he eventually opted for the formula which granted the most freedom, so we can basically vote whatever we like, and relying on any possible interpretation of "to like"...

That's a problem with charts and votes: if a game is indeed a perfect 10 and people forget it, does it stop being a perfect 10?

It doesn't of course. and I'd add (for great justice) that awesomeness has very little to do with the platform of origin, be it arcade or else.

Funny that you mention Apidya though, since it's probably one of the most arcadey console games ever

Apidya is home computer ^_^ and that phrase of yours just shows that in your mind "arcade" is pretty much translated with "properly done, well realized". No wonder that you like "arcade" games if you identify "arcade" with the concept of "Good". It's as saying you like good games.

[Turrican]

If this sounds too stupid, please let me know

Even what's a "new" shmup may be subjective. I mean, Sengoku Ace was out im 1993, but if I am playing it for the first time now, wouldn't be a new game for me?

There are a few shmups on my votes that I only played for the first time MANY years after its initial release (Gigawing, Cotton Boomerang, Soldier Blade and a few others).

The thing is that I still think many people here don't care too much about a game, if he is resorting to emulation to play it and/or the game is too old. It's like they play the game for five minutes, then just drop it together with the other tons of roms he downloaded, or something like that.

It doesn't sound stupid at all to me!

[cigsthecat]

The only real problem I see with the list is that 25 is just too many. And this isn't to say that all of the games on my list haven't gotten a good chunk of play time- I've put a fair bit of time into each. I mean, I ended up with Star Soldier games on my list just to round things out! (And boy, I've done quite the 180 on those as some may note) It's not that I dislike them persay, but Rando's theory is correct. They aren't challenging or interesting to play anymore.

I vote my top 25 of all time as such: These are the games that I will end up playing forever. That's also why I give my top five so much weight relative to the rest of the list; there just aren't many games that I love enough to really explore every little detail and get the most out of.

As to the question of old versus new here are the key problems as I see them.

- The vast majority of old games have many and varied flaws that were fixed as the genre progressed. I see no point in playing flawed games when there's plenty that aren't.

- Older games are also either too easy, or too "hard." I put hard in quotes because their difficulty comes from the aforementioned flaws. Cheap shots, enormous hitbox, stuff jumping out from behind, etc. etc.

These issues are why over the years my top 25 reads as it does.

[Turrican]

I vote my top 25 of all time as such: These are the games that I will end up playing forever. That's also why I give my top five so much weight relative to the rest of the list; there just aren't many games that I love enough to really explore every little detail and get the most out of.

There, for the sake of world's variety, I'd say that in my lists there are games that I enjoyed surely more than once, but I wouldn't play again(*). For a couple of reasons. I don't think challenge and replayability are my decisive factors, because I value a game even for its aesthetics (in the broad sense of the word) merits. I mean, once you play Axelay through the end, you've done, as is with Secret of Monkey Island. It was an experience, you avenged your dead ones, fought the aliens, THE END. There is clearly a bulk of games that weren't written with score in mind, so replayability is limited. And I don't feel like it's right to penalize these games just because I could, you know, lock myself inside a dojo and study DDP's chains for the next forty years. I mean, if that would be my criteria for gaming, my list would read like this:

[all] Chess

Therefore I try to evaluate games for what the programmers had in mind. I don't think it's fair to judge / criticize a game that wasn't built around score / replayability just for the fact that it's something different.

As for the 25 number... Well, sure, it's a big number going by your criteria cigs. I totally understand that one can only devote himself to a limited selection of games that require an hard training in his life. However, if you do a top ten it gets sclerotic quite fast, because the first positions are less likely to change. And since there are people on this board who judge shmups on a different basis (even newcomers which used the infamous "try-it-for-five-minutes-via-emu"), I'd say 25 it's a fair number. You didn't have to dilute too much after all; likewise many didn't feel too constrained by a smaller number.

(*)= to be more precise, I could say that I try to figure my top 25 by thinking at those games as I had played each of them just once. (which is a paradox of course, but I hope you get the idea)

[xaer0knight]

Therefore I try to evaluate games for what the programmers had in mind. I don't think it's fair to judge / criticize a game that wasn't built around score / replayability just for the fact that it's something different.

Ah Men. it all comes down to there vision and if you have fun playing that game. Replayability is a PLUS IMO these days, a way to make it popular and what not... Replayability, Limited Edition, Extended Version, and get "this if you Pre-Order at Gamestop" sells games. after all these programmers, developers, and publishers have to make money and sell games to make that money. Compatition from all sides of the gaming of the world influences all desisions.. from console to arcade to handheld versions, to reviews on the net, word of month, and via magazines. After all arent you just a little "influenced" by the reviews to try or buy a game?

However, if you do a top ten it gets sclerotic quite fast, because the first positions are less likely to change. And since there are people on this board who judge shmups on a different basis (even newcomers which used the infamous "try-it-for-five-minutes-via-emu"), I'd say 25 it's a fair number.

Total agreed. Most people in general have different views and opinions in everything. same with lables, genres, and SHMUPs... I even fall victim to the playing 5 mins via MAME

[Randorama]

(although it must be said, that among periods there's the Renaissance and the Early Middle Age... They are periods, yet there's a difference).

Well...they're just shmups. But seriously enough, it's very reactionary (extreme right wing, i mean) to evoke the idea that "past=golden age, present=Damnation". I shiver at the thought, personally.

Apidya is home computer ^_^ and that phrase of yours just shows that in your mind "arcade" is pretty much translated with "properly done, well realized". No wonder that you like "arcade" games if you identify "arcade" with the concept of "Good". It's as saying you like good games.

Touche'. But seriously, i have prejudices against Megadrive stuff, to make names. In my head, great console stuff is PC-Engine shmups on hard or very hard level. I endorse the idea that a game must be balanced, challenging and fast paced ( i can be very loose on pace, in case). Old arcade titles were usually not too balanced, console titles were usually trivially balanced (i.e. too easy, so no real chances for the engine to show weaknessses). It must be said that late Compile titles, or Recca, or the Caravan series, were quite influential on arcade market, as they proposed a rather high pace and dynamic gameplay. In fact, Raizing was formed by "ex-Compilers" and Recca's maker (Yagawa).

One peculiarity, though: i don't really mind the absence of a true score system. Level design can be extremely refined thanks to survival, or score, or both in various contributions. As long as there is room for variety, it's ok. Maybe some titles are meant to be played forever, but i truly don't care. I like when i can say "the end" in my gaming journeys, so i can play something else. That's one good side of commercial products, i think

[louisg]

I mean, once you play Axelay through the end, you've done, as is with Secret of Monkey Island. It was an experience, you avenged your dead ones, fought the aliens, THE END. There is clearly a bulk of games that weren't written with score in mind, so replayability is limited

I'm not sure how you can compare Axelay to Monkey Island-- I like adventure games, but once you solve them, they are done gameplay-wise because you know the answers to all the puzzles. Not so with shooters: you're comparing arcade games to a genre in which, like most story-oriented games, the goal is to see all of the game. Arcade games differ in that you can see all of the game pretty quickly, but the longevity comes from the player actually improving. This can not only take the form of scoring, but several other factors as well...

[Eps]

Honestly, all these manichean dichotomies floating around (score vs fun, old vs new, good vs evil, Milan vs Inter) are, to say the least, questionable.

I totally agree. I mean, everyone knows that the answer is Juventus.

*ducks out*

[dai jou bu]

that phrase of yours just shows that in your mind "arcade" is pretty much translated with "properly done, well realized". No wonder that you like "arcade" games if you identify "arcade" with the concept of "Good". It's as saying you like good games.

I deem this a new use for the word "arcade."

[louisg]

Just a thought: a top 10 borderliners poll might also be fun. I'd guess borderliners to be vehicular shooter-like games (spy hunter), run n guns both vertical (heavy barrel, commando, shock troopers) and horizontal (contra, metal slug but NOT something like megaman, castlevania or turrican), and railed chase view games (space harrier, aqua jack).. whatcha think?

[bVork]

Just a thought: a top 10 borderliners poll might also be fun. I'd guess borderliners to be vehicular shooter-like games (spy hunter), run n guns both vertical (heavy barrel, commando, shock troopers) and horizontal (contra, metal slug but NOT something like megaman, castlevania or turrican), and railed chase view games (space harrier, aqua jack).. whatcha think?

That would be neat. Especially if every type of borderliner is lumped into the same poll. It would be interesting to see if, say, arena shooters are more loved than run n guns.

And Mega Turrican should be included as a borderliner. It has far less exploration than the others

[Herr Schatten]

To toss a new topic into the discussion: I think that games that are parts of series tend to be underrepresented in the poll. I mean, you just have 25 slots for your votes, you can't possibly fill them all with, say, Gradius and Parodius titles. Taking these as examples, I think every single one of them is good enough to deserve to be placed among the best, but almost everyone will just pick his favourite in the series and vote for that. Since not everyone's favourites are the same, each individual game tends to get fewer votes than it possibly deserves.

I think games from companies that share a similar style of gameplay suffer from this too, albeit not quite as much. But I know that I have fewer Cave and Psikyo titles on my list than I wanted to, because I thought it would be better to have some diversity.

[Shocky]

I mean, you just have 25 slots for your votes, you can't possibly fill them all with, say, Gradius and Parodius titles.

Yeah, because there ain't enough of them Only about 14 different Gradii and I don't know, 5 Parodii? And 3 Salamanders. That makes 22. Maybe next year I could rack up 25...

Edit: I was wrong! There are at least 25, I forgot Solar Assault Gradius, Interstellar Assault and NEO Imperial (and maybe some others too).

[Ganelon]

The NEC Consoles, SuperGrafx, TG16, PCE, and Duo, have a great selection of SHMUPs. Its an expensive system to collect for, man i paid 40+ bucks for a Complete R-Type. Games like Sapphire, Magical Chase, Final Solider are very looked for making it expensive. Sapphire alone hit 600 last i looked (ebay), Magical Chase (altus games hit $$$ easy about 700, ebay)... NEC Consoles takes some money and some detication.

Dude, you're paying WAY too much for your games. If you do some more research and be patient, you can acquire those same games for 1/4 to 1/2 of what you're paying.

- Older games are also either too easy, or too "hard." I put hard in quotes because their difficulty comes from the aforementioned flaws. Cheap shots, enormous hitbox, stuff jumping out from behind, etc. etc.

Perhaps you feel this way because you aren't used to them? Stuff from behind don't matter since they're only good for a death the first couple of tries. Then you know where they are and just avoid them. As for hitbox (which are mostly just ship-sized, not extravagantly large), yeah, it's annoying sometimes, but once you're used to the dimensions, you recognize it as just a larger area to protect. As for cheap shots, I totally agree: a slow unchangeable ship speed can contribute to lots of frustration, esp. when combined with homing enemy shots. But if you're talking about a fast bullet from seemingly out of the blue, they're just the same as ships from behind and will always appear in the same place at the same time, making everything easily anticipated.

Some people may not like these forms of difficulty but they're not magically unfair or impossible due solely to these factors as a result. The term "flaw" seems too subjective; I could imagine casual gamers considering the 1-hit kill design of most shooters to be a huge flaw. If I were a shooter designer, I'd implement every one of these techniques to create difficulty and reward those who memorized every bit of my shooter. Of course, I'm also an oldschool shooter fan focused solely on the 1CC so my opinions are naturally coated with personal bias.

EDIT: to end my quote tags

[Randorama]

Just a thought: a top 10 borderliners poll might also be fun. I'd guess borderliners to be vehicular shooter-like games (spy hunter), run n guns both vertical (heavy barrel, commando, shock troopers) and horizontal (contra, metal slug but NOT something like megaman, castlevania or turrican), and railed chase view games (space harrier, aqua jack).. whatcha think?

This is shmups.com, there are other forums for this, thanks

[Rob]

Stuff from behind don't matter since they're only good for a death the first couple of tries.

Hmm, older games are typically much longer and less distinct visually, so it is harder to memorize these points, especially when this tactic is used multiple times a stage. But even once is still annoying and it's a garbage challenge with no thought but "think you can dodge this in .01 seconds heh."

[Bydobasher]

That's why I long ago learned to play horis in the middle of the screen instead of at the edge.

[louisg]

Just a thought: a top 10 borderliners poll might also be fun. I'd guess borderliners to be vehicular shooter-like games (spy hunter), run n guns both vertical (heavy barrel, commando, shock troopers) and horizontal (contra, metal slug but NOT something like megaman, castlevania or turrican), and railed chase view games (space harrier, aqua jack).. whatcha think?

This is shmups.com, there are other forums for this, thanks

Yeah, I should've posted it to like planetquake, since Quake is such a run n gun-- and you guys should dissolve shmups.com and play Rogue Squadron instead since you like games about space ships blowing stuff up In all seriousness, the genres I mentioned in my first post are closely linked to shmups, unlike other arcade game or action game genres. For instance, you could probably make a good case for Heavy Barrel being more like a modern space shmup than Galaga or Tempest. I don't see a reason why this is all that out of the way, especially considering how I remember games like Bangai-O appearing in the top lists before.