F%^$ing hypocrites!

[icycalm]

I was just scanning the headlines over at IGN (don't ask me why--I have my reasons), and this one caught my eye:

Gradius Collection
Vic Viper, oh how we missed you!

Their newspost itself is not important--I didn't even glance at it. The title of the article pisses me the fuck off however.

Sorry I had to vent.

[EOJ]

I find this quote from the article far more offensive than the title:

"Unlike other popular genres of the 1980s, however, the "Shmup" category hasn't evolved much past its original roots, and finding a good shooter that isn't played in the first-person perspective nowadays is close to impossible."

Absolute bullshit.

[Middlemoor]

That's why I don't trust reviews from gaming publishers.

[GaijinPunch]

IGN is a massive publication. Best left unread.

[The Coop]

I was just scanning the headlines over at IGN (don't ask me why--I have my reasons), and this one caught my eye:

Gradius Collection
Vic Viper, oh how we missed you!

Their newspost itself is not important--I didn't even glance at it. The title of the article pisses me the fuck off however.

Sorry I had to vent.

And this pissed you off, why?

[Specineff]

Because all the current game sites talk about is "ZOMFG! HALO IS TEH AEWSOME!!11 LOL!lol!! EleventyONE111!ELEVEN!!11"?

[99pence]

Wow it sounds just like reading a printed gaming magazine.

[Middlemoor]

Only gaming magazines I liked were Mean Machines Sega and EGM.

[The Coop]

Because all the current game sites talk about is "ZOMFG! HALO IS TEH AEWSOME!!11 LOL!lol!! EleventyONE111!ELEVEN!!11"?

Is that a joke? I ask only because this whole thread is confusing the living hell out of me, and I honestly can't tell at four in the morning. I see nothing to get pissed off about in that title, or in the review itself.

In other words, to sum of my feelings at the moment in three letters...

WTF?

[ptoing]

I find this quote from the article far more offensive than the title:

"Unlike other popular genres of the 1980s, however, the "Shmup" category hasn't evolved much past its original roots, and finding a good shooter that isn't played in the first-person perspective nowadays is close to impossible."

Absolute bullshit.

quoted for truth

[JBC]

It's likely that at some point in time someone at IGN stated something along the lines of Gradius being stale and crappy since it's old school - and now they would be contradicting themselves saying that they miss it, thus he calls them hypocrits. I figure that's whats being said.

That reviewer should be flogged for not giving Gradius IV a real chance.

[icycalm]

They didn't miss Gradius! It's a bold faced lie, that's why I am calling them hypocrites.

Gradius is a shooter, if they missed it that would mean they missed shooters in general. I've never met a fan of one shooting franchise who only liked that one franchise and no other shooter. But they've stopped covering shmups on a regular basis since their Ikaruga DC review ages ago.
(edit: actually, forget that, they never covered shmups on a regular basis.)

That guy should lose his job for all the crap he sprouts. If there was any accountability in this business.

[GaijinPunch]

That guy should lose his job for all the crap he sprouts. If there was any accountability in this business.

Take a step back, and realize who you are talking about. Not IGN, but mass publications in general. They are all "on the surface" reviews, and that's all they will ever be. People in forums like this know the interworkings of shooting games like the backs of our hands. It's the same complaints in the fighting game world, and I'm going to guess every other world there is out there. They just don't have the intelligence to get someone that's knowledgeable in each specific genre.

I was hosted under Gamespy for over 5 years. I offered, but was never asked once to to write/review anything. I could've definitely helped in their crappy Virtua Fighter previews, but of course, they don't do their homework.

[Fenrir]

Well? What did you expect? Since when are shmups covered decently in a non-shmup fanatic/related/focused webzine/site? Most of the people can't even comprehend what the hell are modern shmups about.
The majority out there still thinks that shmups are all a matter of shooting your way to the last boss, a dimly rewarding experience back in the days when videogames were one millionth compared to nowadays.
They don't miss Vic Viper at all. In fact they couldn't care less. Tactics, how to keep multipliers and chains on, bullet hells, stuff like this is just ignored. They gave that guy a shmup to review (OH NOES!) and he stunted the usual bullshit and summarized it before going back to their staff newsletter and begging for a prerelease promo of Halo3.
So yeah basically for them everything stopped with R-Type, with OMG exceptions like Ikaruga and Rez. Stop. Deal with it

[icycalm]

Well? What did you expect? Since when are shmups covered decently in a non-shmup fanatic/related/focused webzine/site? Most of the people can't even comprehend what the hell are modern shmups about.
The majority out there still thinks that shmups are all a matter of shooting your way to the last boss, a dimly rewarding experience back in the days when videogames were one millionth compared to nowadays.
They don't miss Vic Viper at all. In fact they couldn't care less. Tactics, how to keep multipliers and chains on, bullet hells, stuff like this is just ignored. They gave that guy a shmup to review (OH NOES!) and he stunted the usual bullshit and summarized it before going back to their staff newsletter and begging for a prerelease promo of Halo3.
So yeah basically for them everything stopped with R-Type, with OMG exceptions like Ikaruga and Rez. Stop. Deal with it

Really, comments like "Stop. Deal with it." are unecessary. I am obviously dealing with it.

All you are saying, and all GP says are things we've known for a while. Yes these people don't cover shmups for the known reasons, and when they do their coverage sucks because they don't know shit.

That's one thing. They are not lying--they are just being ignorant.

Saying they missed these games is quite another. That IS lying. That is a fucking insult.

[Fenrir]

The "deal with it" was more of a joke, really. Following smiling face included for clarifying purposes
By the way it looks like it really hit you on the nerve

[icycalm]

Sorry then, my bad.

And yeah, I got pretty worked up about this. I even followed a link to this guy's blog (he is a fat, smug-looking sonofabitch), and was about to let him know exactly what was on my mind.

And then I didn't.

One of these days I am going to sit down and write a letter to IGN, and email it to them as well as dozens of other blogs and websites. I think I could make it good. I think it could have an impact if it got posted on places like Joystiq and attracted attention. I know one of the guys who writes for Kotaku, so maybe he could help me get it out there.

It's not just that they are ignoring old genres. They are even ignoring new ones these days. It took them weeks, if not months, to start talking about Crysis, an FPS from the guys who made Far Cry. And that's just one example. They'd rather talk about that GTA game that is being ported from the PSP to the PS2. Wow big deal. It's the worst GTA title out there. I mean WTF is the deal with that?

Ok I'll stop now.

[Middlemoor]

Publishers have the gaming media industry in thier pockets.

[Eps]

Publishers have the gaming media industry in thier pockets.

Yep; printed magazines (and unfortunately, now also the big sites) are nothing more than PR tools these days. And it's not just nostalgia: I'm struck when reading old 80s and early 90s gaming mags how much more frank many of the reviews were.

That's why I no longer buy gaming magazines. Why would I, when the Internet is here? And the argument about editorial content frankly doesn't wash; if you don't think you can get intelligent, informed 'editorial' about games on the Net, it's probably just because you are going to the wrong forums / sites / etc.

[elvis]

This thread makes me happy.

Not happy because IGN staff prove yet again just how incompetant they are. Not happy because the world is full of ADD-stricken gamers who only want pretty games that fill in the 10 minutes a day that they actually play. Not happy because the world at large is grossly ignorant to one of the most important gaming genres in modern culture. But happy because for all the ranting and raving I do in various other forums and in real life, it's nice to know that there's someone else out there on this crazy rock I call home that rants at the same things I do, and with the same amount of passion.

Keep it coming, icycalm. I really dig your posts here, and on your site. Love your work.

I'm off to re-read my collection of Mean Machines and CVG mags. I've got a stack of old early-90's EGM and GamePro too, but I have to be honest and say that I much prefer the Brit sence of humour and complete irreverence that was the old EMAP-house style.

[Macaw]

This kinda makes me think of the old game magazine GameFan, which was at time more biased towards import games and 2d. Obviously nowadays major magazines and sites barely touch on imports.

[The Coop]

I find this quote from the article far more offensive than the title:

"Unlike other popular genres of the 1980s, however, the "Shmup" category hasn't evolved much past its original roots, and finding a good shooter that isn't played in the first-person perspective nowadays is close to impossible."

Absolute bullshit.

quoted for truth

I'm pretty sure in that last part, he was referring to the US scene of "shooters". Sure, we all know where to go to get shmups until our eyes bleed. But the average gamer out there these days probably doesn't know about shmups beyond the few that have been released for the PS2 and Gamecube in The States over the last few years (somehow, the PS1 seems to have been forgotten about already). Ikaruga, Castle Shikigami 2, R-Type Final, Gradius V, Chaos Field and the Gradius III & IV pack, are basically all they've seen, and let's be honest... CS2 is rather odd and could easily keep the average gamer at bay looking on the back of the box.

We're shmup nuts here. It's what this site is all about. Keep in mind that not every place is as passionate about saving the universe in a Fire Leo or Vic Viper as this place is. Also, the US scene for shmups has been on life support for a long time due to the so-called "over-saturation of the market" in the late 80s/early 90s, and there aren't many companies willing to bring out what's arriving in Japan (they just don't see shmups as big sellers... kind of like how a lot of US companies viewed RPGs for a good portion of the 90s). So for the average US player, this area of "shooters" is rather hard to find examples of. After all, FPS are coming out of every US company's asses. But games of flying a lone ship to save the known cosmos? Not so much.

[Middlemoor]

Yes, but then the writer didn't make that distinction.

[The Coop]

Quite a few don't. They're writing to get to the review, not necessarily to give a history on the genre. At most, they give a brief background if the game they're reviewing is another entry in a series. Beyond that, the reviews pretty much stay in the here and now. It's up to the reader, regardless of how informed they are, to fill in the blanks and translate what the reviewer is saying.

Plus, with so many seemingly ADD-riddled brats having the attention span of a ferret on a triple espresso, they kind of have to get right to the point these days. Otherwise, they may lose the reader before they get to any aspects of the game being reviewed.

[Ed Oscuro]

Ha, IGN would love a Vic Viper racing game. Interstellar Speedway!

I don't honestly much mind statements to the effect that shooters haven't evolved much, though I myself wouldn't write such a thing (to be diplomatic). When you get right down to it, though, one can look at any number of action games (first or third person) and see what looks like steady progress changing the product over the years. Anything that has been done in shooters has had a counterpart in other genres, which have additionally added on the extra graphical and ambience stuff. Let's face it, more work is going into the average mood-over-gameplay big action blockbuster. I might not play Half-Life 2: Episode 1 a second time through*, but it looks better than the latest Dreamcast release, right**? On the big Features Abacus that marketing and the public uses when comparing one game to another, it becomes obvious that the new games are doing just as much as the old games. Most shooters that get released these days are high-quality, streamlined experiences, and they've done very well satisfying a demanding user base, but a number of factors are keeping them from reaching mass-market potential. I think the appearance of extreme difficulty is possibly one...

What's also tipping the scale is that the current red-hot genres are friendly to the public. Aside from Star Fox, what classic shooter games did Nintendo ever put out? Nothing. As much as I love their games, it's obvious that they've been careful to target them to the mainstream. Most modern shooters (actually, most shooters and many classic games, period) seem too tough and unrewarding the average player.

It does kinda scare me to think that these corporate reviews will eventually be the last word on a number of good games. I was just reading a Greg Kasavin (that's GameSpot) review and a few things struck me as being questionable or even clueless...but I like the reviewer, and this doesn't diminish my estimation of his other work). I don't expect to see eye-to-eye with reviewers, never have and never will (and passively accepting a constant stream of supposed truths in review after review is a good indicator you've got a rusty B.S. detector).

What's sad in this business, of course, is that many of the best people in the community can't really make a dent on the structure. As GaijinPunch noted, nobody accepted his help. I can imagine a number of reasons for it (deadlines, ownership/credit issues might have motivated the other side to sit on his proposal), so probably the best course of action is to move out and make your own site, as GP has done. It's not too hard to fight against the corporate structure for the spotlight (and Google rankings); it just takes time.

For my part, I would just like it if shooter reviews didn't all start out with some cliche reference to the fact that shooters have fallen out of the public eye. If reviewers were so keen on getting right to the point, why do they all fall into this trap? I don't want substantiative gameplay tips from these reviews. That falls into the realm of spoilers, guides, and FAQs best written by people who have the time to do them right

Then again, try to find a review for Condemned that doesn't make a "the buildings are condemned, get it?" joke (I know I would, too).

* Lie. Need to listen to commentary. Going deeper, a lot of the old games push you to memorize patterns to excel, and after getting a pitiful 20K score in Scramble I get a feeling of accomplishment that I don't out of many other action games. That said, this does come down to preference; I can point out a lot of 3D games that can be just as taxing and some people feel most rewarded with them. Don't make the mistake of automatically assuming dexterity and hundreds of sprites onscreen are more worthwhile than 3D spatial skills - which 3D games build - and modern shooter artificial intelligence. All things in balance.

** Another lie. Maybe. Style comes first for me.

Hmm, that's more than enough words from me. Sorry if you've read all the way down here looking for any kernel of wisdom ;) Harvest the kernel of truth and then leave the chaff of another's worthless opinion behind. Don't carry it along with you.

[roker]

gamepro pwns

[GaijinPunch]

When you get right down to it, though, one can look at any number of action games (first or third person) and see what looks like steady progress changing the product over the years.

I'd say our shooters, with their crazy ass scoring mechanisms (no matter how similar) have evolved way more than FPS. To my knowledge, there are two spectrums. Ones that concentrate more on strategy, others on brute force, but most right in the middle. I can name 5 recent shooting games that have different gimmicks, while keeping chaining as the basis.

[Ed Oscuro]

When you get right down to it, though, one can look at any number of action games (first or third person) and see what looks like steady progress changing the product over the years.

I'd say our shooters, with their crazy ass scoring mechanisms (no matter how similar) have evolved way more than FPS. To my knowledge, there are two spectrums. Ones that concentrate more on strategy, others on brute force, but most right in the middle. I can name 5 recent shooting games that have different gimmicks, while keeping chaining as the basis.

I don't think so. Oblivion, anybody? Or the Unreal Tournament series, which had (by UT2003) shock rifle combos, double jumps, and button combos for adrenaline effects, and a variety of engrossing game types.

3D action games are certainly more diverse - you can have tournament fighting, driving, shooting, crime scene analysis, and any combination of those, and all but the tournament fighter have been done in first person.


It doesn't much matter, though. Shooters have updated in recent times along with everything else to provide an experience that shooter enthusaists want. Good 3D action games are meant to provide a different experience, and they do well.

It's not correct to compare the progress of traditional shooters (over a roughly 29-30 year lifespan) with, say, first person shooters over roughly 14 years. Both types of gameplay are limited by human perception, and at this point you can't really do much for shooter gameplay without breaking it (or adding a new control scheme). What's more, shooters aren't getting as much money for production. Gradius V was one of the better selling games of '04 ('least in Japan), so these games can do well if they get the funding.

But anyway, if by evolution you mean "refinement," well, I can't say there's a winner. For any person dedicated to refining a traditional shoooter, there's at least a dozen working on refining their unique FPS game, and adding human interface features as well. But again, this speaks more to the flexibility of 3D than it does in any shortcoming in 2D, which still works because it's an easily understood setup that provides a slightly different challenge.

Basically, I'm taking a few paragraphs to say that saying that shmups haven't changed much in recent times isn't a slam, but just the truth. Shmups haven't died, they've been overtaken - but they've also matured.

[louisg]

Re: FPS vs. shooter refinement.. just my two cents, but aside from the genre comparison being apples and oranges, I'd say that when people talk about refining FPS games it's generally in the way of more immersive atmosphere, more cutscenes, or adding features. When talking about refining traditional shooters, though, it's a matter of creating something with extremely tight and balanced gameplay, and with hopefully some entirely new game mechanics. If we are comparing totally different genres and I had to make a value judgement, I'd have to say traditional shooters are a much more refined genre-- the focus is squarely on the gameplay and you get the feeling that the designers have experience with videogames which predate Apogee.

(flamebait, sort of =))

[sffan]

^ I agree ^