Psikyo games suck because they're all so similar

[shoe-sama]

lol you just move to dodge aimed things

If you're not moving you run the risk of not noticing a sniper shot and dying.

[Shatterhand]

Yes, they are just very difficult but there is some risk reward trade-offs (half for the very advanced players). Like not using bombs (if you can somehow stockpile 9 of them, it might be a 100,000 point bonus for each extra), grab extra power ups for 4000 points and keep pushing rank, and every scoring element is clearly risky (grabbing bonus items through a barrage of fast bullets, boss technical bonuses).

And when you don't power up to keep rank down, you also misses some score opportunities as you just can't destroy everything with your ship underpowered

+BLOODY ROAR

YEAH! Though Bloody Roar 4 was a big dissapointment after the EXCELLENT Bloody Roar 2. I skipped 3.

[Rob]

Originally called BEASTORIZER. I can't decide if that is a cooler title than Bloody Roar.

Good levels have to have thought put into them, regardless of the scoring system or bullet patterns. Check out some of the 16-bit shmups with completely haphazard and cluttered enemy placement if you don't believe me! UD levels are well-paced, and have a lot of variety. It's hardly some slapped together and rushed game, so I have no idea where this is coming from.

Yeah, it is a step above those crappy 16-bit shooters... but that doesn't say much to me because it's just mind-boggling how those games were ever conceived. I don't think it is such a great accomplishment to not crowd the screen with impossible/cheap attacks. That is basically the only rule they need when designing a stage other than accommodating the really simple scoring system. Probably not rushed, but not a whole lot of thought either when compared to the bulk of shooters being released. The simplicity was the appeal for a lot of people, right?

I just think it turned out a little too simple. Like more so than Zero Gunner 2.

[captain ahar]

No love for Greater Mahou or Shippu Mahou?

shippu: racing mode horribly broken
great: bad all around

not a fan of shippu mahou, but i think great mahou is fantastic, not that i'm any good at it...

i'm a sucker for medaling though, and this game is medaling taken to masturbatory levels.

[louisg]

Yeah, it is a step above those crappy 16-bit shooters... but that doesn't say much to me because it's just mind-boggling how those games were ever conceived. I don't think it is such a great accomplishment to not crowd the screen with impossible/cheap attacks. That is basically the only rule they need when designing a stage other than accommodating the really simple scoring system. Probably not rushed, but not a whole lot of thought either when compared to the bulk of shooters being released. The simplicity was the appeal for a lot of people, right?

Uhhh, not to be mean, but I don't think you know what really goes into designing a shooter. I don't want to give some weird kind of after-school PSAish lecture, but a lot more goes into a shooter than the shot patterns. No, the absence of cheap attacks is not all that goes into an oldschool style game. I already talked about some of the attributes above. I don't think fancy shot patterns necessarily show that the developers are putting a lot of thought into the game, either. Sure, an oldschoolish game won't make you go "ooh, ahh!" at the flowery radial patterns all over the place, but I think you are failing to recognize the obvious skill that goes into a different style shmup other than the one that has been popular among new shooter fans.

No, more than simplicity is the appeal-- it's everything that I have mentioned in this thread and more that I haven't.

[Rob]

a lot more goes into a shooter than the shot patterns.

Never said otherwise.

but I think you are failing to recognize the obvious skill that goes into a different style shmup other than the one that has been popular among new shooter fans.

This thread is about Psikyo games, a company that is derided for their non-manic (old school?), repetitive, etc. game design. I love a half dozen of their games. Under Defeat blatantly rips off one of those games. I think I can appreciate this style of game and that they did a mediocre job of it. After playing 100 hours of Zero Gunner 2 the highlights in UD were few and far between. "Obvious skill" should be apparent to me by providing an interesting challenge, scoring system, etc. It is not obvious to me since it has a weak challenge and a weak scoring system.

Very cool explosions though.

[shoe-sama]

PSIKYO GAMES MAKE ME THINK

OW MY BRAIN

Well sure beats being able to pick up some random game and beating them first try using purely reactionary dodges. Doujins anyone?

[VorpalEdge]

All shooters are purely reactionary. You see a bullet, you dodge it, you see a boss, you shoot it, you see a medal, you collect it (or avoid it, if you're manipulating rank). I'm quite possibly taking this too literally, which brings me to ask: what exactly do you mean?

[shoe-sama]

Psikyo is pattern memorization.

In later stages, the bullets are too fast to react to in many cases. They can only be anticipated.

And most old school shmups rely on memorization and strategy to survive. In Gradius, one must have the right option positioning to safely get through certain sections, and R-Type is pretty impossible without good knowledge of enemy placement and such.

[JoshF]

Was that a useful post lol?

[BulletMagnet]

And most old school shmups rely on repetitive, brain-numbing memorization, and memorization only, to survive.

Fixed.

[Icarus]

And ALL shmups rely on repetitive, brain-numbing memorization, and memorization only, to survive.

Fixed.

Le fix'd.

[BulletMagnet]

Methinks the word "only" is the flaw in your fixin'. ;P

[Icarus]

Methinks the word "only" is the flaw in your fixin'. ;P

You obviously haven't played enough, then.

[BulletMagnet]

I dunno, memorization won't get you through a random spam pattern or the like...and if nothing else, the memorization required for more "modern" shmups tends be less "exact" than in older ones, as in "for this next pattern I have to move something like this" as opposed to "if I'm not in this exact spot in the next 2 seconds I'm going to die." Once you start playing for score it's another matter in many cases, but we're talking purely survival here.

[louisg]

This thread is about Psikyo games, a company that is derided for their non-manic (old school?), repetitive, etc. game design. I love a half dozen of their games. Under Defeat blatantly rips off one of those games. I think I can appreciate this style of game and that they did a mediocre job of it. After playing 100 hours of Zero Gunner 2 the highlights in UD were few and far between. "Obvious skill" should be apparent to me by providing an interesting challenge, scoring system, etc. It is not obvious to me since it has a weak challenge and a weak scoring system.

I don't know if anyone here has derided them for being not manic enough (Psikyo is sort of borderline manic). I already explained in depth how Under Defeat was not a blatant rip off of Zero Gunner 2, but it looks like my comments were ignored. In fact, when I got UD, I was initially disappointed it wasn't more similar to Zero Gunner 2. The two are only alike in a superficial way, and it doesn't sound like you played it very much.

It's interesting that you hold ZG2 in such high regard when it, like Under Defeat, presents a weak challenge compared to games such as GunBird 2. Also, like Under Defeat, the scoring system isn't the focus of the game. It could be said then that Zero Gunner 2 has a weak challenge and a weak scoring system. Would I then assume it was put together really quickly and sloppily? No, because the two characteristics have nothing to do with each other. You could make a game "hard" just by speeding all the shots up several times, for example.. This doesn't take planning, it just takes some number tweaking, and has nothing to do with the skill with which the levels and bosses were designed. So yes, "obvious skill".

[Pirate1019]

Aimed shots are the simplest to comprehend, but they aren't the simplest to dodge.

Bullet hoarding and cutbacks for the win.

[Rob]

I already explained in depth how Under Defeat was not a blatant rip off of Zero Gunner 2, but it looks like my comments were ignored.

You did? It has a helicopter that shoots slightly at the ground and there are some colors other than blue. Impressive, but still a rip off!

The two are only alike in a superficial way, and it doesn't sound like you played it very much.

And they are both superficial games, so. I played it for a week or two. That is all the time I need to know the depth of a game as simple as this.

It's interesting that you hold ZG2 in such high regard when it, like Under Defeat, presents a weak challenge compared to games such as GunBird 2. Also, like Under Defeat, the scoring system isn't the focus of the game. It could be said then that Zero Gunner 2 has a weak challenge and a weak scoring system. Would I then assume it was put together really quickly and sloppily?

Higher regard, yes. "Like Under Defeat," "also, like Under Defeat," etc. - I completely agree. Zero Gunner 2 definitely could've been harder and the scoring system is definitely weak. Like Under Defeat they could've put some more thought into it. But its existence is justified to me by being a 360° multi-direction shooter. If you take that away it is just as useless as UD.

On the box they should've put "Like Zero Gunner 2, But Even Less!"

[Icarus]

I already explained in depth how Under Defeat was not a blatant rip off of Zero Gunner 2, but it looks like my comments were ignored.

This thread's about Psikyo, Louis.
Of course Rob's going to ignore every comment you make. ^_-
It's like shouting at a brick wall with a picture of Gordon Ramsay painted on it. Kinda pointless, and to the people watching it's kinda funny.

[Mortificator]

Well, this thread got me to give Dragon Blaze another try, at least. I'm enjoying it more than when I'd first played it, though I'm just playing on easy for now. But every damn boss manages to kill me at the exact instant I kill it.

[louisg]

This thread's about Psikyo, Louis.
Of course Rob's going to ignore every comment you make. ^_-
It's like shouting at a brick wall with a picture of Gordon Ramsay painted on it. Kinda pointless, and to the people watching it's kinda funny.

Yeah, the thread sort of derailed there. I learned my lesson though: Psikyo fans are impervious to logic

[professor ganson]

Psikyo fans are impervious to logic

Well, some of us teach logic, so so much for that theory.

[Icarus]

Well, some of us teach logic, so so much for that theory.

Backwards logic?

[Rob]

I'm glad Louis didn't actually respond to my post or else I would be trapped in an endless loop of saying how crappy Under Defeat is.

[louisg]

I'm glad Louis didn't actually respond to my post or else I would be trapped in an endless loop of saying how crappy Under Defeat is.

That was close!

So let's put the Strikers and GunBird games in chronological order and list the differences between each installment (aside from graphics/audio). We could do the same with Battle Bakraid/Garegga and the Mahous. That would pit Psikyo against Raizing for most changes in gameplay per installment, throwing out the obvious "really different" games from both shmup companies. Would that help put the topic to bed?

[Gorecki]

I'm a Vulcan and I can assure you that most of the later period Psikyo verts are masterpieces. And those who criticise their graphics... for shame. Some of my favourite 2D game art comes from Psikyo. It's beautiful!

[Pirate1019]

According to Mame32 .106 they were released in this order:

Samurai Aces (1993)
Gunbird (1994)
Strikers 1945 (1995)
Sengoku Blade/Tengai (1996)
Striker 1945 II (1997)
Sol Divide (1997)
Space Bomber (1998)
Gunbird 2 (1998)
Strikers 1945 III (1999)
Dragon Blaze (2000)
Gunbarich (2001)

I'm assuming that we are not including the following:
Tengai (are we skipping the hori?)
Sol Divide
Space Bomber
Gunbarich

The changes as I see them (there are probably more I am unaware of):

Samurai Aces > Gunbird: You might actually use the charge shot.

Gunbird > Strikers 1945: Pickups are now variable in value.

Strikers 1945 > Strikers 1945 II: You can now chain the gold bars (?) and the charge shot has a gage now.

Strikers 1945 II > Gunbird 2: Added Gemheads

Gunbird 2 > Strikers III: Added the Technical Bonus, gold bars are now gold medals and they can come from air as well as ground enemies. (Does Strikers III have gemheads or something similar?)

Strikers III > Dragon Blaze: Gemheads return (if there wasn't an equivilent in Strikers III), point pickups are much more abundant, different types of coins worth different values instead of the traditional flashing pickups, more attack variety.

[Rob]

Would that help put the topic to bed?

No. It is irrelevant to the point being made in the first post. This isn't a most/least changes thread.

the problem here is not that they are all similar.

Everyone knows they are similar, the first post acknowledges that clearly. The point is that they are not all the same (and not so minor from Sengoku Ace to Strikers 1945 II to Dragon Blaze, that is a significant improvement - yes, we know how many games that is). Basically, the changes occurring from SA to DB:

-no crashing into ships
-smaller hitbox
-no automatic power downs
-varying point bonuses
-a bar for charge attacks
-multiple degrees of charge attacks
-item chaining
-proximity attacks
-secret scoring elements (gem head, gold idol)
-more freedom over charge bar use
-boss technical bonuses
-far more elaborate patterns
-other small details like boss timers

That is enough to treat the early games as different from the last few games. Everything that works well was retained (like a healthy ship/character selection, short stages, random opening stages) and everything else was refined to something much more playable.

Raizing's main and most popular line is known for one type of game, ones that include elaborate rank/suicide tactics/medal collecting. Psikyo is known for short random stages, fast bullets, etc. I think there is something to be said for consistency, realizing what is successful and staying on course

In my opinion Psikyo's changes were always for the better. Can that be said for games like Battle Bakraid and Ibara (if you want to include that)? Judging by the board's and my own favorites they seem to have hit their peak with Battle Garegga and Batrider, then slid a little or a lot. While you will see about equal support for Strikers II to Dragon Blaze.

[professor ganson]

Evidently "backwards logic" yields some pretty good arguments.

[VorpalEdge]

It's just too bad that not everybody agrees that what they retained works well, isn't it, Rob?