Darius, Rule 34'd

[Mega Mudkip]

No RE4 is easy. Once you get the system down your gonna beat it. Most people who say it's hard couldn't get the controls down and gave up immediately, if they put in more time they could beat it. Another thing that makes it easy is the ability to retry something right after you mess up and die. Most old school games would have you start over.

DMC3 and NG are challenging but not hard. The hurricane packs is a different story all together though . I think people just have trouble with moving out of the way of things, once you get dodging down your set. You are correct to assume that most people find these hard. I think these same people find shmups hard for the same reason, they have trouble not being where the bad things are.

I never played GoW so I can't speak for this game.

I do believe that 3-D games can be just as hard though. In some ways fundamentally they are harder but do to the current state of gaming these types of games are made easier for today's gamer. Their are a few 3-D games that reach this level of difficulty though like God Hand or the Dante must Die modes in DMC3 and DMC1. But on the other hand I believe that 3-D games will never reach the level of intensity(not difficulty) of a manic-shmup.

"No RE4 is easy. Once you get the system down your gonna beat it. Most people who say it's hard couldn't get the controls down and gave up immediately, if they put in more time they could beat it."
Anyone can beat a game if they want to expend sufficient time at it. This is the only place I've ever heard people say "RE4 is easy" and especially for the reasons stated, and from most people I've conversed with about RE4 usually think the controls are great...and also believe the game to be hard.

"Another thing that makes it easy is the ability to retry something right after you mess up and die."
And many shmups have infinite continues, yet aren't they still hard?

"Most old school games would have you start over."
lol, 85% of manic shmups do not follow such a law.

"DMC3 and NG are challenging but not hard."
I lol'd

"The hurricane packs is a different story all together though ."
At least we agree here.

" I think people just have trouble with moving out of the way of things, once you get dodging down your set. You are correct to assume that most people find these hard. I think these same people find shmups hard for the same reason, they have trouble not being where the bad things are."
I really can't agree; I play shmups more than any other genre, and I still found DMC3 and NG to be difficult.

"I do believe that 3-D games can be just as hard though."
Well, you pretty much shot down some of the hardest games of last generation. =/

"But on the other hand I believe that 3-D games will never reach the level of intensity(not difficulty) of a manic-shmup."
I can agree here; shmups are too simplistic, so really the only thing going for them is their absurd difficulty which would understandably only attract a somewhat small gaming community.

[Dale]

Most people strive for the 1cc so I guess that makes all the credits in the world use less considering peoples pride towards the genre. But by that same token RE4 could be harder because almost anyone has to retry at some point to go for a perfect no death play through of that game would be quite hard, I don't think many strive for that though.

[Mega Mudkip]

Most people strive for the 1cc so I guess that makes all the credits in the world use less considering peoples pride towards the genre. But by that same token RE4 could be harder because almost anyone has to retry at some point to go for a perfect no death play through of that game would be quite hard, I don't think many strive for that though.

So, RE4 is easy because people don't try to get through the game without no death play? But shmups are hard because people try to 1'CC it?

"I guess that makes all the credits in the world use less"
Then so does your contention about RE4's retry thingy.

I hope you see the contradiction you made.

[Dale]

I didn't make a contradiction. People have the notion not to die in a shmup. People play RE4 just wanting to get through it. From a gameplay stand point their isn't much of a difference though it's all about what the player strives to do.

[JoshF]

Devil May Cry 3 was as hard as many excellent oldschool games that were considered hard. (MegaManX3 for example.) In fact, I found DMC3 harder than MMX3.

In DMC3 you had to do things. MMX3 was mainly dashing past enemies (a score system could've prevented this) and in certain orders it was easy even without any upgrades other than air-dash. I still like the game though. Rushing through the levels without getting hit is very fun.

When he says old-school games are harder, I guess that's incorrect. Even back in the 16-bit era you can look at games like the Bare Knuckle series that were much easier than arcade beat 'em ups. You had to play on Hardest and start with 1 life for it to begin to compare (it still threw extends at you constantly.) This is how the difficulties of games started to go down, by giving less skilled players the default (instead of a practice mode or something) and if the skilled players wanted a challenge they would have to initiate it themselves.

[Mega Mudkip]

I didn't make a contradiction. People have the notion not to die in a shmup. People play RE4 just wanting to get through it. From a gameplay stand point their isn't much of a difference though it's all about what the player strives to do.

Most people generally have the notion of "not to die in any video game."

If people were to play a shmup without caring about 1'CCing it, would it still be hard? Fuck yes.
Basically that's the implication you are giving, is that shmups have an excuse to be called hard because people attempt to 1CC them, but games like RE4 cannot be hard because people don't try to get through the game without getting killed once. (Where you get your information is beyond me...=/)

"From a gameplay stand point their isn't much of a difference though it's all about what the player strives to do."
So...what a person attempts to accomplish (like 1CCing a shmup) in a game is what determines whether it is easy or hard?

Devil May Cry 3 was as hard as many excellent oldschool games that were considered hard. (MegaManX3 for example.) In fact, I found DMC3 harder than MMX3.

In DMC3 you had to do things. MMX3 was mainly dashing past enemies (a score system could've prevented this) and in certain orders it was easy even without any upgrades other than air-dash. I still like the game though. Rushing through the levels without getting hit is very fun.

When he says old-school games are harder, I guess that's incorrect. Even back in the 16-bit era you can look at games like the Bare Knuckle series that were much easier than arcade beat 'em ups. You had to play on Hardest and start with 1 life for it to begin to compare (it still threw extends at you constantly.) This is how the difficulties of games started to go down, by giving less skilled players the default (instead of a practice mode or something) and if the skilled players wanted a challenge they would have to initiate it themselves.

MMX3 definitely had its tough spots though; Gravity Beetle was a bastard if you didn't have the Ray Splasher, and the game it had some difficult platforming at times.

And I agreed with most of what you said in your second paragraph. Some of that I've been trying to constantly stress in this thread.
I do agree that the difficulty of games has declined as well, but I wouldn't say they've declined as much as some of the people in this thread are claiming. =>

[Dale]

You said earlier that you could just credit feed through most shmups and that that would be easy. What I'm trying to say is that the initiative that a die hard shmup player has makes it much harder. Resident Evil4 isn't just easy because people will keep continuing, it's just an easy game. The bosses aren't hard, the A.I is passive, and you get lot's of ammo. I absolutely love RE4 but not for it's challenge.

The difference is that when someone dies in the middle of a chapter in RE4 they start that portion over, when someone dies in an area in a shmup and they don't have a suitable amount of lives to go through the rest of the game on one credit they start completely over.

But yes their are console shmups that have multiple credit's that still offer challenge. I think that shmups just tend to be harder because you can't rest with out pausing or whatever, they constantly flow.

It is true that most people don't care about 1CC'ing games but these people would tend to die more in a shmup then a modern 3-D action game.

Like I said earlier a 3-D game has the same potential for difficulty but it rarely reaches it. To be honest I play so many shmups and 2-D action games that sometimes a 3-D game can give me more difficulty just because I'm not used to it.

Most of what I said stems from my own opinions on what is hard or what I fond to be the general consensus on what is hard.

You pointed out one of the weird things about shmup enthusiasts is the fact that most of the challenge comes from what they want to accomplish rather then what the game really offers. I guess I should have pointed out that most people don't follow this. But since theirs not much of an outer audience for shmups I used this community as a consensus.

I guess all true difficulty is created by the mind when you get right down to it.

EDIT:In games anyway.

[Emperor Fossil]

Fuck, there's a lot of bosses in the Dragon Quest games that I considered hard even if I beat them on my first try.

I understand it's all a matter of perception, but I don't think I would ever describe a boss I beat on my first try as 'hard'.

...unless it was in the context of 'Hey, that was hard for a level 1 boss.'

...or unless I was so incredibly in the zone that I was firing lightning bolts out of my fingertips and levitating and stuff, in which case I might be prepared to concede that the boss was indeed hard but my zone-induced awesomeness just couldn't be overcome.

[Mega Mudkip]

You said earlier that you could just credit feed through most shmups and that that would be easy. What I'm trying to say is that the initiative that a die hard shmup player has makes it much harder. Resident Evil4 isn't just easy because people will keep continuing, it's just an easy game. The bosses aren't hard, the A.I is passive, and you get lot's of ammo. I absolutely love RE4 but not for it's challenge.

The difference is that when someone dies in the middle of a chapter in RE4 they start that portion over, when someone dies in an area in a shmup and they don't have a suitable amount of lives to go through the rest of the game on one credit they start completely over.

But yes their are console shmups that have multiple credit's that still offer challenge. I think that shmups just tend to be harder because you can't rest with out pausing or whatever, they constantly flow.

It is true that most people don't care about 1CC'ing games but these people would tend to die more in a shmup then a modern 3-D action game.

Like I said earlier a 3-D game has the same potential for difficulty but it rarely reaches it. To be honest I play so many shmups and 2-D action games that sometimes a 3-D game can give me more difficulty just because I'm not used to it.

Most of what I said stems from my own opinions on what is hard or what I fond to be the general consensus on what is hard.

You pointed out one of the weird things about shmup enthusiasts is the fact that most of the challenge comes from what they want to accomplish rather then what the game really offers. I guess I should have pointed out that most people don't follow this. But since theirs not much of an outer audience for shmups I used this community as a consensus.

I guess all true difficulty is created by the mind when you get right down to it.

EDIT:In games anyway.

Aw fuck, I wake up at 4 am to be greeted with a tl;dr post. I don't know how the hell I'll be able to do this without any coffee and one bloodshot eye. Oh well, I'll try it anyway.

"You said earlier that you could just credit feed through most shmups and that that would be easy."
ergh, gurgle, arghh, poke, slow, SLOWPOKE, SLOW DAMMIT NO. I didn't say anything of the sort, you silly Jew nose. Here's what I said:

And many shmups have infinite continues, yet aren't they still hard?

So, once again, I have absolutely no idea where your information is coming from.

"What I'm trying to say is that the initiative that a die hard shmup player has makes it much harder."
I am well aware of what you have been trying to stress; what I am trying to stress is that you are forcing ways to make a game harder. You've been trying to say that RE4 is easy because people don't try to one life that fuckin' thing. That doesn't make sense in any way, shape or form. By your logic, I can say that Windwaker is a hard game (because I try to get through it with getting as little hearts and health refill shit as possible.)

"Resident Evil4 isn't just easy because people will keep continuing, it's just an easy game. The bosses aren't hard, the A.I is passive, and you get lot's of ammo. I absolutely love RE4 but not for it's challenge."
Okie dokie, dude. Despite what I think to be a silly accusation of the game, (because I do think you are being biased because of "shmup hard') let's just agree to disagree.

"The difference is that when someone dies in the middle of a chapter in RE4 they start that portion over, when someone dies in an area in a shmup and they don't have a suitable amount of lives to go through the rest of the game on one credit they start completely over."
Despite there being numerous shmups that have infinite continues. And hell, there's even some console shmups that give the player free play after extensive play. (Even if the game hasn't been beaten.)

"But yes their are console shmups that have multiple credit's that still offer challenge. I think that shmups just tend to be harder because you can't rest with out pausing or whatever, they constantly flow. "
Well, obviously. =/

"It is true that most people don't care about 1CC'ing games but these people would tend to die more in a shmup then a modern 3-D action game."
If you could go into more detail of what you mean here, that'd be helpful. I think I know what you are getting at with this statement, but I'm not 100% sure. =/

"Like I said earlier a 3-D game has the same potential for difficulty but it rarely reaches it."
Well, dude. If you think about it, most 2D games don't even reach the status of R-Type or Ikaruga's difficulty. Many oldschool games had the potential to reach them but didn't.

" To be honest I play so many shmups and 2-D action games that sometimes a 3-D game can give me more difficulty just because I'm not used to it."
That's odd. I've never had that sorta problem before, but it can make someone a bit disoriented at first.

"Most of what I said stems from my own opinions"
Well yeah. It just just seem like they are somewhat biased at times.

"what I fond to be the general consensus on what is hard."
I think we both agree on some areas on what the general consensus of hard is; I just think you misconstrued some of what I've been saying as the evidence shows with this:

You said earlier that you could just credit feed through most shmups and that that would be easy.

"You pointed out one of the weird things about shmup enthusiasts is the fact that most of the challenge comes from what they want to accomplish rather then what the game really offers."
I just thought the challenge came from just getting dick-smacked in the face by the game over a billion times.

"I guess I should have pointed out that most people don't follow this."
Well yeah. I knew that, but considering it is the same with RE4 one of the reasons as why you found the game to be easy--the retry thingy. If most people don't try to get through RE4 on one life which determines that the game is easy (because of retry), then shmups can be determined in the same way. I can say that Dodonpachi is easy because I credit fed the game and didn't try to 1CC it. Whether you agree that RE4 is a hard game or not, listing the "retry" thingy as a reason for it being easy was somewhat flawed. This was the contradiction I attempted to show to you earlier.

"I guess all true difficulty is created by the mind when you get right down to it."
True, but I'd still think someone was crazy for saying R-Type 2 was easy. The crazy guy might as well look at a turd and say that it is beautiful.

A groggy, grumpy, Mudkip has just contributed his tl;dr response.

[Shatterhand]

Erm...

I am no hater of modern gaming... Funnily enough, I am currently playing DMC3, while I've just finished Hitman:Blood Money... right before I was playing Resident Evil 4 (Which I obviously finished, and like I said it, I loved it), and before that I was playing Tomb Raider Anniversary. I loved all those games. I never said easy games are automatically bad (Prince of Persia Sands of Time was amazingly easy, and yet I loved every little bit of it... as much as I love Streets of Rage 2, even though I 1cc it on my second try at default settings, my favourite shmup is Aleste 2, which is a very easy one also) or hard games are automatically good.

I just pointed out that modern games are usually easy, mainly because most players today are big whining babies who will cry at anything that throws a real challenge to them. If they don't feel they are WINNING they just won't play the game at all. God Had is a fucking wonderful game that most people I know just hated... the same about Shinobi on the PS2... both are modern, 3D games that are very difficulty...

Ghouls 'n' Ghosts, Rolling Thunder, Strider, Time Soldier, Shock Troopers, Alien vs Predator, Pang, Rainbow Islands... all those games are a good challenge without ever being "EXTREMELY HARDCORE OH NO LOOK AT THOSE CHEAP DEATHS" (Well, Ghouls 'n' Ghosts maybe, and Rolling Thunder with that time bug on the last level), and they are as oldschool as you can get.

Most modern games are all about just load the last saved game and try again and get past that part that you died. There's no mastering of the game. You say anyone could finish R-Type if he tried... but if he doesn't have the skill, he would have to try REAL hard... I know people who have been for YEARS trying to score a 1cc at a particular shmup (One at R-Type, another on Dodonpachi) and this could be true for any of the games I mentioned above, while any modern game would be finished before that.

And that doesn't make them better or worse. It just make them more challenging. The big deal here for me is that oldschool gaming last a lot longer, because it's not just about "finishing" the game, but about mastering it. Some modern games do offer this too, but not on the same degree, and rarely with the same amount of fun (Or else they wouldn't need "unlockables" to make the player acutally want to keep playing the game - and this is an opinion of mine and not a fact).

[Mega Mudkip]

Erm...

I am no hater of modern gaming... Funnily enough, I am currently playing DMC3, while I've just finished Hitman:Blood Money... right before I was playing Resident Evil 4 (Which I obviously finished, and like I said it, I loved it), and before that I was playing Tomb Raider Anniversary. I loved all those games. I never said easy games are automatically bad (Prince of Persia Sands of Time was amazingly easy, and yet I loved every little bit of it... as much as I love Streets of Rage 2, even though I 1cc it on my second try at default settings, my favourite shmup is Aleste 2, which is a very easy one also) or hard games are automatically good.

I just pointed out that modern games are usually easy, mainly because most players today are big whining babies who will cry at anything that throws a real challenge to them. If they don't feel they are WINNING they just won't play the game at all. God Had is a fucking wonderful game that most people I know just hated... the same about Shinobi on the PS2... both are modern, 3D games that are very difficulty...

Ghouls 'n' Ghosts, Rolling Thunder, Strider, Time Soldier, Shock Troopers, Alien vs Predator, Pang, Rainbow Islands... all those games are a good challenge without ever being "EXTREMELY HARDCORE OH NO LOOK AT THOSE CHEAP DEATHS" (Well, Ghouls 'n' Ghosts maybe, and Rolling Thunder with that time bug on the last level), and they are as oldschool as you can get.

Most modern games are all about just load the last saved game and try again and get past that part that you died. There's no mastering of the game. You say anyone could finish R-Type if he tried... but if he doesn't have the skill, he would have to try REAL hard... I know people who have been for YEARS trying to score a 1cc at a particular shmup (One at R-Type, another on Dodonpachi) and this could be true for any of the games I mentioned above, while any modern game would be finished before that.

And that doesn't make them better or worse. It just make them more challenging. The big deal here for me is that oldschool gaming last a lot longer, because it's not just about "finishing" the game, but about mastering it. Some modern games do offer this too, but not on the same degree, and rarely with the same amount of fun (Or else they wouldn't need "unlockables" to make the player acutally want to keep playing the game - and this is an opinion of mine and not a fact).

"I am no hater of modern gaming"
I never tried to say that you were; it's possible to be biased without being a hater.

"my favourite shmup is Aleste 2, which is a very easy one also) or hard games are automatically good."
Well, yeah. Despite saying RE4 was easy in your last post, you did say it was good. I never meant to imply that you thought "hard = good."

"I just pointed out that modern games are usually easy, mainly because most players today are big whining babies who will cry at anything that throws a real challenge to them. "
A lot of shmup fans seem to whine too, like in that "anti-shmup hogwash" thread.
The thing is, the difficulty of oldschool games are being severely overpraised. Yes, oldschool games are generally harder, but the only difficulty that I really see newschool games being compared with here are the difficulty of shmups.
I do have to admit that I must prefer debating with oldschool shmuppers than newschool gamers though; if I were having a similar argument on a newschool forum, I would have been b& a long time ago due to me coming off as an abrasive ass.

"If they don't feel they are WINNING they just won't play the game at all."
I really don't know if that is exactly the case; people didn't feel like they were winning in Ninja Gaiden or Devil May Cry 3, but people loved them anyway.

"God Had is a fucking wonderful game that most people I know just hated..."
Hmm, it looks like it scored decently. People hated it? (Also, if you found that hard, then I'm interested, since you apparently found DMC3 to not be hard.)

"Ghouls 'n' Ghosts, Rolling Thunder, Strider, Time Soldier, Shock Troopers, Alien vs Predator, Pang, Rainbow Islands... all those games are a good challenge without ever being "EXTREMELY HARDCORE OH NO LOOK AT THOSE CHEAP DEATHS" (Well, Ghouls 'n' Ghosts maybe, and Rolling Thunder with that time bug on the last level), and they are as oldschool as you can get."
I actually found some of those games to be no more difficult than many modern games of today as well. I just get tired of seeing the majority complaints from both coins of the gaming community. "OLD SCHOOL IS THE SAME THING!!!!" from newschoolers and "NEWSCHOOL ARE NOT HARD ENOUGH!!!" from oldschoolers.

"Most modern games are all about just load the last saved game and try again and get past that part that you died. There's no mastering of the game."
There were many load/save and try again oldschool games too. :3
Most games require some degree of mastering to beat them as well.

"You say anyone could finish R-Type if he tried... but if he doesn't have the skill, he would have to try REAL hard..."
I suck ass at most shmups and I beat Rezon, R-Type, Super R-Type (on hardest difficulty), R-Type Delta (on hardest difficulty), R-Type Final (on Bydo mode), and Pulstar. (Currently trying to beat Z-Out.) Also, if I was determined enough, I'm sure I could beat the arcade version of Gradius 3.

"I know people who have been for YEARS trying to score a 1cc at a particular shmup (One at R-Type, another on Dodonpachi)"
Well, I never said anything about 1CCing it, but if anyone has the patience of beating games like R-Type or the GCN port of Ikaruga they can pull it off. People just think that they can't do it. That's really all it is. It just depends on a person's patience in beating a game.

"and this could be true for any of the games I mentioned above, while any modern game would be finished before that."
Oh, I don't know about ANY modern game. =P

"The big deal here for me is that oldschool gaming last a lot longer, because it's not just about "finishing" the game, but about mastering it. Some modern games do offer this too, but not on the same degree, and rarely with the same amount of fun"
While the "amount of fun" thing can't exactly be debated, I really have to say I do not agree with your other statement. Many games require a lot of mastering. Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, any good fighting game (newschool and oldschool), Zone of the Enders, etc, etc. (Hell, even Metal Gear Solid has mastering.)

"Or else they wouldn't need "unlockables" to make the player acutally want to keep playing the game - and this is an opinion of mine and not a fact).
Didn't a lot of oldschool games have unlockable things and secrets and stuff too? I mean, sure it wasn't on the same degree as modern games, but still. =/

This Mudkip has contributed another tl;dr post but is less bitchy now that he has had some caffeine.

[Shatterhand]

I think my definition of oldschool is a lot different of yours. I can't remember of any oldschool games having content to be unlocked or load/save features to be abused, as most of them didn't even save ANYTHING.

And beating a shmup is to 1cc it. Nothing else matters, you have only finished a shmup if you have 1cc it.

Other than that, I think you just want to discuss to prove something, and I really don't feel like doing that when I am just up to a nice chat... I mean

I really have to say I do not agree with your other statement. Many games require a lot of mastering. Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, any good fighting game (newschool and oldschool), Zone of the Enders, etc, etc. (Hell, even Metal Gear Solid has mastering.)

Some modern games do offer this too, but not on the same degree, and rarely with the same amount of fun

I also can hardly call something like The King of Fighters XI or Arcana Heart as "newschool"... I'd say the fighting genre is a genre apart:)



I am not saying the most modern games are crap and the good games stayed on the 80s or something. The only thing I stated is that in the 80s games were generally more challenging. For each "challenging" game you can name today (and most of them can be finished easily with some load/save abuse, and they were designed it like that), you will find 10 from the 80s, remembering that finishing an arcade game means finishing it with a single credit(the way they were designed). [/quote]

[Fighter17]

Why I want to be newschool when there's sequels after sequels after sequels?


And there's noting really excited at all (in my point of view).

I used to be newschool, back when the PS2 was selling like hotcakes. I played tons of good PS2 games at the time, and I found something which bugs the hell out of me: This shit is easy.

Most games don't need skill, you need time to beat it. Hell if only if God Hand came out when I was still into the PS2 then I would be in gaming heaven. I really prefer hard games, because I need challenge. They are some good games that are easy, but a hard game would get more respect and playtime from me. I got MUSHA Aleste in the mail for the MD yesterday and I played it once and 1CC it (actually this is my second ICC of MUSHA but you get the idea). While MUSHA is great, I prefer playing Eliminate Down because it's great and it's hard.

[spadgy]

Why I want to be newschool when there's sequels after sequels after sequels?


And there's noting really excited at all (in my point of view).

I used to be newschool, back when the PS2 was selling like hotcakes. I played tons of good PS2 games at the time, and I found something which bugs the hell out of me: This shit is easy.

Most games don't need skill, you need time to beat it. Hell if only if God Hand came out when I was still into the PS2 then I would be in gaming heaven. I really prefer hard games, because I need challenge. They are some good games that are easy, but a hard game would get more respect and playtime from me. I got MUSHA Aleste in the mail for the MD yesterday and I played it once and 1CC it (actually this is my second ICC of MUSHA but you get the idea). While MUSHA is great, I prefer playing Eliminate Down because it's great and it's hard.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but an easy game can be great fun can't it?

Zelda, We Love Katamari, Loco Roco..... really easy, but extraordinary fun.

[Fighter17]

I'm inclined to agree with you, but an easy game can be great fun can't it?

Zelda, We Love Katamari, Loco Roco..... really easy, but extraordinary fun.

A easy game can be fun.

But for me if the game is easy then don't expect too much playtime from me.

[JoshF]

By your logic, I can say that Windwaker is a hard game (because I try to get through it with getting as little hearts and health refill shit as possible.)

The one credit rule isn't an artificial demand, it's how arcade games are designed to be played. That's why most of them reset your score counter or take away bonuses and stuff like that. If score isn't incentive for someone they probably hate arcade games and wouldn't play them, or credit-feed to see the ending and think they've met the objective of the game.

Pretty much any game has the potential to be difficult, but with a lot of console games (including old-school) you have to force demands on yourself (like beating the game within a certain time or not getting power ups or health) instead of the game demanding a high level of play off the bat. As a compromise, maybe we could say that there is a greater disparity between low and high-level play than saying they're just easier.

[Mega Mudkip]

I think my definition of oldschool is a lot different of yours. I can't remember of any oldschool games having content to be unlocked or load/save features to be abused, as most of them didn't even save ANYTHING.

And beating a shmup is to 1cc it. Nothing else matters, you have only finished a shmup if you have 1cc it.

Other than that, I think you just want to discuss to prove something, and I really don't feel like doing that when I am just up to a nice chat... I mean

I really have to say I do not agree with your other statement. Many games require a lot of mastering. Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, any good fighting game (newschool and oldschool), Zone of the Enders, etc, etc. (Hell, even Metal Gear Solid has mastering.)

Some modern games do offer this too, but not on the same degree, and rarely with the same amount of fun

I also can hardly call something like The King of Fighters XI or Arcana Heart as "newschool"... I'd say the fighting genre is a genre apart:)



I am not saying the most modern games are crap and the good games stayed on the 80s or something. The only thing I stated is that in the 80s games were generally more challenging. For each "challenging" game you can name today (and most of them can be finished easily with some load/save abuse, and they were designed it like that), you will find 10 from the 80s, remembering that finishing an arcade game means finishing it with a single credit(the way they were designed).

"I think my definition of oldschool is a lot different of yours. I can't remember of any oldschool games having content to be unlocked or load/save features to be abused, as most of them didn't even save ANYTHING."
Back in the days of NES and SNES, there were a considerable number of games with save points, passwords, secrets, etc. (Unless you're also going beyond this back to Commodore64 games from 1982.)

"And beating a shmup is to 1cc it. Nothing else matters, you have only finished a shmup if you have 1cc it."
So, I never beat Rezon even though I beat the last boss? I spent forever on that fuckin' thing. D'=

"Other than that, I think you just want to discuss to prove something, and I really don't feel like doing that when I am just up to a nice chat..."
I actually forgot how a big, deep, contention even transpired in the first place. I just recall posting Darius porn.

*checks*

Oh, it is because I had to give a link that motherfucking "anti-hogwash" thread.
Truth is dude, I've been sorta bored with this debate too since everything from both sides seems to be getting convoluted. I just get obligated to respond for some reason.

"I also can hardly call something like The King of Fighters XI or Arcana Heart as "newschool"... I'd say the fighting genre is a genre apart:)"
Well, wait. Wut? I apparently missed something here. Either /b/ has rammed all of my glial cells up my ass or this didn't explain enough. (I'm willing to bet it is the former, but stfu anyway >=<)

"I am not saying the most modern games are crap and the good games stayed on the 80s or something. The only thing I stated is that in the 80s games were generally more challenging. For each "challenging" game you can name today (and most of them can be finished easily with some load/save abuse, and they were designed it like that), you will find 10 from the 80s, remembering that finishing an arcade game means finishing it with a single credit(the way they were designed)."
God dammit, everything is going in a big loop. D'=

I have seen the light of this argument, whatever the hell it is.

By your logic, I can say that Windwaker is a hard game (because I try to get through it with getting as little hearts and health refill shit as possible.)

The one credit rule isn't an artificial demand, it's how arcade games are designed to be played. That's why most of them reset your score counter or take away bonuses and stuff like that. If score isn't incentive for someone they probably hate arcade games and wouldn't play them, or credit-feed to see the ending and think they've met the objective of the game.

Pretty much any game has the potential to be difficult, but with a lot of console games (including old-school) you have to force demands on yourself (like beating the game within a certain time or not getting power ups or health) instead of the game demanding a high level of play off the bat. As a compromise, maybe we could say that there is a greater disparity between low and high-level play than saying they're just easier.

"The one credit rule isn't an artificial demand, it's how arcade games are designed to be played. That's why most of them reset your score counter or take away bonuses and stuff like that. If score isn't incentive for someone they probably hate arcade games and wouldn't play them, or credit-feed to see the ending and think they've met the objective of the game."
I'm just sayin' that a game is still hard even if you credit feed. If anyone says that a shmup is easy because all you have to do is credit feed, then they are retarded. Even if you credit feed on a shmup, the game is still gonna grab you by the balls from start to finish.

"Pretty much any game has the potential to be difficult, but with a lot of console games (including old-school) you have to force demands on yourself (like beating the game within a certain time or not getting power ups or health) instead of the game demanding a high level of play off the bat. As a compromise, maybe we could say that there is a greater disparity between low and high-level play than saying they're just easier."
Right, but since that isn't part of the artificial demand should it count towards the game's difficulty?

[Shatterhand]

Is there a need to quote the same thing twice?

[Mega Mudkip]

Is there a need to quote the same thing twice?

No, I'm just an idiot. =<

"Is there a need to quote the same thing twice? "Is there a need to quote the same thing twice? "Is there a need to quote the same thing twice? "Is there a need to quote the same thing twice? "
There. It is been quoted four times.

"Is there a need to quote the same thing twice? "
Five times.

[charlie chong]

i hope you do realize no one really cares about your personal opinions on a site like this that is dedicated to shooters . you've just wasted mad time typing all that shit out

[Mega Mudkip]

i hope you do realize no one really cares about your personal opinions on a site like this that is dedicated to shooters . you've just wasted mad time typing all that shit out

I wasn't even expecting a tl;dr conversation after I posted this thread. D=

[charlie chong]

yeah i'm not being nasty it's just pointless
everyone here can make up there own mind how they feel about games i'm sure...

[Mega Mudkip]

yeah i'm not being nasty it's just pointless
everyone here can make up there own mind how they feel about games i'm sure...

Yes, I think it is pointless now too since everything was getting convoluted and looping around and shit.

Seriously, this debate is confusing as hell.

[Dale]

Alright, I'll just agree to disagree. We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore. We both like RE4 and shmups so let's just leave it at that.

[Shatterhand]

We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore.

Yeah. The trolling is completely unnecessary though.

[Mega Mudkip]

Alright, I'll just agree to disagree. We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore. We both like RE4 and shmups so let's just leave it at that.

Works for me. =P

We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore.

Yeah. The trolling is completely unnecessary though.

srs busns

[Dale]

We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore.

Yeah. The trolling is completely unnecessary though.

What is trolling exactly? Did I do something wrong? I never intended anything I said to be mean.

[Shatterhand]

not you when I saw what I posted again I noticed you could get it wrong. You are fine Dale, you didn't do nothing wrong

[Mega Mudkip]

We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore.

Yeah. The trolling is completely unnecessary though.

What is trolling exactly? Did I do something wrong? I never intended anything I said to be mean.

He's talking about me; you didn't do anything wrong. I was being accused of trolling for some reason. Probably because I appear too abrasive in forum debates.

Trolling has to do with messing/irritating people on the internet.

[spadgy]

We seem to have the exact same opinion on allot of things I don't know what we are really debating anymore.

Yeah. The trolling is completely unnecessary though.

What is trolling exactly? Did I do something wrong? I never intended anything I said to be mean.

I never understood the term trolling either - glad I'm not the only one...