Rob said something like that too. I guess we could found a "shameful regret" circle. I should have given all my pie weight to Gradius V.Shatterhand wrote:If I had voted last year, Gradius V would had been in 1st place.
6th Annual Top 25 Shmups of All Time! - Discussion thread
-
Shatterhand
- Posts: 4101
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
- Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
- Contact:
Rob is more guilty, as he didn't vote in Gradius V with the purpose of not putting it on the 1st place.
That's why I know if I had voted AT ALL, Gradius V would be on 1st place.. I would give it a big slice of my pie, so even with Rob not voting for it, it would get first place no matter what.
I didn't vote because I was around, I hadn't checked the forum for sometime at that time last year.
That's why I know if I had voted AT ALL, Gradius V would be on 1st place.. I would give it a big slice of my pie, so even with Rob not voting for it, it would get first place no matter what.
I didn't vote because I was around, I hadn't checked the forum for sometime at that time last year.
In fact, this may be the reason why we see so many Cave/Treasure shmups get high ranking. Because the fans are usually not worried about putting 7 or more Cave games in their lists, or all Treasure shmups.This is OUTRAGEOUS BLASPHEMY . You should vote for Zanac and Aleste. Also vote for Aleste 2 because it's the best shmup ever.
While people with more diversified taste tend to include more devloppers and leave some of their favorite games out of their lists for the sake of diversity.
A good list could include : Raiden 1,Raiden 2, Raiden DX, Raiden Fighters 1, Raiden FIghters 2, Raiden FIghters Jet, Raiden 3, Raiden 4, Viper Phase one, Twin Cobra....
(or same idea with compile or psikyo)You definitely have a point. I never saw it from this perspective. My cleverness and sophisticated taste are harmful for my beloved shmups!nimitz wrote:Because the fans are usually not worried about putting 7 or more Cave games in their lists, or all Treasure shmups.
While people with more diversified taste tend to include more devloppers and leave some of their favorite games out of their lists for the sake of diversity.
-
Shatterhand
- Posts: 4101
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
- Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
- Contact:
But what happens when those are their favourite games indeed? I am pretty sure my list will have 3 or 4 compile games, and 2 Gradius games on it.nimitz wrote:In fact, this may be the reason why we see so many Cave/Treasure shmups get high ranking. Because the fans are usually not worried about putting 7 or more Cave games in their lists, or all Treasure shmups.This is OUTRAGEOUS BLASPHEMY . You should vote for Zanac and Aleste. Also vote for Aleste 2 because it's the best shmup ever.
While people with more diversified taste tend to include more devloppers and leave some of their favorite games out of their lists for the sake of diversity.
A good list could include : Raiden 1,Raiden 2, Raiden DX, Raiden Fighters 1, Raiden FIghters 2, Raiden FIghters Jet, Raiden 3, Raiden 4, Viper Phase one, Twin Cobra....
Though I can see the point. I was just joking about Herr Schatten's statement... I find Zanac to be a better game than Aleste (Well, it aged a lot better) , and Aleste 2 is so much superior, that voting for the original Aleste really feels redundant.
Regarding the criteria thing...
I actually think for the most part it's fairly straightforward. If you have a lot of experience playing these games, you can form solid opinions over time.
I've been playing arcade games ever since I can remember, and then really fell in love with shmups when the original Gradius came out in 1985, at which point I was 16 years old. I think if you live through such a large part of the history of the genre and have a really strong interest in it, you will notice innovations and improvements as they appear. I also think that a true contender has to stand the test of time, and ideally not be superseded. So for example, even though the original Gradius is the game that got me into the genre in the first place, in my opinion a couple of the newer Gradius games have improved dramatically on the original, so those are in my list instead of the first one. Despite the fact that the original is, of course, still a classic... but I obviously can't put every Gradius in my list, or it'd fill up a large part of it and not leave room for other games.
And that's obviously not to say that someone getting into the genre later can't have opinions - everyone's opinion is important - that's the whole point of the vote. Someone younger than me might just have a different perspective and might just value different things.
I also don't believe you can possibly break your opinions down into strict percentages for attributes such as 'innovation', 'originality', 'graphics', 'level design', 'scoring system', 'difficulty curve', etc, and then simply add them up or average them... You just have to form an overall opinion on each individual title. Sometimes the whole thing will be so much more than the sum of it's parts. Sometimes one innovation will be so stunning that you can forgive some boring sections in the levels and the dull scoring system. Sometimes the production standards and attention to detail in every tiny aspect of every single stage will be so amazing, that might be enough to elevate a game with a fairly standard design to classic status. Games are all individuals and have their own different strengths - you just have to play lots of them and then form your opinion.
I actually think for the most part it's fairly straightforward. If you have a lot of experience playing these games, you can form solid opinions over time.
I've been playing arcade games ever since I can remember, and then really fell in love with shmups when the original Gradius came out in 1985, at which point I was 16 years old. I think if you live through such a large part of the history of the genre and have a really strong interest in it, you will notice innovations and improvements as they appear. I also think that a true contender has to stand the test of time, and ideally not be superseded. So for example, even though the original Gradius is the game that got me into the genre in the first place, in my opinion a couple of the newer Gradius games have improved dramatically on the original, so those are in my list instead of the first one. Despite the fact that the original is, of course, still a classic... but I obviously can't put every Gradius in my list, or it'd fill up a large part of it and not leave room for other games.
And that's obviously not to say that someone getting into the genre later can't have opinions - everyone's opinion is important - that's the whole point of the vote. Someone younger than me might just have a different perspective and might just value different things.
I also don't believe you can possibly break your opinions down into strict percentages for attributes such as 'innovation', 'originality', 'graphics', 'level design', 'scoring system', 'difficulty curve', etc, and then simply add them up or average them... You just have to form an overall opinion on each individual title. Sometimes the whole thing will be so much more than the sum of it's parts. Sometimes one innovation will be so stunning that you can forgive some boring sections in the levels and the dull scoring system. Sometimes the production standards and attention to detail in every tiny aspect of every single stage will be so amazing, that might be enough to elevate a game with a fairly standard design to classic status. Games are all individuals and have their own different strengths - you just have to play lots of them and then form your opinion.
-
Mortificator
- Posts: 2864
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: A star occupied by the Bydo Empire
*shrugs* I put in a shitload of R-Types. It means shooters like Mars Matrix and Stargate didn't make the cut, but R's game design is still my favorite, and the stages are different enough that the installments don't feel like retreads to me. Compare it to Gradius, where the volcano / Moai / speed zones could practically be swapped from game to game without anyone noticing. I didn't bother putting in both II and Super, though, and on replays the long lapses in action really hurt III.Shatterhand wrote:But what happens when those are their favourite games indeed? I am pretty sure my list will have 3 or 4 compile games, and 2 Gradius games on it.nimitz wrote:In fact, this may be the reason why we see so many Cave/Treasure shmups get high ranking. Because the fans are usually not worried about putting 7 or more Cave games in their lists, or all Treasure shmups.This is OUTRAGEOUS BLASPHEMY . You should vote for Zanac and Aleste. Also vote for Aleste 2 because it's the best shmup ever.
While people with more diversified taste tend to include more devloppers and leave some of their favorite games out of their lists for the sake of diversity.
A good list could include : Raiden 1,Raiden 2, Raiden DX, Raiden Fighters 1, Raiden FIghters 2, Raiden FIghters Jet, Raiden 3, Raiden 4, Viper Phase one, Twin Cobra....
Though I can see the point. I was just joking about Herr Schatten's statement... I find Zanac to be a better game than Aleste (Well, it aged a lot better) , and Aleste 2 is so much superior, that voting for the original Aleste really feels redundant.
Even the most defined and intricate opinions can be conceptualized and broken down into smaller aspects then added and compared mathematically. The idea of a game being more than the sum of its part is true, but it can also be included with algorithms.LSU wrote:I also don't believe you can possibly break your opinions down into strict percentages for attributes such as 'innovation', 'originality', 'graphics', 'level design', 'scoring system', 'difficulty curve', etc, and then simply add them up or average them... You just have to form an overall opinion on each individual title.
Pretty much everything is mathematical, including opinions and emotions (or feelings). It can be very hard and complex to decypher, but it still is mathematical.
I am not saying that this method is superior, just that it is (or will be one day) possible.
What would you guys think about a limitation of 1 shooter per developer as a rule? I think that would be an interesting thing to try. Imagine people having to pick between RSG and Ikaruga or one Cave game! Each game would really have to earn its spot on its own. More interesting results.Turrican wrote: You definitely have a point. I never saw it from this perspective. My cleverness and sophisticated taste are harmful for my beloved shmups!
It's too easy to pick 5 Psikyo games.
I personally think it's a bad idea this kind of list. People should pick the games they have the most fondness for, and not have their fondness tempered by a one-per-customer-per-company clause. It changes what's supposed to be a "top 25 of all time" list, into something entirely different.Rob wrote:What would you guys think about a limitation of 1 shooter per developer as a rule? I think that would be an interesting thing to try. Imagine people having to pick between RSG and Ikaruga or one Cave game! Each game would really have to earn its spot on its own. More interesting results.
It's too easy to pick 5 Psikyo games.
It's an interesting idea on its own, but not a good one for an overall top 10 or 25 shmups list... IMO of course.
Ha, it's a boutade, but not a bad one. It would surely reduce the number of voters. I doubt there are many out there capable to list, without consulting sources, 25 shmup developers.Rob wrote:What would you guys think about a limitation of 1 shooter per developer as a rule? I think that would be an interesting thing to try. Imagine people having to pick between RSG and Ikaruga or one Cave game! Each game would really have to earn its spot on its own. More interesting results.
It's too easy to pick 5 Psikyo games.
As you put it it's impractical. Say a limit of 3 games per developer and it could be done. But even so, The Coop is right: it bonds too much one's freedom for this poll.
Two max! That'd still get the Ikaruga-RSG votes. Yuck.
The thing about it is it seems like some games are automatically paired with others. Ikaruga and RSG always side-by-side in the results, clusters of similar Cave games. These really aren't that different so the top 25 looks like:
1. DDP
2. Treasure chaining 1
3. Treasure chaining 2
4. DDP1.2
5. DDP1.7
6. Raizing rank management 1
7. DDP2.3
8. Raizing rank management 2
etc.
It's like a top 10 spread over 25 positions. My list only has 13 developers on it. One each might be extreme, picking 25 games from different developers is pretty hard, but also proves people know more than a few types.
Here's what I came up with
-mars m.
-db/strikers2 <-- argh
-layer section
-gradius v
-guwange
-shikigami 2
-psyvariar 2
-zanac
-forgotten worlds
-armed p.b.
-tf4
-einhander
-raiden dx
-v-five
-border down
-recca
-bio metal
-xexex
-air gallet
-rapid hero
-x-multiply
-lords of thunder
-fantasy zone
-terra cresta
-galaga '88
The thing about it is it seems like some games are automatically paired with others. Ikaruga and RSG always side-by-side in the results, clusters of similar Cave games. These really aren't that different so the top 25 looks like:
1. DDP
2. Treasure chaining 1
3. Treasure chaining 2
4. DDP1.2
5. DDP1.7
6. Raizing rank management 1
7. DDP2.3
8. Raizing rank management 2
etc.
It's like a top 10 spread over 25 positions. My list only has 13 developers on it. One each might be extreme, picking 25 games from different developers is pretty hard, but also proves people know more than a few types.
Here's what I came up with
-mars m.
-db/strikers2 <-- argh
-layer section
-gradius v
-guwange
-shikigami 2
-psyvariar 2
-zanac
-forgotten worlds
-armed p.b.
-tf4
-einhander
-raiden dx
-v-five
-border down
-recca
-bio metal
-xexex
-air gallet
-rapid hero
-x-multiply
-lords of thunder
-fantasy zone
-terra cresta
-galaga '88
-
Shatterhand
- Posts: 4101
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
- Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
- Contact:
Ha, it's a boutade, but not a bad one. It would surely reduce the number of voters. I doubt there are many out there capable to list, without consulting sources, 25 shmup developers.
1-Compile
2-Konami
3-Psikyo
4-Raizing
5-Cave
6-Toaplan
7-Jaleco
8-NKM
9-UPL
10-Irem
11-Taito
12-Namco
13-G-Rev
14-Milestone
15-Triangle Service
16-Alfa System
17-Treasure
18-Shin'en
19-Takumi
20-Hudson/Red
21-Technosoft
22-Capcom
23-Nichubutsu
24-Seibu Kaihatsu
25-Square (Yeah, they made more than Einhander)
Still could name a few more. Am I l333t or what?
Edit: Changed Factor 5/Kaiko for Treasure, just to have a more known name on the list
Last edited by Shatterhand on Wed Apr 09, 2008 8:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
But keep in mind, knowing a lot types, and liking all those types are two different things. I can know Cave, Psikyo, NMK, Unipacc, and others, but that doesn't mean any of their games are going to appear in my personal top 25. It seems silly to tell someone they're expected to choose a game from a different company if they otherwise wouldn't, just because they hit an imposed company limit. It also makes for a false top 25, as the results would now be skewed.Rob wrote:One each might be extreme, picking 25 games from different developers is pretty hard, but also proves people know more than a few types.
Last edited by The Coop on Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Nice idea Rob. not because it would make the top 25 any more accurate, but it would make more interesting lists.
Something that would be doable would be to have a number of entries based on the ammount of games made by the developer.
Im not saying this would be good as a rule of the top 25, but as a separate poll. Example: developers with less than 5 (or 10?) shmups can only have one enrty and two entries for the others.
Something that would be doable would be to have a number of entries based on the ammount of games made by the developer.
Im not saying this would be good as a rule of the top 25, but as a separate poll. Example: developers with less than 5 (or 10?) shmups can only have one enrty and two entries for the others.
Of course. And not only that. Our top 25 would become very similar each other. I dare anyone who wish to include one Square game not to pick Enhander. In short, there aren't 25 companies out there with a roster of titles strong enough to choose from, preserving variety. Many small developers shone once or twice in their life, and everyone would vote their greatest achievement.The Coop wrote:But keep in mind, knowing a lot types, and liking all those types are two different things. I can know Cave, Psikyo, NMK, Unipacc, and others, but that doesn't mean any of their games are going to appear in my personal top 25. It seems silly to tell someone they're expected to choose a game from a different company if they otherwise wouldn't, just because they hit an imposed company limit. It also makes for a false top 25, as the results would now be skewed.
@Shatterhand: who could think to question one of the top ten posters around here? You like to show off, don't you
They wouldn't be forced to pick any developer they didn't like. Though the people who were having problems finding 25 games total that they just liked would have more problems. Does vote weighting make the list false already?The Coop wrote:I can know Cave, Psikyo, NMK, Unipacc, and others, but that doesn't mean any of their games are going to appear in my personal top 25. It seems silly to force someone to choose a game from a given company if they otherwise wouldn't. It also makes for a false top 25, as the results would now be skewed.
you're suggesting to abandon the "25" rule? Like, I don't want to pick developers I don't like, so I just make a top ten? Impractical.Rob wrote:They wouldn't be forced to pick any developer they didn't like. Though the people who were having problems finding 25 games total that they just liked would have more problems. Does vote weighting make the list false already?
In my opinion? Yes... or at least, it makes it quesitonable.Rob wrote:They wouldn't be forced to pick any developer they didn't like. Though the people who were having problems finding 25 games total that they just liked would have more problems. Does vote weighting make the list false already?The Coop wrote:I can know Cave, Psikyo, NMK, Unipacc, and others, but that doesn't mean any of their games are going to appear in my personal top 25. It seems silly to force someone to choose a game from a given company if they otherwise wouldn't. It also makes for a false top 25, as the results would now be skewed.
All this vote weight is totally unneeded if you ask me. If someone has trouble picking 25 shmups that they've played, then they can avoid the top 25 list (isn't that what the top 10 list was for anyway?). The weight stuff adds an unnecessary amount of process clutter, since the general concept behind at top 25 list is supposedly ranking games from 25 points, to 1 point. The whole 5 points for five games, and putting all your points behind one game, makes it all over complicated, and makes the results questionable IMO.
I know I'm not highly versed on how this place decides to do its stuff, and that my opinion means squat here. But those are my thoughts on it.
Edits: For typos and clarification justice.
Last edited by The Coop on Wed Apr 09, 2008 8:38 pm, edited 3 times in total.
I like the flexibility we are granted by the current system. As I wrote, it's what it keeps the poll fresh.The Coop wrote: In my opinion? Yes.
All this vote weight stuff is totally unwarranted if you ask me. If someone has trouble picking 25 shmups that they've played, then they can avoid the top 25 list (isn't that was the top 10 list was for anyway?). This weight stuff adds an unnecessary amount of process clutter, since the general concept behind at top 25 list is supposedly ranking games from 25 points, to 1 point. All this 5 points for five games, and putting all your points behind one game, makes it all over complicated, and makes the results questionable IMO.
This year, each voter has two new limitations: he can't give 99% weight of his vote to a single shmup, and he MUST come up with twenty-five titles, no more no less.
I appreciated the spirit of both these corrections. However, I wouldn't want it to become even more strict.
Things like:
"don't pick more than [--] games from the same company"
"each company can have slots depending on how much games they developed"
Are going to make this stuff way too strict, and would bring disaffection.
Aww, come on. That's not true. Everyone here respects your stances. And while I'd probably fight teeth and nails to keep a safe distinction between Gradius and your beloved Galaxy Force II, you cannot say there's no debate or everyone is deaf to what you have to say...I know I'm not highly versed on how this place decides to do its stuff, and that my opinion means squat here. But those are my thoughts on it.
It's already strict (see the %s people should be familiar with), but why should picking a few games be so hard or more strict than being familiar with 50% of every game picked by anyone (that's a few hundred games at least)?Turrican wrote: Things like:
"don't pick more than [--] games from the same company"
"each company can have slots depending on how much games they developed"
Are going to make this stuff way too strict, and would bring disaffection.
A few quotes from the voting thread:
I think it would help exclude the inexperienced more than the scoring mechanism and be closer to a "basic background" for someone new looking at it as a guide.the value of such a list is diminished as those lacking adequate experience participate in the voting process. Scoring mechanisms are in place to try and counteract this somewhat, but this is by no means a perfect system.
Currently it's more of a narrow background. You gave me this idea, it's your fault!most importantly: it helps provides everyone an annual snapshot of what the forum's widely and deeply experienced players collectively felt was "basic background" for any serious (or aspiring) shmupper.
It's stricter, because it's going to limit people's taste, or in better words:Rob wrote:It's already strict (see the %s people should be familiar with), but why should picking a few games be so hard or more strict than being familiar with 50% of every game picked by anyone (that's a few hundred games at least)?
if you claim that elitism is the way to go, I can't really argue. But it's changing the premises of this annual poll quite a bit. Also, I think the problem of inexperienced players is exaggerated a bit. Check the voters - over the years, there's a consistent share of returning voters. As bloodflowers says, it's entirely possible that many of them aren't on par with the newer releases, but this doesn't make them automatically cheaters.The Coop wrote:But keep in mind, knowing a lot types, and liking all those types are two different things. I can know Cave, Psikyo, NMK, Unipacc, and others, but that doesn't mean any of their games are going to appear in my personal top 25. It seems silly to tell someone they're expected to choose a game from a different company if they otherwise wouldn't, just because they hit an imposed company limit. It also makes for a false top 25, as the results would now be skewed.
Last edited by Turrican on Wed Apr 09, 2008 9:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I see it as requiring people show more of their taste (and not how limited it is). They could still have the Cave game at #1 and Treasure at #2 and another Cave game at 3, which would be reflected in the results. Then they'll show that they know something else.Turrican wrote: It's stricter, because it's going to limit people's taste,