note to arcade fans: high scores are lame

[Ed Oscuro]

IGN thinks so, anyway.

Mind this is for the PS3 console version; god knows what a review of the PC port would be like.

I'm thinking about buying a copy of this game, btw, since it cheap and doesn't afraid of anything.

[Aru-san]

Wow. Guy criticizes the game for all the glories that is arcade gaming. Well, this comes from a guy that probably never heard of 1CCing and is probably directed to audiences that probably have never heard (or done) the same.

[professor ganson]

A scoring system does not a good game make. He didn't get hooked by the game, so why would he want to spend more time trying to perfect? If this thread is about criticizing the reviewer, you might want to say where he goes wrong, exactly.

[Damocles]

If anyone is listening, The Club fucking rocks. You all need to buy it. Now.

Shame the 360 multiplayer scene is non-existant. Then again, death match really isn't what the game is about. Buy it and play with me.

[Ed Oscuro]

If this thread is about criticizing the reviewer, you might want to say where he goes wrong, exactly.

I wish I could say, because all he told us was that high scores suck.

There was some waffling about how the game didn't feel 'compelling' or something, but did he explain why? No.

o/\o HIGH FIVE @ Damocles. Glad you like it. I don't imagine I can play with you on my PC, though (although I read that it does track achievements and you sign in using a Live look-alike).

I've played the demo (twice now; played Venice twice and the asylum grounds siege level once). Sure it is short, and OMG you don't feel a strong personal tie to the scenery, how horrible. The feel of the worlds is like that of a game from a year or two ago in terms of details and the relative lack of physics objects (just the occasional dynamic prop, exploding barrels, ragdolls, and breaking glass), but this is a console game after all.

On a more personal note, despite the reputed death of Sega, they have published some of my favorite dark games from recent times - i.e. Condemned (the original, still don't have the sequel) and, probably, this title.

The music's by Jesper Kyd and is decent. I haven't heard much of it, and the Venice track from the demo is just meant to be fast-paced stuff.

[sven666]

high scores are lame

hello gentlemen, all your base are belong to us.

[Momijitsuki]

I honestly don't see the logic behind 'high scores are lame'. If you're not playing for a score, what are you playing for?

[Ruldra]

It's funny that the reviewer keep refering to people who play for score as 'obsessive'.

To be honest I liked the game a lot. I'll get the demo and see if it's really worth it.

[JoshF]

Playing for score in a sports game is lame.

Playing for time in a racing game is lame.

[DMC]

...unless you are obsessive.

[neorichieb1971]

On Stardust PSN you can pretty much give up before you start when you see the no1 score.

[OmniGLH]

If you're not playing for a score, what are you playing for?

Maybe playing for fun?

[moozooh]

Haha, this game looks like Cameltry.

On topic of playing for fun vs. playing for score, the only thing a good scoring system is obliged to do is rewarding the player for showing off. The greatest fun comes from the feeling of risk, not from something mundane. A risk-rewarding scoring system is a win/win, because it gives you higher score for playing for fun.

[JoshF]

The whole "playing for fun" thing has already been debunked as a scrub tactic. Let's move on.

[Frederik]

The whole "playing for fun" thing has already been debunked as a scrub tactic. Let's move on.

Well, actually, no. The problem is that "I play for fun, not for score" implies that playing a game seriously ISN´T fun. If you don´t have any fun whatsoever while playing a videogame, you´re obviously doing it wrong. Playing for score is one of many ways to try to get better at a given videogame, and in the case of shmups it´s usually the focus on survival or score (or both tied together). Whenever I play games, even if I don´t have any bigger plans with them, I always try to play concentrated and learn something, otherwise it´s just fucking around with an eletronic toy, and that´s NOT fun to me. (Well, maybe sometimes. )

So I´d say many people play for score because it´s challenging them, and they find it enjoyable to really sink their teeth deep into a certain game. That makes them fun for them. There are, on the other hand, cases of people burning out on games because they get so caught up with the highscore chase that they actually forget to enjoy them. (IIRC the Danmaku Gata blog got closed because the creator got fed up with shmups by playing them too hard.)

To me it´s usually poison if I try to beat someone elses score, because then the driving force for playing a game is not the joy of learning and challenge itself, but dependent on how well others do. That´s why I always compare my scores only with my past efforts, because that way the actual fun stays intact for me. People who try to be the best at any cost even if it ruins their mental balance have submitted a battle that everyone will eventually lose, because there will always be someone better than you. This goes for everything else in live, by the way.

[MR_Soren]

Basically the same reasons reviewers hate shmups.

Too short, story sucks. Then, despite the scoring system, they say: no replay value.

Sad, because that's the only recent PS3/360 3D shooting game that looked interesting to me.


Edit: FWIW, I knew it wasn't an FPS, but I hear (ignorant) people call it one so often that I typoed. Stupidity is contagious.

[moozooh]

Ironically, this is not an FPS.

[Kaiser]

Ironically, this is not an FPS.

It's a f` next-gen State of Emergency

[Momijitsuki]

If you're not playing for a score, what are you playing for?

Maybe playing for fun?

Playing for fun is lame.

I play for the sense of achievement and accomplishment that you get for completing a game.

[Lordstar]

My friend helped make this game. He was very iffy about talking about the game until the demo pop'd up on XBL. I recall asking about the game when i was being devloped and we had a big long conversation about how he should get me in to do voice acting (he DJ's with me from tim to time and he knows I can PA a party) never happend though.

When i played the demo i got on to the phone strait away about it and I was like yeah its time trials isint it?! We discussed it and it was really about the team wanting to do something a little difrent since all they do is driving games since the GBA version of treasure plannet (I dont include G-wars as I think that is a cell of one or two people in the company titing about, at least thats )

[kemical]

the club is awesome and I'm glad Bizarre makes games that focus on game-like things.
A lot of game reviewers need to wise up a bit and think in context of what they are actually reviewing...

[Ganelon]

Playing for score in a sports game is lame.

Playing for time in a racing game is lame.

Actually, I agree with the first statement. Even for the second, I think playing to win against other players is far more engaging than going through time trials over and over.

So on that note, I actually agree with IGN since I dislike games that put all focus on scoring without offering anything new (yes, this includes most arcade titles made before Black Monday). And judging by the audience they're writing to, I can see why they'd mention the repetition.

That's why I like playing 2-player fighters. You experience new situations based on the behavior of other people without going through the exact same play procedure over and over. Of course, playing for survival always works too.

[Ed Oscuro]

Playing a sports game is lame.

Playing a racing game is lame.

fixed to show JoshF's TRUE FEELINGS

[Daigohji]

The Club is basically Score Attack: The Game. If that sounds good to you, you'll find it's been polished with that one thing in mind. I think it's great, but I can understand why a lot of people don't like it. In order to balance its game play as an elaborate shooting gallery, the developer had to twist, streamline, or remove a lot of what's expected in a more generic modern shooter.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Playing for score in a sports game is lame.

Playing for time in a racing game is lame.

It all got started with Namco's 1982 groundbreaking psuedo third-person perspective arcade racing game of Pole Position. So should the blame be placed on Namco for starting this "playing for time" genre?

[OmniGLH]

If you're not playing for a score, what are you playing for?

Maybe playing for fun?

Playing for fun is lame.

I play for the sense of achievement and accomplishment that you get for completing a game.

Is this sarcasm or serious?

Why so serious? I gain sense of achievement and accomplishment when I excel at work and for my efforts, I am rewarded with bonus pay.

When I am at home on relaxation, I enjoy playing video games.

To me it´s usually poison if I try to beat someone elses score, because then the driving force for playing a game is not the joy of learning and challenge itself, but dependent on how well others do. That´s why I always compare my scores only with my past efforts, because that way the actual fun stays intact for me. People who try to be the best at any cost even if it ruins their mental balance have submitted a battle that everyone will eventually lose, because there will always be someone better than you. This goes for everything else in live, by the way.

When video game playing becomes a chore rather than recreation, then honestly something is not right. For me, video games have always been an activity to do for recreation. There should never be any stress when doing something that is meant for enjoyment. I enjoy getting a high score in my games but if I am not having fun doing such a thing, then it becomes a time to step back and reflect on where it went wrong.

Games should be fun, not work. I don't receive a paycheck or a trophy when I get the high score, but if I had fun playing and a high score resulted, I can know that I had fun and will continue to have fun playing!

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Maybe playing for fun?

Playing for fun is lame.

I play for the sense of achievement and accomplishment that you get for completing a game.

Is this sarcasm or serious?

Why so serious? I gain sense of achievement and accomplishment when I excel at work and for my efforts, I am rewarded with bonus pay.

When I am at home on relaxation, I enjoy playing video games.

To me it´s usually poison if I try to beat someone elses score, because then the driving force for playing a game is not the joy of learning and challenge itself, but dependent on how well others do. That´s why I always compare my scores only with my past efforts, because that way the actual fun stays intact for me. People who try to be the best at any cost even if it ruins their mental balance have submitted a battle that everyone will eventually lose, because there will always be someone better than you. This goes for everything else in live, by the way.

When video game playing becomes a chore rather than recreation, then honestly something is not right. For me, video games have always been an activity to do for recreation. There should never be any stress when doing something that is meant for enjoyment. I enjoy getting a high score in my games but if I am not having fun doing such a thing, then it becomes a time to step back and reflect on where it went wrong.

Games should be fun, not work. I don't receive a paycheck or a trophy when I get the high score, but if I had fun playing and a high score resulted, I can know that I had fun and will continue to have fun playing!

If you have ever been involved in an arcade game contest or tourny, then it's a different matter, especially if prizes such as cash, or other HTF arcade related stuff is to be won. Gives the arcade contest entrants some extra incentive & motivation to strive for some good friendly competition. Not only that, but you'd be going head to head against some players who know such arcade game titles "inside and outside" due to playing them countless hours and developing their own insider tips, tricks and stratagies. If you mess up during the heat of competition, then you have only yourself to blame for such poor performance. There's always another time to play competitively to regain one's honor and status. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[professor ganson]

If this thread is about criticizing the reviewer, you might want to say where he goes wrong, exactly.

I wish I could say, because all he told us was that high scores suck.

No disrespect for Ed Obscuro, whose contributions at this I enjoy, but I just don't see the reviewer saying that high scores suck. He doesn't explicitly say it; nor is he implying it. He does imply that people who really get into high scores are a bit obsessive, but that seems true enough.

I know it's fun to have an us-them attitude toward mainstream gaming venues, but I thought the review was an honest effort, reasonably well written, clear, and fairly concise. I haven't played the game, so I don't know whether I agree or disagree with the verdict, but I liked the review just fine.

[moozooh]

Rather, he's saying that only people who play for score will enjoy this game beyond the initial clear playthrough, and those are all obsessive. At least that's what I got from his bored rambling.

[professor ganson]

Rather, he's saying that only people who play for score will enjoy this game beyond the initial clear playthrough, and those are all obsessive. At least that's what I got from his bored rambling.

I don't see him saying this, exactly, either. I think he didn't enjoy the initial playthrough, so he didn't find himself hooked enough to go back and perfect his score. Here is how he sums up:

"I didn't find the hook all that appealing and felt left with a glorified shooting gallery. The idea is sound. There just isn't much to be excited about in the final product."

He likes the idea of a scoring based shooter that rewards style and speed; he just doesn't think they pulled it off quite. It didn't draw him in enough to go back and obsess-- but that's precisely what scoring games are supposed to do. So this scoring game fails.