I'm still pretty new to the genre, but..

[Dragoforce]

Drago in particular, baffle me.

Thank you sir, but I believe it takes two to tango. I think you had a lot of prejudice against "the fanbase" and that you where just looking to have them fulfilled.

Don't make me blush Jockel!

Edit: Sure, I might have come off as little aggressive here. But this is a subject that I feel very much for.

[RHE]

First of all, I'm not a hardcore elitist. Just making a discussion.

Unfortunately, you rather make a slap fight than a discussion.

I find the biggest problem with many scoring games is, that they take a lot of stuff away that's naturally fun to poeple. Like penalty for bombing and stuff. This way I can see why some people ingore scoring systems or even tell that they are some sort of curse.

[Klatrymadon]

In games do certain more powerful weapon combos give you lesser scores, like a penalty for doing more damage or something? Not sure if that makes much sense. Basically does weapon type ever factor into score?

I can't think of one that penalises you for choosing certain types of weapons, off the top of my head, but I suppose you could say Raizing's games frequently "punish" you for maxing out your weaponry, because doing so tends to be one of the things that increases the 'rank' (dynamic difficulty adjustment) in their games. Check out Icarus' Battle Garegga guide in the strategy section for an in-depth look at this sort of thing.

[rockyraccoon5]

Not sure if that will be much use to me since I've not played Battle Garegga nor will I have the means to soon, I think.

Question, what do most fans prefer? Standard "retro" shmups, or bullet hell? I've tried a bit of both, I'm more for the retro, though Imperishable Night is absurdly fun.

[Jockel]

Not sure if that will be much use to me since I've not played Battle Garegga nor will I have the means to soon, I think.

Question, what do most fans prefer? Standard "retro" shmups, or bullet hell? I've tried a bit of both, I'm more for the retro, though Imperishable Night is absurdly fun.

Play Garegga on Mame.
And most people here prefer modern bullet hell, but there are quite some people who like it oldschool too.

[TrevHead (TVR)]

while i like the no bomb score mechanic, its nice to have a change thats why i liked that freeware shmup genetos so much cos of the way it encourages bombing through chaining by bombing and the large stock of bombs it gives you. Its a bomber paradise

In games do certain more powerful weapon combos give you lesser scores, like a penalty for doing more damage or something? Not sure if that makes much sense. Basically does weapon type ever factor into score?

I can't think of one that penalises you for choosing certain types of weapons, off the top of my head, but I suppose you could say Raizing's games frequently "punish" you for maxing out your weaponry, because doing so tends to be one of the things that increases the 'rank' (dynamic difficulty adjustment) in their games. Check out Icarus' Battle Garegga guide in the strategy section for an in-depth look at this sort of thing.

In gradius the more power ups like options your ship has the higher your rank gets (rank = difficulty, check out bulletmagnet's shmup glossory at the top of this forum section)

[Slump]

This is an enjoyable thread to read lol and I can't help but chime as well. "Fun," is a subjective, generalized term that can mean many different things to many different people. I agree that many people play shmups for "fun," which could mean all sorts of things depending on what you find fun. I for one, don't find shmups fun, they are an intolerably piss-boiling challenge for me and I enjoy taking them on. So far as I read, most people seem to fall into those two categories: play for fun and play for challenge (whether you find the challenge fun is a different discussion). Bitching which ones one is more rewarding or intended, while highly amusing, doesn't really matter as long as your doing what you want to do. I'll go back to screaming at Garegga now...

[jonny5]

what rockyraccoon5 doesnt seem to get is that the difficulty in a lot of games(especially more modern games) is based around the scoring

to ignore the scoring mechanics is to make the game harder than it need be( in some cases...the opposite can also be true some times depending on the game in question).....once you have a good grasp of the scoring system the game really comes alive

the other downside to playing for survival and then working on score(if ever) is that you get into habits that might be very counterproductive to scoring and you will quite possibly develop bad strategies....

then when you decide to start actually playing the game properly and play for score you have to unlearn what you have picked up just playing for survival

scoring mechanics generally arent afterthoughts....the game is built around it....to ignore that is just silly

better to play for score from the get go and get slaughtered at first until you get into the swing of things than to waste time developing strategies that simply dont work for scoring play

[Klatrymadon]

In gradius the more power ups like options your ship has the higher your rank gets

Aye. It's most noticeable in the original Gradius, and the third and fourth ones; I've never really had to keep my eye on it in the others.

As for preference, I definitely spend more time playing older shmups than bullet hell ones, but I still love them and try to support new releases as often as I can.

[worstplayer]

When it does come to scores, this actually interests me. In games do certain more powerful weapon combos give you lesser scores, like a penalty for doing more damage or something? Not sure if that makes much sense. Basically does weapon type ever factor into score?

Depends. For example, in Dodonpachi there are many areas where laser is more effective, but you want to use machinegun to keep the combo going, and areas where it's the other way around. But I can't think of any game that explicitly gives you bonuses depending on weapon type used.

[dpful]

Man, reading this thread made me so mad, I wrote a super-rant and then accidentally erased it instead of posted it. It summed up like this

1. "chore" and "shmup" in the same sentence? wtf?
2. "you'll get better", what does that have to do with anything?
3. "that's how they were intended", wtf?
4. "you're playing them wrong", wtf?
5. "keep practicing", WTF!!
6. "I'm scared you're not enjoying them as much as me" wtf?

I've been on this forum for years because of my love for shmups-- from seeds planted firmly in the easthetic and visceral element of shmups-- and the defensive nerdlines of this thread just goes way over my head.

Personally, i only play for fun, which often means score.
All your scores be damned (my scores are fine). I encourage anyone one to love shmups. You can't transcend the art for score unless you only play abstract PC shmups with dots and lines. I challenge all you nerds to transcend your score for the art in your shmups. Or go play "dont touch the walls" mazes and relfex tests instead.
Seriously, how can you be jaded enough to pick on a new member for liking shmups?

(sorry, I guess it summed up into another rant)

[shadowbringer]

That was very well said, but I think everyone here is still missing the big picture. Fun is a very subjective concept and just because you find it fun to play for score, does not mean that every player will feel the same way.

I can see that fun outside of scoring/1ccing games, most people here have to begin somewhere. I also mentioned that, while the players that play just "for fun" will get bored of the games they're playing, those who look for the game's depth (once again, provided that the game has such depth) will experience more of the fun that the game has to offer.

Just to give an example. Let's say there are two people playing Street Fighter against each other. If they play "just for fun", they will have fun, no matter who's winning, or who's winning more consistently.
Now, when two experienced players are playing against each other, there so much more tools to work with (attack ranges, moves' startup/recovery speed, safe vs. unsafe moves, what to do and what to not do against character X, and lots of other related knowledge), and these tools/possibilities/potentials were always present in the game. Even if you lose, you feel exercised. Even if you win, there's room for improvement/corrections. Finally, while the first group may think that trying to get better at the game is troublesome/stressing, the second group enjoys their option more.

Does a good scoring system add more depth to gameplay? Does playing for score extend the time you can spend with a game? Absolutely, will you enjoy the extra time? Maybe.

for the first question, I can't think of an exception. Now, for the other two, it depends on what goals the player are looking for.

I'll go back to Ikaruga as an example. I love the game. I love the mechanics. I absolutely will not play it for score. Why? because it has a chaining system that forces me to play the game exactly as Treasure preordained and I just don't find that fun. If I played the game for score I would actually be having less fun than if I just playing for survival. Does this make me wrong? Am I broken? Am I not really a shmups fan? No, it just means I have different tastes.

there are certain scoring systems that I enjoy more than others, as well as there are certain shmups that reward certain virtues more (for example, fast reflexes, memorization, good coordination). If you don't like Ikaruga, try other shmups. You'll eventually find one that has a scoring system that you enjoy. Still, Ikaruga doesn't have to be played "perfectly". Not playing "perfectly" also doesn't completely cripple your score, to the point that a less skilled player would be able to surpass you.

This is the point I've been trying to make. Everyone finds fun in different ways. Making claims that not playing for score is cheating you out of fun or "they prefer the former way, because they know, from experience, that doing so is even more fun", ignores this fundamental fact. That's why a lot of posters in this thread, who I whole-heartedly believe are not trying to be jack asses, are coming off as being arrogant and closed minded. I can see your side of the arguement. I get that most of the forum's population find playing for score to be fun. And that's awesome, but why can't they see the people on the other side of the debate just don't? We all derive pleasure from different things.

People find fun in different ways, I'm aware of that and haven't denied it, or ignored it. I'm also not telling you to play for 1ccs/score, but I did say that those who do, prefer it that way. Otherwise, why do the players that play "for fun" get bored of the games they play, while that second group keeps playing the same games (those good enough to "resist the test of time")? Because they've got contact with that other source of fun.

[Rob]

In games do certain more powerful weapon combos give you lesser scores, like a penalty for doing more damage or something? Not sure if that makes much sense. Basically does weapon type ever factor into score?

Obviously, yeah, but it's usually choosing the weaker (long range) weapon that nets fewer points. They make you get up close to use it. The trade-off to more damage/points is danger. A good game is always about balance, risk & reward.

Question, what do most fans prefer? Standard "retro" shmups, or bullet hell? I've tried a bit of both, I'm more for the retro, though Imperishable Night is absurdly fun.

I prefer both "retro" and modern stuff. Sometimes the appealing simplicity of the genre feels lost in games loaded with tedious scoring rules + micro-micro-hitboxes are kind of retarded. Most fans here: look at the top 25 thread. Most are '97 and beyond.

[BulletMagnet]

In games do certain more powerful weapon combos give you lesser scores, like a penalty for doing more damage or something? Not sure if that makes much sense. Basically does weapon type ever factor into score?

If memory serves, choosing anything but "W" power in the original Mushihime-sama will hurt your score (on anything but "Original" mode anyway), as the other weapons don't add to your chain/hit counter as fast.

As for the broader topic at hand, I really don't care if someone just plays shmups to blow stuff up - while I encourage them to at least give "playing for score" a try, who exactly are they hurting if they don't? Are we that obsessed with upholding some mythical "pure" fanbase that we'd prefer he didn't play shmups at all? Just so long as someone doesn't go around bragging about how they "easily beat" a shmup by credit-feeding through it, I could honestly care less.

[Klatrymadon]

Sometimes the appealing simplicity of the genre feels lost in games loaded with tedious scoring rules + micro-micro-hitboxes are kind of retarded. Most fans here: look at the top 25 thread. Most are '97 and beyond.

Yeah, this place is probably isn't all that exemplary, despite being possibly the biggest shooting forum in the West. I've spoken to plenty of people who think games like Gradius and Darius were already starting to "miss the point", and wish there were more games in which the emphasis is on aiming rather than dodging. I think that's a rather extreme view, but it's still interesting stuff...

[jonny5]

i think the OP's original post was what spawned most of this argument.....the use of words like 'elitist', especially around these parts, is always liable to start shit....

games are meant to be fun....but at the same time, would you buy a FPS and just run around the game not killing stuff?

would you buy an RPG and just run around in circles....wait.....bad example

you know what i meant though.....the scoring system is there for a reason.....to ignore it seems foolish

it makes not a bit of difference to my own play what others do in theres, but i just find it odd that people would be interested in playing these games while ignoring the base of them....the scoring mechanisms....

just my 2 cents

[rockyraccoon5]

Just so long as someone doesn't go around bragging about how they "easily beat" a shmup by credit-feeding through it, I could honestly care less.

Well I mean I think this is something we can all agree on, that someone who does brag about it when they only credit-feed is an idiot. I'm credit-feeding through it to learn the stages, but certainly not going to claim I "mastered" the game in this way. Has anyone ever actually said this before? Sounds moronic to me..

[evil_ash_xero]

Hey man, I started playing shmups in the late eighties. I just credit fed and had fun probably until just a couple of years ago. I didn't even really think about 1cc or anything until I started going here.

Just enjoy them the way you do, and maybe once you get better, you can strive for a bit more. It gives more longevity to the games. I usually play for survival, since I suck at scoring. But I wouldn't worry about it until you got better.

Have fun.

[cools]

Haha at shmup fascism.

Just play the damn games however you please, if it's making you happy it's utterly irrelevant what anyone else thinks, it doesn't affect them.

Well, unless playing them involves somehow using their dismembered body as part of the control mechanism, that is.

Gives me an idea for a thread...

[BrightSuzaku]

It's a challenge, but going with the toothpaste laser in Raiden (typically one of the weaker weapons in the game) is what a lot of new players do. Now, if you want to really challenge yourself, go ahead and use it the entire dang game, which is amusing. In fact, Raiden IV specifically has an achievement related to it!

Just don't go messing things up by thinking toothpaste laser + homing missiles equals "OMFG, UBERHAX", because it doesn't, exactly. Although judging from how you play (which sounds like me!) you'll really enjoy Raiden. I highly suggest Raiden Fighters ACES, if only because Raiden Fighters Jet is SO FREAKING FUN.

Also, you should try out the PC shmup XOP, as well. It's hard, crazy-fun (for me), and appears pretty straightforward about scoring (which is good if you like surviving). I said "appears", because I don't see any convoluted mechanics. I think in XOP, like XOP Black, you can toggle how the graphics work: more notably, how insane the explosions can get.

Of course, nothing beats Treasure when it comes to jaw-dropping frame-rate-lagging explosive balls of DOOM. It just that Ikaruga, sadly, isn't exactly friendly to survivalists like you or me.

And I really enjoy bullet hell, with some Raiden and Thunder Force. Methodical or "retro" shmups I enjoy too, but any ability I had to play them were killed once I started playing Espgaluda. *cough*
(EDIT: Shoot! I didn't catch that. I've never played Espgaluda, only ESP Ra.De.... Whoops.)

And my ability to play Gradius is... beyond horrible. R-Type: marginally better, give me Delta any day.

[Dragoforce]

As for the broader topic at hand, I really don't care if someone just plays shmups to blow stuff up - while I encourage them to at least give "playing for score" a try, who exactly are they hurting if they don't? Are we that obsessed with upholding some mythical "pure" fanbase that we'd prefer he didn't play shmups at all? Just so long as someone doesn't go around bragging about how they "easily beat" a shmup by credit-feeding through it, I could honestly care less.

In all fairness, the man started this thread by bashing people who play for score. Everybody have the right to play in whatever way the want, but if you start to debate these things in whatever way you have to be prepared for the arguments that are bound to follow.

[TrevHead (TVR)]

Haha at shmup fascism.

Im on a shmup jihad

but seriously all i was trying to do was to try and get ppl who like to credit feed into giving 1cc or scoring a try, if they still hated it thats fine. as i said b4 no elitism intended

whats wrong with endocturing (brain washing) newcomers into the cult

[rockyraccoon5]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

[t0yrobo]

whats wrong with endocturing (brain washing) newcomers into the cult

The process still needs some work I guess.

[TrevHead (TVR)]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

I dont, im the same as most ppl i go for collectable, (rings, coins) which have more importance in a something like a platformer

[rockyraccoon5]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

I dont, im the same as most ppl i go for collectable, (rings, mushrooms) which have more importance in a something like a platformer

See I don't understand this, how you guys would say platformers, even though they have score, you ignore it. You would think since you treat it with such respect in shmups you would in platformers too, right, I mean it's still a score. This is exactly why my not treating score as some holy thing isn't so weird, because I'm sure none of you (or the large majority of you) don't play platformers for score, yet for those who do, that's just one more option. Same exact thing with shmups, bitchesss.

[Udderdude]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

I dont, im the same as most ppl i go for collectable, (rings, mushrooms) which have more importance in a something like a platformer

See I don't understand this, how you guys would say platformers, even though they have score, you ignore it. You would think since you treat it with such respect in shmups you would in platformers too, right, I mean it's still a score. This is exactly why my not treating score as some holy thing isn't so weird, because I'm sure none of you (or the large majority of you) don't play platformers for score, yet for those who do, that's just one more option.

Early console platformers did have score counters, but it was more because the game's designers were clueless; they just copied it from early arcade games with no thought as to how it would fit into a platformer or sidescroller. It is comically easy to counterstop or otherwise break the 'scoring' in almost all of those games, hence why they're ignored and nobody takes them seriously. However, speedrunning these games (shortest time to completion) is taken more seriously.

[captpain]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

I dont, im the same as most ppl i go for collectable, (rings, mushrooms) which have more importance in a something like a platformer

See I don't understand this, how you guys would say platformers, even though they have score, you ignore it. You would think since you treat it with such respect in shmups you would in platformers too, right, I mean it's still a score. This is exactly why my not treating score as some holy thing isn't so weird, because I'm sure none of you (or the large majority of you) don't play platformers for score, yet for those who do, that's just one more option. Same exact thing with shmups, bitchesss.

You have got to be kidding me. This is probably somebody's troll account.

[Rob]

It's not.

[TrevHead (TVR)]

Uh my OP wasn't nearly as scathing as the bullshit that followed.

Makes me wonder though, did anyone ever (or do they still) play games for score that only had score counters arbitrarily? Like Mario or Sonic.

I dont, im the same as most ppl i go for collectable, (rings, mushrooms) which have more importance in a something like a platformer

See I don't understand this, how you guys would say platformers, even though they have score, you ignore it. You would think since you treat it with such respect in shmups you would in platformers too, right, I mean it's still a score. This is exactly why my not treating score as some holy thing isn't so weird, because I'm sure none of you (or the large majority of you) don't play platformers for score, yet for those who do, that's just one more option. Same exact thing with shmups, bitchesss.

Hmm you seem to b fishing for an argument, so ill bite but i wont be a dick about it.

The reason is that plaformers (and almost all modern games) scoring if included at all is not very important to the grand scheme of things, most games have something else that takes the place of score like rings, coins or number of kills, headshots.

Shmups on the otherhand score is very important in most shmups. Don't get me wrong im not some sort of score mad freek, i just like play games as they are intended to be played, since thats where alot of the content (and to me that equals more fun to be had with a game)

Just like anybody playing team fortress 2 would take note of who had the most kills and try to be the person at the top of the kill table. If some1 was playing a fps deathmatch game and not playing for kills, sure whatever floats their boat but he might have more fun playing it as intended

whats wrong with endocturing (brain washing) newcomers into the cult

The process still needs some work I guess.

im working on a pop up for the forum thats a black and white swirly picture all ppl need to do is look into the center