linko9 wrote:I loved SOTN, and I never grinded for anything. Sure, my favorite Castlevania is Rondo of Blood, but SOTN and the subsequent games have been fun in a different way; they're RPGs essentially, sure, but they're much more action oriented than a standard RPG. I happen to like RPGs, so the "Metrovania" games are very enjoyable for me. I can see a shmup/RPG hybrid being successful in the same way. Obviously, the emphasis wouldn't be on skill, but I think videogames can still be great even if they don't require much skill (I thought Animal Crossing was pretty fun). Anyway, if you hate RPGs, I understand your point, but lots of people like RPGs, so I think lots of people could enjoy a well-made shmup/RPG hybrid.
I enjoy the RPG genre--regrettably, I've sunk 60+ in several games of the genre and am mad hype about the new Golden Sun game--but only to a degree. Several years ago, JRPGs were my main interest, but I eventually found the genre shallow and devoid of mental stimulation and considered giving up videogames. I fortunately discovered shooting games, which at their best force the mind to work far more creatively than JRPGs ever will, and my interest in games was saved. My GPA also plummeted, but that's another story.
Regarding grinding in SotN, all of the most interesting items/powers in that game and subsequent ones you procure through grinding. And in SotN, you level up so quickly that unless you AVOID killing enemies, the game will be too easy. Poor, poor design. I love the damn games, but they would be so much better without these elements.
Challenging, skill-based games tend to be more engaging because they encourage the player to experiment and try to push tactics to their utmost. This is one of the most interesting aspects of shooting games, and allowing things like leveling up or godlike equipment or what have you will ruin this quality. Sure, people can work hard to try to make easy games more interesting, as with people who try to beat SotN with no equipment, but this only underscores the fact that the design is inherently flawed.
Also, the best shooting games are almost all originally from arcades, an environment where extraneous "RPG elements" are completely impractical. Focus and a constant sense of intensity are necessary for a successful game. As shooting game development becomes primarily home-based (and I am sure this is the current trend) we may see developers trying the hybrid approach more--and the development of games radically less interesting than their predecessors.
Exarion wrote:I meant more exploration elements rather than the "level up+grind for rare drops" garbage that most people seem to be attempting (see above rant about valkyrie sky). What I was thinking was having a series of bases, separated by 5 part shmup areas. In a base, you can modify your ship (increase/decrease speed, adjust shot/bomb types, etc.) and restock lives/bombs/etc, and then choose which direction you leave in (what the next 5 stages will be). Now that I think about it, RPG elements is probably not the right term for what i'm thinking of, and would really only serve as a marketing term, as all you do is have an inventory of possible shot/bomb/etc types you can use, which is not unique to RPGs.
Point taken. This just underscores the uselessness of the phrase "RPG elements," a word that one day I hope to excise entirely from my vocabulary.
But I don't think the ideas you propose would improve the genre at all--they would only dilute the experience by adding superfluous sections largely unrelated to the meat of the game, which is surely the shooter section. Allowing the player to choose their own paths through a game is a great idea and has been successful in the past--look at Darius, Death Smiles, or Thunderforce--but adding a "base area" where the player can walk around will only be annoying distraction from playing the real game.
GET BODIED 
(SPOILER - this is Irem) Actually, once I saw the back cover of the DS artbook, I facepalmed
