Most Controversial Shmup?

[llabnip]

What I find offensive is that with this statement you seem to be insisting that you're the smartest person here, and thus you must be right.

This is a common problem on all discussion boards. Discussion involving opinions can sometimes come across as a shouting match where both sides seem to imply that they are the absoute authority on the subject. In reality, both (or all) parties have some good points but it often gets lost in the shouting match. Anyway, opinions are like a$$holes, most stink.

What I hate about these threads is that it makes people gun-shy if they want to say that they dislike a game due to some feature that has been recently hotly contested on these boards. While I can appreciate that others love the game, I don't care for Garegga mainly due to the hard-to-see-bullets and the ranking system. I think those are bad features. Others are free to find those features acceptable or may not be bothered by them (and I'm sure some people actually, gulp, enjoy the Rank system for Garegga). To each, their own.

[Nemo]

Of course it's caused by rank, but the dilemma is the identification of what is causing the increase in rank. In DOJ, it's quite easy to see, in Garegga it is not.

Of course it's quite easy to see, because it's so fucking blatant. The very instant you use a Hyper, the change is so sudden it's obvious what just caused it. In Garegga the increase is gradual, which is why you must be observant to change. The same principle is applied to all other shooters - you observe changes and adapt, or else you get eliminated.

I know Rando will accuse me of injecting fake rules again, but these are shooting games, not puzzle games or riddles. If rank increase isn't obvious, that's problematic, but when rank is correlated to counter-intuitive actions, then that's deplorable.

Hah! "Natural ability" is a complete myth. There is no such thing as birth-given capabilities to play games; the use of the term implies that in the near future a videogame God will pop out of his/her mother's womb and proceed to obliterate all challengers, the very idea is refutable. All abilities are trained - co-ordination, reactive ability, visual ability, information processing - and while everyone starts with varying levels, they can all be trained up.

Any skill requires training, but certain people have natural-born abilities that make them better at certain things than other people. Anyone who trains their butt off can't become a pro athelete, it requires a comibantion of God-given gifts and honing these abilities.

I very much doubt that anyone can claim to play for an ALL and be totally ignorant of rank in any game, because the system is designed to obstruct your progression. If you play for an ALL, you have to be mindful of it, and have some control over it. Same goes for all games, an understanding of the system can further progression.

Of course in any game that becomes progressively harder you will be cognoscente of rank, but in no other game must you manipulate it like you do in BG.

To quote a line from Arcadia's Ibara guide in issue 62 (thanks Cthulhu for the translation):

If your rank gets so high that you can’t go on, then it’s important for you to re-think the way you’re playing the game.

That in essence is strategy, not just in Garegga, but in ALL games. If you find that progression is obstructed, either by on-screen problems - enemies, scenery, bullet patterns - or by invisible factors - rank - then you adopt a new strategy. It's the fault of Western gaming practice that expects a game to give in to the player. Games are meant to challenge.

Challenges are good, but a game which forces the player to develop strategies which are contrary to intuition, logic, and instinct is not. The fastest way to reach the ground from an airplane is to jump without a parachute or any other device, does that make it right and a good strategy?

That again? "Guidelines" may have been established since the dawn of the genre, but all rules undergo change and evolution. If you think that every shmup should be "go through stage, blow shit up, progress" then by admission, the genre is dead, every game will be the same, a carbon copy of the previous one.

Your hypothesis is wrong because the genre hasn't died and games aren't carbon copies, and yet they have maintained the same basic "rules" sans a few black sheep (i.e. BG).

Rules in game design are there to create familiarity, not to force design practice in a particular direction. Games will appear that bend or break these conventions. Are you going to dislike them because they don't adhere to genre convetions as well?

I dont like anything that forces me to play in a way that is counter-intuitive. Just because something is, doesn't make it right.

You imply that you understand the game perfectly. That would suggest that you have extensive knowledge of the game, it's working systems, and can masterfully manipulate the game to your own will.

Can you?

One can fully understand something without choosing to put it to use, I know how BG works, but I choose not to participate in "Illogical Exercises in Tedium".

People can also create arguments without facts and warp them so others believe that it's legitimate. Lawyers have been doing it for years.

I've seen no evidence to suggest otherwise.

I've backed everything I've said with evidence, whether you or Rando want to believe what I'm saying is valid, is your choices. On one side, you and Rando love the game so you defend it, on the other, you have people like me who wanted to love the game but found it flawed, so who is right?

[BulletMagnet]

I disagree, while skill is clearly part of the equation, it takes a back seat to other factors. If you're going to be so severly penalized for utilizing certain things favorable to your cause (collecting power-ups, point icons, bombs, etc.) then these factors shouldn't have been included, because from the onset you're figthing a backwards war. And at a point which is player must suicide, skill is a burden rather than an asset.

Well, you do still hafta use powerups and whatnot, just not as many: the thing with Garegga (unless you're playing the "Bring on the rank!" way Rando described) is getting by on as little as possible, in terms of reserve lives, bombs, and items, which provides its own challenge, since if you mess up then you've got pretty much nothing to fall back on. Thus, you've got to dodge and shoot pretty much perfectly to keep going, and that requires plenty o' skill; collecting and using stuff is only one part of shooter "skill", after all.

Granted, I have my own criticisms of Garegga, as does nearly everyone, but "lack of skill" required to finish it isn't one of them. The play style is very extreme, and I myself am not a huge fan of it, but I don't think it "ruins" the game, it just makes it much more appealing to a more limited audience; most everyone else who wants to get into it will have to make a major adjustment in their attitude towards shooters, or else just leave it be and let others play it. Which shouldn't be a problem either way; heck, there are plenty of other more traditional shmups out there, after all.

[Randorama]

Exactly, the issue with Garegga isn't the goal of reaching an ultimate score, it's about merely surviving game while being oblivious to score. Yet, as you stated, one has to get extends, which require points, but anything you do for points increases rank, understand the empty cycle?

The empy cycle is present in earlier titles, where cyclical extends are pointless, as dying means to throw away the entire play. Taking medals doesn't increase rank, shooting and powering up does. If you behave and you don't shoot too much (like in Darius, 1986) or you don't power up wildly (like Gradius, 1985, or Raiden, 1991), you can keep the game calm.
Unllike those titles, though, extending has a point, and comebacks can work. Now, if you also want to completely ignore medals and you just want to shoot stuff, as your only source of score, we're back to whack-a-moles...

But they have never been done in the same combination and to the same degree as in BG, which is again, why there's dissention.

No, this is completely different from earliest claims: if you just go apeshit at this combination, fine. If you try to summon back Torquemada to launch an inquisition against Garegga, you must be kidding ( i hope).

What for? Garegga isn't a skill-based game. A true skill-based game can be beaten on natural ability alone while being totally ignorant to rank.

It's impossible for a normal person to "use their brain" and simply know how to manipulate BG.

You keep referring to bizarre concepts. Am i odd? Are all the japanese players who competed in the official competition odd? If the reply is "yes" because, like that "Ren and Stimpy" episode, they only think in job (where Stimpy lobotomizes Ren and Ren's brain goes to work etc etc), i really can only frown.

The correct "bitching" is the first, and as i said before: if you don't like chess because there are too many rules, why don't you play Go (three rules)? Chess works and Go works, too. If you start make claims about normality...*shivers*

If everything was so simple as you pretend it to be, there would be no need for the all the strategies and replays created for the game.

Again...which strategies are "survival only" and which ones are "score-only"? Same discourse can be applied to DDP. Forget big scores if you want to clear it, you need to bomb, and you need to die in order to increase your bomb stock.One of the many, also.

And it wasn't until relatively recently that people even fully understood the intricacies of the rank system, people had ideas about what was involved, but didn't fully understand to what degree.

People?Who? Japanese players started during the competition itself. Western players...a few knew since a long time ago. Including me, Icarus, Alamone and some others. That's why i write guides: i like to share knowledge. Yes, i also add score-guides, but surely not to have people to copy my strategies in an asinine way. Sometimes you propose a good approach and someone elses, when applies it, discovers something new. If you don't share, on the other hand, fine.

No, the point is I do know, I've read the STs and any shooter that requires a player to play the way Garegga must be played, is flawed.

That's why i brand you as a bigot: the way Raiden DX or DOJ "must be played" make me crazy, but i still consider them superb engines. Beside that, you still insist in not making differences between "just survival" "1cc-based scoring", etc.

So unwritten rules are just a myth I suppose. What makes a shooter different from a platformer or a sports game, I mean they all must be the same thing since there are no books written about what defines a game and a genre.

Give me a break, please! What genre Bangai-O is? Mercs? Rolling Thunder? Aliens vs Predator? But you're pretending that your narrow vision of "what a shmup is" is a dogma, while in 25 years the only costant thing seen so far is the possibility to shoot stuff and move in 2 directions. Maybe. And no one got arrested for that. Maybe there is some ISO standard stating that all shmups should be whack-a-moles...in that case, you can denounce Raizing to "the association that checks ISO standards" for something they did 9 ago.

Think as you may friend, but I'm the one looking at this logically (as I do with any subject) and you're the looking at it as an irrational fan.

By putting the word "logically" you don't prove a lot, since you still invoke the witches and you make the wrong inferences. Now, study a bit before speaking, thanks.

All your posts favoring BG are overwhelmed by irrationality and bigotic hate. Go ahead and insult me, my country, and anything else you want. You continue to believe I lack logic, yet you're arguing in favor of a system that is illogical, and contrary to normal shooting game behavior.

See above. You have to prove that a system is "illogical" (uh? That it generates undecidable propositions?) by proving that Garegga doesn't adhere to the the standards you have in your mind. In that case, you would make a perfect case of solypsism. Just to be clear, you can prove, in a perfect logical way, that the world doesn't exist, simply by using properly built syllogisms. Logic studies the correctness of reasonings, not their pertinence to a given state of things. That's why you're perfectly logicaland rational, in your mind. You prove that your reasonings about Garegga stick exactly to your reasonings about Garegga. And, if you pretend to be right, everyone who doesn't entirely stick to your reasonings is wrong. Hence, solypsism. Beside that, "normal shooting game behaviour" sounds like some Maccarthian propaganda against homosexuals, sorry but...

Challenges are good, but a game which forces the player to develop strategies which are contrary to intuition, logic, and instinct is not.

Instinct and Logic are not the same thing. Nor Intuition and Logic, and so on...

Any skill requires training, but certain people have natural-born abilities that make them better at certain things than other people. Anyone who trains their butt off can't become a pro athelete, it requires a comibantion of God-given gifts and honing these abilities.

Everyone has hand-eye coordination, some have an innate (...whose contribution is pretty low, worth a lot of research on, but let's say that it gives you a whooping 4% in your skills and a 10% faster learning ability) better hand-eye coordination, but well, programmers will force you to solve the puzzle, infinitely good reflexes won't suffice, on most shmups after the disappearance of whack-a-moles.

finally

I've backed everything I've said with evidence, whether you or Rando want to believe what I'm saying is valid, is your choices. On one side, you and Rando love the game so you defend it, on the other, you have people like me who wanted to love the game but found it flawed, so who is right?

If you accept that you're Nemo (real name... i don't know) instead of "people", it would be...saner. If you find the game flawed because

But they have never been done in the same combination and to the same degree as in BG

fine, but that's a matter of scalarity. If you clearly state " I do find the system flawed (i.e. exagerately demanding, impossibly hard, too cerebrotic)", fine,i don't. If you call it "illogical"...uh, please read above. If
you

Did I write these rules? I'm merely follow the guidelines that were established since the dawn of the genre.

You sound like those bigots and blah blah blah...

[Acid King]

Well, you do still hafta use powerups and whatnot, just not as many: the thing with Garegga (unless you're playing the "Bring on the rank!" way Rando described) is getting by on as little as possible, in terms of reserve lives, bombs, and items, which provides its own challenge, since if you mess up then you've got pretty much nothing to fall back on. Thus, you've got to dodge and shoot pretty much perfectly to keep going, and that requires plenty o' skill; collecting and using stuff is only one part of shooter "skill", after all.

I think the whole "no skill" bit was stupid but what's he's saying has merit. The complaints with rank in Garegga all readily apply to the way you approach shooting games. Ex. I bought Soukyugurentai for saturn like 4 or 5 years ago. I played it the way I play all shooters; picking up all the powerups and killing all the enemies and promptly ran into a wall around the 5th level. I thought 'This is insane, I need to play more and get better' not 'Maybe if I skip picking up powerups and not kill all the enemies the game will get easier'. I didn't notice changes in the difficulty because I didn't study the game, I only threw it in and played it once in awhile. I only found out about the 100% and the powerups increasing your rank when I started posting on these boards.

Unless the change is drastic (DOJ or Border Down), where you can visibly see the changes obviously within a level (getting to the first boss in BD on one life vs. dying once in the stage and getting to him) a casual player isn't going to notice a subtle changes brought on by doing normal things like shooting stuff and picking up powerups, hence the "counterintuitive" bit. That's the whole crux of the argument. Some see it as a flaw others see it as an interesting change to the genre. WHETHER OR NOT YOU SEE IT AS A FLAW IS COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE. This whole argument is retarded because someone brings up rank as a flaw of the game and someone who feels the game is basically perfect comes in and defends it, all the while ignoring very legitimate reasons why someone would dislike the subtle implementation of rank. It just runs around in a fucking circle and instead of people realizing the acceptance/rejection positive/negative perception of rank is completely subject to personal taste (A great man once said "That's just like.... your opinion, man.") shit storms like this perpetuate.

[incognoscente]

Ex falso sequitur quodlibet (from falsehood, anything follows)

Thank you! :)

[Randorama]

Ex falso sequitur quodlibet (from falsehood, anything follows)

Thank you!

you're welcome

[CMoon]

There are so many things to respond to hear that it is hard to know where to start, but one must first reiterate what 8 1/2 said in another thread, namely that things have gotten very hostile here of late--I certainly wish everyone could tone it down just a bit.

1) All this stuff about Garegga is really only a reflection of your personal tastes in shmups:

a) shmups are incredibly varied. Someone said these are 'shmups' not puzzle games, but then what about Ikaruga which has been referred to as a puzzle-shmup. Some shmups have rpg elements and others have the two players versus each other. You are free not to like any of these different styles, I don't think anyone has argued that they aren't shmups.

b) Rando is correct that all the elements of rank increase were introduced in previous games (some over a decade earlier), as are the subsequent comments that no other game utilizes those ideas to such a degree. However, it can also be argued that no other game utilizes scratching the way psyvariar/shiki do, and no other game introduces color chaining the way RSG does, etc. etc. etc.

c) As stated repeatedly, BG is as playable as any shmup, and indeed, unless you are very, very good, you simply won't get that far, rank or no rank. It isn't like Bullet Magnet is suddenly going to become good at BG because the rank system becomes intuitive. It will still kick his ass on level 4 the way it kicks my ass on level 4. Likewise, no lack of understanding of rank will ruin those first 4 levels of play. If BG is broken (the point of contention), it is because of inviso-bullets, not rank.

2) Always I hear about how counter-intuitive BG is and that there is no way to understand the rank. Also, only in Garrega is rank implemented so subtly...

a) So, did Raizing actually explain to the gamers just how rank works of did players figure it out? I believe these strategies for BG were player-discovered, and therein lies the first problem. Experienced shmuppers already familar with rank (again, none of these ideas are new) and who were observant (possible even creative!) no doubt pieced together the game play mechanics just in the same way that others are now discovering how Ibara works. Many will not like this, and that's fine, but in the beginning, most things when we first learn them are counter-intuitive; so anyway, yeah I find this argument rubbish.

b) Garegga is clearly NOT the first game to implement rank subtley. Since most shmups have rank, and few of them have rank kicking in dramatically, I think this argument is also by and large rubbish.

c) So, from my perspective, it seems that we speak like very lazy gamers. Plenty of other gamers were able to observe and figure out the mechanics of a game. How long did we spend figuring out the patterns to get an all-clear in the Street Fighters? Who ever could have possibly figured out cancels, or even undocumented things like taunting increasing your character's stats? Oh, it must be the Japanese, only their super-players could have figured these things out, since they are genetically better gamers than we are anyway. Don't any of you ever ask, when suddenly a boss acts very different, or the enemies act much angrier; why do they do this? Why did I do that was different?

(My god, somewhere someone forgot that play is a form of LEARNING. If your brain goes off when you play shmups and you can't observe and deduce, perhaps it is time to turn off the console...)

3) Given that average skilled players are not really affected by rank in this game, what we are hearing instead are the complaints of highly skilled players. This is like listening to how life is hard for the rich. BG is a pretty innovative game that while us normal players can still have fun with it (again, this point has yet to be addressed), it seems more specifically designed as an ultimate challenge to top players. It is mt. Everest for shmuppers. How much time would you listen to mountain climbers complaining it is too hard to get to top of the mountain. Too unfair, too unorthodox, too unintuitive. Would it be better if such challenges did not exist for the top players?

For Bullet Magnet, llabnip and myself; honestly, rank is a non-issue in this game for our level of play. For people like Rando, Nemo, Twitchdoctor and many others; I just don't have any sympathy! You are already playing at a level that I will never attain and don't have the time to commit to. If you whine about games being unfair you can't be my heroes anymore

[sethsez]

You know, I think if Garegga just had a simple intro screen explaining the ranking system, nobody would ever bitch about it. It's not the actual system that people think is a flaw, but the relative obscurity of it. Unexplained rules are rarely a good thing, especially when they have a significant impact on how the game works (which most ranking systems don't have to this degree).

[professor ganson]

For Bullet Magnet, llabnip and myself; honestly, rank is a non-issue in this game for our level of play. For people like Rando, Nemo, Twitchdoctor and many others; I just don't have any sympathy! You are already playing at a level that I will never attain and don't have the time to commit to. If you whine about games being unfair you can't be my heroes anymore

And then there are those of us just below BulletMagnet, Illabnip, and CMoon in terms of skill, and for us I think the rank system is also a non-issue.

I say "I think" because, as sethsez points out, the system is a bit hard to understand. That's why today I printed out Icarus' guide-- 30+ pages. Looks like very interesting reading.

[CMoon]

And then there are those of us just below BulletMagnet, Illabnip, and CMoon in terms of skill, and for us I think the rank system is also a non-issue.

I say "I think" because, as sethsez points out, the system is a bit hard to understand. That's why today I printed out Icarus' guide-- 30+ pages. Looks like very interesting reading.

No really, for us this is an overrated affair. I can get to level 4/5 no matter how I play the game. And I can't beat level 5 no matter how I play the game. Blah!

You know, I think if Garegga just had a simple intro screen explaining the ranking system, nobody would ever bitch about it. It's not the actual system that people think is a flaw, but the relative obscurity of it. Unexplained rules are rarely a good thing, especially when they have a significant impact on how the game works (which most ranking systems don't have to this degree).

I don't really disagree with this, but at the same time, when Street Fighter 2 came out in the US, it didn't tell us how to throw fireballs, and no one complained about it then...

[black mariah]

I don't really disagree with this, but at the same time, when Street Fighter 2 came out in the US, it didn't tell us how to throw fireballs, and no one complained about it then...

If you want to get into weird-ass motions in games, let's not compare SF2 to Garegga. A better one is SF2 vs Psyvariar.

I get my ass handed to me in Psyvariar because the play system is so unlike EVERYTHING. It ENCOURAGES you to do stupid shit for points!

[sethsez]

I don't really disagree with this, but at the same time, when Street Fighter 2 came out in the US, it didn't tell us how to throw fireballs, and no one complained about it then...

Except the moves were shown in demos and were used by the computer, so they were clearly possible. Even if the game didn't tell you how to pull off the moves, it made it obvious that they existed, and successfully pulling off a move gave you instant feedback telling you that it was done right.

Rank in Garegga is this hazy thing that doesn't officially give any indication of its existence, doesn't really give you any meaningful feedback, doesn't tell you what does what, and yet can completely ruin a run if not properly utilized. For something so central to gameplay (and there's no doubt in my mind that rank in Garegga is more important and complicated than rank in the original Gradius or what have you), it's existence and inner workings are essentially hidden from the player, and that's my entire complaint with it, at least as far as it being a flaw goes. I still don't like rank in general, but that's an issue of personal preference and not something I consider a problem per se.

Make an intro screen. Show power-ups: "Grab these for increase difficulty!!" "Shoot more for increase difficulty!!" "Dying for a lower difficulty!!" and then go into the game. Takes all of two seconds to read, can be easily skipped, and explains one of the fundamental aspects of the gameplay without delving into strategy or anything. S'all I ask.

[Randorama]

Make an intro screen. Show power-ups: "Grab these for increase difficulty!!" "Shoot more for increase difficulty!!" "Dying for a lower difficulty!!" and then go into the game. Takes all of two seconds to read, can be easily skipped, and explains one of the fundamental aspects of the gameplay without delving into strategy or anything. S'all I ask.

Nice idea. However, it seems (i don't speak japanese, eh) that the recently, the usual going for rank is this: if the game becomes popular and thus Arcadia covers it, they ask to programmers what the players haven't found by themselves. Some history: back in 1996, Garegga was launched with a competition (and in the second half of the '90s, arcade market reached its peak, so making hardcore shmups granted a big niche), and this compo was very successful. However, bullet nullification (which apparently was the only rank element to be entirely new, but i'm not so sure) was missed by the masses, so Gamest (the arcade magazine before Arcadia) asked to Shinobu Yagawa..."Ehi, are these all the parameters you put in the game?".

Also, and more i say this, the better, a relatively wide-spread habit in Japan is to write and distribute infos and leaflets about the game. Typical arcade culture (my uncle typed the basic puyo puyo combos, back in the day, or gave for free the xeroxes of the SF2 macros). That's why i write guides: to share knowledge, and thus power. But well, i think that only this bitching is point-less...Ibara is out and Yagawa, apparently, has done the same old stuff, again.

[Neon]

I don't care for Garegga mainly due to the hard-to-see-bullets and the ranking system.

The hard to see bullets are easily cured by a PCB dip switch setting or on the options screen of the Saturn port, you know.

[Blade]

Yeah, I really wish people would talk like this about Torus Troopers.

*hits BG topic self-destruct button*

[llabnip]

I don't care for Garegga mainly due to the hard-to-see-bullets and the ranking system.

The hard to see bullets are easily cured by a PCB dip switch setting or on the options screen of the Saturn port, you know.

Not quite. I've had the option turned on in my Saturn version since the beginning. It changes _some_ bullets to pink. Some missiles are unchanged and the debris is still too much for my eyes even with the pink bullets on. It's certianly better, but no cure.

[teenwolf]

Oh yeah, don't forget the close-up you get of the bosses panties when you win!

yeah, I was watching a movie of the first level and got sucker punched with the panty crotch shot. Not that I didn't enjoy it, but back in the day my mother would have never let me play a shooter like this. CAVE NEEDS TO THINK OF THE SHOOTER CHILDREN.

btw, thanks for turning Cave's first level boss panty shame into an avatar.

[Drum]

I almost (almost) feel like a dick bumping this thread out of the nether, but I felt I needed to add NARC. Because it's NARC. Also, how on earth is Gradius controversial? Unless the controversy is that some people think it's controversial and some people don't.

[ShmupSamurai]

Maybe it's just me, but personally I think the orginal Darius is rather overrated.

Reasons:

1)3 moniter stack-up gimmick gives you more space to move around in, but that's about it.

2) Actual levels are quite bland in terms of design, while enemy formations move faster than expected, leading to cheap deathes when taking out a line just to get a power up.

3) Only other gimmicks are the big fishy battleships and the split path at the end of each stage.

4) you can die while choosing a path by stupidly crashing into the wall.

[Drum]

Yeah, but it's not exactly controversial - almost everybody agrees that Darius sucks.

[Ed Oscuro]

Oh boy, Rando in his prime!

I have a feeling there's one I really ought to mention, but can't remember, so instead of a three-item list this is going to be two items:

1.) Master of Weapon, because silly people think games predict real life. (We're still waiting on Nostrodamus.)
2.) Whatever Cave's keeping out of MAME.

[zaphod]

Okay, does any of you have a plan to single life clear garegga?

All other forms of rank manipulation are fair game, and almost certainly required for this task.

It is my belief that battle garegga is unique in the fact that many players consider it a good game, but the number of poeple in the world who can single life clear it can almost certainly be counted on one hand.

t
If any member of this board can actually single life clear this game without tool assistance, I will take back everything i've ever said about it.

Saying that the game punishes you for playing well is unfair. The problem is that for 99.99999% of players, dieing is part of playing well.

[near_miss]

Not to throw rocks at the beehive, awaken sleeping giants-- but this thread has given me more appreciation for BG!

The way I see it, controlling rank is like picking your battles-- imagine a real soldier going to war, he could be the best marksman ever, but does that mean he has to charge in the main gates when he could take a more strategic approach for a better chance at survival?

When you think about the linearity of your average shooter this really is a beautiful thing, that it becomes a sort of metagame that reacts to your skill or given streak.

I think those upset by having to suicide to control rank are being overly egotistical; that even an intentional blemish against their perceived skill threatens their overall confidence; where really it's more about winning the war than the battle; how to make the most of your credit.

People have become so obsessed with chasing the 1cc, that they are trying to put shmups in a box; when truthfully, each game should be appreciated for its own individuality. If you don't like it, you don't have to play it.

I think it's brilliant to have a ranking system that can go so insane if left unchecked. In fact, I can see that being a very entertaining thing for players who already understand the ranking system, deliberately provoking an onslaught, to test themselves against the virtually impossible; ride the dragon!

That's the best high I get when playing a shooter-- defying "impossible odds" - for however long!

Garegga simply gives you the choice of what end you wish to play for, should you wish to learn it.

[gameoverDude]

Get a Garegga or Ibara 1LC? I don't even think about that.
Sometimes suiciding is good for your score- and not just for keeping rank in check. Respawning gives you an extra bomb- which is even more useful in Ibara. Also your explosion shrapnel damages enemies.

Japan's Bakraid record holder suicided over 50 times to get his 125M record. If you have a multiplier, suiciding buys you a little extra time on it.

[Estebang]

Yeah, but it's not exactly controversial - almost everybody agrees that Darius sucks.

Not me. It's my favorite of the series! You just have to look at it by 1986 standards and as a kind of spiritual sequel to the game "Scramble."

Gaiden and G-Darius are without a doubt graphical and auditory masterpieces, but their quality ends there. Darius II has a boring first stage and nondescript music. The SNES exclusives feel like some unpolished doujin game.

Literally everyone seems to agree that Burst is arse.

[zlk]

The most controversial: donpachi

What other game has players refusing to submit their top scores to arcadia?
What other game has the record for two of the ships (A/B) not publicly known?
What other game has no superplay?
What other game has several people that have no-missed the game, captured it on video, then all of them refuse to show it to the world (or make it nearly impossible in one player's case)?
What other game has average players saying "yea I could finish it so easily, it is just so boring"?
What other game has a TLB attack with a hiding spot that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't for no discernable reason?
What other games high score thread accepts both the USA and JP/KOR versions which are drastically different in difficulty?

[Drum]

Yeah, but it's not exactly controversial - almost everybody agrees that Darius sucks.

Not me. It's my favorite of the series! You just have to look at it by 1986 standards and as a kind of spiritual sequel to the game "Scramble."

Gaiden and G-Darius are without a doubt graphical and auditory masterpieces, but their quality ends there. Darius II has a boring first stage and nondescript music. The SNES exclusives feel like some unpolished doujin game.

Literally everyone seems to agree that Burst is arse.

Oh, I misread his post - I thought he was talking about the series in general. Which does suck. But somehow there are at least 2 Darius games on this board's top 25 shmups. That's just depressing.

[Exarion]

What would happen if DeathSmiles became known outside the shmup community? Just think of the controversy!

[BIL]

somehow there are at least 2 Darius games on this board's top 25 shmups.

What the fuck are you talking about