Drum wrote:I should just add one thing: Fixed time limit is the devil. Time extenders required. Maybe some sort of checkpoint system that kicks you out unless you pass it with a high enough score, gives you a time extend based on score. Something like that. But not shit or anything.
Like Torus Trooper eh?
Actually I love the discipline of a fixed time limit cos it calls on you to play a small stage with ever-increasing and subtler skill. It's like macro-shmupping, and Blade Buster is the bomb
Drum wrote:Yes. Time attack and procedural generation. Burn it down, burn it allllll down.
Well at first I thought your burn it down comment was dissing both of these as the same thing (hence my reply), but if you were actually praising them as separate styles you enjoy, then I'm surprised you like procedural generation, as it does not play well for score in score/time attack (re: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... 9&p=626471).
By all means include stage select, boss rush, time attack etc., experiment with world map modes, but if you make a shmup of ultra-short fragments, expect many complaints that it fell somewhat short of epic.
Quick and shorter mini game styles of play really only work with a group of friends all playing against each other, so everyone get a turn without waiting 30 minutes or more for their turn to play. Solo play of mini games makes for a very short and rather unimpressive gaming session in general (for me, anyway), so there has to be an arcade style long play mode for the single player designed somewhere into the game, preferably as the primary/default game play mode.
And I definitely don't want to see shmups effectively turned into the next generation of racing games, except for having airplanes, spaceships, or characters instead of automobiles, boats, snowmobiles, or hovercraft like the current racing games do.
Drum wrote:Yes. Time attack and procedural generation. Burn it down, burn it allllll down.
Well at first I thought your burn it down comment was dissing both of these as the same thing (hence my reply), but if you were actually praising them as separate styles you enjoy, then I'm surprised you like procedural generation, as it does not play well for score in score/time attack (re: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... 9&p=626471).
Naw, it's just a matter of implementation really - though it's definitely a hard thing to get right. There are lots of different approaches that can work - giving the player the tools to deal with any situation that could arise or code it so enemy patterns are generated organically from a random 'seed' as opposed to pure randomisation - strictly speaking procedural is not synonymous with random. I'm thinking more algorithm-based as opposed to everything being pre-baked. Rank systems like Xevious/Zanac's are examples of procedural generation.
Strongly disagree with comments in that thread that random elements make playing for score pointless - introduce random elements and high scores become a better indicator of how well the player grasps the system as opposed to the specifics, which I think is more interesting. There are too many great score-based games with heavy random components to dismiss them like that.
Frederick's idea is something I've been thinking of for a long time, one that would actually stand a chance of getting a mainstream audience into scrolling shooters. There are so many things about having a Super Mario World type map system that would create interest:
- Many levels means longer games. People hate that scrolling shooters are so short.
- Could allow for some amount of (skippable!) story segments in between levels. Gamers these days need a story to coax them into gameplay mechanics.
- Different areas with different rulesets. The first world could have simple "kill the enemy to score," the second world could have simple chaining, the third world could have Ketsui-style chaining, etc. The levels of each world could be a straight arcade style experience, a time attack, bullet maze survival, boss rush, etc. Some levels might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it doesn't matter when the next level or world is absolutely perfect for you. You can just beat the level, and move onto one that you'll spend weeks perfecting.
- Different areas with different styles. First world classic 8 bit, second world cute-em-up, third world vector graphics, fourth world bleak DOJ. Players would have incentive to continue just to see what's around the corner.
Yeah, it would probably be a hell of a thing to program, but I think that progressive ideas should be picked up on some level in order to create a wider scope experience. There's a lot that could be done to get shooters out of their current repetition of ideas and appeal to casual style play and hardcore scoring alike. Cave is my favorite game company, but it would be nice to have the occasional alternative to Cave style shooters.
More on topic, I love a good time attack mode, one where it really feels like there's a near-unlimited ability to perfect your skills. Pac Man CE DX is absolutely brilliant; I love it even though I can't stand vanilla Pac Man / Ms Pac Man. Also, I absolutely loved Mars Matrix's score attack mode. I love being able to perfect my score on a single level, and it was awesome watching every enemy bleed cubes. I'd even be happy if traditional style shooters included score rankings for each individual level of the arcade experience. That way, even if your overall run wasn't too great, you'd be able to take solace in the fact that you absolutely destroyed stage 2.
I think scrolling shooters are much too interested in dwelling on things that have always worked. I'd be very happy if the occasional game came along that asked "what does the average gamer like," and then turn it into something that the hardcore gamer would enjoy. I think the most brilliant shooter is Mars Matrix. There was a game that made people CARE about scoring. I picked it up on a blind purchase, only having a passing familiarity with the genre, and it really made me crave that high score. There's a reason for this. Above anything else, the average gamer wants progression. For a hardcore shooter fan, this progression is inwardly focused. They want to progress to a new plateau of scoring, they want to better themselves. For young me, I wanted to buy everything in that fucking shop. Everything. I didn't even want to use all those lives and continues, I just wanted to own them. I wanted to see the crazy high score videos. I wanted to unlock the score attack levels. And that created a shooter fan out of me. I wanted those gold cubes, not just because they gleamed (one musn't de-empasize the allure of shinies in shooters!), but because they were currency. I wanted to jack my combo up into the hundreds and thousands, because it had benefits outside of that one run, it was progression. Eventually, scoring became its own end, but Mars Matrix was forward-thinking enough to use an immediate goal to coax me into the end goal, to make me fall in love with shooters in general. Developers need to use these tricks: shops, world maps, bite sized gameplay, etc to draw people in. A lot of people need something to fixate on while they intimately learn the beautiful ways the mechanics interlock.
Sometimes you have to trick people into loving something. People these days are impatient, always looking for that jump to the next big game. You might have to make them care with unlockables and story, but if you play your cards right, you'll open their eyes to the joy of inward progression.
For the SMW-style shooter, how are people thinking the scoring would be done? Would you be able to revisit levels and redo the score for each level, which could mess with the total score (or just redefine what it means) - or would it be like Bangaio or whatever where each individual stage has its own score? Or else would it be like SMB3 where you can save but can't revisit individual levels?
Drum wrote:For the SMW-style shooter, how are people thinking the scoring would be done? Would you be able to revisit levels and redo the score for each level, which could mess with the total score (or just redefine what it means) - or would it be like Bangaio or whatever where each individual stage has its own score? Or else would it be like SMB3 where you can save but can't revisit individual levels?
I wonder this too. R-Type Dimensions (Xbox 360)'s infinite mode, an infinite lives mode, has the total score based on redoable levels. Not sure if this works or not. If you had a game that was split into many stages, not connected as R-Type is, maybe a score on each stage is best? That's lots of score though.
Drum wrote:For the SMW-style shooter, how are people thinking the scoring would be done? Would you be able to revisit levels and redo the score for each level, which could mess with the total score (or just redefine what it means) - or would it be like Bangaio or whatever where each individual stage has its own score? Or else would it be like SMB3 where you can save but can't revisit individual levels?
I feel that the best system would be one similar to Pac Man CE DX's.
Each stage has its own individual score that you can revisit and perfect, and they all feed into one overall score. Each stage could have its own top 10 leaderboards as well. That way people have incentive to score on individual stages and overall. Even if some stages have more scoring potential than others, there would still be a reason to try getting high scores in all the levels.
1)A selectable play mode available in some shmups, in which the player can access a single, unique, endless stage available only in this mode; usually he is given infinite lives, but also a strict time limit, during which he tries to score as many points as he can before the timer runs out (in some cases, the player can extend the time he has left by performing certain in-game tasks), or else to reach a certain score mark as quickly as possible. High scores for this mode, as in Score Attack mode, are usually recorded on a separate list from that of the “main” game.
Some players prefer to use the term “Score Attack” to describe these sorts of modes, as the purpose is to acquire a high score, albeit within a limited time – others prefer “Score Run” or “Score Rush.”
2) An alternate setup to the aforementioned type of “extra” mode – while the player is still given a unique stage and unlimited lives, the goal is to reach a certain amount of points within the shortest amount of time (thus, the record which is saved afterwards is the time spent, rather than points scored).
1)A selectable play mode available in some shmups, in which the player can access a single, unique, endless stage available only in this mode; usually he is given infinite lives, but also a strict time limit, during which he tries to score as many points as he can before the timer runs out (in some cases, the player can extend the time he has left by performing certain in-game tasks), or else to reach a certain score mark as quickly as possible. High scores for this mode, as in Score Attack mode, are usually recorded on a separate list from that of the “main” game.
Some players prefer to use the term “Score Attack” to describe these sorts of modes, as the purpose is to acquire a high score, albeit within a limited time – others prefer “Score Run” or “Score Rush.”
2) An alternate setup to the aforementioned type of “extra” mode – while the player is still given a unique stage and unlimited lives, the goal is to reach a certain amount of points within the shortest amount of time (thus, the record which is saved afterwards is the time spent, rather than points scored).
Oh, I thought you guys were talking about a specific game or something
I'm not a huge fan of time-attack modes to be honest. I think scoring is usually more important than speed, but then again you could always incorporate both.
Of course, in most of my games I'm a sort of "Take your time and milk everything" person so that's probably why I'm not fond of it.
